ON SS. CYPRIAN AND FELIX AND COMPANIONS: BISHOPS, AND FOUR THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIVE OTHERS, PARTLY MARTYRS, PARTLY CONFESSORS, IN AFRICA,
ABOUT THE YEAR 482 AND AFTER.
PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.
Cyprian, bp. M., in Africa (S.)
Felix, bp. M., in Africa (S.)
And four thousand nine hundred and seventy-five others, partly MM., partly confs., in Africa.
BY C. B.
§ I. The memory and eulogies of the Saints in the sacred Fasti, or what is related in these, taken from Victor of Vita, that is, from the Acts written by him in the best faith and to be published here.
The Little or Old Roman Martyrology, composed about the year 740, as Du Sollier teaches in his Preface to Usuard, num. 142, the 4976 Saints whom the Little Roman announces today, in Ado has thus today: In Africa, of the holy Confessors four thousand nine hundred and seventy-six, who suffered under the Vandal persecution. This most glorious band of Catholic Champions in Africa, mentioned here in truly few words, Ado and Usuard, who, as may also be seen in the praised preface of Du Sollier, flourished only about one century after the author of the Little Roman, likewise announce today, with eulogies also added in which they adorn those Saints as partly martyrs, partly confessors. These, because they contain some things not to be left untouched here below, I also transcribe here. That which Ado supplies is conceived in these following words: In Africa, of the holy Confessors and Martyrs four thousand nine hundred and seventy-six, who, in the Vandal persecution in Africa, being Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons of the churches of God, with crowds of faithful peoples associated with them, by order of Huneric the Arian king, for the defence of Catholic truth were thrust into the exile of a horrible desert and assigned among the most ferocious Moors: among whom were Cyprian and Felix, eminent priests of the Lord. Of whom very many, when they were cruelly threatened, and were beaten with the points of spear-shafts to make them run and with stones, or, their feet being bound, were dragged like corpses through hard and rough places, torn limb by limb by so dire a punishment, while the head of one was crushed on the sharp swords of the rocks, while the sides of others were split, breathed out their spirit in the hands of those dragging them. There exists along the whole public highway, with speaking tombs, the mean burial of the Saints.
[2] Much shorter than this eulogy, which may perhaps not undeservedly seem longer than is right, [and Usuard the eulogies. What these two martyrologists narrate in them, from Victor of Vita] is that which Usuard composed, as containing only these words, by which it is not inelegantly contracted: In Africa, of the holy Confessors and Martyrs four thousand nine hundred and seventy-six, under King Huneric, who, being bishops, presbyters, deacons of the churches of God, with crowds of faithful peoples associated with them, for the defence of Catholic truth were thrust into the exile of a horrible desert, and at last, variously tortured, celebrated martyrdom; among whom were Cyprian and Felix, eminent priests of the Lord. Such are the eulogies, supplied by Ado and Usuard, which I have thought fit to transcribe here, whom both, or one or other of them, not a few less ancient martyrologists, and especially Notker, afterwards followed; but since our holy Athletes flourished, as will become clear from what is to be said below, before the 5th century had elapsed, and therefore lived some centuries removed from Ado and Usuard, who, from what has been said, composed their Martyrologies only in the 9th century, whence did these draw, and further have perceived, what they mention about them in the eulogies already given? St. Victor, bishop of Vita, and not, as was formerly commonly believed, of Utica, in Africa, whom our Cuper, the title of Saint being vindicated for him, brought into tome IV of August of our Work from page 628, wrote piously and faithfully the History of the Vandal persecution in the year, as is shown there, 487, and therefore, as will become manifest from what is to be said below, only about five years after the orthodox, of whom we speak here, 4976, had been banished by Huneric.
[3] that is, from the Acts to be published here, which he wrote in the best faith, That golden (for so it is called, and not undeservedly, by more than one writer) Little Work, which, after it had already been published by the benefit of print by Beatus Rhenanus, Lorichius, Chifflet and others, Ruinart took care to have printed again at Paris in the year 1694, divided by him into five books, each distinguished by its own numbers, contains a not very long relation, in which Victor, having premised that as many Catholics were driven into exile by Huneric as the author of the Little Roman, Ado and Usuard say above, most clearly reveals in more than one place that he was present with them on the journey, when they were now about to proceed to it and then further proceeding; so that truly we could not desire a more excellent or more credible writer and witness of the things which he narrates those holy exiles then did and endured. That relation, in which whatever pertains chiefly to our Saints is set forth, has already been supplied in the Acts of St. Eugenius, bishop of Carthage, reprinted in tome 3 of July of our Work from page 495, num. 14 and the seven following, and can therefore be seen there by the studious reader; but, although this is so, I shall nevertheless subjoin it to this Commentary, distinguished by the name of Acts and divided into numbers according to our custom, from the edition of Ruinart, collated with the editions of Surius and Chifflet, both that I may discharge the promise given in some manner by our predecessors in tome 2 of September in the historical Sylloge on SS. Donatian, Praesidius and four other African bishops, num. 3, and that I may serve the convenience of the reader, who, eager to know what pertains chiefly to our Saints, will thus not have to have recourse elsewhere to this end.
[4] Further, to answer now, these things premised, what I proposed above, [were received, nor from the fact that from the present one, whose words are also given here,] the eulogies recited above in the second and third places, that is, what Ado and Usuard mention in them, were originally drawn from the said relation, that is, from the Acts of our Saints to be subjoined, as I have said, to this Commentary. Everyone who has compared these with those will perceive this without difficulty, as also that the very announcement of the Little Roman, which I transcribed here just at the beginning of this Commentary, flowed from the same Acts, so that it is certainly not necessary to prove either the one or the other more laboriously here. Nor is there reason why anyone, in order to show that those three martyrologists, and by name Ado and Usuard, did not take their material from Victor, should perhaps here object the present Roman Martyrology, in which the eulogy which is given to our Saints today is conceived in these following words, which, because no differently than the eulogies composed by Ado and Usuard it is necessary on account of what is to be said below to be placed before the reader's eyes, I now also transcribe here: In Africa, of the holy Confessors and Martyrs four thousand nine hundred and sixty-six, in the Vandal persecution under Huneric the Arian king: who, being partly bishops of the churches of God, partly presbyters and deacons, with crowds of faithful peoples associated with them, for the defence of Catholic truth were thrust into the exile of a horrible desert: of whom very many, while they were cruelly led by the Moors, driven with the points of spear-shafts to run and beaten with stones, others, their feet being bound, dragged like corpses through hard and rough places and torn limb by limb, at last, variously tortured, celebrated martyrdom. There were among them eminent priests of the Lord, the bishops Felix and Cyprian.
[5] For although the praised Roman Martyrology, or its chief reformer Baronius, to the Roman Martyrology, that is, to Baronius, in the Saints whom they assign, who diminished the number of the Saints expressed by the author of the Little Roman, Ado and Usuard, by ten Athletes taken from it in the eulogy just now recited, had, as is clear from the Annotations which he subjoins to it, Victor of Vita also lighting his way, it cannot nevertheless be inferred from this that that number was not taken by those ancient martyrologists from this holy writer. This will become clear from what is now to be said. There exist different exemplars of Victor of Vita, as Ruinart teaches in the History of the Vandal persecution, page 168, of which some record that seventy-six orthodox, others sixty-six, and others finally sixty-four, were driven into exile by Huneric together with four thousand nine hundred others
are found; and since this is so, and the whole band too of the orthodox, that is, of these exiles, is reduced in Chifflet's edition of Victor to four thousand nine hundred and sixty-one, why could not both the author of the Little Roman and Ado and Usuard, who mark a greater number of Champions than Baronius or any others who mark a smaller, have received it from Victor of Vita, following different exemplars of him? That certainly I do not perceive.
[6] differ in number, And indeed, although it cannot be called into doubt, on account of what has already been said, that Baronius received the smaller number of our Champions which he assigns from some exemplar or other of Victor of Vita lighting his way, yet, even from the fact that no ancient writer, different from Victor, is found from whom Ado as well as Usuard and the author of the Little Roman could have received the greater number of Athletes which they record, it is likewise not to be called into doubt that they received it from exemplars of Victor lighting their way. Nor is this only not to be done, but I also think, with our Du Sollier in his Observations on Usuard for today, that this same greater number of the Saints, as being founded, as follows from what has already been said, both in those exemplars of Victor of Vita older than the 10th century (for before this the three classical martyrologists just praised flourished) and in the more correct edition of Victor by Ruinart and moreover in other exemplars of the same Victor which are praised in it on page 168, is to be embraced, or certainly to be preferred to the smaller number of Champions assigned by Baronius; and even if we granted for the moment that that larger number of Athletes, of which enough already, is neither to be admitted nor was received from Victor of Vita by Ado and Usuard and the author of the Little Roman, yet it could not be concluded from this that the other things which the first two of these record in the eulogies transcribed above were likewise not received from Victor, as everyone who has weighed the matter attentively will recognize without difficulty.
[7] [and because together with the same Baronius, in what they relate about the same Saints,] But, you will say, Victor of Vita relates that the glorious band of 4976 orthodox, of which he speaks in the Acts to be published, num. 1, was composed of bishops, presbyters, deacons and other members of the Church, and that it was driven into exile by Huneric at the time of which he makes discourse, no mention at all being made of another multitude of the faithful which was joined to that band; but in this matter Ado and Usuard, nay and Baronius, seem to be opposed to Victor; for they seem to establish in the eulogies of the Saints transcribed above, as will become clear to one considering them, that the same most valiant legion of African Champions which they record today, four thousand nine hundred and seventy-six, or, as Baronius has it, sixty-six, was composed of bishops, presbyters and deacons, and that these, together with another multitude of faithful peoples which was joined or associated to that legion, were driven into exile by Huneric; and since they insinuate, not altogether obscurely, as appears, that the most valiant band of Catholic Champions which Victor records consisted of bishops, presbyters and deacons alone, and seem to number even more, either confessors or martyrs, than Victor, there is certainly reason why they should be judged to conflict with this writer and therefore not to have drawn from him all the things they record.
[8] by Victor himself, either truly or in appearance This Châtelain no doubt observed, who knew that Victor of Vita is to be believed here rather than Baronius and any other writers whatever, whether older or more recent, and hence, thinking that nothing which was opposed to that writer even in appearance, much less in reality, was to be inserted in his Universal Martyrology, and that therefore a freer wit was to be used here in interpreting Baronius, he substituted for the first period of the eulogy of our Saints, in which the things which I have said, opposed to Victor either in reality or at least in appearance, seem to be related by that martyrologist, another period, which, translated into Latin from the French idiom in which it is written, sounds thus: In Africa, of the holy Confessors and Martyrs four thousand nine hundred and sixty-six, who suffered the persecution from the Vandals under Huneric the Arian king; of whom some were bishops, others presbyters, others deacons, and others, in even greater number, lay people, who were all, for the defence of Catholic truth, thrust into the exile of a horrible desert. So the praised Châtelain, who, although, when he here reveals that the band of our Champions consisted partly of lay people, he has perhaps not attained the mind of Victor, as will be said below, nevertheless relates in the words already given nothing which certainly conflicts with this writer. But what are we now to say of Ado, Usuard and Baronius?
[9] I think that these, either speaking less accurately, recorded even more than they wished to be understood, dissenting, Cyprian too, who nevertheless or certainly, interpreting not aptly enough what they had read in Victor, put into writing the things which seem to conflict with this writer; and since it appears by no means unlikely that one or the other took place, it can certainly by no means be concluded from what the said martyrologists record about the most glorious band of our Champions that they did not receive those things from Victor, with whom they conflict either truly or in appearance, that is, that they did not use this writer for writing things of this kind. But can this likewise not come about from the fact that, as I shall show below, they number Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, of the province of Byzacena, as is understood from the Notitia of the bishops of Africa in Ruinart on the Vandal persecution, page 131, among our glorious 4976 Athletes, whom the Acts to be published relate to have been banished together by Huneric, or, to speak more clearly, commemorate him as one of these holy Exiles? Victor of Vita, by whom we must certainly stand in all things pertaining to our Saints, writes thus in the said Acts, num. 7: There was present … there then (namely with the 4976 orthodox going away into exile by order of Huneric and suffering on this occasion the most grievous hardships on the way) the blessed pontiff Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, an excellent consoler, who cherished each one with pious and fatherly affection, not without rivers of running tears: ready to lay down his life for the brethren and to give himself of his own accord to such sufferings, if he were let go; who spent all that he had on the needy brethren in that necessity then: for he was seeking an occasion how he might be joined to the confessors, himself a confessor in mind and virtue. Who afterwards, through many contests and the squalor of prison, went with exultation to the exile which he desired.
[10] Cyprian, therefore, was a very great solace and help to our holy Athletes, 4976, was not banished with those Saints, whom Victor relates to have been banished by Huneric, on the journey to the desert to which they were being led away, and most ardently desired, as the same Victor testifies in the words already given, to be joined to them as a companion of their hardships and exile; wherefore, as even for that reason he stands with full right inserted in the Martyrologies of Ado and Usuard on the present day (although meanwhile whether this was chosen for celebrating those Saints for some cause, or by mere choice, is in obscurity) together with those holy Exiles, and by name with Felix, referred here among those Passed Over by us from the 14th day of January, on which he is wrongly marked in Reusner's Historical Diary as slain then, so also at the same time, since the very inscription of Saints in the ancient or classical Martyrologies, such as those of Ado and Usuard are, is held as ecclesiastical cult, he is honoured by the Church as a Saint. But Ado and Usuard, having spoken in their eulogies, transcribed above, some things about the 4976 Catholics whom they record as driven into exile by Huneric, presently subjoin: Among whom were Cyprian and Felix, eminent priests of the Lord; and so, as Baronius also does, they number among those Saints not only Felix, bishop of Abbir, or, as it is otherwise written, of Abira or even Abdera, who truly, as Victor teaches, was of their number; but also Cyprian of Unizibira, as if he likewise were one of those blessed Exiles; and this seems most openly opposed to Victor of Vita. For since he not obscurely reveals in the words just transcribed here that Cyprian was made an exile not then, when those most valiant 4976 Champions whom he records were setting out into exile, but only afterwards, truly he does not number him among them; nay on the contrary he manifestly insinuates that Cyprian was not one of those holy Exiles.
[11] as if they commemorated him as one of the same, the contrary can be concluded. Hence I, since I have perceived that Cyprian is indeed deservedly honoured today by the Church together with the holy 4976 Athletes whom Victor writes to have been driven into exile by Huneric, and yet suppose that only Felix, and not also Cyprian, on account of what has already been said, can be commemorated as one of these, have indicated above in the title that we are treating here of SS. Cyprian and Felix and four thousand nine hundred and seventy-five others, not four, partly MM., partly confessors. For the rest, to answer now also the difficulty proposed above and drawn from Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, whom Ado and Usuard, and likewise Baronius, from what has been said, make one of the 4976 Athletes of whom Victor speaks in the Acts: he is indeed, as I have already shown, not numbered among them by Victor, and this holy bishop was cast into exile not about the year 482, in which, from what is to be said below, they were, but in the year, as I shall afterwards show, 484; but since indeed, as is clear even from this, this happened not long after that numerous band of Saints had been driven into exile, and Victor speaks of Cyprian also in the same place as of it, the time at which he was made an exile not being determined, they could have judged that that holy prelate was comprehended by that writer under it, and hence Ado and Usuard together with Baronius could have numbered him among the 4976 Saints, or, as Baronius has it, 4966, whom the Acts to be published narrate to have been banished together by Huneric, thinking that they would thus be doing nothing opposed to Victor; so that truly, from the fact that they did in fact do this, it can likewise not be concluded that they did not receive from Victor the things which they narrate in the eulogies transcribed above, that is, that they did not use that writer for committing these things to writing.
§ II. Of what condition, and whether of mixed sex, the 4976 orthodox were whom Huneric banished together, and about what year this prince did so.
The 4976 orthodox, who all, no one of the female sex being among them, That the glorious band of 4976 Orthodox, which Victor of Vita relates in the Acts to be published, num. 1, to have been driven into exile by Huneric, was composed of persons of mixed sex, our Limpens insinuates at the 6th day of September in the Historical Sylloge on SS. Donatian and five other bishops in Africa, num. 10; but undoubtingly to assent to him in this matter, not
I am able. For I hold it nearer the truth that no one of the female sex was among those holy Exiles, and this also seemed so to Tillemont, volume XVI of the Mémoires ecclésiastiques, page 548. Victor indeed, in the Acts to be edited, number 3 and following, makes mention of a certain old woman who set out into exile together with that most valiant band as it went forth into the exile to which Huneric had ordered it; but that woman, as is plain from the context of those Acts, withdrew into exile not by the command of Huneric but of her own accord, namely in order to be at the side of her little grandson, who had been ordered by Huneric to go into exile, lest, found alone by the enemy, he should be led away from the way of truth to death. Moreover, from the very things which Victor writes in the same place about that old woman, it can, as it appears, not unfittingly be concluded that no woman at all was among our 4976 holy Exiles. For he affirms that this poor little woman was rebuked by himself and by others because she seemed importunate, either in joining herself to men in spite of her sex, or in associating herself with the army of Christ; that is, if I rightly grasp Victor's mind, because, being a woman, she would be importunate both in joining herself to men and in associating herself with the army of Christ. But since, if other women had been mingled with or joined to this holy band, the poor little woman of whom we are here speaking would seem in no way at all to have deserved rebuke for having joined herself to it, this is truly an argument that among our 4976 orthodox Exiles, as I have said, there was no one of the female sex.
[13] probably to the clergy, as here, the difficulty, It may further be added to confirm the matter that that most valiant troop of Catholics was composed partly of bishops, presbyters and deacons, partly, as Victor speaks at number 1, of other members of the Church, and that these, as it appears, were not laymen but clerics of inferior order, or at any rate belonged in some manner or other to the clergy. Castellanus indeed thought the contrary, as everyone will gather from his words recited at number 8; but who would assert for certain that this martyrologist, however often praised by us for his accuracy and sharpness of mind, grasped Victor's mind in that place? Tillemont certainly does not seem likely to have asserted it; for he says that the other members of the Church, of whom, as Victor relates in the Acts to be edited, number 1, the troop of 4976 orthodox driven into exile by Huneric was partly composed, were probably ecclesiastics or clerics. Nor is he moved to think otherwise by the fact that among those holy Exiles there were very many little children, as the same Victor teaches in the Acts to be edited, number 3; for he holds that these could have been readers of the churches, and not without reason, as will become clear from what is to be said presently. In Ruinart, in the Historia Persecutionis Wandalicæ, book 5, number 9, or in the Acts of Eugenius, bishop of Carthage, taken from there and inserted in volume 3 of July of our Work, number 46, Victor of Vita, proceeding to treat of the persecution continued by Huneric against the Catholics even after these 4976 Champions had been banished, speaks in the following manner: Then also, when Eugenius the pastor had already been placed in exile, the whole clergy of the church of Carthage, almost five hundred or more, is worn down by slaughter and starvation. Among whom were very many little children who were readers, who, rejoicing in the Lord, are thrust far away into cruel exile.
[14] which makes for the contrary, being resolved, from two There were therefore, as is understood from this text of Victor, in the church of Carthage little children who were readers, or rather, since little children of this kind, as may be seen with us in the Commentary prefixed to the said Acts of St. Eugenius, bishop of Carthage, number 3, were accustomed to be employed for singing in the church, cantors; and these, who, although they were called readers, had not however been initiated into an ecclesiastical order among the minor orders preceding the acolytate, as may also be seen with us in the place last cited, are by Victor, in the words given, both reckoned among the clergy of Carthage and narrated to have been driven into exile together with it after suffering most grievous things. And as in the church of Carthage, so also in the other churches of Africa there could have been little children of this kind who were driven into exile by Huneric with the bishops, presbyters, deacons and other members of those churches. Now, since this is so, Tillemont was certainly in no way to be moved, by the fact that, as Victor says in the place cited, there were very many little children among the 4976 Orthodox banished by Huneric, to believe that the other members of the church, of whom the same Victor teaches that their troop was partly composed, were not ecclesiastics or clerics. Nor does anything else occur by which one ought to be moved to believe it; but let us now also set before the reader's eyes why not only the bishops, presbyters and deacons, but also those other members of the Church of whom Victor relates that that troop of Orthodox was partly composed, probably belonged to the clergy, or why all and each of those who were of that troop may not without reason be believed to have been ecclesiastics or clerics.
[15] by the texts of Victor of Tunnuna which are recited Victor of Tunnuna, or, as others write, Tununensis or Tunonensis, bishop in Africa, who, as Isidore teaches in De Viris illustribus, chapter 33, flourished about the middle of the sixth century, in his Chronicle, as it was edited by Scaliger, first at the third consulship of Leo Augustus, which coincides with the year of Christ 466, writes thus of Huneric, king of the Vandals: Huneric, king of the Vandals, roused by Arian fury, persecutes the Catholics throughout Africa more than his father; he takes away the churches of the Christians and sends Catholic priests into exile; and then at the third consulship of Zeno Augustus (for of this that chronographer speaks in that place), which falls in the year of Christ 479, he adds the following of the same most cruel Arian prince: Huneric, king of the Vandals, pressing on exceedingly with the persecution throughout all Africa, banishes to Tribunni, Macri and Nippis and other parts of the desert Catholics, no longer only priests and clerics of every order, but also monks and laymen, about four thousand, to harsher exiles, and makes confessors and martyrs, and cuts out the tongues of the confessors. Since Genseric, king of the Vandals, departed from the living in the year of Christ 477, on the 25th day of January, as Ruinart, Historia Persecutionis Wandalicæ, part 2, chapter 7, number 1, rightly teaches after Noris, and therefore Huneric, who soon succeeded him, began the first year of his reign in the said year 477, when it had advanced to the 25th day of January; and since certainly, as is plain from Victor of Vita, he did not begin to rage against the Orthodox before the year 481, about which year Eugenius, as our Cuper proves from the same Ruinart in volume 3 of July, in the Commentary prefixed to the Acts of this holy Prelate, number 17 and following, was ordained bishop of Carthage, it must surely be confessed that Victor of Tunnuna, who, as I have already indicated, attaches the things he relates in the two texts transcribed here above to the years 466 and 479, disturbs the order of times, or does not mark them with the true years in which the things he narrates there happened.
[16] But, although this is so, yet no one will say that all credit is therefore to be denied him in what he writes on the subject here proposed, it must rightly be gathered even then, while he conflicts neither with Victor, of whom he was nearly a contemporary, nor with other ancient writers; wherefore, since the things which he records in the two texts transcribed here above were certainly done not very long before his age, and do not conflict with Victor of Vita or other ancient writers worthy of credit, they are truly to be held, if not as certain, at least with good reason as probable. But let us come to what chiefly concerns this place. From the two said texts it appears that it must rightly and deservedly be gathered that the whole troop of 4976 Orthodox driven out by Huneric, as Victor of Vita teaches, and therefore not only the bishops, presbyters and deacons, but also the other members of the Church of which the same Victor relates that it was partly composed, belonged to the clergy, or that all and each of those who were of that troop were ecclesiastics or clerics. For since, after Victor of Tunnuna has said in the former text that priests were sent into exile by Huneric, he then in the latter, speaking of the same Arian king pressing the persecution of the Catholics throughout all Africa beyond measure, adds that he banishes to harsher exiles no longer only priests and clerics of every order, but also monks and laymen, about four thousand, he surely indicates not obscurely that there was a time when Huneric raged with exile against priests and clerics of every order alone.
[17] Now this, as cannot be denied, undoubtedly happened either before or after the first day of February of the year 484, it is shown, belonged, on which, as is understood from Victor of Vita, De Persecutione Wandalica, book 2, the Catholic bishops of the African church were present at Carthage by Huneric's command, to render an account of their faith, or to dispute about it with the Arians; and since it certainly cannot have happened after that month, inasmuch as from it Huneric, as will become evident to anyone who turns over Victor's Persecutio Wandalica, book 2, the last number, and above all books 4 and 5, raged with exile and other penalties not only against priests and other clerics of inferior order, but also, about four thousand monks and laymen, of whom the latter text of Victor of Tunnuna given at number 15 speaks, having been banished at that very time, against Orthodox of every condition, age and sex, it is necessary that it be said to have happened before that same month of February of the year 484. Now, since what Victor of Vita relates in the Acts to be edited, number 1, about the troop of 4976 Orthodox sent into exile by Huneric, undoubtedly took place, as will become plain from what is to be said below, before the said February of the year 484, and Huneric is not read in Victor or in other writers worthy of credit to have done anything at that time, distinct from the banishment of those Orthodox, by which he might seem to have raged with exile against priests and other clerics of every order alone, nothing remains but that he be believed to have done this when he sent that same most valiant legion of orthodox Athletes into exile; and that consequently, having regard to what follows from the two texts of Victor of Tunnuna transcribed here above, not only the bishops, presbyters and deacons, but also the other members of the church of which Victor of Vita reports that that band was partly composed, probably belonged to the clergy, or, what comes to the same thing, were ecclesiastics or clerics.
[18] [were most probably not before the year 482, and certainly, as from the edict of Huneric,] Now let us determine the time about which this numerous troop of Catholic Champions was driven into exile by Huneric. Victor of Vita accurately describes the beginning and the various increases of the persecution set in motion by Huneric against the Catholics, and it is plain from the order which he keeps in handing these things down to memory that the Orthodox
4976 recorded in the Acts to be edited, number 1, were not banished by Huneric before St. Eugenius had been ordained bishop of Carthage; wherefore, since the ordination of Eugenius as bishop of Carthage took place about the year 481, as I have already noted above is proved by our Cuper, and yet that numerous band of Orthodox was driven into exile by Huneric not immediately then but, as everyone will conclude from what the same Victor writes in the place cited, only some time afterwards, this most probably happened not earlier than the year 482; and since Victor, having narrated the banishment of those glorious Champions and set forth the most grievous hardships which they suffered on the road while they were being led away into exile, only then begins to speak of the edict by which Huneric, planning harsher measures, as he says, against the Church of God, summoned the Catholic bishops of all Africa to Carthage to render an account of their faith, it follows that, regarding Victor here too, by whom we must certainly stand, our 4976 glorious Champions, who from what has been said were most probably not banished by Huneric before the year 482, nevertheless undoubtedly underwent this lot before that edict was issued; wherefore, that we may have clearly in view the very day before which this was done, inquiry must here be made into the year and day on which the aforesaid edict was issued.
[19] by no means, contrary to what seemed so to Chifflet, That edict, which Victor of Vita, in Ruinart's edition (for I use this as the more accurate), book 2, number 13, recites in full, is noted as given on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of June, in the seventh year of the reign of Huneric; so that, since Huneric, as I have taught above, began to reign in the year 477 when it had advanced to the 25th day of January, the seventh year of his reign, marked with the 13th day before the Kalends of June, or the twentieth day of May, corresponds to the year 483, and that consequently the edict of which we are here speaking was issued in this very year. But since that edict or precept is noted as given on the 13th day before the Kalends of June, or the 20th day of May, and yet Victor, in the place last cited, affirms that it was directed by Huneric, on the day of the Ascension of the Lord, while Reginus, the legate of the emperor Zeno, was present, to bishop Eugenius, to be read in the midst of the church, Chifflet, thinking that the edict was promulgated on the day of the Ascension of the Lord and that the error lies in the day subscribed to the edict, observes thus in his Elucidations on Victor, chapter XI: From the day of promulgation … the day subscribed to the edict, the 13th before the Kalends of June, that is, the 20th of the month of May, must be emended. For in that year (namely of Christ 483) Easter fell on the 10th of April, the Ascension on the 19th of May. How then was the edict read publicly in the church on the 19th, if it was given and drawn up only on the following day, namely the 20th of May? We think therefore that it was given on the very day of the Ascension, the 14th before the Kalends of June, or at any rate two days before, that is, the 16th before the Kalends, so that the number XIII has crept in for XIV or XVI by an easy change of the mark V into II.
[20] So he; but Victor does not say that the precept or edict was read publicly in the church, or promulgated, on the 19th day of the month of May, or the day of the Ascension, [being faulty, it is proved that they were driven into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483.] but only that on that day, when it had already been signed and drawn up, it was directed to bishop Eugenius; namely so that on the following day, or the 13th before the Kalends of June, on which day what was then to be promulgated was dated, it might be read publicly in the midst of the church. So, more or less, Pagi in his Critica at the year 483, number 9, and surely, as it seems to me, most rightly: wherefore, since the error does not lie in the day subscribed to the edict or precept, there is indeed reason why it should be believed to have been issued in the year 483 and on the very 13th day before the Kalends of June, or the 20th day of May, on which it is noted as given in Victor; and since, before it was issued, our 4976 Champions had been driven into exile, as has been said, the inference becomes that they underwent this lot, by which, as I have shown above, they were most probably not pressed before the year 482, certainly indeed before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, and most probably either in the year 482 or in the following year before it had advanced to the 20th day of May.
§ III. Whether St. Felix was present at the conference of Carthage, held in the year 484.
[Felix, who, surviving the hardships of the road, arrived where he had been banished,] Although St. Felix, bishop of Abbir, or, as it is elsewhere written, Abir, when he had to withdraw into the exile to which he had been condemned by Huneric, had already discharged the office of bishop for forty-four years, as Victor testifies in the Acts, number 1, and, stricken, as the same writer speaks in the same place, with the disease of paralysis, was so ill affected in health that he neither felt anything nor could speak at all, I nevertheless persuade myself that he did not succumb to the most grievous hardships and penalties endured on the journey, but arrived at the desert to which he had been banished. This opinion sits with me because, as Victor says, during the whole journey, namely the one which had to be made by those going into exile, he was carried upon a burdo, that is, as Du Cange interprets it in the Glossary, a mule; and this, it seems, could not have been said with truth preserved if he had died on the road, before it was completed, either from its hardships or from his disease or from the penalties inflicted on him. Moreover, in Ruinart, in the Historia Persecutionis Vandalicæ, from page 123, there exists the Notitia, as it is usually called, of the African church, written, as is commonly believed, not very long after the year 482, about which Felix and the rest of the 4976 Orthodox of whom we treat here were driven into exile, as I have already taught; and in this precious monument of sacred antiquity, or Catalogue of the Orthodox bishops who were present at Carthage on the Kalends of February in the year 484 by Huneric's command to render an account of their faith, Felix Abaritanus, probably not different from ours, who by a slight difference of one or another little letter is called by Victor Abiraitanus or Abbiritanus, is reckoned in the second place among the prelates of the proconsular province: wherefore, since he is thus there displayed as still surviving among the living at the time when the bishops of Africa came to Carthage in the year 484 to dispute with the Arians about the faith, this too is an argument that he did not die on the journey to the desert to which, from what has been said, he had been banished about the year 482.
[22] nor, as from those things adduced here There will perhaps be someone here who thinks, or at least suspects, that when Felix had been driven into exile and had moreover perished on the journey to the desert to which he had been banished, another prelate of the same name was substituted, and that this man is reckoned in the Notitia of the African church, or the Catalogue of the Orthodox bishops who came to Carthage in the year 484 to dispute with the Arians. But since, from the year 482, about which the 4976 Orthodox, and therefore also Felix, bishop of Abbir, who was one of them, were driven into exile by Huneric, until the year 484, in which the Catholic bishops of the African church came to Carthage by Huneric's order to render an account of their faith or to dispute with the Arians, the persecution set in motion against the Catholics by this Arian prince, as is plain from Victor, boiled up to the highest degree, it appears exceedingly hard to believe that the people of Abbir then put in a successor to their bishop Felix, who had died on the journey to the desert to which he had been banished, or substituted one received from elsewhere, and that Huneric did not oppose its being done. Moreover, Victor of Tunnuna, praised above, while he speaks of Huneric as banishing as yet only priests and clerics of inferior order, which, from what has been said above, he must be judged to have done when he drove the 4976 Orthodox into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, clearly records, in the words transcribed here above in the first place, that churches too were then closed by that Arian king. Nor is there reason why we should not give him credence in this matter; for since, of the 4976 Orthodox whom, as has been said, Huneric sent into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, some at least, on Victor's testimony, were bishops, it appears most like the truth that that king, who, as Victor of Vita teaches in book 4, number 1, after the conference of Carthage held in the year 484, while the Catholic bishops who had attended it were still at Carthage and were driven into exile only a little afterwards, closed the churches of all Africa, likewise then ordered the sacred buildings of the dioceses whose bishops he banished before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, and therefore before that conference, to be closed.
[23] But I add something which also appears certain, and which conduces no less to our purpose here. it appears, by Felix, in the Notitia of the African church, Since the troop of most valiant Athletes whom Huneric sent together into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, as has been said, was composed partly of bishops, partly of priests and deacons and, as I have taught above, other clerics of inferior order, these certainly belonged to the dioceses over which those bishops presided; and truly it cannot be called into doubt that the sacred buildings of those dioceses were then, either all or at least not a few, deprived of their ministers. Since this is so, and so very many sacred buildings of the dioceses whose bishops Huneric banished before the twentieth day of May of the year 483 were, if not closed, at any rate bereft of their ministers by Huneric's doing, who would persuade himself that in the diocese of Abbir, which was one of these, a successor was then put in for St. Felix, supposing he had died, when affairs were so disturbed? Felix, therefore, recorded in the Notitia of the African church in the second place among the prelates of the proconsular province, is not another bishop of this name who was substituted for our Felix after he had been banished to the desert and had died on the journey to it, but this very man, who, although, when he was driven into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, he was, as Victor teaches, in very bad health, was nevertheless by a singular favour of the God who has mercy kept still among the living until the year 484, in which the Catholic bishops of the African church betook themselves to Carthage to render an account of their faith or to hold a conference about it with the Arians, and was restored to full, or at least better, health.
[24] But, someone perhaps will still say, Ruinart, on the said place of the Notitia of the African church although perhaps in the word Abaritanus in which Felix Abaritanus is recorded among the bishops of the proconsular province, writes thus in the Historia Persecutionis Wandalicæ, page 218: *It is not … improbable that here in the Notitia Aboritanus is to be read for Abaritanus. For we have the city of Abora in Africa, which belonged to the proconsular province, as is certain from the synodical letter of the bishops of the same province to Paul, bishop of Constantinople, which was read in the Lateran council against the Monothelites under St. Martin, in the second action or session. For to this there subscribed "Felix, bishop of the holy church of Abora." Besides, at the Carthaginian
conference, held in the year 411 in the cause of the Donatists, in the first session, chapter 133, there was present "Trifolius, bishop of Abora," a Catholic.* But since the episcopal city of Africa, Abora or Aboritana, which he records here, is certainly different from the city over which Felix, who is recorded by Victor in the Acts to be edited, number 1, presided in the office of bishop, it follows that this man too (for who would say that one and the same man then presided in the office of bishop over two cities, each of which was adorned with an episcopal see?) is different from the Felix entered in the African Notitia, if in it Aboritanus ought to be read for Abaritanus. But since, indeed, if this is to be done, it is necessary that an error lie in the word Abaritanus of the Notitia, why is it to be emended here by the word Aboritanus rather than by a word derived from the name of the city over which the Felix recorded by Victor presided in the office of bishop? Is it perhaps because this word departs less than that one, in the manner in which it is written, from the word Abaritanus? It will undoubtedly be answered in the affirmative; but let us look into whether the matter really stands so.
[25] faulty, by the Felix recorded, Abderitanus indeed is read to designate the city over which Felix presided in the edition of Victor by Chifflet, and, with the slight difference of one little letter, Abdiritanus in the editions of the same Victor by Rhenanus, Surius and some others; but Ruinart here in his Notes on Victor praises two printed copies of Victor and one manuscript in which Abirritanus is marked, and to these he adds three other manuscript copies of the same Victor in which, as he says, Abiritanus is written; and since, as the same Ruinart presently adds in the same place, there existed in Africa a double city Abbir, not called Abder or Abdir, the bishop of each of which attended the conference of Carthage held in the year 411 in the cause of the Donatists, everyone, as I think, will without difficulty admit as genuine the reading by which Abbiritanus, or with the slight difference of one little letter Abiritanus, is written in Victor. Now since this is so, and the word Abirritanus, or rather Abiritanus, which is substituted for it in the manuscripts praised above, departs no more in the manner in which it is written from the word Abaritanus than does the word Aboritanus, I truly do not see why the error which perhaps really lies in the word Abaritanus of the Notitia (for I find among the ancient writers no episcopal city in Africa from whose name it could be derived) is to be corrected by the word Aboritanus rather than by the word Abiritanus. Indeed, since no bishop named Felix who presided over the church of Abora or Aboritana about the time of the conference of Carthage celebrated in the year 484 occurs among writers worthy of credit, and since it is established from Victor of Vita that Felix of Abir flourished at that time, I judge that that error is to be removed by the word Abiritanus rather than by the word Aboritanus.
[26] is to be believed different, Nor does Ruinart himself oppose this opinion of mine; for although, in the words transcribed here just now, he pronounces it not improbable that in the place of the African Notitia cited above Aboritanus is to be read for Abaritanus, yet in his Notes on Victor he says that the Felix praised by this writer in the Acts to be edited, number 1, seems to be the very one who in the African Notitia is called Abaritanus among the proconsular bishops, number 2; and he then repeats this also in his Notes on the Notitia. Matters therefore standing as I have already said, the words of the praised Ruinart objected in the number immediately preceding ought surely not to move us either to believe that the Felix recorded by Victor in the Acts to be edited, number 1, is different or distinct from the Felix who in the Notitia of the African church, or the Catalogue of the Catholic bishops who betook themselves to Carthage in the year 484 to attend the conference to be held there then with the Arians, is reckoned in the second place among the bishops of the proconsular province. But did this Saint of ours too then betake himself to Carthage and attend the conference held between the Catholics and the Arians? Limpens, in the Historical Sylloge on SS. Donatian, Præsidius and four other African prelates, inserted in volume 2 of September of our Work, number 15, affirms that Felix, bishop of Abbir, when Huneric, by the edict issued, as I have taught, in the year 483 on the twentieth day of the month of May, had summoned all the Catholic bishops established throughout all Africa to Carthage, to attend the conference to be held there with the Arians on the 1st day of February of the following year, returned to Carthage from the exile into which he had been driven before the twentieth day of May of the year 483; nor would I wish to oppose him vehemently in this matter, although perhaps, because Felix, when he was driven into exile about the year 482, was, as we have seen, in very bad health, it will not easily find credence with many.
[27] But even if it were most certain on every side that Felix returned from exile in 484, in the year 484, although perhaps when he had returned from exile, you would not rightly infer from this that he was present at Carthage in that year on the first day of February and presented himself at the conference then held there with the Arians; and whether I think so with reason or without, let the reader decide from what is now to be said. The Notitia of the African church, of which above, bears in Ruinart this title: Here begin the names of the Catholic bishops of the various provinces who came to Carthage by royal command to render an account of the faith, on the day of the Kalends of February, in the sixth year of king Huneric. That in the sixth year of king Huneric is put here faultily, and in the eighth year is to be read, is plain from the fact that, as is established from Victor of Vita, Huneric on the 20th day of May, in the seventh year of his reign, of Christ, from what has been said above, 483, proclaimed the conference to be celebrated at Carthage on the next coming Kalends of February, and therefore, since Huneric, as I have taught above, began to reign in the year of Christ 477 on the 25th day of January, in the eighth year of his reign, of Christ 484. Further, since the bishops who attended the conference of Carthage arrived at Carthage not on the very 1st day of February on which Huneric had appointed it to be celebrated, but already when it was approaching, as Victor of Vita clearly teaches in book 2, number 18, it appears beyond doubt that in the title of the Notitia transcribed here just now the word came is used for the word were present.
[28] Now, since these things are so, it is surely indicated not obscurely by that title that the Catholic bishops, at the conference of Carthage whose names the Catalogue subjoined to it then displays, were present at Carthage to render an account of their faith by Huneric's command on the 1st day of February in the year 484; but, although this is so, you would not rightly extend it either to all and each of those bishops, or to Felix, whom the Catalogue just mentioned reckons in the second place among the bishops of the proconsular province. For the author of the Notitia, after that title, or rather, on account of what is presently to be said, that part of the title by which, as I have already noted, the bishops recorded in the subjoined Catalogue are indicated to have been present at Carthage to render an account of their faith by Huneric's command on the 1st day of February in the year 484, immediately, with only a few words interposed by which he declares that he begins from the names of the bishops of the proconsular province, subjoins: or who were sent into exile. And since thus the entire title which he prefixes to the subjoined Catalogue of bishops, or at least to that part of it which comprises the bishops of the proconsular province, consists not of the words alone transcribed here in the immediately preceding number, but of a disjunctive proposition by which the bishops marked in the subjoined Catalogue are indicated either to have been present at Carthage to render an account of their faith on the 1st day of February in the year 484, or to have been sent into exile, so surely it reveals not obscurely that some at least of those bishops had been banished, or, hindered by the exile into which they had been driven, were not then present at Carthage and so did not attend the conference held there. So I judge, because, when he intimates under a disjunction that the bishops whose names he recounts were present at Carthage on the 1st day of February in the year 484 or had been sent into exile, he certainly intends, as will become clear to one who considers it, to signify no more that all and each of them were present at Carthage than that all and each of them had been driven into exile.
[29] to have attended But who are the bishops whom the author of the Notitia, already so often praised, reveals in the aforesaid title not to have been present at Carthage on the 1st day of February in the year 484, hindered by the exile into which they had been driven? That they are those very ones to whose names, in the subjoined Catalogue of the bishops of Africa, he then adds the word exile or into exile, appears to me surely, if not certain, at least most like the truth, if only from this: that although it is certain from Victor of Vita that very many, nay, if you perhaps except one on account of what is to be said below, all the Catholic bishops of Africa who attended the conference of Carthage and remained constant in the faith were driven into exile after that meeting with the Arians, yet he adds this word exile or into exile to none who is known for certain to have been of their number, not even to Cyprian himself, bishop of Unizibira, who nevertheless, as you will understand from what is to be said below, undoubtedly attended the conference of Carthage and was punished with exile after it; while meanwhile he expressly distinguishes, in Ruinart, De Persecutione Vandalica, page 130, by the words into exile Præsidius, bishop of Sufetula in the province of Byzacena, who for certain, as may be seen with us in volume 2 of September in the historical Sylloge on him and five other African prelates, number 14 and following, was cast into exile about one month before the conference of Carthage and was thus prevented from attending that meeting.
[30] does not seem. Now, since the author of the Notitia likewise adds the word exile to the name of St. Felix in the praised Catalogue, it follows from what has been said that he was most probably one of the bishops whom he indicates in the title recorded above not to have been present at Carthage on the 1st day of February in the year 484, and so not to have attended the conference then held there, hindered by the exile into which they had been driven; and that consequently, although perhaps after the proclamation of that conference, made, from what has been said above, on the 20th day of May in the year 483, he returned to Carthage, as Huneric's precept required, if in any manner his health allowed it, from the exile into which, as I taught before, he had been driven before that day of this year, he was nevertheless most probably compelled by Huneric's order to withdraw again from there into exile before it was celebrated, so as not to attend the said conference, just like Donatian, bishop and confessor (see what has already so often been praised concerning him and five other African prelates in volume 2 of September of our Work). But enough now of this matter, which concerns St. Felix alone; let us now set out other things which are to be recorded both of him and of the rest of the Athletes of the troop of our 4976 holy Exiles, and likewise of Cyprian, who, as has been said, is not to be reckoned among them as a companion in exile.
§ IV. Whether Cyprian and Felix and the rest together
with him by Huneric are to be held as martyrs, and whether they are distinguished from the Saints whom the Greeks celebrate on the 7th day of December.
Cyprian and Felix and the rest of the 4976 Exiles, of whom some as martyrs, At about the same time as the glorious band of 4976 Orthodox was banished by Huneric, very many of it also passed to the Heavenly Ones, being taken from the living, as Victor teaches in the Acts to be edited, number 10, at the time when, soon after the sentence by which they had been condemned to exile by that Arian king, they were being led by the Moors to the place assigned by it, succumbing to the most monstrous cruelty with which they were tortured by them at the command of the Vandals. Hear what he says in the same place, after premising that the multitude of Catholics who were being led away into exile, already almost worn out by the most grievous hardships which it had suffered on the road, was compelled even to run, so that the place appointed for the halt might be reached quickly enough, and that the old men and others failing from weariness then began to be beaten with the points of spear-shafts to drive them on. But afterwards, he says, the Moors were commanded to drag those who could not walk, with their feet bound, like the carcasses of dead animals, through hard and rough stony places; where first their garments, then their individual limbs were torn away. Of whom, by the sharp swords of the rocks, the head of one was crushed, the sides of others were split open, and so they breathed out their spirit between the hands of those dragging them. Whose number we were in no way able to gather, the multitude preventing it: yet the humble burial of the Saints is raised up along the whole public highway, the tombs speaking. So that writer, truly, as has been proved above, by far most worthy of credit; and Ado, using almost his very words, expressed him most accurately in this place towards the end of the elogium transcribed here at number 1. And not only, as I have said, that very many of our 4976 Orthodox passed to the Lord at about the same time as their banishment took place, made, from what has been said, most probably either in the year 482 or at the beginning of the following year, but also that these, inasmuch as they not only openly confessed the Catholic faith before its enemies, but also, which is required for martyrdom in the strict sense, died in the torments or penalties endured for it, are to be held as true and genuine martyrs, is established from the words of Victor transcribed here just now, as will become plain to one who considers them.
[32] But are the rest of those most valiant Exiles, and above all Felix, the only one of them known by name, others, and Felix by name, for the reasons who, surviving the hardships endured on the road, arrived at the place of their exile, likewise to be held as martyrs? That Felix is not to be presented with the glorious title of Martyr, or did not end his life by martyrdom, appears to me surely, if not certain, at least most like the truth, for the reasons now to be stated. Since against this Saint of ours, if perhaps he returned to Carthage from the exile into which, from what has been said, he had been driven before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, to attend the conference to be celebrated there on the first day of February in the year 484, there was raged before that conference only with exile a second time, as everyone will certainly gather from what has been alleged above, no one surely will say that he was then afflicted with martyrdom. But was this likewise not done after the same conference? Although the author of the Notitia of the African churches reckons Felix among the bishops recorded by him there, even at the very beginning, yet at the end, when he draws up the sum of all those prelates who, to say how the matter is, presided over the African churches at the time of the aforesaid conference of Carthage, or immediately either before or after it, and enumerates how many of those same Prelates then perished, how many fled, and finally how many were banished, he brings into the count only one of all those Prelates who was afflicted with martyrdom; and since all the learned think that this was none other than Lætus, bishop of Nepte or Neptitana, already brought into our Work at the 6th day of September, this is truly an invincible argument that Felix, who, from what has been said, was not afflicted with martyrdom before the conference of Carthage, likewise did not undergo this lot shortly after the same conference, or while the year in which it was celebrated, 484, was still running.
[33] alleged here; In the same place indeed the same author of the Notitia reckons among the aforesaid bishops also only one who was a confessor, or who then indeed confessed the faith but did not undergo death for it; but he counts the banished at the number 348, and by this very fact makes all of them confessors, inasmuch as he intimates that even so they professed the Catholic faith before the Arians and at the least suffered exile for it; so that, although indeed he distinguishes with the title of confessor only one, whom he most probably could not count among the banished for the reason that, although he had indeed confessed the orthodox faith and had also suffered penalties for it, he had nevertheless not been punished with exile, yet in reality he must be judged to number as confessors not one but very many, nay as many as he intimates were then banished. And since Felix was undoubtedly one of those banished, I, since he did not afterwards either, as I shall teach below, undergo death for the faith, think him to be held as a confessor, not as a martyr, on account of everything already alleged on this argument. I now turn my discourse to the other Athletes of the glorious troop of our 4976 Exiles who, just like Felix, surviving the hardships endured on the journey to exile, arrived at the desert to which, from what has been said, they had been banished before the twentieth day of May of the year 483. As, of the Saints who suffered persecution for Christ, those who openly confessed His holy name or faith and also died in the torments endured for it are usually held as martyrs, so of the same Saints those who indeed openly confessed the faith but did not die in the torments endured for it are usually held as confessors; wherefore, as of the glorious troop of 4976 Orthodox which Victor, and from him the hagiologists praised above, record, those who professed the Catholic faith before the Arians and were therefore driven into exile by Huneric, and also died in the hardships and penalties endured for it on the journey thither, are certainly with good reason, as I have already taught above, to be held as martyrs in the strict sense, so also those of the same troop of whom we now speak here, who, although they indeed openly professed the Catholic faith and were therefore driven into exile, yet did not die in the hardships and penalties endured for it on the journey thither, are with equal right to be held as confessors, although meanwhile, because indeed they died in the exile into which they had been driven for the faith, they may also in a certain measure be called martyrs.
[34] But, you will say, Victor of Vita in the Acts to be edited, number XI, speaks thus of these last holy Exiles of ours, the time meanwhile at which they died being uncertain, who, surviving the hardships endured on the road to it, arrived at the desert to which they had been banished: The rest, the more able-bodied, reach the places of the wilderness, in which, having been placed, they receive barley to eat like beasts of burden. Where also the multitude of venomous animals and Scorpions is said to be so great that to those who do not know it it seems incredible, which by their breath alone pour the virus of their poison even into those placed far off. For they say that no one struck by a scorpion has ever escaped. Whose virulent ferocity, Christ defending them, is taught to have harmed none of His Servants up to the present time; and by these words he indicates not obscurely that, if not all those holy Exiles, at least several of them were still surviving among the living while he wrote these things, and therefore in the year in which, as I have taught above, he did so, 487. I confess it is so; and it appears most probable that not a few of the same holy Exiles prolonged their life even long after that year; nor do I know whether the same is not to be said of Cyprian of Unizibira, driven into exile, as I shall teach below, in the year 484; and although Felix of Abirra, when he was driven into exile before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, was of a very advanced age and, as we have seen above, in very bad health, yet whether he too did not prolong his life beyond the said year 487 I am not to determine; so that, these things being so, the time both at which St. Cyprian and at which St. Felix and the others of our holy Exiles who arrived with him at the desert to which they had been banished departed from the living is surely altogether uncertain. But although this is so, it appears undoubted from what has already been said above that all of these, if you except perhaps a few of those last recorded who died not long after they had been brought to the desert to which they had been banished, exchanged this mortal life for the immortal after about the year 482. And since this is so, and moreover, since from the fact that, although our holy Exiles who died on the journey to the place of their exile passed to the Lord most probably not before the year 482 and certainly before the twentieth day of May of the year 483, as is plain from what has been alleged above, yet in reality they perhaps obtained this happy lot either a little before the year 482 or at the beginning of the year 483, it follows that, whether this happened a little before 482 or in this very year or at the beginning of the following, they may nevertheless not unfittingly be said to have been taken from the living about the year 482, I therefore wrote above in the margin about the year 482 and after, thus indicating, namely, that of our 4976 holy Exiles those who died on the journey to the place of their exile passed to the Lord about the year 482, but the others, together with Cyprian, somewhat later, or after the time at which those did.
[35] as confessors, such as Cyprian also was, But, to return now to the point from which I digressed, although of our 4976 holy Exiles those who did not die on the road to the place of their exile, or at least very many of them, died only after about the year 482, nay even, as has been said, prolonged their life beyond the year 487, there is nevertheless no reason why anyone should suspect from this that they were at length taken from the living by a violent death for the faith, and are therefore not to be held as confessors. For Huneric, of whom it is abhorrent to every appearance of truth that he afterwards also raged with slaughter against those Saints banished by him about the year 482, being taken from the living before the year 484 had elapsed, when he had already ceased from persecuting the Catholics, obtained as successor Gunthamund, who favoured them; and although Thrasamund, who succeeded him in the kingdom of the Vandals in the year 496, renewed the persecution against the Orthodox, yet nothing which to even one of the same Saints death under that prince, or after, if any of them perhaps still existed then
among the living, was inflicted, I have been able to find anywhere anything in any way fit to persuade it. However far, therefore, these Saints of ours prolonged their life beyond the year 482, or 484, or even 487, there is surely no reason why it should be thought on that account that it is to be called even into doubt whether they are to be held only as confessors. But, you will say, Victor of Vita in the Acts to be edited calls all our 4976 Exiles indiscriminately now Martyrs, now Confessors. I confess it is so, and I shall presently answer this objection, as soon as I have here also declared whether Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, who, as I have shown above, was not banished with that numerous band of Orthodox, was a martyr or a confessor. He, who was of the greatest possible help and solace to them as they set out into exile about the year 482, as has been said, afterwards himself too, as Victor teaches in the Acts to be edited, number 7, through many struggles and the squalor of prison went on to exile … with exultation, namely at Huneric's command. And since in the often-praised Notitia of the African church, or the Catalogue of the Catholic bishops who came by Huneric's order in the year 484 to Carthage, to attend the conference then to be held there with the Arians on the first day of February, he is reckoned in Ruinart, De Persecutione Wandalica, page 131, and yet the word exile or into exile, by which the bishops who, hindered by the exile into which they had been driven, were not present at that conference, are marked in the same Catalogue, as I have taught above, is not added to his name there, it follows that he attended the same conference, from which nothing else either persuades that he was absent; and since that conference, before which, as follows from what has been said, he was certainly not banished, was celebrated in the year 484, it further follows that he was driven into exile by Huneric in that very year, inasmuch as it was the year in which Huneric, who banished Cyprian, died.
[36] Now since this is so, and it can be proved in almost the same way they are to be held according to the more received manner of speaking, that cruelty was not then likewise inflicted on Cyprian, as I showed in the number immediately preceding that after the death of Huneric there was no raging against the Saints recorded there by inflicting death on them for the faith, I now judge that he, just like them, ought to be counted not among the martyrs but only among the confessors. As regards now the difficulty proposed just now from Victor, he indeed, as was objected, calls all our 4976 Catholic Athletes banished by Huneric indiscriminately now Martyrs, now Confessors; but what then? In this that holy writer undoubtedly followed the custom by which, of the Saints who suffered persecution for the faith, both those who had died and those who had not died in the torments endured for it were in former times also from time to time called indiscriminately now Martyrs, now Confessors, because both these designations, of which one is derived from the Latin verb confiteri, the other from the Greek verb μαρτυρεῖν, in Latin testari, belonged to them by almost equal right; and Ado and Usuard, and after their example Baronius, are to be judged to have done this also, if in the elogia of our Saints transcribed here above they intended to signify that all and each of them were confessors and martyrs; as also the author of the Little Roman Martyrology, who distinguishes them all with the title of Confessors in the announcement given at number 1. But of the Saints who suffered persecution for the faith, only those who died in the torments endured for it are usually called Martyrs, and the others, who did not die in the torments endured for it, Confessors, according to the stricter and more received manner of speaking; and, this being regarded, truly our Saints are neither all to be held as martyrs nor all as confessors. Hence I, judging that that more received manner of speaking was to be followed, indicated above too, in the title prefixed to this Commentary, that their glorious band consists partly of confessors, partly of martyrs.
[37] For the rest, before I put an end to this Commentary, undoubtedly together with Cyprian, contrary to what Baronius judged, I now address Baronius for a little while still. He insinuates in his Annotations on the Roman Martyrology for today that our Saints, or the Catholics, among whom, as has been said, he counts Cyprian, 4976, or, as he himself notes, 4966, driven together into exile by Huneric, are the same as the martyrs, or venerable men, recorded by the emperor Justinian in the constitution on the office of the prætorian prefect of Africa, book 1 of the Justinianic Code, title 7, and inserted in the Sirletan Menology of the Greeks at the 7th day of December; but that this is foreign to the truth is plain if only from the fact that, as Justinian himself and the author of the said Menology of the Greeks declare in the same place, among those venerable men or martyrs there were some who had their tongue cut out and yet after this punishment, by a plainly remarkable miracle, spoke distinctly and articulately without a tongue; and that this kind of penalty, which the praised author of the Menology of the Greeks says sixty of the Martyrs underwent, Victor of Vita, in book 2, where he treats of them, does not affirm to have been inflicted either on Cyprian or on any one of the Catholics banished together by Huneric, much less on sixty of them, or at any rate on some. Nor is there reason for you to reply that this was likewise omitted here by Victor, who himself confesses that many things were from time to time omitted by him; for since this writer sets out in the Acts to be edited in detail whatever that numerous troop of Exiles suffered for the faith, not omitting circumstances of whatever kind, even of lighter moment, and, speaking also of Cyprian, writes that after many struggles and the squalor of prison he went on into exile with exultation, who, I ask, would persuade himself that Victor would have passed over it if the tongues of Cyprian, or of sixty, or at least of some of the said troop of Exiles had been cut out by Huneric's order, with a miracle also following, by which they afterwards spoke articulately without a tongue?
[38] from the Saints recorded here, whom on the 7th day of December No one surely, as far as I think, who has considered that this writer had thoroughly examined all things that concern both those holy Exiles and Cyprian, and also did not omit to record, in book 5, number 6, what he had ascertained about some citizens of the city of Tipasa who were punished with that penalty because they had celebrated the divine mysteries in the Catholic manner, after the conference of Carthage of the year 484, as is understood from Victor, and therefore long after the banishment of our 4976 Saints, which is to be attached, as I have taught, to about the year 482. Wherefore, since among our Saints, as everyone will draw out from what has already been said, there were by no means some whose tongues were cut out, and this kind of punishment, as has already been said, some of the venerable men or martyrs recorded by Justinian and the author of the Sirletan Menology underwent, truly it becomes beyond doubt, if only from this, that the former are different from the latter. But it will help to have proved the matter in still another way, specifically as regards the martyrs inscribed in the Sirletan Menology at the 7th day of December. It is established from Victor that the Orthodox driven together into exile by Huneric were 4976 in number, and the author of the praised Menology contracts the martyrs recorded by him to three hundred, or at any rate to 362; and since he moreover affirms that the greater part of them consummated their martyrdom by the sword, by which kind of death nothing at all persuades that either Cyprian or any one of those Orthodox ended his life, it comes about also, if only from this, that it ought to seem placed beyond all controversy that our Saints are to be distinguished from the martyrs of the Sirletan Menology. It can indeed still be replied that the three hundred, or even 362, martyrs recorded by the Greeks in the Sirletan Menology at the 7th day of December are nowhere marked in the sacred Fasti of the Latins, unless they are to be judged the same as our Saints or at least comprehended under them; but what then? Many others besides, both martyrs and confessors, who nowhere appear in the sacred Fasti of the Latins, are found in the Sirletan Menology and other hagiologies of the Greeks.
[39] whom the Greeks venerate, are distinct. Moreover, since the orthodox and religious men whose tongue was cut out by Huneric's order remained surviving among the living long after that punishment, as we are taught by the constitution of Justinian praised above, by Victor of Tunnuna at the third consulship of Zeno Augustus, already cited before, by Æneas of Gaza, who flourished under the emperor Zeno, by count Marcellinus, who flourished when Justinian had not yet even obtained the reins of empire, and finally by Procopius, likewise a writer of the sixth century, it was perhaps on this account called into doubt whether those religious men persevered until death in holiness of life and conduct; especially since by the Procopius just praised, who, speaking of those men in book 1 of the Vandal War, testifies that they were seen by him at Constantinople, two of them are narrated to have fallen into the sin of the flesh and then at once to have been deprived of the faculty, conferred on them, of speaking without a tongue. What if, then, for this reason the author of the Little Roman Martyrology did not bring into the Martyrology compiled by him the religious men or orthodox punished by the loss of the tongue at Huneric's order, whom the Greeks celebrate at the 7th day of December, and perhaps already celebrated at the time when that martyrologist flourished, and Ado and other more recent compilers of the Latin Fasti then followed him in that matter? Truly, that this was done in actual fact may be seen to be in no way foreign to the appearance of truth, if only from the fact that the praised author of the Little Roman, who, as Sollerius inculcates in more than one place in his Observations on Usuard, very frequently brings Saints who suffered persecution for the faith under Huneric from Victor of Vita into the Martyrology composed by him, does not even reckon in it the subdeacon Reparatus and some citizens of the city of Tipasa who, as the same Victor relates in book 5, number 6, were punished with the loss of the tongue by Huneric's order, and yet spoke after that punishment as before. Since, therefore, these things are so, and nothing besides is found to stand in the way of our Saints being believed different from the venerable men recorded by Justinian and inserted in the Sirletan Menology at the 7th day of December, we must stand without doubt by the opinion that distinguishes them from those, the contrary opinion of Baronius being moreover disregarded.
ACTS,
By Victor of Vita,
From the edition of Ruinart collated with the editions of Surius and Chifflet.
SOLE CHAPTER.
The Saints are banished, constantly confess the faith, are led away into exile, are most cruelly treated on the road; very many, succumbing to the cruelty of the enemies, perish; the rest arrive at the place of exile.
Cyprian, bishop, M., in Africa. (S.)
Felix, bishop, M., in Africa. (S.)
And four thousand nine hundred and seventy-five others, partly martyrs, partly confessors, in Africa.
BHL Number: 2036
4976 Catholics, among whom Felix, bishop of Abbir, are banished, But with what rivers of tears shall I follow it, when he destined to the exile of the desert bishops, presbyters, deacons and other members of the Church a, that is, four thousand nine hundred and seventy-six b? Among whom were very many gouty men, others, on account of their advanced age, deprived of the light of this world. In
whose number was blessed Felix, bishop of Abbir c, having now forty-four years in the episcopate; who, stricken with the disease of paralysis, neither felt anything nor could speak at all. Taking very great thought for him, since he could not be carried on a beast, we suggested that the king be petitioned by his own people at least to order him, who was soon to die, to remain at Carthage, because he could by no means be brought to exile. To whom the tyrant is reported to have said with fury: "If he cannot sit on an animal, let untamed oxen be yoked, to bring him, bound with ropes, by dragging, to where I have commanded." Him we carried during the whole journey, bound crosswise upon a burdo d, like a trunk of wood.
[2] [they are gathered in the places recorded here and, having constantly confessed the faith, first in a wider] They are all gathered into the cities of Sicca and Lares e, so that the Moors, meeting them there, might lead those delivered to them to the desert f. Two counts, then, coming upon them, began with damnable subtlety to deal with the Confessors of God in coaxing words. "What are you thinking of," they say, "to be so obstinate and not to obey the commands of our lord at all, you who could be honoured in the sight of the king if you would hasten to do his will?" At once, as they cried out with a mighty shout and said: "We are Christians, we are Catholics, we confess inviolably the Trinity one God," they are shut in a custody harsher indeed, but still roomier, where leave was given us to go in and to speak a word of admonition and to celebrate the divine mysteries g.
[3] and then, while into exile, with many women, There were there also very many little children h, whom their mothers followed with maternal affection, some rejoicing, some sad, some drawing them back: some rejoiced that they had borne martyrs, others strove by the softening i deluge of rebaptism to call them back from the confession of the faith. Yet at that time neither did blandishments overcome anyone, nor did carnal affection bow anyone to the earth. For it delights me to relate briefly what a certain old woman did then. While we were making the journey, accompanying the army of God, and perhaps advanced more by night on account of the heat of the sun, we see a poor little woman carrying a little sack and other garments, holding one little child by the hand and consoling him with these words: "Run, my lord. Do you see all the Saints, how they go on and hasten joyfully to the crown?"
[4] [the wonderful faith of one of whom shines forth, following of their own accord, they set out,] When we rebuked her, because she seemed importunate either in joining herself to men in spite of her sex or in associating herself with the army of Christ, she answered: "Bless me, bless me, and pray for me and for this little grandson of mine; for, though a sinner, I am the daughter of a former bishop of the city of Zuri k." To whom we said: "And why do you walk so meanly, or for what reason are you shown to be going hither on so long a journey?" She answered: "I am going to exile with this little servant of yours, lest the enemy find him alone and call him back from the way of truth to death." At these words, filled with tears, we were able to say nothing except that the will of God be done.
[5] shut in the narrowest and foulest custody on the road, in heaps, But when the adversary, who perhaps was already saying: "I will divide the spoils, I will fill my soul, I will slay with my sword, my hand shall have dominion [l]," could seize no one, he seeks out narrow and most foul places, in whose chambers he might cramp the army of God. Then even the consolation of human visitation was denied them. The guards too are punished with cudgels and grievously afflicted: the Confessors of Christ are thrown upon one another, the narrowness cramping them, one on top of another, like swarms of locusts, and, to speak properly, like most precious grains of wheat.
[6] In which packing, no means allowed them to withdraw for the natural function, [no one at all being admitted to visit them, they are heaped together most wretchedly.] but, necessity pressing, they made there a place for dung and urine m, so that that stench and horror surpassed all kinds of punishments: to whom at one time, a great bribe n having been given to the Moors while the Vandals slept, we were scarcely admitted secretly to go in o. Going in, we began to sink up to the knees as in a whirlpool of mud; seeing then fulfilled that word of Jeremiah: "They that were brought up in scarlet have embraced their dung [p]." What more? They were commanded, the Moors clamouring on every side, to make ready for the journey to where they had been destined.
[7] Going out therefore on the Lord's Day, having their garments smeared with dung, led out from there, they are refreshed with help and solace by Cyprian, their faces likewise and their heads, though they were cruelly threatened by the Moors, they sang a hymn to the Lord with exultation: "This glory is to all His Saints [q]." For there was present there at that time Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, an excellent consoler, who cherished each one with a pious and fatherly affection, not without rivers of flowing tears: ready to lay down his life for the brethren and to give himself up of his own accord to such sufferings, if he were let go; who spent everything that he had on the needy brethren in that time of necessity: for he sought an occasion by which he might be associated with the confessors, himself a confessor in spirit and virtue. He afterwards, through many struggles and the squalor of prison, went on with exultation to the exile which he desired [r].
[8] How great multitudes of peoples, too, from various regions and cities ran together at that time to see the Martyrs of God, [and while farther, a countless multitude of the faithful running together from all sides to the spectacle,] the roads and paths bear witness: and since these could in no way contain the bands of those coming, the inestimable crowds of the faithful, running together over the summits of the mountains and the hollows of the valleys, came down bearing tapers in their hands, and, casting their little children at the footsteps of the Martyrs, cried out with this voice: "To whom do you leave us wretched ones, while you go on to your crowns? Who are to baptize these little ones in the fonts of everlasting water? Who are to confer on us the gift of penance, and to loose us, bound with the chains of sins, by the indulgence of reconciliation? For to you it was said: 'Whatsoever you shall loose upon earth shall be loosed also in heaven' [s].
[9] "Who are to bury us with solemn prayers when we die? [having gone forward, they are compelled even to run, so that the halt prepared may be reached,] or by whom is the customary rite of the divine sacrifice to be performed? It would please us too to go on with you, if it were permitted; so that in such a way no necessity might separate sons from fathers." Amid these cries and tears and praises no consoler was any longer allowed to go on [t]; but the multitude was pressed to run, so that it might occupy its toilsome lodging where a cannava [u] had been prepared. And when the old men failed, and others perhaps, though young, delicate of body, they began to be beaten with the points of spear-shafts and with stones to make them run; whence, failing the more, they grew the more weary.
[10] But afterwards the Moors were commanded to drag those who could not walk, with their feet bound, like the carcasses of dead animals, through hard and rough stony places; where first their garments, then their individual limbs, were torn away. Of whom, by the sharp swords of the rocks, the head of one was crushed, very many succumb to the most monstrous cruelty with which they are treated, the sides of others were split open, and so they breathed out their spirit between the hands of those dragging them [x]. Whose number we were in no way able to gather, the multitude preventing it: yet the humble burial of the Saints is raised up along the whole public highway, the tombs speaking.
[11] and the stronger only arrive at the desert to which they had been banished. The rest, the more able-bodied, reach the places of the wilderness, in which, having been placed, they receive barley to eat like beasts of burden. Where also the multitude of venomous animals and scorpions is said to be so great that to those who do not know it it seems incredible, which by their breath alone pour the virus of their poison even into those placed far off. For they say that no one struck by a scorpion has ever escaped. Whose virulent ferocity, Christ defending them, is taught to have harmed none of His servants up to the present time [y]. But whereas they were fed there with grains of barley, afterwards even this was taken away, as though God, who had rained manna on the fathers, could not feed even now those consigned to such an exile.
ANNOTATIONS.
as it appears, wrongly; for no city is found in Africa from whose name that word could have come, and Ruinart, in his Annotations on this place of Victor, assigns Zura, an episcopal city situated in the proconsular province of Africa.
l. Exodus 15, verse 9.
p. Lamentations 4, verse 5.
q. Psalm 149, verse 9.
r. That Cyprian, bishop of Unizibira, was not one of the 4976 Saints driven together into exile by Huneric, and that he is therefore not rightly recorded by Ado and Usuard as one of them, becomes plain from this place of the Acts. See the Preliminary Commentary, number 10.
s. Matthew 18, verse 18.
t. From these words it seems that it must be concluded that the author of the Acts, or Victor, was here prohibited from accompanying the glorious Exiles any further; and our Cuper, as it appears, in actual fact concluded this from here in volume IV of August of our Work, in his Historical-Critical Commentary on that holy writer, number 20.
u. This word among authors of the middle age signifies an underground place, nor does the sense seem to require another meaning here.
x. Whoever has compared the elogium which Ado composed for our Saints, transcribed here in the Preliminary Commentary, number 1, with the words which the author of the Acts, or Victor, supplies here and in the number immediately preceding, will at once discover that it was in great part put together from them.
y. Hence it appears that it must be concluded that of our Saints who arrived where they had been banished, some at least were still surviving among the living while Victor wrote these things.