ON ST. ROMULUS OF GENOA, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,
MOST PROBABLY AFTER THE YEAR 350.
PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.
The age of the Saint in some way defined; the translation of the relics; his cult; the Life, such as it is, and when it was written.
Romulus, bishop of Genoa, confessor. (S.)
BY C. B.
Ughelli, in the Series of the Bishops of Genoa in tome 4 of Italia Sacra as enlarged by Coleti, col. 837, having first stated that of the bishops of Genoa St. Salomon or Salo, already inserted in our Work at the twenty-eighth day of September, at which we also examined The Saint, whom indeed the order in which he is believed to have sat, whether he truly was bishop of Genoa, because he is then commemorated in the present Roman Martyrology, was the first whose memory has come down to posterity, and that three, whose very names are not known, succeeded him next, presently lists four others, namely St. Valentine, St. Felix, St. Syrus, and finally St. Romulus, of whom it now remains for us to treat here (SS. Valentine, Felix and Syrus having likewise already been brought into our Work at the days on which each is either venerated or thought to have died), in the very order in which I have just related them; and if this is to be admitted, and what Ughelli, as I have already indicated, states beforehand, before he speaks of these four holy Bishops, agrees with the truth, it follows from this that Valentine sat in the fifth place among the prelates of Genoa, Felix in the sixth, Syrus in the seventh, and finally Romulus, as the Tables of the Church of Genoa also, as Ughelli witnesses, hand down to memory concerning him, in the eighth.
[2] Hence further, and at the same time from the fact that Diogenes, related by Ughelli next after Romulus in the Series of the Bishops of Genoa, [and those things which are adduced here besides, not very long before the year 381,] was present at the synod of Aquileia in the year 381, and is thus certainly known to have been sitting then, you would not unfittingly conclude, first, that Valentine, whom the Epitaph, inserted in our work in tome VII of May, page 344, in the Encomium of his Life, witnesses to have sat 12 years and XI months and to have died in the thirteenth indiction, departed from among the living either in the year 325, in which, for the first time after Constantine made the beginning of numbering Indictions and renewing them every fifteen years, the XIIIth indiction ran, or, if it pleases one to wait for this same indiction recurring, in the year 340; and then, since his successor Felix, inserted in our Work at the 9th day of July, on which he is venerated at Genoa, presided over the church of Genoa for twenty years, as his epitaph, related in the same place, attests, and consequently, considering what has already been said of Valentine, must have died either in the year 345 or in the year 360, that his successors SS. Syrus and Romulus occupied the chair of the church of Genoa during the whole of that space of time which runs from the year either 345 or 360 up to the time at which Diogenes began to sit before he took part in the council of Aquileia in the year 381, and consequently that our Saint most probably died not very long before the year 381. And thus indeed our Papebroch, who had already treated of this Saint at the second day of May, sacred to the cult of St. Valentine, treating of him again afterwards, on account of certain Acts of whatever kind, which had been wanting until then, being at last happily obtained and to be given to the public light, in the Appendix to the same day of May, tome VII of May, page 542 and following, SS. Valentine, Felix, Syrus and Romulus, each of whom, in the order assigned above, to have occupied the see of Genoa
believed, thinking that this could not unfittingly be done in that way, endeavored there, in the Commentary prefixed to the said Acts, num. 1 and 2, to arrange the chronology in some fashion.
[3] [but other things, likewise adduced here, require that he sat even before the year 342,] But afterwards, while he was treating of St. Syrus at the 29th day of June, on which this Saint both died and had been inserted in the more recent Roman Martyrology, he thought that the chronology which he had previously established in some fashion in St. Valentine should be somewhat changed. For when, all things having been weighed more attentively, he noticed on the one hand that, if the chronology which he had arranged in St. Valentine were admitted, SS. Felix, Syrus and Romulus would be entangled in the most savage storms of the Arian heresy, by which, after the East, the West too, having begun to be shaken already from the year 325, was turned upside down under the Arian emperor Constantius, the bishops who refused to subscribe to the condemnation of Athanasius being compelled to go into exile in the synods of Arles and Milan, assembled in Gaul and Italy in the years 353 and 355, and yet that in their Lives, nay nowhere else either, is any mention made of the Arians disturbing the West, or of what dealings they had with them; and on the other hand found Syrus named, in the first Session of a council of Rome of whatever kind, celebrated in the year 324 under Pope St. Silvester, in Labbe, tome 1 of the Councils, col. 1546, among the first who are written to have been present at that council, and conjectured that he was the holy bishop of Genoa of this name, he removed Valentine from the fifth place in which he is commonly believed to have sat among the bishops of Genoa, and laid it down that he sat after St. Syrus, who had been substituted for St. Felix a little before the year 324, when the latter had held the episcopate for twenty years, and likewise after St. Romulus, who was taken from among the living about the year 342, and that, having been ordained bishop about this year, he died in the year 355, in which also the thirteenth indiction was in course.
[4] So our praised predecessor, at the same time also adding most probably indeed even before the year, as the things alleged here that it could be believed that there was substituted for Valentine in the year 355 one who, although seduced with the others in the council of Rimini, deserved to be consigned to oblivion, nevertheless prolonged his life until about the year 380, in which Diogenes began to sit. But since he thus indeed removes Valentine from the fifth place, in which he is commonly placed by others among the bishops of Genoa, and puts him after both St. Romulus and St. Syrus, why can we not put the same Valentine after Diogenes also, who most probably began to sit only about the year 380, and defer his death to the year 400, in which likewise the thirteenth indiction was in course? I indeed do not see why: and if this is done, nothing will prevent the death of St. Romulus from being thrown back from the year 342, at which it would otherwise have to be marked according to what has just been said, to the year 352 or 353, and another from being laid down as having sat after him, from about this latter year, one who, because he was seduced with the others in the council of Rimini of the year 359, deserved to be consigned to oblivion, next before Diogenes, who was certainly created bishop before the year 381. Moreover, what if this bishop of Genoa consigned to oblivion should also be said to have been promoted to the see of Genoa next after Syrus, when the latter, who no differently from St. Felix is thought by some to have sat 20 years, had held the episcopate from about the year 322 to the year 342, and, when he had occupied it until about the year 361, in which the emperor Constantius died, to have obtained St. Romulus as his successor?
[5] Thence again it will follow that the latter prolonged his life until about the year 381; [persuade, sat 352, and died after the year 350, and was buried in the place where this happened, afterwards from there, as the things which with us] but St. Romulus is commonly believed to have succeeded St. Syrus immediately, and this also seems to be indicated in his Life, to be subjoined to this Commentary, num. 2; and although neither this common opinion nor, as will become apparent from what is to be said below, the Life of our Saint deserves undoubted credit, yet there seems to be reason why it can deservedly be doubted whether St. Romulus truly did not succeed St. Syrus immediately. But although this is so, it appears most likely from what has already been said above that the Saint sat before the year 352, and did not die before the 4th century had already passed its middle. I proceed to the things which followed his death. After, in the township of Matutiana, in which he was staying while visiting his diocese, seized by a sudden illness and quickly brought to extremity, he had exchanged this mortal life for the immortal, he was also committed to the earth there; and thence afterwards, that township having been destroyed by the Saracens, he was translated to Genoa by Sabbatinus, bishop of Genoa. All these things are taught by the Life of St. Romulus, such as it is, which, as I have already advised, is to be subjoined to this Commentary. This Life, which, if you except what it relates about the day and place of the Saint's death and his translation, hands down to memory almost nothing which would not fit any bishop conspicuous for holiness, exists with us in an authentic instrument which our Janning found at Rome, and which is in all respects similar to that from which the Life of St. Valentine has already been given in our work in the Appendix to the 2nd day of May, excerpted or transumpted, as the preamble which you will find in our work in tome 7 of May, in the said Appendix, in the Commentary prefixed to the Life of St. Valentine, num. 4, attests, from a great parchment Manuscript codex of the cathedral church of Genoa.
[6] his Life exists in the instrument mentioned here, And first indeed there is subjoined to the text of the Life the notarial attestation of Marco Antonio Mulfino concerning its ancient use in the church of Genoa, and the credit to be given to the transumpt, dated, as is here noted, in the year MDCVIII according to the Genoese reckoning, that is, in our year MDCVII; then, after this, whose tenor you will find in the Commentary just cited, num. 5, there follows the authentic testimony of Giacomo Cuneo, notary by imperial and Genoese authority, who on the 11th day of May in the year MDCXII had the said transumpt transcribed from the protocols of the praised notary Marco Antonio Mulfino, which were in his possession, by which, reducing his transcript or copy, which exists with us, to a public and probative form, he declared that he had done this; and this is presently followed by another, by which the same Papiniano Dinalio, apostolic protonotary, canon, and vicar general of the most illustrious and most reverend Lord Orazio Carlo Spinola, archbishop of Genoa, before whom the Magnificent Lord Antonio Maria Montebruno, patrician of Genoa, having appeared, had caused the transumpt mentioned above, which he had had made, to be authenticated, testified to the legality, as they say, of the said Giacomo Cuneo, in such a way as to bring it about that credit, public credit too, should be given to him both in and out of court, by an attestation made for that purpose, to which Silvestro Merello, notary and chancellor of the archiepiscopal court of Genoa, subscribed.
[7] by an author who nowhere reveals his name, Such is the authentic instrument which contains the Life, such as it is, from what has been said, of our Saint, and which, found at Rome, Janning procured for our Museum, brought forward most probably, so far as it pertains to SS. Valentine and Romulus, chiefly in order that the antiquity of the cult which both these Saints enjoy at Genoa might be proved from it; and although, as what it contains about St. Valentine, so also what it contains about St. Romulus bears the appearance rather of a sermon than of a Life, yet the anonymous author himself, who committed these things to writing, calls the little lucubration in which he did this, treating of our Saint, a Life right from its very beginning. It is extant also in tome 4 of Italia Sacra, enlarged by Coleti, col. 839 and the two following, in Ughelli, taken, as he says there, from an old Manuscript, of which he gives no information; but since both there and in our transcript it labors under not a few faults, it will be exhibited by me to the reader here below neither as it is edited by Ughelli nor as it stands in our transcript, but employing the less faulty Readings which occur sometimes in the latter and sometimes in him. The author of the Life nowhere indeed reveals his name, nor supplies anything from which you could gather it; but he has at least that from which you may in some fashion determine the time at which he composed this lucubration of his.
[8] For in it, at num. 12, he speaks in the following manner: "But in modern times, when Dom Sabbatinus had been raised to the episcopal chair of the see of Genoa, when Sabbatinus was governing the church of Genoa, or certainly it happened that the same bishop was troubled with exceeding agitation, because the body of most blessed Romulus in the township of Matutiana, deprived of every inhabitant and for so long a time desolate of the priestly office, was held in neglect"; for since by these words he not obscurely reveals that he wrote either in the very time in which Sabbatinus occupied the chair of the church of Genoa, or certainly not very long after him, and since the latter, as one who, as may be seen in Ughelli, took part in the synod of Pavia in the year 876 and then in the council of Ravenna in the following year, certainly began to sit no later than the former of these two years, and further his successor Theodulf, the first of this name, was already sitting in the year 930, as you will find in the same Ughelli, it follows that the anonymous writer of the Life of our Saint prepared this lucubration of his in that space of time which runs from the year 876 to the year 930, or certainly not much after.
[9] But although this is so, the following words, which he puts immediately before those already given, persuade me that he did this not while the 9th century was still running, as from the words adduced here but when the 10th had already begun for some time, and perhaps indeed had advanced even beyond the thirtieth year: "The race of the Saracens, having occupied, as has been related, a great part of Spain, … practising piracy according to its custom, invaded the city of Arles, and, ravaging the provincials, came as far as Fraxinetum. Having found this lurking-place for brigandage, it settled there, and, advancing into the territories round about, laid waste the city of Fréjus and Antibes, the castles of Nice as far as Albenga, and, entering the Alps on foot, destroyed the valleys and cities, and the territory of Embrun, the Maurienne, Seutia, on this side and that, and for three years, the inhabitants having been slain, reduced Elimannia to nothing. Having entered Italy after this, the race of the Saracens, over a space of nearly two hundred years, killed many who were going to Rome for the sake of prayer; and having obtained various treasures and a multitude of captives, it returned to Fraxinetum, and sent ships filled with spoils and captives to Spain; and thus Matutiana, having been ravaged, is deprived of every inhabitant up to the present time."
[10] For thus he hands down that Fraxinetum was occupied by the Saracens before the township of Matutiana, his words, since of these from which the body of our Saint was afterwards translated, was destroyed by them, and this, as Pagi teaches in the Critica at the year 921, num. 3, happened between the year 888 and 890; and although perhaps somewhat earlier still, nay even before Sabbatinus to the see of Genoa
was raised, that castle was occupied by the Saracens and the township of Matutiana destroyed, yet it cannot be inferred from this that the body of our Saint was translated thence while the 9th century was still running. For that this township, before the body of our Saint was translated thence to Genoa, had been destroyed a long time before and deprived of inhabitants, the biographer of our Saint clearly insinuates by the words just given, and by others which he put before these and which have likewise been given; and since this is so, and he does not seem on any ground to have prepared his writing, in which he embraced both this translation and at the same time the Life, such as it is, of the Saint, immediately after the body of Romulus had been translated from the township of Matutiana to Genoa, he most probably did this not while the 9th century was still running, but when the 10th century had already begun some years, or, which pleases me more, when the same century had advanced even beyond the thirtieth year.
[11] [some things, from which it would follow that this lucubration was prepared later than the 10th century,] But, you will say, considering what the same biographer of our Saint writes, it appears necessary that he be said to have prepared his lucubration not only after the ninth century but even long after the tenth century. For after he has narrated, by the words transcribed here at num. 9, that Fraxinetum was occupied by the Saracens, he hands down to memory that these, after they had done this, raged through Italy for the space of nearly two hundred years, very many who were going to Rome for the sake of prayer being killed; and since, as appears, the Saracens occupied Fraxinetum certainly no later than about the year 870, and the nearly two hundred years during which he relates that they raged through Italy after they had done this lead to about the year 1070, he could not have committed this to writing unless he had written either about or after this year, and it is therefore necessary, considering what he writes, that he be laid down as having written even later than the 10th century. I confess it is so, if the words by which the Saracens are narrated, after Fraxinetum was occupied, to have raged through Italy for nearly two hundred years are to be ascribed to him. But these seem not to have proceeded from him, but to have been thrust into his text by an interpolator of a later age, and indeed, as appears, one not sufficiently skilled in history.
[12] are only from an interpolator, as is proved, For besides the fact that the Saracens, driven out in the year 972 or the following from Fraxinetum, which they had certainly occupied no earlier than the year 870, as may be seen in Pagi's Critica at the former of these two years, no longer afflicted the Christians with incursions made from there, and consequently raged through Italy not for two hundred but only for about a hundred years, our biographer narrates, through the words by which the same Saracens are asserted to have done this for the space of two hundred years, that, having gone forth from Fraxinetum, which, as appears, was situated not far from the river Var, flowing between Gaul and Italy, and had been occupied by them, all the places lying between this castle, or, if you prefer, between Forum Julii and Albingaunum, today Albenga, and consequently the township of Matutiana too, as situated between this last place and the Var, were at once most foully laid waste, and that Septimania (for I think this word should be substituted for the word Elimannia, which is read in Ughelli and in our Manuscript) was worn down by a like disaster within three years; and then immediately after the same words by which, as has been said, the Saracens are asserted to have raged through Italy for the space of nearly two hundred years, he relates that these returned to Fraxinetum, and thus, if those words are his, indicates that this happened only about two hundred years after they had gone forth thence.
[13] [proceeded, it appears, written when the 10th century had advanced beyond the year 30, he hands down to memory, by Sabbatinus to Genoa.] Now since this is plainly incredible, and, as will become apparent to one considering it, his text, transcribed here at num. 9, if those words are cut away from it, offers nothing further that is foreign to the appearance of truth, it appears all but undoubted that they are words which there is no need to keep for the sense to be complete, which in fact are to be cut away from it, and consequently proceeded not from the biographer but from his interpolator. Since this is so, those words certainly cannot prevent the anonymous writer who composed the Life of our Saint from being believed, on account of what has been alleged above, to have done so certainly no later than when the 10th century had advanced beyond the thirtieth year; and since this is so, and he was consequently not far, as is easy to gather from what has been said above, from the age of Sabbatinus, bishop of Genoa, we can safely believe that our Saint was translated by him, as he relates, from the township of Matutiana, where he had been buried, and that all the circumstances which he relates as accompanying this translation in fact took place, although in the meantime, the place in which he says the Saint died and was buried remaining certain, one must judge somewhat otherwise about the things which he narrates as done in his age, because, as everyone will draw out from what has been said, he was very far removed from it.
[14] Further, since Sabbatinus, bishop of Genoa, who, [which happened when the same 10th century had already begun for some time, he was translated,] as has already been said, translated St. Romulus from the township of Matutiana, where he had been buried, to Genoa, after the 9th century, in whose year 76 he had occupied the chair of Genoa, as I have already shown above, and perhaps somewhat earlier still, seems to have been still among the living when the 10th century had already begun some years, as appears to be concluded from the fact that his successor Theodulf is not found to have sat before the year 930, it may be asked here whether he translated our Saint from the township of Matutiana to Genoa while the 9th century was still running, or, on the contrary, when the 10th was already running. Since this certainly, as becomes plain from what the biographer of our Saint writes at num. XI and following, did not happen before the township of Matutiana had long been laid waste, and it suffered that disaster only when Fraxinetum had been occupied by the Saracens, which, from what was said above, happened not very long before the year 890, it appears more likely that our Saint was translated by Sabbatinus to Genoa in the 10th century, and indeed not earlier than when it had already begun some years. Let us now also examine whether our Saint, or, if you prefer, his sacred body, was found about three centuries afterwards at Genoa in the church of St. Syrus, in which, as the common, though perhaps not sufficiently certain, opinion holds, it had been deposited by Sabbatinus.
[15] In the year 1283, as may be seen in our work at the 29th day of June, in the Commentary [and yet, contrary to what some have thought, he was not found there in the 13th century;] prefixed to the Life of St. Syrus, bishop of Genoa, num. 1 and following, three distinct coffins were found in the said church, in the first of which the body of St. Syrus, and in the second that of St. Felix, was contained, as the inscriptions with which they were furnished revealed; and since the third coffin had no inscription, some judged that the body contained in it was that of St. Romulus; but, says our Papebroch in the Commentary just cited, num. 7, and deservedly indeed, as it appears to me, not rightly; "for Sabbatinus, pontiff of Genoa, who about the year DCCCC translated it from the township of Matutiana, its first place of burial, to Genoa, composed an epitaph" (see the Life to be published, num. 13) "in hexameter and pentameter verses, and placed them, inscribed on marble" (tablets), "on the front of the chest in which the body of blessed Romulus is contained"; but nothing of the kind was found with the coffin of the third body. So our praised predecessor, who also in the same Commentary already mentioned, num. 2, gives the reason why St. Syrus, but not likewise St. Romulus, stands inscribed in the present Roman Martyrology.
[16] But although the most learned men who reformed the present Roman Martyrology did not think that this Saint of ours should be honored with that distinction, he nevertheless has enjoyed at Genoa for a very long space of time the cult proper to the Saints, [and although he is not inscribed in the present Roman Martyrology, he is still venerated today by the Genoese,] and still enjoys it today, as is attested by the Proper of the Saints of the church of Genoa, which exists with us, printed at Genoa in the year 1640, in which an Office of nine Lessons, to be recited of St. Romulus with the rite of a greater double, of which the three middle ones are proper to this Saint of ours and are composed for the greater part from his Life, to be given here presently, is proposed at the 13th day of October, although, through an error of the printer, as becomes plain from the Calendar which is prefixed to the said Proper, it bears at its head not the 13th but, the numerical characters being wrongly transposed, the 31st day of that month. I have said that the Lessons which are proper to our Saint in the said Office are composed for the greater part from his Life presently to be given; and I spoke thus chiefly because in the last of those Lessons Sabbatinus is said to have been admonished in sleep by the divine spirit to translate the body of our Saint from the township of Matutiana to Genoa, and nothing at all by which this is done or in any way indicated occurs in the Life of the Saint.
[17] [and therefore he is deservedly celebrated by Ferrari and Chastelain and likewise in the Genoese Sanctuary.] But although this is so, I would not on that account dare to assert that Sabbatinus was not divinely admonished to translate St. Romulus from Matutiana to Genoa. For the same Lesson adds both that the body of our Saint, when Sabbatinus had translated it here to Genoa, was deposited by him in the church of St. Syrus, then still the cathedral, and that the township of Matutiana, from which that sacred pledge had been brought there, was afterwards called, from the name of our Saint, the town of St. Romulus, commonly San Remo; and although neither the one nor the other is handed down in the Life of our Saint, yet both appear consonant with the truth. And the latter indeed, which is altogether certain, is also expressly asserted by not a few writers, and by name by Ferrari, who, knowing that St. Romulus is venerated by the church of Genoa with the cult proper to the Saints, deservedly granted him a place, having afterwards also obtained Chastelain as his follower in commemorating the Saint, in both the Catalogues of the Saints which he composed, in the second of which, which embraces the Saints of Italy, doing so with a fairly prolix eulogy too, which it appears undoubted was taken from the same Manuscript book of the church of Genoa from which the Life of our Saint is presently to be exhibited here, both from the fact that it dissents from it in nothing, and because that hagiologist, as soon as he has recited it, cites for himself the monuments of the church of Genoa in an ancient Manuscript codex. To Ferrari and Chastelain may further be added also Mariano de Grimaldi, who in the Sanctuary
of Genoa, written by him in Italian and published by the Genoese press in the year 1613, also granted Romulus a place, adorning him, page 179 and the six following, with a fairly prolix eulogy too, which he calls a Life, taken, as he says, from the ancient Breviaries of the cathedral church of St. Lawrence.
LIFE,
By an anonymous author,
From an ancient Manuscript codex of the church of Genoa and the edition of Ughelli.
Romulus, bishop of Genoa, confessor. (S.)
BHL Number: 7335
aBY AN ANONYMOUS AUTHOR.
SOLE CHAPTER.
He shines forth exceedingly in holiness of life; he is elected bishop by the Genoese; he governs his flock with the greatest charity and kindness; visiting his diocese he dies in the country and is buried, and thence long afterwards is translated to Genoa.
Romulus, who, shining chiefly with charity and holiness of life, Being about to write the Life of blessed Romulus the bishop, dearest brethren, we beseech that it be imputed not to the boldness of our presumption, but to the clemency of the pious mind of him who was so illustrious both in life and in conduct, and with what piety he flourished appeared from the sweetness of his luminous speech. For the kindness of his love was so extended toward all that it could most truly be said of him that he was filled with the all-embracing magnificence of charity, of which it is said: "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts through the grace of the Spirit, who is given to us b."
[2] The clemency, therefore, of his most holy conversation having been heard of, shining with holiness, is elected bishop by the Genoese, by which he had followed the rule of Felix and Syrus, his most blessed predecessors c, he is adopted and elected by the people of Genoa as one beloved, and raised to the pontifical mitre. The Genoese rejoice, exalted by the dignity of so great a Prelate, who by the help of God's grace had not been disappointed of so great a Patron, to whom they might be able to commit themselves and their possessions, and by whose teaching they trusted that they would attain heavenly things, through the instruction and converse of a most blessed life.
[3] Let us too rejoice, most beloved, that so great a patron, most blessed Romulus, presided over the city of Genoa for many years and ministered the food of the divine Word to the people. he shows himself to his flock a father rather than a lord, For in the time in which blessed Romulus remained alive in this world, he shone with so great a prerogative of chastity and efficacy of charity that by all the Genoese he was believed to be rather a father than a lord, and a special friend, although, exercising lordship, he was a most powerful Man and a Bishop.
[4] By the observation of his kindness all were animated, and toward greatness of virtues, in mind, as if by the approach of feet, they advanced through his pious admonitions, [and with a plainly excellent zeal, by which he draws him to virtue and in fostering peace] and thus by the grace of God were universally carried forward to higher things. Finally, it was permitted to no one moved by any goad of anger, with most blessed Romulus knowing of it, to stretch on to the setting of the sun without first enjoying the kiss of peace, lest by the demon's precipice he should be cast headlong into the darkness of night. Most blessed Romulus had certainly not consigned to oblivion the tenderness of the mellifluous discourse with which the Lord had admonished his disciples at the time of his passion.
[5] and in keeping it, he strives, by kindness as well as justice For he recalled that at the very moment of his departure Our Lord Jesus Christ had said to his disciples: "Peace be to you"; and, peace having been bestowed, added: "My peace I give to you, my peace I leave to you." Nor had he consigned to oblivion, remembering of which peace it had been said, what follows: "Not as this world gives, do I give to you [d]." Moreover he excelled in so great a virtue of justice that it was not permitted to anyone to do any injury to another, or in any way, by force used, to oppress him; for most blessed Romulus flourished in an inestimable charity of mind, and indeed he excelled in counsel and industry, by which the magnificence of his chastity and the clemency of his justice and compassion were declared. Finally, he was acknowledged as the father of wards and widows, and the outstanding guardian of the poor and of orphans.
[6] the veneration of all toward himself And the kindliness of simplicity and goodness had so adorned the lineage of blessed Romulus that those who were of his stock were asserted to be true worshippers of Christ in Christ. He was venerated and reverently honored by all, as a patron and special friend, luminous in speech, conspicuous in discourse, shining with all good conduct. And by his fellow bishops he was held in the highest reverence. The clerics looked up to him as a beloved father, the laity as a defender, and the ward and orphan as a patron. And the women who were truly widows in Christ admired the charity of the outstanding Father. The frequent report of his outstanding holiness exhorted all to be carried forward to better things, to whom his most kindly report had come.
[7] and wins their love, For the clemency of his kindness was spread abroad in all the neighborhood of the Genoese and the provincials; and those near to every religion flocked together to the admonition of blessed Romulus, and, admiring his holiness and charity, on account of the exceeding charitable reverence shown to them they proclaimed him worthy of every honor, and committed themselves in every way to him whom they revered and loved. For those near rejoiced in his pious admonition, the neighbors were glad in the charitable affection of mind they received, the strangers over the most clement love bestowed on them.
[8] [full of virtues, he departs from among the living in the township of Matutiana, whither he had gone to visit the people,] But at a certain time, when he frequently went to the people of Matutiana for the sake of visitation, and, advancing, having stayed for a little while, was addressing them most kindly, it happened that he was suddenly deprived of the strength of his body; and finally it came about, by disposition, that the day of his death was imminent. Then most blessed Romulus the bishop, perceiving that he was entering the way of all flesh, longing with what strength he could, with spirit and mind, for things above, committed himself to the Lord, and thus, full of virtues, on the third day before the Ides of October, he happily entered the ethereal kingdoms, to reign with Christ, as whose co-heir he passed to glory.
[9] And he was buried in the township of Matutiana e in the crypt of most blessed Syrus, [and was buried there; thence afterwards, the Saracens, who subdued a great part of Spain,] bishop of Genoa, in a tufa chest next to blessed Ormisdas f, by whose prayers very many benefits are shown even to the present day. The blind are given light, demons are put to flight, lepers are cleansed, and other things besides are accomplished. But, sins so requiring, the Saracens, having gone forth from Mauretania to the territories of the Spaniards, and the whole region round about having been ravaged, the palace of king Roderic is taken by force by the pagans, and the king himself is delivered to death g. And he having been killed, the race of the Saracens, having received the power of reigning, took various cities of the same province, which it possessed, no one preventing.
[10] But the Gallic race (God's grace disposing) resisted it h. [and then had laid waste the places near Fraxinetum, which they likewise occupied,] And the race of the Saracens, not a little glad over the things that had prosperously befallen it, having embarked on galleys i, practising piracy according to its custom, invaded the city of Arles k, and, ravaging the provincials, came as far as Fraxinetum l. Having found this lurking-place for brigandage, it settled there, and, advancing into the territories round about, laid waste the city of Fréjus and Antibes m, the Castles of Nice n as far as Albenga o: and so, entering the alps on foot, it destroyed the valleys and cities, and the territory of Embrun [p], the Maurienne, Seutia [q], on this side and that, and for three years, the inhabitants having been slain, reduced Elimania [r] to nothing.
[11] Having entered Italy after this, the race of the Saracens, over the space of nearly two hundred years, having ravaged this township too, killed many who were going to Rome for the sake of prayer [s]; and so, having obtained various treasures and a multitude of captives, it returned to Fraxinetum [t], and sent ships filled with spoils and captives to Spain. And thus Matutiana, having been ravaged, is deprived of every inhabitant up to the present time.
[12] But in modern times, when Dom Sabbatinus had been raised to the episcopal chair of the see of Genoa [u], he was translated to Genoa by Sabbatinus, bishop of Genoa, it happened that the same bishop was troubled with exceeding agitation, because the body of most blessed Romulus in the township of Matutiana, deprived of every inhabitant and for so long a time [x] desolate of the priestly office, was held in neglect. Counsel having therefore been taken, both peoples of both sexes and clergy, having embarked on ships, hasten to the township of Matutiana, clergy and people accompanying, and the body of the blessed Man, the sarcophagus having been broken open, having been carefully placed with all zeal in a chest, is brought to the ships. And thus with Hymns and Praises, sailing with prosperous sails, all return rejoicing to the city of Genoa.
[13] The aforesaid Pontiff Sabbatinus, therefore, gave thanks to God with diligent care, [he is enclosed and buried there in a chest bearing on its front an epitaph composed of pentameters and hexameters.] and composed an epitaph in hexameter and pentameter verses, and placed them, inscribed on marble [y], on the front of the chest in which the body of blessed Romulus is contained. And he was buried in the same crypt [z], the aforesaid bishop being present, and all the Genoese, both the people standing around and the clergy, rendering to God hymns and praises of thanks for all things for the relics of so great a Pontiff granted to them. We too render thanks to almighty God, to whom we commit ourselves, that by his patronage and prayers he may grant us better things in the present life and bestow the best things in the life to come, he himself granting it, to whom be honor and glory, power and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
ANNOTATIONS.
d. John 14, ℣. 27.
our, who, unless I am greatly mistaken, could also have added, with the truth safe, that the same Ormisdas nowhere enjoys the cult customarily paid to the Saints.
p. This is a small region of Gaul, so named from the city of Embrun, called Ebredunum, or, as it is called by others, Ebrodunum, which is included in it, and which is situated in Dauphiné at the foot of the Alps, so that it could easily be reached by the Saracens entering the Alps by a land route, as is here said by the biographer.
q. Why the Maurienne is here called Seutia by the biographer you will gather from what Valesius supplies in the Notitia of the Gauls at the first of these two words, who at the same time teaches in the same place both that that city is now commonly called St. Jean de Maurienne, and that formerly, when it had been raised to the episcopal dignity, it was attributed to the province of the Graian and Pennine Alps and to Tarentaise, its metropolis.
r. It appears undoubted that the discourse here is of a Subalpine region, the whole of which the Saracens laid waste; but since I find no region of this kind which was called Elimannia either among ancient or among more recent geographers, I think that for the name Elimannia, which is read both in our transcript and in the Ughelli edition, in both places, unless I am greatly mistaken, through the error of copyists, the name Septimania, not altogether unlike the name Elimannia, should be substituted, being partly moved also by the fact that Septimania was bordering on the Alps, and embraced both the territory of Embrun and the cities of Fréjus and Antibes, which the biographer writes were laid waste by the Saracens, as may be seen in Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, tome X, col. XCIII and following, concerning the Chorographical Map of the middle age.
s. That many Christians indeed, going to Rome for the sake of prayer, were killed by the Saracens, as is here said, Liutprand clearly teaches us, who was then living, and who, in book 5 of the History, chapter 7, beginning a discourse about Fraxinetum and the Saracens occupying it, writes thus: "Established in that place, how many Christians crossing to the thresholds of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul they shed the blood of, he holds the names written in the book of the living."
t. If these words, by which the Saracens, after they had occupied Fraxinetum, are narrated to have raged through Italy for nearly two hundred years, are to be ascribed to our biographer, it follows that, as what I said in the Preliminary Commentary, num. XI, shows, he wrote the Life of our Saint not earlier than when the 10th century had already passed. But those words are not to be attributed to him; for if they are considered, as they ought to be, together with the other words immediately preceding and following them, the text composed of all these will signify also that the Saracens, after they had gone forth from Fraxinetum, which they had occupied, to lay waste the neighboring places, returned there not before about two hundred years had passed; and since this appears plainly incredible, it appears undoubted that those words were thrust into the said text by an interpolator who did not notice that it would come about from this that a thing foreign to every appearance of truth is narrated there. Consult the Preliminary Commentary, num. 12 and following, and at the same time observe that it will come about that, if the following words, "Having entered Italy after this, the race of the Saracens, over the space of nearly two hundred years, killed many who were going to Rome for the sake of prayer," are cut out of the said text, it will be signified by the remaining words of it that the Saracens returned to Fraxinetum, whence they had gone forth to ravage very many surrounding places, not about two hundred but, which is by no means incredible, only three years after they had done so.
u. Our biographer here indicates that he wrote while Sabbatinus, who died before the year 930, was governing the church of Genoa, or certainly not very long after him; wherefore, lest he be set at odds with himself, the words extant in the preceding number, by which the Saracens, having gone forth from Fraxinetum, which they had occupied, are said to have raged through Italy for nearly two hundred years, cannot be his, since they could not have been written before the 11th century had already passed its greater part, as you will understand from what I taught in the Preliminary Commentary, num. XI.
x. Namely from the 9th century, when it had not yet advanced to the year XC, up to the 10th century, when it had already begun some years, as is easy to draw out from what I discussed in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 12 and 14.
y. So the Ughelli edition, and I have thought it should be followed, because it is here preferable to the Reading of our transcript, already exhibited above from Papebroch in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 15, in which the substantive tabulae "tablets" has to be added to the adjective marmoreae "of marble".
z. The biographer here undoubtedly speaks of the crypt which existed at Genoa; but since he had not before made mention of such a crypt, why, I ask, does he here affect this word with a pronoun which seems to signify the contrary? I indeed do not see why. Truly, unless the solecisms or faults of speech occurring in this Life of our Saint are for the greater part to be imputed to the copyists, who dared to change even phrases and constructions, it will certainly have to be confessed that the writer who composed this lucubration did so in a style plainly barbarous and foreign to all purity of Latin speech. Would that here at least he had named the church in which Romulus was deposited at Genoa by Sabbatinus! For thus it would be ascertained whether or not the body of St. Romulus was placed there by this prelate in the church of St. Syrus, then still the cathedral, nor would there remain any further room to fear that it is believed to be preserved there even today only because it was thought by some, impelled to this by a reason not sufficiently valid (see the Preliminary Commentary, num. 15), that the body of St. Romulus was contained in the coffin found without inscription in the said church of St. Syrus in the year 1283 together with the coffins containing the bodies of SS. Syrus and Felix.