Cosmas of Maiuma

ON ST. COSMAS OF MAIUMA, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, IN PALESTINE,

ABOUT THE YEAR 781.

SYLLOGE.

Cosmas, bishop, confessor, at Maiuma in Palestine. (S.)

BY M. S.

§ I. The memory of the saint in the sacred calendars: certain things about the chronotaxis of his life: his monastic state.

Some account of the city of Maiuma; Maiuma, whose mitre our saint bore, is called Maiuma of Gaza to distinguish it from three other cities of the same name situated in the same tract, and this means in the Palestinian tongue, as Le Quien testifies in his Oriens Christianus, volume 3, column 622, the same as port or dockyard in Latin; nor is it to be confused with Gaza itself, for it is distant from it about twenty stadia, and lies by the mediterranean sea at the mouth of the river Bosor: but now, as Ferrarius has it today in the General Catalogue of the Saints, it is commonly called Porto Betto; further, as Sozomen says, book 5, chapter 3, page 597, the emperor Constantine, when it had suddenly been converted to Christ, ordered that what had formerly not been a city should be a city, and called it Constantia, honouring that place on account of its religion with the name of the one of his sons whom he held dearest; it accordingly enjoyed civic right until the times of Julian, in whose reign it lost, plainly on account of the same religion, what it had before gained for itself by religion: for the apostate prince, a lawsuit furnishing the opportunity, subjected it again to the people of Gaza; not, however, so that it did not retain its own bishop, clergy and diocesan boundaries; so much so, indeed, that in the time of Sozomen, as he asserts at the place cited, the bishop of Gaza attempted in vain to subject Maiuma, widowed of its pastor, to himself, the provincial synod, having taken cognizance of the case, judging plainly to the contrary, and asserting that it was just that those who had obtained the right of a city for the sake of piety, but had fallen from that right by the sentence of a pagan prince, should by no means be despoiled of the rewards granted them, at least in those things which pertain to the priesthood and the ecclesiastical order. Thus, in the main, the praised Le Quien. But let us come to our saint.

[2] of St. Cosmas, its bishop This saint, whom John Bolland, the parent of our work, placed among the Passed Over on the 15th day of January because of his announcement in certain Menaea, and, on account of his repeated announcement today in many others, partly Menaea, partly martyrologies, assigned to be given today, which was likewise done at the 12th day of this month: for he was announced on the day just cited in the calendar of the Greeks, which Génébrard translated into Latin, in these words: Cosmas the poet. In the Slavo-Russian Menology, rendered into Latin by the noble Lord John Gabriel, baron of Sparwenfeld, and in our possession in manuscript: and of our most blessed Father Cosmas, maker of canons. And also in the Greek Horologion in this manner: τοῦ ὁσιοῦ πατὸς ημῶν κοσμᾶ τοῦ ποιητοῦ. Of our holy father Cosmas the Poet. Who seems to be the same as the one whom the Greater Menaea, Sirleto and others announce today. The Menaea indeed in this manner: Οὗτος ὁ ἁγιος προσλαμβάνεται κομιδῇ νέος ὤν παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰωαννου τοῦ Δαμασκηνοῦ ὡς υἱοποιητός. ὃς πλούτῳ πολλῷ κωμῶν, και κοσμικῇ δόξῃ προσελάβετό τινα τῶν Ἀσυγκριτῶν, ἄνδρα πολυμαθῆ, καὶ σοφὸν, ᾧ τόν τε υἱὸν αὑτοῦ Ἰωάννην, καὶ Κοσμᾶν τὸν υἱοποιητὸν παραδοὺς πᾶσαν σοφίαν θεῖάν τε, καὶ ἀνθρωπίνην ἐκδιδάσκειν ἀυτοὺς ἐξηκριβώσατο. οἳ δεξιᾶς τυχόντες φύσεως πᾶσαν ἐν βραχει γραμματικήν τε, καὶ φιλοσοφίαν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ διδαχθέντες, ἔτι δὲ ἀστρονομίαν, καὶ γεωμετρίαν ἐξασκήσαντες, ἅπασιν αἰδέσιμοι ἀνεδείχθησαν. ὅς δὲ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν ἀυτῶν τελειότητα βούλεται μαθεῖν, ἀπο τῶν αὐτοῖς πονηθέντων συγγραμμάτων ἀκριβῶς εἴσεται. ἐ͂ιτα εἰς τὴν Λαύραν τοῦ ἁγίου Σάβα παραγενόμενοι, τὸν μοναδικὸν ζυγὸν ὑπέρχονται. καὶ ὁ μὲν μακάριος Ἰωάννης πρεσβύτερος χειροτονεῖται παρὰ τοῦ Πατριάρχου Ἱεροσολύμων. ὁ δὲ ἀοίδημος Κοσμᾶς πολλὰ παρακληθεὶς ὑπο πάσης τῆς Συνόδου Ἐπίσκοπος Μαιουμᾶ προχειριζεται. καλῶς οὖν πολιτευσάμενος, καὶ τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ποίμνιον επὶ νομὰς σωτηρίους ὁδηγήσας, καὶ εἰς βαθὺ γῆρας ἐλᾶσας ἀνεπαύσατο ἐν Κυρίῳ.

[3] in the Menaea Which the most eminent Cardinal Quirini, bishop of Brescia, in the Diatribe on the Old Office of the Orthodox Greeks, page 115, subjoins to the Greek translated into Latin in this manner: This saint (namely Cosmas), while still a very young boy, is adopted as a son by the father of St. John Damascene, who, since he flourished in great riches and human glory, chose a certain Asyncritus (Rader, at the 15th day of January, translates: a certain one of the order of secretaries), a very learned and wise man, to whom, handing over his son John and his adopted son Cosmas for instruction, he took great care that they should be imbued by him with all divine and human letters. And they, endowed with a good disposition, having in a short time been taught all grammar and philosophy, and moreover exercised in astronomy and geometry, won for themselves the veneration of all; and whoever desires to know their excellent knowledge in all things will certainly find it from the monuments of genius which they themselves composed. Then, turning aside to the Laura of St. Sabas, they take up the monastic yoke. Blessed John indeed is ordained priest by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, while the illustrious Cosmas, much entreated by the whole synod, is proclaimed bishop of Maiuma; and when he had administered the province imposed on him excellently, and had led his flock to saving pastures, advanced to a great old age he rested in the Lord. But since he is also announced, as I said above, on the 15th of January, I add here in Latin, as Rader translated them, the things which differ from today's announcement: the Menaea, then, have this on the day cited, about the middle: The same father, namely of John Damascene, … also took into his family this most blessed Cosmas, while still almost an infant, and an orphan, and afflicted with the utmost poverty, and educated him liberally, and called him, like his son, John. Then, some things being interposed, they continue thus: Whence blessed Cosmas was made a vessel of election, of whom we can take the proof, how much he was able both in eloquence and in wisdom, from his canons which he composed, and his troparia, if we read them diligently.

[4] and in the martyrologies The rest agree with the above, except that they assert that our saint was created bishop of Maiuma by the archbishop of Jerusalem, and make no mention of a synod. More briefly, the Graeco-Muscovite Ephemerides, exhibited in volume 1 of May, have today, in the metrical October, this little verse about our saint … τοῦ ὁσιοῦ πατρὸς ημῶν ΚΩΣΜΑ Ποιητοῦ: Of our holy father Cosmas the poet. Understand, adds Papebroch, the memory. With these the most eminent Sirleto agrees, presenting the following eulogy of our saint: On the same day, namely the day before the Ides of October, the birthday of our holy father Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, a man remarkable for wisdom and piety; ruling praiseworthily the church of Maiuma, of which he was bishop, he reached the highest old age, and rested in the Lord. But Bucelinus more prolixly, in these words: On the same day the birthday of St. Cosmas the Hagiopolite, bishop of Maiuma. He, a native of Jerusalem, deprived of his parents while still of tender age, was adopted by the father of St. John Damascene. Then, having obtained as master Cosmas, a monk of the same name, an Italian, carried off thither as a captive, he made wonderful progress with John in the study of letters, far the best instructed in grammatical, philosophical, mathematical and theological sciences. And with the same zeal and purpose as John he set out to the Laura of St. Sabas, a monastery even then of our Order, and, having professed as a monk, excelled in the rarest holiness of life.

[5] At length, compelled by force and drawn out of the monastery, he was created bishop of Maiuma by the Patriarch of Jerusalem; memory. and when he had ruled his flock excellently, and had adorned his chair for ever by the most holy example of his life, he departed, having ended his life in a good old age, leaving most beautiful monuments of a most profound genius. From the Life, volume two of the Saints of the Order, and from John, Patriarch of Jerusalem. But that Bucelinus asserts that the Laura of St. Sabas was even then a monastery of his Order displeases Mabillon, and not undeservedly: for he, treating of John Damascene, a member of the same monastery, forbids him to be reckoned to his Benedictine Order, though for another reason: for he has the following on this matter in volume 2 of the Benedictine Annals, page 212: There shone forth, he says, among the Greeks in that conflict for the sacred images the zeal of St. John Damascene, whom, because he had as teacher Cosmas, an Italian monk carried off captive from his native land into Palestine, Trithemius (On the Illustrious Men of the Order of St. Benedict, page 35, where Busaeus corrects the cited error in the margin) and certain others reckoned to ours on no sufficiently solid foundation. Let Molanus succeed Bucelinus: he, in his Additions to Usuard, celebrates our saint in this manner: And of the holy father Cosmas the Hagiopolite and Poet, bishop of Maiuma. And Wion mentions him, Lignum Vitae, book 3, page 340: On the same day, of the holy father Cosmas the Hagiopolite and Poet, bishop of Maiuma. But in the Additions he adjoins the following: More about him in the Life of St. John Damascene; he was an Italian by nation, and abbot of St. Sabas near Jerusalem, master and foster-father of the same St. John Damascene, about the year of the Lord 700. Whom I shall meet below, as also Ferrarius, who agrees with Wion in the Additions (omitting, however, the episcopal title); to these are added Dorganius and, of whom above, Génébrard, and also the author of the Greek Horologion, announcing our saint again today.

[6] The Acts of this saint existed, or still exist, That Acts and a Life of St. Cosmas existed, or still exist, Fabricius and Bucelinus openly indicate; Fabricius indeed in volume X of the Bibliotheca Graeca, book V, chapter XLI, page CCVIII, where these are the words: The Life of Cosmas the Melodist, not yet edited, from which Allatius frequently brings forward passages in Greek, On the Books of the Church of the Greeks. Namely in Dissertation 2, page 120, where he introduces the biographer of our saint discoursing on the fabulous liberation of the father of St. John Damascene from hell, which the praised biographer ineptly maintains; as also in the Dissertation cited, page 138, where the following are recorded from him: And of the saints, indeed,

namely of Cosmas, the presage had its effect in deed at the opportune time, and he made his step to the heavenly mansions, truly worthy of them, and was added to the fathers and masters, himself a father and master; and now, standing immediately by the Triad conspicuous in unity, he is more purely illuminated by the splendours which shine forth thence. But Bucelinus writes that he took from the Life the things which we recited from him above, and cites volume 2 of the Saints of the Order; but what edition, or what work he means to indicate, is hidden from me; none of these things occurs to me in Trithemius, Yepes, Mabillon and others; only the same things which we saw above from Bucelinus A. de Heredia presents to us in Spanish in volume 4 of the Saints of the Order of St. Benedict at this day: but the entire Life, as I shall presently say, is lacking. Its beginning, however, Fabricius expressed in volume X, page 218, and Allatius in the Diatribe on the Writings of the Simeons, among the Lives of the Saints which are denied to Metaphrastes, page 123, in these words: τιμᾷν ἐστιν ἄξιον τοὺς ἐφευρηκότας τὰ κάλλιστα… That is: It is worthy to honour those who have found the most excellent things.* Le Quien and the most eminent Quirini bring forward the same biographer of our saint from Allatius; but he is honoured by Le Quien with a plainly slight encomium, when, in the Works of St. John Damascene printed at Paris in the year of the Lord 1712, in the first Life of the same saint, page 3, he speaks in the following manner.

[7] and they are held by Le Quien as fabulous, From all these things, finally, it is further inferred how foolishly an anonymous writer, I know not who, of the Life of St. Cosmas the Melodist, said that the father of our John Damascene lived devoted to the Mohammedan sect until his death; and so that Leo Allatius, in the Dissertation on John Damascene and his Works, wrongly sends us off to this fable-teller to fish out circumstances of the life of Damascene of which the Patriarch of Jerusalem was ignorant. Thus he. Which things plainly did not add to me a spur to inquire more diligently for the Life: but Leo Allatius passes another judgement on it in the same Works of St. John Damascene published by Le Quien, in the Prolegomena whose title is Of Leo Allatius on John Damascene, from the unedited work of the same Leo on Apocryphal Books, page XXXVI, no. LXIII; behold the words: The author of the Life of St. Cosmas, the brother of Damascene, whoever he was, not inelegant, and a not imprudent investigator of ecclesiastical history, and one who committed to writing many things about Damascene (this Le Quien criticizes) passed over or neglected by John, the writer of the Life of Damascene. For although this biographer, treating of Damascene, wavers, as Le Quien pleases, and elsewhere acts the fable-teller, as we shall see below, these things do not prove that the Life of St. Cosmas, which he was writing by design, is plainly fabulous; nay indeed, the most eminent Quirini decides altogether otherwise in the Office of the Orthodox Greeks, Dissertation 2, page 120, where he has this: The writer of the Life of the same, cited by Allatius, would show us more about the affairs of Cosmas, if that learned man had given him to the public light.

[8] nor can they be found: hence one must keep to the Life of St. John Damascene. However the matter stands, having applied diligent inquiry, I have not been able to dig out this work, of whatever sort it finally is; for neither in the numerous furniture of our books, or our cases, nor in the indexes of the most ample libraries, although they very often mention our saint and his writings, has it been possible to find his Acts. Wherefore I am compelled to rest chiefly on the Life of St. John Damascene, the adoptive brother of our saint, which is had in our work, volume 2 of May, at the 6th day, from page III, and which was written by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, according to the Historical Chronology of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem prefixed to volume III of May, John IV (read V, as will be clear to anyone beginning the count from the first John in name and patriarchal dignity, and proceeding up to this John, whose patriarchate Papebroch describes in the cited Historical Chronology, page XLII): nor am I the first who is driven to this, since the same happened before me to Surius, as he himself testifies in his last Trimester in these words: You have the Acts of St. Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, in the Life of St. John Damascene, 6th of May, chapter 8, etc. This in the Index of the Saints of the month of October; he repeats the same in the General Index of this trimester, faultily calling our saint bishop of Mammetrana. I shall rest chiefly, then, on the Acts of St. John Damascene, and add to them the things which have become known from elsewhere: nor do I stay here over the inepties of Cave in the Saeculum Iconoclasticum, at the word Joannes Damascenus, nor of Oudin, eighth century, column 1713, in which they hold the Patriarch John as a most trifling writer, since they blurt these things out at will.

[9] This saint is born at Jerusalem about the year 674 The birthplace of this saint was Jerusalem itself, as not only the common name of Hagiopolite shows, but also the biographer of Damascene clearly relates, chapter 2, no. 10, introducing the father of St. John Damascene speaking thus to the master: Moreover this other one, namely our Cosmas, of the same name as you, whom, sprung from Jerusalem and bereaved of his parents in tender age, I have adopted as a spiritual son. But the time of his birth is not so certain, nor do I have whence to dig out a certain year, although Constantine Acropolita, to be cited below, calls him older in age than Damascene, which the adoption also seems to establish; for parents bereaved of offspring are wont to take adoptive offspring to themselves. If these things are so, our saint must have preceded his brother John Damascene in birth by one or two years: for the equal zeal of both sons and their equal morals forbid extending that time longer, as do other things which we shall see below. Since, then, John Damascene, as Papebroch thinks in the note b to chapter I of the Life, was born about the year of Christ 676, our saint's birth must have been about 674, and accordingly he flourished partly in the seventh, partly in the eighth century; whom Castellanus alone, so far as I know, of the more recent writers, wrongly notes in the margin in his Universal Martyrology as having flourished in the ninth century (a fragment of the Life of our saint, to be cited below and rejected, supports him), although he himself announces that his brother Damascene died on the 6th of May in the year 760.

[10] from parents, as the Menaea assert, of slender fortune: The Menaea cited above indicate the qualities of this saint's family; for they declare that, afflicted with the utmost poverty, he was taken into the family by Damascene's father, and called John; but let the credit of these things rest with the Menaea, since you would seek them in vain in Damascene's biographer, in Bucelinus and in others, as many as treat of our saint; the biographer of Damascene indeed asserts that he was bereaved of his parents in tender age, but is silent about the poverty and the name, as are the others, very many of whom I consulted in order to confirm the statements of the Menaea: but no one says anything about our saint's family and kindred, if you except one, Allatius, in the Prolegomena cited above, no. XXXVII, indicating in passing Stephen, our saint's nephew, namely by adoption, and son of the uterine brother of Damascene (as is established from the Life of this St. Stephen, volume 3 of July, § II, page 526), in these words: At length he returns to the monastery of Sabas, namely our saint, renowned there also by miracles, while Stephen, the son of the brother of Cosmas, presided over the place. Further, that our saint was the adoptive brother of St. John Damascene, and was adopted as an infant and orphan, we have just seen from the Menaea; the other things about his boyhood the Menaea and others are silent about; but more broadly by Damascene's biographer, as the title of chapter 2 of the Life shows: The excellent progress of John and Cosmas under the master Cosmas, brought from Italy, is recorded: but before I adduce this progress from the cited Acts, this seems an opportune place to discourse somewhat about the Cosmases and to distinguish our saint from the master of the same name.

[11] the same from the master For although the title just described, as also the whole Life of Damascene, most clearly distinguish the disciple from the master, no one will wonder that I judge something must be said on that matter, if he weighs these words of the most eminent Quirini in the Office of the Orthodox Greeks, Diatribe 2, page 118: We must beware, he says, lest we confuse this Cosmas with his teacher, who was likewise called Cosmas, which we wonder has been done even by some very much practised in the critical art. But who these are he himself does not express; yet among their number I find Cave, who in the Saeculum Iconoclasticum, page 339, at the word Cosmas, writes this: Cosmas of Jerusalem, as some would have it called the Hagiopolite, sprung from Italy, a man most cultivated in every kind of more polished literature, flourished in the year of the Lord 730; captured by Saracen pirates, he was carried off to Damascus, and, received into his house by the father of John Damascene, was given as teacher to John, then still a youth; at length he was made bishop of Maiuma. The same happened to Ferrarius, Nova Topographia in Martyrologium Romanum, page 73, where it is read thus: Maiuma … 14th of October, Cosmus the Hagiopolite, foster-father of St. John Damascene, bishop, in the year of the Lord 700. And he cites, which I wonder at, Surius in the Life of Damascene. Nor had Fabricius distinguished them, volume X, page 131; but the learned man corrects himself in the same volume, page 217, and points out Cave's error in these words: Hence you will emend what I wrote above on page 131, and the most learned Cave, who makes one out of these two Cosmases.

[12] of the same name More broadly Wangnereck, priest of the Society of Jesus, treats of these very things in his Graecorum Pietas Mariana; let us hear him discoursing in the Prolegomena, page 75: But, he says, this is more amusing, that the translator of the Euchologion (whose name I did not find expressed in him; but the translator of the cited Euchologion is the Reverend Father Goar of the Order of Preachers, whose work appeared at Paris in the year 1647) says on the same folio 541 that these most holy brothers "Theodore and Theophanes, and likewise Joseph, especially with John Damascene and Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, who was Damascene's teacher, devoted themselves to composing hymns." And having shown that St. Theodore and his companions flourished later than Damascene and St. Cosmas, he continues in this manner: Now indeed, what cannot be dissembled without detriment to historical truth: good heavens! Who among the writers ever said "that Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, was Damascene's teacher"? There has happened here to you, learned man, what also happened to me more than once before I became more attentive to historical matters: namely, two men of the same name, that is, two Cosmases, have sweetly deceived you. Let us hear the Patriarch John, the writer of the Life of John Damascene, who, as Baronius proves in the events of the year 749, likewise lived in the century of Damascene. And this very Life of Damascene written by the Patriarch John the faithful translator Billius prefixed to the Works of Damascene, translated by himself (and, having related the words which Damascene's biographer supplies at no. 8 and the following, he continues thus): These things the Patriarch John says about Cosmas the teacher, whom he nowhere says was bishop of Maiuma. But concerning the other Cosmas, whom he said was born at Jerusalem and brought up with Damascene, and finally by this very Cosmas, the Italian monk and captive of the barbarians, in

every kind of piety and discipline excellently instructed together with Damascene, of this other Cosmas, I say, the Patriarch John says: "That he was created bishop of Maiuma by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, not indeed willingly, but compelled to obey."

[13] is distinguished: The Menaea relate altogether the same things about these two Cosmases, partly on the 4th of December in the Life of St. Damascene, partly on the 14th of October in the Life of St. Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma. Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, was therefore not the teacher of St. John Damascene, but plainly his fellow-pupil from his tender nails onwards; whom nevertheless, a bishop, the translator of the Euchologion, folio 541, most confidently calls the teacher of Damascene. But we have already treated above of this St. Cosmas, of Jerusalem by origin (whence the Menaea call him the Hagiopolite). Namely in the same Prolegomena, no. 20. These things Wangnereck says learnedly about both Cosmases. But in avoiding Charybdis he fell into Scylla; for he himself, deluded in the same way as the translator of the Euchologion, confuses the homonymous Johns, patriarchs of Jerusalem: for that he asserts that the Patriarch John of Jerusalem flourished in the century of Damascene, since John Damascene was raised by him to the priesthood, is plainly conformable to the truth; but that the same man was the biographer of Damascene is foreign to the truth, as is easily shown from the very passage of Baronius which he cites: for that John, according to the Historical Chronology of the Patriarchs, the third of this name, nay the fourth, had been taken from the living in the year 749, as will be clear at no. 44: how, then, could he write the Life of Damascene, who survived that year and several others? Which, finally, the Patriarch John, according to Papebroch's series of patriarchs the fourth of this name (read, as we saw at no. 8, the fifth), carried out, and adorned the Life with brilliant style, the argument being received from a certain Arabic and most simple narrative, almost two centuries after the death of Damascene. Thus Papebroch, no. 3, in the Commentary prefixed to the Life of St. John Damascene.

[14] his image is twice exhibited in our work; Wion has the same things as Cave and Goar, as we have just seen, as also Ferrarius again today in the General Catalogue of the Saints who are not in the Roman Martyrology, announcing our saint, the title of bishop suppressed, as above. Equally doubtful on this head is that image of Cosmas which, among the images of the other hymnographers, Raye presents to us from the front of the Triodion printed at Venice, in the Akolouthia of the Greek Office prefixed to volume II of June: for there is exhibited on the left side, in the second place from Christ, an image with this inscription, ΚΟΣΜΑΣ: but the saint shown there is destitute of episcopal ornaments and insignia, although the reason for this may be, as we shall see below, that our saint acted as hymnographer in the time of his monastic state; as Raye also seems to hint at the place cited, § III, no. 25, when among the known hymnographers he places Damascene, and Cosmas, brought up equally with him, afterwards bishop of Maiuma, and declares that his Acts are to be given today. Nor more certain is the other image, which is exhibited in the Appendix on the Hagioptycha of the Greeks and Muscovites, over which is written Constantinopolitan diptych, and which is seen delineated in our work, volume 1 of May, page LX, as also in our possession on wooden tablets, coated first with gypsum, then with colours, and finally with a certain gummy varnish for splendour and durability: our saint, then, is depicted in the copy on the left side, in the second line, beside John Damascene in the fourth place, the name ΚΟΣΜΑΣ being added round the head, as is done for the others too.

[15] but without episcopal ornament: And concerning the saint delineated in the said place Papebroch relates on the following page: That he was the companion of St. John in composing and restoring sacred hymns is rendered more probable even by this conjunction. And noting in the Index, page LXVIII, that the aforesaid image is exhibited, he has this: Cosmas the poet, bishop of Maiuma, 14th of October, Gr. and A. That is, the Graeco-Muscovite Ephemerides and the Appendix treat of the saint cited. Although, then, the saint shown there again lacks episcopal ornament, yet the opinion was settled with our elders that the bishop of Maiuma is designated by those images; which adds no small weight to what I am going to say at no. 29 about the office and cult of our saint which obtains among the Greeks. And since we have made mention of tablets, I forewarn the reader in advance that, being of moderate size, they were wont to be carried closed at the neck by the Greeks, and, when unfolded (for some are folded with a double fold, others with a triple), to be hung on the wall for the sake of veneration; and I refer the one desiring to know more fully what pertains to them to the place cited in the preceding number, lest I do what has been done. Let these things suffice for now, for discourse will return to them below, when we treat of our saint's works. Let us return, then, to where we digressed from.

[16] the progress of him and of his brother Damascene under the master. More broadly, as I said at no. 10, the progress of our saint and of Damascene under the master Cosmas is set forth in chapter 2 of the Life of the saint last cited: behold now the words, though I shall not add those which pertain less to our saint: Then his excellent disposition of mind and his zeal bore John through heaven like the wings of an eagle. But Cosmas, his brother in spirit, his fellow-pupil in study, you would have said was a ship borne over the water with sails spread like wings, the winds blowing favourably and the Zephyrs swelling the stern. So by swiftness of intellect and intensity of study all the more abstruse learning was acquired by them, both that which is engaged in writing and that which is engaged in disputing and demonstrating. Meanwhile by the discipline of morals they not only cultivated the mind, but also calmed the turbulent motions of the soul; and as keen as the eagle's eyes upon the sun, so unswervingly did they fix theirs on the natures of things explained by words. And they attained arithmetical proportions no less happily than either Pythagoras or Diophantus himself. They also became so skilled in geometrical demonstrations that they were thought to be other Euclids, or any who have been like him; and so eminent in poetic faculty as they seem to the learned, on account of the divine songs which they composed. But how great John was in astronomy, although he himself wrote down only a few things about intervals, stations, relations and the equable reckoning of recessions, for the brief instruction of the less learned, appears clearly. Cosmas too was such in all things, the discourse on whose praises I leave to others.

[17] the judgement of Constantine Acropolita on our saint, Thus the Patriarch, who, would that he had carried the Acts of Cosmas, as of John Damascene, through to the end, and that the more because the discourse of the most wise Lord (these are the words of the title) Constantine Acropolita the Logothete on St. John Damascene, in the translation of John Francis de Rubeis, a Roman jurisconsult, which exists in the Appendix to volume 2 of May, page 738, no. 14, affirms that this could scarcely be done as it deserves; for he writes this at the place cited: For the rest, when he had set him, namely Cosmas the teacher, snatched from the hands of the Saracens, over all the household, and had ordered that he be honoured by all as another self, handing over his sons to him, he makes them as it were his sons. These were John, the most splendid argument of our discourse, and he who before him (behold what I said above at no. 9 about the time of birth) had been adopted by Mansur for want of natural offspring, Cosmas, I say, admirable both in his name and in his morals; of whom what I may say as it were in passing, since if anyone should undertake to recount his affairs by design, he would scarcely accomplish it as it deserves … But I omit to speak at present of the excellent Cosmas, deferring and putting it off to another time; for I, who am not able to speak of one according to his dignity, what sort of man should I prove, lingering at pleasure on the actions of another? … The things, then, which pertain to Cosmas I pass over, bearing it indeed with a sick mind that I cannot attend to both at once, and embrace their deeds with both hands, as is said, and narrate in one discourse the prerogatives of each, or rather their divine works and excellent acts.

[18] and the judgement of the biographer of St. John Damascene on his learning: These words sufficiently indicate the illustrious man's judgement of our saint; but whether, as he hints, he ever delivered another discourse about him is hidden from me; at least Cave does not mention it in the Saeculum Scholasticum, at the word Constantinus, page 250, where he presents a catalogue of his works. Damascene's biographer now goes on to extol this saint's learning, and especially his theological learning; and although he does not mention St. Cosmas here, yet the things which we saw above easily prove that he was equal to Damascene in these; nay, the teacher himself, restoring the sons to their father, commends the learning of both at no. 13 in these words: Eh, he says to the father, what you desired has been attained: these boys excel me in learning: for it was not enough for them to have equalled their master, but by the greatness of their intellect and by efforts never relaxed, God especially increasing the gift of wisdom in them, they have been raised to a higher step of philosophy than I. To these Damascene's biographer subjoins the elder Cosmas's withdrawal to the monastery of St. Sabas, and the death of the father of John Damascene, inserting nothing about our saint during that whole time in which St. John Damascene was substituted in the place of his deceased father and adorned with the dignity of protosymbulus, which time meanwhile must have comprised a course of various years: but that our Cosmas clung to his brother's side, and stood by him with a helping hand when, as we shall see below, he began at that time to tear down the heresy of the Iconoclasts, although I find it nowhere for want of monuments, I nevertheless strongly suspect, since Damascene's biographer declares in this manner that they withdrew together to the Laura of the same St. Sabas (a brief description of which is had in our work, volume III of March, page 166, in the Preliminary Commentary to the Life of SS. John, Sergius, etc., no. 1).

[19] together with his brother Damascene, St. Cosmas Damascene, then, as he came forth naked from his mother's womb, so departed from the world stripped of all things except necessary clothing; such he went to Jerusalem, where, having adored with fitting worship the majesty of the holy places, like a hart burning with divine thirst, withdrawing into solitude, he reached the Laura of the divine Sabas, having Cosmas as companion and partner not only of his journey but also of his counsel, whom he had before had as sharer of the same education and instruction. You would have said they were a sacred pair, which ran together to the yoke of Christ, to submit their necks to it. But in what year this withdrawal took place Damascene's biographer does not express; but Papebroch, in the Historical Chronology of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem prefixed to volume III of May, page 35, under John III, places it in the year of Christ 730, in these words: And that some time after the monastic habit was assumed by Damascene; and he assumed it about the year 730, if I am not mistaken, being more than forty years old (nay, fifty). But the same Papebroch, in the Preliminary Commentary to the Life of St. John Damascene, no. 13, says that this saint, about the fortieth year of his age, amid the

affairs of public administration, began to busy himself for the cult of the sacred images: but what impelled him to set this last chronotaxis so I would not easily say; for since Damascene was born, as he notes in the margin and says in the text, about the year of Christ 676, if we add 40 to this, we shall have the year of Christ 716, at which time no one, certainly not the emperor, was attacking the sacred images; hence Damascene had at that time no one to resist.

[20] he enters the monastery of St. Sabas But Papebroch seems through inadvertence (if the error is not the printer's) either to have written forty for fifty, or to have confused the beginning of the Leonine persecution with the beginning of the same reign; whereas it is established among historiographers, as Papebroch knew very well (as may be seen in our work at the 25th day of February in the Acts of St. Tarasius, page 572, at the 27th of the same month in the Acts of St. Procopius, and often elsewhere), that Leo, as emperor, craftily dissembled for nine years the heresy which he had proposed to himself before his empire, and only in the tenth year, which nearly coincided with the year of Christ 726, began it by public edicts: whom, more probably from the beginning, Damascene, and perhaps our saint, resisted. Further, that the withdrawal to the monastery could not have occurred before the year 730 Le Quien (whom I wonder did not point out the aforesaid inadvertence of Papebroch, since he both transcribes the words of the last note to chapter 3 of the Life of St. John Damascene, substituting, though rightly, 18 for 11, and elsewhere in the same Life does not pass over smaller matters) shows clearly enough, since he proves on page 9 of the Life of St. John Damascene that Damascene was still flourishing at Damascus in the year of Christ 730, in these words: Namely, he afterwards composed a second letter for the sake of friends who had found something obscure in the first; which indeed he did in the year of Christ 730, in which Germanus was thrust from his throne by Leo; for Damascene complains of this crime in these words: "now also blessed Germanus, shining both in life and in doctrine, has been afflicted with blows and driven into exile." Baronius also records these words of Damascene at the year of Christ 730, although he refers the cutting off of the right hand, as also the withdrawal to the Laura of St. Sabas, prematurely to the year 728.

[21] about the year of Christ 730 or 731, Theophanes also relates the same things as Le Quien at the year 730, in these words: Then indeed at Damascus in Syria John Chrysorrhoas, son of Mansur, an excellent doctor, shone equally with holiness of life and with doctrine. While, then, he was still flourishing at Damascus, Damascene added a third to the two letters spoken of in the preceding number; the force of which the emperor, being unable to bear, acted by calumny with the prince of the Saracens at Damascus, and accused John of treason; and the barbarian, too credulous, orders John's right hand to be cut off; which having been miraculously restored by the help of the divine Virgin, he at length, though with difficulty, obtained from the prince the faculty of going to a monastery; all of which things prove that our saint with his brother Damascene went to the monastery of St. Sabas, and that in the old Laura, either at the end of the year of Christ 730 or at the beginning of 731: for both what will be said below about our saint's episcopate, and the things which Theophanes narrates at the year of Christ 736, but Baronius and Pagi at the year of Christ 734, about Theodore, son of Mansur, probably the paternal cousin of Damascene, do not allow this entry to be put off further; for in this year, says Theophanes, Theodore, son of Mansur, more probably the successor of Damascene in dignity, was banished to desert places. Since, then, Theodore, before any crime was objected to him, which Papebroch suspects was done by the machination of Leo, and which Pagi declares in the margin happened on the occasion of the sacred images in the year 734, bore the dignity of protosymbulus for some years, that entry seems necessarily to be fixed at the end of the year 730 or the beginning of 731, at which time our saint numbered about the 56th year of his age.

[22] Maimbourg agrees with these in the History of the Iconoclast Heresy, volume 1, page 171, to which reckoning Maimbourg gives his vote, where he has in French about the following at the year of Christ 731: After this (he had premised the amputation of Damascene's right hand), suddenly awaking, he found his hand so perfectly restored that he had the use of it as before; only a circle was seen, which showed the place where the hand had received the blow, so that it could not be said (as Damascene's biographer says happened) that another, substituted in his place, had suffered the punishment: the whole city, instructed by those who had heard him singing divine praises at home, ran to the spectacle; the caliph himself, informed of the illustrious miracle, wished to view the matter in a man of this quality; he could not resist the clear truth, since it could neither be denied nor rejected: therefore, confessing his injustice and precipitancy, he detested the infamous crime of Leo, and showed the honour due to the innocence of St. John, and used every means that the saint should resume his former dignity; but the saint at length prevailed by most humble prayers, and obtained from the prince to give himself at his pleasure to the divine services. Hence, having distributed the goods with which he abounded, partly to the poor, partly to the churches, so as to fulfil the debt both of grace and of nature, partly to his kinsmen, he withdrew to the celebrated monastery of St. Sabas. Thus the praised Maimbourg, who inserts not even a word about our saint; nor is it an objection that the same author treats of Damascene's priesthood in this year, since he declares most clearly that he obtained this very dignity only when instructed by a long exercise of religious functions.

[23] nor does Le Quien's suspicion hinder it. But, these things having been in some way established, Le Quien, the most recent editor of Damascene's Works, seems to be opposed, in the first Life of the same saint, page 9, where he asserts that the epistolary exhortations desired by Papebroch are those very three Orations on the images, and, having cited the Orations, continues thus: But indeed a grave suspicion has come upon me that John had already then been co-opted into the clergy of Jerusalem before Leo declared war on the sacred images, and so had given his name to the monastic life long before this. But by what reasoning this suspicion can stand I do not see; for certainly Damascene did not act as monk and protosymbulus at the same time, nor was his hand certainly cut off when he was a layman, except by the machination of Leo, now an image-fighter; accordingly, unless I wish to tear down the whole structure of Damascene's Life, I cannot subscribe to this suspicion. Nay, not even Le Quien himself holds it firm, when he asserts that he can suspect that the Oration on the Annunciation of the divine Virgin, which had given the handle for suspecting, was delivered under Leo, son of Copronymus, who was not impious as his father was. I keep, then, to the chronotaxis given, since it appears more probable, nor can a certain one be had, and I think that the withdrawal of our saint, as also of Damascene, to the monastery took place at the end of the year of Christ 730 or the beginning of 731.

Perhaps quique*.

§ II. The saint in the time of his monastic state acts as hymnographer: of what sort he proved in that art is shown: his works are enumerated.

St. Cosmas acts as hymnographer, as also Who and of what sort our saint and his brother Damascene were, enrolled in the register of the monastery of St. Sabas, the seminary of so many saints, Damascene's biographer treats throughout chapter 4; and although he chiefly proclaims the virtues of Damascene, whom he calls the sole argument of his writing, yet there is no reason why we should doubt that Cosmas was like him in all things, since we have just seen him trading with the talents granted him like a good servant, and the biographer writes by design the deeds not of Cosmas but of John Damascene: nay indeed, the Patriarch, treating of Damascene's works, professes openly, and says in chapter 4, no. 35: In these labours he had as helper, through brotherly love, him whom he had received as a brother from the divine Spirit, Cosmas, that most accomplished man, sharer of his eloquence, instruction and exercise. Further, being furnished with the monastic virtues and taught to run more perfectly the way of God's commandments, they were exempted from the care of the master, to whom, as Damascene's biographer relates at nos. 23 and 24, they had hitherto been subject. Which indeed, as regards Damascene, the Patriarch affirms in chapter 5, no. 32, happened at the admonition of the Mother of God: and since it treats chiefly of sacred songs, the composing of which had perhaps been forbidden by the master to our saint as well as to Damascene, it has seemed good to transcribe here the words of the divine Virgin from the praised biographer, and that the more willingly because I think that this is the epoch at which our saint began to act as hymnographer, as the Patriarch testifies of John, and as Fabricius, to be cited below, asserts of our saint.

[25] It runs, then, thus: Why, she says to the old man, hast thou stopped up the fountain that will pour forth waters so sweet, at the admonition of the divine Virgin, his brother John Damascene: so limpid, so copious, so pleasant? that will give to souls a water more excellent than that which burst forth wonderfully from the rock in the wilderness, the water for which David was seized with longing, the water of the Samaritan woman, promised by Christ? Allow the fountain to flow, for it will flow most abundantly, and will wander over the whole world, and with its huge blast will cover the seas of heresies, and turn them into wonderful sweetness. Let those who thirst go in haste to the water, and let those who lack the silver of a pure life, their affections being sold for the price, buy from John, nay and from Cosmas, the sincere purity of opinions and works. He will take up the prophetic harp, he the Davidic nablum; he will sing new songs, songs to the Lord God: he will surpass the song of Moses with his musical measures, he will surpass the dance of Miriam: the songs of Orpheus will be called a useless fable. He will tune a spiritual and heavenly melody. He will follow after the Cherubic hymns, and will make all the churches, namely the daughters of the heavenly Jerusalem, young maidens playing on timbrels, who may sing a song to God, to announce the death and resurrection of Christ… That these things also suit our saint will be clear from what follows. Since, then, I have spoken of St. Cosmas's melodic learning, I shall show somewhat more broadly of what sort he proved in that art.

[26] the eminent skill of St. Cosmas in this art, from the martyrologists, We have seen, both from the Menaea and from Damascene's biographer, that this saint was cultivated and instructed in every kind of learning; but of what sort and how celebrated he was in the melodic and hymnographic art is indicated by the common name of Melodist, as also of Poet, with one at least of which he is distinguished by all who treat of him, both martyrologists and other writers: the martyrologists we have seen above; now let us see the writers whom I have read about him (I think it superfluous to bring forward all, but necessary to bring forward some), who with one mouth praise our saint's eminent skill in this art: and first of all Leo Allatius, On the Books of the Greek Church, Dissertation 1, page 70, says from the unedited Synaxarion of Nicephorus Callistus: On this day, God so granting, we begin the Triodion … The first of all who devised it, three odes, I say, in the figure, as I think, of the holy and life-giving Trinity, was the great poet Cosmas, in the great and holy week of the passion of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ. The most eminent Quirini has things similar to these in the second Diatribe on the Lenten hymns of the Greeks and their authors, page III: Now indeed, he says, reviewing the hymnographers in the order in which they occur in the Barberini codex, to Cosmas first of the Triodion

author we have come. And he proves from Cedrenus, in the Historical Compendium, at the 10th year of Leo the Isaurian, page 456 in my copy, that the name of Melodist suits our saint, as also Damascene and Theophanes; nay, Fabricius, volume X, page 217, calls him by far the most celebrated among the Melodists of the Greek Church.

[27] C. Oudin agrees with the preceding, having this on the matter in volume 1, column 1785: by authors He was a man of most elegant genius, excelling chiefly in composing hymns and Greek songs. In like manner speak of our saint Damascene's biographer, Bucelinus, Le Quien, Cave and, as I was just saying, as many as treat of our saint: but above the rest, embracing much in few words, Suidas, at the word Ἰὠάννης Δαμασκηνός, John Damascene, presents the following eulogy of St. Cosmas about the middle of the article: At the same time also flourished Cosmas of Jerusalem, a most ingenious man, and wholly breathing that sweet musical modulation. And those canons of songs of John and Cosmas have admitted no comparison with the writings of others, nor will admit it as long as our life is passed: but as they have hitherto been incomparable, so they go forever, as long as men live. Leo Allatius promises, in the Dissertation cited, page 77, that he will say more, in these words: In vain, therefore, should I heap up more here about Cosmas; the matter is sufficiently plain. I promise, however, that I shall say more in the treatise which I have in hand, on the Melodists of the Greeks. But that treatise, so far as I know, has not hitherto seen the light, as the Reverend Father Possinus also asserts in his most courteous letters sent from Rome to our elders, in these words: Concerning the Melodists of Allatius, which was the other head of the commission, I have made a long and hitherto fruitless inquiry; that book has been found nowhere, and many deny that any volume was ever published with that title. Cardinal Quirini has things consonant with these in the Diatribe cited in the preceding number, page 132, as also more briefly on page 135, in this manner: Whether the History of the Greek Melodists, which the same Fabricius writes, Bibliotheca Graeca, volume VIII, page 820 and elsewhere, was being prepared by Urban Gottfried Siber, doctor of the Academy of Leipzig, has hitherto seen the light is unknown to me.*

[28] by various, Let these things suffice, then, which the praised Allatius has on this matter in the Dissertation cited, page 72: Why do we argue here about Thomases and Cosmases? Who, if only he has looked into the books of the Greeks, is ignorant of Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, chief among the Melodists and hymnographers? Nay, to finish the matter briefly, how highly the Greek Church valued the hymnographic learning of St. Cosmas I render proved from the following Rule VII of the Typicon, which I set out in Greek as well as in Latin: it is had thus in the most eminent Quirini, Diatribe cited, pages 136 and 137: Ἰστέον δὲ καὶ τοῦτο, ὡς εἴπερ ἔχει τὸ Μηναῖον ἐν μνήμῃ Ἁγίου τινὸς Κανόνας διαφόρων Ποιητῶν, εἰ μέν ἐστὶ Κανὼν ὁ τοῦ κῦρ Κοσμᾶ, προκριτέος, εἰ δὲ τοῦ κῦρ , Ἰωάννου, καὶ ἐτέρων, τοῦ Ἰωάννου προκρίνεται, εἰ δὲ τοῦ κυρ Θεοφάνους, καὶ ἐτέρων, ὁ τοῦ κῦρ Θεοφάνους προκρίνεται, προτιμητέος γάρ ἐστι τῶν ἀλλων, εἰ δὲ τοῦ κῦρ Ἰωσὴφ, οὗτος τῶν λοιπῶν προτετίμηται Ποιητῶν. Which in Latin, as Quirini puts it first in the same place, run thus: If the Menaeon has, in memory of any saint, canons of various poets, if the canon of the lord Cosmas is present, it is to be placed before the others; if of the lord John and others, that which is John's is placed before; if of the lord Theophanes and others, that of the lord Theophanes is placed before, for he is to be honoured before the others; if of the lord Joseph, he is placed before the remaining poets.* And all these things indeed evidently treat of our saint, and not of the homonymous master, which let it suffice to have noted here.

[29] The Menaea celebrate the learning of our saint just spoken of with a lengthy Office, and in the Menaea wherefore, as a specimen, I shall transfer here some strophes, as the most eminent Quirini rendered them into Latin, since they at the same time clearly hint and prove that he enjoys ecclesiastical cult among the Greeks: behold, then, the first, Diatribe cited, page 112: Bearing a mind illuminated by the rays of the Spirit, thou didst appear more splendid, O admirable one, gladdening all things with the beauty of thy words, and teaching us to celebrate the miracles of the Saviour, which He wrought by divine power, and also the passion which He, being kind, endured willingly for us … Put on a joyful countenance, O Church, and call thy sons, that they may rejoice together over this sublime proclamation. For the spiritual harp, the divine lyre, invites all to the mystical table, setting forth the honey-flowing and divinely resounding melodies of his songs, Cosmas the divine and glorious … Like a trumpet, O blessed one, thou didst sing the saving passion of Christ, and His miracles, and likewise the dormition of the Immaculate One, and didst gladden all, O Cosmas, with the sweet and pleasant harmony of thy words… The organ of spiritual songs, sending forth a pleasing sound, the divinely resounding lyre, and the charming intellectual flute of hymns, the cicada rendering many voices, the nightingale of charming songs, the wise Cosmas, sets forth today to the faithful his divinely inspired melodies.

[30] Soft harp, sweetly sounding swallow, renowned string of musical modulation, he is celebrated at length; swiftly writing reed of the divine oracles of the Spirit, treasure of dogmas, glory of sweet singers. … Prince of the hymn-speakers, comrade of the masters, harmonious and most right norm of spiritual songs, well-sounding trumpet, illustrious source of the modulation of odes, emulator of angelic hymnody, adorner of the Church of Christ, may Cosmas be adorned by me with hymns… Thy heart, made the dwelling of wisdom, O most celebrated Cosmas, has uttered hymns worthy of God, and has poured out brilliantly the streams of divine songs, like a fountain moved by the Spirit; having drunk of which, we, nurslings of the Church, follow thee with sacred hymns, as the coryphaeus of spiritual singers. Other things of this kind follow there, all of which, lest I be excessive in this part, I omit with Cardinal Quirini, whose words I almost use, and I betake myself to investigating and enumerating the works and compositions which our saint elaborated in the time of his monastic state amid the beloved delights of the solitude of St. Sabas.

[31] he is again distinguished from the master, But before I treat of them more distinctly, what we touched on above must be recalled again to memory, namely that our saint is wrongly confused with his homonymous teacher even by the learned, from which it has come about that the offspring of the one cannot be distinguished from that of the other: let us hear Fabricius discoursing on these things in a few words, volume X, page 218: for, treating of our saint, he has this: Yet the hymns of Cosmas which the Greek Church uses are mostly attributed to Cosmas, not the bishop, but the monk; so that it is credible that the elder Cosmas also laboured in this kind, and that, time intervening, it happened that the works of both were confused, or referred to one: or that the Hierosolymitan is also called by the name of monk because as a monk before his episcopate (and this is what I was saying above at no. 24) he had composed most of his hymns. Ceillier has almost the same things, volume XVII, page 731: in this, however, disagreeing with Fabricius, that he says that most of the hymns are attributed not to Cosmas the monk but to the elder, that is, to our saint's teacher, and accordingly denies to our saint, not indeed all, but most of the hymns. But whether in fact they are to be denied him, let us inquire a little.

[32] First of all, Ceillier brings forward no foundation for this assertion of his, [and the first parts in hymnography are attributed to him; although the master also] nor does he cite any author agreeing with him, nor have I found one: for Fabricius, just cited, is as far as possible from him, who indeed asserts that most of the hymns are attributed to the monk, which also suits our saint, not to the elder, which squares only with the master; and other authors, equally versed and skilled in Greek matters, extol our saint wonderfully in these very things; to prove which, it is not irksome to repeat the words of Allatius cited above: Why, he says, do we argue here about Thomases and Cosmases? Who, if only he has looked into the books of the Greeks, is ignorant of Cosmas of Maiuma, note it, bishop, chief among the Melodists and hymnographers? The most eminent Cardinal Quirini confirms what has just been said, from whom we transcribed the strophes cited above: for he, clearly distinguishing our saint from the master, applies the strophes enumerated to him, and not to the teacher: with whom the Bibliotheca Patrum, to be cited at no. 35, agrees. Besides this, the hymnographer whom the Greeks praise enjoys ecclesiastical cult among them, as the strophes several times cited prove; which neither our elders nor I myself have found of the elder. In this, then, I think Ceillier blundered, that, reading monk, and knowing that our saint was distinguished with the episcopal character, he attributed to the elder what was attributed to the monk; which the fact that the same Ceillier, at the place cited, did not hint even in the least at our saint's monastic state, makes me judge the more.

[33] [behold what he elaborated in this art: hence, however, their works are with difficulty distinguished;] Although, then, I do not deny that the elder Cosmas wrote some things, nay, even acted as hymnographer, since this is agreed among most authors, yet he must yield the palm to his disciple, from what has been said. But by what fate it finally came about that these two men and their works were confused, there is no need of lengthy investigation; for the name of Cosmas, common to both, to which was read added Hierosolymitan, is by nature apt to bring this about: for the elder was such by abbatial dignity, our saint by origin; moreover each was a monk, and indeed of the same monastery, and in the time of his monastic state acted as hymnographer; and, if we believe Oudin, our saint, as well as his teacher, shone with the abbatial dignity; which things, how easy a handle they supply for confusing the two Cosmases, everyone will perceive, provided he considers the aforesaid even lightly. I shall therefore enumerate the works of our saint as authors present them; although I am not able to assert them as genuine and undoubted works of his, except those which he composed with Damascene: for these can neither be denied to our saint nor transferred to the master, or the elder Cosmas.

[34] These works of Cosmas, then, Cave, cited above, page 339, presents to us, confusing the two: Cave enumerates them, and He wrote thirteen hymns on the chief festivals of the year, composed with such art that the initial letters of all the sentences of which each hymn consisted, collected into one, formed a certain rather short sentence prefixed to the hymn. Secondly, ἀσμάτικοι κανόνες, canons of song; among these the Triodion, or song consisting of three odes, deserves not the lowest place. But Oudin enumerates the same more broadly and assigns them to our saint: for the things which he enumerates are of Cosmas of Jerusalem, whom Suidas mentions with praise, and who was most friendly to John Damascene, at whose exhortation Damascene wrote many things, as is established from the letter prefixed to the Logic of St. John Damascene, and who from abbot was made bishop of Maiuma. All of which suit our saint, if you perhaps take away the single title of abbot. Behold now what compositions he attributes to him: We have, he says, thirteen hymns of this Cosmas in Latin, which he composed for the chief festivals of the year, extant both in the Works of St. John Damascene and in the Bibliotheca of the Holy Fathers, volume XII of the last Lyon edition, page

734 (in my copy, in the Lyon edition of the year 1677, from page 737). Secondly. Among the manuscript codices of the Bodleian Library, in the Barocci manuscripts, there exists in codex 110, page 1, the Octoechos of Cosmas and Damascene, with the exposition of Theodore Prodromus. And from page 182 to 334, hymns of Cosmas and Damascene, with the exposition of the same. Thirdly, the Triodion, which the Greeks use in the divine offices from Septuagesima to the octave of Pentecost, is said to have been composed by this Cosmas of Jerusalem, and augmented by SS. Theodore and Joseph the Studites, as Aubert Le Mire observes in the Auctarium on Ecclesiastical Writers. In my copy page 221, where he says: On the threshold page of this it is read that that book was written by St. Cosmas.

[35] Oudin goes on to enumerate the works of this saint Oudin, and the Bibliotheca Patrum presents his thirteen hymns. which exist in the Library of Vienna, which appear not to differ from those cited, and finally subjoins these, not yet mentioned: a paracletic canon to Christ, in the Library just cited, codex CCLXXXXIX; and codex CLXXXXVII, an Ἔκφρασις, or metrical narration of each of the psalms of the whole Davidic psalter. Of which Fabricius says this, volume X, page 218: The Metaphrase of the Psalms of David in political verses by Cosmas of Jerusalem has not yet seen the light; if he is the same Cosmas, I know no one more ancient who used that kind of verse. The nature of these verses is sufficiently obscure: Du Fresne, Lord Du Cange, learnedly heaps up much about them in the Glossary at the word Politicus, to whom I refer the reader, if he wishes to know these things. Of these compositions of our saint the thirteen hymns have gone under the press, and they exist in the Bibliotheca of the Holy Fathers of the Lyon edition, volume XII, from page 737, and are clearly ascribed to our saint, although he is called neither saint nor bishop (which observe against Ceillier): for it plainly distinguishes the one from the other: for, having related the eulogy of our saint from Suidas, it subjoins this: There was another Cosmas, abbot of Jerusalem, more ancient than this one of ours, of whom mention is made in the Spiritual Meadow of John Moschus, chapter 40. These hymns are acrostic in Greek: for the first letter of each verse constitutes a rather short little verse prefixed to the hymn; but in the Latin version the translator neglected this. Behold the first Greek acrostic, as it is presented at the place cited: χριστὸς βροτωθεῖς, ἠνοπερ Θεὸς μένη. Christ having been made mortal, remains what He was, God.

[36] And the Bibliotheca Patrum lists these hymns in this order: first, no title, but the said acrostic is prefixed. The second is inscribed On the Appearance of God; the third follows this, On the Great, namely second feria. The fourth, On the Great Third. The fifth, On the Great Fourth. The sixth, On the Great Fifth Feria. The seventh, On the Great Parasceve. The eighth (Fabricius, volume X, page 334, has On the Great Sabbath), On the same day. The ninth, On Pentecost. The tenth (more rightly Fabricius at the place cited: On the Transfiguration of our Lord Jesus Christ), On the same festivity. The eleventh, On Palm Sunday. The twelfth, On the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The thirteenth, On the Meeting, namely the bringing according to the flesh of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; or, in our manner, on the feast of the Purification. These are specimens of most solid instruction and eminent piety, which show that the holy man reached its summit even in the time of his monastic state, and declare with what religion and with what heat of love he was borne towards God and the most holy Virgin Mother. These, then, are the things of which we have obtained knowledge, although our saint more probably wrote more, and perhaps had no small part in the works of St. John Damascene, fighting for the cult of the sacred images; for this Papebroch, who asserts that Damascene became famous with our saint in writing canons, affirms; and the Menaea on the 4th of December, in the eulogy of St. John Damascene, assert that our saint, after many monuments of writings left behind, at length rested in peace; which Bucelinus also, whom the Acts perhaps lighted, seems to confirm. I think, then, that the holy man passed the time of his monastic state among these exercises of learning and piety: but whether meanwhile he was honoured with the abbatial office I have nothing from which to render it proved; for Damascene's biographer is silent, all the rest are silent, if only you except Oudin, who, as I suspect, attaches this title to our saint from Cave: for Cave, wrongly confusing the two Cosmases, had written before him that the bishop of Maiuma was an abbot: however that may be, I am not able to assert on the sole testimony of Oudin that this saint was an abbot.

Perhaps erunt* they will be?

* κυριοῦ

* κυριοῦ

* κυριοῦ

* κυριοῦ

* κυριοῦ

§ III. A catalogue, such as it is, of the bishops of Maiuma is presented: our saint is raised to the episcopate, whose beginning is fixed in some way.

The known bishops of the see of Maiuma Some years having elapsed, then, from his entry into the monastery of St. Sabas, which we have seen is to be tied to the year of Christ 730 or 731, Cosmas indeed, says Papebroch in the Preliminary Commentary to the Life of St. John Damascene, no. 13, was made by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, after Peter the Martyr, bishop of Maiuma, about the end of Leo, or the beginnings of Copronymus. But, leaving these things for a while, we shall first set out what has become known about the bishops of Maiuma. The episcopal see of Maiuma, then, if not together with the religion of the place, yet seems to have taken its beginning not much after, as Le Quien hints, presenting a catalogue of the bishops of Maiuma in his Oriens Christianus, volume III, column 621: And although, he says, it is scarcely to be doubted that some bishops presided over the church of Maiuma from the time of its conversion to Christ under Constantine the Great until Theodosius, for about fifty years, yet we have obtained knowledge of none of them before Zeno, whom we therefore set down as first. Since, then, I myself have found no earlier one, I keep to Le Quien's catalogue, and place in the first place this St. Zeno, of whom Sozomen says more, and whom we shall give in our work with the Roman Martyrology on the 26th of December: Paulianus followed him, who is read in the Acts of the first synod of Ephesus at the year 431, volume 3 of the Councils of Labbe, column 468: παυλιονὸς ἐπίσκοπος Μαἳουμᾶ Παλαιστίνης τῆς πρωτης ἐ͂ιπε. Paulianus, bishop of Maiuma of the first Palestine, said. The same is also listed in the same place, columns 500, 541 and 604. In some Latin Acts of this council, and in Marius Mercator, he is called Paulinianus. To him succeeded Paul, who at the Robber Synod of Ephesus in the year 449 stood for Dioscorus, as its Acts read at the council of Chalcedon, Act 1, make plain: his name is expressed in volume IV of the Councils of Labbe, column 118: καὶ Παύλου Μαἳουμᾶ, and to Paul of the city of Maiuma, as also at column 311 in the same place.

[38] Procopius follows him in the said catalogue: and that he was other than the bishop of the city of Gaza, are enumerated, from whose number as I said at no. 1, the distinct subscription of each bishop to one and the same synodical letter of John, bishop of Jerusalem (namely the II, according to their Historical Chronology, where these things are narrated more broadly), to John, Patriarch of Constantinople, against Severus the Monophysite, in the year 518, clearly indicates: namely Procopius, bishop of Maiuma of Gaza, Μαἳουμα Γάζης, volume V of the Councils of Labbe, column 191, and Cyril, bishop of Gaza, γαζαίων, ibid. In Le Quien's catalogue, whose words I have almost transcribed, our saint follows him; but in the Works of St. John Damascene printed at Paris in the year 1712 the same Le Quien, in a note to the Life of the same saint, page XIX, treats of St. Peter, bishop of Maiuma, and asserts at page XXI in the same place that it seems undoubted that our saint succeeded him. But whether in fact this is undoubted let us inquire a little: for Le Quien adduces no foundation by which he proves that this holy martyr was a bishop: for it will not be rendered proved from Theophanes, on whom, as it appears, he chiefly relies: for when Le Quien had related from Theophanes the martyrdom of the most holy Peter, metropolitan of Damascus, he writes this on page XX: He, namely Theophanes, then adds another narration about Peter, bishop of Maiuma, which it is pleasing to recite here in Greek and Latin, inasmuch as it pertains somewhat to the Life of St. John Damascene. To these he subjoins, from Theophanes at the year of Christ 743, page 349 in my copy, the martyrdom of St. Peter of Maiuma, which I too subjoin in Latin, so that learned readers may judge whether it hints anything about the episcopate of the holy martyr.

[39] Behold the words from Theophanes himself: His emulator and sharer of the same name, Peter, at Maiuma, about these times bore of his own accord a signal martyrdom for Christ. St. Peter For, being held by sickness, he invited the chief men of the Arabs, known to them from his office as chartularius of the public revenues, and familiar with him, to a private conversation. Then he said to them: "I pray that you may receive from God the reward of this journey of yours to visit me: for although deprived of the light of faith, you are yet to be reckoned friends. I wish you, therefore, to be witnesses of my testament, which is of this kind. He who does not believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the consubstantial and life-giving Trinity of persons in unity of nature, is blinded in the eyes of the soul, and worthy of eternal punishment. Muamed, your false prophet and the forerunner of antichrist, was such a one. Wherefore, if you give any credence to me now calling heaven and earth to witness before you, abjure his fabulous and doting doctrine. This is the present proof of my attachment towards you: admit this kindly counsel, that you may not suffer torment equal with him." The Arabs, hearing him set forth these sacred and other like words, and seized at once with astonishment and madness, bade the man farewell, judging that he had fallen into a delirium of mind. As soon as he had recovered strength from his infirmity, he cried out publicly with a strong voice: "Anathema to Muamed and to his fabulous doctrine, and to all who believe in him"; at once subjected to the penalty of the sword, he is declared a martyr.

[40] chartularius Our holy father John, rightly surnamed Chrysorrhoas on account of the spiritual grace of eloquence and holiness shining as with a golden brightness, celebrated him with the encomia of his orations. These words in no way hint that this holy martyr was distinguished with the episcopal character; nay, and what presses more, the very passage which I have brought forward is noted in the Index in these words: Peter of Maiuma, notary, a celebrated martyr, (page) 349; praised in an encomium by John Damascene, (page) 350. Into this opinion also, namely that this holy martyr was not a bishop, went our elders; first of all Bolland prefixes the following title to the Historical Commentary on this St. Peter, volume 3 of February, at the 21st day, page 266: On St. Peter of Maiuma, chartularius and martyr, in Palestine. And at no. 2 he has this on the matter: Perhaps St. Cosmas, bishop of Maiuma, at once announced Peter's martyrdom to him (namely to John Damascene, who wrote an encomium on this martyr). Now, then, according to Bolland, our saint held the episcopate before the martyrdom of St. Peter. Our Bye agrees with Bolland in the Sylloge on St. Peter

perhaps of Damascus, volume II of October, at the 4th day, nowhere presenting Peter of Maiuma as adorned with the title of bishop, although he mentions Le Quien. And Baronius, in volume 9 of his Annals, at the year of Christ 742, page 143, recording the martyrdom of this St. Peter, adds the following to our purpose: His homonymous emulator Peter … held by sickness, called the chief men of the Arabs, as being accustomed to him, since he was chartularius and, rendering account, collected the public tributes.

[41] and martyr And as regards the martyrologies, in none of those which I have consulted is this saint announced as a bishop; for all are nearly consonant with the Roman (which presents St. Peter in these words: At Damascus, of St. Peter of Maiuma, who, when he said to certain Arabs coming to him when he was sick: "Everyone who does not embrace the Christian Catholic faith is damned, as also Mahomet, your pseudo-prophet," was killed by them). These things suffice to show that it is not so undoubted, as Le Quien proposed to himself, that our saint succeeded this Peter, although this would otherwise agree well enough with the chronotaxis. Le Quien himself perhaps perceived these things, since in his posthumous Oriens Christianus, volume III, treating professedly, as they say, of the bishops of Maiuma, he makes no mention either of this St. Peter or of the things which we have just seen. Nor, however, should you infer from these things that I lay down with certainty that no Peter was adorned with the mitre of Maiuma: for this could have been ascertained from somewhere, and indeed of this Peter (which, however, as we shall see below, I judge less likely), or have become clear from the eulogy of Damascene, which it has not been given me either to inspect or to find: these words of Papebroch, related at no. 37, move me, to add this, in which he declares, yet without further proof, that St. Cosmas succeeded Peter the martyr.

[42] But whether Papebroch is treating of St. Peter the chartularius is excluded: is not clear; nay, that the Peter, martyr, whom he says our saint succeeded, was other than the chartularius I conjecture even from this, that, if he wished to designate the chartularius, he does not even report the opinion of Bolland, plainly contrary to himself: I think, therefore, that other monuments, which are not now evident to me, lighted Papebroch's way; or, if anyone would have him treating of the chartularius, he neglected to investigate this matter more deeply, since he reports it only incidentally. However it finally be, whether St. Peter the martyr bore the tiara of Maiuma or not, it is certain that the catalogue of the bishops of Maiuma, which we saw above mutilated at its beginning, is defaced with the same fault in this place: for Procopius, as I said at no. 38, is read subscribed to the synodical letter of John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, in the year of Christ 518; granting for a while, what we shall see below is less conformable to the truth, that St. Peter the martyr, whose illustrious martyrdom Bolland places in the year of Christ 743, and rightly, as our Bye proves in the Sylloge cited above, no. 11 and following, was a bishop, between his martyrdom and the subscription of Procopius 225 years run in between, as will be clear to one subtracting 518 from 743, to fill which, unless the see was vacant, various bishops are lacking. Let us now return to our saint, whom we left for a while in the old Laura of St. Sabas, still a monk, but on the threshold of entering the episcopal dignity.

[43] Having related the outstanding and altogether rare virtues of St. John Damascene and of Cosmas, our saint is promoted to the episcopate: by which they became famous as monks, Damascene's biographer relates St. Cosmas's promotion to the episcopate, no mention being made beforehand of priesthood, diaconate or subdiaconate, in chapter 4, no. 35, which, since it treats of our saint and contains as it were a compendium of his Life, I subjoin here entire. It runs, then, thus: In these labours he (Damascene) had as helper, through brotherly love, him whom he had received as a brother from the divine Spirit, Cosmas, that most accomplished man, sharer of his eloquence, instruction and exercise; and he ingeniously imitated John in his studies of spiritual songs, and sang sweet harmonies to the Church with harp and voice, fitting his own body to God like a timbrel by the repression of the affections, and showing himself wholly also like a ten-stringed psaltery, while he tuned with great art and wisely the fivefold sense of the body and the faculties of the soul equal in number. At length, created bishop of Maiuma also by the hand of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, not spontaneously and of his own accord, but compelled by force, he governed his flock excellently, as was pleasing to God, and, having now advanced to great age, went to his fathers, or rather to God, by dying.

[44] but in what year? Le Quien wrongly assigns 743, But in what year our saint entered upon the see of Maiuma, since chronological notes are lacking, I have nothing whence I may certainly define; Papebroch indeed asserts that it happened about the end of Leo the Isaurian, or the beginning of Copronymus: and Damascene's biographer says that he was ordained bishop by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, that is, according to the Historical Chronology cited above, by John III, read IV: but these things are broad, nor do they show us a fixed year: hence Le Quien enters on another way, and ties the beginning of our saint's episcopate to the year of Christ 743. But rightly? Rightly without doubt, if only he had demonstrated that Peter of Maiuma was a bishop and that our saint succeeded him: but since he does not prove it, and we find nothing which confirms Le Quien's statements, and very much which weakens them, as we have seen above and shall presently see, we have rejected this assertion of Le Quien. The beginning of our saint's episcopate must therefore be dug out from elsewhere, and this will be shown us by the patriarchate of John IV, as we saw at no. 8, by whose ministry, as Papebroch testifies in the oft-cited Chronology, no. 156, John Damascene obtained the priestly dignity: for by the same Patriarch both John was raised to the priestly and our saint to the episcopal dignity, as I shall say at no. 46; before, then, John IV had departed from the patriarchate, St. Cosmas must have borne the episcopal mitre. Further, there is sufficient agreement among chronographers about the death of this Patriarch, although Le Quien, in the Oriens Christianus, volume III, column 290, writing this, somewhat doubts: He, namely Papebroch, conjectures that the letter just cited (he had cited the letter of St. John Damascene on the Trisagion) was written not long after the death of John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, which happened about the year of Christ 735 (which one year Papebroch assigns, and that according to the mind of the author of the tables inserted in Theophanes) or 745.

[45] Since mention falls here of the letter of John Damascene on the Trisagion, [and he stumbles about the year in which the letter of St. John Damascene on the Trisagion was written,] receive briefly in what year it was written: Le Quien, as we have just seen, says that it was written, and that, as it seems, according to Papebroch's mind, not long after the death of John of Jerusalem: but Papebroch himself, in the cited Historical Chronology, no. 156, asserts that it was written, by the judgement of Baronius, about the year of Christ 740: For then, adds Papebroch, he, namely Baronius, thinks that the heresy of Peter the Fuller was revived by Anastasius, to refute which that letter serves. But the error of Papebroch, which seems to have misled Le Quien, was manifestly committed by the fault of the printer; although in our work, at the number cited, it is had in Roman numerals DCCXL, and in the preface of the same work printed at Venice in three volumes, volume 1, page 298, in Arabic figures 740. And this I prove from Papebroch himself: for he, in the Preliminary Commentary to the Life of St. John Damascene, no. 13, referring the reader to the place of the catalogue of which we are treating, writes this: But John was ordained priest, and that not a little before the year 749: for we showed in the catalogue that John the Patriarch was then no longer among the living, whom, however, dead, Damascene praises as his master, all of whose sentiments he knew intimately, in the letter written before the year already named, nay in the year named, against those who were reviving the heresy of Peter the Fuller. Not, therefore, immediately after the death of the Patriarch John, which happened in the year 735, as we shall presently see, nor in the year 740, but, as Baronius himself testifies, in the year 749 was the heresy of Peter the Fuller revived by Anastasius, hegumen of St. Euthymius; which St. John Damascene met by the letter of which we are treating: with which reckoning Pagi also agrees at the year just cited. Let us return to the saint.

[46] [the beginning of the episcopate seems more probably to be tied to the year of Christ 734 or 735,] Le Quien, then, who, as we have seen, places in his Oriens Christianus the death of the Patriarch John in the year of Christ either 735 or 745, writes this in the oft-cited Life of St. John Damascene, page XXI, note 1: John Damascene was ordained priest of the church of Jerusalem by that Patriarch John, with whose friendship he relates in the letter on the Trisagion hymn that he was most closely joined … he ruled the church of Jerusalem for 30 years, and closed his last day in the year of Christ 735. How these things agree with the beginning of St. Cosmas's episcopate, which Le Quien so confidently throws back on the same page to the year 743, I do not see: for the same Patriarch ordained Damascene priest and our saint bishop, as Damascene's biographer and Leo Allatius, in the oft-cited Prolegomena, no. XIII, testify. Let him reconcile these things himself; meanwhile Papebroch maintains 735 as the year of the Patriarch John's death in the cited Historical Chronology, no. 157, as also Pagi in the Critica on Baronius at the year of Christ 749, where it is read thus on this matter: Baronius says that he does not know who this John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, is, whose disciple Damascene says he is, namely because in his time the Chronography of Theophanes had not seen the light; for in the tables inserted in it, at the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 700, which begins on the Kalends of September of the year of Christ 507, it is said that John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, sat for 30 years, and that that year is the third of his see; wherefore he ruled the church of Jerusalem until the year of Christ 735 or thereabouts. These things being so, our saint ascended the see of Maiuma before the end of the year of Christ 735: nay, Baronius as well as Pagi point to him at the year 734 by the name of bishop. Hence it is plain how far from the truth is the episcopate of St. Peter the chartularius, since this holy martyr, Le Quien himself agreeing, met death for Christ only in the year 743.

[47] it seems to be tied; Nor does this epoch of the episcopate hinder the rest of the chronotaxis, although it encloses our saint's monastic state in about three years: for Papebroch asserts, in the Historical Chronology prefixed to volume III of May, no. 156, that John Damascene was subject to monastic exercise for a few years; hence our saint, who seems to have been raised to the episcopate before Damascene's priesthood, could have been a bishop even in the year 734: for these men were most celebrated even before their monastic state for learning as well as holiness of life, as Theophanes, Damascene's biographer and others testify. But Leo Allatius opposes this chronotaxis, deduced as it may be, and the anonymous biographer of our saint, from whom Allatius brings forward a fragment in the Prolegomena cited, no. LXIII, inverts it altogether: the whole number, since it treats of the death of Damascene, whom our saint survived by a year or perhaps two, I [set] from the cited Prolegomena before the reader's

favour, intending to wash away below the conjectures of the same Allatius by which, at no. LVIII, he tries to show that John Damascene closed his last day before the pseudo-synod of Copronymus. Behold now the words of Allatius, rather prolix.

[48] nor do those things stand in the way, But it is better to linger here a little, since mention was made above of the death of John Damascene, which we placed, by no light conjectures, before the Copronymian synod. Yet the doubt that remains to be unravelled by others I shall frankly bring into the midst, lest I seem to have passed over anything. Gretser, in the dedicatory epistle to Theodore Abucara, when he inquires into the times of Abucara, thinks he has also settled the times of John Damascene, although too intricately. For since Turrianus several times names Abucara a disciple of Damascene, and reconciles probability with Turrianus's statement, that from the title of the eighteenth dissertation, διὰ φανῆς Ιωάννου τοῦ Δαμασκηνοῦ, "from the mouth of Damascene dictating"; and on the other side Theodore, bishop of Caria, defended the Photian party against Ignatius, and afterwards, as Nicetas testifies in the Life of Ignatius, the Photian frauds having been brought into the open, obtained pardon for the crime committed in the eighth synod, Gretser thinks that under Basil the Macedonian, in the times of the eighth synod, he was renowned for learning and celebrity of name. And since from the second synod of Nicaea, celebrated in the year of the Lord 787, to the eighth synod, which was held in the year 869, seventy-two, nay eighty-two years flowed by; and John Damascene, as pleases most chronologers not unskilled, died before the seventh synod; one of two things must necessarily be asserted: either that Abucara, while almost still a boy, attended Damascene, or that he had far passed his eightieth year when the ecumenical synod, eighth in order, was gathered at Constantinople: unless one should wish to extend Damascene's life beyond the seventh synod. Yet from what we said above it seems not to be extended beyond the seventh synod.

[49] And although the opinion of Gretser about Theodore Abucara seems probable, which Allatius in so slippery a conjecture who will be the one to give firm assent? And the things which establish the contrary are these. The author of the Life of St. Cosmas, the brother of Damascene, whoever he was, not inelegant, and a not imprudent investigator of ecclesiastical history, and one who committed to writing many things about Damascene passed over or neglected by John of Jerusalem, the writer of the Life of Damascene. He then, discoursing of Cosmas, while he follows his deeds in the city of Byzantium, relates, among other things which he had foretold to the Patriarch Tarasius three years before he died, and which were afterwards fulfilled at the time already named, this also: "But what the holy herald had prophesied, and which came to pass at the time named, it seems to me necessary to narrate, and not superfluous to commit to writing. And what are these things? Enough for me, he says, and more than enough, O divine bishop and best of teachers, has been my stay in this life. For whence I came, thither I must withdraw again. But thou, when thou hast fed the flock of Christ well and piously, wilt go eagerly to the Lord, and wilt receive the crown of justice which is laid up for thee for thy labours; which will follow after the course of three years."

[50] brings forward to the contrary by way of inquiry, Tarasius dies in the 21st year of his pontificate, continues Allatius, of Christ 806. The prophecy of Cosmas will therefore have been made two years before, in the year of Christ 804. Cosmas afterwards withdrew from Byzantium, came to Rome, then landed in Egypt, at length returns to the monastery of Sabas, renowned everywhere for miracles, while Stephen, the son of the brother of Cosmas, presided over the place, from whom he also hears that John Damascene had departed from life a little before: and I shall contract the series of these deeds into the shortest time; I extend it no further than two years. Therefore John Damascene, having measured out the life of the Patriarch Tarasius, met death in the same year as Tarasius, or about the same times. Therefore in the year of Christ 806, in the 17th year after the second synod of Nicaea, in the 51st after the Copronymian synod, in which mention was made of him as dead, as we supposed. In the 40th year after the martyrdom of Stephen the Younger, about the time when Stephen of Byzantium was committing to writing the deeds of the same Stephen. Wherefore, if Stephen of Byzantium could write the Life of Stephen the martyr, so could Damascene. Yet, even if it were permitted on account of age, on account of so many other things brought into the midst it certainly was not permitted. I know that Damascene, full of age and worn out with extreme old age, as one who died older than a hundred, did not hasten death for himself; but that he reached those times I should wish others to say: I am very much in suspense of mind. Ah, how shall I extricate myself from this tangle?

[51] Here Allatius stops, and, keeping silent his own opinion on the matter, since the fragment of the anonymous biographer of our saint leaves the knot to me to be untied. But to finish the matter briefly, I am firmly resolved to keep to the preceding chronotaxis, and not to abandon my opinion on account of this fragment of the Life of St. Cosmas, since I cannot have the entire Life from elsewhere; and since Le Quien holds this anonymous biographer of our saint for an inept fable-teller, he has indeed cast so much of a scruple into me that it displeases me to follow him without a fit surety: nay, I am led by these reasons to judge that whatever the cited biographer brings forward about Tarasius is plainly fabulous: first of all, there is deep silence about this prediction in the Life of St. Tarasius the Patriarch, although it is prolix and written in oratorical style (as may be seen in our work, volume III, at the 25th day of February), nor does Ignatius, bishop of Nicaea, the biographer of St. Tarasius, make the least mention of our saint, nor do the writer of Damascene's Life and Constantine Acropolita mention these things: nay indeed, all who declare that our saint was consecrated bishop by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, whose last year was the year of Christ 735, oppose the cited words of St. Cosmas's biographer; from whom I do not think one should depart without a most evident foundation, of which the cited fragment has scarcely a shadow.

[52] For since we have seen our saint born about the year of Christ 674, the rest of the biographer's a monk about 730, and a bishop about 735, how could he still have been living in the year 804? Which, however, if the biographer wrote truly, must follow, and in the year just cited St. Cosmas must have measured out the 130th year of his age: nor does he stop here, but, according to the same, as it seems, Cosmas afterwards withdrew from Byzantium, came to Rome, then landed in Egypt, and at length returns to the monastery of Sabas. All of which anyone easily perceives to savour of fable. Moreover, there stands against these what we said above at no. 20, and clearly proved, namely that John Damascene flourished at Damascus in the year 730, most solidly confuted the heresy of the Iconoclasts, and was more than fifty years old; nay, since Damascene, by Papebroch's reckoning, was born about the year 676, while still at Damascus he was in the 54th year of his age, which coincides with the year of Christ 730; if to this we add the remaining years, in the year 804 Damascene will be in the 128th year of his age, and we shall find that he survived it long, if the anonymous's method of arranging chronology stands.

[53] opposes the chronotaxis Besides this, Le Quien proves clearly enough that our saint's biographer is false, in the Life of St. John Damascene, page XXIII, in these words: That John Damascene, he says in annotation 2, extended his age beyond the pseudo-synod of Copronymus, which was held in the year of Christ 754, we hold as more than certain from his writings against that fine synod and its leaders which are recorded in the Life of Stephen the Younger, martyr (in Surius, 27th of November, page 638). That he died before the seventh general synod the acclamations of the same sacred synod hint: but in what year is an obscure matter. For no monument exists from which we can fish it out. These things at once weaken the conjectures of Allatius, by which he tries to show that Damascene died before the pseudo-synod of Copronymus, and demonstrate that Damascene was living at that time: nor do the things which he adduces from Theophanes to strengthen his conjectures help Allatius: for Theophanes writes that Damascene (whether living or dead he keeps silent) was struck with anathema by the pseudo-synod, which the actors of the conventicle could have belched out equally against the living and against the dead; nay, that they belched it out against the living is clear from the Life of St. Stephen, since Damascene, the fervent defender of the faith, calls the bishops figuring in the said conventicle ἐπισκότους, that is, darksome ones, nay, slaves of the belly, gluttons. Nor do the things which he cites on the matter avail him, namely the second synod of Nicaea, Act 6, Nicephorus, Zonaras and Cedrenus: for these say nothing more than Theophanes, and only express the anathematisms, which, as we know, and as obvious examples confirm, fall upon the living equally with the dead.

§ IV. The deeds of our saint in the time of his episcopate are in obscurity: the year of his death is fixed in some way: and inquiry is made into the place of his burial.

From what has been said, then, it is gathered that the beginning of our saint's episcopal dignity, in the year 734 or the following the saint and not archiepiscopal, as Corderius wrongly notes in the margin in the Catena of 65 Greek Fathers on St. Luke, page 92, no. 31, is to be placed in the year of Christ 734 or 735: but how many years he spent in apostolic labours, or by what virtues in particular he became famous, cannot be exactly computed, since little of the whole time of his episcopate has come down to us: for the few things which Le Quien brings forward about our saint in the catalogue of the bishops of Maiuma he professes to have drawn from Damascene's biographer: but whence Allatius has the things which he subjoins to the fragment cited above, namely Cosmas afterwards withdrew from Byzantium, came to Rome, then landed in Egypt, at length returns to the monastery of Sabas, renowned everywhere for miracles, while Stephen, the son of the brother of Cosmas, presided over the place, from whom he also hears that John Damascene had departed from life a little before, he does not express; I suspect, however, that he transcribed them in compendium from our saint's biographer, since he subjoins them to his words; which indeed, although we have rejected the chronotaxis, can stand, although they could not have happened at the time in which they are placed by Allatius, as we have just seen above; those things, then, which our saint did while presiding over the church of Maiuma, and which have come down to us, I subjoin, and I begin from his consecration.

[55] That this saint, sublime in humility, resisted, and strove with all his efforts that he might not be placed upon the candlestick, he admitted the episcopal dignity unwillingly: the Menaea, Bucelinus, Damascene's biographer and others assert: but what he had wished to decline through humility he at length admitted, overcome by prayers and commands, and by governing his flock excellently showed himself its pattern from the heart; but whether as bishop he wrote any of the works which we have seen above is unknown to me; but that at this time he was the author of John Damascene's writing, Damascene himself testifies in the preface of his Dialectic, or rather of his Tripartite Work, dedicated to our saint: for in the said preface (to which he himself prefixes this title, in Le Quien, page 3: To the most religious and venerable father in God, Cosmas, most holy bishop of Maiuma, John, the least monk and priest, greeting in the Lord) he has this on the matter about the middle: Wherefore, obeying through you Christ, who exercises the office of pontiff in you, I comply with your commands: and, some things being interposed, thus

he concludes: Wherefore I beseech you, venerable fathers in Christ, that you grant pardon to me, who have complied with your precepts, and favour me kindly, and repay in turn with your prayers the obedience which I show you. Whether the holy bishop had his part in this way in the rest of the works of St. John Damascene, although these men were most closely joined in continual friendship, I would not dare to assert, being destitute of due monuments.

[56] but by what virtues especially the holy bishop shone, As regards the virtues by which the holy pontiff became famous, I have none to commemorate above the rest: but that this man burned with apostolic zeal, and showed himself a living model of all the virtues, no one will doubt, provided he attends to what we have brought forward above from Damascene's biographer and Constantine Acropolita; nor does it seem to be doubted that our holy bishop, of whose deeds excellently done in the episcopate the ancients have left us only a few, embraced the faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he might be able to exhort in sound doctrine, and to refute, not without fruit, those who at that time most contradicted, namely the Iconoclasts. But what our saint did at Byzantium, at Rome and in Egypt, or for what cause he visited these places, I am not able to say, as also by what miracles, if credence is given to our saint's biographer, or perhaps to Allatius, he became famous in all those places, since, as I have just said, very few things concerning the whole course of his episcopal life have come down to us. And whether our saint foretold certain things by the prophetic spirit, although the biographer asserts it, I have nothing whence I may prove or disprove it; I indicated above that the prophecy made to St. Tarasius does not cohere with our chronotaxis and that of others. Being destitute of monuments, therefore, I am not able to present these things more broadly: wherefore I hasten to other things, but equally uncertain, and I inquire into the year of death of our saint the bishop, to be fixed in some way, which must certainly have befallen him when of great age and laden with sheaves of virtues, although we have already touched beforehand on certain things pertaining here from Allatius.

[57] as also in what year he died is not known for want of monuments: The last year of St. Cosmas among mortals is neither marked by those who treat of him, nor do they supply anything whence we may dig it out, if you except one, Allatius, or perhaps our bishop's biographer, who asserts that he survived Damascene. But neither is Damascene's year of death plainly ascertained: for Allatius thinks, by conjectures not light, as he himself says, that he died before the pseudo-synod of Copronymus; but we have seen above that these were light indeed, where I also judged that the anonymous biographer prolonged the life of our saint, as also of Damascene, more than was fair; not so, however, but that, if anyone shall have brought some light into a matter most obscure, I shall be ready to say farewell to this opinion of mine, which seemed to me the more likely. Since, then, Damascene prolonged his life beyond the pseudo-synod of Copronymus, which, as Baronius says, was celebrated in the year of Christ 754, and closed his last day before the seventh ecumenical synod, or the second of Nicaea, which was held in the year of the Lord 787, and persisted among the living beyond a hundred, nay 104 years, and was born, as I said above, about the year 676, his more probable year of death was the year of Christ 780, 26 years after the conventicle of Copronymus, and 7 years before the second synod of Nicaea: with which reckoning Papebroch, illustrating the Acts of John Damascene on the 6th of May, entirely agrees.

[58] yet the year 781 is assigned as more probable: These things, if they are so, bring no little light to digging out the last year of our holy bishop among mortals: for since our saint preceded his brother Damascene in birth by one or two years, as we have from Constantine Acropolita, and we have therefore set his birth-year about 674, and since our saint heard from Stephen that John Damascene had departed from life a little before, as Allatius says: it follows that St. Cosmas surpassed his brother Damascene in age, and survived the year of Christ 780, which was Damascene's last, and perhaps closed his last day in the year 781, and reached the 107th year of his age: but although I do not put forward this year as the certain year of death, yet amid these densest darknesses I find none more plausible, being altogether destitute of the usual aids of chronotaxis, and especially of a catalogue of our saint's successors in the episcopal chair.

[59] equally uncertain is The year of death of this saint being fixed in some way, it remains to inquire whether at Maiuma or in some other part of the earth this saint flew from the prison of the body to heaven and obtained a sepulchre; our elders doubted on that matter, nor have I found where to fix a firm foot; behold first the opinion of our elders, which they present to us on the occasion of St. John Damascene, in the Appendix to the 6th day of May, in the seventh volume of the same month, page 614, where these things are read: On page 119, no. 9, add: … John Phocas indeed, whose sacred Itinerary we placed at the threshold of this 2nd volume, describing the Laura and church of the Sabaites as he found them in the year 1185, and finally the sepulchre of the holy father Sabas himself: "Near and around it, and also under ground," he says, "are seen the sepulchres of the holy fathers who were renowned in the desert, with whom also may be seen the monuments of Cosmas and John, the old poets." But within four centuries, passed through so many tossings of that sacred Laura, from the death of each to the coming of John Phocas into Palestine, I easily see that it could have happened that those whose cells were shown there were also believed to have their sepulchres there. I am also warned by Homer that τὸ μνῆμα (which originally signifies a memorial) is not necessarily taken for a sepulchre or sepulchral monument, Odyssey ό: Μνῆμ᾽ Ἑλένης χειρῶν, a memorial of the hands of Helen, celebrating.

[60] the place of burial, Now to our matter: that Cosmas, certainly, afterwards made bishop of Maiuma, as we shall presently say, was buried with his predecessor bishops is credible: and if it were established from elsewhere that John was really entombed among the Sabaites, I should rather judge that this gave occasion why the wavering memory of posterity joined the name of Cosmas to his name: but we could also suspect in turn of John, if it were established that Cosmas, contrary to the use and custom of bishops, was laid so far from his see, at an interval of twenty-four or more leagues. From these things it is clear that our elders held it unascertained whether Maiuma or the Laura of St. Sabas received the remains of our bishop: nay, they hint sufficiently that these should rather be assigned to Maiuma, and suspect that this saint was entombed there according to the custom of bishops: but this doubt displeases Le Quien, who therefore, relying though on almost the same foundation adduced from John Phocas, decisively resolves that John Damascene, as also our saint, closed his last day in the Laura of St. Sabas: let us hear him discoursing in the Life of St. John Damascene, page XXII, note 2.

[61] [for although Le Quien holds for certain that he was buried in the Laura of St. Sabas,] The most learned continuators of Bolland, he says, judged, namely Papebroch in the Preliminary Commentary to the Life of St. John Damascene, that John Damascene, having at length left the Laura of St. Sabas and Palestine, spent the last part of his life abroad, and they prove this by a double argument. The first is that the Menology of Basil, the emperor as they think, narrates that the saint, "variously banished by heretical emperors and delivered to prisons, was consummated in a beautiful confession, and was buried by his disciple." The second is that the Palestinians knew nothing of his age and burial, which is an indication that he did not die in that region. As regards the first, the narrations of the Menologies or Synaxaria are of too slight credit for us to give them credence without discrimination. Our elders certainly knew this, and showed it in various places of our work; but they certainly did not wish to deny them all credit, especially when other monuments do not stand to the contrary. Le Quien continues: That Copronymus wrote abuse against John, and devoted him to curses, the seventh synod, Theophanes and the author of the Life of Stephen the Younger testify; they are profoundly silent about his exiles, as also the Menaea of the Greeks themselves, which do not even hint that he was buried apart by a disciple. They have only this, that in a rich old age, in the hundred and fifth year of his age (nay, fourth: ἔτη ἑκατὸν πρὸς τοῖς τέσσαρσι), he ceased to live.

[62] he holds for certain that he was buried: But that John died in Palestine and in the Laura of St. Sabas, and was buried in the same, is established by a far richer witness, namely John Phocas, in the compendious description of Palestine edited by Leo Allatius in the Symmikta: for this author, who lived in the 12th century under Manuel Comnenus, asserts that in his age there was customarily shown in the monastery of St. Sabas, in the forecourt of the church, the sepulchre of our John Damascene beside the sepulchre of St. Sabas himself. "Near it" (these are the words of Phocas, but differing a little from those related above) "and around, and also under ground, are seen the sepulchres of the holy fathers who, leading the solitary life, were held illustrious, and together with them those of SS. Cosmas and John." What clearer? Who are those holy poets Cosmas and John, if not Cosmas of Maiuma and John Damascene, with whose songs and canticles the Eastern churches resound? Moreover it has already been shown that our Damascene, when already of advanced age, delivered the Orations on the Dormition of the Virgin at Jerusalem: so that from this too it can be gathered that he died in Palestine. Nor does it matter that no mention is made of his sepulchre in the Life of Stephen the Sabaite. For in that Life the sepulchres of other most illustrious men who died in the same Laura are not commemorated, except that of John, bishop and Hesychast, who flourished in the age of Sabas himself. To these Le Quien subjoins that Damascene's body was kept still entire at Constantinople in the 14th century, in which city Papebroch, in the Commentary prefixed to his Life, no. 10, judges that he obtained his sepulchre.

[63] yet I suspect it more likely that he was buried at Maiuma. Although, then, Le Quien holds for certain that these holy brothers Cosmas and John Damascene were entombed in the monastery of St. Sabas, his reasons add no weight to what was said at no. 59, since he was probably deceived by the word μνῆμα: for this word he either himself translated sepulchre, or found it wrongly so translated by another, whereas the same, as we said above, originally signifies a memorial. Nor does what we adduced above from Allatius, or perhaps from our saint's biographer, prove anything, namely at length he returns to the monastery of Sabas, since it does not express that he died there. I prefer, therefore, to leave uncertain where our saint obtained his sepulchre, rather than by divining to expose myself to the danger of error; or, if it is permitted to divine in a matter most obscure, I rather judge that the holy bishop died and was buried at Maiuma, since no one insinuates either that he abdicated the episcopate, or, as above from

our elders I was saying, it is credible that he was buried with his predecessor bishops, and not laid, contrary to the custom and use of bishops, so far from his see, at an interval of twenty-four or more leagues.