ON SS. LUPUS AND AURELIA, MARTYRS, MOST PROBABLY AT CÓRDOBA IN SPAIN,
From the Hieronymian and other sacred calendars.
Century uncertain.
CommentaryLupus, Martyr at Córdoba in Spain. (S.)
Aurelia, Martyr at Córdoba in Spain. (S.)
BY C. B.
Three Martyrs who suffered at Córdoba in Spain, Faustus, The Saints who today Januarius and Martial, having been brought into our Work yesterday, two other Saints, namely Lupus and Aurelia, today come to be brought into it, and indeed as most probably Martyrs who suffered likewise at the same place. For they are inscribed today — which is equivalent to a public cult introduced even for several centuries — in the most ancient Hieronymian copies to be alleged below; and although these, which do not adorn these two Saints of ours with the title of Martyrs, nor expressly assert that they were put to death for the faith — the latter of whom is wrongly distinguished in the Lucca Hieronymian copy in Florentini and in the Reichenau one in Sollerius by the appellation Aurelius, it appearing undoubted from several other sacred Calendars to be praised presently, which, together with the Corbie Hieronymian, both the major one in Florentini and d'Achery and the lesser or contracted one in Sollerius and Martène, attribute to her by unanimous consent the name of Aurelia — yet from the very fact that they stand inscribed, as I said, in the most ancient Hieronymian copies, it appears most probable that they ended their life by Martyrdom, as I shall show below. Morales meanwhile and Martín de Roa — the former, namely, when he treats of our two Saints in the general Chronicle of Spain, brought to light in the year 1574, book 10, chapter 25, and the latter in his work on the Feasts and Saints of Córdoba, made public in the year 1615, page 139 verso — do not affirm that these were most probably Martyrs; nor is it at all strange: for at that time they most probably did not have to light their way the Hieronymian copies, published only later by d'Achery and others, from which, as you will understand from what is to be said below, they could have gathered this.
[2] inscribed in the Hieronymian ones And indeed, lest you should think that perhaps even manuscripts containing them lit their way, they cite for themselves only Bede and Usuard, no mention whatever being made of the Hieronymian ones; and to these Marieta, On the Saints of Spain, who there, book 2, chapter 29, expressly calls Lupus and Aurelia Martyrs, Ferrari and others agreeing with him in this matter, adds also Ado, book 4, chapter 48. And most probably indeed, nay undoubtedly, since in the pure and genuine Martyrologies of Bede, Ado and Usuard SS. Lupus and Aurelia are not marked today, as will be clear to anyone consulting them, there lit the way for those three writers Martyrologies which, although they bore the names of Bede, Ado and Usuard, had yet been augmented with saints received from elsewhere whom these had not mentioned, and from them they made mention of our Saints. Certainly in the Barberini addition to Bede, with us before tome 2 of March, in the Appendix added to the Martyrology of Ado which Rosweyde published together with it, and in the Greven Supplement to Usuard in Sollerius, SS. Lupus and Aurelia appear today, announced in these few or not much dissimilar words: In the city of Córdoba, of SS. Lupus and Aurelia, and most probably first received from the Hieronymian copies, to which certainly Rabanus and Notker — who also celebrate our Saints today in almost the same words in the Martyrologies composed by them — nay even Bede, Ado and Usuard, and accordingly whatever additions or Supplements to these, yield the palm of antiquity; as you may gather from this very fact, that in the same manner, almost, as in the Hieronymian ones to be alleged presently, they are mentioned in the said Martyrologies, both those augmented by the additions made to Bede, Ado and Usuard, and those which Rabanus and Notker drew up.
[3] and therefore to be given here as martyrs, But since these are wont to commemorate without distinction Saints who did not end their life by Martyrdom as well as those who did, it certainly cannot be inferred from the fact that they celebrate SS. Lupus and Aurelia today that these were most probably Martyrs; and even if this could be inferred from it, you would not yet rightly think, from the fact that they mark them at Córdoba, that they were crowned with Martyrdom there. For sometimes they set the Martyrs whom they celebrate not in the places where they suffered, but in others, in which they obtained either birth, or cult, or burial. But indeed, to come now to what is chiefly to be proved here, one must speak otherwise of the Hieronymian copies. For these scarcely ever commemorate any others than those who fell for the faith, and they assign the place and day of the passion of those whom they list, as we are taught by the letter of Gregory the Great to Eulogius of Alexandria, cited by Sollerius in his preface to Usuard, num. 22; wherefore, since the major or uncontracted Lucca and Corbie Hieronymian copies in Florentini, and the contracted or briefer Corbie and Reichenau ones in Sollerius and Martène, announce SS. Lupus and Aurelia today, and the briefer Corbie one, which the rest of these do not contradict, places them at Córdoba in these following words, In the city of Cordoba, of Lupus, of Aurelia, you would not ineptly infer thence that these were most probably both Martyrs and suffered there.
[4] at Córdoba in these, But although it is so, and Lupus and Aurelia are most expressly ascribed to Córdoba in those four Hieronymian copies, and Flórez was not unaware of it, he nevertheless calls into doubt, España Sagrada tome X, treatise 33, chapter 9, num. 99 and the three following, whether they in any way belong to this city and were put to martyrdom there; and he does this, first indeed, because Saturninus, who all agree suffered in Cappadocia, is joined with Lupus and Aurelia in the Greven and Brussels Supplements to Usuard in Sollerius, and hence a suspicion could rightly arise that these likewise suffered there and are so wrongly ascribed to Córdoba; and then, because, contrary to what is done in the other Hieronymian copies, in the Corbie copy in Florentini a Maximus is added to Aurelia and Lupus; but, although from the fact that he, as he says, is not found mentioned today in other sacred Calendars, the said Hieronymian copy in which he is announced today may seem able to be charged with error, yet who does not see that it does not follow thence that Lupus and Aurelia are wrongly attributed to Córdoba? I come now to the two Usuardian Supplements in Sollerius just mentioned. In the Greven one, Saturninus is not joined with Lupus and Aurelia, contrary to what Flórez thought. For, these being announced at Córdoba with a punctuation mark subjoined which indicates a complete sense, it commemorates St. Saturninus and Lupus without a place to which you may attribute them; and Greven is not wont to join Saints whom he so lists after others announced by him and ascribed to a determined place with these, and to attribute them all to the same place.
[5] although meanwhile So — that the studious reader may see how true this is by an example which may stand for many that could easily be alleged here — yesterday, after St. Lubentius, priest and confessor, announced in the territory of Trier with a punctuation mark subjoined by which a sense is usually closed, he presently records St. Congan, abbot, the place to which you may ascribe him not being expressed; and yet who would affirm, with truth safe, that Congan is joined there by Greven with Lubentius and accordingly, no otherwise than the latter, ascribed to the territory of Trier? As concerns now the other of the two Supplements to Usuard mentioned above, which is the Brussels one, in this indeed, being conceived in these following words, At Corduba, the birthday of the Saints Saturninus, Lupus and Aurelia, Saturninus, who suffered in Cappadocia, is most clearly joined with Lupus and Aurelia; but, lest on that account we suspect that these likewise suffered in Cappadocia and are accordingly wrongly announced and further ascribed to Córdoba, we are prevented by the Martyrologies, both the Hieronymian and the others praised above, all of which, Saturninus being omitted, mark SS. Lupus and Aurelia there, and which, taken together, are certainly to be made more of than the one Brussels Supplement to Usuard of which we are speaking here, which is therefore to be corrected from them in the announcement just given, by which it stands, Saturninus being struck out of it, who belongs to the class of the Cappadocian Martyrs of whom we have already treated today. Nor does it matter that in this Saturninus is joined with Lupus; for that this one is different from Lupus, companion of St. Aurelia, is persuaded by the same Martyrologies just praised, in which the latter is ascribed not to Cappadocia but to Córdoba.
[6] whether to this city These things being considered, therefore, what Flórez brings forward about the two said Usuardian Supplements in Sollerius and about the Corbie Hieronymian copy ought not to bring us to doubt whether Lupus and Aurelia belong to the city of Córdoba. But, not to leave untouched the remaining things which that writer alleges further in his favour: at the day immediately preceding, he says, the Hieronymian copies labour under the greatest possible confusion in announcing SS. Faustus, Januarius and Martial, and do not set each of these in his place; and since it is so, it can be feared lest a similar blemish has also crept into the present announcement of SS. Lupus and Aurelia which they supply, and lest these, who ought to be attributed to Cappadocia, are wrongly ascribed there to Córdoba. Further, since the Corbie one, which Sollerius among the contracted Hieronymian ones added by him to the Alphabetical index of the Saints of the first six months of the year, or to the part of the Usuardian Martyrology
of the second part, lists in the fifth place, announces at the XIII day of October — on which almost all the other Hieronymian ones consign SS. Faustus and Marcia, or rather Martial, to Córdoba in the Spains — SS. Lupus and Aurelia at the same place, Faustus and Marcia or Martial being omitted, there is certainly reason why SS. Lupus and Aurelia, placed in the stead of these removed or omitted from there, should seem wrongly ascribed to Córdoba in the Spains, the arena of SS. Faustus and Marcia or Martial. But that the said contracted Corbie Hieronymian one, as Sollerius made it public in the place just indicated from a manuscript which, excerpted from a very ancient codex of the monastery of Corbie, had been sent by d'Achery to our Papebroch, is faulty at this and at the immediately preceding day, I shall show from another edition of the same contracted Corbie Hieronymian one, which Martène supplies from a manuscript of the said monastery in tome 3 of the New treasury of Anecdota, after I have first in a few words vindicated Sollerius from the mark of negligence imposed on him there by Martène for not having consulted it.
[7] That predecessor of ours had read in the mentioned manuscript, which, in truth as I have already pointed out, had been communicated by d'Achery to our Papebroch, at the XVII day of June: On the same day the Venerable Fulk, archbishop, was slain by an impious man; and hence, since these words, as he thought, were written by the first hand, and the said Fulk was slain first in the year 900, he concluded that that codex could not have been written before the X century perhaps well advanced, and accordingly was not so old as d'Achery had judged, thinking it could rightly be doubted also whether the latter had put any labour into examining that Martyrology; but Martène, when he was preparing for the press tome VI of the Old writers and monuments, given to the public light in the year 1729, having noticed this, carped at Sollerius on that account thus, in the observation prefixed to some most ancient Martyrologies or Calendars which he inserted in that tome: If the man, otherwise most sagacious, had consulted our edition of the contracted or Briefer Corbie one, he would not so easily have precipitated his judgment; for he would have noticed that these very words which he cites were written not by the first hand, as he unhesitatingly asserts, but by a more recent one, and somewhat otherwise than he himself read, between two parentheses in this manner: ("By another hand. On the same day the venerable Fulk, archbishop, was slain by the wicked Winemar.") But he could also have emended his edition in some places.
[3] to belong, So he; but if he had weighed in what year the edition of the contracted or Briefer Corbie one which he himself, and in what year that which Sollerius had prepared, saw the light, he would not so easily have taken him to task as precipitate in judging, the matter not having been discussed diligently and maturely enough; for he would have noticed that both appeared in the same year 1717, and accordingly that the one he himself had prepared most probably could not have been consulted by Sollerius. But content to have pointed this out here, lest the sinister opinion which the words of Martène just transcribed here could have begotten concerning our praised predecessor should find place with anyone, I now proceed to what is to be shown here from the edition of the contracted Corbie one made by Martène. Martène thought, as his words just transcribed here reveal, that the other, prepared by Sollerius, could be emended from this in some places; and although I would not think that one should agree with this writer in that matter forthwith — since each of the manuscripts from which those two editions were prepared was undoubtedly excerpted from one and the same most ancient Corbie codex, and the copyist who transcribed from this the one Sollerius used is not to be judged to have done it merely carelessly — yet, the matter being maturely examined, I have found that the other, prepared by Sollerius, is at least for this and the immediately preceding day to be corrected from the edition of the briefer Corbie one made by Martène.
[9] are to be called, For the latter, on the third of the Ides of October or the XIII day of this month, announces In the Spains, in the city of Cordoba, Faustus and Martia or Martial, and then on the second of the Ides or the XIV day of the same month, in the city of Cordoba, Lupus and Aurelia; and since the major Corbie one, from which all agree the lesser or briefer was taken or contracted, also does this, certainly from the edition of the latter which Martène made the other, prepared by Sollerius, is to be corrected for the two said days, which on the former of these commemorates in the Spains, in the city of Cordoba, not Faustus and Martia or Martial, but Lupus and Aurelia, no mention at all being made of Faustus and Martial, and then, the latter, or the second of the Ides of the said month, being left empty, presently proceeds to the XV, or the Ides of the same month. Now since it is so, and accordingly one must stand by the edition of the briefer Corbie one prepared by Martène, which announces at the XIII SS. Faustus and Martia, and then at the XIV day of October SS. Lupus and Aurelia at Córdoba, the other edition of the same briefer Corbie one, prepared by Sollerius — which, SS. Faustus and Martia or Martial, whom almost all the other Hieronymian ones mark at Córdoba in the Spains at the XIII day of October, being omitted, from what has already been said wrongly announces Lupus and Aurelia there at that time — ought not to move us to doubt whether these truly belong to that city, or were put to Martyrdom there.
[10] is called As regards now the very great confusion and disorder under which all the Hieronymian copies labour in yesterday's announcement of SS. Faustus, Januarius and Martial, who would wish to doubt on that account that nothing about that matter can be determined from these, unless perhaps on account of the blemishes enumerated by Sollerius in his Preface, both to Usuard, num. 23, and to the contracted Hieronymian copies, nums. 2 and 3, with which the said copies are infected at almost every day — especially since the Supplements already praised above, both to Bede, Ado and Usuard, and the Martyrologies composed by Rabanus and Notker, in which, as I have already shown, SS. Lupus and Aurelia are announced today at Córdoba, and indeed most expressly, are an argument also that most probably there formerly existed many more Hieronymian copies than are now found, which announced SS. Lupus and Aurelia today at Córdoba no less expressly than those, and indicated that they belonged to that city, or were put to martyrdom there, as from what has been said most probably happened. But in our Work at the XXII day of April, on which it was treated of SS. Parmenius, Helymas and Chrysotelus, Martyrs, as is noted, at Cordula in Persia, there at num. 6 our Henschenius — reporting that Baronius, in his Notes on the Roman Martyrology, discloses that he once suspected that for that city, since, as he thought, no city of this name is found in Persia, Corduena should be put, a city of this kingdom known from Ammianus Marcellinus and distinguished by Aethicus in the Cosmography by the name of Cordubenna — observes that in a manuscript codex of Jerome it is called Cordua, and by others also Corduba.
[11] And indeed the Acts of those Saints, as they stand in the Laurentian ones in Surius at the X day of August, call the city in which they suffered not Cordula but Corduba, into doubt, and the Hieronymian copy of the queen of Sweden in Florentini at the said XXII day of April also does this, while the Echternach one there calls the same city — which, as Sollerius teaches at the XXX day of July in his observations on Usuard, obtains still other appellations — neither Cordula nor Corduba but Cordua; and since it is so, and it cannot be doubted that the city of the Persians in which the Saints just mentioned underwent martyrdom is sometimes found called Corduba, there will perhaps be someone to contend that in very fact a city named Corduba is found in Persia, and that accordingly it can be called into doubt whether SS. Lupus and Aurelia suffered there or at Córdoba in Spain. There is certainly reason why it should so appear at first sight; and yet the matter would stand otherwise if the addition of the briefer Corbie one prepared by Sollerius and already mentioned above — in which at the immediately preceding day SS. Lupus and Aurelia are announced in the Spains, in the city of Cordoba, and so are expressly attributed to this city of the Spains — were to be admitted; but since I have shown that one must stand there not by this but by the other prepared by Martène, in which at the XIII day, or the III of the Ides of October, is read in the Spains, in the city of Cordoba, of Faustus, of Martia, and at the XIV, or the day before the Ides of October, only in the city of Cordoba, of Saint Lupus, of Aurilia, the city of Corduba to which these two Saints are ascribed not being expressly set in the Spains, it is necessary that we have recourse here to another way by which the difficulty objected and drawn from a city of Persia which also had the name of Corduba may be solved.
[12] are attributed, Since no city named Corduba which is outside Spain occurs anywhere among the Geographers, whether ancient or more recent, I think that in very fact no city of this name outside Spain either is found or was ever found. Nor does it move me to think otherwise that the city of the Persians where Parmenius, Helymas and Chrysotelus are said to have suffered is distinguished by the name of Corduba in the Acts of St. Lawrence in Surius praised above and in the Hieronymian copy. For this most probably came about because, for Cordula or Corduena, where those martyrs were marked in the ancient manuscripts, the copyists who transcribed these, deceived by the affinity of the names, as only a difference of one or another little letter intervenes between them, put Corduba. Nor is there reason why you should think on that account that the same can be said of the copyists who transcribed from ancient manuscripts the Martyrologies commemorating SS. Lupus and Aurelia today and attributing them to Córdoba; for Parmenius, Helymas and Chrysotelus are attributed not in all the monuments in which they are mentioned to Corduba, but in some indeed to that most noted city, and in others to Cordula or Corduena; whereas Lupus and Aurelia, in absolutely all the monuments or sacred Calendars in which they have place, are constantly ascribed not to Cordula or Corduena but to Corduba, or certainly to Cordoba, by which name, the letter U being changed into O, this most noble city of the Spains came to be called in the time of the Goths, as Ambrosio de Morales teaches, Hispania illustrata, tome 4, page 361. And now, since these things are so, and so the argument drawn from a city named Corduba situated in Persia ought not to bring us to doubt whether SS. Lupus and Aurelia suffered at Córdoba in Spain, there is certainly reason why, even with that considered, we should judge that this most probably took place there, and accordingly that Lupus and Aurelia belong to this city.
[13] and there with cult But indeed, says Flórez, praised above, further, Lupus and Aurelia neither enjoy nor ever enjoyed sacred cult there, and since accordingly Córdoba does not seem to hold these as its Saints, there is certainly no reason why to this
city we should attribute them. Indeed, since Lupus and Aurelia neither stand inscribed in the present-day Roman Martyrology nor are mentioned by St. Eulogius, and it was established, as Martín de Roa teaches in his work on the Martyrs of Córdoba written in Latin and published in the year 1617, page 45, as the XVI century was growing old, that of the Martyrs only those should be venerated at Córdoba who were either read in the Roman Martyrology or at least were known from St. Eulogius, then certainly our Saints did not enjoy cult there. Hence I think he will not stray from the truth who believes that the tablets of the church of Córdoba, in which Ferrari, in the Annotations subjoined to the present day's entry of the Saints whom he lists in the general Catalogue, affirms that Lupus and Aurelia were not found by him, were drawn up either then or earlier; for in tablets of this kind drawn up later, or about the beginning of the XVII century, Lupus and Aurelia would have had to be inscribed, as being then honoured at Córdoba with the honour that Saints are wont to receive, as Martín de Roa, praised above, teaches us. For to his Work on the Feasts and Saints of Córdoba, written in Spanish, which he then published, he prefixed both a Calendar, in which the Saints and feast days which the church of Córdoba celebrates are shown in the order of the days and months on which it does so, and an index, in which the same are listed in alphabetical order; and Lupus and Aurelia appear in that Calendar as well as in the index.
[14] they once enjoyed it, though perhaps not lasting today, But do they continue to enjoy there today the cult of Saints which they then enjoyed at Córdoba? That they are honoured today at Córdoba as Saints in any manner I would not dare to assert, lacking documents by which I might prove that Flórez, who, as I have already indicated, affirms the contrary, strays from the truth in this matter. Nor have I anything in readiness to record of them besides what has already been said. For monuments of proved credibility by which I might do so are lacking, and I find nothing in these which can be added to their memory and almost bare names in the sacred Calendars related above. Hence the Acts of SS. Lupus and Aurelia, adduced today in the Spanish Martyrology by Tamayo, find no credence whatever with me, nor, as I think, will they find it with any man of sense; which, not content with having made these Saints spouses and referred them to the times of Nero, affirm moreover that they were sprung from Ilipa, or the town of Zalamea, which was the native place of Tamayo. He brings forward indeed, from his manuscript Gothic Codex of Aulus Halus — which he very often cites elsewhere too — a sepulchral poem, from which all those things were drawn, written, as he says, by Cyprian, archpriest of Córdoba; but Nicolás Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana Vetus, book 6, chapter 7, num. 145 and following, lists the poems which ought to be held as genuine of Cyprian, archpriest of Córdoba, and then, at num. 147 and some following, others falsely ascribed to him by an impostor, whom on that account he calls pseudo-Cyprian.
[15] are adorned by Tamayo with a eulogy which is plainly fictitious. Further, numbering among these last, at num. 159, the already mentioned sepulchral poem of SS. Lupus and Aurelia, which, no otherwise than some other poems of the pseudo-Cyprian, he says was devised for clothing the bare Histories of Saints truly Spanish, he writes thus: Lupus and Aurelia are praised at Córdoba in Spain on the XIV day of October in the Martyrologies (the Augmented ones, namely) of Bede and Ado; with which the more recent agree, adding nothing further about them. The open field invited Tamayo to roam freely under the person of Cyprian, and to comprehend in verses (the studious reader can see these in that writer) their condition, the time of their martyrdom, and, what was of the greatest value, the dwelling of the Martyrs in Ilipa, or rather, as Nicolás would have it, Julipa, a city, the native place of Tamayo. So he, whose words I have thought should be transcribed here, because they bear on our purpose and show that the Acts of the Saints adduced by Tamayo are to be made nothing of.