Tryphonia

ON ST. TRYPHONIA, WHO IS CALLED A WIDOW AND MARTYR, AT ROME,

IN THE 3RD CENTURY.

SYLLOGE.

Tryphonia, at Rome. (S.)

E. C.

Sole §. Whether St. Tryphonia is to be called the wife of the emperor Decius or of one or other of his sons; or a servant of his wife. Her Relics translated by St. Paul I, pope.

St. Tryphonia, wife of the emperor Decius, in the classic Martyrologies All the classic Martyrologies which were written after the 7th century praise at the present day, on which she was buried in the crypts, St. Tryphonia, a Roman widow; who is also sometimes (yet with no foundation) called a Martyr. First of all the old, or rather little, Roman, which Du Sollier, relying on excellent arguments, shows was written about the year 740 Preface to Usuard, no. 142, p. XXXVIII.: At Rome, it has, of Triphonia, formerly wife of Decius Caesar. Bede, or rather Florus Ibid., no. 45 and following, p. XIII and following., edited by Papebroch, is fuller: At Rome, of St. Triphonia, wife of Decius Caesar, who, her husband having been divinely punished after the slaying of the Blessed Sixtus and Lawrence, asked to be baptized with Cyrilla (or, as Bianchini Anastasius, Lives of the Pontiffs, volume IV, p. LXXXIII. reads, with Cyrilla the daughter of Decius) by Justin the presbyter, and on another day died, and was buried in a crypt beside St. Hippolytus. Ado, Rabanus and Notker scarcely differ from Florus; Usuard is more condensed, and has: At Rome, of Saint Triphonia, wife of Decius Caesar; Wandelbert dedicated this little verse to her:

And beside them Triphonia too shines forth, a trampler upon a kingdom.

Finally the Roman Martyrology of Baronius: At Rome, it says, of Saint Tryphonia, formerly wife of Decius Caesar, who was buried in a crypt beside Saint Hippolytus.

[2] and by other fasti she is said Some sacred fasti of lesser name are also to be kept before our eyes, namely the Martyrologies of Fulda In Giorgi, Martyrology of Ado, p. 671. and the Ottobonian Ibid., p. 687., almost similar to the Little Roman and to Usuard, the Augsburg Edited by Du Sollier, p. 22. and the Labbean, which report the bare name of Trifonia, and one or another Auctarium of Usuard which has something singular. The Brussels one reports this: At Rome, the natalis of St. Triphonia or Cephinia, wife of Decius Caesar, the rest almost as in Florus, Ado, etc. But the Hagenau one sounds thus: At Rome, the deposition of Saint Triphonia, wife of the younger Decius, emperor, who was cruel enough and yet reproached him for the slaying of the Saints. After the death of her husband she was made a Christian, with her daughter Cyrilla, by Blessed Justin, and on the following day, praying at the confessions of the Saints, she departed

to the Lord. And here too must be referred the old Notice of the places of the Holy Martyrs which are outside the city of Rome, edited by Eckhart De rebus Franciae Orientalis et episcopatus Wirceburgensis, volume I, p. 831. from a copy of the ninth century. In it we read: Beside the Via Tiburtina is the church of St. Agapitus … and near the same road is the greater church of St. Lawrence… Thence northward, up on the hill, is the basilica of St. Hippolytus, where he himself lies with his whole household, XVIII * martyrs; the prison is there in which Lawrence was. There is Trifonia, wife of Decius Caesar, and Cyrilla her daughter: between the two Concordia and Geneseus, and many Martyrs are there. Froben edited the same notice in the Appendix to the Works of Alcuin Works of Alcuin, volume II, p. 598.; to which he added another Notice also, in which we read Ibid., p. 597.: Then by the Via Nomentana to the church of Saint Agnes, which is beautiful, in which she rests alone, and bishop Honorius adorned it with wonderful work. Afterwards you leave that road and will come to Saint Hippolytus, Martyr, who rests underground in a chamber; and Concordia, his woman, Martyr, before the doors. In another chamber Saint Triphonia, Queen and Martyr, and Cyrilla her daughter and Martyr, whom Meditus Decius (read Messius Decius) slew, his wife and daughter, and Saint Genesius, Martyr. Afterwards you will come to the church of Saint Lawrence. Father Marchi refers both notices to the earlier part of the 7th century Monumenti delle arti cristiane primitive, Architettura, p. 68., who also observes that their authors arrange their itinerary round Rome by the reverse road. A similar Notice was written in the 12th century by William of Malmesbury, in which you have [In Bianchini, Anastasius, Vitae Romanorum Pontificum, volume II, part II, p. CXLI.]: And there not far off the basilica of St. Hippolytus, where he himself rests with his household, that is, eighteen. And there rest Blessed Trifena, wife of Decius, and her daughter Cyrilla, and Concordia her nurse. And on the other side of his road is the church of Agapitus the Martyr. Which must have been copied from an older Notice, since at that time the body of St. Tryphonia was no longer there.

[3] [according to the Acts of St. Lawrence, into which the conversion and burial of St. Tryphonia are inserted;] And from these things we manifestly have that in the 7th century it was believed at Rome, and thence spread through Gaul, Germany and other nations, that St. Tryphonia was the wife of Decius Caesar. Nor is it difficult to recognize on what foundation this old persuasion rests, namely the Acts of St. Lawrence, met with in manuscript Codices almost everywhere in the world and edited by Surius at the 10th day of August. There we read of St. Tryphonia Lives of the Saints, August, p. 93. Edition of 1618.: And Decius Caesar ordered a display of games to be prepared in the amphitheatre, and, sitting in a golden carriage with Valerian the prefect, went down that they might enter the amphitheatre and exhibit the deadly slaughters of many Martyrs. But behold Decius Caesar cries out, seized by a demon: St. Hippolytus, you lead me like a captive bound with dreadful chains. Valerian also cries out: O Lawrence, you drag me with fiery chains: and in the same hour, in the presence of Decius, he expired. But Decius, returning to the palace, harassed by the demon for three continuous days, cried out day and night: I adjure you, Lawrence, cease even a little from the torments. And a great mourning having arisen in the palace, the wife of Decius, Tryphonia, a cruel pagan, seeing Decius tormented by the demon, ordered all the Saints who had been shut up to be released. In the same hour Decius died. But his wife Tryphonia came to Blessed Justin the presbyter, and with the daughter of Decius, Cyrilla, threw herself with tears at his feet, praying that she might be baptized. Blessed Justin the presbyter received them with joy, and enjoined on them a fast for seven days. The seventh day being completed, he baptized them: which thing was spread abroad in the whole world. On another day Tryphonia, praying, gave up her spirit, and Blessed Justin the presbyter buried her body in that crypt in which St. Hippolytus was interred, on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of November. From that day Blessed Justin searched out carefully wherever the bodies of the Saints were hidden, and promised a reward to the soldiers. And the soldiers, hearing that Tryphonia, the wife of Decius, with her daughter Cyrilla, had given her name to Christ, came, to the number of forty-six, to Blessed Justin with their wives; and, prostrate at his feet, asked to be baptized, and afterwards under the prince Claudius obtained martyrdom.

[4] but these Acts are held apocryphal, But since this shred plucked from the Passion of St. Lawrence is the sole origin of all the things that are carried about concerning St. Tryphonia, it will suffice to explore its authority for a little. Cardinal Baronius Roman Martyrology, in the notes at the 10th of August picks out in these Acts many apocryphal things, and many contrary to the truth, especially those concerning the death of Decius and Valerian. Pagi In the Critica on Baronius at the year 261. calls these Acts supposititious, and Noris De epochis Syro-Macedonum, dissertation III, chapter XX. says the greatest part concerning SS. Abdon and Sennen is plainly fabulous, and continues: Accordingly that expedition of Decius against the Persians narrated in the said Acts is fictitious; as also in the same place Xystus the pope and Lawrence are wrongly said to have been slain as martyrs under Decius, who were killed in the reign of Valerian… Since in the same Acts, chapter 7, we read: The bodies of Saints Abdon and Sennen lay hidden until the times of Constantine, it is clear that they were written by a writer of a later age, unskilled in what he was putting into writing.

[5] although they contain many good things; I will indeed readily grant that Noris should perhaps be called too severe. For as regards the Persian expedition, Cuper, defending the Acts of SS. Abdon and Sennen, learnedly opposed very many things Volume VII of July, p. 133, no. 22 and following.; to which some authority is also added by what Suysken disputed at the 8th of October concerning St. Reparata Volume IV of October, p. 26, no. 15 and following., and perhaps the very Acts of St. Isidore Volume III of May, p. 419 and following., crowned with martyrdom in the island of Chios under Decius. As regards the conjunction or confusion of Decius with Valerian, the same Cuper Volume IV of August, p. 504, no. 5 and following. treated this question. And indeed that blemish is so common in the Acts of the Martyrs that it can indeed be concluded from it that they are not contemporary, but by no means that they are of no worth. For recall the Acts of St. Secundina at the 14th of January Volume I of January, p. 996., of St. Polyeuctus at the 13th of February Volume II of February, p. 651., of St. Alphius at the 10th of May Volume II of May, p. 503, § II., etc. Indeed St. Jerome himself, whose words Cuper recites Volume IV of August, p. 404, no. 8., fell into this error more than once; and the same must be said of St. Optatus of Milevis Works, p. 71, Paris, 1621.. Nor are the causes of this conjunction and confusion hidden, which, since they have been so often set out in our work, do not seem to need opening again here. I will grant too that Pagi In the Critica at the year 268, no. 6. went too far when he laid down that the name of Claudius II, under whom forty-six soldiers are related to have suffered, was wrongly inserted into the Acts of St. Lawrence, because that Claudius never played the persecutor; at the 25th of October, namely, we shall show from Trebellius Pollio himself that this is otherwise. In a word, it is far, very far from being the case that we have everything in these Acts foreign to the truth; for Stilting seems to us to have said rightly Volume V of September, p. 471, no. 5. that they for the most part agree with what is handed down by the Fathers.

[6] the worst passage is that concerning St. Tryphonia, But almost all the things which pertain to St. Tryphonia can justly and deservedly be called apocryphal, contrary to the truth, supposititious and plainly fabulous. First of all, Decius fell in the year 251; and in the year 258, in which St. Lawrence and St. Hippolytus underwent martyrdom, Valerian was staying not at Rome but in the East [Volume II of August, p. 485, and volume III of August, p. 8, no. 18. Cf. Pagi at the year 258, no. 12.]. In place of Decius and Valerian, therefore, must be substituted prefects, judges, perhaps torturers, carrying out the decrees of Valerian, or those of Decius which Valerian had renewed Cf. Henschen, volume II of February, p. 651, no. 11.. Then St. Justin, who baptized and entombed Blessed Tryphonia (as is related in the Acts recited), was created presbyter by St. Sixtus; who, it has been sufficiently shown elsewhere, was promoted to the pontificate only in the year 257 Acta Sanctorum, volume V of September, p. 470, nos. 1 and 6.. But if the matter is so, what of that tragedy in the palace of Decius which gave place to the conversion of St. Tryphonia? What credit is there that St. Tryphonia was the wife of Decius in the year 258, when Decius had already died seven years before? What of the remaining circumstances, if in these, which were of the greatest moment, the writer stumbled so enormously?

[7] whom Decius did not have as wife, But lest anyone should say that St. Tryphonia survived her husband Decius, and, having seen the constancy of the holy Martyrs in bearing torments, was converted to the faith; let us inquire into the wife of Decius. In the notes to the Roman Martyrology at this day Baronius calls her Herennia Sallustia. But Pagi protests [In the Critica at the year 251, no. 29, volume II of Baronius's Annals, p. 631 and following. Mansi edition.], following Seguin, and lays down from coins that Herennia Etruscilla was the name of Decius's wife, concluding with these words: So that it is undoubted that Etruscilla was the wife of Decius and the mother of Etruscus and Hostilianus… Baronius makes Herennia Sallustia, some antiquaries Sallustia Barbia Orbiana, the wife of Decius. But the former is fictitious; while the latter was the consort of the emperor Alexander Severus, as may be seen on his coins in Mezzabarba. So he, partly rightly.

[8] since, as is established from Dacian coins, Herennia Cupressenia Etruscilla And indeed that Herennia Etruscilla (whom the Trévoux Journal [Journal de Trévoux, October 1725, p. 1812 and following, and April 1726, p. 643 and following.] would have also called Cuperia, but it is now clear that she was called Cupressenia) was the wife of Decius many have shown; but, you will say, when she had died or been dismissed, Decius could have married Tryphonia; which conjecture Baronius suggests in the notes to the Martyrology: Unless, he says, we should say that he had several wives.

Nor can this stand. For it is certain that Etruscilla was still among the living in the year of Decius's death, 251, and that she was still at that time Augusta, or wife of the emperor, and then that the same had already been in wedlock with Decius for about twenty years. Since I find these things not yet demonstrated anywhere, it will be worth while to have set them in the light. Further, that in the year 251 she was still living and honoured with the title of Augusta becomes manifest from a coin brought to light by Frölich. He describes it thus Quatuor Tentamina, p. 135.: HER. ETRUSCILLA. AUG., that is: Herennia Etruscilla Augusta. Head of Herennia, wife of Decius. On the reverse: PROVINCIA. DACIA. A woman standing, adorned with the native dress, carries a branch in her right hand, a staff in her left: at her feet on the right an eagle, raising a wreath in its beak, on the left a lion; below AN. V., IN THE FIFTH YEAR. In the fifth year, therefore, of the era of the province of Dacia, Etruscilla was still among the living and called Augusta. But what is the beginning of this era? Geremia de' Bennetti Chronologica et critica Historia, part, volume IV, p. 397., having comprised in a few words the principal fortunes of Dacia, continues: Dacia having been restored to liberty by Philip, seems to have introduced a new epoch in his honour, which is seen engraved on coins with the years I and II of Philip's reign and the inscription Dacia Felix. Whence the era of Dacia would have to be begun from the year 244. But Frölich otherwise Tentamina, p. 135.: The years of the Province of Dacia, he says, inscribed on coins in these times, take their beginning from the fourth year of Philip the elder, that is, the year of the City 1000 and of Christ 247, in which it is gathered from Zosimus, book 1, that he freed Dacia from the Carpi; and Vaillant moreover judges that Dacia was then made free and immune by Philip.

[9] in the last months of his life she was still his wife, And indeed this opinion of Frölich, so far as it concerns the Dacian era and the second Carpic victory Cf. Biographie universelle, under Philippe, volume XXXIV, p. 87., becomes entirely certain from another coin edited by the same Frölich Tentamina, p. 137.; and it has: IMP. C. C. VIB. VOLUSIANUS. AUG., that is: Imperator Caesar Caius Vibius Volusianus Augustus. His head laureate. On the reverse: PROVINCIA. DACIA. AN. V., that is: Province of Dacia, in the fifth year. A female figure, clothed in the native fashion, holds a standard in each hand, on one of which V, on the other XIII is seen inscribed: at her feet on the right an eagle bearing a wreath in its beak, on the left a lion. Now if we compare this coin with the other and keep in mind that in both the year V of Dacia is marked, we shall easily detect the Dacian era. For Volusianus, whom Gallus gave himself as colleague, could not be emperor before the month of December of the year 251, in which Decius fell Cf. Biographie universelle, under Dèce, volume X, p. 628, note 1.; but on the other hand, in the same year Etruscilla was still called Augusta on the Dacian coins; whence it follows that the year V of Dacia concurred with part of the year 251 and part of the following; and at the same time (which is now our principal conclusion) that Etruscilla lived to the last times of Decius.

[10] [and indeed for twenty years and more, as is clear from the age of their common children.] And that Etruscilla was not at that time a recent wife of Decius, but had been living with him by the law of matrimony for twenty and perhaps more years, is no less certain, namely from the age of Decius's sons. Concerning his sons indeed opinion is manifold; some attribute four to him Cf. Tillemont, Empereurs, note II on Dèce, volume III, p. 273, Brussels, 1732.; others three, Herennius Etruscus, Hostilianus and Trajan Cf. Biographie universelle, under Dèce, volume X, p. 628, note 1.; others finally two, namely leaving out Trajan. And this is the more certain opinion. For, as Eckhel observes Doctrina numorum veterum, volume VII, p. 347., the children known from coins are Herennius and Hostilianus … others have invented several others, but from plainly weak conjectures. Various writers likewise hold various opinions as to of what mother they were born; some would have both born of Etruscilla, others one of Etruscilla and the other of another mother. But from the commentaries which we have already cited from the Trévoux Journal it is plain enough that Herennius, equally with Hostilianus, was born of the mother Etruscilla, and so that Herennius Etruscus was the elder. And, to use the words of Eckhel in his Thesaurus Volume XIII, p. 347., every doubt that might remain was wiped away by a stone dug up not many years ago at Carseoli, which Muratori edited:

HERENNIÆ

CUPRESSENIÆ

ETRUSCILLÆ. AUG.

CONIUGI. D. N. DECI

AUG. MATRI. AUGG.

NN. ET. CASTROR. S. P. Q.

[To Herennia Cupressenia Etruscilla Augusta, wife of our Lord Decius Augustus, mother of our Augusti and of the camps, the Senate and People of Rome.]

Behold, clearer than light, Etruscilla the wife of Decius and mother of the Augusti, Herennius and Hostilianus. These things having been premised (which will also be of use below), it is easily understood that the marriage of Decius with Etruscilla was very long. For in the second year of his rule, of Christ 250, he sent his son with forces against the Goths, who had crossed the Danube [Cf. Tillemont, Empereurs, volume III, p. 130. Brussels edition of 1732. Likewise Biographie universelle, under Dèce, volume X, p. 620.]. Similarly Herennius Etruscus bore arms in the battle in which he himself fell together with his father Decius Ibid., and passim elsewhere.. And since the military age among the Romans was the seventeenth year Pitiscus, Lexicon Antiquitatum, under Aetas militaris., everyone understands that it is necessary that the marriage of Decius and Etruscilla, from which Herennius was begotten, was celebrated about the year 230; or even some time before, if it be considered that Herennius in the year 250 was already in command of forces. And from these things it is more than sufficiently clear that the marriage of St. Tryphonia with Decius is a mere fable.

[11] [Nor could St. Tryphonia be the wife of the elder son, who married Herennia Sallustia;] Nor did that marriage greatly please Baronius; wherefore, besides the conjecture now overthrown, he proposed in the notes to the Martyrology another, namely that Tryphonia was rather the wife of the son who reigned with his father; and in a recent and learned Commentary on Salonina Augusta Mémoire sur l'impératrice Salonine. the distinguished Monsieur De Witte, member of the Brussels academy, embraced the same opinion. Further, as we have said, Decius had two sons, the elder Q. Herennius Etruscus Decius, the other C. Valens Hostilianus, both created Caesars and Augusti by their father [Cf. Caronni, Manuale, p. 118, Rome 1808; Biographie universelle, under Dèce, volume X, p. 628.]. That Hostilianus, who survived his father and was the colleague of Gallus in the empire, had as wife that very Herennia Sallustia whom Pagi above called fictitious, Tristan taught from coins Cf. Frölich, Quatuor Tentamina, p. 345.; and on one coin in Frölich Ibid., place cited the same is called Gneia Seia Herennia Sallustia Barbia Orbiana Augusta: and that he had no other wife than her is gathered even from this, that he died after a few months of rule in the year 252.

[12] nor is she to be called wife of the younger, since no argument is available, And indeed I do not see that any writer has attempted to assign St. Tryphonia in marriage to the younger son of Decius, but to Herennius Etruscus Decius, who perished with his father in the Gothic war. Baronius seems to have been moved to embrace that opinion because he, no differently from his father, was called Decius: the distinguished Monsieur De Witte relies on the Hagenau Auctarium of Usuard, which we recited at no. 2, and in which in fact St. Tryphonia is called wife of the Younger Decius, emperor. But since all the martyrological announcements acknowledge one source, the Acts of St. Lawrence, they are to be explained according to these and according to the Notice cited at no. 2, and accordingly it must by all means be judged that in them the discourse is about the same Decius as in these Acts: and that in them the elder Decius, or Messius Decius, is treated of no one, I think, who has read them will call in doubt. In very truth the writer of the Hagenau Auctarium set down the Younger Decius; but it cannot on that account be said that he used other documents: for no one more manifestly and more word for word copied the Acts of St. Lawrence in the rest, as will at once be clear to one comparing them. Wherefore, if he said the Younger Decius at his own pleasure or by conjecture, we should be moved by it no more than by the suspicions of any other writer. Add that this Auctarium is among the more recent; for he who wrote it out wrote at the end: In the year one thousand four hundred and twelve, on the sixteenth day of June. Wydo Kreutzelin's pen makes these glued-together letters; and certainly it was first collected after the year 1369, and indeed with so dull a wit that it is reckoned by Du Sollier among the worst Preface to Usuard, no. 234.. Had the most learned man whom we here have against us noticed these things, he would surely, in keeping with his excellent judgment, have felt with us that this document is of no value for attesting matters of the 3rd Christian century.

[13] nor the concubine of the father Decius. Since, therefore, the Acts of St. Lawrence remain the hinge of the dispute, Baronius perceived that they must either be followed or abandoned, but by no means changed, that is, that the Younger Decius must not be substituted for the elder Decius. In the Annals, therefore, he said that Tryphonia was the wife or concubine of the elder Decius In the Annals at the year 269, no. v.. That she was not his wife is more certain than certain; nothing suggests a concubine. Indeed our Cuper Volume II of August, p. 630, no. 32. cleverly observes that Decius was not given to lust: whence concubines do not seem so readily to be assigned to him.

[14] Some would have her to have been a servant of Decius's wife, ingeniously indeed, In the past century, therefore, another opinion was devised, which Gaspare Oderici, S.J., at the suggestion of his colleague Lesley, first brought to light. Interpreting, namely, his inscription XLI: VERVS CÆ. N, he discourses thus [Dissertationes et adnotationes in aliquot ineditas veterum inscriptiones et numismata, Rome 1765, p. 212 and following.]: Read: Verus of our Caesar, namely servant; which word innumerable examples show to be frequently omitted, many of which Fabretti collected: "Cimber of Livia, Philadelphus of Caesar, Pythion of Germanicus Caesar, to Doris of Asinius Gallus, to Artemisia of Caesar," occur in the same author. Through ignorance of this it has come about that those who had been maidservants were held to be wives. Thus Tryphonia the Martyr, to confirm the matter by an illustrious example, who had been the servant of Etruscilla, the wife of Decius, turned into the wife of Decius himself. Our Lesley once taught me in that letter which I cited above: "The other question was about St. Tryphonia, whether she was the wife of Decius Caesar;" to which also I answer in the negative. The Acts of St. Lawrence, on which the opinion is founded, which

make St. Tryphonia the wife of Decius, are without doubt corrupt in this place, and indeed also badly understood. The most ancient Martyrology in which St. Tryphonia is commemorated is the Little Roman, from which Ado, Usuard, Bede and others received her. But in the aforesaid Martyrology at the 18th of October she is announced thus: "At Rome, of Tryphonia, formerly of the wife of Decius Caesar:" from which manner of speaking, very much used among the ancients, it is drawn out that she was not the wife of Decius, but a servant of the wife of Decius. From the same locution not well understood, they afterwards wrote: "Tryphonia wife of Decius," instead of "Tryphonia of the wife of Decius." So Lesley, whose Italian letter has here been made Latin. And our Antonio Morcelli approved these things with his vote Opera epigraphica, Padua 1819, volume I, on inscription CLXXXIII..

[15] but less truly. Now if it be worth while to know my opinion of these things, I will first recall what I warned before, that all the Martyrological announcements were drawn from one source, namely the Acts of St. Lawrence. Of Bede, or rather Florus, and accordingly of his offshoots Ado, Rabanus, Notker, Usuard and others, there can be no doubt, since whole shreds from these Acts are found in their works. As regards the Little Roman, the announcements there are indeed commonly too brief for the matter to be settled by the same argument; nevertheless, since this Martyrology is not very ancient and was written about the year 740, everything persuades us to believe that the Acts of St. Lawrence showed the way to its writer also. For the rest, the very memorial which is made in it of St. Tryphonia sufficiently indicates that the author's mind was not that Tryphonia served the wife of Decius, but that she had FORMERLY (let this word be recalled) been the wife of Decius: whence the whole foundation of Lesley's conjecture collapses.

[16] Several female Saints are reported to have been Roman empresses; But if it be asked how at last it came about that St. Tryphonia comes forward in the Acts of St. Lawrence with the title of Augusta or wife of Caesar, at once a most vast field lies open to conjectures, which anyone may run over according to his wit. This one thing I will note, that the Romans were formerly rather liberal in creating Christian empresses. Thus St. Serena, who is venerated on the 16th day of August, is said to be the wife of Diocletian; which our Cuper denied with arguments solid enough (as far as I see, although our Farlati Illyricum sacrum, volume II, p. 350 and passim. and the learned Monsieur De Witte Mémoire sur l'impératrice Salonine, p. 23 and following. think otherwise) Acta Sanctorum, volume III of August, p. 263 and following.; similarly St. Artemia is reported to be the daughter of Diocletian and St. Serena; which no less displeased Cuper in the Acts of St. Cyriacus Ibid., volume II of August, p. 331, no. 20 and following.; St. Alexandra too was proclaimed wife of Diocletian; but that too Cuper corrected Ibid., p. 630, no. 30 and following.; add that in the fabulous Greek Acts of St. Thecla St. Truphaena or Tryphaena comes forward, who in the first century of the Christian era is said to have been a princess and kinswoman of Caesar, and who elsewhere is also called empress [Ibid., volume II of September, p. 663, no. 6, and volume VI of September, p. 547.]. Generally, however, our predecessors preferred, with SS. Irenaeus and Cyprian, with Tertullian, Lactantius and Eusebius, to be ignorant of all these Christian Augustae, since they become known from writings of lesser credit.

[17] the name of Tryphonia seems to have been servile. Besides these things it will perhaps be useful to observe that the name of Tryphonia (which is the same as Truphaena or Tryphaena Cf. volume I of June, p. 374, d.) seems servile, as perhaps is gathered from inscription XLII in Oderici:

D. M.

P. ÆLIUS. MONIUS

LARTIÆ. TRUPHENÆ

CONIUGI. B. M. ET

P. APOLLINARI. ET LAR

TIÆ SECUNDINÆ

LIBERTIS. POSTERISQUE

SUIS.

[To the Divine Shades. Publius Aelius Monius, to Lartia Truphena, his well-deserving wife, and to Publius Apollinaris and Lartia Secundina, his freedmen, and to their descendants.]

I confess that this inscription is somewhat obscure; for which reason I would not wish to rely on it too much.

[18] St. Tryphonia was buried in the crypt of St. Cyriaca or St. Hippolytus, In the fragment of the Acts of St. Lawrence which we edited above at no. 3, it is asserted that the body of St. Tryphonia was deposited by Blessed Justin the presbyter in that crypt in which St. Hippolytus was buried, that is, as both other records and the same Acts teach, in the cemetery of St. Cyriaca in the Ager Veranus, to which the crypt of St. Hippolytus is frequently reckoned, since an underground passage joined the two places [Marchi, Monumenti delle arti cristiane primitive nella metropoli del Cristianesimo, p. 77.]; and of which the writers on Roma subterranea, Bosio, Boldetti, Bottari, Marangoni and others, have treated copiously. You have very much also in our work concerning the same cemetery, both in the Acts of St. Cyriaca at the 21st of August Volume IV of August, p. 405. and in the Acts of St. Lawrence at the 10th day of the same month Volume II of August, p. 496, nos. 54, 55, and p. 486, no. 6.. And a few years ago Father J. Marchi, who happily unlocked very many hidden things of the Catacombs, discovered and described in the very cemetery of St. Cyriaca two new kinds of sepulchres, unknown to the former antiquaries Monumenti delle arti cristiane primitive, etc., p. 110 and 225 and following.: of which one seems to have been reserved for the more distinguished Martyrs, the other built in the fourth or fifth century in the wider spaces of some crypts. For the sand-pits or catacombs did not cease to be burial places immediately after the persecutions; nay rather, the Christians longed to bury their kinsfolk among the Martyrs: whose bodies were not taken out thence immediately after peace was restored to the church; but were long visited and venerated there by the Christians, until they were carried into basilicas and monasteries. At what time, further, the body of St. Tryphonia was taken out thence must now be inquired.

[19] and there a basilica was built; Above, from the Notice of the places of the bodies of the Saints and of the churches within and without Rome, which I cited at no. 2, we were able to learn that a basilica was built under the title of St. Hippolytus, and the body of St. Tryphonia laid in it. For that the word basilica there does not merely designate a cemetery or crypt will be manifest to one reading the whole notice: in which the bodies that were buried in crypts are carefully distinguished from those in churches. Further, there is scarcely doubt that the body of St. Tryphonia was raised, or at least that steps to her sepulchre were constructed, when that basilica of St. Hippolytus was built. It would therefore be worth while to have known the age of this basilica; but for that the records are lacking to me. Further, even now at Rome a part of the cemetery of St. Cyriaca is designated under the name of St. Hippolytus (surely because of the old church once built there); but not even traces of the basilica appear; but the road by which one formerly went to it still exists Marchi, Monumenti, p. 78..

[20] [it is now kept in the Monastery of St. Silvester in Campo Marzio. From a comparison of the Vatican tablet] The body of St. Tryphonia afterwards came to the monastery of SS. Stephen and Silvester; that is, to the church of St. Silvester in Campo Marzio; where it is established that it was kept also in these last centuries, from the General Catalogue of the Saints of Ferrari at the 14th of October, compared with his Catalogue of the Saints of Italy at the 18th of the same month, from Severano Le sette Chiese di Roma, p. 644 and following., Panciroli Index of the sacred relics of the City. and others. But it may be asked whether, before it was carried hither, it did not rest at some time elsewhere, namely in the Vatican crypts. The reason for doubting is that here, in a very small chapel, as Alfarano says In Cancellieri, De Secretariis Basilicae Vaticanae, volume IV, p. 1660., in the atrium of the basilica under the mosaic of the nave, there exists a marble tablet which comprises the memory of many relics of Saints laid up there; and here is read also the name of St. Trifonia. But in the monastery of St. Silvester there also exists, in the manner of a calendar, a marble tablet containing the same. Whence it is natural to suspect that these relics were first deposited in the Vatican basilica, then in the monastery of St. Silvester. But for this suspicion to be able to stand, the Vatican tablet would have to be older: to define which, our eyes must be cast upon those monuments. There is no need, however, for us to edit them here again, since Cardinal Mai has recently brought out an excellent edition. Further, the Vatican tablet shows first a long series of names of men; at the end of which come the women Scriptorum veterum nova Collectio, volume V, p. 44.:

Scar. Dariæ et Hilariæ Scar. Memmiæ et Julianæ Scar. Arthemiæ Concord. Scar. Sofiæ Pistis. Helpis et Agapæ. Sce Conchiliæ et Trifoniæ. Sev. Cyrilla [Of the holy women Daria and Hilaria / Of the holy women Memmia and Juliana / Of the holy women Arthemia, Concordia / Of the holy women Sofia, Pistis, Helpis and / Agape. Of saint Conchilia and / Trifonia. Sev. Cyrilla]

and in the very last place is read: Scr Stephani Silvestr. Of the holy Stephen, Silvester. For the rest, these tablets have no title, and all the names are set in the genitive case, although no word precedes or follows that governs this case.

[21] with the Silvestrine, on which the name of St. Tryphonia is inscribed, The other tablet is double, and has obtained a place in the portico of St. Silvester in Capite. Each part, or Calendar of the male and female Saints, has this title Ibid., p. 56: † In N Dni hæc est notitia nataliciorum. scorum, seu scarum hic requiescentium. [In the name of the Lord, this is the notice of the natal days of the holy men, or holy women, resting here.] The latter part was broken and afterwards restored Ibid., p. 58., most probably from another old parchment tablet, of which Wadding speaks Annales Minorum at the year 1285, no. 20, volume V, p. 148.; we shall separate the restored letters with brackets Mai, Collectio, volume V, p. 58.:

Mense. mart. D. XVIII. N scae Dariæ et Hilariæ V. et M. Mense. aug. D. VIII. N. scar. Memineæ et Julianæ D. VIIII. M. SS. N. scæ Arthe[miæ] Mense. sept. D. XXX. N. scar. Sophiæ viduæ Pistis. Helpis et Agape. Mense. oct. D. XIII. N. scæ Cyrillæ V. et M. D. XVIII. M. SS. N. scæ Trifo niæ viduæ D. XXVII. M. SS. N. scæ Conciliæ V. et M. In the month of March, day XVIII, the natal day of saint [Daria and Hilaria, V. and M. / In the month of August, day VIII, the natal day of the holy women Meminea and Juliana / Day VIIII, the same month, the natal day of saint Arthe[mia] / In the month of September, day XXX, the natal day of the holy women Sophia, widow, Pistis, Helpis and Agape. / In the month of October, day XIII, the natal day of saint Cyrilla, V. and M. / Day XVIII, the same month, the natal day of saint Trifonia, widow / Day XXVII, the same month, the natal day of saint Concilia, V. and M.]

[22] and from the translation of SS. Stephen and Silvester It must be observed, however, that in neither Silvestrine tablet, neither in that of the men nor in that of the women, is mention made of SS. Stephen and Silvester; whose names, however, we read on the Vatican tablet. Hence it is natural to conclude that the bodies of these Saints were translated later than those of the others: which, if it is confirmed from elsewhere, once the time of the translation of SS. Stephen and Silvester is known, it will at the same time be clear that the Vatican tablet is more recent and the Silvestrine ones older. Before all things, therefore, let us inquire when the bodies of SS. Stephen and Silvester came into that monastery. Further, that time is learned from the appendix to

the bull whose authenticity Papebroch had formerly called in doubt Propylaeum to May, p. 122., but afterwards, openly confessing his error, most firmly established Acta Sanctorum, volume V of June, p. 380, note g.. In that appendix, namely, is read Baronius, Annals at the year 761, no. 13.: In the month of June, on the nineteenth day, we brought into this oratory the body of Blessed Silvester, bishop and confessor of Christ. In the month of August, on the seventeenth day, we brought in the body of Blessed Stephen, Martyr and pontiff, in the time of Constantine and Leo, Augusti, and of Pepin, most excellent king of the Franks and defender of the Romans, in the fourteenth indiction, that is, in the year 761.

[23] [and from the bull of St. Paul I it is learned that the body of St. Tryphonia was carried to the monastery of St. Silvester about the year 760;] What, therefore, we conjectured from the comparison of the tablets, that the bodies of SS. Stephen and Silvester were translated later than those of the others, is confirmed from the very bull just vindicated. For that bull was given not on the fourth day before the Nones of July in the fourteenth indiction, as Baronius published perhaps by a fault of the typesetter, but on the fourth day before the Nones of June, as Pagi corrected Critica at the year 761, no. 1., namely some days before the translation of St. Silvester. And when that bull was given, the bodies of the other Saints had already been translated, as the reader will easily draw out from the following fragment (whence also the causes of these translations can be learned). Since, through the lapse of the spaces of years, thus speaks Pope Paul I Annals at the year 761, no. 3., the various cemeteries of the holy Martyrs and Confessors of Christ, situated of old outside the walls of this Roman city, remained neglected and quite in ruins: it happened afterwards that they were utterly demolished by the impious assault of the Lombard nations. Who also, digging up some of the very sepulchres of the Martyrs and impiously laying them waste, plundered the bodies of certain Saints and carried them away with them… Whence, having beheld the slothful neglect of those same holy places, and groaning greatly at this, and worn by very much sorrow and grief, I saw it fitting, God assenting, to take away those same holy Martyrs and Confessors of Christ and Virgins from those ruined places. Whom also with hymns and spiritual canticles we brought into this Roman city, and in the church which I built newly and from the foundations in their honour (namely within the walls, in the house which came to me by inheritance from my parents, in which it is established that I was born and brought up), placing their most holy bodies, I laid them up. And although the names of the Saints are not reckoned there, yet since this bull and the Silvestrine tablets give testimony (so to speak) to each other, who would doubt that these names can be known from those tablets? It seems, therefore, by all means to be held that the body of St. Tryphonia was carried by St. Paul I, Pope, to the monastery which was afterwards named of SS. Stephen and Silvester, or simply of St. Silvester, between the 28th day of May of the year 757, on which he obtained the pontificate Acta Sanctorum, volume V of June, p. 378., and the 2nd day of June of the year 751, on which he published the said diploma.

[24] the Silvestrine tablet belongs to the same time; Moreover, the age of the Silvestrine tablets may also be concluded from this; they must have been made before the bringing in of the bodies of SS. Stephen and Silvester: for how would the names of those not have been noted on them whose cult was the chief and who were afterwards held as the sole titular patrons? And hence it seems that the controversy can be removed which there was between Muratori and Mazzocchi, when the latter adjudged these tablets to the 11th century and the former made them older Cf. Mai, Collectio, volume V, p. 56.. Mazzocchi Kalendarium Neapolitanum, volume III, p. 906. found fault with two things: first, that the days were marked not by kalends, nones and ides, but by ordinal numbers; then, that it was written in the Greek manner, in the month of September: but I wonder that the learned man did not notice that these things are owed to the same cause to which the ordinal numbers in the Neapolitan Calendar of the 9th century, which he himself illustrated, are to be ascribed; namely to Greek usages. For as these flourished at Naples on account of the presence of the Greeks, so it is nothing singular that they flourished also in a Greek monastery at Rome. And that the Greeks were formerly ignorant of the Kalends and afterwards used them more sparingly is known to all. Add that the Romans themselves in a later age marked the days in the Greek manner equally with the ancient Roman: which anyone who has turned over the letters of St. Gregory the Great, or has run his eyes over any work on diplomatics, readily knows. However that may be, Mazzocchi would surely never have written these things if he had weighed Anastasius for a little. For he, after narrating that the bodies of SS. Stephen and Silvester were laid up by St. Paul in an oratory, or chapel, in the upper buildings of the monastery, but in the church (as it seems, under the ciborium) the bodies of innumerable other Saints; and that many estates were conferred by the same pontiff, adds Bianchini, Anastasius, Vitae Pontificum, volume IV, p. 257.: Where also, establishing a congregation of monks, he decreed that it should be a monastery of psalmody of Greek chant, namely for the sake of the monks fleeing the persecution of Copronymus.

[25] [the Vatican tablet is more recent, and therefore it cannot be concluded from it that the relics of St. Tryphonia were ever deposited in the Vatican crypts.] But what is to be thought of the Vatican tablets? How does it come about that the names of SS. Stephen and Silvester are written not among the men but at the end of the women? To what age are they to be referred? On what occasion were they carved or painted? Are they an indication that in this place of the Vatican crypts relics of all these male and female Saints are kept, as Alfarano records? Were these bodies at least kept there before they were carried into the monastery of St. Silvester? I think that this tablet is nothing other than a memorial of the translation made by St. Paul I: and that Alfarano's assertion about the presence of the relics is mere suspicion. For the rest, those who have at hand the remarkable work on the Vatican Crypts may be pleased to teach us if the matter stands otherwise.

* In Froben's edition: XIX.