ON ST. LAURA OF CÓRDOBA, WIDOW AND MARTYR, IN SPAIN,
IN THE YEAR DCCCLXIV.
HISTORICAL CRITIQUE.
The deeds of St. Laura from the Adversaria of Liutprand and the Spanish Martyrology of Tamayo de Salazar. The Adversaria are to be denied to Liutprand; Tamayo's assertions are fictitious.
Laura, Widow, Martyr, at Córdoba in Spain. (S.)
B. B.
The encomium of St. Laura from the Adversaria of Liutprand. "The memory and name of this most holy woman would have lain hidden hitherto, had not the works and writings of Cyprian, archpriest of Córdoba, and of Liutprand, subdeacon of Toledo, come forth drawn out of darkness." So Tamayo de Salazar at this day, in the Spanish Martyrology. Further, Liutprand writes in the Adversaria Num. 281.: "In my age was found the Body of St. Laura, Martyr, killed by the Saracens XC and more years before. She was of the most noble race of the Mozarabs of Córdoba, and joined by a special bond of kinship with St. Aurea, abbess of Cuteclara. Given by her parents in marriage to a noble man, she received two daughters; with whom, widowed of him after six years, she betakes herself to the monastery of St. Aurea; but Aurea, a little after, namely in the year DCCCLVI, being laurelled with martyr's blood, Laura, taken up into her place, governed the monastery for nine years. In which time she made wonderful progress in all virtues, always intent on prayer and the maceration of the body. At length, reported by spreading fame to the judge of the Saracens, when she remained most constantly in the confession of the faith, most cruelly beaten with stripes, put into a bath of boiling pitch, completing three hours in divine praises by the divine gift, she flew away to heaven on the XIX day of October, in the year of the Lord DCCCLXIV. Whom indeed St. Eulogius does not mention, because he himself had been crowned with martyrdom in the year DCCCLIX. The relics of Bl. Laura began to be distributed through many churches of Spain, and she herself to be held in great esteem." Thus Liutprand Works according to the recension of Ramírez. Antwerp, page 510..
[2] The Adversaria are not a genuine work of Liutprand. But the learned today sufficiently agree that only two genuine works of Liutprand exist, namely the Antapodosis, or six books of Things done by the Emperors and Kings of Europe; and the other book on the Embassy of Liutprand to Nicephorus Phocas: "To our Liudprand" (for so Muratori contends it should be written) "is attributed a Chronicle of Spanish affairs; there are attributed also certain Adversaria, in praise of which Francisco Bivar heaped up many things. These also Lorenzo Ramírez and Jerónimo de la Higuera illustrated with notes, published at Madrid and Antwerp. We have already said that these are to be reckoned among the Romance Fables, as altogether supposititious and filled to satiety with lies. At Mainz also, in the year 1602, a book on the deeds of the Roman Pontiffs from St. Peter to Pope Formosus came out, attributed to the same Liutprand. But this work too the learned contend is altogether to be denied to him, since it is too discordant with his style, and more probably came from some ill-employed German, perhaps even of more recent times" Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scriptores, vol. II, p. 422.. With Muratori agree Cave Scriptorum ecclesiast. Historia litteraria, p. 500. Geneva edition 1720., Pertz Monumenta Germaniae, vol. V., Nicolás Antonio in the Bibliotheca vetus, the writers of the Biographie universelle At the word Luitprand, Dom Ceillier Auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. XIX, p. 685.. He, to deny the Adversaria to Liutprand in particular, draws an argument from the fact that the author of the Adversaria several times calls himself Librarian of Fulda; whereas it is established, says Dom Ceillier, that Liutprand never stayed at Fulda. And in very truth at Adversaria n. 85 is read Where above, p. 473.: "When I was librarian at Fulda, I fell upon a codex of the councils of Toledo, etc." Elsewhere
it is said: "while I was at Fulda I found," n. 132; or: "as I read in the Gothic books of the library of Fulda," n. 137; and finally: "I remember that I read in the library of Fulda," n. 200.
[3] Liutprand does not seem ever to have been librarian of Fulda, It might perhaps be admitted that Liutprand stayed for some time, nay several times, at Fulda; since, as Muratori writes Loc. cit., p. 420., "after long service Liutprand at length so incurred the hatred of Berengar that he was compelled to betake himself to Germany to King Otto. In which exile, about the year of Christ 958, he finished his history, comprised in six books, begun at Frankfurt on the Main. He returned to Italy in the year 962." But one will with difficulty be brought to believe that Liutprand discharged the office of librarian at Fulda. And on this side Ceillier's note stands. Further, the Adversaria of which there is talk here are as it were a kind of Diary, in which the author wrote down what happened on each day.
[4] As regards Liutprand himself, let us note here in passing that Tamayo too confidently (which otherwise is familiar to that writer whenever talk falls upon things making for the glory of his country) asserts that he was a subdeacon of Toledo. He had as leader Francisco Bivar, who in the censure prefixed to the works of Liutprand makes him a Spaniard by race, of Córdoba by home, at least of Baetica, and indeed a subdeacon of Toledo, and affirms that, put to flight by the Saracens together with his parents, he settled in Italy. But, on the testimony of Muratori Where above.: "Both the old and the more recent have judged him an Italian by nation, and sprung from the city of Pavia, as Trithemius wrote." Dom Ceillier seems to hesitate in doubt about his country: "According to Trithemius," he says, "he was born at Pavia, according to Bivar at Córdoba." In no way, however, does it seem possible to maintain that he was ever a subdeacon of the church of Toledo. Whence A. Beuchot is to be corrected Biographie universelle, at the word Liutprand, who expressly affirms it.
[5] Incidentally certain things about St. Aurea. We gave the Acts of St. Aurea at the XIX day of July Acta SS., vol. IV of July, p. 651., where the question was discussed whether the monastery of Cuteclara belonged to the Carmel or to the Benedictine nuns. Our Cuper does not hesitate to assume as certain that the claim of Carmel is not founded; but at the same time he also thinks it not proved on every side that the monastery of Cuteclara was of the order of St. Benedict. This is clear, that it was placed near Córdoba, and already from that time not to have been illustrious from the century.
[6] The things related of St. Laura from the Adversaria are false. Since, therefore, the Adversaria are to be denied to Liutprand, and moreover that work, in Muratori's judgment, is found filled to satiety with lies, it follows that whatever Tamayo relates of St. Laura (for hitherto he relies on Liutprand alone) totters at least violently; nay, that it is altogether false is shown by Don Bartolomé Sánchez de Feria in his work: Palestra sagrada, or memorial of the Saints of Córdoba, in the historical critique of the saints falsely ascribed to the city of Córdoba Vol. IV, p. 41 and 42. Córdoba edition 1772., where he has these words: "At the XIX of October, in the year 864, Liutprand, Tamayo and Vivar report that St. Laura, a very noble widow, lived at Córdoba. She was first a nun in the monastery of Cuteclara, over which St. Aurea presided, and lived there with her two daughters. On St. Aurea's death she succeeded, and for nine years governed the aforesaid monastery with great praise of virtue. Accused at length before the judge, she was put into a bath of boiling pitch, where after three hours she sent forth her spirit. The said writers add that mention of this martyrdom is not made in St. Eulogius, because he had died five years before." These things being briefly set out, Sánchez de Feria continues thus: "This whole narrative is a mere fable worthy of the fire. 1º No abbess named Aurea presided (as is supposed in the aforesaid history) over the monastery of Cuteclara, as is proved from St. Eulogius, who relates that she lived there." (See the Acts of St. Aurea Vol. IV of July, p. 651, num. 2..) "2º From the year 856, in which St. Aurea was crowned with martyrdom, to the year 864, in which St. Laura is supposed to have obtained the palm, there is an interval of only eight years; nor accordingly could Laura, Aurea having died, have presided for nine years." (I should not, however, wish to insist on this note, lest it pass into a kind of quibbling. Since there are eight years, nine, nay perhaps ten, could in some sense be said, according as their beginning or start and end are counted: eight years are completed, the ninth could have been begun.) "3º The Christians freely professed their dogmas, and were condemned to death only for this, that they spoke ill of Muhammad. Which indeed Liutprand is detected to have been ignorant of, since he says that Laura was accused because she was a Christian: for from this a capital judgment did not arise. 4º The Moors, according to their law, beheaded those condemned to death, just as, according to our (Spanish) laws, those condemned capitally are put to death by hanging. This cutting off of the head was the very penalty intended and decreed by the law. If, therefore, they had judged Laura guilty of death, they would have taken off her head with the sword, as of the other martyrs at that time, and would not have put her into a bath of boiling pitch; which kind of punishment was abhorrent from the usage of the Moors; nor does any example of it occur. Moreover it was not permitted to subject the condemned beforehand to other torments: for this was not lawful by the laws of the said nation. Blessed be God, that He permitted the lie to be betrayed by its own footprints." Thus far Sánchez de Feria, whose words we have turned from Spanish into Latin.
[7] The epitaph of St. Laura, Now let us dispatch the other things which Tamayo wrote of St. Laura. "Thus far," he says, "Liutprand, who describes the Acts in a brief reckoning. But Cyprian composed this sepulchral Poem, which is read thus in my Ms. Codex of poems:
Here rests the body of noble Laura; and this Case of the sarcophagus her sacred pledges fill. She, joined to a lordly husband through many times, And mother of offspring; at length Widowed, she follows The Monastic life, which forthwith the Virgin Aurea Of Cuteclara gave. Taught by her trophies, At length she shines forth as Mother and Mistress of the convent. But crushed by the fury of the Saracen king, After wounds, fires, crowned, she passed to heaven.
These things we could find about this holy Martyr; the rest God knows." So Tamayo In the Spanish Martyrology, at the XIX day of October..
[8] Tamayo has already been flogged very often in our Work, and not undeservedly indeed, which Tamayo falsely ascribes to Cyprian of Córdoba. not only when he thrusts upon us the fictions of Pseudo-Dexter, but also where he brings forward his Ms. codex of poems. Let our Janning be an example, in the Preliminary Treatise to volume I of July, page 45. "I should believe," he says, "that the whole Ms. codex of Poems of Tamayo (for elsewhere he often brings forth from the same source other things, as ancient epitaphs, equally insipid) is the offspring of another Pseudo-Dexter rather than that that epitaph is so ancient." There is question of the epitaph of SS. Carpophorus and Abundius. Nor is Tamayo treated more kindly by Nicolás Antonio in the Bibliotheca Hispana. "Not best deserving of Spanish history, as being a follower and champion of Pseudo-Dexter and of similar spurious historians. From whose desks for the most part he compiled, little happily, the Spanish martyrology." So Nicolás in the Bibliotheca nova at the word Juan Tamayo de Salazar. Likewise vol. I of the Bibliotheca vetus, book VI, chapter VII, where he disputes about the writings of Cyprian. "Cyprian," he says, "Archpriest of the church of Córdoba, a poet of some name in his time, some genuine things of whom are still extant, whether epigrams, or epitaphs, or hymns; and other poems in Ms. books. Some things are falsely attributed to him by those who, fitting to themselves the mask of antiquity, love nothing more than to deceive and to play with history."
[9] The genuine Poems of Cyprian are enumerated. Then he reviews the genuine Poems of Cyprian from the codex of Juan Lucas Cortés, in this way: "Here begin the epigrams of the Lord Cyprian, Archpriest of the see of Córdoba:
I. On the sacred bibles laid up by Count Adulphus at Córdoba in the church of St. Acisclus.
II. Likewise of the same, at the petition of Zoilus his son, at the end of the bible which he had written for Saturninus the archdeacon.
III. Another Epigram without title.
IV. An Epigram to Count Guifred and his wife Guisinda.
V. Likewise another of the same on the Fan of the same Countess Guisinda.
VI. An Epitaph which the same published on the tomb of the Lord Samson in heroic metre.
VII. Likewise an epitaph published by the same over the tomb of Hermildis, handmaid of Christ.
VIII. Likewise over the tomb of St. John the confessor.
IX. Two hymns of the same on the festival of St. Leocadia, virgin and martyr, citizen and patroness of the city of Toledo. These, however, Cortés added, are wanting in this codex of his."
[10] The epitaph of St. Laura is spurious. Nicolás adds: "These are the poems of Cyprian which ought to be held as genuine, unless others by no means suspect are produced from elsewhere. Such as are (namely suspect) almost all, these excepted, which are read here and there in the Spanish Martyrology of Juan Tamayo. A list of which we give here, taken from a certain Ms. codex of poems of Aulus Halus and others, which he uses on almost all his pages, as he says." Among these is noted the Epitaph of St. Laura. And let these things suffice for our purpose, in a matter otherwise sufficiently plain. Whoever wishes more, let him go to the Bibliotheca vetus of Nicolás, loc. cit.
[11] Conclusion. From these the learned reader will gather that whatever Tamayo relates of St. Laura is deservedly judged fictitious. Whether Laura has a cult in the church of Córdoba or elsewhere, since we have in hand no other witness except Tamayo alone, it may at least be permitted to doubt vehemently. And on this head she should rather have been treated among the Passed Over. Since, however, it seemed to us not beside the point to examine here somewhat more diligently the fictions of Tamayo, the treatise turned out longer than could conveniently be placed in the series of the Passed Over. Compare above the Acts of St. Veranus, on this very day, § I.