Sonnatius

ON BL. SONNATIUS, ARCHBISHOP OF REIMS, IN GAUL,

BEFORE THE YEAR 633.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

The cult of Blessed Sonnatius has perished; his body is translated; he celebrates a council; the bounds of the kingdom of Dagobert, king of Austrasia; statutes attributed to Blessed Sonnatius.

Sonnatius, bishop and confessor, at Reims in Gaul (Bl.)

V. D. B.

Blessed Sonnacius, whose body was translated in the year 1204, Du Saussay in the supplement to his Gallican Martyrology celebrates on the present day the memory of Blessed Sonnatius, metropolitan of Reims; but, using other types of smaller form, and adding no title of Saint or Blessed, he seems to indicate that the cult was not established for him; yet that some beginning was given to his cult and that he was reckoned among the Blessed, there is no reason for us to doubt. Wherefore, although his cult never seems to have flourished very much, and so perished long since with his sacred bones, there is no less reason for speaking of him than of so many Martyrs whose names alone are known from the Hieronymian calendars. Before all, then, we must speak of the ecclesiastical honours paid to him. Of these, however, we have no other witness than Democharès (whose French name is Antoine de Mouchy), a grave man, doctor and professor of the Sorbonne, and a theologian praised at the council of Trent. He relates, and following him Marlot Metropolis Remensis Historia, book II, chapter XXXI, vol. I, p. 247. and Gallia Christiana Vol. IX, col. 19., that after the course of several years had elapsed, God, miracles flashing at the tomb, revealed his sanctity to the world, especially in the times of the archbishops Raynald (II, who sat from the year 1124 to 1138), Samson (who succeeded until the year 1161) and Henry (who died in the year 1175), and that his sacred bones were translated from the church of St. Remigius to the cathedral on the 4th of November of the year 1204, Guido, Cardinal of Praeneste (and at the same time archbishop-elect of Reims Leonardo Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, book IV, chapter II, p. 257), celebrating the pomp of the elevation; but that these perished a little after in a chance fire, by which the church was disfigured, with a huge quantity of furnishings. In the 12th and 13th centuries, then, the cult of Blessed Sonnacius flourished; whence it is no wonder if no traces of this veneration appear in Flodoard.

[2] made bishop before the year 613, and probably many years before, Almost all the things that are known of Blessed Sonnatius were handed down to posterity by Flodoard, historian of the church of Reims; nor are these many in number, or liable to grave disquisitions. It is asked, however, first in what year Blessed Sonnatius ascended the see of Reims, second in what year, passing to those above, he left it vacant, and third, finally, in what year he celebrated a very well attended synod. About the beginnings of his episcopate various opinions are carried about. Le Cointe [Annales ecclesiastici Francorum at the year 593, nos. 13 and 14, vol. II, p. 406.] weaves this chronology: Romulfus, the predecessor of Blessed Sonnatius, according to St. Gregory of Tours [Historia ecclesiastica Francorum, book X, chapters X and XIX, in Dom Bouquet, vol. I, pp. 368 and 376.], ascended the see of Reims in the fifteenth year of king Childebert, the twenty-ninth of Guntram, that is, of Christ the five hundred and ninetieth: nor is there any dispute about these things, on account of the certain authority of St. Gregory. They will have him surviving on the 7th day before the Kalends of June, in the eleventh indiction, that is, in the year 593, on account of the pseudo-privilege of Saint-Médard given at this time. But these things are of no profit, since all agree, even those to whom this privilege is approved, that the subscriptions, among which the name of Romulfus comes, are fabricated Compare Bréquigny and du Theil, Diplomata, vol. I, p. 88 and following. Nor is the assertion of Chenu of greater value, that Romulfus sat at Reims three years, since it rests on no ancient testimony. Marlot Metropolis Remensis Historia, book II, chapter XXVI, vol. I, p. 233. gives Romulfus six or seven years of government; but from mere conjecture, since he himself immediately after admits that the year of his deposition is unknown. Alberic of Trois-Fontaines In Leibniz, Accessiones historicae, vol. II, p. 49. writes at the year 626: At Reims Sonacius succeeded bishop Romulfus; but he seems to have referred this succession to this year not because it was then made, but because he had to speak of the council of Reims held about this time: for the rest, it is certain that Blessed Sonnatius obtained the see of Reims quite a long time before. Marlot Vol. I, p. 233. and others suppose that Romulfus died before the end of the year 596, that is, in the time of Childebert, king of the Austrasians, because the latter, on the testimony of Flodoard [Historia Remensis ecclesiae, book II, chapter XIV, Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum, vol. XVII, p. 533.], approved his testament by his authority. The argument is not altogether empty, although it could have come about (as Gallia Christiana rightly observes Vol. IX, col. 18.) that Romulfus survived Childebert after the privilege was granted. No certain limit, therefore, can be fixed for the episcopate undertaken by Blessed Sonnatius, except that, already created bishop, he exchanged certain properties with Brunechild, as we have Flodoard as witness Book II, chapter V, p. 535.: which must have happened before the harvest of the year 613; at which time Brunechild died Compare Gebhardus, Regum Francorum Merovingicorum, p. 72..

[3] he died before the year 633; About the year of the death of Blessed Sonnatius there is no less battle among the writers. Le Cointe At the year 631, no. 14, vol. II, p. 841. fixes the year 631; Marlot Book II, chapter XXXI, vol. I, p. 247. the year 633; Gallia Christiana does not define the matter Vol. IX, col. 20.. But from the deeds of Leudegisilus, the successor of Blessed Sonnatius, a limit may be established beyond which the latter's episcopate cannot be extended. Leudegisilus, namely, ordained St. Autbertus bishop of Cambrai [Compare Le Cointe at the year 632, no. 9, vol. III, p. 8; Gallia Christ., vol. III, col. 6, and Acta SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 536.], and that certainly before the 15th day of January of the year 638, on which Dagobert, who was accustomed often to come to the holy prelate of Cambrai Compare the Life of St. Autbertus, Acta SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 541., died Compare Gebhardus, Regum Francorum Merovingicorum, p. 116.. But Le Cointe deduced In the place cited above that this ordination was made on the very 21st day of March of the year 633, from the fact that that ordination is noted in the Martyrologies at the 12th day before the Kalends of April, which about that time coincided only in the year 633 with a Sunday, on which ordinations were to be celebrated. To Rivet, however Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. III, p. 539., the death of Blessed Sonnatius seems to be consigned before the year 628, since his successor is reported by Flodoard Book II, chapter VI, Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum, vol. XVII, p. 535. to have ruled the bishopric in the time of Dagobert. But it is not elicited from this that he obtained the see of Reims before the reign of Dagobert, which lasted from the year 628 to the 19th day of January of the year 638; but only that for some time within this decade he discharged the episcopal office. It will suffice for us, therefore, to fix the death of Blessed Sonnatius before the month of March of the year 633. About the day all agree: Robert Gallia Christiana, p. 118., the brothers Sainte-Marthe Gallia Christiana, vol. I, p. 479., Marlot Book II, chapter XXXI, vol. I, p. 247., Le Cointe At the year 631, no. 14, vol. II, p. 841. and Gallia Christiana Vol. IX, col. 19. unanimously report that he died on the present day; nor does Du Saussay depart from it Martyrologium Gallicanum, supplement at 20 October, whom Marlot falsely accuses of having reported the death of Blessed Sonnatius at the 25th day of October. This day could easily have become known to them from an obituary or Calendar.

[4] about the year 625 he celebrated a council, Of the time of the council celebrated by Blessed Sonnatius it has been spoken quite often in our work, especially at the 16th day of October in the Commentary on St. Magnobodus Vol. VII of October, p. 738.. Sirmond Concilia Galliae, vol. I, p. 479. had said that it was celebrated in the year 630; which did not please Labbe Councils, vol. V, cols. 1688 and 1693., Le Cointe At the year 625, no. 14, vol. II, p. 751., Mabillon [Annales Benedictini, vol. I, p. 331 and following; Ouvrages posthumes, vol. I, p. 440.], Toussaint Du Plessis Histoire de l'Église de Meaux, vol. I, p. 623. and most others, who assign the year 625. The arguments on which they rely they draw from the subscribed names of St. Sulpicius of Bourges, Senocus of Eauze and St. Arnulf of Metz. For St. Sulpicius, as Henschen showed both in the Commentary on St. Amandus Vol. I of February, p. 830. and in another on St. Austregisilus Vol. V of May, p. 228., could not have been created bishop of Bourges before the 20th day of May of the year 624, on which St. Austregisilus died: whence it follows that the synod of Reims was assembled after the middle of the year 624. On the other hand, from the presence of Senocus, or Sidocus, bishop of Eauze, it is gathered that it took place before his exile; which Fredegar Chronicle, no. 54, in Dom Bouquet, vol. II, p. 434. ties to the 43rd year of the reign of Chlothar, that is, 626. A similar argument is drawn from the presence of St. Arnulf, who seems to our Bosch Vol. IV of July, p. 429 and following more probably to have resigned the bishopric of Metz in the month of September of the year 625, although it does not displease others that he did so in the year 626. Certainly, then, that council was held between the years 624 and 626; and on account of Bosch's calculation it is very probable that it was not held in the year 626; it remains, therefore, that it took place either at the end of the year 624 or before the month of September of the year 625.

[5] at which more than forty bishops from the dominion of Chlothar II assembled, As Flodoard witnesses, who had the Acts before his eyes, forty or more bishops of the Gauls were present at this council; of whom he himself, besides Sonnatius, records forty names. D. Ceillier Auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. XVIII, p. 789. establishes that six metropolitans were present: Sonnatius of Reims, president of the council, Theoderic

of Lyon, Sindulfus of Vienne, Sulpicius of Bourges, Medegiselus of Tours and Senocus of Eauze. But several others were present whose sees were at one time metropolitan; but it is disputed whether in the 7th century they enjoyed this right. Wherefore, lest we must run on too far, we prefer to leave untouched how many archbishops assembled here. Ceillier will have it, moreover, that this synod was assembled from the bishops who had Chlothar II as king; for from the Kalends of March of the year 622 Compare Gebhardus, p. 114. Chlothar had made his son Dagobert partner of the kingdom and had appointed him king over the Austrasians, retaining for himself what the Ardennes and the Vosges excluded towards Neustria and Burgundy. On which Pagi observed the following Fredegar, Chronicle, chapter XLVII, in Dom Bouquet, vol. II, p. 432.: And so the kingdom of Austrasia, thus bounded towards Neustria by the Ardennes forest and towards Burgundy by the Vosges mountains, extended much less than before: for Chlothar retained for himself the dioceses of Reims, Châlons, Meaux, Laon and Cambrai on this side of the Loire, with many others beyond that river and the Rhône in Aquitaine and in Provence, which had once obeyed the former kings of Austrasia. Henschen had already written similar things before Critica at the year 622, no. 11., noting moreover that the Ardennes are understood here in the same sense as in Caesar, De Bello Gallico book VI, chapter XXVI, namely as extending as far as the Nervii.

[6] while the dominion of Dagobert was comprised almost by the diocese of Toul. I, however, should judge that the kingdom of Dagobert scarcely extended beyond the ancient diocese of Toul (that is, before the diocese of Nancy was cut out of it); for if the words of Fredegar are properly considered, they seem to indicate these bounds; then all the neighbouring bishops were present at the council of Reims, of Metz, Trier, Cologne, Laon, Verdun, Cambrai, Mainz and Châlons. But the bishop of Toul was absent; and in very truth that Toul was under the power of Dagobert is witnessed by Fredegar On the three Dagoberts, p. 24., narrating that Godinus, son of Warnachar the mayor of the palace, fearing ill for himself from Chlothar, turned his back and went to king Dagobert in Austrasia, and, terrified by fear of the king, took refuge in the church of St. Aper in the suburb of Toul. As Henschen shows Chronicle, chapter LIV, in Bouquet, vol. II, p. 334., a huge part of the former province of Bourges was at one time assigned to Austrasia; yet all the bishops of this part were present at the synod of Reims; whence it is sufficiently clear that they were not subject to Dagobert; nor should I assign to Dagobert's kingdom the bishops of Provence or of the region of Marseille, although from it only one bishop, of Riez, was present at the synod: for there would have been no free access for Dagobert from Toul, his seat, to this corner of Gaul; then the Vosges are established by Fredegar as the southern and eastern limit of Dagobert's kingdom; and besides, several bishops also from other parts of Chlothar's kingdom were absent: whence from their absence there is no certain argument. And to conclude these things, it is manifest from what has been said that it was a national council: and of so much the greater weight, because several who now enjoy ecclesiastical cult were present at it, and matters of the greatest moment were treated in it. Since, however, the decrees have been commonly transferred into the collections of councils, as the care of Flodoard preserved them for posterity, we shall omit them below.

[7] Other statutes too are attributed to Blessed Sonnatius, Colvenerius found in the archive of Marmoutier, and published by way of appendix to the History of Flodoard, synodal statutes of the church of Reims by the Lord Sonnatius; which passed from there into the History of Marlot and into the collections of Councils. On these Colvenerius noted the following Acta SS., vol. I of February, p. 210 and following, from no. 22 to 26.: For although there are some things in them which do not seem to savour of antiquity: as that it gives the title of PASTOR to parish priests, who in the age of Sonnatius and long after were wont to be called only PRESBYTERS or PRIESTS: likewise that it places the feast of the Nativity of Blessed Mary among the feasts to be celebrated without any forensic work, which in these parts does not seem to have been so ancient, since Fulbert of Chartres, who lived in the year 1017, is said to have been the first to celebrate it in Gaul, if we believe Democharès. But it could easily have come about that in place of presbyter the name of pastor was put by some more recent person, and that feast perhaps added by someone. Yet St. Ildephonsus (who lived in the same age as Sonnatius) writes in the book on the virginity and childbearing of Blessed Mary that her Nativity is celebrated and venerated by authority of the whole church. Similar to these statutes are the things which Jesse, bishop of Amiens, writes in the letter to the priests of his diocese, and the constitution of bishop Riculf, which Jean Cordes published with the little works of Hincmar.

[8] [in which the name of pastor given to parish priests, the feast of the Nativity of the B. V. M., cause difficulty,] These things Marlot Metropolis Remensis, book II, chapter XXIX. and Rivet Histoire littéraire de France, vol. III, p. 540. approve by their vote, adding that the title of pastor in the other council of Reims, of which we have just spoken, canon IV, comes for parish priests as well as for bishops: but falsely, as is clear from the words: If any heretics are still suspected to be in the Gauls, let them be searched out BY THE PASTORS OF THE CHURCH; the pastors of the church are plainly the bishops. Rivet, however, is not pleased by the argument from the book of St. Ildephonsus, since this writing is rather to be attributed to an anonymous author of the 9th century; wherefore he tries to strike down the difficulty by saying that perhaps out of singular piety the feast of the Nativity of the B. V. M. was introduced to be celebrated by Blessed Sonnacius. After his custom the Rev. Mr. Binterim learnedly collected some things about this festivity Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. V, part I, p. 450 and following, from which it follows that this feast is marked in the most ancient sacramentaries of SS. Gelasius and Gregory; that a procession on this day was proclaimed by pope Sergius; that the book or sermon on the Virginity of the B. V. M. was vindicated to St. Ildephonsus by a learned dissertation of Luigi Andruzzi; that this feast, however, does not come among the feasts which the council of Mainz of the year 813, Ahyto of Basel and St. Adelard of Corbie ordered to be celebrated with the omission of servile works; but among the feasts kept in the forum which Herard of Tours in the year 858 and Rodulf of Bourges in the year 847 ordered to be observed; and that in the 10th century the feast seems to have been already celebrated in England too. These things, however, we do not think sufficient for the difficulty to be said to be removed.

[9] and foundations of Masses for the dead, Another difficulty arises too from canon 18, which runs thus: We command that the suffrages of the dead be by all means kept, and that the solemnities of masses be not turned in another way against the mind of the founders: which, since some said it does not savour of the 7th century, Rivet observes Histoire littéraire, vol. III, p. 540. that in this century many foundations were made, and accordingly it could have come about that their authors prescribed a certain (what they call) intention. That Rivet uses this form of doubting here, the cause is Mabillon, who assigns the beginning of mass stipends to the 8th century. But that this most learned man erred in these things is now admitted; and so that these stipends, private intentions for the living and the dead, and the very foundations for this purpose are most ancient is most manifest from what the praised Rev. Mr. Binterim has most learnedly discoursed about these things Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. IV, part III, p. 376 and following. It must be granted, therefore, that the difficulty from canon XVIII is vain. Vain likewise is another difficulty, namely that no mention is made by Flodoard of these statutes; for, as Rivet rightly observes Volume cited, p. 540., many other things escaped the diligence of Flodoard. But that which is asserted by Colvenerius, and following him by Marlot and Rivet, that these statutes are similar to the letter of Jesse of Amiens and the Constitution of Riculf, I do not find; for the form is altogether other, and many things are omitted in these which are touched upon in the statutes ascribed to Blessed Sonnacius.

[10] yet they do not seem for that reason to be denied to him. What, then, is to be judged of these things? First, these statutes are certainly older than the Lateran council held under Alexander III, in which besides the title of benefice the title of patrimony was admitted, while in these statutes, at number 12, it is prescribed: Those who wish to be promoted to orders, let them have a benefice sufficient for their sustenance, and this at the examination of upright and sworn men; where the title of patrimony is excluded. Nay rather, they are to be held older than the 9th century, since in this age the feast of All Saints was commonly celebrated in Gaul in the forum and in the choir; which however is lacking in these statutes. As regards the remaining difficulties, the name of pastor given, as they will have it (for this could perhaps be denied), to parish priests conflicts equally with the usage of the 9th and following centuries and with the custom of the 7th; on which matter Nardi may be seen Dei Parrochi, vol. 1, p. 1 and following; whence this argument seems to prove too much. There remains the difficulty drawn from the feast of the Nativity of Blessed Mary; but since this feast was certainly kept in the choir in the 7th century, what wonder is it if some archbishop proclaimed that it should be observed in the forum too? These statutes also suit Blessed Sonnatius in so far as they were drawn up by an archbishop: for at number 19 is read a monition to the suffragan bishops: Let the bishops be faithful, etc. Which last thing finally I should wish observed, that when you read them you would believe (if you attend to the words and manner) that decrees of the 14th or 15th century are before you; and yet certainly, as we have seen, they are much older; and indeed I do not think any word will be found in them which you will not excuse by examples of the 7th or 6th century. The thought will also occur that these statutes are perhaps of another Sonnatius; but in the index of the councils of Labbe and in the supplement of Mansi no namesake occurs. Wherefore I should not dare to deny them to Blessed Sonnatius; which neither Colvenerius, Marlot, Rivet nor Binterim himself dared, commonly praising them under Blessed Sonnatius of Reims.

[11] [He did not translate the body of St. Remigius; before the episcopate he was archdeacon.] On the other hand, among the deeds of Blessed Sonnatius I shall by no means report the translation of St. Remigius, which Gallia Christiana Vol. IX, col. 18. maintains could have been made by Blessed Sonnacius in the year 600. For our predecessors have shown Vol. I of October, p. 113. that it was made before the year 585, and accordingly by Mapinius or Aegidius, archbishops of Reims. For the rest, under Romulfus, his predecessor, Blessed Sonnacius discharged the office of archdeacon, as Flodoard witnesses Book II, chapter IV, Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum, vol. XVII, p. 533.; who, speaking of the testament of Romulfus, writes: Of which testament the page is still in the archive of the church of Reims

is preserved with the authority of king Childebert: by which the same king, petitioned by the aforesaid prelate through the deacon Sonnatius, a venerable man, decreed to confirm this testament. He adds these other things too, pertaining equally to Blessed Sonnacius and to Romulfus Ibid., in the place cited: Certain properties also, seized by certain persons, (Romulfus) is found to have recovered before the royal majesty, the aforesaid archdeacon Sonnatius acting, the instruments of royal authority concerning these recoveries still remaining. It remains for us to recite separately the other deeds of Blessed Sonnatius, as they are read in Flodoard Ibid., chapter V, p. 533 and following.

LIFE OF BL. SONNATIUS, ARCHBISHOP OF REIMS,

From the history of the church of Reims of Flodoard.

Sonnatius, bishop and confessor, at Reims in Gaul (Bl.)

BY FLODOARD.

Blessed Sonnatius celebrates a council, Sonnatius ^a follows Romulfus in the episcopate, who is found to have celebrated a synod with forty or more other bishops of the Gauls. Where St. Arnulf too, prelate of Metz, is found to have been present, with Theoderic of Lyon, Sindulfus of Vienne, Sulpicius of Bourges, Medegiselus of Tours, Senocus of Eauze ^b, Leontius of Saintes, Modoaldus of Trier, Chunebert of Cologne, Richer of Sens, Donatus of Besançon, Auspicius of Autun; likewise Modoaldus of Langres, Ragnebert of Bayeux, Childoald of Avranches, Bertegisel of Chartres, Palladius of Auxerre, Gondoald of Meaux, Leudebert of Paris, Chainoalgus of Laon, Godo of Verdun, Ansaricus of Soissons, Claudius of Riez ^c, Berthoald of Cambrai, Agomarus of Senlis, Caesarius of Clermont, Verus of Rodez, Agricola of the Gabali ^d, Lupoald of Mainz, Willegisel of Toulouse, Constantius of Albi, Nammatius of Angoulême, Rusticus of Cahors, Audericus of Auch, Emmo of Arisitum ^e, Felix of Châlons, Hadoindus of Le Mans, Magnebodus of Angers, John of Poitiers, Leobard of Nantes. In which synod many useful decrees are read ^f…

[2] he takes care of the temporal affairs of his church; Moreover, the aforesaid prelate, the lord Sonnatius, is read to have ordered the affairs of the church commendably, increasing also the bishopric with lands and slaves bought at a price paid, of which purchases some records are still found. Certain properties also, which certain wicked men had seized, he duly restored to the church, having reclaimed and obtained them before the royal majesty both by himself and through his agents, Mark the presbyter, his legate, also pleading the cases. He also ordered the colonists of certain villas of the bishopric with services arranged. He obtained also royal precepts concerning the immunity of ecclesiastical properties, and also concerning the confirmation of certain donations. And he is found also to have exchanged certain properties with queen Brunechild for the convenience of both parties.

[3] and he makes a testament, and makes many pious legacies. He also made a testament of his goods, in which he conferred many gifts on various churches. The basilica of Blessed Remigius ^g, however, he instituted chiefly as his heir, where also he chose to have his burial: and there he assigned a gilded silver missorium ^h. Also twelve spoons, and a silver salt-cellar, and his portion of a certain hamlet with slaves, vineyards, meadows and the other appurtenances, and some other things which he records he had purchased at a price paid. To the basilica of SS. Timothy and Apollinaris ⁱ he bequeathed certain houses both next to the church itself and within the city. To the basilica of St. Martin ^k, whom he calls his particular patron, he handed over the villa of Mutatio, which he had purchased, entire as it was possessed by him. Moreover he gave gold too, from which a chalice should be made there. To the basilica of St. Julian ^l, for its recovery, five gold solidi. To the basilica of St. Nicasius ^m likewise five solidi. To the basilica of St. John ⁿ five solidi. To the basilica of St. Sixtus ^o, likewise three solidi in gold. To the basilica of St. Maurice three solidi. To the basilica of St. Medard [p] three solidi. To the monastery of girls [q] a vineyard situated in Germaniacum [r], with certain vessels to be of use to that basilica. To the basilica which is called At the Apostles [s] three gold solidi, with other little gifts from which a chalice should be made. To the basilica of St. Peter [t] in the city three gold solidi. To the basilica of St. Theoderic [u] his portion of the villa of Germaniacum, with slaves, vineyards and the other things belonging to it: silver too for making or adorning the sepulchre of the lord Theodulf [x]. To the basilica of St. Vitus [y] a certain silver vessel for making a chalice, and fifteen solidi in gold. To the basilica of the Holy Martyrs Rufinus and Valerius [z] fifteen solidi in gold. To the basilica of the Holy Martyrs Crispin and Crispinian [aa] fifteen gold solidi. To [bb] the matricula of the holy church of Reims, moreover, he conferred some gifts. To the other matriculae or congregations [cc] too he bequeathed various gifts. To certain persons too among his heirs he left certain estates on this tenure, that after their death they should return to the places of the Saints destined by him. Some slaves he presented with freedom and enriched them with peculium added. Which testament of the man of God is found strengthened by the page of a royal precept.

ANNOTATIONS.

p. Gallia Christiana omits these basilicas of SS. Maurice and Medard. Yet a parish church of St. Maurice is seen outside the Porta Basilicaris in the aforementioned little Map. Expilly Dictionnaire Géographique de France, under Rheims. and Marlot Vol. I, p. 131, no. 9. record it.

q. Which this monastery of girls is, seems not to be able to be determined.

r. In the margin Colvenerius notes that Germaniacum is now commonly called Germigny; which village is about three leagues distant from Reims according to the geographical dictionaries of France.

s. Either this basilica of the Apostles perished long since, or it is the same as the church of St. Symphorian Marlot, vol. I, p. 130, no. 8., which at the beginning was the cathedral temple of Reims, having the title of the Holy Apostles; but afterwards was made a diaconia with the name of St. Symphorian.

t. There were formerly within the walls, or, as Flodoard speaks, "infra civitatem" (within the city), two monasteries of St. Peter: one lower, the other upper. In the Commentary on St. Baldericus at the 16th day of October Vol. VII of October, p. 912. we showed that the upper monastery of St. Peter is meant here. Marlot seems rather to insinuate that the gift here is made to the church of Old St. Peter, which the lord's court in

the testament of St. Remigius calls the lord's court, and it was the principal parish of Reims.

u. The monastery of St. Theoderic on Mont d'Or, three miles from Reims, you have illustrated in Gallia Christiana Vol. I, p. 130, no. 5..

x. The lord Theodulf, commonly St. Thiou, third abbot of St. Theoderic, is venerated on the 1st day of May; at which his Acts were illustrated in our work.

y. Of the basilica of St. Vitus no monuments seem to survive.

z. Of SS. Rufinus and Valerius, who are held among the apostles of the Gauls, we shall speak at the day on which they are venerated, the 16th of November.

aa. Of the basilica of SS. Crispin and Crispinian Marlot has this Vol. IX, col. 180.: The church of SS. Crispin and Crispinian at the Porte de Trèves is known only by the erection of a cross. Formerly a station was made to it.

bb. Before this last donation two codices add: To the basilica of St. Medard fifteen solidi: which we have omitted, says Colvenerius, following other copies, because it was spoken above of the church of St. Medard.

cc. Flodoard perhaps omits the names of these basilicas and monasteries because they fell among those things which he discusses elsewhere Vol. I, p. 130, n. 4.: There were formerly among us, finally, many basilicas of the Saints, and monasteries too, which are now proved not to be held.