Salome

ON ST. SALOME, MOTHER OF THE SONS OF ZEBEDEE,

IN THE FIRST CENTURY.

HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

Salome, mother of the sons of Zebedee. (S.)

BY B. B.

§ I. St. Salome, wife of Zebedee, a kinswoman of Christ, who was present to him also as he died; a witness, too, of his resurrection, and one who is read in the Gospel to have been solicitous for his burial. Her memory in the Martyrologies, Breviaries and Missals.

Salome, in Greek Σαλώμη, in Syriac Scholoum, is, says Lucas of Bruges On the Gospel of Mark, chap. 15, v. 40, vol. II, p. 713. Antwerp, 1606., St. Salome, wife of Zebedee, a woman's name, derived from the masculine Solomon; and more precisely Schleusner Greek-Latin Lexicon of the New Testament.: Salome is a Hebrew proper name of a woman, signifying "peaceable," from the root Schalam; finally St. Jerome, On Hebrew Names [Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. XXIII, col. 843. Compare the Glossary of Thomassin, col. 997.]: Solomon, "peaceable" or "he shall be pacified"; Salome, "peaceable." Now it is established from the Gospel text itself that St. Salome was the mother of St. James the Greater and of St. John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, whose father was Zebedee Matth. chap. 4, v. 21.; whence in the sacred writings too they rather often go under the name of the sons of Zebedee. And that St. Salome was their mother is plainly established by comparing the texts of Matthew and Mark: for she who in the former is the mother of the sons of Zebedee Ibid., chap. 27, v. 55. is in the latter expressly called Salome Mark chap. 15, v. 40.. Whence those are convicted of error, as Baronius has it Apparatus to the Ecclesiastical Annals, p. 459. Lucca, 1740., who said that Salome was the wife of Joseph, and that he had received from her the children so called. Compare Castro Viridarium Marianum, p. 50. Cologne, 1649.. Few are the things that are related of her. There came, says St. Matthew Chap. XX. 20 and following., to him (Jesus) the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, adoring and asking something of him. He said to her: What wilt thou? She said: Say that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand and the other on thy left, in thy kingdom. And so far between the Lord and Salome. The rest, in the same place, is addressed to all, unless you prefer to say between the sons and Jesus: You know not what you ask. Can you drink the chalice that I shall drink? They say to him: We can. He saith to them: My chalice indeed you shall drink; but to sit on my right or left hand is not mine to give to you, but to them for whom it is prepared by my Father. And the ten, hearing it, were moved with indignation against the two brethren. St. Jerome notes on this passage On chap. 20 of Matthew, Migne, vol. XXVI, col. 143.: The mother makes the request, and the Lord speaks to the disciples, understanding that her prayers came down from the will of her sons. It is also to be observed that St. Mark makes mention of the sons, not of the mother Chap. XV, v. 35.: And there come to him (Jesus) James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying: Master, we desire that whatsoever we shall ask thou wouldst do it for us, etc. To reconcile these with one another, the usual answer, says Calmet Literal Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, chap. 20., is that Mark speaks of the sons as doing what their mother had done on their behalf; but that Christ answered the sons, not the mother, because she was asking not for herself but for her sons. A little before, the same Calmet had said: The woman's name was Salome; and she had joined herself to Christ's following, perhaps after the death of her husband, that is, of Zebedee. Since she was most closely connected by blood with the Mother of God and with Jesus, she thought she had a right to ask for her sons the first dignities among the apostles. To the same effect is what is found in the Critici Sacri [Annotations on the Gospels, or the Critici Sacri, vol. VI, col. 615. London, 1660.]: Salome seems to have conceived this confidence from the fact that no mother of the other apostles followed Christ so constantly and served him so assiduously. Her maternal ambition was fostered by the hope that came of her having learned that her sons had several times been taken apart by Christ without the company of the other apostles, so that Peter alone seemed able to contend with them. Certain other conversations of the same St. Salome with the Saviour were current among the Egyptians, of which you will find some mention in the books of the Stromata of Clement of Alexandria, taken from the Gospel according to the Egyptians, an apocryphal one, assuredly, as is known to everyone. They say (thus Clement [Stromata, book III, chap. 9. Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. VIII, col. 1166 and following, also col. 1150. Compare the Critici Sacri, vol. VI, as above.]) that the Saviour himself said to Salome: I came to destroy the works of the female… Salome says: How long shall men die? The Lord answers: As long as women bear children… When she had said: I have done well, then, in not bearing children ..; the Lord takes her up, saying: Eat of every herb, but of that which has bitterness, eat not. And this is about all that has come down to us from that Gospel, the most ancient of all the apocrypha [Calmet, Commentaire littéral, vol. VII. Dissertation on the apocryphal Gospels, p. XLVI and following.].

[2] sister of the Lord As regards the kinship by blood of St. Salome with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and so with Jesus the Saviour himself, the question is entangled in no few and no small difficulties; so much so that nothing certain on every side could be established. The hinge of the whole matter turns on that Gospel text: And coming (Jesus) into his own country, he taught them in their synagogues, so that they wondered and said: How came this man by this wisdom and miracles? Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James and Joseph and Simon and Jude? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Matth. chap. 13, v. 54 and following; Mark chap. 6, v. 1 and following. Now this has greatly troubled, and still troubles, interpreters: namely, in what sense those men are called brethren of the Lord; likewise, who the sisters are, and how. The filthy heresiarch Helvidius answered, says Cornelius a Lapide Commentaries on Matth. chap. 12, v. 46., that they were those who had been born of the same mother, the Blessed Virgin, after Christ… But St. Jerome refuted him sharply and learnedly in his book against Helvidius. The Greeks generally, with Eusebius, book II of the History, chap. 1, and among the Latins St. Hilary with Ambrose, whom Baronius cites in the Apparatus to the Annals, chap. 46, think they were those who were born of an earlier marriage of Joseph, before he took Blessed Mary as his wife. But this is plainly opposed to the perpetual virginity of St. Joseph, which today no one would attack without the mark of rashness. Indeed St. Peter Damian, Epistle II, chap. 4 (as cited by Suárez [On the Third Part of St. Thomas, question 28, articles 2 and 3, disputation 5, section 4. Vol. II, p. 58. Mainz, 1616.]), says that this (the virginity of St. Joseph) is the faith of the Church; that is, as the said Suárez notes in the same place, a universal and pious belief. Hugh of St. Victor (so our Cornelius continues As above), and the Gloss on chap. 1 of Galatians, and Eck in his Homily on St. Anne, hold that these were begotten of St. Anne, the mother of the Blessed Virgin; for St. Anne, besides Joachim, of whom she bore the Blessed Virgin, had two other husbands, from whom were begotten those who are called brethren of the Lord. This opinion will find few patrons in our age, since according to Suárez Vol. II, p. 59. it is neither likely nor rests on any probable foundation, as is shown more at length in the place cited. Finally the same Suárez concludes Ibid., p. 60.: It is uncertain on account of what degree of consanguinity or kinship these were called brethren of Christ, nay, even whether they were true blood relations or only reputed such.

[3] so called, Yet rightly, in our opinion, does John Baptist Cancellotti, S.J., note Annales Mariani, Rome, 1616, in folio, p. 82.: The opinion received and spread abroad by the sacred doctors is that Joseph (the foster-father of Christ) had a full brother named Cleophas (others call him Cleopas and Clopas)… They add besides that the wife of Cleophas was Mary, who for that reason is called Mary of Cleophas, or also sometimes Mary of James, with respect to her elder, or at any rate better known, son. (Henschenius treated of her on the 9th of April Acta SS., vol. I of April, p. 811 and following.) And those who are called by the Evangelists brethren of the Lord, and those called his sisters, are attributed to these parents, namely to Cleophas and Mary; whence also nephews and

nieces of St. Joseph, the spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and consequently first cousins of the Saviour on the father's side, male and female; who, as Cornelius a Lapide has it As above., were called brothers and sisters by a phrase familiar to the Hebrews. In agreement is Christopher de Castro, S.J., in his excellent work on the Blessed Virgin Mary [Viridarium Marianum, or the true history of the virtues and life of the Mother of God. Cologne, 1649.], who judges it more probable that those four who are called brethren of the Lord in the Gospel text recited above were begotten of the same parents, Cleophas and Mary Ibid., pp. 37 and 38.; and that she is called the mother only of James and Jose or Joseph, the two others, namely James the Less and Simon or Simeon, being passed over, because these were the first of the brothers and the more distinguished Ibid., p. 42.. As regards the sisters of the Lord, it is established, says Cancellotti Annales Mariani, p. 83., that there were several, from the Gospel history, where in Matthew the citizens of Nazareth called them, in the number of a multitude (that is, in the plural), sisters of the same Christ, and said of them as of the brothers: "Are they not all with us?" On this testimony they could by no means have been fewer than two. And in very truth St. Epiphanius Heresy 87, num. 8. Works, vol. I, p. 1040. Paris, 1622, edited by Petau. calls them Mary and Salome; which names, according to Castro As above, p. 49., can be gathered not obscurely from the Gospel. Yet altogether obscure are the things that concern the former, that is, Mary; so that Cancellotti rightly lays down Annales Mariani, in the place cited that only one is found expressly named in the sacred writings, namely St. Salome, who was, according to the truer opinion, says Castro P. 50., which we have followed, the daughter of Cleophas and of Mary his wife. Castro also inquires in the same place in what order these brothers and sisters of the Lord were born, and lays down that St. Salome more probably preceded her brothers in age. Salome, he says Ibid., p. 53., seems to have been born before James (the eldest of the sons of Cleophas) and Simeon, because she would already have been married to Zebedee when Christ was born, she being at the least fifteen or sixteen years old. This, however, is a mere conjecture only, which I should think it superfluous to examine more diligently. For the rest, as may be seen in Castro himself in the place cited, others have thought otherwise. Thus Epiphanius, whom Nyssen also follows, will have the sisters born after the brothers, on the witness of the same Castro. St. Ambrose says that St. Salome, when she approached Jesus with her sons, was advanced in age On the Faith, to Gratian, book V, chap. 5. Migne, vol. XVI, col. 661..

[4] and in very fact by blood to him Further, our Cornelius appends a table in which, he says Commentaries on Luke, chap. 3, v. 23., you will see before your eyes the series and degree of the genealogy of the whole of Christ and of his kinsfolk, put together probably but carefully from the Fathers and the moderns, and especially from Christopher de Castro, chap. 1, On the Mother of God. From it we extract the following, which serve our purpose.

If this table be admitted, since Jacob (who begot Joseph, the husband of Mary) was the brother of St. Anne (she the mother of the Blessed Virgin Mary), it will follow that Mary and Joseph were first cousins, in the second degree of consanguinity. Consequently the Blessed Virgin was in the same degree of consanguinity with Cleophas (the brother of St. Joseph); and since Salome is the daughter of Cleophas, it further follows that the Blessed Virgin touched her in the third, unequal, degree. Again, with respect to Joseph, he was the paternal uncle of St. Salome, and consequently his spouse the Virgin Mary was her aunt by affinity (which makes the second unequal degree); while Jesus, inasmuch as he was the son of Mary, touched St. Salome in the third degree of consanguinity, but unequal; and inasmuch as he was reputed the son of Joseph, in the second, equal. And these things indeed stand so, if the genealogical table of Cornelius a Lapide be admitted.

[5] joined to him closely enough, Indeed, St. Salome's kinship with Jesus Christ and Mary will be closer still, if one adopts the opinion that Fr. Francis Xavier Patrizi, S.J. On the Gospels, three books. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1853, book III, p. 101., a man most diligent indeed and eminently versed in scriptural matters, judges alone to be true; namely, that Joachim, the parent of Mary, and Joseph, her husband, were brothers, which he there sets out and proves in a few words, with Zachary, thus: Each evangelist has described the lineage of Christ; but Christ had no lineage except his mother's. Therefore each genealogy shows us the lineage of Mary. But each is also the lineage of Joseph; for their very words in no way allow us to believe otherwise. All, therefore, or nearly all, of the ancestors of Joseph enumerated by the evangelists were also ancestors of Mary. And since it is not permissible even to suspect that she was Joseph's sister, she must be thought to have sprung from a brother of Joseph himself. What could be said against this I for my part do not see. Thus Fr. Patrizi, who then develops it more at length, relating Ibid., p. 102. from Julius Africanus: Jacob … taking his (Heli's) widow to wife, begot of her a THIRD son, Joseph; and concluding: Joseph therefore had two brothers, sons of Jacob by another wife. He then lays down that one of these was Clopas, which is one and the same name with Alphaeus. He adds finally: But who the third was, of the number Julius Africanus wrote of, there is scarcely reason for you to doubt. He was Joachim, the father of the Virgin Mary. And lest you think this is asserted by me without reason: John relates this: "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his Mother and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas." But that she who is called Mary of Cleophas was the full sister of the Virgin Mary and the wife of Clopas I should not readily believe, but rather that she was the daughter of Clopas, a first cousin of the Virgin herself on the father's side. For ἡ ἀδελφη does not necessarily signify a full sister, since neither are οἱ ἀδελφοι of Christ, of whom mention is made more than once in the New Testament, to be held his full brothers. Then the Greek expression Μαρια ἡ του Κλωπα sounds as the daughter, not the wife, of Clopas. Finally it is perhaps less likely that two full sisters were given the same name, Mary. One may therefore now confidently affirm that Joseph was Mary's paternal uncle Ibid., pp. 102 and 103..

[6] on the witness especially Great weight indeed does this opinion, which Papebroch already praised from Poussines Acta Sanctorum, 19 March. Commentary on St. Joseph, num. 23., borrow from the authority of Julius Africanus, who flourished at the beginning of the third century Ceillier, vol. II, p. 535., and is highly commended by Eusebius: Of the same Africanus, he says Ecclesiastical History, book VI, chap. 31, p. 230 and following. Mainz, 1677., five books on chronography (today lost), most carefully composed, have also come down to us. And a little lower: There is extant also another letter of the same Africanus to Aristides, on the disagreement which seems to exist between Matthew and Luke in recounting the lineage of Christ, in which he most plainly demonstrates the agreement of the Evangelists from a certain account which he had received from his forebears. How highly Eusebius esteemed this writing shines out still more clearly from the fact that he inserted it in great part into his own work, namely where he treats of the disagreement which is believed to exist between the Gospels on the lineage of Christ Ibid., book I, chap. 7, p. 20 and following, as being that by which the question proposed would best be solved. Since, he says, Matthew and Luke … are commonly thought to disagree very much with one another, so that individual believers, through ignorance of the truth, have vied in devising various explanations of those passages, let us set out the tradition about them which has been handed down to us, which… Africanus recorded in his letter to Aristides… Considering, then, the writer's age, diligence and care, no one surely would fail to set great store by his explanation. Africanus himself, however, seems to have some slight doubt: Whether, then, he says, the matter be so or otherwise, no one, certainly in my judgement and in that of others who wish to be fair judges of things, will easily find a plainer interpretation. Let this, therefore, suffice us, although it is supported by no testimony, since we can put forward no other better or truer. For the rest, that the narrative of the Gospel is true cannot be doubted. And at the end of the same letter Africanus adds this: Matthan from Solomon, etc. And so much in Eusebius Eccl. Hist., book I, chap. 7, p. 23.. Valesius, however, notes on this passage Ibid., Annotations on book I, p. 15.: How much store is to be set by this explanation of the Gospel passage is plain from these words of Africanus; for he admits that it is supported by no testimony of ancient writers. Yet he wishes it to be admitted by us, because no better can be brought forward. This being so, I could wish that our Eusebius had not made mention of this matter (the discrepancy of the Gospels) in the vestibule of his history. These words, for my part, I consider to have been uttered too harshly and unfairly against Africanus as much as against Eusebius. For why are the testimonies of ancient writers invoked here? As though Africanus himself did not approach the primitive age of the Church, and had not lived in those places where the kinsmen of the Saviour according to the flesh dwelt, separated from him by only a few generations.

[7] Julius Africanus. Certainly Africanus himself writes Eusebius, p. 22.: The kinsmen of our Saviour, whether to show the nobility of their family or simply to teach the matter, handed these things down to us, assuredly in truthful speech. He then relates that the origins of the families, which until that time had been recorded in the public archives, were burned out of envy by Herod, the son of Antipater, and adds Ibid., 23.: A few, however, who were zealous for antiquity, having private records of their lineage in their keeping, either because they knew the very names by heart or had copied them from the archives, gloried above all in having preserved the memory of their ancestral nobility. Of their number were those of whom I spoke above, called δεσπόσυνοι on account of the nearness of kin by which they were joined to our Saviour. These, setting out from Nazareth and Cochaba, villages of Judaea, into various regions, expounded the aforesaid series of the lineage from the book of daily records as faithfully as they could. Whether, then, the matter be so or, etc., as above. It would indeed have been desirable, as Africanus too declares, that the series of the genealogy be proved from the public archives; but shall we on account of a defect of this kind either call the whole narrative suspect, or reject it as lying and fictitious? For the rest, Patrizi presses this one point from Africanus in this place: Jacob, taking his (Heli's) widow to wife, begot of her a third son, Joseph. Would anyone then deny that these things could, and that in one and the same family, within a few generations,

be transmitted from one to another by tradition (this is the word Eusebius uses), even if only oral? Yet that writings were not altogether lacking is manifest from the passage of Africanus cited. For my part I assent to the opinion of Fr. Patrizi, and with Africanus I hold it the better and truer; nor do I think Eusebius is to be blamed, but rather well praised, for having inserted the narrative into his history; all the more because otherwise we should no longer have it, since the letter to Aristides has not come down to us from any other source. And by these things is confirmed what we said about the degrees of consanguinity of St. Salome with Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary, in this sense, that, as I hinted above, a closer kinship or agnation is held to exist between them than in the former opinion.

[8] Recapitulation. From what has been said so far it follows that St. Salome was born of Cleophas or Clopas (the brother of St. Joseph) and of Mary (about whom scarcely anything occurs for us to assert); that she was the wife of Zebedee; the mother of St. James the Greater and of St. John the Evangelist; that she followed Jesus, and approached to ask something of him, to whom she also appears to have been joined fairly closely by blood. And these things indeed from the Gospels and from the ancients, whether Fathers or ecclesiastical writers. I add certain things in this place (since a more opportune one will not occur) from legends and offices.

[9] In legends and offices she is called sister of the Virgin Mary. We have, says Henschenius Acta SS., vol. IX of April, p. 812., long Acts, copied from a manuscript codex of the most serene Christina, Queen of Sweden, marked number 1131, under this title: "The Life or legend of the three Sisters, Mary the Virgin, Mary of James, Mary Salome." What they contain is shown by the Prologue, which begins thus: The holy and undoubted, most exalted and salutary genealogy of the most blessed Sisters, of the glorious ever-virgin Mary, namely the Christ-bearer, of Mary of James and of Mary Salome, the maternal aunts of the same our Lord Jesus Christ, the conversation of their life and the dissolution of their bodies in the Lord, and their finding, with the translation and their miracles, we shall, God helping, try to narrate, though in slight and unpolished speech. After all these things have been set out and related at length, there follows: A brief sermon on the holy Sisters, on the feast of the most blessed Mary of James and Mary Salome, sisters of the most sacred Virgin and maternal aunts of Christ. Now the manuscript Acts, written in the fifteenth century, are not solid enough, being heaped together by various hands without any examination, so much so that Henschenius judged nothing from them fit to be printed except a few miracles selected from them, which are related to have happened in Gaul, and which he holds as more likely Ibid.. And he adds: They are mistaken besides (namely the compilers of those Acts) who, in order to find three Marys, call Salome, the mother of SS. James and John the Evangelist, Mary of Salome, as if this Mary were the wife of Salome. But Salome is the name of a woman, not of a man. Colvenerius also noted this The newest Kalendar of the Blessed Virgin Mary, vol. II, p. 302. Douai, 1638.: for having cited the words of Mark: There were women looking on afar off, among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and of Joseph, and Salome, he adds: where it is plain from the Greek that Salome is a nominative and not a genitive, and Estius declares it solidly in the Annotations on chap. 15 of Mark, ℣. 41. In what sense Mary of Cleophas or of James can be called the sister of the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of God, can be gathered from what was said in the preceding number. But not so of St. Salome: for, as Henschenius again rightly observes As above, and as flows clearly from what we have adduced and discussed above: that she (Salome) was held to be the sister of the same Mother of God is read neither in the Evangelists nor in the ancient Fathers. Finally he adds: Whether Salome was the sister of Mary of Cleophas, and occasion was thence given for saying that she too was the sister of Mary the Mother of God, we have no ground on which to assert solidly, nor to refute those who assert it. We judge, however, that this is a fairly convenient reason (which is certainly a mere conjecture only) for explaining what is read of them, as sisters of the Mother of God, in various Missals and Breviaries, in which (as will be seen below) they are commonly called sisters to one another, and sometimes maternal aunts of Christ.

[10] She was present to Christ as he died, Tillemont notes [Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire ecclésiastique, vol. I, p. 325. Paris, in quarto, 1701.] that Origen, in his commentary on Matthew, besides the praises he gives in general to those holy women who followed Jesus, hints in particular that St. Salome, by her faith, holiness of life and the constancy with which she accompanied the Lord wherever he went, merited the grace of being present at his death on Mount Calvary, with the others who had come from Galilee. And in very truth Mark Chap. 15, v. 39 and following, after relating that the centurion exclaimed: Indeed this man was the son of God, adds: And there were also women looking on afar off, among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and of Joseph, and Salome. Matthew agrees XXVII, 55 and 56.: And there were there many women afar off, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him; among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee, namely Salome, who is called by her own name by St. Mark alone. Likewise the other two evangelists Luke XXII, 49. John XIX, 35. testify that the holy women were present, some of whom they designate by name, yet not St. Salome. Matthew, Mark and Luke then record the coming of Joseph of Arimathea, who laid the body wrapped in fine linen in the tomb; and the first two add: And there was there Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre Matth. XXVII, 61., and they beheld where he was laid Mark XV, 47.. From which it might seem to follow that those two alone were present there, and consequently that St. Salome had withdrawn; but Luke hints the contrary Luke XXIII, 55.: And the women that were come with him from Galilee, following after, saw the sepulchre and how his body was laid. Unless one should say that the first two remained throughout as witnesses of the whole proceeding, while the rest came only to examine where and how the body was laid. For the rest, there is no one who does not know how much the Gospel narrative of the doings of the holy women, whether on Mount Calvary or at the Lord's sepulchre, has exercised, nay even vexed, sacred exegetes. It is not ours to settle, nor even to set out, such great disputes. It suffices for our purpose to have shown from the Gospels that St. Salome not only was present when Christ was fixed to the cross, but was also solicitous for his burial, and a witness of the resurrection.

[11] and solicitous for his burial That we may make this good, we think it worth while to write down here an excellent passage from Fr. Patrizi, in which both the matter itself is contained (which alone, as I have already noted, we have in view), and at the same time it is shown how the various texts of the evangelists can be harmonized with one another. While Christ, he says On the Gospels, book III, dissertation LIII, pp. 543 and 544., was being buried, "there was … there Mary Magdalene and the other Mary sitting over against the sepulchre Matth. XXVII, 61.," which other Mary was Mary of Joseph, and "they beheld where he was laid Mark XV, 47.;" but others too with these Luke XXIII, 55.. "And returning they prepared spices and ointments." And on the sabbath day indeed they rested, according to the commandment Luke, ibid. 56.. "And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week," that is, on the day after Christ's death, about sunset, "came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre Matth. XXVIII, 1.." Straightway, on that very evening, "and when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary of James, and Salome bought" other "spices, that coming they might anoint Jesus Mark XVI, 1.. And on the first day of the week Luke XXIV, 1; John XX, 1.," on the same day, I say, if you attend to the Jewish reckoning of days (for the Jews the day began not from midnight nor from sunrise but from sunset, so that if before sunset it was the last day of the month and the last of the week, the sabbath, after sunset it would already be the first day of the week and the first of the following month Patrizi, ibid., p. 540.), but on the following day if you attend to the Roman reckoning, Christ came to life again before dawn, and there happened those things which Matthew narrates XXVIII, 2–4. (the earthquake, the angel rolling back the stone, etc.). Soon πρωι σκοτιας ἐτι οὐσης John XX, 1. and ὀρθου βαθεος Luke XXIV, 1.. "Mary Magdalene came to the sepulchre John, ibid.," but at least one other also Ibid. 2. (for she says, etc.: "They have taken away the Lord … and we know not where they have laid him," so there were at least two), nay several Luke, ibid., either came before Magdalene, or with her, or arrived while she herself was at the sepulchre. They see "the stone rolled back Luke XXIV, 2." and "taken away from the sepulchre John XX, 1.. She ran therefore," Mary Magdalene, "and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved Ibid. 2.," but the rest stayed there, and presently "going in, they found not the body of the Lord Jesus Luke XXIV, 3.;" but "two men stood by them in shining apparel" and taught them of the things which had come to pass Ibid. 48.. Meanwhile Mary Magdalene, having gone to Peter and John, "saith to them: They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him John XX, 2.."

[12] and a witness of the resurrection. Soon the others too, "going back from the sepulchre, told all these things" which they had seen and heard "to the eleven and to all the rest Luke, ibid. 9.," not indeed all of them to all at once, which perhaps the hour of the day that it then was does not allow us even to suspect, but… one after another, and some to some, others to others. On receiving this second message, Peter and John ran "to the sepulchre…" As they returned, Mary Magdalene, who, as it appears, after she had announced the matter to them had followed them running to the sepulchre, "stood at the sepulchre without, weeping. Now as she was weeping, she stooped down and looked into the sepulchre, and she saw two angels in white, sitting, one at the head and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been laid John XX, 11–13.;" and straightway Jesus himself showed himself to her "first" to be seen, and conversed with her Ibid. 14–17; Mark XVI, 9.. "She going" "told" the whole matter "to them that had been with him

Mark, ibid. 10; John, ibid. 18.." Then at last the other women Matth. XXVIII, 5; Mark XVI, 2.. Mary Magdalene having already gone back into the city, since it appears that she by no means met them, from the fact that they were still ignorant of the whole matter Mark, ibid. 3.; "they came to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen Mark, ibid. 2.." And as they went in there, the angel told them what had been done, and bade them announce it "to the disciples and to Peter Matth. XXVIII, 5–7; Mark, ibid. 5–7.," that the message already brought to him by Mary Magdalene might be confirmed, after she had seen Christ come to life again, to which message those who had received it did not yet give credence Mark, ibid. 11.. They, terrified, "went out quickly from the sepulchre Matth., ibid. 8.," and fleeing thence οὐδενι οὐδεν εἰπον "said nothing to any man Mark, ibid. 8.," namely on the way while they fled Compare Matth., ibid.. "And behold Jesus met them," greets them, and when they had worshipped him, addresses them Matth., ibid. 9 and 10.. So Fr. Patrizi, no less acutely than diligently; and in these things is certainly contained whatever, in these events, pertains from the Gospels to St. Salome (who is expressly numbered by Mark among the holy women).

[13] The memory of St. Salome in the martyrologies, Nor have we anything else about St. Salome on which one may sufficiently rely. Thereafter the sacred pages are silent about her, as are also the ancient monuments of ecclesiastical history. Yet below we shall have to examine more at length the tradition of the church of Veroli among the Hernici, and of that of Arles or of the Camargue; and before we do so in the following paragraph, we append here what occurs worthy of note in the martyrologies and liturgical books and breviaries. The Roman Martyrology has on this day: At Jerusalem, of St. Mary Salome, who is read in the Gospel to have been solicitous about the Lord's burial. This announcement is drawn word for word from Usuard, except for the position or place, At Jerusalem, and the name Mary, which he does not have. On this Sollerius notes Martyrology of Usuard, 22 Oct., p. 619.: The forename Mary is given her (Salome) in some places; but nowhere, so far as I know, is she read to have been so called among the ancients. In certain codices of the additions, namely that of Brussels Ibid., that of Utrecht Ibid., p. 620, as also in the Lübeck–Cologne edition (on which see the same Sollerius in the Preface, in the same place P. XXXVI.), that forename is written in. Yet Chastelain rightly notes Martyrologe universel, 22 Oct.: A forename unknown to the evangelists and to all the martyrologists who wrote before the correctors of the Roman Martyrology. Nor does Baronius in his Annotations give any reason for introducing that forename; indeed in the Annals he designates her by no other name than that of Salome Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. I, p. 595.. Tillemont suspects Ibid. that that preposterous addition had its origin in the fictitious histories of the three Marys, or in the tradition of the church of Veroli among the Hernici, as one may conjecture from the Notes on 25 July, where James the Greater is treated. Compare what is to be said below. In the Little Roman Martyrology, which our Rosweyde brought to light, there is announced on the 22nd of October (the manuscript Rosweyde used gave, but, as he himself notes, wrongly, the 21st): At Jerusalem, of Mark, who was made the first bishop there from among the Gentiles. And of Salome, who is read in the Gospel. Whence Sollerius rightly observes Martyrology of Usuard, p. 619.: Salome, passed over by the other ancient martyrologists, is owed to the author of the Little Roman. From there Ado transferred her: Of blessed Salome, who is read in the Gospel to have been solicitous, with the other holy women, about the Lord's burial. Usuard struck out only those words that did not properly belong to her, namely: with the other holy women; all the rest is plainly Ado's. The Roman copies Usuard word for word, except that it adds the position, At Jerusalem, and inserts the forename Mary. On this day, therefore, the memory of St. Salome is celebrated separately. On other days she is treated, but jointly with others.

[14] the menologies, By the Greeks, on the 8th of April, are commemorated the Gospel Matrons who came on the Lord's day early in the morning to anoint Jesus.

Χριστῷ φέρουσιν αἱ μαθήτριαι μύρα· Ἐγὼ δὲ ταύταις ὕμνον, ως δῶρα, φέρω.

The women disciples bring ointments to Christ; I bring them hymns, in place of gifts.

And Henschenius observes Acta SS. on the 9th of April, p. 811.: The occasion of this solemnity seems to have been given at Constantinople, on account of the bodies translated to the church of St. James, the brother of the Lord; and he relates from George Codinus, in the Origins of Constantinople, p. 50: Justin … the emperor built the church of St. James, where in their tombs are kept the relics of the holy Innocents … and of James τοῦ ἀδελφοθέου… And on the right of the sacred tomb are laid the bodies of the holy women who brought ointments to the sepulchre of Christ. To this Henschenius adds: The last words are expressed thus in Greek: Ἐν δὲ τῷ δεξιῳ μέρει τῆς ἁγίας σοροῦ, εἰσι κείμενα τῶν ἁγίων μυροφόρων γυναικῶν τὰ σώματα. St. Mary of Cleophas, mother of St. James the brother of the Lord, and Salome, mother of the sons of Zebedee, seem to be meant. Saussay Gallican Martyrology announces on the 11th of May: At Reims, the feast of the blessed Mary of James (for she was called indiscriminately Mary of Cleophas and Mary of James [Faillon, Monuments inédits sur l'apostolat de Sainte Marie-Madeleine, etc. Paris, 1848, vol. I, col. 1316. In the margin.]) and Salome, and that under the double rite Acta SS., 11 May, p. 612. Among those Passed Over.; in the Breviary of Reims of the year 1759 the rite noted is the lesser semidouble. The same Saussay testifies Saussay in the Supplement, p. 1200. that the same are likewise venerated with the double rite by the church of Bordeaux on the 25th day of the aforesaid month. Likewise on the third day before the Nones, that is on the third day, of December, there is celebrated at Arles the revelation of SS. Mary of James and Salome Ibid.. Of this we shall speak at length below.

[15] the breviaries and missals. We have, says our Henschenius Acta SS., 9 April, p. 812., ancient Breviaries of the church of Auxerre in Gaul and of Tournai in Belgium, in which on the 25th of May the feast of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, sisters, is celebrated with solemn cult. Compare Colvenerius Marian Kalendar, 25 May. Douai, 1638.. In the Missal for the use of the church of Évreux, of the year 1497, there is noted: Of the most blessed Mary of James and Salome, probably on the 22nd of October Faillon, Monuments inédits, vol. I, p. 1315, note a.. Likewise in the Missal according to the custom of the church of Rennes, of the year 1523: on the eighth day before the Kalends of June (25 May), of the Three Sisters Ibid.. So also in the Missal of the church of Utrecht, printed in the year 1514, after the masses from the common of the Saints, there is placed a mass in honour of SS. Mary of James and Salome: where each is called sister of Mary the Mother of God and maternal aunt of Christ Acta SS., as above. In Wadding Annals of the Minors, vol. VII, p. 278., in the Kalendar of the proper feasts of the church of Jerusalem, there is appointed to be celebrated on the 22nd of October the double feast of St. Mark, bishop and martyr, and the semidouble of St. Mary Salome, neither virgin nor martyr. Compare, below on this very day, the Acts of St. Mark at the final number. Nor is what our predecessors have on the 25th of May P. 2. Among those Passed Over. to be passed over: The Order of Carmelites, out of its special devotion towards the Mother of God, had judged that her kinswomen too should be venerated by it, and had noted in its older missals and breviaries "On the eighth day before the Kalends of June (25 May), of Mary of James and Salome. Double," with a proper office. Daniel of the Virgin Mary, in the Speculum, seems to indicate that by more recent usage the feast was transferred to the 22nd of May. But neither on that nor on any other day have we found anything in the more recent breviary of the order of the year 1672. Nor have I found anything in the Breviaries of the same order that I have in hand, of the years 1689, 1702, 1730 (Day Hours), 1778, nor finally in the Proper offices of the Saints granted to the Discalced Carmelite friars and nuns for this day, published at Mechelen in the year 1849. In all of these, moreover, the office of the Octave of St. Teresa is noted on the 22nd of October. Likewise the feast of both holy Matrons is celebrated on the 25th of May in the breviaries of the ancient profession of the Regulars of the most blessed Mother of God and ever Virgin of Mount Carmel, according to the approved use and custom of the church of Jerusalem and of the Lord's Sepulchre Acta SS., 9 April, p. 812.. And Fr. John of Venette, of the Carmel of Paris, wrote in the year 1357: The feast of St. Mary of Cleophas is kept on the 25th of May; the feast of St. Salome on the 22nd of October. Some, however, treat of the two Sisters together in the month of May (the 25th), because there is a common prayer on that day Monuments inédits, vol. I, p. 1315.. Finally in the Martyrology of the Canons Regular there is announced at Jerusalem St. Mary Salome, and that on the 22nd of October Roman Martyrology. Mechelen, 1846. At the end.; but in the Proper of the Canons of the holy church of Jerusalem and guardians of the most sacred Sepulchre of the Lord there is noted on the following day, the 23rd of October, the feast of St. Mary Salome, Widow. Double. Proper Feasts, etc. Liège, 1674..

[16] Likewise in the Propers of Brussels In the ancient Breviary of the collegiate church of St. Gudula at Brussels there is a proper office of St. Mary of James and Salome, and that, as is noted in the calendar, under the double rite. Its Antiphon at First Vespers is this: O happy lineage propagated from the royal stock of David: blessed Province, made illustrious with stars under the name of Mary, worthily dost thou rejoice, Villa Maris, who art made illustrious by two daughters of Anne. The Prayer: Be propitious, we beseech thee, O Lord, to us thy servants, that by the glorious merits and loving intercession of the blessed sisters of the glorious virgin and thy mother Mary, and thy maternal aunts, Mary of James and Mary Salome, we may always be protected from all adversities. Who livest. The Invitatory: Let us rejoice on this day with praises worthy of God, who by bright virtues gives the kingdom to the Sisters of the virgin mother Mary. The nine Lessons consist of a Legend of both Saints together. The chief contents of the first six are briefly summed up in the Antiphons of the second Nocturn: Anne, the wife of Joachim, had three spouses, and first bore Mary, the mother of the Lord — on his death she took Cleophas as husband, of whom she conceived Mary, the mother of James. — At last she is given to Salome as third spouse; from this is born Mary called Salome. (Here, then, Salome is the name of a man. Compare num. 6.) In the seventh and eighth Lessons I find these things worthy of note: Through the envy of the Jews they were sent out, with certain disciples of Christ, in a certain boat on the sea without helmsman or oarsman. But God, who is the helmsman of all things, and especially of those who hope in him, steered them by himself and brought them right to the shore. And going out of the ship, they entered the land,

which in ancient times was called Stichados, but is now named Carimarchia, and there they judged the place suitable for prayer and friendly to contemplation, which part these Saints chose. The hymns at Lauds and Second Vespers are proper: the former has nothing worthy of special mention; the latter is of this kind:

Let the court of heaven exult, Let this church resound; Let the land of Provence applaud, Let us worship God today.

On the border of the sea, O Villa, rejoice with joy, Who art endowed with the suffrages And the relics of the Sisters.

Diocese of Arles, Free of every heresy, Within thy bounds Are the holy stocks of the bodies

Of the Sisters of the Virgin Mother, Of a stock and name worthy of praise: The two maternal aunts of Christ Rejoice together in the heavens.

The two Mothers of James also, May they obtain that we be not reprobate, When the great day shall come And the supreme judge shall be present.

This Breviary is in our days most rare, even in our Belgium. It was possible to acquire it for the Museum a few years ago. For what reason it was printed we learn from the preface, which is placed at the head: The dean and canons of the church of the holy Gudula of Brussels to their clergy, greeting. Behold, venerable priests, the Breviary of our use, long desired and demanded with almost daily reproaches (sic), diligently ordered and not negligently printed, to the honour of our God, best and greatest, and to the praise of his most holy mother and perpetual virgin and our lady Mary, and also of his excellent spouse, our titular (so to speak), the most holy Gudula of God, and indeed of the whole court triumphant in heaven; and for the salvation of the faithful abiding in purgatory and of ourselves who fight in this vale of tears. It remains that you be most grateful to God and to the promoters of so great a work. Farewell. Where and when, and by whose zeal and diligence it was printed, the Rubric teaches us in these words: Here ends the winter part of the Breviary for the use of the distinguished collegiate church of St. Gudula, virgin, in the illustrious town of Brussels, of the diocese of Cambrai. Printed at Paris, by the skilful labour of Didier Maheu and the watchful care of Josse Bade of Assche, on the third day before the Kalends of November, in the year one thousand five hundred and sixteen. Thanks be to God.

[17] and of Compostela. If Tamayo is to be believed, the church of Compostela keeps the feast of St. Salome on the 23rd of October: At Compostela in Galicia in Spain is kept the anniversary festival of St. Mary Salome, mother of St. James the apostle of the Spains, who, having followed her son into the Spains, rested by a glorious end at Vercelli. So Tamayo, where, unless he meant to utter something altogether absurd, Veroli is without doubt to be read in place of Vercelli, as will be plain from what is to be said. Henschenius notes, however Acta SS., 9 April, p. 817., that Salome is inscribed in the ancient martyrologies of Spain on the 22nd of October. And this indeed obtains today also, as follows from the Proper of the Spanish Saints, published at Mechelen in the year 1841 after the Madrid edition of the year 1831, where on the 22nd of October one reads: Of St. Salome, widow. For the city and diocese of Compostela, double of the 2nd class, and for all the other dominions subject to the Catholic king, greater double. Two hymns are proper; one for both Vespers and Lauds; the other at Matins. Likewise proper Antiphons at the Magnificat and Benedictus. The Lessons of the first nocturn: A valiant woman; of the second nocturn, proper, setting out the Gospel history; of the third nocturn, a homily of St. Fulgentius on the Gospel: There came to Jesus the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

§ II. What is to be thought of the cult of St. Salome in Spain, and on what foundation rests the tradition of her death at Veroli in Italy.

The cult of St. Salome in Spain, What we have said so far (except those few things in num. 9) has been taken either from the sacred writings or from monuments certain in their kind, such as Martyrologies, Liturgies and Breviaries, in so far as they testify that the memory of some Saint is kept or his feast celebrated. Now we must proceed further, and examine the traditions of certain regions and churches about the origin and antiquity of the cult which they show to St. Salome. For no slight dispute has existed, and still exists, as to where she closed her life and where her sacred remains are kept. This is, says Henschenius in the Acts of St. Mary of Cleophas Acta SS., 9 April, p. 812, the boast both of the city of Veroli among the Hernici, a people of Latium among the Italians, and of the territory of Arles in Provence, a region of Narbonese Gaul, and indeed to some extent of the church of Compostela in Galicia in Spain. Let us begin from this last, so as to step from the lighter to the weightier matters; which it will be possible to dispatch in a few words, since scarcely anything occurs for me to add to Henschenius's commentary. The whole proof on this matter is taken from the Additions of Braulio and Heleca to the chronicle of Maximus, under the years 16 and 17, where these things are read: The report is that when St. James came into Spain, Mary of Cleophas and Salome his mother and a certain Mary Magdalene courteously accompanied him, and returned with him, and came with his body, and that both, Mary of Cleophas and the Magdalene, died in the town of Civitas (in the vernacular Ciudad-Rodrigo) in Lusitania, on the 10th day of April; but that Magdalene, the sister of Lazarus, came with Lazarus, Maximinus and Chelidonius, Marcella and Joseph of Arimathea into Aquitanian Gaul, and there preached the holy Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, as the histories of the Gauls clearly teach, and it is a tradition sufficiently received everywhere in that region. Mary Salome, returning with James her son himself, having travelled through parts of Germany, England and Italy, where she preached, when she had come to Veroli, worn out by age, rested there on the 24th of May. Thus there, under the name of Heleca, archbishop of Saragossa, who flourished in the ninth century Nicolás Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana vetus, vol. I, p. 510. Madrid, 1788..

[19] where, however, she never came. Besides various absurdities that are uttered in this text, such as the confusion of Aquitanian Gaul with Narbonese, etc., already censured by Henschenius Acta Sanctorum, as above, there applies here what our Philippe Labbe has in his dissertation on ecclesiastical writers [In Papebroch, Answer to the Exhibition of errors, art. 21, §2, num. 10.]: But, to say what the matter is, and what all throughout Europe who are eminent in learning and judgement hold: all those Hispano-Gothic Chronicles of the Liutprands, the Dexters, the Maximuses, the Helecas and the Julians, together with the rubbish of John of Viterbo, and old wives' fables or the trifles of the Amadises, are to be banished to Utopia and the island of Morbonia. Nicolás Antonio agrees, here and there in his Bibliotheca, and in particular where, treating of Heleca, he asserts Bibliotheca Hispana vetus, p. 510, num. 315. that the additions to the Chronicle of Maximus, whether they go under the name of Braulio or under that of Heleca, are nothing but tuneful trifles. There is therefore no reason to linger longer on these, since they are spurious, and nothing is adduced from elsewhere in confirmation. This one thing is proved from the Spanish Proper: that the feast of St. Salome, Widow, is celebrated, and that, as appears, because she was the mother of St. James, the apostle of the Spains, on this day, the 22nd of October. For the rest, in the proper lessons of the Second Nocturn there is nothing about her deeds after Christ's ascension. Having narrated his appearance after he had risen, Lesson III concludes thus: Enriched with these heavenly gifts, constant in faith, rich in hope, mighty in charity, overcoming persecutions unconquered, persevering to the end, she passed to the heavenly kingdom. Her feast is noted on the following day, the 23rd of October, in the Spanish Martyrology of Tamayo. Compare num. 17.

[20] The tradition of Veroli about the coming We must treat a little more at length of the cult and tradition of Veroli, which rest on arguments, if not solid, at least numerous, and are supported by an authority not to be despised. Henschenius sums up the Legend (of which we spoke at num. 6) in about this way Acta SS., 9 April, p. 812.: Mary Salome and Mary of James are said, after their husbands had died, to have dwelt with the Mother of God, and to have been present with her when Joseph her spouse died, and when Christ, fixed to the cross, expired; after the resurrection and ascension of Christ to have remained with the same Mother of God, until they had shown her the last offices as she died; but afterwards, when the report had spread that St. John, the son of St. Salome, had been put into a vat of boiling oil and had been kept unharmed from it, they left Palestine and sailed to Italy, and having gone on as far as Rome, dealt with Pope Clement; and, more fully instructed about everything, came to the city of Veroli; and there both died and, placed in the same tomb, rested: Mary of James on the eighth day before the Kalends of June, Salome on the eleventh day before the Kalends of November. The same things, again on the witness of Henschenius Ibid., p. 813., are narrated in an ancient Carmelite breviary at the feast of St. John before the Latin Gate, 6 May; but of the mother of St. John alone. Baronius, in the notes on 25 July, treating of St. James, the brother of John the Evangelist, asserts from the monuments of the church of Veroli that their mother, the wife of Zebedee, Mary, having been put to flight in that persecution which followed the slaying of St. Stephen, came to Italy, and among the Hernici, wearied by her journey, rested in peace, and that her venerable body is religiously kept there, no mention being made of any companion or sister. Finally, in Ughelli it is read from the old Menology of the church of Veroli Italia sacra, vol. I, col. 1387. Venice, 1717. that Mary of James, mother of the sons of Zebedee (so, namely, he writes), when Christ's disciples were dispersed after the slaying of St. Stephen, turned aside the more willingly to the Hernici in Latium in order to visit her son John the Evangelist, who was held by order of Domitian (how these things hang together chronologically let Ughelli see); but when she had come to Rome and had heard that he had been banished into exile, and was returning thence, she remained near Veroli, and was received in hospitality by a certain countryman, whom, when she had converted him to the faith of Christ, she named Maurus; finally, weighed down by the burden of an age above a hundred years, she passed to the Lord on the sixth day before the Kalends of July. And these are the things that it has been possible to gather from various sources about the coming of St. Salome and her stay at Veroli.

[21] of St. Salome First of all it may be asked here why Ughelli, or rather his Menology of the church of Veroli, calls Mary of James the mother of the sons of Zebedee. By common usage Mary of James is the same as Mary of Cleophas, the mother of James the Less; but she can by no reasoning be called the mother of the sons of Zebedee, namely of James the Greater and John the Evangelist, who in the same Ughelli is expressly held to be the son of the same Mary of James. The same writer also adds in the same place that the cathedral church of Veroli is rich in relics of the Saints, among which he lists the body of St. Mary of James. But since elsewhere he relates Italia sacra, vol. V, col. 1181., without any asterisk, that the head of Mary of Cleophas is kept at Venice in the church of the Servites, unless you say that Ughelli is inconsistent with himself, it seems one must conclude that for him Mary of Cleophas was another person than Mary of James; but who this latter is, or reasonably could be, other than the mother of the sons of Zebedee, that is Salome, I for my part do not see. Add that she is sometimes, although, as we have seen, wrongly, called Mary

Salome; and once the name Mary is admitted, Salome could in some sense be called Mary of James, because she is the mother of James the Greater. Therefore, in my opinion, it is St. Salome who is treated in the monuments of Veroli, and Baronius slips where in the Roman Martyrology on the 25th of May he announces: At Veroli among the Hernici, the Translation of St. Mary of James, or rather of St. Salome; especially as he himself notes that he received the history of this event as published by the church of Veroli. Henschenius nevertheless remained in doubt Acta SS., vol. I of April, on the 9th, p. 814.: Let the reader notice, he says, that she is here called "Mary of James" and is held to be "the mother of the sons of Zebedee," who for others is Salome; whereas it is the mother of the brother of the Lord and bishop of Jerusalem who ought to be called "Mary of James"; so that it seems doubtful whose body is said to be kept there (at Veroli). To me it does not seem so. What of the fact that Henschenius himself recites Ibid., p. 813. the Relation to Innocent III about the finding of the body (of which mention will presently fall), taken from the Vallicellian collection of Gallonio, in which the mother of the sons of Zebedee is expressly and exclusively treated; of Mary, the mother of John the apostle and of James; but of Mary of James not even a word?

[22] does not seem sufficiently founded; The tradition of the coming of St. Salome therefore rests on these two things: the Legend and the Monuments of the church of Veroli. The Legend is of slight, nay of no, authority. It was first written in the fifteenth century: for the author testifies Acta SS., vol. I of April, on the 9th, p. 812. that he was miraculously cured of the pains of the stone in the year 1425; he says besides that he drew his material into Latin speech from French writings; namely, as Colvenerius has it Kalendar of the most sacred Virgin Mary, 25 May, vol. I, p. 564. Douai, 1638., from the Life of the three Marys, of their mother, offspring and husbands, in French rhyme, its author being John of Venette or de Vineta, of the Order of Carmel, who died, according to Lezana Annals of the Carmelites, vol. IV, pp. 662 and 663. Rome, 1656., about the year 1367. But who, says Henschenius Vol. I of April, p. 812., translated all these things into Latin, the author is unknown. This one thing we can declare about all of them, that they heaped various things together without any examination. What man of sense would trust a farrago of this kind? As regards the Monuments, what and of what kind they are I nowhere find: I see only words, by themselves vague enough: from the Menology, from the Monuments of the church of Veroli; so Baronius, so Ughelli In the places cited. These are certainly little suited to proving a historical fact belonging to the primitive age of the ecclesiastical annals, of which not even the slightest trace is to be detected in writers either nearly or remotely contemporary. But if it were lawful to stand on arguments of this kind, there will scarcely be any church throughout Italy, the Gauls, the Spains, not to say throughout almost the whole world once known, endowed with some antiquity, which would not be proved to go back to apostolic times. Yet the learned know how falsely most, nay almost all, things of that kind are thrust upon us. There are lacking, therefore, positive arguments, as they are called, by which it would be established that St. Salome came to Veroli and there ended her life and was first buried; nor is it any clearer at what time her body would afterwards have been brought there, nor whence, nor in what manner.

[23] what is to be thought of the finding of her body But what of the Finding, which Ughelli records thus Ibid., vol. I, as above: The sacred body of the same St. Mary of James, on the eighth day before the Kalends of June in the year 1209, in the twelfth year of the pontificate of Innocent III and the tenth of Oddo, bishop of Veroli, on the revelation both of her son the blessed apostle James and of the most holy Peter to a certain man of Veroli named Thomas, who prayed frequently in the church dedicated to the prince of the apostles himself, was found to the supreme joy of all in a certain cave outside the city, where it had once been hidden by those early faithful of Christ… The old monuments of the church of Veroli relate that very many miracles were wrought by the Lord at the finding of the sacred body of Mary of James, and that countless peoples flocked there from every side, and that there was so great an abundance of alms that out of them first a small church, then the most noble one that now exists, was built in her glory and honour. Baronius testifies Martyrology, on 25 May. that he received besides other manuscripts about these things from the church of Pistoia, agreeing with the foregoing. And these things indeed are narrated so there; from which very different things occur in the Legend cited above: namely, that blessed James, the brother of St. John the Evangelist, appeared to the bishop of Veroli and showed him the place where he would find hidden the bodies of his mother Mary Salome and of her sister Mary of James; and that afterwards, a splendour of great brightness flashing out and a fragrance of wonderful odour following, the bodies were found so white and snowy that no traces of corruption appeared; and the pall too, in which they had been wrapped, was found entire, as if new. They are said, therefore, to have been placed in a new shrine near the high altar and fittingly laid up, with this title: Here are two sisters, the maternal aunts of Christ, who, having ended their life, hold the stars in their mind. There health was restored to the sick, lepers were cleansed, the blind recovered sight, the deaf hearing, the lame their walk Acta SS., vol. I of April, p. 813.. In the manuscript of Pistoia, which on the witness of Baronius agrees with the manuscripts of Veroli, certain miracles are related in particular under this heading: Of St. Mary, mother of St. James and of John the Evangelist; which see, if you please, in Henschenius Ibid., p. 813 and following.

[24] is to be thought. I should think the fact itself cannot be called into doubt, in this sense, namely, that in the thirteenth century a body or two bodies were found, and it was believed that they were the remains of St. Salome, or also of her and of the other Mary. The manuscripts both of Veroli and of Pistoia praised by us above scarcely, nay not even scarcely, allow anything else to be established. From which it is further gathered that already for some or even many years, unless you prefer to say for some centuries, the conviction had prevailed at Veroli that St. Salome was buried there, whether alone or together with Mary of James. Indeed, this conviction will have to be called most ancient if the Relation to Innocent III be supposed authentic, which with Henschenius we praised from the collection of Gallonio at num. 16. For it is related there Ibid., p. 813.: They dug (in searching for the relics) almost to the height of a man; and a stone was found, under which again another stone was found, on which was written: MARY, MOTHER OF JOHN THE APOSTLE AND OF JAMES, IN THIS. There was found also a LITTLE PAPER, on which was the very same thing that was written on the stone. This little paper was sewn into the cloth in which the relics themselves were wrapped. The paper, the cloth and the bones, all clean, whole and sound, as if they had been newly laid there. Of these things mention will recur below. This I will add: from the manuscripts of Veroli and Pistoia, agreeing with one another and with the Relation, a single body would have been found, and that of St. Salome, the mother of the sons of Zebedee, namely of St. James the Greater and of John the Evangelist: for it does not seem that they (the manuscripts), if they are to be consistent with themselves, can reasonably be interpreted otherwise, of Mary of Cleophas, but rather of St. Salome. Next, the Legend is not of such weight with me as to make the finding of two bodies probable. I should set great store by the Relation, if its genuineness were established. Yet I should not wish to make myself its guarantor.

§ III. The tradition of the Camargue about the landing of St. Salome on the coast of Provence is set out.

The tradition of the Camargue The Rhône, dispersed into three mouths, forms the island of Camaria, which is commonly called la Camargue, the letter i being changed into gu Valesius, Notitia Galliarum, at the word Camaria.. That is, not far from Arles towards the South, the Rhône is divided into two unequal streams [Compare Faillon, Monuments inédits, vol. I, p. 1271, where there is a topographical map. Likewise Cassini, Carte générale de la France, vol. II, 19 K and 19 L]. A branch or arm goes out there (it is called the little or lesser Rhône), turning first to the west, and then by a more or less winding bend it tends to the north, until it pours itself back into the Mediterranean sea. Between this (the lesser Rhône) and the river itself, which again, where it comes nearer to its mouths, is split into the great or greater and old Rhône (Vieux Rhône), is comprised the island of the Camargue. It shows the appearance of a Delta or triangle, whose base, to the north, is the Mediterranean sea; the summit, to the South, not far from Arles; the eastern side is washed by the greater and old Rhône; the western by the little or lesser. The area in length, from South to North, or from apex to base, has fully ten French leagues, or forty miles (kilometres); and where it extends most widely, seven and a half, or thirty miles (kilometres), in breadth, from east to west. The region is very low-lying, abounding in marshes and pools (of which the chief is called Vaccarès); nevertheless, where it is less low, as towards the banks of the river, most fertile; the interior part has here and there excellent meadows, in which sheep, oxen and choice horses graze in flocks and in huge number [Ad. Guibert, Dictionnaire géographique et statistique, at the word Camargue. Paris, 1850.]. Most excellent (so Valesius in general Notitia Galliarum, as above) in fertility of soil, in the best salt-pans, in sea and river fishing, in hunting, in cyrogrylli (Du Cange See the Glossary writes chirogryllus, and it is a kind of rabbit or hedgehog), in fowling and in pastures. Further, at the mouth of the lesser Rhône is seen the little city or town of Trimarianum or of the Three Marys (Saintes-Maries) Guibert, Dictionnaire, under Maries., or also of St. Mary of the Sea (Notre-Dame de la Mer), numbering only five hundred and forty-three inhabitants Ibid.. And to this properly is referred the far most celebrated tradition, which we must here weigh more diligently. For there are said still today to be kept there the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Salome, from whom the little city borrowed its name.

[26] about the landing of Mary of James and Salome, What is related is this [Acta SS., 9 April, p. 815; Faillon, Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1266 and following.]: that the holy Matrons Mary of James and Salome, and their handmaid Sara (of her the Rev. M. Faillon is silent), migrated from Palestine together with SS. Martha, Mary Magdalene, etc., and landed in the Camargue, and that not far from the town of St. Mary of the Sea which is now seen there, and there built an altar of earth; and that this so pleased the Lord that forthwith in that place he brought forth a spring of sweet water, which is found nowhere else in the whole surrounding area; and that the holy Matrons, grateful for this, erected an oratory,

sacred to the Blessed Virgin Mary; and indeed that Mary of James and Salome (Henschenius adds Sara) remained in that place, while the others departed in different directions, having built beside the oratory a little cell, which they inhabited until their death; that the said oratory with the adjoining cell was the beginning of the church of St. Mary; finally that both, St. Mary of James and St. Salome, were buried beside the spring in the oratory where that altar of earth stood; that the burial-place lay hidden for a long time on account of the incursions of various barbarians, Goths, Vandals and Saracens, but was afterwards uncovered. It is added that the holy Matrons brought with them from Jerusalem the heads of three of the infant Innocents, and a fourth besides, which they assert to be the head of St. James the apostle, which were laid in the same tomb as SS. Mary and Salome. I should think these are the chief heads of the tradition of the Camargue, and that nothing of any moment has been passed over.

[27] most fiercely attacked Whoever is versed in hagiological matters knows how many and how great disputes have been occasioned by the cult in Gaul of SS. Mary Magdalene, Lazarus, Maximinus and Martha, with which the cult of St. Salome is closely joined; some most fiercely defending the coming of those Saints to Marseilles or to the mouths of the Rhône; others no less fiercely contending that all these things are invented and merely fictitious. This struggle, says Sollerius in the Acts of St. Mary Magdalene [Acta SS., 22 July, Preliminary Commentary, §16, p. 213 and following.], this battle, which occupied the Provençals for twenty whole years and more, the leader and coryphaeus of the detractors being Jean de Launoy. Who went out into the battle-line, and what were the fortunes and vicissitudes of the fights, may be seen in the same Sollerius Ibid., num. 146 and following; who also adds that out of so many contentious writings there can scarcely be hammered out those things which would explain the state of the question, which ought to be confined within its own fixed limits, so clearly that all readers could easily judge of it for themselves Ibid., num. 150.. Indeed he professes that he altogether does not admit any Acts whatever under the name of Marcella, Syntyche or anyone else, whether written in Hebrew or in Latin Ibid., num. 151.. Finally, after enumerating various published Acts Ibid., §15, num. 166. and very many manuscripts Ibid., num. 167., he concludes Ibid., num. 168.: Let me be permitted to assert that all those legends, of whatever sort, seem of so slight moment, and have long been so despised by the learned, that I have long considered it a matter of scruple and conscience to sprinkle our Acts with them. In their place he set the Sermon of the Venerable Odo, abbot of Fleury and Cluny, on blessed Mary Magdalene Ibid., p. 218 and following, written therefore in the tenth century Ibid., §15, num. 169., in which (sermon) there is not even a word about her coming into Gaul.

[28] and defended After this, more than one will wonder that it is most probably established for Sollerius Acta SS., ibid., §14, num. 152. that St. Mary Magdalene with her companions landed in Provence at whatever time it was; that she undoubtedly lived there, ended her life there, and was laid to rest there. And below Ibid., num. 154.: I undertake to defend this … namely, that the sacred remains of St. Mary Magdalene survive in Provence; and that by a twofold argument: the one negative Ibid., §13, num. 139 and following, namely, that they neither are nor ever were at Ephesus, nor at Constantinople, nor at Jerusalem, nor in Bethany; in the same place he deals with the tradition of Vézelay Compare Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 694 and following, of which more will be said below; the other, that at the finding of the sacred body of Magdalene in the year 1279 a little schedule was found which manifestly showed that it was the very one which in the year 716 (rather in the year 710, on the sixth day of December, as the Rev. M. Faillon proves from the true reading of the schedule Ibid., col. 695.) had been hidden for fear of the Saracens. These things our learned predecessor laboriously unfolds, abounding in words and repetitions; he twists himself in different directions, nowhere at all circumscribes his thesis clearly, or, where he seems to do so, in other places restricts, limits, tempers and modifies it; this one thing he states roundly and repeats, that he will by no means enter the ocean of those controversies Acta SS., as above, num. 152.. Whence the suspicion arose that Sollerius, from love of peace and fear of disturbances, abstained from a more severe examination Acta Bollandiana Vindicata, p. 352.. In the Acts of St. Martha in the following volume, on the 29th day of the same month of July: The same reasoning, he says Acta SS., 29 July, p. 4, num. 1. (as for the Magdalene), holds, the tradition of the Provençals prevailing as to the ancestral possession of those sacred bodies (of Martha and her companions). For Sollerius, therefore, the chief hinge of the matter turns on the aforesaid schedule, which it will be helpful to set down here Acta SS., vol. V of July, p. 215.: In the year of the Lord's Nativity 716, in the month of December (rather 710, on the 6th day of the month of December), by night, most secretly, in the reign of Odoin, most pious king of the Franks, in the time of the harrying of the perfidious nation of the Saracens, this body of the most dear and venerable Mary Magdalene was translated from her alabaster sepulchre into this marble one, for fear of the said perfidious nation of the Saracens, because it is safer here, the body of Sidonius having been removed. It is true that this schedule or cartallum, especially from the year and the name of the king set down in it (in the reign of Oidoin, most pious king of the Franks), gave occasion to many disputes, the Provençals themselves going off in different directions, so far that even Natalis Alexander departed very far from the true sense. Concerning this schedule, moreover, Pagi (who, in the judgement of Sollerius [Acta SS., vol. V of July, §14, nums. 156 and 157.], rightly and solidly vindicated it from the cavils of the critics) writes thus Annals of Baronius, in the Critica on the year 916.: That schedule still survives, but on account of its age it can no longer be read. But Bernard Gui, inquisitor of the holy faith and bishop of Lodève about the year 1320, in his Speculum historiale, reports it, and says: I who write these things have read this most ancient cartallum, and saw it kept there in the sacristy (namely of the town of Saint-Maximin) in testimony of the truth… Philippe Cabassole, bishop of Cavaillon and cardinal, also saw it… The same words are read in a parchment book kept in the convent of the Friars Preachers of Saint-Maximin, and in almost all the writers who in former ages have spoken of this finding. Odoin, king of the Franks, was causing trouble, some saying he was one man, others another. But, Pagi continues in the same place, that Odoin, king of the Franks, is no other than Eudo, duke of Aquitaine, who is found called sometimes Odo, sometimes Otto, Odoicus or Odoin.

[29] even by Sollerius, With this difficulty, by far the chief, removed, they attack the force of the argument from other directions. And first, because the aforesaid writers praised by Pagi and others are of lighter authority. Let those, says Tillemont Mémoires, vol. II, p. 481, etc. Paris, 1701, who know Ptolemy of Lucca and Bernard Gui, see whether they are fit witnesses for proving so unusual a fact. And Bishop Philippe wrote in the seventy-fifth year after the event. Muratori certainly passed a far different judgement [Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 771. Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scriptores, vol. XI, p. 747 and following.]: As regards the times nearer to Ptolemy, there will be no one, I think, with whom whatever he left written will not be of value; both because he was a writer of no common judgement, diligence and learning… and if in ancient history I do not set great store by him … that … is to be attributed to the condition of the times. And elsewhere Ibid., col. 772. Muratori, vol. III, part I. Prolegomena.: Among ecclesiastical writers illustrious is the name of Bernard Gui, and his fame so spread abroad in the books of the learned that, etc. Whence Baillet too Vies des Saints, 20 July, p. 316. would have the testimony of the three writers praised suspect on another head, namely that they belonged to the Dominican family, whose interest it was to defend the cartallum by which the contrary tradition of Vézelay would be destroyed. But truly I judge it wrong to brand three prelates (for they were bishops) with such a mark Compare Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 769, as though knowingly and willingly they had published fictions, solely in order to favour the order to which they had given their name.

[30] whose argument Secondly, Tillemont and Baillet object As above the diplomas of the Roman pontiffs, especially of Martin IV, which are thus briefly cited by Briet in Sollerius Acta SS., vol. V of July, p. 207.: This Martin then sent to Sens a rib of St. Mary Magdalene, which he had set aside when he was present in the year 1267 at her translation at Vézelay with St. Louis the king, to which he also bears witness, as also the diploma given in this year (1281), in which it is asserted that the body of St. Mary Magdalene rests at Vézelay, in accord with the diplomas of Lucius II, Urban III, Clement III and Innocent III, over which there was a huge contest between the monks of Vézelay and the Dominicans of Saint-Maximin. Whence Tillemont thus: I do not understand how, if the narrative of the people of Saint-Maximin stands intact, Martin IV, who was on the most friendly terms with the prince of Salerno, that is Charles II, king of Sicily, should assert on the 24th of September 1281 that at that time the body of St. Mary Magdalene rested at Vézelay; which Nicholas III had likewise declared two years before, in the year 1279 (that is, the same in which the Finding in Provence took place under the aforesaid prince of Salerno). Nor is it to be passed over that Martin IV is that very Simon, cardinal priest of the title of St. Cecilia, legate of the apostolic see in France, and that as such he was present together with St. Louis the king in the year 1267 at the solemn translation of the body of St. Mary Magdalene, found at Vézelay two years before, as follows from the instrument of the second finding, first brought to light by our Sollerius from manuscripts of the Vatican library Ibid., p. 209 and following. Sollerius does not call the trustworthiness of the instrument into doubt; but the origin of the tradition of Vézelay about the possession of the holy body, as it is rendered from the annals and other documents, he censures and rejects on account of the parachronisms and inconsistencies with which the narrative is sprinkled. Towards the end, however, he hesitates somewhat Ibid., p. 213.: But, you will say, would you dare to deny that the body of St. Mary Magdalene was ever at Vézelay? I will speak candidly: that it is by no means proved to me from all the ill-ordered things that have so far been produced; he understands, of course, those things that concern the first carrying-off of those relics, which some, and those the more ancient, among whom Baldric, say were brought to Vézelay from Jerusalem Ibid., p. 212, others from the city of Aix, as is read in the Chronicle of Sigebert of Gembloux, where it is added: Although some write that she (St. Magdalene) rests at Ephesus, having no covering over her Ibid., which last words St. Gregory

of Tours manifestly shows Greg. of Tours, book I, On the Glory of the Martyrs. Migne, vol. LXXI, col. 731.. Finally Sollerius adds As above: Why could not another holy woman have been venerated at Vézelay under the name of Magdalene… If that does not please, say that some part of the relics was received from Provence in some manner.

[31] the chief is weighed, Thirdly, to the cartallum of Saint-Maximin is opposed the cartallum of Vézelay. That these holy relics (so in the instrument Ibid., p. 209.) are the body of the most blessed Mary Magdalene is most manifestly declared from the testimony of the letters of the most illustrious King Charles of former times, found with the same relics. And the letters are of this kind: In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Charles by the grace of God King. It is the custom of royal highness that, assenting to the supplications of the just, we confirm with the subscription of our own hand and seal with the impression of our ring those things which are to be commended to the memory of posterity. Therefore let the experience and diligence of all the faithful know that in this sacred coffer is laid up the sacred body of the most blessed Mary Magdalene. The sign ✠ of Charles, most glorious king. Who that Charles is is not sufficiently established, perhaps Charles the Bald Compare Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 865, note a.. It is also to be well noted that in the letters no mention is made of the monastery: In this sacred coffer; and consequently, keeping strictly to the words as they lie, in order to determine the age of King Charles it is not necessary to attend to whether the monastery of Vézelay had then been founded or not. We have, therefore, on this side Royal Letters, on that side a Schedule, or if you prefer, on both sides a Cartallum, of equal (I will not oppose it) credibility. What then? Is each cartallum supposititious, or added or introduced after the first burial? But thus would collapse the principal, nay the only, argument of Sollerius's opinion. Is one or the other not sufficiently trustworthy? But which; that of Saint-Maximin, or that of Vézelay? An involved and intricate question: for whatever you have opposed to the one will presently be objected by others to the other, and with almost equal right. Finally, if, although there is a cartallum, the tradition of Vézelay can nevertheless be called fictitious, can not the other be so by the same reasoning? Something similar occurs above at num. 24, where we treat of the burial of St. Salome at Veroli: They dug almost to the height of a man; and a stone was found, under which again another stone was found, on which was written: Mary, mother of John the apostle and of James, in this. There was found also a LITTLE PAPER, on which was the very same thing that was written on the stone; which little paper was sewn into the cloth in which the relics themselves were wrapped. The paper, the cloth and the bones, all clean, whole and sound. For the rest, it is not infrequent for Schedules or Cartalla of this kind to be exhumed when older relics are raised or translated, without the learned deducing a decisive argument from them. To say candidly what I think, Sollerius seems to me to have attributed too much to the Cartallum Compare Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 819–867..

[32] and the question lately revived by the Rev. M. Faillon. And in very truth, if you except Provence, almost everywhere, by name at Paris, even after the publication of the Acts of St. Mary Magdalene, the opinion of Launoy prevailed, which the Rev. M. Faillon himself acknowledges Ibid., col. 341–348.. As doubtful (so the Gallia Christiana Vol. I, col. 299, edition of 1715.), not to say false, are now held among almost all the learned the things commonly said, that Lazarus, Mary Magdalene… landed on the coast of Provence. But in the later years of the eighteenth century, as also in our nineteenth century, I am not aware of anything worthy of special attention having been either undertaken or produced on this question, until in the year 1835 the said M. Faillon published his Essay on the apostolate of St. Lazarus and the other saints, tutelaries of Provence [Essai sur l'apostolat de S. Lazare et des autres saints tutélaires de Provence. Paris, 1835.], thus preluding a greater work. And it came about that, while this diligent man was seeking out and collecting from every side documents to confirm his opinion, he at last became master of a Life of St. Mary Magdalene, which he had heard was composed by Rabanus Maurus and lay unpublished at Oxford among the manuscripts of Magdalen College. Prosecuting his cause thereafter with new zeal, at last in the year 1848 he published from the Migne presses the Unpublished Monuments on the apostolate of St. Mary Magdalene in Provence, and of others, namely of SS. Lazarus, Maximinus, Martha, and the Marys of James and Salome. The work consists of two volumes in quarto, and those not a little dense. The aim of the first, after a very long treatise prefixed on the identity of Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany and the Sinner, is to establish by every kind of argument the tradition of the landing of those Saints, men and women, on the coast of Provence; in the second are contained the Monuments themselves, hitherto unpublished, sprinkled with very many annotations, certainly learned and sometimes very curious. It was natural from a writing of this kind, truly excellent, that the controversy should be revived, at least to some extent, which for a century and more had been almost laid to sleep; which certainly is by no means to be passed over by us, both because in it very many things concern St. Salome, and because others, in the mind of the author (the Rev. M. Faillon, priest of Saint-Sulpice), are most closely connected with her Acts. And in very truth, once the coming or apostolate of the others is proved, the landing of the other could not easily be denied. It is plain of itself that what the learned writer disputes about one or three Marys does not concern our purpose. For the rest, he altogether agrees with Sollerius Acta SS. on 22 July, p. 198 and following; also p. 218, num. 169.. Both lay down that she is one and the same. Nor is it our purpose either to recall to examination afresh the whole dispute so fiercely agitated in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; this one thing we shall inquire, what the arguments which the diligent and truly learned writer either put forward new or placed in a clearer light contribute to establishing the tradition of the Provençals. And they are chiefly four. The first is the Cartallum found in the year 1279; the second the Life of St. Mary Magdalene recently discovered at Oxford and attributed to Rabanus Maurus; the third, the confirmation of the foregoing from some documents hitherto not considered attentively enough; the fourth, finally, is taken from the sepulchres of St. Maximinus and St. Mary Magdalene and other monuments of that kind. Of these (passing over the Cartallum, of which enough has been said at length above at num. 28–31) let the following paragraph treat.

§ IV. Whether the Camargue tradition of the Provençals is proved from the Monuments lately published; especially from the Life of St. Mary Magdalene attributed to Rabanus Maurus, and from the sepulchres and other similar things.

From the Life of St. Mary Magdalene, To one who turns over the two volumes of the Rev. M. Faillon it strikes the eyes that this, as I said, was the author's opinion: that the more ancient monuments borrow no small force from the writing of Rabanus, so that things that before seemed to be rejected can now, nay must, be admitted after its publication. And this was the reason which induced the said editor first to present the Life translated into French, illustrated with a historico-critical commentary Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 131–346.; then to give the genuine text, namely the Latin, adorned with notes taken chiefly from Rabanus Ibid., col. 454–558., so that from the agreement of this book with those things that occur in other works of Rabanus it might appear that it truly flowed from the same source; which otherwise is expressly undertaken to be proved in the preliminary Critical Examination Ibid., col. 7–130.. The author vindicates the authenticity of Rabanus's book both from the controversies and state of the Gallican church in the ninth century, which are described in the Life, and from the style and the opinions proper to Rabanus, exhibited there exactly. For my part I by no means hesitate to agree fully with the opinion by which it is laid down that the book was published in the ninth century; for this is most plainly indicated by the errors which are incidentally attacked; and by the division of the provinces of Gaul, but especially by what is related of Bordeaux, "now" the metropolis of Second Aquitaine; for anciently Bordeaux belonged to the metropolis of Bourges. Since, therefore, the metropolitan right attributed to Bordeaux is treated as a recent fact, which the particle "now" signifies, it is sufficiently shown that the writer of the Life is ancient and can scarcely go beyond the ninth century. So my colleague in the preceding volume, in the Acts of St. Florentinus, bishop of Trier Acta SS., vol. VIII of October, p. 29.. Compare our Passed Over, p. 433.

[34] which is the work of Rabanus Maurus But whether Rabanus is to be held the author of that Life one may doubt; which has already been observed by us in the place cited. For it is added there: Further, some scruples keep me from fully admitting Rabanus as author… Ibid., p. 30.. The chief arise from comparing the Life with the Martyrology of Rabanus, in which such different things are related of the same Saints, for example Frontinus or Fronto, likewise Feronicus or Ferrutio, that one and the same author of both books could not easily be held Ibid.. I add that the scruples are very greatly increased by the following two announcements inscribed in the Martyrology and already recited elsewhere: 22 July, the Birthday of Mary Magdalene, without a Position or indication of place; and 19 January: At Jerusalem, the birthday of Martha and Mary, sisters of Lazarus. Who would believe that these were uttered by the same man who in the Life so expressly relates that Martha and Mary landed in Provence at the mouths of the Rhône, and died and were buried there, without the least correction being added or hinted in either the one writing or the other? Add that Rabanus Life, chap. 37. Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 538. gives as companions of the voyage of SS. Mary Magdalene and Martha the holy archprelate Maximinus and the blessed archdeacon Parmenas, the bishops too Trophimus and Eutropius, and also the other leaders of the Christian warfare; but in the Martyrology, although I have turned it over more than once and not idly, I have found no mention of four of these so expressly named.

[35] to be I know, as you have it already noted by the said colleague Vol. VIII of Oct., ibid., 57 and 58, that the martyrology is denied to Rabanus by some, few indeed in number; but wrongly, as Jacques Basnage teaches in his Observation on Rabanus and his writings In Canisius, Thesaurus monumentorum, vol. II, part II, p. 285.: It is, he says Ibid., p. 290., his (Rabanus's) genuine offspring, as is plain from his own Letter to Abbot Ratleic and the Verses to Grimald the Archchaplain, which he had placed at the front of the Martyrology. These are lacking in the edition of Canisius. They were read, however, in the manuscript codices of the monastery of St. Gall together with other writings which the most diligent Mabillon drew out from there in his Analecta. Sollerius Martyrology of Usuard, preface, p. XIX. and Binterim Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. V, part I, p. 63. agree with Basnage. But, as rightly observes

Basnage again In Canisius, as above, p. 292.: Very many things would have to be observed about the Martyrology, if one were permitted to weigh each, to open what is obscure, to reject what is spurious; such as the names of regions and cities insipidly noted; and, what is more serious, the same Saints are brought forward on different days, and sometimes on days not far apart, with a varied and not sufficiently concordant eulogy: thus on the seventh day before the Ides (the 9th) of March the Passion of the Forty holy Martyrs is related, almost as in the Roman Martyrology, but again on the fifth day before the Ides (the 11th) of the same month an announcement of the same is read which departs greatly from the former and is not consistent with itself; something similar is found of Mary, handmaid of Tertullus, on the sixteenth day before the Kalends of April (17 March) and on the third day before the Ides (the 13th) of May. See these things explained more at length in the Acts of St. Florentius of Trier Acta SS., vol. VIII of Oct., p. 30., where it is aptly noted that it can scarcely be believed that Rabanus was so incurious as to indulge himself in similar repetitions without reason. Since, therefore, on the one side no sufficiently solid reason is found for denying the Martyrology to Rabanus, and on the other side not a few things are found that call for correction, and even incoherences, it remains that with Basnage and others we admit that it was rather often adulterated In Canisius, as above, p. 292.. Shall we then say that it was adulterated in all those places in which it is opposed to the Life, and consequently that the discrepancy between the two books is only apparent? For my part I should not easily persuade myself of this.

[36] is not sufficiently established, But is it perhaps sufficiently clear from elsewhere that the Life is to be adjudged to Rabanus, and, if so, that it was not corrupted? On the testimony of the Rev. M. Faillon himself, the Oxford Manuscript, perhaps the only one existing today, is not an autograph, but a transcript of a more recent age, say of the time of Edward III, king of the English, who ascended the throne in the year 1327 Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 16.; and written indeed by an unskilled copyist ignorant of the Latin tongue, who therefore heaps blunders upon blunders, so that the reading is rendered very obscure, nay sometimes displays an absurd and ridiculous sense, for example where one has hundredth for thirtieth, from which it would follow that Christ was baptized in the hundredth year of his age Ibid., col. 39.. In this copy, therefore, the Life is found inscribed with Rabanus as its author; which certainly of itself, in the circumstances of things of this kind, is of no great authority. The often-mentioned Rev. M. Faillon observes besides Ibid., col. 14. that this Life is most probably the same as that which Sollerius mentions Acts of St. Mary Magdalene, 17 July, p. 217, num. 167. in these words: Two Lives (of St. Mary Magdalene) were copied… by Pierre-François Chifflet from a manuscript codex of Vauluisant and likewise from another of the Charterhouse of Dijon, the latter of which agrees fairly well with that which is exhibited in our great codex of Vaucelles; but in Chifflet's there follows another Life of SS. Mary, Lazarus and Martha, extended to fifty chapters (exactly as many are numbered in the Oxford one too), not a few of which Chifflet judged should be omitted, and they are without doubt the famous Marcellian Acts, which it is enough to have named. Here, then, the name of Rabanus was wanting. Did that name perhaps creep into the Oxford codex from the fact that many things were found not out of keeping with the writings of that author, nay even fairly consonant with them? I should not venture to decide. It is truly to be regretted that Chifflet's codex has escaped us: for light would shine forth from the comparison of the two. Meanwhile this remains beyond doubt, that the name of Rabanus was lacking, and that it entered the mind neither of Chifflet nor of Sollerius to attribute the Life to him. Indeed, both of them made no more of that writing than of the others on the same subject, which they held of scarcely any value.

[37] the tradition of the Provençals The proof drawn from this, therefore, totters: for once the name of Rabanus, a man beyond controversy learned and erudite, is suppressed, this Life of Mary Magdalene now has nothing serving history above the others, which are rejected by the critics almost with one voice. But if it were admitted as written by Rabanus, it would have to be considered which of the two books should be preferred to the other, which is earlier in age than which, which is to be corrected or emended from the other. The Rev. M. Faillon thinks Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 399. that the Life was written after Rabanus's alleged pilgrimage in the East, as will be seen, and consequently before the year 822 [See Mabillon, Historical Eulogy of Bl. Rabanus Maurus, Migne, Patrologia, vol. CVII, col. 17.]. Basnage fixes the Martyrology In Canisius, vol. II, part II, p. 292. to the year 855 (Rabanus died in 856), but by pure and simple conjecture, as he says, since we know nothing of the time when it was written. One may suppose, however, that in Basnage's mind it is not to be referred to the author's prime of life, since he himself ties it to the last years of his life. Fabricius Bibliotheca latina, vol. VI, p. 25. Padua, 1754., reviewing his (Rabanus's) writings in chronological order, puts the Martyrology almost in the last place, so that he is not far from Basnage's conjecture. Mabillon agrees: There died, he says Benedictine Annals, on the year 851, vol. II, p. 15. Lucca, 1739., about the same time the abbot Ratleic, to whom a little before his death Rabanus dedicated his Martyrology. Whether it is a question of the death of Ratleic or of Rabanus, who died in the year 856 Ibid., p. 48, matters little. Dom Ceillier Auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. XVIII, p. 760. Paris, 1752. expressly ascribes it to the year 845; which also seems far more likely to Sollerius Martyrology of Usuard, preface, p. 19., who disapproves of Papebroch's suspecting the year 830 [Acta SS., vol. II of March, preface to the Martyrologies of Bede, etc., p. VII, num. 11.]; the writers of the literary history of France agree with Sollerius Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. V, p. 174. Paris, 1740.. From these things, therefore, there now collapses the following argumentation of the editor of the Monuments: If, he says, there had been any controversy between the Easterners and the Westerners about the sepulchre of the blessed Mary Magdalene, Martha and Maximinus, it would not have escaped Rabanus, who most certainly conversed with the Greeks in his pilgrimages, and he would without doubt have mentioned it and attacked it; but since Rabanus nowhere relates that different opinions on this matter obtained either in his own or in past centuries, one must conclude that the Greeks, both in the ninth and in the preceding ages, agreed with the Latins Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 399.. But first, it is evident that one can reason in a similar manner, but to the opposite side, negatively, as they say, from the Martyrology; and consequently that it is wrongly argued from the silence of Rabanus in the Life about the diversity of opinions that the Greeks agreed with the Latins in the tradition of the Provençals. Secondly, of the Greek tradition that the body of St. Mary Magdalene was first laid up at Ephesus, it is so established that no one has seriously undertaken to call it into doubt. Of course, those who defend the side of the Provençals hold it as false or not sufficiently founded, or try to explain it in some way of their own; but that this tradition really exists, not a single person could rightly deny.

[38] is not solidly enough Moreover, since by the Easterners and the Greeks not only St. Mary Magdalene but also her brother Lazarus and her sister Martha, and others of the same fellowship, so to speak, or family, are celebrated as having died among them and been buried, and thereafter some at least translated to Constantinople or elsewhere, and this from the testimonies of St. Epiphanius Book XI, Heresy 66., of Modestus In Photius, col. 275, bishop of Jerusalem at the beginning of the seventh century, and in the eighth century from the Life of St. Willibald Third Benedictine century, part II., with whom St. Gregory of Tours expressly concurs, writing [Book I, On the Glory of the Martyrs, chap. 30. Migne's Patrologia, vol. LXXI, col. 751.]: In that city (of the Ephesians) Mary Magdalene rests, having no covering over her; and finally from the Menaea and from several Martyrologies; hence it comes that this tradition of the Eastern and Greek church is the chief argument they oppose to the Provençals. Thirdly, finally, would it not rather have to be said, on the Rev. M. Faillon's view, that what is related in the Life about the landing in Provence is fictitious, since it is manifestly opposed to the Martyrology of the same Rabanus, where Mary Magdalene is announced without a position, while the birthday of Martha is celebrated at Jerusalem? Therefore, if the Life was written before the Martyrology, then Rabanus, better informed, changed his opinion; if after it, we fall into the last years of the author, and consequently he will have to be reckoned to have uttered contradictory things, and that without any warning to the reader; whence his whole authority in a historical question would collapse. I should prefer to deny the Life to him rather than brand so great a man with such a mark of incoherence. Nor should I think there will be anyone who would readily admit that the Martyrology was so corrupted that he would pronounce whatever pertains to the apostolate either struck out or adulterated. Finally, Rabanus's pilgrimage into the East, which rested on the sole authority of Mabillon, is fictitious. He, namely, had written in the Historical Eulogy of Bl. Rabanus Migne, Patrologia, vol. CVII, col. 17.: In that storm of Ratgar (which came to an end in the year 817 Ibid.) I think it happened that Rabanus, compelled to give way, went off to the holy places: which pilgrimage, hitherto unknown, he himself mentions in the manuscript commentaries on the book of Joshua, chap. 11, verse 8, where he treats of Sidon. "I indeed," he says, "though I have several times stayed in the regions of Sidon, never found that there are two Sidons, one great and the other small, as regards the earthly place." For the journey cannot be referred to the time when his abbatial government was interrupted; since he dedicated these commentaries to Frederick, bishop of Utrecht, who was slain in the year 834, eight years before Rabanus resigned the government. And so far Mabillon there. But the learned man candidly confessed in the Annals that he had slipped: It once seemed to me, he says Benedictine Annals, on the year 815, vol. II, p. 388., that Rabanus went abroad to the holy places in that storm (of Ratgar), which I thought was to be gathered from his commentary on Joshua, not yet published. But I afterwards discovered that this passage was taken from Origen. Henschenius gave the Acts of Bl. Rabanus On the 4th of February, pp. 500–538. in the year 1658, before Mabillon's Eulogy came out. No mention of a pilgrimage is made in them.

[39] proved, Besides, granting without conceding that the Life is the offspring of Rabanus, it would nevertheless not go back beyond the ninth century, and consequently would be too far distant from the event to furnish by itself a sufficiently fit testimony. It would declare only that in that or even in the preceding century an opinion of this kind more or less obtained. Nor would I deny this. It is true indeed that the author, whether Rabanus or another, professes in the Prologue Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 456.: That he considers it worth while that the things which after the Saviour's ascension, concerning his friends (namely Mary,

Lazarus, etc.) were done, which our fathers handed down to us and left also in their writings, should be discussed in a truthful style; but what are those writings? The Rev. M. Faillon says that they are first the primitive Life of St. Mary Magdalene, which he himself found, and which he chose to publish quite faithfully from three codices written in the tenth century Ibid., vol. I, col. 405; vol. II, col. 440., which he also thinks is the most ancient of all Ibid., vol. I, col. 411., and is a fragment of the Acts of St. Maximinus, and was composed in the fifth or sixth century Ibid., col. 413.; it is quite short, and almost the whole of it relates to the landing, death and burial of SS. Magdalene and Maximinus (for of these two alone mention is made there) in Provence. Then there comes another anonymous Life of the same Saint Ibid., vol. II, col. 437–446., in itself indeed not lengthy, but compared with the former not so slight. That Rabanus and Odo of Cluny drew from this the Rev. M. Faillon supposes Ibid., col. 435. rather than proves; indeed he declares fairly openly Ibid., col. 437. that there are not lacking those who think it was excerpted from them. What then? Those two manuscripts are certainly of the number of those which Sollerius himself, though favourable to the apostolate, judged unworthy to be sprinkled into our work. Then in each of them only Mary Magdalene and Maximinus are treated, but in the Life attributed to Rabanus several; so that if this is held authentic and worthy of credit in every part, one must conclude in favour not only of the apostolate of those two, but of the others too. Since, therefore, it is not established whether Rabanus is the author of the aforesaid book, and moreover it is far removed from the event it narrates, nor besides does it rest on more ancient documents, at least sufficiently proved, the conclusion does not seem legitimate to me, as though the landing of those Saints in Provence were now beyond all doubt, and as though so great a force had accrued to proofs which formerly and lately were rejected by very many, that the dispute could be declared settled; nay rather, in my opinion, it still hangs before the judge.

[33] nor even from the Acts of St. Alexander of Brescia, Relying on his Oxford manuscript, he thinks his conclusions are also confirmed both from the Acts of St. Alexander of Brescia and from the more ancient martyrologies. And as regards the first, there is indeed read in the aforesaid Acts [Acta SS., vol. V of Aug., p. 777. On the 26th. Likewise Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 523; vol. II, col. 581.]: Alexander, born of a noble family at Brescia … as a youth came to Marseilles, to blessed Lazarus, bishop of that city. Having set out thence to Aix, to blessed Maximinus the bishop, he was confirmed by him in the faith, etc. A testimony certainly most clear, but is it also authentic? The Rev. M. Faillon affirms it As above, vol. I, col. 522–532, praising the diligence and erudition of Ferrari, the first editor of those Acts, from whom they passed into the Bollandist volumes; nor can they be said to have been fabricated in favour of the Provençals, since they were written by an outsider; they agree besides with contemporary history, with the chronology of Marseilles and of Aix; consequently those Acts furnish an irrefragable argument for the apostolate of SS. Lazarus and Maximinus; so indeed he. But very differently our Pinius Acta SS., as above: The following Acts (of St. Alexander), since we cannot certainly approve or disapprove them from elsewhere for lack of documents, we give on the credit of Ferrari, even though some things are mingled with them which are not without great difficulties. He then adds: At the 17th day of December the difficulties about the time of his (Lazarus's) see can be weighed, and he notes that the Gallia Christiana left the matter undecided; as regards St. Maximinus, he is very much exposed to chronological tangles, as may be seen in our work on the 8th of June, vol. II, p. 53, where the first, fourth or sixth century is indicated. Nor were the said editors of the Gallia Christiana more clear-sighted in this matter. So Pinius. For the rest, Ferrari indicates his sources thus: From the manuscript monuments of the church of Brescia Catalogue of the Saints of Italy, 26 Aug., p. 544.. And elsewhere General Catalogue of the Saints, on the same day, p. 377. Venice, 1625.: From the tablets and the ancient martyrology of the church of Brescia. There exists at Brescia a distinguished church dedicated to this martyr, possessed by the Servite friars, in which the Acts and passion of the same martyr are read painted on the wall. Compare num. 22 of this commentary, where we said that from a general indication of sources of this kind nothing at all certain can be concluded.

[34] and from the more ancient martyrologies, Nor do I see any more clearly how anything in favour of the same tradition can be hammered out of the Little Roman, of Ado, of Usuard Compare Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 635–680.. The Little Roman, from Rosweyde's edition, records on 22 July The Old Roman and the Martyrology of Ado. Antwerp, from the Plantin press, 1613.: Of St. Mary Magdalene; on 17 October: Of Martha, sister of Lazarus; on 17 December: Of Lazarus, whom Christ raised, and of Martha his sister, in Bethany. Who would infer from these that they died in Narbonese Gaul? Fr. Natalis Alexander, objecting to himself [Ecclesiastical History, first century, dissertation XVII, vol. III, p. 184. Venice, 1778.] the silence of the ancient martyrologists, especially of Ado of Vienne, as one who was a neighbour of Provence, answers that arguments of this kind are futile because negative; that Bede and Usuard flourished in regions far removed from Provence, and consequently did not write of things which were then known almost solely by the tradition of the churches of Provence; and that Ado passed over in silence even the domestic Saints of his own church (of Vienne). Be it so. Yet it is one thing to have passed over in silence, another to have set down this announcement: On the sixteenth day before the Kalends of January (17 December), of blessed Lazarus, whom the Lord Jesus is read in the Gospel to have raised from the dead; likewise of blessed Martha his sister, whose venerable memory a church built not far from Bethany (where their house was close by) preserves In Rosweyde, as above, p. 199.. Will it enter anyone's mind, reading this, that Ado in the ninth century (he sat at Vienne from the year of Christ 859 to the year 874 [Fabricius, Bibliotheca mediae et infimae latinitatis, vol. I, p. 15. Padua, 1754.]) had the tradition of the neighbouring province clearly known to him, much less approved? I for my part should not easily persuade myself of this. What of the fact that in the Little Book on the festivals of the holy Apostles and of the others who were disciples or close followers and successors of the apostles themselves, which Rosweyde also published As above, pp. 31–45. and which is a genuine work of the same Ado, the author is equally silent about the tradition of the Provençals, where nevertheless he is accustomed to give fuller announcements? On the eleventh day before the Kalends of August (22 July): The birthday of St. Mary Magdalene, out of whom, as the Gospel relates, the Lord cast seven devils. Who also, among other signal gifts, merited to be the first to see Christ rising from the dead. Let this be compared with what is read in the same little book a little above Ibid., p. 39.: On the fourth day before the Kalends of January (29 December): The birthday of St. Trophimus, of whom the Apostle writes to Timothy: "But Trophimus I left sick at Miletus." He, ordained bishop at Rome by the apostles, was the first to be sent to Arles, a city of Gaul, to preach the Gospel of Christ. From whose source, as blessed Pope Zosimus writes, all the Gauls received the streams of the faith: who rested in peace in the same city. Yet I should not wish what has been said to be taken as though I thought there was no tradition in the ninth century about the landing of SS. Lazarus, Magdalene, etc., or as though I attached too much weight to the negative argument drawn from Ado's writings; this alone I intend to prove, that the holy martyrologist of Vienne, so far from favouring the aforesaid tradition, rather stands in its way; and I should prefer to say that he was ignorant of it rather than that, knowing and approving it, he chose to pass it over in silence. What, finally, of the fact that Rabanus himself, as we have seen elsewhere, mentions St. Mary Magdalene in his Martyrology without a position, and celebrates at Jerusalem the birthday of Martha and Mary, sisters of Lazarus? Nor is it to be passed over that Rabanus was contemporary with Ado, since the latter survived him by only about twenty years.

[35] nor indeed from the two There remains another kind of argument, which the often-praised writer explains and develops at length, drawn namely from sepulchres and other ancient monuments of this kind Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 426–596.. He says that in the crypt called after St. Maximinus there are to be seen still today various sepulchres or sarcophagi, by name those of SS. Mary Magdalene and Maximinus. And these two indeed are expressly mentioned in the ancient Life, which the Rev. M. Faillon holds was written in the fifth or at the very latest the sixth century. She (St. Magdalene) passed away on the eleventh day before the Kalends of August, and the blessed prelate Maximinus, taking up her most holy body, embalmed with divers spices, placed it in an honourable mausoleum, building over the blessed limbs a basilica of wonderful architecture. And her sepulchre of white marble is shown, etc. So, namely, in the ancient Life Ibid., vol. II, col. 435.. And again a little lower Ibid., col. 436.: Finally, when the time drew near at which blessed Maximinus … knew he was to receive the reward of his labours from the merciful judge, he ordered a place for his burial to be prepared within the aforesaid basilica, and his sarcophagus to be placed beside that of blessed Mary Magdalene. In which, after his holy passing, he was honourably laid by the faithful … which place was afterwards held in such great veneration, etc. One might ask what is meant by a basilica of wonderful architecture built by blessed Maximinus? For would anyone easily believe that in that age buildings of this kind could have been erected by Christians? It would be another matter after the times of Constantine the Great. Nevertheless the Rev. M. Faillon sets the greatest store by this testimony, from which, in his opinion, it follows that in the fifth century it was established, as a most notorious matter, that two sarcophagi were preserved there; which tradition is thereafter confirmed by the monuments of each and every century Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 432 and following. But that ancient Life is of doubtful credit at least, and indeed so is the writing of Rabanus itself. Compare num. 27–30. The age of those sepulchres, therefore, must be proved from elsewhere, and so from their own marks or characters. And in very truth, in the middle of the face of the sepulchre of St. Maximinus two figures are discerned, the one of Christ the Saviour, about which there seems no room for doubt Ibid., col. 443.: the other the Rev. M. Faillon asserts to be blessed Maximinus, and that it cannot be referred to anyone else Ibid., col. 445.. Be it so. But from the fact that the holy Prelate is shown without stole, pallium or pastoral staff; without tonsure or mitre; without, finally, any insignia of priesthood, the learned man concludes that the sarcophagus

is older than the fourth century, or than Constantine the Great: because, as he says, it is certain that in the fourth century prelates, at least within the precincts of churches, wore some ornament as an indication of their dignity, which he denies obtained in the first three centuries Ibid., col. 450 and following. For, he adds, it is not permissible to suppose that the faithful, if they had set it up in the fourth or fifth century, would have shown the holy Bishop without any ornament, with the aim of conforming to the custom of the preceding centuries. Why not? There is nothing to oppose it, until the contrary assertion is proved. He then returns to the testimony sought from the ancient Life, and adds: If the sarcophagus had been made in the fourth or fifth century, who would have dared to commit to writing, much less have tried to persuade his contemporaries, that a work so recent, whose craftsmen it would still have been possible to point to with the finger, belonged to the apostolic age? It is necessary, therefore, to infer that the sarcophagus is most ancient, and most certainly older than the fourth century Ibid., col. 451.. This I think is the sum of the whole argumentation. I omit the confirmation drawn from the Life, since that itself is of a mark not sufficiently proved.

[36] of St. Maximinus As regards the ornaments not used by bishops in the first three centuries of the Church, I wonder that the author adduces Baronius as a witness on this matter, and cites these words of his: It is certain that it came down from the institution, nay and the usage, of the apostles … that the bishops of the Christian church … used a precious mitre in the sacred rites Ibid., col. 550 and 551, note b.. Certainly Bingham, a minister of the Anglican church, writes Origines, or ecclesiastical antiquities, vol. V, p. 247. Halle, 1727.: The writers of the Roman church, Baronius, Saussay and Bona, who will have every ceremony to be apostolic, keep saying that the apostles themselves used a peculiar habit in all the acts of their ministry. Yet he does not altogether reject their opinion, but calls it an uncertain tradition Ibid., p. 248.. But Cardinal Bona: More boldly, he says On Liturgical Matters, book I, chap. 5, num. 11. Works, p. 342. Antwerp, 1677., than was fitting, Niccolò Alemanni … denies the use of sacred vestments not only to the apostles but also to apostolic men; and says that this is to be hissed off as ridiculous and is disapproved by all learned men. Altogether too great a boldness. For no one will deny that Waldensis, Démochares, Baronius, Stapleton, Saussay and other assertors of the contrary opinion were learned men. Nay more, to the truly learned man Anton Joseph Binterim it is most likely Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. IV, part I, p. 188 and following that the apostles and the first bishops and presbyters used a peculiar kind of dress in celebrating the sacred mysteries. Giovanni Marangoni agrees: although, he says [Delle cose gentilesche e profane trasportate ad uso e adornamento delle chiese, p. 136. Rome, 1744.], it is certainly established from the ecclesiastical history of the first three centuries that the holy Apostles prescribed a distinct kind of vesture in celebrating the divine offices; yet what its particular form was is nowhere determined specifically, etc. And he adds from the Acts of St. Cyprian, bishop and martyr: when he had stripped himself of his Dalmatic and handed it to the deacons, he stood in his linen and began to await the executioner. Indeed Johann Augusti, although he is of the reformed religion, candidly confesses that the matter is made out by the arguments of Cardinal Bona. For thus he writes in his learned work on ecclesiastical Antiquities [Denkwürdigkeiten aus der christlichen Archäologie, vol. VIII, p. 208. Leipzig, 1826.]: Bona rightly and deservedly holds that from the time when the Supper, that is the Eucharist, was offered as a sacrifice, it flows both from the very nature of the thing and from the analogy with the sacred ministers of the Jews and of the heathen, that in celebrating the sacrifice the priests used a vesture distinct from the common and everyday one. Which the same writer says is manifestly established Ibid., p. 207. from the clear testimonies of Polycrates and of SS. Jerome and Epiphanius; he also adduces Tertullian as a witness, and refutes Daillé, who he says was led by the preconceived opinion of his confession when he strove to drag Tertullian's words into another sense Ibid., p. 212.. It is not for this place to treat more fully the argument about the ornament used in offering sacrifice in the first centuries. What has been said suffices for the learned reader to judge what is to be thought on this matter.

[37] with the effigy, What of the fact that to some, considering more attentively the effigy of St. Maximinus (if indeed it is his) as it is presented in the Monuments Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 441., the holy Bishop may perhaps seem to wear an ornament not much unlike certain ancient planetae or chasubles? Yet I should not wish to insist on this remark. A stronger reason for doubting, to me, is whether the effigy of St. Maximinus is truly shown here. Of course, if it were established, as the Rev. M. Faillon thinks, that the sarcophagus belongs to the age of the aforesaid holy Prelate, I should not see why anyone would refer the figure to another holy pontiff; but it is far from being possible to claim such antiquity for the monument. Hear the excellent man Giovanni Battista de Rossi, whose equal in skill in Christian archaeology you would scarcely find [On the Christian Monuments displaying the ΙΧΘΥΝ. See Spicilegium Solesmense, vol. III, p. 557.]: Sarcophagi distinguished by reliefs (sculptures) of Christian subject are scarcely any of them earlier than the fourth century; the few to which this prerogative of antiquity truly belongs delight solely in the ornament of shepherds, sheep and other images of about that kind. And yet among the great number of sarcophagi which all the most skilled agree were carved in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries, and which display the histories and symbols of both covenants, I do not remember to have yet seen any, etc. Below, after I have spoken of the sepulchre of St. Magdalene, I shall inquire into the age of the sarcophagus of St. Maximinus. But from what has been disputed so far, I should think it demonstrated that the assertion of the Rev. M. Faillon wavers, both because the ancient Life is of doubtful credit, and because the learned not only vary but rather agree today about the ornament used in sacrificing in the first centuries, and because certainly the sarcophagus of the holy prelate is not older than the fourth century.

[38] and of St. Mary Magdalene In a similar manner he reasons about the sepulchre of St. Mary Magdalene, which according to some is of white marble, according to others of alabaster Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 456., but greatly mutilated by the indiscreet zeal of pilgrims Ibid., col. 457 and 458.; yet several carved figures are still discerned, which the Rev. M. Faillon presents and explains. I doubt whether anyone would readily admit what he there relates of Christ in the Elysian fields, as a symbol of his glorification after the resurrection Ibid., col. 458–470.. For my part I do not see how an Elysium can be detected in a beardless man sitting under an arch or portico and conversing with two soldiers standing before him See the plate, ibid., col. 465., without some other circumstance being added by which the thing would be signified more distinctly. For the rest, the said writer admits that no one else before him proposed any such thing Ibid., col. 465–469.. He himself was led to this idea by a certain similar emblem which he found in Dom Bernard de Montfaucon Ibid., col. 465 and 466.. He concludes, therefore Ibid., col. 473 and 475., that the aforesaid figures were carved on the sarcophagus before the times of Constantine the Great, being moved chiefly by the heathen symbol in which Christ is shown in Elysium, which indeed, as he says, sufficiently indicates that at the time when this monument was made the heathen still held dominion. What can be built upon such a conjecture (it cannot be called anything else) I for my part do not see. First of all it would have to be proved, of course, what is now only set down by conjecture; then it would have to be demonstrated that it follows legitimately from that heathen emblem placed there that the heathen were then masters of affairs. But the said writer achieves neither. Indeed, as he himself admits, on the other side of the same sarcophagus is seen a cross, adorned with jewels, nay perhaps also having the monogram placed on it , and besides there appear fairly clear traces of a soldier kneeling before it Ibid., col. 473.. That these should not be referred to an age later than Constantine he busies himself to guard against in many words; yet demonstrating nothing else except that it is not absolutely impossible that figures of this kind were cut on sepulchres before peace had been given to the Church.

[39] the reliefs Let us hear again J. B. de Rossi: One thing, however, he says Spicilegium Solesmense, as above, pp. 552 and 553., to confess the truth, I do not recognize as an argument of so ancient a time in … these epitaphs, namely what they call the monogram of Christ . For whatever very many men, and those most learned, have written on this matter, I certainly have not yet been able to find any Christian monument which has proved itself to me with even moderate credibility, and which has demonstrated that the monogram was cut or painted by Christians before Constantine. Yet I am not one who thinks that before that time a monogram of this kind either had not yet been devised by Christians, or that it was forbidden by law or custom that it should be cut even once on their monuments: wherefore I certainly cannot deny that some monuments ennobled with this sign of Christ were made before the year 312, in which Constantine won the victory under the leading and auspices of that sign, and if somewhat more certain arguments were available I should myself affirm it of my own accord. Meanwhile, while I lack these arguments and the question has to be settled by conjectures, I lay down this alone, which the monuments themselves have plainly taught me: that the use of that monogram in the second and at the beginning of the third century of the Church was either none at all or certainly most rare; but at the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth easily some, perhaps even not infrequent, and at last most widespread and altogether customary from the year of Constantine's victory, 312. Therefore I would not dare to deny that those eleven inscriptions, on whose account I have pointed these things out, may be older than the fourth century itself, or contemporary with the beginnings of that century; but my doubt will only have this effect, that those who wish to be most cautious will not presume meanwhile to raise their age beyond the year 312. Thus far de Rossi, no less wisely than learnedly. From which it would follow that the sepulchre of St. Mary Magdalene is not, in de Rossi's mind, to be numbered among the monuments of the apostolic age. Add also what we recited in the preceding number about the reliefs from the same author. This besides is not a little opposed to the opinion of the Rev. M. Faillon, that of seven subjects in all carved on the sarcophagus and still appearing more or less clearly, five manifestly concern the passion of Christ; another shows the Cross, as above; finally the seventh the Elysian fields, or rather, if I were pleased to conjecture anything, I should say Christ coming forth from the sepulchre. For in Montfaucon's emblem it is not a man, as in ours, but a woman who sits; and not under an arch but under hangings; nor does she only stretch out her hand, but joins it to the hand of a man standing close by: for there are not two soldiers shown, as in the sepulchre of St. Mary Magdalene,

but only one; the other is a man of excellent form and appearance, elegantly clad in a light tunic. So that those two reliefs are not a little unlike. Certainly the arch to me is most probably a sepulchre; and this all the more because the six other reliefs adorning the sarcophagus of the Magdalene are referred, with the Rev. M. Faillon himself agreeing, to the passion of Christ the Lord; whence it is quite natural to conclude that the seventh concerns his resurrection. For the rest, if from one of them, and that a very obscure one, he thinks he can legitimately conclude that the heathen were then dominant, why should not I much more legitimately infer the contrary from six others so manifest? What is adduced in confirmation from the ancient Life I pass over. See above n. 30

[40] the sarcophagi It is therefore certain to me that the sarcophagi of St. Maximinus and St. Mary Magdalene are not to be referred to an age earlier than Constantine. In what century, then, shall we say they were erected? On the authority of Giovanni Battista de Rossi (compare above n. 37), all the most skilled in these matters agree that monuments displaying in reliefs the histories and symbols of both covenants were made in great number in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries. Nothing therefore prevents us from admitting that the aforesaid sarcophagi may belong to those times; but to which century are they to be ascribed: the fourth, the fifth or the sixth? Nay, is it impossible that something similar was done in one or another of the following centuries, so that we now come nearer to the age of Rabanus, or the ninth century? Someone too might perhaps ask whether those sarcophagi were really erected in the first place for SS. Maximinus and Magdalene, and this all the more because those writers must be abandoned who thought that both were prepared by St. Maximinus himself. There are certainly not lacking examples by which it is proved that the bodies of Saints, especially of those who enjoyed great veneration in particular churches, were laid in sepulchres which had from the beginning been destined to keep the bones or the sacred relics of another. Certainly that the body of the blessed Magdalene was translated in the eighth century, for fear of the Saracens, by the Cassianite monks from its own sarcophagus into another is proved from the celebrated cartallum or schedule found in the year 1279. Compare what was said at num. 28. I should think, therefore, that no certain age can so far be given to either monument. A man skilled in architecture and archaeology, having examined the sepulchres of Junius Bassus, from the Vatican cemetery Aringhi, Roma subterranea, book II, chap. 10, p. 177, and of St. Mary Magdalene, as they are shown in the work of the Rev. M. Faillon Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 459–462, judged that both are of the same age, and not later than the fifth century. It would truly be desirable that a clearer light should arise, which indeed one may hope for especially from the excellent labours of the most diligent and most learned J. B. de Rossi; meanwhile I gladly confess that the said editor of the Monuments has both opened and paved the way for new investigations into the tradition of the Provençals, and on this account not a single person would deny that he has deserved excellently.

[41] and other similar things, It would be superfluous to relate at more length what the often-mentioned writer relates of the cave of the Baume or holy Baume (la Sainte-Baume) Ibid., col. 477–500., of the oratory of St. Saviour at Aix Ibid., col. 501–520., of the Sepulchre of St. Lazarus Ibid., col. 533–552., of his Prison at Marseilles Ibid., col. 553–572, etc. For there is nothing at all in all these which is of greater weight for proof than what is disputed about the Sarcophagi of SS. Magdalene and Maximinus. Let it suffice to have noted in general that, by the common opinion of the learned, it is very difficult to assign a certain age to monuments of antiquity from their own characters, when external documents, and those authentic, sought from annals and manuscript codices, are lacking. There is scarcely a single crypt, sepulchre or ancient oratory of this kind about which an agreeing judgement of different persons is found; almost everywhere they go off in different directions, so that for the most part they differ from one another not by one or two but by several centuries. Compare what is to be said on this day about the Crypt of St. Gervase in the Acts of St. Mellonus, bishop of Rouen. Besides, where the age of some sepulchre is held certain, it is not rarely disputed whether it belonged from the origin to him to whom after some centuries it is commonly read as ascribed.

[42] therefore the Camargue tradition is not made certain from that of Aix. To sum up in a few words a disputation perhaps longer than was right: I think that from the sarcophagi and other monuments of that kind the very great antiquity of the cult is established and confirmed; so too, from the recently published Life, even if it be denied to Rabanus, it is duly proved that the tradition of the apostolate flourished in the ninth century, and consequently that the assertions of Launoy on this side are altogether to be abandoned. But as regards the actual stay of the Saints in Provence while they were alive, it does not seem to me that from the work, certainly excellent and learned, of the Rev. M. Faillon there has shone forth such a light that the disagreements of writers vanish, the greatest part of whom hold the landing to be fictitious, as someone noted about the fiftieth year of the past century: All the eminent critics of our age, he says [Acta Bollandiana vindicata, Papebroch's Answer to the Exhibition of errors, p. 352, note 1.], count this landing of Mary Magdalene at Marseilles among fables, so that I wonder (as we have noted elsewhere) that our Sollerius in vol. V of July undertook its patronage. Elsewhere he had said Ibid., pp. 271 and 272, note 1.: Love … of peace and fear of disturbances seems to have deterred the good old man (Sollerius) from a severer examination … in the Acts of St. Mary Magdalene. Be it that Sollerius was led by love of peace; but he was not so old, since he was not yet sixty; for he was born in the year 1669, and vol. V of July (where the Acts of St. Mary Magdalene are) was published in the year 1727. For the rest, Sollerius rejects any Lives whatever of that Saint, whether manuscript or printed; he relies almost on a single argument, which is taken from the Schedule found in the year 1279 at the Finding of the sacred body of the Magdalene; but certainly, after the publication of the Monuments, he would have thought his opinion was to be confirmed, and had been confirmed, by other arguments not to be despised. Compare above num. 27 and 28, where we explained Sollerius's conclusions more at length.

§ V. The arguments are weighed by which they would have the tradition of the Coming of St. Salome into the Camargue proved. Of her cult there, and of her Relics.

Certain difficulties having been weighed, According to the often-praised writer Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1268., the Camargue tradition rests on the same monuments of the churches of Provence as the landing of St. Magdalene; which assumption, in his opinion, being evident in itself, needs no proof. Consequently, since from what has been said the landing totters, the tradition too totters on this side. The Rev. M. Faillon then adds that this tradition is opposed to no certain and proved documents of history. And here he objects two things to himself: the one from an antiquary of Arles, by name Pierre Véran, who wrote that the coast of the Camargue where the village of St. Mary of the Sea is now seen was under water at the time when St. Salome is asserted to have landed there; and this indeed, in my opinion, is sufficiently refuted Ibid., col. 1268–1272: the other is taken from the Roman Martyrology, revised by the care of Baronius, where on 25 May the Translation of St. Mary of James is celebrated at Veroli, and on 22 October St. Mary Salome at Jerusalem. The answer is Ibid., col. 1273 and following: since the village of St. Mary is situated on the extreme coast of the Camargue, it is no wonder that Baronius did not know that St. Salome was venerated there; that the learned cardinal too professes himself liable to errors: We are all men, he says; nor do we attribute so much to ourselves as to think we have nowhere stumbled; that the Little Roman omits the place where St. Salome is venerated, and that if Baronius announces her at Jerusalem, this arose from the fact that, not knowing where she had died, he set down the city in which she had lived; finally that the Mary of James commemorated at Veroli is different from her who is venerated in Provence. Compare above num. 21. Finally the Rev. M. Faillon Ibid., col. 1275–1277 exposes as a silly fabulist, and that quite rightly, John of Venette (see num. 22), who narrates that the bodies of SS. Salome and Mary of James were translated from Veroli into the Camargue in the year 1357. And these are the things by which he thinks it demonstrated that the Camargue tradition is not opposed to well-proved historical facts. But would not the Greeks and the people of Veroli, in a similar manner and with equal right, prove that their traditions too are not opposed to the same? Where, therefore, the traditions of churches contradict one another, the hinge turns on the arguments which each adduces, so that from them it may be judged which tradition is to be preferred to the others, or whether there is one at all which is proved firmer than the rest.

[44] two testimonies are brought forward With these things premised, the learned man comes to the arguments by which he thinks the Camargue tradition is specially confirmed. In the first place comes the testimony of Gervase of Tilbury Ibid., col. 1277 and following. He, as Fabricius has it Bibliotheca latina, vol. III, p. 55, dear to Otto IV, emperor from the year 1202 to 1218 … and advanced to the dignity of Marshal, dedicated to him the "Otia imperialia," a historico-geographical and physical work taken back from the origin of things. And Gervase writes that the church of St. Mary of the Sea is the first of all the churches on this side of the sea… founded by the disciples driven out of Judaea and sent off through the sea in a boat without oars, Maximinus of Aix, Lazarus, etc. And it is added: Under the altar of this basilica, kneaded by them of earth… antiquity holds with full authority… that the two Marys are buried Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1267.. Everyone sees that Gervase's age stands in the way of his being held a fit witness. The Rev. M. Faillon rightly concludes that from this the aforesaid fiction of John of Venette collapses; but nothing else may be inferred. Nor is the confirmation of Gervase's testimony of any more value, sought from the Rationale of the divine offices of William Durand, bishop of Mende in Aquitanian Gaul from the year 1286 to 1296 Fabricius, Bibliotheca latina, vol. II, p. 68, who says Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1268.: In the county of Provence, in the castle of St. Mary of the Sea, there is an altar of earth which Mary Magdalene and Martha, and Mary of James and Mary Salome made there. Nevertheless the Rev. M. Faillon holds that altar as a monument of the highest antiquity Ibid., vol. I, col. 1281 and following, which certainly would have to be proved. For what follows is no proof; namely that, on the witness of the same Gervase, a slab of Parian marble was afterwards laid upon the altar, and underneath, by way of a support, a small stone column was placed; and that all these things, committed together to the earth beneath the choir, were found in the middle of the fifteenth century; that the marble slab bore a Latin inscription, mentioned by several writers and recognized afresh in the years 1774 and 1791, which, however, no one has ever been able to explain

and which today no longer exists, having been broken and destroyed when in the year 1795 the church of St. Mary of the Sea was despoiled Ibid., col. 1282..

[45] and a third taken from the structure of the sacred building; For the rest, that these things prove little or nothing the editor of the Monuments sufficiently admits: for he says a little after Ibid., col. 1287.: Written testimonies failing, we have as an argument the church of St. Mary of the Sea itself, which beyond controversy is to be numbered among the more ancient of that region. But straightway he adds: at what age, however, it was built is not easy to determine. He then reviews the various opinions of various persons Ibid., col. 1288 and following. Guesnay and Pierre Véran fix its building at the middle of the twelfth century, others at the end of the tenth. It is certain, affirms the Rev. M. Faillon Ibid., col. 1292 and following, that from its structure the church is to be referred to the times of the kings of Provence (who, he relates elsewhere Ibid., col. 1308. Compare L'Art de vérifier les dates, pp. 661 and 662, reigned in the ninth and tenth centuries); nay, that it may be judged older than these, which he tries to declare from certain architectural marks, very doubtful, as it seems to me at least, as even the very words of the author in his discussion sufficiently show. But what of the two carved lions to be seen on either side at the ancient door of the church (now closed) Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1299 and following? The authors of the more recent statistics write [Statistique des Bouches-du-Rhône, vol. II, p. 1130. Likewise Monuments inédits, ibid., col. 1302 and 1303.]: Those lions, fixed in the wall facing one another, are carved of Parian marble, and that choice; one has an infant beneath it, the other a lamb; both much worn. An excellent work of a Greek craftsman, as it seems. The Rev. M. Faillon concludes from the infant and the lamb that it is a symbol sought from the Christian law Monuments inédits, ibid., col. 1303 (which I should not disapprove) and older than the ninth century Ibid., col. 1304, which is indeed supported by some conjectures; which, however, would easily be knocked down by this other one, namely, whether perhaps those lions were not brought here from elsewhere, especially if (and this is not altogether denied) they are of Greek origin? Darkness again, therefore. I pass over another carved stone, on the roof at the western end of the church, showing a boat or ship floating, in which there are two female figures, now headless. For nothing more is demonstrated from this than from the others Ibid., col. 1305 and following. For the rest, this figure, with the legend of a ship on the open sea, has been from time immemorial the device of the town of St. Mary of the Sea Ibid., col. 1308, formerly called (certainly from the Boat) St. Mary of the Boats (Notre-Dame de la Barque Ibid., col. 1308 and 1309), which name is already read in the sixth century in the testament of St. Caesarius of Arles: We reserve … the little wooded field in which is situated the church of St. Mary of the Boats [Ibid., col. 608; likewise Baronius, at the year 508, num. 23; Acta SS., vol. VI, where St. Caesarius is treated, p. 62]; nor does the Rev. M. Faillon doubt Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1309 that the aforesaid little city is designated by these words, adding Ibid., col. 1312 and 1313: It is certain that a name of this kind is derived from the Boat in which the apostles of Provence landed in these lands; thus turning the words of Caesarius into an argument for his Tradition. Others perhaps would argue the contrary from the silence of the holy bishop. It would certainly have to be demonstrated that that name does not come from the boats which were accustomed to put in at that place.

[46] but not sufficiently proving And these things have been said on a most intricate question, which concern the original landing in Provence of SS. Mary Magdalene, Lazarus and their companions, as also of St. Salome. Although the Rev. M. Faillon has made public many things hitherto unpublished, and, as I gladly acknowledge and repeat, has on that head deserved well of history, indeed also because he has disputed many things about them learnedly and eruditely, so that his Monuments will be held in esteem by posterity too; I should not think, however, that the principal matter has been settled. Wherefore, in my opinion, each will abound in his own sense; many will judge the apostolate fictitious, others doubtful, a few certain. To me, however, neither the tradition of Veroli nor the tradition of the Camargue (though as such by no means to be disdained, much less to be hissed off with superciliousness) is sufficiently proved. I conclude, therefore, from and with Henschenius Acta SS., 9 April, pp. 817 and 818 in the connected question of St. Mary of James or of Cleophas: Meanwhile (until a clearer light arises) I leave the death (of St. Salome) ascribed to Jerusalem, with the Roman martyrology… For the rest, if perhaps we too do not seem to some to have given satisfaction in this troublesome inquiry, we shall gladly be taught a better method of more certain truth.

[47] The cult of St. Salome in the Camargue: It is another matter with the cult, which no one would deny to be both ancient and celebrated in the Camargue. We have certain documents of the twelfth century by which the veneration is established, already then shown from time immemorial to SS. Mary of James and Salome in the church of St. Mary of the Sea. See above, num. 44, the testimonies of Gervase of Tilbury and Durand of Mende. Others thereafter occur in the three following centuries, very many and by no means doubtful, which we pass over, because they are touched upon in the instrument of the finding of the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Salome in the year 1448, which, because it is too long to be inserted here, you will find entire with annotations at the end of this Commentary; from which we learn that in the middle of the fifteenth century the bodies (as was believed) of those holy Matrons were raised with solemn rite, by the authority of Pope Nicholas V, at the request of René, king of Jerusalem and Sicily, count of Provence, who was present at the solemnity; in memory of which the festival of the Revelation was instituted, to be celebrated thereafter on the third day of December Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1333 and following. From then on, devotion to those sacred remains increased. In particular it is recorded that the city of Arles about the end of the sixteenth century was on the point of being driven to ruin by civil discord; that the consuls took refuge in the protection of our Saints. And in a short time the city was pacified. The same consuls, therefore, in gratitude, had made a silver emblem showing the aforesaid city, with both holy Matrons standing by, with a French inscription: Saints Mary of James and Salome, intercede for the citizens of the city of Arles: which was then on the 15th of September 1596 carried with great pomp by the consuls, accompanied by the metropolitan chapter, the chief men and a countless multitude of the people, to St. Mary of the Sea Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1333 and following; on which day also the shrine in which the bodies are kept was opened Ibid., col. 1334..

[45] the relics, And an opening of this kind was made once and again, as Honoré Bouche relates [Histoire de Provence, by Honoré Bouche, book IV, chap. 4, vol. I, p. 327; so Monuments inédits, as above, col. 1335], in the following century, namely the seventeenth: first about the year 1627, at the request of Alphonse-Louis du Plessis de Richelieu (full brother of the most celebrated Armand, Cardinal Richelieu), then archbishop of Aix, afterwards cardinal and archbishop of Lyons; again about the year 1640, at the instance of Jean Joubert or Jaubert de Barrault, archbishop of Arles. Of neither the one nor the other event is mention made in the Gallia christiana, where the Prelates of those churches are treated Vol. I, col. 337; likewise col. 593. There are to be added others too in the same century, under Jean-Baptiste de Grignan, Jacques de Forbin-Janson and François de Mailly, archbishops of Arles Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1335. There are very many other testimonies, and those most illustrious, of the cult paid to those sacred pledges, which it would be too long to recite here, all the more because most of them will occur in the said Instruments of the Finding.

[48] preserved at the end of the eighteenth century But by no means are to be passed over the things that happened at the end of the eighteenth century, when everything in France was turned upside down. The church of St. Mary of the Sea was then despoiled of its precious ornaments, and in particular of two reliquaries in the form of an arm, of silver, containing fragments of the bones of the holy Matrons Ibid., col. 1336. (One, however, was afterwards returned.) There was also a stone fixed in the wall of the church, the Cushion of the Saints, called le coussin des Saintes, and held in great veneration among the faithful: this they tore out and threw into a pit dug before the doors of the same church for setting up the tree, as they call it, of liberty Ibid.; likewise vol. II, col. 1639. But the sacred bodies, since they were contained in a wooden coffer, were passed over by the sacrilegious. Therefore the parish priest Antoine Abril secretly summoned a citizen named Antoine Molinier, and on the night of the 22nd of October 1793 both, having entered the church, took the Relics out of the coffer, put together in two distinct bundles, and, wrapped in a rough cloth, committed them to the earth in the wood-cellar of the same Antoine Molinier [Ibid., vol. I, col. 1336 and following; likewise vol. II, col. 1633 and following]. When the civil storm had been calmed, there was restored in the year 1797 into the hands of Joseph Barrachin, the parish priest (who had succeeded Antoine Abril on his death), one of the reliquaries formed in the shape of an arm, but, as it seems, lacking its fragment of bone Ibid., vol. II, col. 1630 and following; and when it was shown in the church to the people, the inhabitants with one voice cried out that it was the very one they had formerly venerated Ibid., vol. I, col. 1337 and following; and an authentic instrument was made thereupon by the hand of a public notary, which you may see in the Unpublished Monuments Ibid., vol. II, col. 1629–1632. Likewise the Cushion of the Saints, to the exultation of the people, was put back in its former place Ibid., vol. I, col. 1338, and vol. II, col. 1639.

[49] and restored. Finally on the 21st of May 1797, the aforesaid Antoine Molinier having declared that, together with Antoine Abril, then already dead, he had four years before committed to the earth the remains of SS. Mary and Salome, with their letters of authentication attached, it was decreed that, with the parish priest Joseph Barrachin presiding and many others accompanying, the place to be indicated by the said Antoine Molinier should be dug up. When this was done, the relics were found, which a physician or surgeon named Gondran, being present, examined. The bones were contained in two separate bundles, bound round with a violet tie. On one was read the inscription: François de Mailly, archbishop of Arles, attests. Bones of St. Mary Salome. And below: By command of the most illustrious and most reverend lord, the lord archbishop and primate. Morel, secretary Ibid., vol. II, col. 1636. On the other bundle: Louis, bishop and count of Saint-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, bones of St. Mary of James. Having been thus recognized, the parish priest put them back in the shrine, and

an instrument was made of the whole proceeding, which again may be seen in full in the Rev. M. Faillon Ibid., vol. II, col. 1633–1640. Afterwards, on the 20th of June in the year 1839, the relics were translated into another shrine by the Rev. M. Jacquemet, vicar general of the most illustrious and most reverend Mgr. Bernet, archbishop of Aix, Arles and Embrun, who had come to St. Mary of the Sea for that purpose. But when a rumour had spread that there was a question of transferring the sacred remains to another city, the inhabitants began to riot, nor did they quiet down until they had duly made out the true cause for which the reverend vicar had come Ibid., vol. I, col. 1340; and vol. II, col. 1639–1642.

[50] The festive celebration After this no one will wonder that the festival of the holy Matrons was both formerly and today solemnly celebrated in the town of St. Mary of the Sea. There may be seen in the Unpublished Monuments fragments of an ancient liturgy and office Ibid., vol. II, col. 599–604. From time immemorial, says the Rev. M. Faillon Ibid., vol. I, col. 1315, pilgrims flocked to this sanctuary, not only from neighbouring but also from far distant regions. They hasten there, according to the writers of the more recent statistics [Statistique des Bouches-du-Rhône, vol. II, p. 1131; so Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1315], from Occitania (Languedoc), the county of the Venaissin and the whole of Provence, in such numbers that some are forced to live in tents outside the circuit of the town; the feast is prolonged for several days in succession; during the whole time the church is full of people praying. But since the roads in the Camargue after the autumn rains are very difficult, this seems the reason Monuments inédits, ibid. which led the faithful to come in crowds rather on the 25th of May (which day is sacred to St. Mary of James) than on the 22nd of October, the feast of St. Salome. One may add from John of Venette (a writer, as we have seen, of the fourteenth century): The feast of St. Mary of Cleophas or of James is kept on the 25th of May, the feast of St. Salome on the 22nd of October. Some venerate both on the former day, because the office is common, so far, that is, as concerns the prayers, in which mention is made of the one and of the other Ibid., note a, as I have already noted somewhere. The Rev. M. Faillon relates that in the year 1841, on the day sacred to St. Salome, namely the 22nd of October, he was at St. Mary of the Sea, and testifies that all the inhabitants assemble in the church to be present while the shrine of the holy Matrons is let down from the tower in which it remains laid up through the course of the year. They carry lighted candles and sing hymns in their praise. As soon as the sacred shrine is seen on high, all cry out rejoicing, until, let down gradually by means of a machine, it reaches the place duly prepared in the sanctuary, where through the rest of the day, except at the time of the solemn procession, it is exposed to the veneration of the faithful. Finally at evening it is raised again, in the same manner in which it was let down, while meanwhile the Magnificat is sung.

[51] especially of the Revelation of the bodies. In the preceding number I said that on the occasion of the Finding of the bodies (as was handed down) of SS. Mary of James and Salome the feast of the Revelation was instituted, to be celebrated on the anniversary day of that Finding, namely the third of December; of which, at the end of the history of St. Mary of James and St. Mary Salome published in the year 1750 by a priest (his name is unknown) of the congregation of Saint-Sulpice, there exists Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1281 an office, having among other things proper lessons of the Second Nocturn and a Hymn at Lauds, which the Rev. M. Faillon suspects Ibid., col. 1283 to be the offspring of that same priest to whom a letter is found written by the most reverend Mgr. de Jumilhac, archbishop of Arles, on the 20th of July 1749, in which the following is read: I gladly consent that you print the prayers and offices which you have composed in honour of the holy Marys. However that may be, the said office was used by ecclesiastical authority in the church of St. Mary of the Sea Ibid.. I have thought the Lessons should be set down here, because they present in a brief compendium the chief heads of the Instrument to be published below.

[52] Its Lessons. Lesson IV. René, king of Sicily and Jerusalem and count of Provence, having heard that the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome rested under the earth in a corner of his dominion, namely in the church of blessed Mary of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, where they had long ago been buried by the disciples of Christ driven out of Judaea, burning with the highest zeal of piety, and lest so great a splendour of the faith should be longer overwhelmed in darkness, resolved in his mind to search for them most diligently, so that, once uncovered, they might be brought forth and religiously set before the faithful for veneration. Wherefore he humbly begged Nicholas V, the supreme Pontiff, to grant him the faculty of carrying out his purpose. Lesson V. Assenting to these pious wishes, the supreme Pontiff granted the permission requested by the king, by apostolic letters directed to the archbishop of Aix, to the prelate of Marseilles, and also to Cardinal de Foix, legate a latere in the county of Avignon. These received and carried out the charge committed to them with fitting reverence. And the legate, taking with him bishops, abbots and very many theologians distinguished with the doctoral laurel in both laws, betook himself to the aforesaid place: and there, having weighed the inquiry conducted by the prelate of Marseilles concerning the opinion, the report and the miracles spread abroad by public voice; and furthermore, after reading the writings of certain men of known holiness, asserting that the sacred pledges were buried there and committed to the earth by the disciples of Christ who had landed here on the sea * without oar or sail; finally, having held a diligent and mature deliberation, and having invoked the name of God, he pronounced the following sentence or edict before several witnesses duly summoned. Lesson VI. Namely, that the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome lay in the aforementioned church, and were to be drawn out of the ground where they had been found before the high altar, and, being drawn out, were to be laid in worthy coffers with solemn rite, he caused to be done by apostolic authority. Indeed the legate, moved by the prayers of the most serene king, prosecuting the work begun, with clerics, abbots and bishops adorned in pontifical vesture assisting, celebrated mass, and at last brought forth from the earth with great apparatus and pomp the relics of the Saints, fragrant with a most sweet odour. Then, conspicuous to the multitude of peoples flocking from every side and of the inhabitants, he honourably placed them in a twin coffer of cypress, adorned with silk cloths interwoven with gold, a royal gift, to be venerated thenceforth by the faithful of Christ. And this was done on the third of December of the year of restored salvation one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, whose anniversary day is celebrated every year in the same church.

[53] A notice on the instrument of the finding, It remains that I treat in a few words of the following instrument of the finding, so that its genuineness may be held demonstrated, and that it may be vindicated from certain animadversions or cavils of Launoy. The original Acts are preserved to this very day in the public archive of the town of St. Mary of the Sea, enclosed in their original coffer of iron Ibid., col. 1219. There exists also an authentic transcript of them in the archive of the praetorium or prefecture of Marseilles, made by order of the apostolic Legate and given to King René, as is related in the Process. For the rest, although the instrument was first published in full by the Rev. M. Faillon, it is nevertheless found cited and partly recited by many; among others by Fr. Sébastien Michaelis, prior of the convent of Saint-Maximin [Démonstrations évangéliques sur la vraie généalogie et l'histoire de Sainte Anne. Edition of 1692, fol. 16 verso], who adduces as witness Vincent Philippon, in the year 1523 praetor (commonly bailiff) of that town Monuments inédits, as above; likewise by Guesnay and Bouche; the words of the latter Henschenius repeats in the Acts of St. Mary of Cleophas or of James Acta SS., 9 April, p. 816 and following. And so thereafter others from others. There is therefore no doubt at all about the complete genuineness of the Instrument. Nor did even Launoy himself find anything to oppose to it solidly, as appears from what he objects in his Disquisition of the disquisition on the Magdalene as an arrival at Marseilles Chap. 7. Works, vol. II, part I, p. 263. Coloniae Allobrogum (Geneva), 1731: There are numbered, he says, among the prelates who were present at the finding of the bodies of Mary of James and Mary Salome in the year 1448, "John de Colliargis, bishop of Troyes," who is not found in the catalogue of the bishops of Troyes, nor is any place vacant there; nor is anyone of this name had in the series of the bishops of Saint-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, nor is any place vacant there either; then "Tristan de Aura, bishop of Couserans," who in the year 1448 was not yet bishop of Couserans, of whom in vol. II of the Gallia Christiana: "Tristan de Aure, of the noble family of Aura, in the year 1458, on the 19th day of the month of February." Thus the instrument which Guesnay uses to prove the finding of the holy bodies is false.

[54] which against Launoy. But first, the conclusion extends too widely. According to the sound laws of diplomatics, no one would easily convict an instrument of falsity on account of one or another blemish of that kind, as is generally established from those who have treated this subject expressly Mabillon, De re diplomatica; Nouveau traité de diplomatique, etc.. Next, the Old Gallia Christiana (on which Launoy relies) is to be corrected from the new, where it is found thus Gallia Christiana, vol. I, col. 1139: To Tristan de Aura, bishop-elect of Couserans, Pope Eugene IV wrote on the fifth day before the Kalends of February, in the 14th year of his pontificate, of Christ 1444, as Raynaldus relates. And it is added: He is numbered … among the bishops in whose presence Peter, bishop of Albano, legate of the Holy See, placed the bodies of SS. Mary of James, Mary Salome and Mary of Cleophas in a more fitting place. It is a hallucination. In the instrument two bodies found are treated, and no mention is made of Mary of Cleophas, except in so far as she was held to be the same as Mary of James. Of John de Colliargis, the Rev. M. Faillon notes Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1217 that in the instrument he is called bishop of Troia, not of Troyes or of Saint-Paul-Trois-Châteaux; and from this Launoy's animadversion is knocked down, without, however, the difficulty being solved. For the editor of the Monuments himself slips, asserting that John Paul is here meant, whom Ughelli relates Italia sacra, vol. I, col. 1347. Venice, 1717 to have been translated from the see of Potenza to the church of Troia on the Kalends of August in the year 1469, pro (after) the death of James (de Lombardis, who had been elected coadjutor in the year 1438 and had died without doubt about the year just mentioned, 1469). But, says the Rev. M. Faillon Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1218, note b, that year (1469) is an error: for the following words, pro obitum, show sufficiently how carelessly the printing of the work (Italia sacra) was looked after. If the reverend writer had inspected in the same place the series of the prelates of Potenza Italia sacra, vol. VII, col. 141, he would have found that no error had crept in, as is clear from the following words: John Paul… Antonio

who had died before, in the year 1463. He presided over the church of Potenza six years in all, and was translated to the church of Troia. He, therefore, could not have been present in the year 1448 at the finding of the bodies. Who, consequently, that John de Colliargis is has not so far been sufficiently ascertained.

[55] is vindicated, Is it perhaps a question here, not of Troia, a little city in the kingdom of Naples, but of Troy in Asia Minor [Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastica, under the word Troia, vol. LXXXI, p. 83 and following]? For this is an episcopal see in partibus, which the supreme pontiffs are accustomed to confer. Certainly Leo XII, in the consistory of the 23rd of June 1828, distinguished with this title Johann Nuschel, abbot of Guastalla. And it is said in the consistorial proposition: In the province of Asia Minor, in Phrygia, is situated Troy, built by Alexander the Great, but even now groaning wretchedly, oppressed under the yoke of the infidels Ibid., p. 86. Whoever wishes to know more of this city, which is different from that whose fate Homer sang, may consult Moroni's dictionary in the places cited. It is known, moreover, that titles in partibus infidelium of the East were given from the twelfth and especially the thirteenth century Pelliccia, On the polity of the Christian church, vol. I, p. 112. Bassano, 1782, such as Spain already had several of in the ninth and tenth centuries, when it was occupied by the Moors Ibid., as among others the learned man Anton Joseph Binterim also teaches [Denkwürdigkeiten der christ-katholischen Kirche, vol. I, part II, p. 378 and following], whose disputation on this matter Johann Augusti highly praises Handbuch der christlichen Archäologie, vol. I, p. 212. Leipzig, 1836. Nothing therefore prevents there having been in the fifteenth century some bishop of Troy, and his being recorded as a witness in the instrument of the Elevation. Certainly it frequently happens in our days that such prelates are present at solemnities of that kind. For the rest, it will be established from the Annotations that the Bishops of Gaul, thirteen in all, and the four Abbots who are recorded as present in the instrument, were really presiding at that time. After this I confess for my part that it seems to me absurd, on account of the see of one man being either unknown or wrongly noted (which, however, I very much doubt is so), to charge with falsity a document of otherwise the best mark.

* ship?

INSTRUMENT OR PROCESS CONCERNING THE ELEVATION OF SS. MARY OF JAMES AND SALOME, IN THE YEAR OF CHRIST 1448.

From the autograph acts and the authentic transcript, in the Unpublished Monuments of the Rev. M. Faillon. Vol. II, col. 1223 and following.

Salome, mother of the sons of Zebedee. (S.)

BHL Number: 5436

FROM THE REV. M. FAILLON.

§ I. Cardinal de Foix, legate a latere, together with King René of Anjou, betake themselves to the Camargue to raise the bodies of the Saints.

Peter, legate a latere Peter, by divine mercy bishop of Albano, cardinal of the holy Roman church, commonly called de Foix ^a, vicar general in temporals for our lord the Pope in the city of Avignon and the county of the Venaissin, and in the same city and county, and in the provinces of Arles, Aix, Narbonne, Toulouse and Auch, legate a latere of the holy apostolic See, and judge and commissary in this matter; together with certain other colleagues of ours in the same matter, with the clause: "In so far as thou, brother bishop of Albano, if thou canst and wilt conveniently attend to it, by thyself or by another, if thou be required in this regard," etc.; deputed by the same authority, to all and each of the faithful of Christ who shall see, read and also hear these our present letters, or this present process of ours, everlasting salvation in the Lord; and that they give full credence to these our present letters or process.

[2] being required We make known to you all by these presents that on the sabbath day, which was the twenty-third of November, in the year expressed more fully below ^b, the most serene prince and lord, the lord René, king of Jerusalem and Sicily, duke of Anjou, Bar and Lorraine, and count of Provence, Forcalquier, Maine and Piedmont, being at Avignon on account of and for the business of which also more fully below it will be subjoined, and personally appearing before us in the cathedral church of Avignon, before its high altar, accompanied by several bishops, prelates, knights and other notable men of his dominions, we also being accompanied in like form by bishops, prelates and nobles, burgesses and other distinguished persons of the aforesaid city and county; after, by the venerable and distinguished professor in the sacred page, Master Adhémar Comitis ^c, of the Order of Preachers, confessor of the lord king himself, the said king elegantly made known the devotion and affection which he bears towards the glorious saints, sisters of the most blessed virgin Mary, Mother of God, namely Mary of James and Mary Salome, whose comely bodies were laid up and buried under the earth by the holy apostles of Christ in the king's own town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, and in the church which is founded in that town under the honour of the said holy Mother of God, and are there venerated with great veneration by the faithful of Christ, to the effect that those glorious bodies, for the firmer devotion of the people and the greater veneration of the same Saints, be raised from the said place and honourably replaced and laid up above the altar, or otherwise within the same church, in a tabernacle or coffer, he caused it to be set forth before us and those standing by with us in these words:

[3] in the name of King René "Most reverend father in Christ, that sincere devotion which is wont to stir the minds of kings in all religion and faith, as it is written: The prince lives by faith, which works through love; and there is nothing too that shines forth with a clearer light than right faith in a prince; has the more attentively provoked the royal highness that the comely bodies of the holy sisters of the most blessed Virgin Mary, St. Mary of James and Mary Salome, lying and buried under the ground in the church of blessed Mary of the Sea, which is itself the first church on this side of the mountains (as Gervase attests), yet fragrant with a wonderful odour, lest, namely, so great a splendour of the faith be overshadowed under darkness, be raised up into the open and be translated to a more eminent place, with all due honour. Whence, most reverend father, it has followed, at the request and diligent prosecution of the most serene prince, the lord king here present, in whose dominion the sacred bodies of this * are situated, his fervour of devotion being kindled in that regard, that our most holy lord the pope, whose circumspect providence, intent on salutary acts and devoted to works of piety, willingly carries out the things that are of God, has thought fit specially to commit this matter, to be salutarily carried out, to you, his holiness's most worthy vicar and legate a latere, and has commanded it, as is established by the sacred letters, of which on the king's part a humble presentation is now made. Wherefore the humble and devoted creature of the king prays and suppliantly asks, and also demands and requires, that your same most reverend Paternity deign and be willing to receive and embrace the burden of this kind enjoined by the apostolic see; and at length, on a day to be fixed, to set out to the place of ministry, and successively, the lords fellow-bishops and prelates being summoned, and the solemnities due and customary in celebrated acts of this kind being observed, to carry out and finish the matter in the Lord, as you shall know to be expedient. Which, most reverend father, will surely redound to the praise, glory and honour of almighty God, the salvation of faithful souls, and also the adornment and exaltation of his holy church, perpetually in time to come."

[4] and having received the letters The most serene king and prince himself exhibited and presented to us, before the public notary and the witnesses named below, apostolic letters which our most holy lord the pope directs and sends to us at the request of the lord king himself concerning an elevation of this kind, which we received from the hands of the lord king himself with the reverence that is fitting, containing word for word the tenor which follows:

[5] of Pope Nicholas V, "Nicholas, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to our venerable brothers Peter, bishop of Albano, and the archbishop of Aix and the bishop of Marseilles, greeting and apostolic benediction. The pious memory of the saints, men and women, is to be recalled, who, following the footsteps of Christ, have attained the rewards of eternal beatitude, whom all the faithful of Christ ought to honour the more willingly, inasmuch as, through their glorious merits, a more abundant grace is bestowed on the just, and pardon for their offences is more easily granted to sinners by their intercessions; on account of which we invite the faithful to the veneration of those saints, men and women, the more attentively, the more effectually we know that it profits them for salvation. Indeed, as we have learned from the tenor of the petition offered to us on the part of our most dear son in Christ René, illustrious king of Sicily, although the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome were laid up and buried under the earth, in a seemly place, by the holy disciples of Christ in the church of blessed Mary of the town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, and are there venerated with great veneration by the faithful of Christ; yet the same king, for the more fervent devotion of the people and the greater veneration of the same Saints, desires that bodies and relics of this kind be raised from the said place, and honourably replaced and laid up above the altar or otherwise within the same church, in a tabernacle or silver coffer, if licence be granted thereupon by the apostolic see. Wherefore on the part of the said king we have been humbly petitioned that we would deign of apostolic benignity to make suitable provision in these matters. We therefore, fully commending in the Lord the affection of the said king, and desiring that the bodies and relics of Saints of this kind be fittingly venerated by the faithful of Christ and becomingly preserved, inclined to supplications of this kind, command your fraternity by apostolic writings that thou, brother bishop of Albano, if thou canst and wilt conveniently attend to it, by thyself or by another, if thou be required in this regard, or otherwise you, brothers, the archbishop and the bishop of Marseilles, or one of you, if it be so, grant by our authority licence lawfully to raise the bodies and relics of Saints of this kind from the said place, and to replace and lay them up above the altar, or otherwise within the church itself, in a seemly tabernacle or silver coffer, with the solemnities required in such matters. Given at Rome, at St. Pudentiana ^d, in the year of the Lord's Incarnation one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of November, in the second year of our pontificate."

[6] to raise those of the holy Matrons Which apostolic letters indeed, inserted above, having been presented to us as was said above and received by us, and their tenor having been read and published there by our command in public assembly, loudly and intelligibly, by the said public notary; we, Peter, cardinal bishop, apostolic vicar and legate and judge and commissary aforesaid, desiring to obey the apostolic mandates, and that the pious and devoted devotion of the said lord king aforesaid in this regard should attain its due effect, offered ourselves there as disposed and ready, as quickly as we conveniently could, for the execution of the said letters

apostolic, in our own person, and for that reason to go to the said Town of the Sea. Of all and each of which things the aforesaid lord king required, for his part, and we too for our part required, that a public instrument be made for him and for us by the public notary written below.

[7] the bodies, All which things were so done and transacted at Avignon, in the place and on the day as above, in the year from the Nativity of the Lord one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, in the eleventh indiction taken with the same year, in the second year of the pontificate of the most holy father in Christ and our lord, the lord Nicholas the Fifth, by divine providence Pope; there being present there the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ and notable men, the lords R., archbishop of Aix ^e; Ro., of Tarbes ^f, G., of Gap ^g, N., of Marseilles ^h, T., of Couserans ⁱ, bishops; Tanguy du Châtel ^k, knight, seneschal; Jean Martin, doctor of laws, chancellor of Provence, and several others standing by at the foregoing.

[8] on the 2nd of December. And then, on the coming of the Sunday immediately following, which was the twenty-fourth day of the aforesaid November, it having been concluded and agreed between the said lord king and us as to the day on which, at the pleasure of the lord king himself, he intended that we should assemble at the said place of the Sea for the execution to be made by us of the said apostolic letters inserted above; the aforesaid lord king caused a solemn mass of the Holy Spirit to be solemnly sung in the said church of Avignon by the aforesaid lord bishop of Couserans, at which, together with the lord king himself and us, a copious multitude of bishops, prelates, nobles and other distinguished persons was present; and a sermon having been made at that mass by the venerable professor of the sacred page, Master Martial Auribelli ^l, of the Order of Preachers, regent in the faculty of sacred theology in the general university of Avignon, the same Master Martial elegantly published in the said sermon the pious and devoted devotion of the said lord king in this regard; and successively the day on which the said lord king intended that we should proceed to the execution of the said apostolic letters and the elevation of the bodies of the glorious Saints aforesaid: which will be, the Most High permitting, on Monday, which will be the second day of the instant and next following month of December.

[9] betakes himself to the Town of St. Mary of the Sea. On the coming of which second day of December, we being at the said town of the Sea, the aforesaid most serene lord king, before us, that we might proceed to the execution of the said apostolic letters inserted above containing our power in this regard, really and in fact exhibited and produced before us a certain verbal process, made by the reverend father the lord Nicholas de Brancas, bishop of Marseilles, whom the same our lord the pope, hesitating lest perhaps we might not be able to give our personal attention to the aforesaid elevation, had beforehand, by the apostolic letters of our same lord, deputed commissary for business of this kind, concerning the search for and finding of the bodies of the said Saints; and certain informations received by the same lord bishop concerning the voice and report of their burial, and certain other writings handed down by men of great holiness concerning the burial of the said Saints, and other circumstances required in these matters; whose tenors follow word for word and are such; and first the process of the said search is as follows.

ANNOTATIONS.

b. Namely 1448.

* this

§ II. The Process of the preliminary search for the holy bodies, made by the bishop of Marseilles, apostolic commissary, is exhibited to the Legate.

Nicholas, bishop of Marseilles In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and to the praise of the same, and of the most glorious and undefiled Mary, Mother of God, and of her most glorious sisters Mary of James and Mary Salome, maternal aunts of Christ. Amen. To all the faithful of Christ, Nicholas de Brancas, by divine mercy bishop of Marseilles, judge and apostolic commissary in this regard, together with certain colleagues of ours in the same regard, with the clause: in so far as you, or one of you, etc., and deputed by apostolic authority, greeting, and that they give undoubted credence to these presents.

[11] for preparing the Elevation We attest to you all, and make known and manifest by these presents: that the most serene prince and our lord, the lord René, king of Jerusalem and Sicily, duke of Anjou, Bar and Lorraine, count of Provence, Forcalquier and Piedmont, recalling the pious memory of the saints, men and women, who, following the footsteps of Christ, have attained the rewards of eternal beatitude, and considering with devout reflection that in his town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, situated in the islands which anciently were called Sicados, but now commonly of the Camargues, as it were dear Marches ^a, enclosed by the river Rhône divided into three mouths; adorned with fertile land, salt-pans of unsurpassed goodness, fishings of the pools and seas, river huntings, cirogrylli, fowlings and incomparable pastures; and in the parish church of the same town, built under the honour of the most blessed Mary, Mother of God, which, as many writings attest, was the first of all the churches on this side of the sea, and was founded by the disciples driven out of Judaea and sent off through the sea in a boat without oars, the blessed Maximinus of Aix, Lazarus of Marseilles,

he of the Gospel, brother of the blessed Martha and Mary Magdalene, Eutropius of Orange, George of Le Velay, Saturninus of Toulouse, Martial of Limoges, Trophimus of Arles, of the seventy-two disciples, was consecrated, there rest in the earth, as the firm belief of the faithful, and also antiquity with full authority, attest and piously hold, the glorious bodies of the holy maternal aunts of Our Lord Jesus Christ, sisters of his said most glorious Mother, Mary of James and Mary Salome, who early on the first day of the week came with spices to see the sepulchre, and many relics of several other Saints: he has determined, and desires, following in the footsteps of his progenitors of divine memory, to cause bodies and relics of this kind, for the more fervent devotion of the people and the greater veneration of the same Saints, at his own proper costs and expenses, all his other cares being set aside on account of so great a devotion, to be raised from the said place, and honourably replaced and laid up above the altar or otherwise within the same church, in a tabernacle or silver coffer: a fitting licence having been obtained thereon from the holy apostolic see; and personally, with our most illustrious lady the queen, his consort, to be present at an elevation of this kind, and, with the most reverend father and lord in Christ, the lord Peter, bishop of Albano, cardinal of the holy Roman church, commonly called de Foix, legate of the said holy apostolic see in these parts, to cause to be summoned and assembled in the said town divers prelates and men both ecclesiastical and temporal of his dominions and of other neighbouring, and also remote, parts.

[12] the cause Wherefore, after, as has been said, the lord our king himself had had a fitting licence thereon from the said holy apostolic see, and had had from our lord the cardinal legate aforesaid word that, out of devotion to the said glorious Saints and in consideration of the most serene lord our king himself, he would willingly, the Lord disposing, be present at the execution of an elevation of this kind: it pleased the majesty of the said lord our king, with the good pleasure of the said lord our cardinal legate also intervening thereto, graciously to choose beforehand us for arranging the business of an elevation of this kind and doing the other things which were to be done beforehand, and he does so choose.

[13] he comes to Arles; And we, Nicholas, bishop, judge and apostolic commissary aforesaid, considering the affection of the said lord our king, desiring to comply with it with all our strength; having taken as our notary and scribe in this regard the honest and wise man Humbert de Rota, citizen of Avignon, public notary by apostolic and imperial authorities; in the year from the Nativity of the Lord one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, in the eleventh indiction taken with the same year, but on Thursday, which was the fourteenth day of November, in the second year of the pontificate of the most holy father in Christ and our lord, the lord Nicholas the Fifth, by divine providence pope; in order to carry out the mandate of the aforesaid our lord the pope and the devout will and affection of the said lord our king, we departed with our said notary from Avignon to the city of Arles, to which we came on the Friday immediately following. And because the same lord our king had enjoined on us that in the execution of his said devout will and affection we should summon the noble and distinguished man the lord Jean Arlatan, knight, lord of Châteauneuf, of the said diocese, faithful chamberlain of the lord our king himself; and the lord Jean himself was at that time absent from the said city on business of this kind, nor did he return to the said city of Arles until the Sunday immediately following, about the hour of vespers of the same; therefore we abstained from doing any business in this matter until the said Sunday.

[14] where by the vicar general And on the coming of the Sunday immediately following, about the hour of vespers, which was the seventeenth of the aforesaid November, the lord Jean Arlatan aforesaid having returned to Arles, the venerable father and distinguished professor of decrees, the lord Jean Albaleti, canon and provost of the church of Arles ^b, vicar in spirituals and temporals, and official general of the archbishopric of Arles ^c, accompanied by several and divers canons of the said church of Arles, and by officers both spiritual and temporal, and by nobles, burgesses and the other citizens of the said city, coming into our presence, us being lodged with our household in the inn of the Mouton ^d, in which we then were; reverently, on the part of the aforesaid lord our king, after he had elegantly made some narration of the life and conversation of the said glorious Saints, and of the most fervent affection and devotion of the said lord our king in this regard, he exhibited and presented, before our notary aforesaid and the others, who for that purpose, as was said above, had been called and gathered together, the apostolic letters granted by the most holy lord our pope to the same lord our king concerning an elevation of this kind, sealed with the true leaden bull of the lord our pope himself, containing our power in this regard, sound and whole, not vitiated, not cancelled, nor suspect in any part, but altogether free from every flaw and suspicion; which we humbly received with the reverence that is fitting, containing word for word the tenor that follows.

[15] the bull of commission is exhibited. "Nicholas, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to our venerable brothers the archbishop of Aix and the bishop of Marseilles, greeting and apostolic benediction ^e. The pious memory of the saints, men and women, is to be recalled, who, following the footsteps of Christ, have attained the rewards of eternal beatitude, whom all the faithful of Christ ought to honour the more willingly, inasmuch as, through their glorious merits, a more abundant grace is bestowed on the just, and pardon for their offences is more easily granted to sinners by their intercessions; on account of which we invite the faithful to the veneration of those saints, men and women, the more attentively, the more effectually we know that it profits them for salvation. Indeed, as we have learned from the tenor of the petition offered to us on the part of our most dear son in Christ René, illustrious king of Sicily, although the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome were laid up and buried under the earth, in a seemly place, by the holy disciples of Christ in the church of blessed Mary of the town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, and are there venerated with great veneration by the faithful of Christ, yet the same king, for the more fervent devotion of the people and the greater veneration of the same Saints, desires that bodies and relics of this kind be raised from the said place, and honourably replaced and laid up above the altar or otherwise within the same church, in a tabernacle or silver coffer, if licence be granted thereupon by the apostolic see. Wherefore on the part of the said king we have been humbly petitioned that we would deign of apostolic benignity to make suitable provision in these matters. We therefore, greatly commending in the Lord the affection of the said king, and desiring that the bodies and relics of Saints of this kind be fittingly venerated by the faithful of Christ and becomingly preserved, inclined to supplications of this kind, command your fraternity by apostolic writings that you ^f, or one of you, if it be so, grant by our authority licence lawfully to raise the bodies and relics of Saints of this kind from the said place, and to replace and lay them up above the altar, or otherwise within the church itself, in a seemly tabernacle or silver coffer, with the solemnities required in such matters. Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, in the year of the Lord's Incarnation one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, on the third day before the Nones of August, in the second year of our pontificate, crowned."

[16] There are also cited And after this presentation of the said apostolic letters of our power in this regard, and their reception, and the reading of their tenor made there in the open and publicly, with a loud and intelligible voice, by our command, by our said notary; the lord provost and vicar presenting them, named above, most instantly required us, both on the part of the most holy lord our pope and also on the part of the lord our king aforesaid, that we would take care to proceed to the execution of those letters and of the things contained in them. We therefore, Nicholas, bishop, judge and apostolic commissary aforesaid, desiring to proceed maturely in the present business, its quality being considered, wished before all things to be informed of the legend of the said glorious Saints, and of what and what manner of things were believed, held and reputed by public voice and report in that country, and of the other circumstances which seemed to us to be expedient in and about this business.

[17] writings Wherefore the aforesaid lord provost and vicar of Arles, for our information of this kind in this regard, in fact and really, before us, exhibited and produced an extracted legend, which every year in the church of Arles and in the other churches of its diocese and provinces where the feast of the said glorious Saints is kept and observed, is read and declared, in a certain quire of paper extracted from the registers and books of the said church of Arles. He produced besides and exhibited, for our aforesaid information, an extract of this, which Gervase in his Treatise or Otia imperialia, book II, On the Division of the world and of the provinces, in the section on the province of Arles beginning in the § Narbonensis, etc., writes and narrates, where he expressly sets down that the bodies of the said glorious Saints rest and were buried, as narrated above at the beginning of these presents. Which writing indeed is corroborated by what is in the Rationale of the divine offices, book one, On the Dedication of altars, in the § …; but afterwards towards the end of that § beginning Verumtamen; the tenors of all which things, so produced, we omit to insert and set down here for the sake of brevity, and we forbear.

[18] and witnesses are adduced, He produced besides nine notable and distinguished persons, both ecclesiastical and secular, of the older persons of the said city of Arles, by whom and by whose depositions he said it ought to appear to us how, as public voice and report relate, the said glorious holy Aunts of God are openly, publicly, commonly and notoriously held and reputed as glorious saints, and have been and were so held and reputed; this also being approved by divers miracles, by all indifferently and openly, publicly and manifestly, and without hesitation or doubt of any kind, and for so long a time on this side and beyond that the memory of men has nothing of a beginning or of the contrary. And that their glorious bodies were in the church of Our Lady of the Sea, by the holy disciples of God expelled from Jerusalem by the Jews on the sea without a rudder, were and are buried in the same church, as is piously believed, proclaimed and held by all, also without hesitation and contradiction of any kind.

[19] by whom the ancient tradition is declared. And that also a feast or festival is kept and celebrated every year of those glorious Ladies, in the city and diocese of Arles, with a double and solemn and proper office, both on the day and through the octaves, namely of St. Mary of James on the twenty-fifth day of May, and of St. Mary Salome on the twenty-second day of October; and concerning the other circumstances necessary and opportune about these matters. Which nine witnesses, thus produced before us, we, at the instance of the said producer, thought fit as witnesses to

bear witness to the truth in this regard, to be admitted, and we admitted them; and successively, concerning and upon the voice and report, belief, repute and the other circumstances aforesaid, having first received from them and from each of them a corporal oath on the holy Gospels of God, the sacred divine Scriptures being touched for that purpose in our hands by them and by each of them successively, to depose and testify to us the truth they knew of and upon these matters, and to mingle no falsehood in their testimonies, all prayer, price, fear, love, hatred and favour whatsoever being set aside and wholly removed, we heard and examined them diligently; and the testimonies which they gave on these matters we ordered, and caused, to be reduced to writing separately by our said notary, named above as scribe in this matter before us.

[20] After this the bishop goes to And these having been reduced and completed by us, of the things that seemed to us to be done for the business of an elevation of this kind, we arranged, for our further and fuller information, to betake ourselves in person to the said town of the Sea, to look upon with our eyes the place of the said church of Our Lady of the Sea; and to take with us the lord Jean Arlatan, who was the executor of a certain ordinance made in favour of an elevation of this kind by the most reverend Father in Christ, the lord Robert, the present archbishop of Aix, our colleague in this regard; by which our same colleague ordered the said church of Our Lady of the Sea to be dug, and by digging to be searched and felt out what could be found of the burial of the said holy Ladies, so that the lord Jean himself, who was present at the aforesaid search, might show us the place, and inform us, and cause us to be informed, of the things thus done and found about these matters. For this cause, therefore, on the Tuesday then next immediately following and most lately past, which was the nineteenth day of the aforesaid November, we departed from Arles, together with the lord Jean Arlatan and our notary and household aforesaid, and took the road to the said town of the Sea; at which we arrived on that same day, at the third hour after midday; and straightway, having arrived there, we ordered and caused to be summoned, by the said lord Jean Arlatan, the king's bailiff ^g and the syndics of the said town, and also those who by the ordinance of the said lord our colleague had made the search by digging the said church.

[21] the town of St. Mary of the Sea; All of whom having been thus summoned, we betook ourselves with them to the said church of Our Lady of the Sea, which we found shut; and we ordered and caused it to be opened to us and to those standing by with us, by the honourable men Pons Comitis and Master Jean Gondelim, notary and syndic of the said town, keepers by the ordinance of our said colleague of the keys of the said church, and having a mandate, even under penalty, not to have or allow anyone of whatever sex, state, pre-eminence or condition he might be, to bring in or be brought in within the said church, without the express licence of the lord our colleague himself, or of the aforesaid lord our king, or of another having a mandate from the lord our king himself or from another superior, except at the hour at which mass is said in the said church; and that then, at that very hour, they should be present, and that those then to be brought in should be the stronger, and should take care lest the part of the said church in which, as has been said, the digging was made for the aforesaid inquiry, should be entered or seen by anyone.

[22] having entered When it was opened, and we in it, and together with us the knight, the keepers and our notary aforesaid, and the honourable men the lords Giraud Sampson, monk of the monastery of Montmajour, of the Order of St. Benedict, prior of the said church, and Hugues Rolland, priest, vice-curate of the same church, and no more having been brought in, we put the said church under our eyes. Which church we found to have from without only two doors, one greater than the other, that is, proceeding across from either side of it, one door; and within we found that church to be in three parts, namely into the nave for the first; and into one chapel, sufficiently extended, closed in front by one grating ^h of iron, and on the two sides and behind by a wall of squared stone, for the second; and into the choir, or that part which ought to be open only to clerics chanting the psalms, for the remaining and third part; and to which third part access could not, nor can, be had from the church itself, except along the wall carried laterally across, which forms the said chapel.

[23] the church, And further we found in the said second part, which is commonly called the chapel of the aforesaid Saints, that this second part was as it were dug on this side and that, along its length and sides, and had in the middle one channel of sweet water; and that hitherto, to this present day, it was piously believed and asserted by pilgrims and other faithful of Christ visiting the said church for the sake of devotion, and otherwise, that the holy bodies of the said holy Ladies had been and were buried at the foot of the principal altar of that chapel; which was of one marble stone, about seven palms in length and three palms in breadth; because beside that altar there exists the form of a well of the said sweet water, which water had been, and was accustomed to be, given and handed by those governing that church to the faithful of Christ coming there for the sake of pilgrimage and devotion, and also to those suffering from the bite of dogs or of a mad dog; and having found the said second part or chapel and the digging, and the other things in the arrangement narrated above, we wished to be made certain why that second part or chapel was so, and had been, dug.

[24] he examines the ground For our being made certain on this matter it was signified to us there, both by the knight and the syndics and by others of the said town then with us, that the said chapel had been so dug by the ordinance and command of the aforesaid lord archbishop of Aix, our colleague; and that in digging in it it had been tracked * and investigated whether the holy bodies of the said glorious Saints, together with other relics brought by them from Jerusalem, which according to ancient writings were said to have been buried in the said church, and, as was believed, in the said chapel; and finally, having tracked and dug in the said chapel down to the abyss, that is, down to the finding of the said sweet water, nothing had been found in the said chapel except the said sweet water. Likewise also, putting under our eyes the said third part of the said church, which is the choir of that church, and is open for clerics chanting the psalms according to the most holy canonical sanctions, we saw and found the said third part, wholly from beginning to end, up to the high altar, which is at the head or end of that third part, dug and searched.

[25] previously dug, And having questioned the knight and others of the said town who were there with us, who had dug and been present at the digging and searching of that part, we found, by their testimonies and reports, that that third part had been so dug and searched by the ordinance and command of the lord our colleague aforesaid. We found also from the reports and testimonies aforesaid that about the middle of the said third part, near the wall on the left side, in hollowing and digging there had been found broken a certain small round underground vault ⁱ, in the middle of the said chapel, built of stones rather weakly, which * extended in breadth across ^k the whole of the said chapel; and the wall itself had, in the middle of that wall, one small door: through which access was had from the altar of kneaded earth, of which more will be said below, in the third part of the said chapel, to the said sweet water; and underneath the said vault ^l, certain dishes of earth arranged for eating, and certain pieces ^m of several other similar dishes of earth, also a certain quantity of ashes and of charcoal.

[26] and inspects one And immediately after the discovery or finding of the dishes, and of the ashes and charcoal of this kind, digging further towards the said high altar, near that high altar, and digging and searching thus fairly deep, almost half a cane ⁿ, they found, over almost the space of one cane, proceeding from that high altar towards the middle of the third part lengthwise, a great quantity of kneaded earth, very different from the other earth hollowed and dug in that church and third part, and in that earth so kneaded one small round pillar ^o of marble, of the height of one cubit; likewise one small marble stone in the manner of a portable altar. And immediately after they found no more of the said kneaded earth beside that, where they found nothing more of the said kneaded earth, and between this and the high altar, they found all the bones of one dead body, namely from the head to the sole of the foot, buried there on the left side, having the head beside the point at which the said kneaded earth ceased to be found further, and the sole of the foot beside the said high altar, namely under that part at which the gospel is accustomed to be read.

[27] and the other These things having been thus found, the aforesaid searchers or diggers ceased to hollow or dig further; and what they thus found they ordered and caused to be notified to the most serene lord our king aforementioned. Which lord our king, having heard this, ordered that they dig and search more and more in the said third part, whether anything could be found there; and to cause this to be carried out he sent back to the said town the lord knight aforesaid. Which lord knight, having seen the excavation and the position of the said human body so found, caused digging and hollowing on the other side of the said altar, namely on that side on which the mass is begun and ended. And so digging and hollowing, there was found on that very side one head of a dead human body. Likewise, digging further there, there were found, immediately after the finding of the said second head, many bones, both of the neck and of the shoulders, also of one dead body. On which account the aforesaid diggers and hollowers, terrified, arranged to search simply with knives, and not with other stronger instruments [p], whether they might find anything more.

[28] the body And so, searching simply with the said knives, they found the remaining part of the said second human body, namely from the navel, or middle part of the belly, to the sole of the foot. And the remaining part found was stretched out in the earth, namely in the form of the other human body found in the first place; namely, holding the head towards the side

in which the kneaded earth had been found, and the feet or soles of the feet under the said high altar; and between these two bodies there was no great distance by which the two aforesaid bodies were apart, one from the other, more than three palms [q]. We found also, by the said reports aforesaid, that at a finding of this kind, and after the said two bodies were uncovered of earth, a very great odour went out and came forth from them and in that place where, so buried, they rest, which was perceived by those standing round and heartily comforted them.

[29] already uncovered. And because at that time the said two bodies were covered over with a bier, which the said lord knight had caused to be built of posts, and upon each of these biers a silk cloth was laid; we ordered and caused both the cloth and the aforesaid biers to be lifted off, and what had thus been found of the said two human bodies to be shown to us and to those whom we had brought in with us. And on lifting the aforesaid biers, after they were lifted, we perceived a great fragrance coming forth from each of these bodies or from their bones, and those standing there with us, as has been said, asserted that they had likewise perceived it; which ought to be judged wonderful, considering the dampness of the earth in which the said bones are buried, which dampness must be judged likely to give forth rather a stench [r] than a good fragrance [s]. And these being entirely uncovered, we found and saw, point by point, that the said two bodies were buried in the arrangement expressed more fully above, and likewise those saw it whom we had brought in with us, who were there together with us.

[30] likewise four These things being thus found, returning to the said chapel from without, on the left side we found also that there had been digging and hollowing there; and on our inquiring why and for what reason hollowing was and had been made there, it was said and answered to us by the knight and others of the aforesaid hollowers standing by us there that when first, by the ordinance of our said colleague, the hollowing of the search of which mention is made above was begun, that search was begun on the right side of the said chapel, namely from without, and in that part in which from the nave of the said church access to the said choir is had on the right side; and in hollowing or digging on that right side about the end of the said right part, fairly deep in the earth, one head of a human body was found, fairly large, bound with a plate of lead; and after hollowing had been done on the said right side, to see whether any bones or anything else could be found on the said right side, nothing more, neither bones nor anything else, was found on the said side, except the aforesaid head.

[31] And therefore the diggers or hollowers of this kind concluded among themselves, other the said lord knight being present and not contradicting, to dig and hollow and search on the other side of the said chapel, namely on the left side, whether anything could be found on that side; and after they had dug on the said side as much as could possibly be dug, they found at the top of the said left side, looking towards the high altar which is in the said third part, and right opposite that right part of the said chapel in which the head bound with lead, of which mention is made above, was found, three heads of human bodies * placed and buried there in the manner of a triquadrate [t], or of what in the French vernacular is called hersa, and which, having regard positionally to the said head found in the first place [u], those four heads thus found could be judged to make a cross or the form of a cross, namely the head first found made the foot, or the form of the foot, of the cross, while the other, which was the head at the top of the said triquadrate, constituted or made the top of the cross, and the two other heads which were at the angles of the said triquadrate constituted the one the right side and the other the left side of the said cross; and having hollowed or dug, as has been said, on the said left side as much as could possibly be dug and hollowed, nothing else could be found on that side except the three heads mentioned above.

[32] heads. We found further and lastly, by the aforesaid reports, that within the memory of men it had neither been seen nor heard that any corpse of any dead person whatever had been buried in the said church, out of reverence for this, that in it rest the glorious bodies of the said Saints with many relics of divers Saints, nor was buried there for any cause whatever; but corpses of this kind are buried in the cemetery of the said church which lies round about the church itself on the outside.

[33] On these things a sworn Our aforesaid visual inspection, therefore, of the said church, in the chapel and the two parts of the same on the outside, namely the right and left parts, and also in the choir of the church itself, having been completed; and in that visual inspection of ours all and each of the things having been found which we said and narrated above that we had found, and nothing more, we departed from the church to the inn in which we had been lodged in the said town; and to that inn we ordered and caused to be presented to us and to come to us the said knight, and the syndics and others who made the hollowings, diggings and searchings of which mention is made above, to the number of seven persons, and we examined and questioned them and each of them singly, diligently and secretly, having first received from them and from each of them a corporal oath on the holy Gospels of God, taken in our hands with the divine and most holy scriptures touched, concerning and upon the aforesaid hollowing, digging and searching, and their circumstances, and the other things that seemed to us to be inquired into about these matters.

[34] inquiry being held And their depositions and testimonies having been made by them on these matters before us, and these having been reduced separately to writing by our notary aforesaid, we arranged to withdraw from the said town on the morrow, which was Wednesday, then the morrow and next coming; we abstained from doing anything further, and to return to Avignon; and humbly to present this our process to the most reverend lord our cardinal and legate aforesaid, to whom the most holy lord our pope aforesaid, after the grant of the said apostolic letters of our power, inserted above, thought fit to commit the execution of the aforesaid elevation, so that his most reverend Paternity might ordain and dispose concerning the things to be done further in the business of an elevation of this kind at the pleasure of his will: and on that day we withdrew, retracing our steps, to Avignon, whence previously for this cause, as was said above, we had taken our road, where at Avignon [v], on Thursday, then the morrow and immediately following, which was the twenty-third day of the aforesaid November.

[35] and the instrument is written In faith and testimony of all and each of which foregoing things, we ordered and caused these letters patent, containing in them this our process, to be made concerning and upon the foregoing by our said notary, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seal. All which things were done in the manner and form aforesaid, at the places and times expressed and declared more fully above. And I, Humbert de Rota, of Mâcon, citizen of Avignon, public notary by apostolic, imperial, and the king of France's authority, and scribe of the episcopal and temporal courts of Avignon in civil causes, was present at all and each of the things in the process written above, while, as is written in it, they were done and transacted by the reverend Father in Christ the lord Nicholas de Brancas, bishop of Marseilles and co-executor aforesaid, and before him; and concerning and upon them, by command of the same lord bishop, I caused the present process to be written and made by another, faithful to me, I being occupied with other business [x], which I have subscribed with my own hand, and signed with my accustomed sign, together with the hanging of the seal of the same lord bishop of Marseilles, in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the things contained in it.

ANNOTATIONS.

the church of Arles there was put in charge Roger, provost of the church of Aix (that indeed from the beginning; but in the year 1448 the Provost was Jean Albaletus)… When the council was ended, he returned to Arles (namely after the abdication of Felix V the antipope, made on the 9th of April L'Art de vérifier les dates, p. 309, or rather the 7th of April Histoire de l'Église gallicane, as above, p. 460, in the year 1449) … Pope Nicholas V restoring to him his former honours (who had been elected in place of Eugene IV on the 6th of March, and crowned on the 18th, in the year 1447 L'Art de vérifier les dates, p. 309)

…, the legation of the apostolic see in Lower Germany being also added. Having returned thence into his diocese, he breathed forth his soul at Salon on the 16th day of September 1540 Gallia Christiana, vol. I, col. 583. And below it is added Ibid., p. 584: It is established that he was renowned for miracles accustomed to be wrought at his sepulchre at Arles, as Aeneas Silvius testifies; and together with Peter of Luxembourg… Pope Clement VII in the year 1527, in memory of the excellent virtues and pious works of both, and also of the shining forth of miracles, granted that they be honoured with the cult and veneration due to the Blessed. I add certain things from the Acts of Bl. Louis Aleman, inserted into our work by Stilting on the 16th of September Acta SS., vol. V of September, p. 436 and following. His office was added to the old breviary of Arles under Archbishop Jean Ferrier, who died in the year 1621 Ibid., p. 436; but afterwards it was omitted, Saxi not knowing for what reason; yet it was resumed in the seventeenth century, perhaps with some slight change, and fixed on the Sunday before the feast of the Dedication of St. Michael the archangel, to be said for ever on that day with the double rite Ibid., p. 437. Stilting treats at length of the deeds, certainly to be reprobated and lamented, of Bl. Aleman at the council of Basel Ibid., 442–455; and concludes Ibid., p. 452: But the unhappy outcome of such great endeavours could open the eyes of a man otherwise by no means bad. He saw at last that a foul schism had been forged in the church, and that his pontiff, whom perhaps he had hoped would quickly be acknowledged by all, just as Martin V after the council of Constance, was disapproved by almost the whole world. He saw not a few of those who had been among the chief in the council subject not to his Felix but to the supreme Pontiff, and the purple of Felix cast off even by some. From this he could see that his deeds were disapproved; he could examine his deeds by a serious and calm examination, and at length acknowledge and bewail their rashness. Nor is it to be doubted that he did so, as I shall show against some who deny it, namely Baillet, Natalis Alexander and others, who contend that Bl. Louis died in that opinion which he had followed at the time of the council of Basel Ibid., p. 452. Namely, they would like to find among the Blessed someone who constantly opposed himself to the decrees of the Roman church, and never changed his mind, not even in death, as though rebellious sons of the church would have nothing more to fear once they had tried, by some futile little reasons, to show a Blessed like themselves in rebellion. But so inept and frivolous are the reasons by which Alexander strives to free the men of Basel from the stain of schism, and to deny the penitence of Louis Aleman, that I wonder such things could have been written by a man otherwise learned. See the rest in Stilting.

p. Ingenia, that is, instruments. In Du Cange's Glossary: Ingenium, a war machine, devised and constructed with ingenuity and art. Hence the French word engin.

q. Three palms. The Rev. M. Faillon rightly observes Monuments inédits, vol. I, col. 1328, note a that from this so minute description of the bishop of Marseilles there is demonstrated to be fictitious what Jean Bertaud has in his Encomium of the three Marys, and as is related in Colvenerius Kalendar of the Blessed Virgin Mary, on the 9th of April, vol. I, fol. 284 verso: Of these, the blessed bodies of Mary of Cleophas and Salome, sisters of the virgin Mary, are now seen laid up in Celtic Gaul, in a certain small town, held exceedingly (greatly) sacred by the French and very many others on their account, opposite Marseilles, a city of the provincial county. Whence when Robert, formerly king of Sicily and count of Provence, had ordered the aforesaid bodies to be pulled out of their little cell, in which they abide at present most famously, he strove in vain: for they are so plainly joined by divine power in a double embrace that it would scarcely be believed they had ever been separate, as Brother John of Venette is the clear authority in the lives of those three Marys. Nor is it strange that the fellowship of these holy Sisters was made after death, God most good assenting, which, while life flourished, had stood pre-eminently unbroken. Now Robert reigned from the year 1309 to the year 1344 Henschenius in the Acts of St. Mary of Cleophas, 9 April, p. 815. This event, therefore, would have taken place a century and something more before the Finding or Elevation under René in the year 1448. And yet it is evident that in this not even the slightest trace of that indissoluble bond of the bodies was found, whence it is deservedly to be numbered among fables, as also most of the other things patched together by John of Venette. For the rest, see his narrative, if you please, in Henschenius, who recites it in full, with one or two miracles added Henschenius in the Acts of St. Mary of Cleophas, 9 April, p. 815.

r. Sentitas. A word derived from Sentina (bilge), and consequently signifying a bad odour.

s. Prodire, that is, producere or prodere.

t. Triquadrate, that is, a triangle; hersa, in French herse, in Latin occa (harrow).

u. Head. In the autograph the word locum was written by mistake for caput.

v. At Avignon. Probably advenimus (we arrived) or something similar is to be read.

x. Supply curavi (I caused).

* indagatum

* quae

* corporum

§ III. The tenor of the informations of which mention is made in the process of the lord bishop of Marseilles.

The testimonies at Arles: There follow the sayings and depositions and testimonies of certain witnesses heard and examined by us, Nicholas de Brancas, bishop of Marseilles, judge and apostolic commissary in that regard, deputed by apostolic authority, both in the city of Arles and in the town of Our Lady of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, for the business and fact of the elevation of the glorious holy bodies of the maternal aunts of God and sisters of his most glorious Mother, SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, which elevation the most serene lord our king René intends to have made shortly.

[37] of Isnard de Aqueria, In the year from the Nativity of the Lord one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, in the eleventh indiction taken with the same year, and on the eighteenth day of November; the venerable, noble and religious man, the lord Isnard de Aqueria ^a, canon and archpriest of the church of Arles, of the age of sixty years, a witness furnished to us, Nicholas, bishop of Marseilles and apostolic commissary aforesaid, and received and admitted by us to bear witness in business of this kind, and sworn, said on his oath: that he, who for many years past has been a canon of the said church, saw, knew and heard it openly, publicly and manifestly believed and reputed at Arles and in the neighbouring parts that the bodies of the said Saints rest, and were and are buried, in the place of the Sea and in its church; and that on that account there is a great resort and pilgrimage of the faithful of Christ to that church and place, by all, even from remote parts, and that he the speaker was a pilgrim there for the sake of devotion; and that the said Saints have a feast every year, namely the one on the twenty-fifth of May, and the other on the twenty-second of October; and feasts of this kind are written in the calendar of the church of Arles; and the church of Arles has an office proper to them from of old, legend, chapters, hymn and responsories, and mass, and octaves, etc., etc.: other things, diligently questioned, he said he did not know.

[38] of Olivari, On the same day, the examination of the lord Jean Olivari [b], precentor of Arles. The venerable and religious man, the lord Jean Olivari, canon and precentor of the church of Arles, of the age of sixty years or thereabouts, a witness furnished, sworn and received, said and deposed on his oath that he, who for twenty-two years past has been a canon of the said church, and before that had been reared as a child in it and in the said city, saw and knew during the whole time of his memory that it was said and reputed openly and publicly, undoubtedly and notoriously, that the bodies of the said Saints were and are buried, and rest, in the church of the town of the Sea, to which church and town of the Sea, on that account, for the sake of devotion to the said Saints, there is and is had, even from remote parts, pilgrimage and common resort; and that he the speaker was many times a pilgrim for the sake of devotion to the said place, and that a feast of these Saints is kept in the said city and church of Arles, and also in the said town of the Sea, namely of the one in May and of the other in October; and that the church of Arles has proper offices of them, namely vespers, matins, hymns, legend and responsories, and a mass for the days of the feasts and their octaves; and he who speaks, as precentor

of the said church, enters the said feasts as doubles on the tables of the choir with ^c when they occur. Questioned, he said he knew no more, etc.

[39] of Antoine Pelam, On the same day, the examination of Antoine Pelam, merchant of Arles. The honourable and wise man Antoine Pelam, merchant, a native of Arles, of the age of seventy years, and of good memory for fifty years and more, a witness furnished as above, and sworn, and received, said and deposed on his oath, namely, that from all the times of his memory he saw and heard it said by the old and by others in the said city, and held openly and publicly, commonly and notoriously, that the most sacred bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome were buried, and rest buried, in the place of the said town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, and he so held and believed, and holds and believes; and that on their festivals, which are namely of Mary of James in May and of Mary Salome, which is in October, in which months the feast of each of those Saints is solemnized, there is a public and common resort and pilgrimage, for the sake of devotion to and adoration of those Saints; and he himself who speaks was at one of these solemnities for the sake of devotion, and saw and heard that many pilgrims then came, and also before and after; and that concerning the foregoing there was and is in the said city of Arles and the neighbouring parts public voice, common opinion, belief and report.

[40] of Jean Cabassole, On the same day, the examination of Jean Cabassole, citizen of Arles. The noble man Jean Cabassole, a native of Cavaillon, citizen and inhabitant of Arles from his youth, of the age of sixty years, and of good memory for fifty and more, as he said, a witness furnished as above, and received and produced, said and deposed that it is true that he who speaks, from the times of his infancy until now, saw, knew and heard it said, held, believed without doubt and reputed by all, even those older than himself, openly, publicly, commonly and manifestly in the said city of Arles and in all those neighbouring parts, that in the town of the Sea of the said diocese, and in the church of blessed Mary of the same, the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, sisters of the most blessed Mother of God, were and are buried, and that on account of the devotion that is had towards them there is pilgrimage to them and to the said place notoriously and manifestly by all the people of the country ^d, and also by those far off and remote, and he the speaker, who so piously and as true holds and believes, was many times, for the sake of devotion and pilgrimage, at that place to pray to and venerate the said Saints, and knows that in the city of Arles and in the said place the festival of them, and of each of them, is celebrated, namely, as he believes, of the one in May, and of the other in the month either just past or another preceding. More, etc.

[41] of Honoré Raynaud, On the same day, the examination of Honoré Raynaud of Arles. The noble Honoré Raynaud, burgess and native of the city of Arles, of the age of sixty years, and of good memory for fifty, a witness furnished, sworn and received, said and deposed on his oath that it is true that he the speaker from all the times of his memory saw, knew and heard it said and reputed without doubt, openly, publicly and notoriously, even by those greater in years than himself, that the bodies of the said Saints were and are buried in the said place and church of the Sea, and that there is a great pilgrimage to that place for the sake of devotion to them, and that their feast is kept every year, namely of the one in May and of the other in October, and he who speaks, who so believed and believes it was and is true, was at the said place for the sake of devotion. More, etc.

[42] of Jean Margoie, On the same day, the examination of the lord Jean Margoie, knight, of Arles. The noble and powerful man the lord Jean Margoie, knight of the order of St. John of Jerusalem, a native of the city of Arles, and preceptor of the house of blessed Mary of the Temple, of the order and city aforesaid, of the age of seventy, and of good memory for sixty years, as he said, a witness furnished as above, sworn and received, by means of his oath said and deposed that he who speaks, as is said before, drew his origin from the city of Arles, and was reared in it so that he stayed there for a great part of his life, and saw, knew and heard it said by all indifferently, even by those greater in years or older than himself, openly, publicly, commonly and manifestly, that in the town of the Sea, and in the church of blessed Mary of the same, there were and are buried, and rest, the holy bodies of the holy maternal aunts of our Lord and sisters of his most blessed Mother, SS. Mary of James and Salome, and that they are venerated there by the faithful of Christ, and that to that place there is unceasingly, for the sake of devotion to them, a public pilgrimage by the people of the country and also from far and remote parts, and he the speaker believed and believes without doubt that this was and is true, and was, for the sake of devotion, at divers times and also in divers companies of great men, at that place of the Sea; and there prayed to the said Saints and saw them prayed to; and that each of those Saints has a feast, which is celebrated in the said cities and place by all, namely, one in May, and the other in the present or past month, etc. He said more.

[43] of Bernard Pangon, On the same day, the examination of Master Bernard Pangon of Arles. The honourable man Master Bernard Pangon, notary, syndic and citizen of Arles, of the age of fifty-five years or thereabouts, a witness furnished, sworn and received, said and deposed on his oath that from the whole time of his memory he saw and heard it said, held and reputed in the city of Arles openly, publicly, commonly and notoriously, that the bodies of the said SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome were and are buried in the church of Our Lady of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, and that their feast is kept in those places every year, namely of the one in May and of the other in October; and that then, and most of all in May, there is a great pilgrimage to the said place for the sake of devotion to them; and many come then from every side, and he who speaks came many times for the said cause, and was a pilgrim, and saw a procession made, and their images carried in procession, and saw over their burial-place many votive offerings, garlands and other things, etc.

[44] of Pierre Isnard On the same day, the examination of Pierre Isnard of Arles. The noble man Pierre Isnard, burgess and native of the city of Arles, of the age of fifty years, and of good memory for forty, a sworn witness, etc., said on his oath that it is true that he who speaks, during the whole time of his age, saw, knew and heard it said and publicly reputed in the said city, and also by the old men of the same, that the bodies of the said Saints rest, and were and are buried, in the said town of the Sea and in its church, founded under the name of Our Lady, and that on account of devotion to them there is and is had a public and common pilgrimage by all indifferently, even from remote parts, and he who speaks, who so believed and believes it was and is true, was many times a pilgrim to that place and church, and that every year their feast is kept at Arles and at the said place, namely of the one in May, that is, on the twenty-fifth of May; and of the other in October; and the church of Arles keeps the said feasts; and on the day of their feasts their images are carried in procession; and he who speaks was in the procession and carried the canopy ^e. More, etc.

[45] and of Jacques Bastonet. On the same day, the examination of Jacques Bastonet of Arles. The honourable man Jacques Bastonet, a native of Arles, of the age of seventy-six years, a witness, etc., said that from all the times of his age he the speaker heard, saw and knew it believed, said and reputed, even by those older than himself, openly, publicly, commonly and notoriously at Arles and in the neighbouring parts, that in the said town of the Sea, and in the church of Our Lady of the same, there rest, and were and are buried, the bodies of the said SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, near and at the foot of the high altar of the same; and that there they are venerated, worshipped and adored by the worshippers of Christ, and that for the sake of devotion and adoration there is a continual, common and public pilgrimage by the people of the country, even from remote parts; and he who speaks was many times a pilgrim to that place for the said cause; and that for their memory and honour their feast is kept every year at Arles, namely of the one in May, and that then a great multitude of the people, even with wagons, is accustomed to come there to the feast, and to have themselves conveyed and carried, and also from the neighbouring parts; and of the other before the feast of All Saints; and he the speaker was many times a pilgrim at the feast in May, and saw the images of the said Saints carried in procession, and the Saints themselves venerated beside the said high altar. More, etc.

[46] The witnesses heard in the town of the Sea: Jean Arlatan on the immemorial cult, Then the said lord commissary of Marseilles proceeded to the examination of the witnesses written below in the town of the Sea, as follows: and first the examination of the lord Jean Arlatan, knight. The noble and powerful man the lord Jean Arlatan, knight of Arles, lord of Châteauneuf, of the diocese of Arles, of the age of sixty years, and of good memory for fifty, as he said, a witness furnished and sworn, by means of his oath said and deposed as follows: namely, that it is true that from all the times of his memory he without doubt, and publicly, openly, commonly and notoriously, saw, knew and heard it believed, said and reputed that the glorious bodies of the holy maternal aunts of our Lord Jesus Christ, and sisters of the most glorious virgin Mary his mother, namely of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, were and are buried, and rest, in the church of Our Lady of the town of the Sea, of the said diocese; and that in the same they are daily venerated by all the people of the country round about, even from remote parts, and many of the said people of the country, and also from the said remote parts, flow daily to the said church of Our Lady for the sake of pilgrimage and devotion to the said Saints, and also many times for this cause he the speaker came and was there; and he knows and saw that in the city and the cathedral church and the others of the city and diocese of Arles, of which he has knowledge, the feast of those Saints is kept, namely of St. Mary of James in May towards the end, and of St. Mary Salome in October, also towards the end.

[47] the ground He said further that in the present year and in the month of July of the same, because the most serene lord our king René determined to procure and bring about with all his power that the bodies of the said glorious Saints should be raised from the place where they rested under the ground of the said church of the Sea; and for that reason had obtained certain letters on this matter from the most blessed lord our Pope, which were directed to the most reverend lord the present archbishop of Aix; the said lord our king, for the execution of letters of this kind, sent the said lord archbishop to the said town of the Sea. Which lord archbishop, when he had arrived at that place and within the said church, inquired of divers inhabitants and others, natives and elders of the said place, where in the said church the bodies of the said Saints were believed to rest; and it having been answered him by those thus questioned that the said bodies were believed to rest in the chapel which is built in the centre of the said church, namely between the nave and the choir of the same church, the lord archbishop himself ordained that digging be done in the said chapel, and hollowing so far that the said bodies could be found, or certainty could be had whether those holy bodies rest in the said chapel.

[48] dug up On which matter the said speaker, who, at the request of the said lord our king, was a little after sent by the said lord archbishop to the said town of the Sea to cause the ordinance of the same lord archbishop to be executed, that the said church be hollowed, as soon as he had arrived in the said town of the Sea, called certain of the syndics and other inhabitants of the said place, to the number of fourteen; and to them, by the authority of the said lord archbishop, he committed and enjoined the making of a hollowing of this kind, a corporal oath on the holy Gospels of God having first been taken by those thus presented, that they would make the said hollowing well, faithfully and diligently, and whatever they should find in hollowing they would truthfully and faithfully reveal either to the said lord our king, or to us on behalf of the lord our king himself; the hollowing aforesaid being entrusted to those thus presented, and ^f they alone being afterwards brought in by the said speaker, by the ordinance of the said lord archbishop, within the said church, those, as has been said, whom the lord archbishop himself had commissioned to make the aforesaid hollowing, alone, and no others except the notary of the said place.

[49] and having found one They, thus brought in, began to make the said hollowing, and they began it beside the said chapel on the right side; and after they had hollowed almost to the end of the said right side, where the enclosure of the said chapel stood; there they found one head of a human body covered or bound ^g with lead; and having made a diligent hollowing, to see if they could find more there, they found nothing else, not a single bone, there on the said side. Then, continuing a hollowing of this kind, they hollowed the part in the choir of the said church, which is behind the said chapel; and in hollowing in the said choir they found in it a certain ancient vault, which they broke, and they found certain dishes, and pieces ^h of dishes of earth, and ashes and black charcoal, and one wall across, in which there was a small door, closed with one stone; and he believes that that door was for going from the said vault to the spring or well of sweet water which is in the chapel of the said Saints situated in the middle of the church, in which chapel hollowing was also done, but nothing was found in it except the spring or well of the said sweet water; and the same speaker ordained that the hollowing be continued, proceeding as far as the high altar of the said choir.

[50] and the other body, And this being ordained, summoned by the said lord our king, he withdrew from here to the lord our king himself, who, as soon as he so summoned had come to him, sent him, he does not remember where for the present. He said further that, the speaker himself having returned, the said lord our king said to him that those of the town of the Sea had caused it to be notified to him that, hollowing as the speaker himself had enjoined them to hollow, they found the bones of one human body, and certain other things fairly consonant with what Gervase in his Otia ⁱ imperialia writes of the burial of the said Saints. Wherefore the said lord our king willed, and enjoined the same speaker, that he return to the said town of the Sea, and see what had been found there, and do those things which should seem to him the speaker more useful and more expedient to be carried out for this matter. And then he who speaks returned to that town; and as soon as he arrived in it, he went with the syndics of the said place, who had ceased and were ceasing to hollow further in the said church, to it; and he visited the said hollowing, and found and saw the bones of the said human body; and having seen this, he who speaks arranged to cause hollowing on the right side of the said high altar; and for this cause he caused the high altar itself to be held up with timbers, and, it being held up, he caused hollowing on the right side of that altar; and after hollowing had been done on the said right side to the level of the floor on which lay the bones of the aforesaid human body, there were found one head and other bones of another human body down to about the navel; and then, more of the said earth being uncovered with knives, and very gently, there were found the other bones of the human body from the said navel to the sole of the foot, stretched out and lying in the earth; namely, from the side of the head they extended towards that side where the kneaded earth had been found, and the soles of the feet were under the said high altar, in the form of the other body first found; nor was there a distance between the said two bodies thus found except about three or four feet.

[51] as also with three other heads; These bodies having been thus found, hollowing further in that part was stopped, from fear that, if more had been hollowed there, the said bones of the said two bodies might perhaps have been destroyed; but withdrawing from here, the said speaker caused hollowing on the left side of the aforesaid chapel. And after enough hollowing had been done on that side, there were found right opposite the right side of the said chapel, where the said head was found of which mention is made above, three other heads of human bodies, small, and very much smaller than the head first found. Which three heads were found alone, without any bones; and those three heads were placed in a triangle, namely one higher than the other two, and the two others lower, namely one at one side, the other directly opposite at the other side, in the manner of a triangle of a cross; and a diligent hollowing and searching having been made on the said left side, whether anything more could be found, nothing more could be found. Therefore further hollowing and digging in the said whole church was altogether stopped. And he who speaks caused the said four heads, and the two other heads of the said two human bodies found as has been said, with a certain part of the bones of the body found in the second place, to be laid up and put back in the sacristy of the said church. And what remained of the bones of those two bodies, and is in the earth, he caused to be covered each with a wooden bier, and a silk cloth to be put over it. The said speaker deposed further besides that when the bones of the said second human body were found and uncovered, a great fragrance and good odour came forth therefrom; and those who found the other bones of the said other body said that it had so come forth at the uncovering and finding of the same. Many other things, etc.

[52] Jean Sondelin, On the same day and in the town of the Sea, the honest and discreet man Master Jean Sondelin, apostolic notary and syndic of the said town of the Sea, of the age of twenty-eight years, a witness furnished, etc.; deposed and said on his oath that he the witness was present, by the authority of the aforesaid lord archbishop of Aix and by the king's mandate made to him the witness through the aforesaid lord knight, and was one of those who by the authority and mandate aforesaid hollowed the said church of Our Lady of the Sea, to investigate in it the place in which the glorious bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, as certain other relics of Saints (which with those glorious bodies in the said church, by some disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, who with those same saints were expelled from Jerusalem by the perfidious Jews on the sea in a boat without a rudder on account of the faith of our Lord) ^k are read; and which glorious bodies he the speaker, during the whole time in which he has dwelt in the said town of the Sea, heard and saw piously believed to have been buried in that church, as has been said, and he saw them venerated there by the people of the country and also from the most remote parts; and in the said church he helped in hollowing, namely first in the chapel, in which nothing, after a great hollowing and investigation made in it down to the abyss, nothing was found except sweet water, coming from a well which was formerly had in it, and of whose water there was given to pilgrims coming to that church, and especially on account of the bite of a mad dog.

[53] he was present at the investigation Then he helped in hollowing on the right side of the said chapel from without, on which side about the end, looking towards the choir of the said church, and beside that choir, there was found one large head of a human body, fortified with lead, and nothing more, at least of a human body or of anything else. Besides, he helped in hollowing in the choir, and the choir of the said church, in which about the middle there was found a small vault, having, between itself and the part of the said choir looking and proceeding towards the said chapel, one wall across the said choir, and in that wall a little door, which was and is closed with stones, and through which door entrance was had to that vault from the side of the said chapel, and also from the side of that vault to that chapel and the said well existing in it; and in that vault nothing of a human body was found, but only certain dishes of earth, and certain parts of similar dishes, and a certain quantity of ashes with black charcoal. These things having been seen, the hollowing was continued as far as the high altar which is at the end of the said churches and choir; and in hollowing there was found

near the said high altar, about one cane off, a great quantity of kneaded earth, very different from the other earth that was found in hollowing the said choir; and in that kneaded earth there was found one small pillar of white stone, much eaten away and wasted, and upon the said pillar a small marble stone in the manner of a portable altar, which stone in the hollowing was broken and divided into several pieces. Then, proceeding further towards the said high altar on the left side, namely that at which the gospel is said, there was found one head of a human body, and then all the bones which could belong to a human body and to the said head, buried in the earth, stretched well out, in such a way that the feet of that body were well under the stone of the said high altar, and the said body had its hands folded on the breast in the manner of a cross, and it gave forth a very good odour and fragrance.

[54] and lent his labour; Moreover he helped in hollowing on the right side of the said choir, fairly near the very place in which the said body had been and was found; and after a certain hollowing on the right side of the said altar, namely that side at which the mass is begun, they found another body buried there in the manner of the other, which had its front part on the side of the said pillar, and its two feet under the said part of the said high altar, and the said two bodies were not distant one from the other by half a cane across, and this second body was buried among small stones which are commonly called lauses ^l. And having left off hollowing further on the said side for fear lest perhaps it should proceed to the ruin of the foundations on that side of the said church, they came to hollow on the left side of the said church, right opposite that side on which the said head fortified with lead had been found; and after great hollowing they found on the said left side three heads of human bodies, buried not far from one another, in the manner of a triangle, because one was higher, and the two others at the right and left sides, and very obliquely to the other place in which the said first head was found; in such a way that the said four heads seemed to be arranged to make a cross, namely one the foot, another the head, and the other two the arms of the cross. They found no more in the said church. And they made a hollowing of this kind from the beginning of August last past until near the middle of the same. Other things concerning this business he said he did not know, diligently questioned.

[55] Pons Comitis At the same place and on the same day, the discreet man Pons Comitis ^m, otherwise Philipot, carpenter ⁿ of the said town of the Sea, another of the aforesaid deputed hollowers, heard again by the said lord of Marseilles as a witness, etc., said and deposed on his oath that, since he is of the age of fifty-five years or thereabouts, he always continuously, and publicly, openly and notoriously, heard it said, and piously held and believed, and also himself held and believed, that the bodies of the aforesaid Saints were committed to the ground and buried in the church of Our Lady of the Sea by the holy disciples of Christ; and he continually saw a very great concourse of pilgrims, both of the people of the country and of others from far parts, and notably on the festivals of those glorious Saints; and he was continually present at the hollowing out and search for the bodies and relics of the said Saints and of the others brought from Jerusalem, by the order, mandate and ordinance of the said lord archbishop and of the knight aforesaid. Which hollowing indeed was begun by him and others deputed for this in the chapel of those Saints, in which nothing was found except only a well of sweet water, by which it is piously believed that those suffering from the bite of a mad dog, or bitten by them, are cured through the drawing or drinking of that water by the glorious intercessions of those Saints; who, seeing that they had found nothing else in that chapel, began to dig and hollow outside it on the right side, on which side, looking towards the choir of the said church, they said they had found one fairly large head of a human body, wrapped in lead; nothing more, however, he said they found in the same place.

[56] likewise put his hand And continuing a hollowing of this kind in the choir of the said church about the middle, there was found a certain stone vault, having a wall across the said choir looking and proceeding towards the said chapel, and in that wall a small door, closed with stones, through which access was had to that vault from the aforesaid chapel and the well existing in it; in which vault indeed there were found certain dishes of earth, and certain pieces of similar dishes, and a quantity of ashes with black charcoal. And these being found, the hollowing was continued as far as the high altar, which holds the end of the church and of the choir, near which there was found a great quantity of kneaded earth, wholly unlike and different from the other earth hollowed out; in which earth also there was found one small pillar of stone, on top of which was a marble stone, which was like a portable altar, which was broken in the aforesaid hollowing. And proceeding towards the said high altar, namely on that side on which the Gospel is read, he said that a certain head of a human body was found, and successively all the bones which are recognized to belong to a human body, buried and stretched out; the hands of that body being placed upon it in the manner of a cross, and the feet being under the stone of the high altar itself; from which body, when it was uncovered of earth, a most sweet odour and fragrance emanated, at which ^o the hollowers themselves very greatly marvelled.

[57] to the work; And digging, and searching further on the right side of the said choir, at which the mass is begun and ended, fairly near the said place they found another body of the same form, having its front part on the side of the said pillar, and its two feet under the said part of the said high altar, which were not distant one from the other by half a cane; which body found second was indeed surrounded with thin stones; and then, hesitating to hollow further for fear for the foundations of the said church, they ceased there, and continued to dig on the left side of the said chapel, where they found three heads of dead persons, right opposite that side in which they had found that head bound with lead, these however smaller, which seemed to stand in the manner of a cross, having regard to the one first found. Other things in the said church they did not find, as he said, although diligently questioned.

[58] Guillaume Besselin At the same place and on the same day, the discreet man Guillaume Besselin, otherwise Beaulaygue [p], fisherman of the said town, also a hollower and searcher deputed by the lord archbishop aforewritten, of the age of twenty-six years or thereabouts, as he said, diligently examined, on his oath, as a witness furnished, said and deposed that always and continuously, openly and publicly and notoriously, he saw it held as true and piously believed, and he the speaker held and always believed, that the most sacred bodies of those ladies, the maternal Aunts of Christ, were and are buried and committed to the ground in the church of Our Lady of the Sea with certain other relics of Saints brought from Jerusalem by the holy disciples of the same Christ, and that there many pilgrims and in great number concur for the sake of devotion to those Saints, and flow together both on their festivals and at other times, even from remote parts; and because it had been ordained by the said lord archbishop commissary that the said church of Our Lady be dug, and the bodies buried in it be searched for, he, deputed by the lord commissary himself as above, was continually present in person at that digging. Which digging and hollowing was begun by him with the others deputed for this in the chapel of those Saints, in which they could find nothing except only one well of sweet water, of which those drank who were bitten by a mad dog, nor did that bite afterwards harm them in anything.

[59] the same And continuing the said hollowing, going out from the outside of that chapel, on the right side, which looks towards the choir of the said church, they found one large head of a certain human body, surrounded with leaden plates, without any other bone whatever. And the said deputies, seeing that they found nothing else in the said place, digging in the aforesaid choir about the middle, there was found a certain vault surrounded by a wall, which wall looked directly towards the said chapel, in which there was a small door, stopped up with stones, through which one was accustomed to go from the said vault to the aforesaid chapel and to that well of sweet water; and in the same there were found also certain dishes of earth, and many pieces of other similar dishes, with a certain quantity of ashes and black charcoal. And proceeding as far as the high altar, which holds and makes the end of the said church, the searchers themselves found a great quantity of kneaded earth, in nothing like the other earth dug, but altogether different, in the middle of which there was one small pillar, on which was placed one stone in the form of a portable altar, which, in hollowing inadvertently, was broken. And digging further towards the aforesaid high altar, towards that side on which the gospel is sung, they found the head of one human body, and straightway all the bones of a human body belonging to that head, from which a very fragrant odour went forth after it was uncovered of earth.

[60] testifies; These things being found, they dug and hollowed more and more, namely on the right side of the said choir, on which the mass is accustomed to be begun, and straightway, fairly near the said place, they found other bones of a human body of similar form, whose feet were placed under the aforesaid part of the said altar; and they were not distant one from the other more than a space of three feet: which body indeed, found last, was girdled round about with stones which are called lauses in the vernacular. And fearing for the foundations of the said church, they dug no further there, but on the other side, namely the left, outside the said chapel, near there, that is where they found the first head, they found three other heads, which were buried in the manner of a cross, regard being had to the said one first found. Many other things in the said church they did not find, believing they had what they sought. Although diligently questioned, etc.

[61] Monet Robert On the same day and in the same place, the discreet man Monet [q] Robert, fisherman, a native of the said town of the Sea, of the age of thirty-five years or thereabouts, a witness furnished as above, sworn and received, who said and deposed on his oath that always, during the whole time of his life of which he has memory, he saw and heard it publicly held, and always said, and piously

believed, that the bodies of those glorious Saints were and are committed to the ground and buried in the said church of Our Lady of the Sea, with many relics of Saints from Jerusalem, by them and by the holy disciples driven out of Judaea, and that to that church, on account of devotion to those Saints, a multitude of people at all times, both of the people of the country and from far parts, flows together; and that he was ordained with others by the aforesaid lord archbishop commissary to search for them and to hollow in that church; who, beginning to hollow and search in the chapel of those Saints, found nothing in it except only a well of sweet water, which is given to drink to those bitten by a mad dog.

[62] of the preceding And therefore, hollowing outside the said chapel on the right side, on which side about the end, looking towards the choir of the said church and beside that choir, there was found one large head wrapped in lead, and nothing more, at least of a human body; but he himself, digging with others and hollowing in the choir of the said church about the middle, found a small vault, having between itself and the said choir a wall looking towards the said chapel across the said choir, and in the same wall a little door, through which one went from the said vault to that chapel and the well of sweet water; in which vault they found certain dishes of earth, with divers pieces of similar dishes, and a certain quantity of ashes with black charcoal; but in it they found nothing else. And these things having been seen, the hollowing was continued by him with the others as far as the high altar; and in hollowing there was found, near the said high altar, a great quantity of kneaded earth, in which there was one small pillar, and upon it one marble stone, which was believed to be a portable altar, which stone was broken in the hollowing through inadvertence.

[63] confirms what was said. And proceeding towards the said high altar, namely that side on which the Gospel is sung, he the speaker found first one head of a human body, and then all the bones which could belong to a human body, buried, and placed stretched out in the earth, and stretched out in such a way that the feet of that body were under the stone of the said high altar, and the said body had its hands bound in the manner of a cross upon the breast, and it gave forth a very good odour and fragrance. Moreover he, with his other companions, searching further and hollowing towards, namely, that side at which the mass is begun and ended, found another body buried there, in the form of the other, which had its front part towards the said pillar, and its feet under the said part of the said high altar, which was surrounded with very thin stones called lauses, and was not distant from the other first found by half a cane; but because there was danger in hollowing further there on account of the foundations of the church, they ceased from further hollowing and searching in that place. And the searchers came to hollow on the left side of the said chapel, right opposite that side in which the first head, wrapped in lead, had been found; and there they found three heads, smaller than that, which seemed to make a cross, regard being had to the said first head, which made the foot of the cross. Many other things he said he did not find, diligently examined.

[64] The attestation of the Notary, So deposed the aforesaid witnesses before the reverend father the lord Nicholas, bishop of Marseilles and apostolic commissary aforesaid, in the presence of me, Humbert de Rota, public notary aforesaid, as my following manual sign witnesses.

H. de Rota.

ANNOTATIONS.

b. Jean d'Olivari.

o. Ideo, rather adeo.

p. Beaulaygue, that is, water-drinker.

q. Monetus. It seems to be an abbreviation of the word Raymonetus, which is a diminutive of Raymond.

§ IV. The solemn Elevation of the holy Bodies.

The testimony of Gervase is read before the Legate The aforesaid most serene lord king René produced besides a certain extract from a certain authentic book, which is entitled the book of Imperial Leisure, an extract from that book, namely from the second book, the rubric On the division of the world and of the provinces, in the section on the province of Arles, beginning in the paragraph Narbonensis, containing word for word the tenor which follows. "The province of Narbonne, a part of the Gauls, has on the east the Tucian Alps, between which and the sea and the Rhône are these provinces: that of Arles, which is the head of the kingdom of Vienne, which enjoys the chancellery of the kingdom; that of Tarentaise, of Embrun and of Aix, and for some part of it that of Lyons and of Besançon. The province of Narbonne has on the west Spain, on the north-west Aquitaine, on the north the province of Lyons, on the north-east Belgic Gaul, on the south the Gallic sea, which is between Sardinia and the Balearic islands, having at its front, where the river Rhône goes out into the sea, the Sticados islands, which they commonly name Camargas, as it were caras marchias ^a, for in the manner of an island, the Rhône being divided into three mouths, they are praised for fertile land, salt-pans, fishings of pools and seas of surpassing goodness, [a] river huntings, cirogrylli and fowlings and incomparable pastures. There by the shore of the sea is the first church of all the churches on this side of the sea, founded in honour of the most blessed Mother Mary, and consecrated by the disciples driven out of Judaea and sent off through the sea in a boat without oars, Maximinus of Aix, Lazarus of Marseilles, he of the Gospel, brother of Martha and Mary Magdalene, Eutropius of Orange, George of Le Velay, Saturninus of Toulouse, Martial of Limoges, Trophimus of Arles, of the seventy-two disciples, with Martha and Mary Magdalene standing by with many others. Under the altar of this basilica, kneaded by them of earth, with a titular stone of marble, and that of Parian, of moderate size, spread over it, antiquity with full authority holds that the heads of six holy bodies are laid out in a square, the other members of the bodies enclosed in their tombs, among which they assert the two Marys to be buried, who early on the first day of the week came with spices to see the sepulchre."

[66] and of Durand of Mende. The same most serene lord king René produced further a certain other extract from the book which is entitled the Rationale of the divine offices, namely from the first book, On the dedication of an altar, in the paragraph Postea vero, about the end of that paragraph beginning Verumtamen, containing also the tenor which follows. (See in the Rationale of the divine offices, book one, On the dedication of an altar, in the § Postea vero, about the end of that § beginning Verumtamen.) "Nevertheless it is read in Exodus that the Lord commanded altars to be made of setim wood, which is incorruptible, and the altar of the Lateran is of wood. Solomon too made a golden altar, as is read in III Kings VII, 48. But those were made in figure; and in the county of Provence, in the castle of St. Mary of the Sea, there is an altar of earth, which Mary Magdalene and Martha, and Mary of James and Mary Salome made there." And the most serene lord king aforesaid prayed us, and suppliantly asked us, and demanded and required, that before all things we would take care to pronounce our ordinance concerning the Elevation and the other things committed to us thereon by the holy apostolic see, and, it being pronounced, to proceed to the execution of the said Elevation by the apostolic authority aforesaid.

[67] Cardinal de Foix, legate, WE THEREFORE, PETER, bishop, cardinal, vicar and legate, and judge and commissary aforesaid, having seen all the things which for attaining the effect of an Elevation of this kind the same most serene lord king willed to have produced before us, and having held deliberation and counsel upon them with the reverend fathers, the lords archbishop, bishops, abbots, prelates, doctors of the sacred page and of both laws, named in the schedule of our pronouncement inserted below, summoned for that purpose both by the lord king himself and by us, with the concordant counsel and consent of these lords archbishop, bishops, prelates, abbots, masters and doctors, proceeded to our sentence or ordinance concerning the making of an Elevation of this kind, and caused it to be read and published by the notary, and the scribe before us in the present cause subscribed, in public assembly, with a loud and intelligible voice, before us, in writing, in these words:

[68] the sentence, The name of Christ being invoked: We, Peter, bishop, cardinal, vicar and legate, and judge and apostolic commissary aforesaid, having seen the apostolic letters containing our power in this regard, inserted above, obtained from the most holy lord our Pope by the most serene lord king René, also named above, concerning the Elevation to be made of the bodies of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome from the ground where, in the church built in honour of the most blessed virgin Mary in the present town of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, those bodies were buried by the disciples of Christ driven from Judaea through the sea in a boat without oars, and presented to us by the most serene king himself; having seen also the processes had and made concerning the investigation, search and finding of the said bodies by the reverend Father the lord Nicholas, bishop of Marseilles, deputed by the same authority, and by other apostolic letters of the lord our Pope himself, prior to the said letters of our power, to make the said Elevation; having seen also the informations taken by the bishop himself concerning the firm belief, and the public voice and report, confirmed by divine power with many signs and prodigies, and the most true notoriety of the foregoing, that the said bodies existed buried in the said place, and were there devoutly venerated by the faithful of Christ; and also certain writings handed down by men of great holiness, attesting this; all which things, for our information in this regard, were produced before us on the part of the said most serene lord king;

[69] the bishops, etc. assenting. And having held deliberation and counsel upon them with the reverend fathers in Christ, the lords: Robert Damiani, archbishop of Aix; Antoine

Ferrier, of Orange; Pierre Nasondi, of Apt; John de Coliargis, of Troy; Gaucher de Forcalquier, of Gap; Guillaume Soybert, of Carpentras; Nicholas de Brancas, of Marseilles; Tristan de Aura, of Couserans; Pierre Turelure, of Digne; Palamède de Carreto, of Cavaillon; Guillaume Guezi, of Grasse; Pierre Marini, of Glandèves; and Pons de Sade, of Vaison, bishops; [b] Pierre du Lac, of Saint-Victor of Marseilles; Arnaud de Saint-Félix, of Psalmody; Jean Préverand, of Saint-Gilles, of the diocese of Nîmes; and Jean Eustace, of Sainte-Marie of Nizelle, of the diocese of Cambrai, abbots of monasteries; Adhémar Fidelis, and Jean de Badoeria, prior of Bédoin, of the diocese of Carpentras: in the sacred page; Jean Arbaleti, provost of the church and vicar and official of Arles; Louis de Frassengis, dean of the collegiate church of St. Peter of Avignon; Jean Payer, archdeacon of Carpentras; Arnaud-Guillaume de Sansac, canon of the church of Aire: in decrees; Jacques Guilhot, of Orléans, professors of laws; the reverend men the lords Guillaume d'Arencourt, Jean Huet and Marquet de Riciis, protonotaries of the holy apostolic see, assisting us together with them;

[70] he pronounces By this our sentence, ordinance or pronouncement, which, to the honour of God the Father almighty, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and the exaltation of the faith and the increase of the Christian religion, by apostolic authority, with the concordant counsel of the said lords archbishop, bishops, abbots and the other prelates, and also of the distinguished doctors in theology and of both faculties, being with us, we deliver, sitting as a tribunal, we pronounce in these writings, and ordain that the said holy bodies lie in the aforesaid church, ^c and that they are to be raised, and ought to be raised, from the ground and from that place in which in the said church they have been found and exist laid up and buried; and by these presents we grant, by the said apostolic authority, licence to raise them from the said place, and, raised, to replace and lay them up above the altar or otherwise within the church itself in a seemly tabernacle or silver coffer, with the solemnities required in such matters; for the carrying out of which our sentence of this kind, and of the Elevation of which mention is made in it, the Most High disposing and permitting, we take and assign the morrow. The said sentence or pronouncement was indeed read, and promulgated in writing, as was said above, by us, Peter, cardinal, and vicar and legate and apostolic commissary aforesaid, at the town of Our Lady of the Sea, of the diocese of Arles, namely in the lodging of the honourable man Pons Comitis, otherwise Philipot, carpenter, inhabitant of the said town of the Sea, in which we were lodged, namely in a certain great new hall of the same lodging, which we chose and took for ourselves as a sufficient and suitable place for doing the present act in this regard, sitting there as a tribunal upon a certain wooden bench ^d there, on the aforesaid second day of December, in the year as above from the Nativity of the Lord one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, in the eleventh indiction, in the second year of the pontificate of the aforesaid our lord Pope Nicholas V.

[71] before the king and the other chief men; There being present there, together with the most serene lord king aforesaid, the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ the lords archbishop, bishops and abbots, and the masters, doctors and other ecclesiastical men beloved to us in Christ named in the schedule of our sentence or pronouncement in this regard inserted above; and Jean Martin, doctor of laws, royal chancellor of the counties of Provence and Forcalquier aforesaid, and the reverend men the lords Guillaume d'Arencourt, Jean Huet and Marquet de Riciis, protonotaries of the holy apostolic see, and I, Humbert de Rota, public notary subscribed; the illustrious lord Frederick, of the illustrious house of Lorraine, son-in-law of the said most serene lord king, and the vigorous men the lords Tanguy du Châtel, royal seneschal of the counties of Provence and Forcalquier; Hélie, lord of Montfaucon; Jean Arlatan, Jean Quiqueran, knights; Louis, lord of Clermont; Jean Cossa, lord of Grimaud, councillors of the said lord king; the lords Giraud de Montmarin, our chamberlain; Garcia de Mota, our treasurer; Romain Goy, our secretary; Jean Malrosii, administering dean; Jean de Sevassio, non-administering dean, and canons of the church of Avignon; Ernaud Baguet, archdeacon and canon of the church of Arles; Jean, lord of Sas; Jean de Châteauverdun, Étienne Gaufridi, Arnaud de Cerasa, Arnauton de Montjoie, Antoine de Reali, called Cabassola, esquires, and our household masters; Pierre de Bleugeriis and Jean Rastezini, public notaries; and many others exceeding the number of three hundred men and more, witnesses called and asked for this.

[72] he solemnly celebrates Mass, Then, on the coming of Tuesday, which was the day following the day of the pronouncement of our aforesaid sentence, in the year, indiction and pontificate aforesaid, we, Peter, cardinal and vicar, and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, considering that it would profit little to deliver sentences unless they were committed to due execution, committing our sentence to execution at the instance of the most serene lord king aforesaid, the holy bodies of the said holy maternal aunts of Our Lord Jesus Christ, namely of Mary of James and Mary Salome, which we found and saw laid up in the said church of the aforesaid town of the Sea and buried in the ground beside and before the high altar of the said church, after we had celebrated one solemn mass, ordained in honour of those Saints and accustomed to be celebrated, both on the days of their solemnities and at other times, on account of devotion to them, we celebrated in pontifical habit, and with a loud and intelligible voice, there assisting us, also adorned in their pontifical habits, the most reverend and reverend fathers, the lords archbishop, bishops and abbots aforesaid, and other ecclesiastical men also named above, in their ecclesiastical habits accustomed to be worn in divine services, and there being present the most serene lord king aforesaid with the most illustrious lady Isabelle his consort, accompanied by many, and very many distinguished men and women, and persons both from the said counties of Provence and from the neighbouring and also remote parts.

[73] From that ground and place, according to the power attributed to us thereon by the said apostolic authority, He encloses the two holy bodies in a shrine directed and granted at the instance of the said lord king, with the archbishop, bishops and abbots named in our said sentence assisting us, we raised them, the solemnities customary in such matters being observed; and, raised, and cleansed of the earth in which they had lain in the ground, and washed in white wine, in our presence and by our command by the reverend fathers the lords bishops of Marseilles and Couserans, named above, in a certain coffer of twin form ^e made of cypress wood, adorned without and within with silk cloths of wonderful work furnished with gold, which had for this cause been beforehand consecrated and blessed by us according to the form handed down and ordained by the holy Church of God, we laid them up, with an admixture of incense, honourably, and put them back, to be piously and devoutly venerated by all the faithful of Christ; and successively, after we had taken our dinner, we ordered and caused the said holy bodies and their heads and bones to be published, exhibited and particularly shown reverently and solemnly, as is the custom, to the clergy and people outside the said church in the public square there, a solemn sermon having first been made by the aforesaid reverend Master Adhémar Fidelis ^f in the presence of us and of the lord king and lady queen aforesaid, and of a great number of nobles and other persons gathered for that purpose, there also being present the lords archbishop, bishops, abbots, prelates and other ecclesiastical men named above.

[74] and deposits them in the chapel of St. Michael, And at length on the Wednesday then immediately following, which was the fourth day of the said December, after we had put back and laid up the heads and the other venerable relics, found in the said church as above in the verbal process of the reverend lord bishop of Marseilles named above, in a certain other coffer * of walnut wood, also of wonderful work, which the said lord king had caused to be made and built for this cause ^g, and blessed by our command, and in the presence of us and of the lord king aforesaid, by the reverend father the lord bishop of Glandèves, in the sacristy of the said church, to be guarded and kept until something else should be otherwise ordained concerning and upon them by us or by our superior; the coffer, in which, as has been said, the said holy bodies of the said glorious holy Aunts of God are and were put back, closed and kept by us with four keys, we also ordered, and caused, to be raised on high and guarded, namely in a certain distinguished place above, before the said high altar, namely in the chapel of St. Michael of the same church, ordered and built marvellously by the said lord king, solemnly, in the presence of the lords and persons of whom mention is made above.

[75] the keys being handed to the king and the prior of Montmajour; And those four keys, namely two to the aforesaid lord king, to be guarded and preserved in his treasuries, and the two others to the religious man beloved to us in Christ the lord Jourdain Guavarret, claustral prior of the monastery of St. Peter of Montmajour, of the Order of St. Benedict, of the diocese of Arles, on which the said church of the Sea depends, and which is accustomed to be governed and held by the monks of the same monastery, to be carried to the treasury of the said monastery and guarded in it, we handed over and committed; and we charitably exhorted in the Lord the aforesaid lord king, present and consenting, not to hand over or communicate the said keys to any persons without consulting the most holy lord our Pope or us, or the successors of the same our lord, or our successors in our aforesaid office. And we forbade the aforesaid claustral prior, by the apostolic authority aforesaid, to do likewise, under sentence of excommunication, which we willed and will that he and those doing otherwise shall in future incur in any manner ipso facto; and we enjoined by the same authority that the said lord king in his treasuries, and the aforesaid claustral prior in the treasuries of the said monastery, should have it written down authentically that they had been so exhorted and forbidden by us; which they freely promised us they would do.

[77] finally letters patent are made out. In faith and testimony of all and each of which foregoing things, we have thought fit to grant these our letters patent, containing the process and the pronouncement of our said sentence and the other things aforesaid, made out by our command by Humbert de Rota of Mâcon, beloved to us in Christ, citizen of Avignon, public notary by apostolic, imperial and royal French ^h authority, and the scribe subscribed of a cause of this kind before us, subscribed and signed, and confirmed by the hanging of our seal, to the aforesaid lord king, present, and requiring, by the voice and organ of the distinguished professor of civil law the lord Jean Martin, his chancellor in the said counties of Provence and Forcalquier, that an instrument or letters patent be decreed and granted by us to him the lord king. The holy bodies of the said glorious holy maternal aunts of our Lord Jesus Christ were indeed raised,

of SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, and laid up and put back, and the other things aforesaid were done and transacted in the manner and form, and at the places aforesaid, in the year also, indiction, days and pontificate aforesaid; there being present there, together with the most reverend and reverend and venerable fathers in Christ, the lords archbishop, bishops and abbots and other prelates, and the knights and the others named above, the lords beloved to us in Christ Hector, lord of Pierre, and Jean de Jambes, master of the household of the lord king of the Franks and his castellan of Aigues-Mortes, and many other witnesses called and asked for the foregoing.

[78] The attestations of Humbert de Rota, notary, And I, Humbert de Rota of Mâcon, citizen of Avignon, secretary of the most Christian lord king of the Franks, and public notary by apostolic and imperial authority and by that of the lord king of the Franks himself, and notary and scribe of the cause of an Elevation of this kind before the most reverend father and lord in Christ, the lord cardinal de Foix, vicar, legate and apostolic commissary named above, because I was present, together with the lords witnesses named above, at all and each of the things done and transacted, as was said above, by that most reverend lord our cardinal and through him, in and about the business of the Elevation of which mention is made above, therefore, by command of the same lord our cardinal, I made out the present process concerning and upon them, written by another faithful to me, I being occupied with other business. Therefore I have subscribed this present process with my own hand, and set before it my accustomed sign together with the hanging of the seal of the same most reverend lord cardinal, in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the things aforesaid, being required and asked on the part of the most serene lord king René named above ⁱ.

[79] of Robert of Aix and Nicholas of Marseilles; We, Robert Damiani, by divine mercy archbishop of Aix, and Nicholas de Brancas, by the same mercy bishop of Marseilles, aforesaid, who, by the apostolic authority committed to us in this regard, as is established by the tenor of the apostolic letters inserted above, made the search for the holy bodies of the said holy Aunts of God, SS. Mary of James and Mary Salome, in the manner and form set out more fully in the verbal process of us the bishop of Marseilles, [and] in the process of the sentence of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and also apostolic commissary in this regard deputed by the same apostolic authority, written immediately above and sealed with his seal; and we were present at the delivery of the said sentence, and at the execution of that sentence, at the Elevation, laying up and putting back of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things described more fully in the said process of the sentence, together with the reverend lords protonotaries of the holy apostolic see, and the bishops, abbots, masters, doctors and other ecclesiastical men named in the said sentence; and we saw all those things done in the manner and form ^k in that process of the sentence. And we the bishop of Marseilles aforesaid, who at the command of the said most reverend lord cardinal helped with our own hands to draw out the said holy bodies from the ground in which they were found buried, and to cleanse and wash them of the earth with which the bones of the said holy bodies, when they were drawn out of the ground, were soiled, together with the reverend father the lord Tristan, bishop of Couserans, sealed below, ordered and caused these our testimonial letters to be joined to the said process, and to be made and signed by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process of the aforesaid sentence before the said lord cardinal, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seals ^l, and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the foregoing.

H. de Rota.

[80] of the protonotaries, We also, Guillaume d'Arencourt, Jean Huet and Marquet de Riciis, protonotaries of the holy apostolic see named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ, the lords archbishop, bishops, abbots and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seals, and of each of us ^m, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the things aforesaid.

Humbert de Rota.

[81] of the bishops of Orange, Apt and Troy, We also, Antoine Ferrier of Orange ⁿ, Pierre Nasondi of Apt [o], and John de Coliargis of Troy [p], bishops, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ and lords, the archbishop, bishops, protonotaries of the holy apostolic see, and abbots and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seals [q], and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the aforesaid.

H. de Rota.

[82] likewise of Gap, Couserans and Carpentras, We also, Gaucher de Forcalquier of Gap [r], and Tristan de Aura of Couserans [s], and Guillaume Soybert of Carpentras [t], bishops, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ, the lords archbishop, bishops and protonotaries, and abbots, and all and each of the other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seals [u], and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the things narrated before.

Humbert de Rota.

[83] of Digne, Cavaillon and Grasse, We also, Pierre Turelure of Digne [v], and Palamède de Carreto of Cavaillon [x], and Guillaume Guezi of Grasse [y], bishops, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ and lords, the archbishop, bishops and protonotaries, abbots and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence inserted above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and to be fortified by the hanging of our seals [z], and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the aforesaid.

H. de Rota.

[84] of Glandèves, Vaison and Abbot Pierre, We also, Pierre Marini of Glandèves [aa], and Pons de Sade of Vaison [bb], bishops, and Pierre du Lac, humble abbot of the sacred monastery of St. Victor of Marseilles [cc], of the Order of St. Benedict, immediately subject to the Roman church, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and commissary, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ, the lords archbishop, bishops and protonotaries, abbots and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and commanded them to be fortified by the hanging of our seals [dd], and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the foregoing.

H. de Rota.

[85] likewise of the abbots of Psalmody, Saint-Gilles and Nizelle, We also, Arnaud de Saint-Félix of Psalmody [ee] and Jean Préverand of Saint-Gilles [ff], of the Order of St. Benedict, and Jean Eustace of Sainte-Marie of Nizelle [gg], of the Cistercian Order, humble abbots of monasteries of the dioceses of Nîmes and Cambrai, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ, the lords archbishop, bishops and protonotaries, masters, doctors and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and commanded them to be fortified by the hanging of our seals [hh], and of each of us, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the aforesaid.

H. de Rota.

[86] finally of the provost of Arles, etc. We also, Jean Arbaleti, doctor of decrees, provost of the holy church of Arles, and Vicar in spirituals and temporals and official general of the same, and Louis de Frassengis, secular, and dean of the collegiate church of St. Peter of Avignon, Jean Payer, archdeacon of Carpentras, and Arnaud-Guillaume de Sansac of Aire, canons of the churches, and doctors of decrees, named in the process of the aforesaid sentence, were present at the pronouncement and execution of that sentence, and at the Elevation of the said holy bodies, and at all and each of the other things contained more fully in the process of the most reverend lord cardinal, vicar and legate, and apostolic commissary aforesaid, together with the most reverend and reverend fathers in Christ and lords, the archbishop, bishops and protonotaries, abbots and other ecclesiastical persons named in the sentence described above. Therefore we ordered and caused these present testimonial letters to be made for that process by Master Humbert de Rota, notary and scribe, signed above, of the said process, and of our seals

[ii], and of each of us, we commanded to be fortified by the hanging, in the year, indiction and pontificate noted above in the last place in the said process; in faith, force and testimony of the truth of all and each of the aforesaid.

H. de Rota.

ANNOTATIONS.

p. Of Troy. See the Preliminary Commentary, num. 50 and 51.

q. The seals of Ferrier and Nasondi have perished, except for the tie; that of Troy still remains whole, and is of red wax Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1278.

r. Of Gap. See the Annotations to §1, letter g.

s. Of Couserans. Compare the Preliminary Commentary, num. 51.

t. Of Carpentras. From bishop of Uzès (Uzès) made bishop of Carpentras, he assisted Peter, bishop of Albano, legate of the apostolic see, drawing out of the earth the bodies of the holy women Mary of James, Mary Salome and Mary of Cleophas (ineptly, as there has already been occasion to say elsewhere, three are named, whereas only two are in question, and Mary of James is the same as Mary of Cleophas), etc. Gallia Christiana, vol. I, col. 909.

u. The seal of the bishop of Gap, of red wax, has been preserved; of the two others only the ties survive Monuments inédits, as above, col. 1279.

v. Of Digne. His surname is given in various ways: Turtulerius, Turelure, Taurus, Turturelli Gallia Christiana, vol. III, col. 1129. Of the Order of Preachers… bishop of Digne from the year 1445. He was present at the translation of the holy Marys in the year 1448, where he also delivered an elegant oration, from the records of Aix Ibid., which certainly is not found in our instrument; indeed, more than once Adhémar is noted to have spoken in the assembly. Whence the Rev. M. Faillon rightly suspects Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1279, note a that what had been done by Adhémar is wrongly attributed to the bishop of Digne.

x. Of Cavaillon. Elected by the chapter in the year 1437, promoted by the supreme pontiff on the third day before the Kalends of March of the same year. In the year 1448, on the 4th of December, he was present at the elevation … of the holy Marys Gallia Christiana, vol. I, col. 953. Not rightly, nay preposterously, does the Rev. M. Faillon assert that he was promoted in the year 1448 Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1279, note b. The error will have come from a not sufficiently attentive reading of the text just cited from the Gallia Christiana.

y. Of Grasse. William, formerly sacristan of the church of Grasse, when he was seeking the bishopric, persuaded Antoine (his predecessor) by promises and flatteries to abdicate, towards whom, however, he was little fair, denying him the agreed pension. He was already sitting in at least the year 1448, as is clear from the bull of Pope Nicholas V by which he is compelled to the payment of a pension of this kind. He made a certain statute in the same year on the 9th of July, and on the 4th of December following was present at the elevation of the bodies of SS. Mary, etc. Gallia Christiana, vol. III, col. 1171. His surname is given in various ways: Guezi, Gueri, Guasqui Ibid.. But that the process of the elevation is said to have been written by Guillaume Soybert is not found in its text. Did the compilers of the Gallia Christiana draw this from elsewhere? They do not say.

z. Only certain fragments survive of the seals of the bishops of Cavaillon and Grasse Monuments inédits, as above, col. 1280.

aa. Glandatensis, or Glandavensis (Glandèves). Pierre, surnamed Marini, of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine, of the convent of Aix, a learned man and a very celebrated preacher, confessor to René, duke of Anjou, king of Sicily and count of Provence, was adorned with the mitre of Glandèves. He was present at the translation of the relics of SS. Mary, etc. Gallia Christiana, vol. III, col. 1244. Some chronological difficulty arises from Wadding's annals of the Minors, which the compilers of the Gallia Christiana explain Ibid..

bb. Of Vaison. Pons de Sade (Pons de Sadon), professor in the University of Avignon, held the dignity of primicerius in the arduous times of the council of Basel, in which he was seen to defend the authority of Eugene IV with the greatest prudence. He was also provost of the church of Avignon… He was present in the year 1448 … at the elevation… of the holy Marys… He ruled until the year 1469 Ibid., vol. I, col. 933.

cc. Peter VI du Lac (of a noble family among the Arverni) took up the abbacy by rescript of Eugene IV through the resignation of his brother (Guillaume du Lac) in 1442. He convoked the general chapters of the order according to custom in 1446. In the year 1448… He was present at the elevation of the holy Marys Ibid., col. 694.

dd. A fragment of the abbatial seal survives. The other two have perished Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1280.

ee. Of Psalmody. Arnaud de Saint-Félix … occurs as abbot in 1439 and 1448, in which year he was definitor of the general chapter held at Carcassonne. He was present in the same year … at the elevation of the bodies of the holy Marys Gallia Christiana, vol. VII, col. 479.

ff. Jean Préverand, professor of decrees, and perpetual administrator of the archdeaconry of Uzès, was present in the year 1448 together with Cardinal de Foix … at the elevation, etc. Ibid., col. 502.

gg. Nizelle, a mile and a half from the town of Nivelle (Nivelles), was formerly a manor of the abbey of Moulins (Molines) Ibid., vol. III, col. 599. Jean Eustace, or Eustachius, as a youth embraced the institute of St. Augustine at Mons in Hainaut in the monastery of the Val-des-Écoliers Ibid., col. 595. About the year 1428, having obtained the permission of his superiors, he passed over to the monks of Moulins. About the year 1435 he was sent by the abbot of Aulne to the little garden of the Blessed Virgin,

commonly called Jardinet (Jardinet). And in the year 1441 he became the first abbot of Nizelle … for six years; which having elapsed he returned to his Jardinet Ibid., col. 596 and 599. Whence it follows that Eustace was not abbot of Nizelle in the year 1448; and in very truth for that year the same writers note Ibid., col. 599: John II Tristandi was abbot of St. Mary of Nizelle in the year 1448; and nevertheless elsewhere Ibid., vol. VI, col. 502 they recite the beginning of the present attestation: We also, Arnaud … and Jean Préverand … and Jean Eustace of St. Mary of Nizelle, etc. All these things indeed do not hang together very well, so that consequently scarcely anything may be inferred from them, all the more because the catalogue of the abbots of Nizelle is not a little imperfect, as is indicated even by the title: Some abbots Ibid., vol. III, col. 599. Besides, even if it be granted that Eustace had already then returned to Jardinet, certainly this had happened recently, and so what the Rev. M. Faillon has Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1281, note c is not absolutely impossible, that in subscribing he took the title by which he was still better known. However that may be, it seems to me that one should rather stand by the instrument of the Elevation, and set the passage to Jardinet somewhat later. Nor is it to be passed over that Eustace recited the history of the Finding in rhyme, as the Gallia Christiana relates elsewhere Vol. VI, col. 479. The Rev. M. Faillon asserts, however Monuments inédits, vol. II, col. 1222 and 1223, that he sought it everywhere; but in vain.

hh. Besides the ties, nothing now survives of these seals Ibid., col. 1231.

ii. There still subsist the seals of Louis de Frassengis and Arnaud-Guillaume, of red wax; of the two others nothing is now had except the ties.

* coffer?