Twelve Brothers

ON THE HOLY TWELVE BROTHERS: DONATUS AND FELIX AND ARONTIUS AND HONORATUS AND FORTUNATUS AND SABINIANUS AND SEPTIMINUS AND JANUARIUS AND FELIX AND VITALIS AND SATOR AND REPOSITUS, MARTYRS AT BENEVENTO IN ITALY,

AT BENEVENTO IN ITALY,

Under Maximian.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Donatus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Felix, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Arontius, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Honoratus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Fortunatus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Savinianus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Septiminus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Januarius, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Felix the second, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Vitalis, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Sator, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Repositus, martyr, one of the brothers, at Benevento in Italy. (S.)

Written by J. S.

§ I. The memory of these Saints in the Martyrologies, and their ancient veneration.

[ ] The Roman Martyrology today

announces twelve martyr

Brothers, The memory of the holy twelve Brothers in the sacred Calendars; who are all venerated together

at Benevento, although on various

days and in various places they obtained the palm

of martyrdom. Receive their brief

elogium: At Benevento, of the holy Martyrs,

twelve brothers. Baronius adds this annotation:

Of these it is treated in the old Roman Martyrology,

with which the ancient manuscripts also agree…

These were all Africans, of Hadrumetum by fatherland,

who, first tortured there, then led into Italy,

consummated their martyrdom on different days.

By the old Roman Martyrology he designates,

I think, the Vatican codex of Usuard,

which records our Saints in almost the same manner in

Sollerius, in these words: At Benevento, the birthday

of the holy Martyrs, twelve brothers. They are also

announced together in other codices of Usuard, both manuscript

and printed, in some indeed without their proper names,

but in others with their names added,

as may be seen in the Usuard of Sollerius. The Utrecht

and the Leyden codices there weave this elogium:

At Benevento, the birthday of the holy Martyrs,

twelve brothers, Donatus and Felix, Aruntius

and Honoratus, Fortunatianus and Savinianus, Septiminus

and Januarius, Felix and Vitalis, Saturninus and

Repositus. These, when by their preaching they had converted very many,

under the emperor Maximian, the judge

Valerian, underwent the capital sentence. All these

things were added to the Martyrology of Usuard;

for Usuard himself did not insert these Martyrs

into his Little Work; nor do the other martyrologists older than Usuard,

or nearly contemporary with him, seem to have known

them all. Nevertheless these Martyrs were afterwards announced

by the author of our manuscript Florarium, in which they are

read set out in this manner: At Benevento, the birthday

of the holy martyrs, twelve Brothers, Donatus

and Felix, Aruntius and Honoratus, Fortunatianus

and Savinianus, Septiminus and Januarius, Felix and

Vitalis, Saturus and Repositus. These, when by their preaching

they had converted very many to the faith, under

the emperor Maximian, the judge Valerian, received the capital

sentence in the year of salvation 295.

[2] who are announced at Benevento, although they did not suffer there: Now here it must be observed that these twelve

Brothers are not announced at Benevento because they suffered

there, but because the bodies of all were at last

translated thither, as we shall relate. Galesinius did not attend

to this, and on that occasion wrongly doubled the twelve

Brothers, assigning one set to Venosa,

where we shall see that some of ours suffered,

but the others to Benevento, where none of them fell.

Each elogium with which he adorned them

fits ours, if we except the arena of the martyrdom

and the increased kinds of torments, whence this writer received them

I do not sufficiently perceive: At Venosa, he says,

in Apulia, of the holy twelve Martyrs.

These, own brothers, when Maximian Cæsar was assailing the Christian

cause, undergoing the struggle with brave spirit,

broken by no bitterness of punishments,

the course of their fight excellently finished, come to the palm.

At Benevento, likewise of the holy twelve

Martyrs, Donatus, Felix, Acontius, Honoratus,

Fortunatus, Savinianus, Septiminius, Januarius,

Felix, Vitalis, Satyrus and Repositus: who,

own brothers likewise, born of noble stock,

illustrious for holiness of life, learned in sacred doctrines,

joined a multitude of men by their preachings to Christ

the Lord. For which cause, being accused,

they are thrust into prison; where, when they had also encouraged

many to martyrdom, first

racked with torments, then pierced with nails, cast upon a pyre,

half-burnt with flames, then beaten again with stripes in the sight

of the judge, at last, all torments being overcome

by heavenly constancy and divine protection,

struck with the axe, they are granted a glorious crown.

[3] Even though all these Martyrs are not commemorated together

by the older martyrologists, the same Martyrs are also recorded on those days, various

of them are nevertheless announced separately on those days

on which they obtained the crown. Four are read as having suffered

on 27 August, whom the Hieronymian copies in

Florentinius record on the same day in these words: In

Lucania, in the city of Potenza, of the holy Felix,

Arontius, Sabinianus, Honoratus. Florentinius there adduces

in his annotations the Corbie, the Antwerp,

and the Queen of Sweden's Mss., in which the memory of the same

occurs, as also happens in

various supplements of Usuard, cited in Sollerius

at the same day. I subjoin the words of the Vatican codex:

The birthday of the holy Arontius, Honoratus, Fortunatianus

and Sabinianus. Hence they were briefly treated

by us in volume 6 of August, page 21, but with the examination

of the Acts referred to this place. On the day

28 August three others are read to have obtained martyrdom at Venosa,

namely Septiminus, Januarius and

Felix, whom the Vatican codex just praised announces on the same

day in Sollerius in these words:

And of the holy martyrs Septiminus, Januarius and

Felix. The place of martyrdom is passed over; for neither is

Salerno, where three others had before been commemorated,

assigned as the arena of these Martyrs, as

is sufficiently gathered from the manner of speaking, and because from elsewhere

it is established that they did not suffer at Salerno. This is moreover confirmed

by the fact that the three following are likewise announced there without a place.

In the copy of the church of Bovino,

cited in volume 6 of August, page 166, the place

is added, namely Venosa, and the judge Valerian.

Further, the praised Vatican codex on the following day

records three others, who on that day, 29 August, are said to have been crowned,

in this manner: The birthday of the holy Vitalis,

Sator and Repositus. Thus the praised codex

referred each of these Martyrs to the days proper to each,

excepting the two last, namely Donatus

and the second Felix, who were crowned on the Kalends of September,

and therefore do not seem to be recorded there separately,

because on that day all are recorded together,

as also all are venerated on the same day.

[4] And which of these Martyrs the Vatican codex has at 29 August,

on which they were crowned by parts: the same are set forth by

the manuscript additions of the Charterhouse of Brussels in this manner:

In Africa, of the holy martyrs Vitalis, Satirus

and Repositus. Doubtless they are announced in Africa,

because there they began their contest, and because

the place of the completed martyrdom was not sufficiently clear to the author,

which he perhaps thought to be in Africa. Finally

the two later of these Twelve are recorded in various

Hieronymian copies at 1 September,

on which they obtained the palm; but in most

not without confusion with others. They are nevertheless clearly

distinguished from the others in the most ancient Antwerp

codex, in Florentinius in his annotations at

this day, where their memory is thus expressed:

On the Kalends of September, in Apulia, of Felix and Donatus.

These announcements of the Martyrologies, in which

the Saints are recorded separately, I wished to bring forward, that

from them the studious reader may gather that all were probably

once celebrated on four different days,

on which they had suffered, namely four on 27

August, three others on the next day, again three others

on the 29th of the same month, and finally the two last

on 1 September; so that they seem to have been already

in veneration before the bodies of all were translated

to Benevento, which was done in the eighth

century, as we shall see below.

[5] the festivity of all at Benevento, as also a second one of the translation: It cannot be doubted that the festivity of the holy

twelve Brothers was instituted at Benevento

as soon as their bodies were brought thither, that is,

in the eighth century. At the same time perhaps began the festivity

of the translation, which in the manuscript additions

of the Charterhouse of Brussels to Grevenus at 15 May

is indicated in these words: Of the holy 12 Brothers,

martyrs, the translation at Benevento. But in the Antwerp Ms.

of St. Michael it is noted thus on the 16th of the same month:

The translation of the twelve Brothers, martyrs.

Both have been observed by us among the passed-over

at the said days. This difference of one day arose

perhaps from the metrical History of the translation, in

which at number 39 the day is expressed in this manner: At the time

when the month of May is now at its middle, the translation is kept

by all the people. But these words can equally

be understood of the day 16 May as of the 15th.

But that doubt is removed by the Office of the translation,

or the Acts in prose, which toward the end clearly

express the day 15 May.

[6] the prayers from their Mass, Vittorio Giovardi, who lately collected various

Acts of these Saints, in the appendix of his Little Work

published various things from the Breviary and Sacramentary of the church

of St. Sophia of Benevento which pertain

to the Office and the Mass customarily read on their

festivity. The three prayers of the Mass, on page 151, he thus

recites. The first: O God, who hast granted us year by year

to celebrate the birthdays of the holy Donatus, Felix, Orontius

[] and Onoratus [], and of their Brothers; grant,

we beseech thee, that by their merits also thou mayest deign

to lead us thy servants to the eternal joys.

Through our Lord, etc.

The second: O God, who in the number of the Apostles hast brought

to the bounds of Italy men born of one womb and one father,

worthy of martyrdom, triumphing from among the Africans, grant

us, we beseech thee, to be fortified by the suffrages of those

by whose merits we believe ourselves to be helped with thee. Through etc.

The third: May the brotherly throng of thy holy martyrs, the twelve

Brothers, we beseech thee, O Lord, go before us

with their prayers, who suffered for the confession of thy name,

and may it defend us from all

adversities, thou being propitious. Through etc. These things

from the Sacramentary, page 285.

[7] a hymn from the ancient Office, Then on page 152, after certain other things, he subjoins

a hymn for Vespers and Matins, conceived

in these words:

Let the ever-watchful company of Christ

With sweet melody

Sing a hymn [*] to the Lord,

Who is the crown of the martyrs.

God, strength, power,

And the best of triumphers,

Bestowing the kingdoms of the heavens

On those whom he makes his own offspring.

Hence let the sacred hall resound

With the voices of all the Brothers,

Mingled with angelic choirs,

Of those fervent with the Holy Spirit.

From whom the twelve Brothers,

Duly kindled from heaven,

Despised the wealth of the world,

And the contagions of the demons.

Whose glorious deeds she beholds

While the suppliant mother asks,

Let him pay her son the cruel

Whom the demon had bound.

(The passage is doubtless corrupt, which you may restore thus:

Beholding whose glorious deeds

While the suppliant mother asks

That they loose the bonds of her son,

Whom the cruel demon had bound:

The Brothers praying [*] to the Father,

Burst asunder the bonds of the demons,

And restore to the mother her only son,

And she believes in Christ the Lord.

The sacrilegious, seeing this,

Offer their services to Christ;

Anointed with the sacred chrism,

They glow red in the everlasting font.

[8] in which various deeds are narrated, Whom presently the minister of the demons

Bound strongly with chains,

For whom in the depth of the prison

A divine light [*] shone.

An angel, coming to the Saints [*],

Burst asunder the bonds of iron;

The Lord, he says, hath sent me,

Who is the Redeemer of all.

The judge, after he had seen these things,

Binding them again with iron,

Then upon the open sea

Began to journey with them.

Presently a storm arises,

The wicked judge implores

That the holy Martyrs of God

Should ask the gifts of Christ.

The Brothers pray as suppliants,

A calm of the sea is made;

Presently many of the soldiers

Beg for Christ by believing.

Seeing this, the executioner in sorrow,

After many torments,

Striking these men with the blow of the sword,

Sent them to the joys of Heaven.

By whose merits, O Christ,

We now bowed down beseech thee,

That we may deserve pardon,

And the joys of paradise.

To God the Father be etc.

[9] The hymn at Lauds is set forth to be recited here:

another hymn of the same Office: The splendour of the day glows red,

Consecrated by the blood of the Brothers,

In which Donatus shines forth,

Felix [], and Orontius []:

Hence Honoratus radiates,

By confessing Christ he preaches him:

Mingled with the angelic troops

They now render praises to the Lord.

Fortunatianus [*] rejoices,

Bearing the garlands of martyrdom,

Bound to the holy virgins,

He utters canticles to Christ.

The renowned Sabinianus,

Septiminus likewise,

And together Januarius,

Most blessed fellow-citizens.

Felix and Vitalis sing together,

Saturus, and Repositus,

Shining in the royal hall,

Ever happy, they rejoice.

Wherefore we all as suppliants

Beg you, O Martyrs,

By the King of kings, the Lord,

That he may grant [*] the joys of heaven.

To God the Father be etc.

[10] The studious reader will observe that one of the holy

Brothers is here called Orontius, who elsewhere is everywhere

called Arontius or Aruntius. But I suspect

that he is faultily so named in the Beneventan Breviary, the festivity of the Saints celebrated with a vigil and an octave.

or at least I judge that the name Arontius is to be preferred

on the authority of all the other monuments.

Nor are other faults lacking in the recited hymns,

which nevertheless can with difficulty be corrected by

conjecture alone. Further, the Office which is set forth to be recited for the festivity

is prescribed also

for the Octave; and another is prefixed for the Vigil of the festivity.

Hence we learn that the feast day of the holy

twelve Brothers was celebrated at Benevento

with a most solemn rite, namely with a Vigil and

an Octave. The praised Giovardi on page 154 published another

Mass in the commemoration of the holy twelve

Brothers, from a most ancient Missal of the Vatican

library marked number 4770, and written about

the tenth century, as he notes. In this Mass the names

of all the Brothers are expressed, but in different

places, and in this manner and order: Donatus,

Felix, Arontius, Honoratus, Fortunatus, Savinianus,

Septiminus, Januarius, Felix, Vitalis,

Sator, and Repositus. Let these things suffice concerning the ancient

cult of these Saints; and from them also

the number and the brotherhood of these Saints are confirmed.

Annotations

* Arontii

* Honorati

* hymnum

* perhaps exorantes

* a syllable is missing.

* perhaps Sanctis

* perhaps & Felix

* Arontius

* a syllable is redundant

* donet

§ II. The various Acts, partly published, partly unpublished, and their discussion.

[ ] Acts written in prose and in verse; Various Acts of the holy twelve Brothers are at hand

to us, of which some seem better than others,

or at least less corrupted. Vittorio

Giovardi, a cleric of Veroli, diligently

sought out all that he could find about these Saints,

and published it at the Roman press in the year 1730,

together with the Acts of St. Mercurius the martyr, who is had in

the Roman Martyrology at 25 November,

and therefore does not belong here. In the said collection Giovardi

from page 77 published Acts written by an uncertain and anonymous

author in prose for the lessons of the Office,

under this title: The Passion of the holy martyrs

Donatus, Felix and their Brothers. Then

from page 90 he subjoined longer and metrical Acts,

to which this title is prefixed: A heroic hexameter poem

of the lord Alfanus, archbishop of Salerno,

in honour of the holy martyrs, the twelve

Brothers, to the lord Roffrid the monk.

Of both these lucubrations Baronius speaks thus

in his observations on the Martyrology: Alfanus,

bishop of Salerno, wrote the Acts of these (twelve Brothers)

in heroic verse, which are found written out in

the seventh volume added to Surius.

We have the same in prose, written in Lombard

script. In all of which those things must be corrected

which are narrated in them about holy Cyprian the martyr:

for the most holy Cyprian lived long before the times of Maximian,

in which these are said to have suffered:

unless perhaps in the same Acts an error crept into the name

of the emperor, and for Valerian

Maximian has been set down.

[12] but both contain some things which cannot be reconciled with others. Giovardi praises this censure of Baronius

in his Preliminary Notice, page 72, and at the same time softens it,

subjoining this: By this judgment of the most learned Cardinal

we are advised that they are not fabulous,

but sprinkled with faults, which if they be cut away, they will turn out

wholly sincere and genuine. Wherefore, if we pledge our faith to the most illustrious

Cardinal, it must be confessed that their passion

happened after the middle of the third century,

that is, under Valerian, who reigned after the middle of the third

century. But that is not the opinion of Baronius,

since he more openly intimates that the things which are read in the Acts

about St. Cyprian are fabulous, and puts forward his conjecture

about Valerian only timidly, so that someone

else might inquire whether in that way the things narrated about St. Cyprian

can be retained in the Acts.

Tillemont, volume 5 of Ecclesiastical Monuments, in the Persecution

of Diocletian, article 51, examines these Acts

briefly, and asserts that they cannot be corrected in the manner

assigned by Baronius, but he brings forward no proof.

He adds also that the metrical Little Work of Alfanus

labours under other defects, which he does not assign, and which

I do not judge so notable that from them alone

the authority of the Little Work would be much diminished. But

the things which are narrated in the Acts about St. Cyprian

can in no sufficiently likely way stand, as

I shall show below, when I examine under what emperor

the Martyrs suffered. Besides this defect,

another is found in the Acts of the anonymous author alone, about an emperor

who died at Aquileia, which likewise seems fabulous,

since we shall show that the Martyrs did not suffer

under Maximinus, of whom alone the passage could be understood.

Certain lighter defects, which might be

excused if the Acts had a contemporary or nearly contemporary

author, I shall assign in the Annotations.

[13] The age in which these Acts were written

does not favour their authority. [Those written in prose seem to be after the year 760 and before the end of the same century;] I can scarcely doubt

that the anonymous author wrote in prose

before Alfanus, who probably had him before his eyes,

and everywhere followed him; but it is not altogether established

how long before Alfanus he flourished.

Giovardi on page 75 suspects that they were written at the end of the seventh

century (he means, I think, the eighth century).

For, he says, the style employed in the antiphons and responsories

(of the Office) coheres well with this, which

nevertheless were written in the same century, since they had before

been composed for the use of that monastery. Quite

probable is this conjecture about the eighth century

drawing to its close: for the Acts were composed

for the Office, and divided into twelve lessons;

and it is likely that the Office was composed

not long after their sacred bodies had been translated

to Benevento, which is said to have happened in the year

760. Further, that the Acts were not written before that

translation is certain from what is recorded toward the end

about the same translation. From the same it is also likely

that they were written while Arichis, the author of the translation, was still

alive, since the author speaks of him as living, or at least

does not intimate that he was then dead. Take the words: For

while they were held unworthily in various more squalid coffins,

the most wise man Arichis, the most famous prince of the nation of the Lombards,

collected their most precious bodies, and those whom by reading he had found

to be Brothers in blood and in faith, with great

honour laid them at Benevento under one covering.

Who unceasingly are mighty in manifest miracles. From

these words, I say, it is likely that the Acts were drawn up

between the year 760 and the end of the eighth century; for

I should not dare to affirm it as certain: nor indeed

does it much matter whether they were written in the eighth century or

later, since that age cannot procure authority

for the Acts. The same author seems to have written the History

of the translation, to be recited in the Office of the translation,

and likewise divided into twelve lessons;

for the style of both writings is the same, and the same

the form of the lessons. This too is published in Giovardi

from page 118, but mutilated at the beginning and at the end.

[14] At what time the metrical Life was composed

we have sufficiently ascertained from the age of its author Alfanus. those written in verse are about the middle of the eleventh century;

For Alfanus flourished in the eleventh century, and first

a cleric, from a cleric a monk of Cassino,

then abbot of a Benedictine monastery at Salerno,

and at last in the year 1058 was created archbishop

of Salerno, as Ughelli sets out more at large,

volume 7 of Sacred Italy from column 380, who also fixes

his death in the year 1085, and reviews his various writings

from Peter the deacon of Cassino; and among

them this metrical Life of the holy twelve

Brothers, of which we are treating, is reviewed in these words: The Passion of the holy

martyrs, the twelve Brothers of Benevento,

to brother Roffrid, monk of Cassino.

It is had in Lipomanus, volume 4, and Surius,

volume 7, under the day 1 September. I suspect

that the Little Work was composed before his episcopate,

and perhaps before his abbatial dignity, since it is written

to Roffrid the monk, and he thus addresses him

in the preface: You bid me write the History of the twelve

Brothers. And presently: I shall obey: so great a command

will excuse the work; and he has other like things,

which an abbot does not seem likely to be about to write to a monk, much less

an archbishop. I judge therefore that Alfanus was a monk

when he wrote these things, and that the Little Work

was drawn up about the middle of the eleventh century, or some

years earlier. Surius and Lipomanus indeed published

this metrical Life, but without the History of the translation,

which Giovardi, praised before, first

made public. And that the History of the translation

was written by the same man he endeavours to prove on page

88, from these words of the preface: You bid me

… write the History, etc.; to which he then subjoins:

And afterwards, how Arichis the great prince translated

the bodies to Benevento, etc.

I confess that from these words it is rightly gathered that Alfanus also wished

to write the translation. Yet I doubt whether

the verses which Giovardi published about the translation are Alfanus's.

The reason is that another style appears in them,

and that much more obscure and less Latin.

Besides, at the end of the translation the abbot Matthew

is said to have ordered that work, or those verses, to be composed;

but Alfanus composed his at the request of Roffrid

the monk. I should therefore rather believe that that translation

which Giovardi published is by another

poet.

[15] both nevertheless from older monuments: Further, not only the metrical Life, but also

the other Acts, or the lessons of the Beneventan Office, were composed

from older monuments. Indeed

that Acts of these Martyrs existed before the translation of their bodies

to Benevento may be gathered from

certain sayings which are inserted into the Office. For

in the last Lesson of the Life, at number 11, it is said of Arichis

the prince: Whom he had found to be Brothers in blood and in faith

BY READING (the ancient history, I think, of the martyrdom), etc.

The same is more clearly gathered from

the Office of the translation, lesson 4, number 1, where Arichis

is brought in speaking thus: These most precious

Witnesses of the Lord… For, as is read in their Passion, etc.

These things Arichis is reported to have said before the translation:

before the translation therefore the Passion of the twelve Brothers

had been written out, but at what time is uncertain.

Hence also it seems certain enough that that Office,

or the Acts which we are about to publish, were composed from older ones;

but again it is uncertain of what

worth those older Acts were, and how

exactly the author of these Acts, or of the lessons of the Office,

followed them. Nevertheless I do not see why

the things which are narrated in the Acts about the places

and the time of the martyrdom cannot be admitted as true, and finally all those things

against which no weightier reason or authority

stands. The same must be laid down about the metrical Life,

which seems to have been composed from these Acts.

[16] Besides the published Acts, of which I have hitherto disputed,

we have a twofold manuscript copy, other, shorter and better Acts: hitherto

unpublished, as I judge. The first copy

was transmitted to our Elders by the Reverend Dom Nicolas

Belfort, a French Canon Regular, often

praised in this Work, from a certain Ms. of his,

about which I find nothing else noted. These Acts

are short, and contain nothing which can be convicted

of error or falsity. Nothing also occurs in them

which is not read in the longer Acts;

but on the contrary not a few things are omitted in these shorter ones

which in the others present difficulty,

or are more suspect. For this cause it appears likely enough

that these Acts are those older ones

which I said existed before the translation, especially

since they have not even a word about the translation, or

about Benevento. For one or the other must necessarily

be said: either that these shorter ones were abridged from the longer,

with those things omitted which displeased;

or that these were written before the longer. The first is less

probable, because no reason can be given

why the author should have wished to omit the translation of the bodies,

than which nothing in the longer Acts was more certain.

The second therefore appears more probable, and I should

altogether judge so if I were sufficiently assured of

the antiquity of the codex from which our copy

was taken.

[17] Whatever it be, these shorter Acts, as better than the rest,

which are to be published, and in what order. and probably older, I shall publish in the first

place; secondly, both Beneventan Offices,

that is, the history of the martyrdom and of the translation

written in prose; and finally, that the reader may

lack nothing, I shall subjoin the whole metrical History

of Alfanus. But the other manuscript

copy, which I said was at hand to us, I have judged

should not be published. Our often-praised Gamans transcribed

it for us from a parchment Passional of the monastery

of Böddeken, and once transmitted it hither. But

it is not very ancient, and is composed

from the aforesaid longer Acts, as everywhere clearly

appears, so that it would be superfluous and would add nothing

to the Acts to be published by us. In the annotations nevertheless

I shall consult it from time to time, and adduce it where it seems

worth the labour.

§ III. It is inquired under what emperor and at what time the Saints suffered; and on that occasion some things in the longer Acts are disapproved.

[ ] The Martyrs suffered under Maximian Herculius; All the Acts which have come into our hands

constantly assert that the holy twelve

Brothers were crowned with martyrdom under the emperor Maximian,

who in the year 286 was chosen by Diocletian into

the fellowship of the empire. But the year of the martyrdom

the Acts nowhere express. Francesco Maria

de Aste, in a marginal note at 1 September

of the Roman Martyrology, places these Martyrs about

the year 298, and cites the monuments of the church

of Benevento. But I suspect that no others are designated

than those which Mario de Vipera, archdeacon

of Benevento, had, to be cited below, who under Maximian

assigns the year about 238 — perhaps by a printer's

error for 298, or 288. In our manuscript

Florarium, whose words I gave at number 1, the year 295

is set down. I should believe that those years were chosen

by mere conjecture, so that I prefer to leave the year

uncertain rather than to choose some one by divining.

Nevertheless that these Brothers suffered under Maximian Herculius

the consent of all the Acts persuades us. Wherefore I shall endeavour briefly to show

that in this part we must adhere to the Acts, and must not

have recourse to other emperors, as some have done,

so that certain things wrongly asserted in the Acts

might be excused: for not even thus could it be shown

that the longer Acts are free from every other error,

and with them there would be admitted at once as many errors as

the times the name of Maximian is repeated in the Acts,

or at least a most grave error would recur so often.

[19] others hold that it happened under Valerian, or Decius, or Maximinus: The conjecture of substituting Valerian seems first

to have been suggested by Baronius, because the age

and rule of Valerian coincide with the age and episcopate

of St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who in

the longer Acts is said to have ordained as presbyter

Donatus, the eldest of the twelve Brothers,

and Felix as subdeacon. But that conjecture the most Eminent writer

only timidly hinted at,

and did not firmly assert. Ferrari in his Catalogue

of the Saints of Italy at 1 September notes this equally doubtfully:

There are some who (think) that these (twelve Brothers)

suffered in the year of the Lord 258,

under the emperor Valerian. And if that is so,

for Diocletian and Maximian (under whom he had before said they suffered)

the emperor Valerian must be put.

Giovardi in the Notice prefixed to the Acts sometimes

has recourse to this conjecture, sometimes to

Decius, and at last looked to the emperor Maximinus,

whom he advises should be substituted for Maximian

in various places in the Annotations to the Acts. Let us weigh

all these conjectures.

[20] [but no fit reason is brought forward why we should say that they suffered under Valerian,] For the rule of Valerian this reason only

can be brought forward. In the longer Acts, at number 3, it is said:

At the same time Cyprian, a most wise man,

a priest of holy manners, was ruling the church of Carthage.

But St. Cyprian was bishop,

and fell a martyr, while Valerian was reigning and persecuting

the Church. Under that emperor therefore

the twelve Brothers suffered, who are read to have been taken not long

after, and led into Italy, and crowned with

martyrdom. But that reason is plainly weak,

because the things which St. Cyprian is said to have done with our

Martyrs would not be sufficiently likely,

even if St. Cyprian were less distant from the rule

of Diocletian and Maximian. For after the above there is subjoined:

Who (Cyprian), hearing the most famous fame of the holy

Brothers (these were at Hadrumetum, in the province

of Byzacena, whose metropolis was Hadrumetum),

asked that they be summoned to him. And when they had come, … one of them,

Donatus, he ordained presbyter; Felix, born after

him, he made subdeacon, etc. First, it is not likely

that twelve Brothers were called from a city far

enough distant to Carthage by St. Cyprian,

especially as this would have been done when the persecution

was already raging. No more likely is it

that Donatus was consecrated presbyter by that holy prelate,

and Felix subdeacon: for Hadrumetum

had Polycarp as bishop, who was present at the third

council of Carthage, and gave his opinion

about the baptism of heretics, as may be seen

in Labbe, volume 1 of the Councils,

column 787. That council was held on 1 September

of the year 256, and at about the same time,

or in the following year, began the three-year persecution of Valerian,

as Tillemont shows, volume 4

of the Monuments, article 2 of the persecution of Valerian.

[21] or under Decius This argument compelled Giovardi

to prefer Decius to Valerian, or rather

to follow no opinion consistently, but to leap back from one emperor

to another according to the various difficulties

which offered themselves. He says on page 74 that

Hadrumetum could have been without a bishop, not indeed in the time

of Valerian, in which he acknowledges Polycarp as bishop,

but in the time of the Decian persecution. Hear

his reasoning: Since therefore of the same (Cyprian)

mention first occurs in Cyprian's letter 44 [*]

concerning that same Polycarp, written to Cornelius

the supreme Pontiff, raised to the see of St. Peter in the year

251, the last of Decius, it follows that at the beginning of the Decian

persecution Polycarp's predecessor died,

and that, the same persecution pressing hard, the election of a successor

being protracted at that time in which

these twelve Brothers at Hadrumetum branded the heathen for idolatry,

the church of Hadrumetum was widowed

of a pastor, until, at the close of the year 251, and the persecution

being as it were extinguished with the destruction of the Decii,

which happened in the East in that year, Polycarp

was elected to the church of Hadrumetum. But,

even if no mention is had of Polycarp

before the year 251, he divines without foundation who

thence concludes that he was not elected before the close of

the year 251. Nay, from the same 45th letter of Cyprian

it is clear that Polycarp wrote to Pope Cornelius

a little after the latter had been elected, which happened

on the 4th day of June of the year 251, as both Tillemont

and Pagi hold. In that letter also nothing occurs

to make us say that he was elected bishop in the same year.

It is not likely, therefore, that the church of Hadrumetum

lacked a bishop during the two-year persecution of Decius.

But even if Hadrumetum had then lacked a bishop,

not even so would it be likely that twelve

Brothers were called to Carthage by St. Cyprian,

and that two of them were there initiated into sacred orders.

In vain therefore is regard had to the times of Valerian or

Decius, that the things which are narrated about St. Cyprian

in the longer Acts of the holy Brothers

might appear true.

[22] Besides, at number 9 in the longer Acts the emperor is said,

or under Maximinus: by whose order the Saints had been taken,

to have died at Aquileia, which doubtless proceeded from an error,

and is inserted only into the second Life. For whether

we choose Decius or Valerian, or whether

we retain Maximian Herculius with the Acts,

none of them died at Aquileia. Maximinus

indeed was slain near Aquileia,

and for that cause the inconstant Giovardi placed this annotation

on page 77, which he afterwards repeats:

Under Maximinus, and not Maximian, as

we noted in the notice, these holy twelve

Brothers suffered. But if they suffered under Maximinus,

who died in the year 237, again the things which are narrated in the Acts

about St. Cyprian cannot be preserved as true;

yet, to defend these, Giovardi had recourse to Valerian

or Decius. Then

in various places of the Acts the emperor is said to have been at Rome,

which cannot stand with Maximinus,

who was never at Rome in the time of his rule,

nor even in Italy, which, when he wished

to enter with an armed force, he lost his life together with his empire

near Aquileia. Wherefore rather are all those things

to be corrected in the longer Acts which do not agree

with the times of Maximian, and it must be said

with all the Acts that these Saints obtained the crown of martyrdom

under the rule of Maximian

Herculius, especially since in the shorter Acts nothing

is asserted which is repugnant to this epoch.

[23] Here someone might ask why Maximian alone

is named in the Acts, when at the same time

Diocletian was reigning, and the cæsars probably

were Constantius and Galerius Maximianus.

I answer that the same may be observed in the Acts of other

Martyrs; [Maximian therefore is to be retained, who alone is set down in the Acts, because all was done by his order.] nor does any other reason occur

than that all these things were done by the order of Maximian

Herculius, whom Italy and Africa obeyed,

after the Roman world was divided into four parts,

and assigned to the four aforesaid princes.

Concerning this division of the Roman empire, which was made

when Constantius and Galerius had been created cæsars,

Tillemont may be consulted, volume 4 of the Emperors,

in Diocletian, article 9, and note 12.

Giovardi also raises a scruple for himself on page 73,

from the fact that our Saints are said to have been led from Africa

into Italy, and to so many various cities. But

that has no difficulty, for not a few other Martyrs

also were led about to various cities.

We have an example in Felix, an African bishop,

who suffered under the same Maximian, and

is recorded at 24 October in the Roman Martyrology.

Of him, from the genuine Acts published in Ruinart,

page 355, Giovardi speaks thus: For indeed

holy Felix, an African bishop, loaded with chains,

was led from Carthage to Agrigento, and from Agrigento to Catania,

thence to Messina, hence to Taormina, whence to

Rulo, a city of Lucania, and at last to Venosa, a city

of Apulia, and there was executed by the head.

But we shall discuss these things in their own time,

since not all agree about the place of the martyrdom.

Annotations

* it is 45

§ IV. Those things which are had in the Acts as less certain are discussed in order, and the more obscure are elucidated.

[ ] The fatherland and parents of the Saints: their deeds at Hadrumetum uncertain; Of the deeds of the holy Brothers those seem more certain

which are asserted in the shorter Acts,

to be published in the first place. But the circumstances

which are read in the longer Acts, some are more likely than others,

others are not even likely, but altogether

to be rejected, as I have already noted. In this place therefore

I undertake to discuss each, so that, as far as can

be done, the false may be separated from the true, and the doubtful from the certain.

Of the parents of these Saints nothing is read in the shorter

Acts. But all the longer Acts

assign the father Boniface, the mother

Thecla. These holy parents, with the Roman Martyrology,

we gave at 30 August, that is, in volume 6

of that month, from page 551, where also there is briefly described

Hadrumetum, the fatherland of these Saints.

This city in the longer Acts is everywhere called

Drumentum or the Drumentine city, but all

understand it of Hadrumetum, and the Hadrumetine

city is in fact named in the shorter Acts.

It is now called Mahometta by the Europeans, Hamametha

by the Africans, and lies on the Mediterranean sea

in the kingdom of Tunis. I do not see why these things

about the parents and fatherland of the Saints anyone should with reason

call in doubt. But the things which are subjoined in

the Acts about their deeds at Hadrumetum with the idolaters

do not seem equally certain, although it is otherwise probable

that the Saints laboured for the conversion of the Gentiles.

Certainly that they were led from Africa into Italy, and that,

as is reported, by the order of Maximian, intimates that they were not

men of the common sort, but either distinguished by their birth

or by an ardour for propagating the faith.

[25] but the things they are said to have done at Carthage are not even probable: The deeds of the Saints with St. Cyprian at Carthage

we have already disapproved. To these are subjoined many others,

which are said to have been done with the relict or widow

of a certain senator, Restituta; but they are related

in a manner little likely, and cannot be admitted as

probable, much less as certain. It may indeed be

that certain miracles were wrought by the Saints at Carthage,

and that the son of a certain noble woman was

freed from a demon; but all the circumstances of that fact

cannot prudently be believed, especially because

they are joined with others which do not agree with the time,

and are certainly to be rejected. Little

credit also deserve the deeds afterwards narrated

at Hadrumetum with Victor, who is said to have been sent

to arrest the holy Brothers there, and who

is said to have been converted to the faith by the Saints' disputations,

together with the soldiers who were his companions on the journey. Nothing about

this conversion have the shorter Acts, even though they relate

that the Saints were taken at Hadrumetum and led to Carthage

to Valerian. It is clear that those longer

reasonings, which the shorter Acts lack,

are meditations of the writers, who believed it lawful

for themselves to bring in the Saints speaking as

they judged that they ought to have spoken.

[26] The Saints, led to Carthage, and constantly professing

their faith before the judge Valerian, [The Saints, beaten with cudgels and shut up in prison, are loosed from their bonds by an angel:] by his

order were beaten with cudgels, and then sent

to prison, as all the Acts have it, even the shorter.

They add a miracle done in the prison, which perhaps

will please the severer critics no more

than the other things narrated in the Acts; but here my opinion

is otherwise. Receive the matter in few words. By night the prison

is said to have been so lit up with a divine

light that one of the guards,

who was drawing nearer, lost his sight;

an angel meanwhile appearing, at whose voice the bonds

of all were burst asunder. That I should judge credit rather to be given

to this one miracle than to all the rest,

the shorter Acts bring about, which

relate this alone, all the others being omitted. And

these Acts deserve the greater credit the shorter

they are, and because they contain nothing which

can with reason be disapproved. Further, that miracle

gave Valerian occasion to hasten the journey into Italy,

lest more should be converted at Carthage,

or, as the shorter Acts have it, lest the people

should believe further. From these words there can be a suspicion that

not only was the city moved by the miracles of the Saints,

as the Acts say, but that some also were

converted, and that this conversion was referred to times

not its own in the longer Acts.

[27] But whatever be the case about that conversion of some,

[their journey into Sicily and Italy, in which a storm is described in a manner not likely:] Valerian put the holy Brothers with himself on board a ship,

to convey them into Italy. What

that voyage was like the shorter Acts do not express;

nor do they even indicate in what harbour

they disembarked. But the longer Acts describe

a huge storm, bring in Valerian

vainly invoking the false deities, and at last the Saints

praying, and the storm calmed by their prayers,

and many thence converted. These things seem altogether

fictitious, and are not set out in a likely manner: for

Valerian is said first to have asked the Saints to

pray to their own God, and then to have attributed to Jupiter

the calm of the sea he had received. Further, the journey, according to the longer

Acts, was thus arranged. From Africa they sailed

into Sicily, and came to Syracuse; thence

after two days they sailed to Catania; and having stayed some

time at Catania, they were carried in the same ship to Messina.

Here, changing ship, they crossed the Sicilian strait,

and disembarked at Reggio. Then

by a land journey through the territory of the Bruttii they set out

for Locri. Hence the published Acts lead them to Cosenza,

and from Cosenza to Squillace, in an order probably

inverted: for Squillace is situated between

Locri and Cosenza at about the middle of the journey, so that

probably they set out from Squillace to Cosenza. They are said

then to have gone to Grumentum, a town now

destroyed, which was situated in Lucania, where today is

the castle of Agromento, as Baudrand and

Orlendius call it. From Grumentum they are said to have set out for Marcilianum,

by which seems to be designated Marsicum Vetus,

likewise situated among the Lucanians. Hence at last the twelve Saints

are brought to Potenza, where four of them

obtained the palm of martyrdom. This whole

journey is omitted in the shorter Acts, and therefore

it is doubtful whether it was received from older monuments

or feigned from conjectures alone.

[28] The Saints are led to Potenza, where four of them are crowned on 27 August, Potenza, where four of the Brothers suffered

on 27 August, is everywhere set down in Lucania,

not far from the borders of Apulia. It was an episcopal city,

very ancient, as Ughelli teaches,

volume 7, column 132, but it was utterly destroyed in the

thirteenth century, if we believe Ughelli, and another of the same name

was raised in its neighbourhood, which stands today

in the kingdom of Naples on a plain above the ridges of the Apennines,

and it enjoys a bishopric under the archbishop of Acerenza.

The praised Ughelli, and Orlendius following him,

Sacred World, part 2, book 4, number 14,

describe Potenza [*] more at large, and say that SS. Arontius,

Honoratus, Fortunatus and Sabinianus

were there crowned with martyrdom on the eighth of the Kalends of September,

that is, 25 August; but the thing happened two days

later, that is, on the 27th of the same month, as, with

the Acts, the Martyrologies cited before have it. Alfanus

in the metrical Life, number 31, says they were slain on the fifth of the Kalends

of September, and Tillemont followed him,

volume 5 of the Monuments, in the Persecution of Diocletian,

article 51, because he had not seen the other Acts. But

greater credit deserve the Acts written in prose,

especially because with these the ancient Martyrologies agree.

[29] three others obtain the palm at Venosa on the next day, From Potenza Valerian set out for Venosa

with the remaining eight Brothers, and there were crowned

of them Septimus, otherwise Septiminus, Januarius

and Felix. Further, Venusia, by others Venusium,

and commonly Venosa, is likewise an episcopal city under

the same archbishop of Acerenza. Of it Ughelli speaks thus

on page 165: Venusium, a city of the Apulians,

not far from the borders of Lucania,

now claiming for itself no lowest place among the cities of the Basilicata,

is not very large, but

most ancient and pleasant, situated by the river Ofanto

between Melfi and the metropolis Acerenza.

In all the Acts the three Brothers mentioned are said to have suffered

one day after the four preceding, so that

it must be said that they were slain on 28 August,

which day, with the Martyrologies, the better Acts designate,

although the metrical Acts assign the following day, and

would have them crowned on the same day with the three following.

Further, Tillemont, just praised, who had said they suffered

on 29 August, raises here some

difficulty. Because, he says, SS. Felix,

Septiminus and Januarius are found crowned with martyrdom

at Venosa on 30 August; and they too were Africans,

but their history has no likeness with this one as regards the rest.

Tillemont here indicates those Martyrs

who in the Roman Martyrology at 24

October are announced in the first place with two

others — Felix, namely, as bishop, Januarius

as presbyter, and Septimus as lector, with Audactus

the presbyter and Fortunatus the lector. Their Acts,

as he acknowledges, are plainly different; nor does the difficulty,

if there is any, properly concern the twelve Brothers,

but St. Felix the bishop, to whom in all

the copies of the Acts the same companions are not assigned,

nor the same day of martyrdom, or place. This

difficulty therefore I remit to 24 October.

[30] The three aforesaid Brothers being slain, Valerian hastened

with the remaining five to Velinianum.

This place, three others on 29 August at Velinianum, or Velleianum, whether it was a town or a village,

is less known than the preceding. Velinianum I have nowhere

found in the geographers of today, nor did Tillemont find it.

Yet Giovardi on page 85 notes this:

Velinianum, formerly Velia, or Helia,

the aspirate being changed into V, called Velia, and thence Velianum.

Of it Pliny, book 3, chapter 5, Strabo and

Ptolemy, and Aulus Gellius, book 10, chapter 16.

Velia indeed is known, which the praised Pliny placed

between the gulf of Pæstum and the promontory of Palinurus,

namely in Lucania on the Tyrrhenian sea.

But when from a mere similarity of name

Giovardi suggested Velia for Velinianum,

he did not sufficiently consider the distance of the places,

nor the plan of the journey by which Valerian was going,

who, returning from Apulia, did not go to the maritime parts

of Lucania, but proceeded by a direct route through the borders

of the Apulians and the Hirpini toward Sentianum,

which town was situated not far from Æcæ,

or today's Troia, as we shall prove. Further,

what is here called Velinianum is in the Itinerary of Antoninus

called Velleianum, and Velleianum is there set down

between Sentianum and Venusia, so that

I greatly wonder that neither Velleianum nor Sentianum

is found expressed in the maps of Cluverius and Cellarius.

Whether Velleianum, as also Sentianum, was in Apulia

or rather among the Hirpini, I do not determine;

I suspect, however, that both were among the Hirpini, and I shall show below

that this is more probable. Meanwhile I say here

that three Brothers, namely Vitalis, Sator and Repositus,

happily came to the end of their contest at Velleianum on 29 August.

[31] Of the Brothers there remained only Donatus the presbyter

and Felix, probably the subdeacon, and finally Donatus and Felix on 1 September at Sentianum. whom

the tyrant wished to torture more than he had tortured

the other Brothers. These he led to another place of Apulia no better

known. That place the Acts call Sentianum,

and attribute to Apulia. Hence again

Giovardi, content with mere similarity of name,

thus explains the place: Sentianum, the word being thus corrupted,

formerly Sontia, whence the Sontini, and Sontianum

mentioned by Pliny: a city of Lucania between

Policastro and the river Tanagro. But it was not in that place

that Sentianum was to be sought, but in Apulia, or

at least in the neighbourhood of Apulia, near Æcæ, now Troia,

since the bishop of that city is said to have buried

the bodies of SS. Donatus and Felix in his own city.

Further, that Æcæ, by others Æcana and Ecana,

stood in the same place where now Troia is, the learned

commonly judge, even though Cluverius was of another

opinion, placing Æcæ where now is the village of Accadia.

Receive the situation of the places from the Itinerary of Antoninus.

Equus Tuticus was a town among the Hirpini

between Benevento and Æcæ (now Troia).

Further, the route from Equus Tuticus to Reggio is described,

and on that journey, 10th, occurs Sentianum, distant

from Equus Tuticus 33 Roman miles. There follows Velleianum,

distant from Sentianum 24 Roman miles. Then Venusia,

distant from Velleianum 12 Roman miles. Thus both towns

occur on that route, and Velleianum

indeed could not have been far from the river Ofanto,

nor from the borders of the Hirpini and the Apulians.

I should say that Labellum, commonly Lavello, is designated,

did it not seem too near to Venosa; for that town

shows antiquity, and something in

its name agrees. But Sentianum could not have been far

distant from today's Bovino, as is easily gathered from the Itinerary.

But let these things said about the various arenas of our Martyrs

suffice. For the rest, it is likely

that they were led to so many various towns, and slain in different

places, that terror might be struck into the Christians,

and be spread more widely.

Annotations

* commonly Potenza

§ V. The translation of the bodies, and the other things pertaining to the posthumous glory of the Saints.

[32] The bodies of the holy Brothers translated by Arichis, prince of Benevento, Mario de Vipera, archdeacon of Benevento,

in his Catalogue of the prelates of Benevento,

in John II, page 38, records the translation of the twelve

Brothers to Benevento in these words:

In the year 760 the bodies of the holy twelve Brothers

were translated from various places of Apulia by the diligence of the most pious

prince Arichis, and in the august temple

of St. Sophia, begun by duke Gisulf, and by

Arichis himself wonderfully completed, and enriched with most ample estates

and wealth, were covered with an honourable sepulchre…

And their translation to Benevento was

on the day 15 May, and in their Deeds these verses are read:

The urn covers twice six brothers, whom one Thecla bore,

Leaders brave for God and harmless.

Their piety had been equal, equal their death and life; Arichis [*]

The prince adorns them, translated, with equal honour.

The same things Ughelli has among the archbishops of Benevento,

volume 8 of Sacred Italy, column 33, except that

a fault has crept into the day of the translation, and in

the verses the word tegit is omitted. The year 760 is also expressed

in the metrical Acts, and the same in both

Acts is said to have been the second year of the principate of Arichis II.

There is added in the metrical Acts the Indiction

13, which was running in the year 760. Hence Giovardi

on page 115 rightly observes the following: Rightly is the second year

of Arichis joined with the year 760 of the common era,

as can be proved from several monuments.

In that year the 13th Indiction was running. And

since he writes that the translation, celebrated by the people,

happened on the 15th day of the month of May of the same year, it follows

that the beginnings of his reign are to be bound to a date before the month of May

in the year 759, as will be proved from the History in prose

presently to be given.

[33] and placed in the church of St. Sophia, These things indeed agree well with one another. But I do not

sufficiently understand what Giovardi means when on page

117 he writes this: The relics of the holy twelve Brothers,

translated by Arichis with great solemnity to Benevento,

were laid up in the monastery of St. Sophia, built by him in the year

774. This monastery, nay this house of virgins, he subjected

in the same year 774 to the abbot and monks

of the archmonastery of Cassino. How were the sacred bodies translated

to the monastery in the year 760, if it was only

built in the year 774? We might judge

that they were first deposited in the year 760 in another church,

and then carried to the church of holy Sophia;

but the Acts put the building of the church before

the translation, and so join with the translation

the deposition in the church of holy Sophia, that it must necessarily

be said that the church was built before

the translation. I judge therefore that Giovardi wanders far

from the true epoch of the building of the church: for

as his whole reason he alleges in the margin Angelo

de Nuce in his notes on the Chronicle of Cassino, book 1,

chapter 9, where the praised de Nuce has this: The diploma

of that grant (by which the monastery of St. Sophia

is subjected to that of Cassino) in the register of Peter, number

175, is said to have been enacted in the seventeenth year of the principate of Arichis,

in the month of November, in the thirteenth Indiction, that

is, in the year of Christ 774. But both this diploma

and others in Ughelli given in the same year

do not designate the year of the church's founding,

which I am wholly persuaded was completed before the translation of the bodies,

in the first or at least the second year of Arichis, that is, of the common era

759 or 760.

[34] For Gisulf, duke of Benevento, the predecessor

of Arichis, had already begun to build the said church,

which he had completed at the beginning of his principate, in the year 760: so that it does not seem doubtful that Arichis

at once at the beginning of his principate advanced

and completed the work begun. Hear Leo of Ostia,

book 1 of the Chronicle of Cassino, chapter 6: That Gisulf

began to build the church of holy Sophia

at Benevento, which, when, prevented by death, he could not

finish, Arichis, who succeeded him, wonderfully

completed; and establishing there a convent of nuns,

he granted it to the monastery of St. Benedict here

at Cassino, as we shall show in what follows.

Then in chapter 9 he narrates the matter further from

Erchempert in these words: He (Arichis), within

the walls of Benevento, founded a most opulent and most beautiful temple

to the Lord, which by a Greek

word he named ΑΓΗΑΝ

ΣΩΦΗΑΝ [*], that is, Holy

Wisdom. And having enriched it with most ample

estates and various wealth, and establishing a convent of nuns,

and making his own sister abbess there,

with all its appurtenances

and possessions whatsoever, he handed it over under the jurisdiction of blessed

Benedict on Monte Cassino, to remain so for ever.

In which temple, namely, he honourably laid together in single caskets

under one altar, for the protection and honour of his fatherland,

the bodies of the holy martyrs, the twelve Brothers,

which were resting in various places through Apulia, in which

they had also been beheaded. De Nuce notes

that all these things about the temple of St. Sophia built

by Arichis are read in all the codices of Erchempert

both written and printed. From these we conclude

that the church seems to have been completed in the year 759 or

760, and that in the same year 760 the sacred relics of the holy

Brothers were laid up there, as the Acts have it.

[35] After certain things about the translation of other relics

to the same church, [a vision which is said to have been offered to prince Arichis as he prayed by the bodies of the Saints] Leo of Ostia again subjoins to our purpose

these words: Where,

when with the greatest devotion (since his palace was near that

place) he (Arichis) had a frequent custom of passing the night

in prayer, it is reported that on a certain night, as he prayed, the holy twelve

Brothers appeared to him, and with faces amicably

inclined greeted him. And when with too stern

a look, thinking them to be some strangers,

he asked who they were who at a nocturnal hour

had presumed so boldly to enter the cloisters of the nuns,

they, gently smiling, said: We

are they, O prince, whom your devotion,

having found them in divers places, brought hither with the utmost zeal.

Which indeed, how good and how

pleasant it is for us, and how profitable for you by the divine

goodness, the last day shall show. And these things said,

the vision which was seen suddenly disappeared from the prince.

The same is related either by Alfanus or by another toward the end

of the poem to be published, but a little more briefly; the questioning

of Arichis being passed over, which is less

likely. The same vision also, with the translation briefly

premised, is narrated in the lessons of the Office

of our Saints, which Giovardi published from a manuscript

codex in the first place from page 69, and which he judges

were recited on the vigil.

[36] But since nothing else is had in those lessons

to our purpose, is said to have been offered: it is pleasing to weave them into this

place: But the bodies of the twelve holy Brothers,

as we have learned from the report of our elders,

Arichis of happy memory, prince of the Lombards,

searching out with pious solicitude and finding with sacred eagerness

those which were buried in divers places,

translated to Benevento with a throng of numerous

people, with the clergy going forth to meet them, with a company of pontiffs,

and with solemn array,

and in the basilica of holy Sophia, which he himself had built,

with the utmost reverence placed them under one altar:

that burial might not divide those whom one

mother had brought forth, whom the same faith had joined, whom suffering had made

companions, and a not unlike crown made brothers.

The sacred Martyrs therefore being placed with the utmost veneration,

and many estates having been conferred on the same monastery, and many

ornaments with royal liberality, the aforesaid prince,

anticipating the hours of the night, began to commend himself

more attentively to the suffrages of the holy Martyrs.

But it happened that, when on a certain

night, content with no companion, he was revisiting the sacred places

after his custom, and had persisted longer in prayer,

he sees the holy twelve Brothers, in the order

of their birth, standing near him, and praying together

with him as he prayed, and with pious entreaty showing him

the courtesy of a greeting. But the prince,

terrified at the new vision, suspecting them to be some other men,

began to be sharply indignant with them, because

they had dared with a certain rashness to enter the monastery of the handmaids of God

at an unseemly hour. To whom the most sacred

Martyrs with placid countenance and joyful voice said:

We are the twelve Brothers, whom, exposed

to various punishments in divers places, you gathered up and fittingly

placed in this dwelling upon one altar;

who, while we inhabit this place, guard it both by our bodies

and by our aid. We have therefore been sent

to meet your devotion, and to favour it with ready kindness.

And because in the present you bear our memory

with pious solicitude and diligent visitation,

you shall obtain both in the present pardon of your sins, and in the future

eternal rewards. Encouraged therefore by this vision,

the most glorious prince began to venerate the bodies

of the holy Martyrs the more devoutly,

as the sacred vision could in no way be doubted.

[37] images of the Saints, as they are painted in a manuscript codex. Finally I subjoin from Giovardi the images of the twelve Brothers.

Of them he writes thus on page 74: The images

of these holy Martyrs are seen painted in our

codex, of which two — Donatus, namely,

adorned after the ancient manner with a chasuble and with a maniple on his

left arm, and with hands spread out before his breast,

and Felix, in a red tunic, holding a codex with both

hands before his breast, likewise marked with a violet

maniple on his left arm; but the remaining

ten Brothers are seen in tunics and with hair,

adorned moreover with a cloak and with diadems or spheres.

Donatus indeed and Felix,

of whom the Acts relate that the one was a presbyter and the other

a subdeacon, are painted above with a clerical tonsure,

or with the head shaven in a crown,

after the manner of the clerical crown, which is seen in the most ancient

images of the Roman Pontiffs from

the basilica of St. Paul, delineated by the most illustrious Bianchini, τοῦ

μακαρίτου.

But I judge that these images were painted, not according

to the truth of the historical and ritual fact, but according to the

ecclesiastical discipline of the eighth or eleventh [*] century,

since it is certain that in the fourth century of the Church the subdeacons

by no means served the altar in tunics, but ministered

clothed only in an alb. Then again it is not sufficiently

clear whether in the third century of the Church the use of the chasuble

had prevailed, and of the other sacred vestments,

at least in the African church; and moreover the contemporary author

of his life relates that holy Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe in Africa,

celebrated the mysteries clothed in his usual

tunic. However it be, this monument,

which corresponds to the credit of the Acts, in order that we might

rescue it from destruction, we have taken care to have engraved on copper.

Annotations

* read Arechus or Arechis

* read ἁγίαν

σοφίαν

* perhaps 9th

FIRST ACTS

by an anonymous author

From the Ms. of Nicolas Belfort.