ON SS. RUFINUS AND SILVANUS AND MARCELLUS AND GAIANUS, MARTYRS,
TOGETHER WITH HELPIDIUS, ANTONINUS, EUSTICUS, MAXIMUS, EUSEBIUS, A SECOND GAIANUS, VITALICA, GAISON, MAGNUS, CASTUS, SATURNINUS, DONATUS, ELEUSUS AND THEIR COMPANIONS, AT ANCYRA IN GALATIA
CRITICAL SYLLOGE.
Rufinus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Silvanus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Marcellus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Gaianus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Helpidius, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Antoninus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Eusticus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Maximus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Eusebius, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
A second Gaianus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Vitalica, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Gaison, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Magnus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Castus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Saturninus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Donatus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Eleusus, martyr, at Ancyra in Galatia. (S.)
Their companions, martyrs, at Ancyra in Galatia.
BY J. S.
Three Martyrs announced separately in the Fasti; and again three others; The Roman Martyrology today announces the following Martyrs: At Ancyra in Galatia, the birthday of the three holy boys Rufinus, Silvanus, and Vitalicus, martyrs. And afterward, with others interposed: On the same day, of the holy martyrs Magnus, Castus, and Maximus, as though these were distinct classes of Martyrs. On the former Baronius noted this: Of these likewise Bede (nay rather Ado), Usuard and other more recent writers, and the old manuscripts agree. I suspect that manuscript Martyrologies are designated, not Acts, since I find nowhere any eulogy of these Martyrs. On the following class of Martyrs the same Baronius observes that Magnus and Castus alone are announced by Usuard, without Maximus. But Maximus occurs in various supplements to Usuard, from which he was adopted by Galesini, and thence by Baronius. But Galesini not only joined Maximus, but also wished to assign a place, having it thus: At Rome, of the most blessed martyrs Magnus, Castus and Maximus. But the more cautious Baronius preferred to omit the place, because he saw that it did not rest on a sufficiently solid foundation: for in truth we shall see that both the later Martyrs and the earlier are to be attributed to Ancyra rather than to Rome, and that both classes are probably to be joined together, and enlarged by several others; just as many more are joined together in the Hieronymian transcripts, from which the knowledge of these Martyrs seems first to have flowed.
[2] The Hieronymian Martyrologies in Florentini have it thus: In Angira Gall. (read, in Ancyra of Galatia, as other codices have) the birthday of the holy Rufinus, but these six are joined in the Hieronymian Martyrologies with several others, Silvanus, Macellus [], Gaianus, Hepidius, Antoninus, Eustichus, Maximus, Eusebius. Likewise Gaianus, Vitalicus, Gaisutus, Magnus, Cassus [], Saturninus, Donatus, Eleusus, with their Companions. Seventeen Martyrs are here joined, and are attributed to Ancyra in Galatia: nor does the interposed particle likewise indicate a second class, because this seems to be added only before the second Gaianus, since another Gaianus had already been named, so that it might be insinuated that there are two distinct Martyrs of the same name. Some names of these Martyrs are written faultily, as happens commonly in the Hieronymian Martyrologies; and some can be corrected from other codices, even though others again are dislocated in those. The seventeen Martyrs enumerated occur also in the Corbie manuscript in Florentini's Annotations, and in that manuscript which he names most ancient, as also in D'Achery, volume 2 of the reprinted Spicilegium, in the above-said Corbie one distinguished by the name of St. Jerome the presbyter. The text of the Corbie one Florentini recites thus: The day before the Nones of September. In Ancyra of Galatia, the birthday of SS. Rufinus, Sylvanus, Mamellus, Gaianus, Helpidius, Antoninus, Eusticus, Maximus, Eusebius, likewise Gaianus, Vitalica, Gaison, Magnus, Castus, Saturninus, Donatus, Eleusus with their Companions. From this text the text of the praised Hieronymian in D'Achery differs somewhat, who published it thus: The day before the Nones of September. In Ancyra of Galatia, the birthday of the holy Rufinus, Silvanus, Marcellus, Gaianus, Helpidius, Antoninus, Eusticus, Maximus, Eusebius. Likewise, Gaianus, Vitalica, Gaison, Magnus, Castus, Saturninus, Donatus, Eleusus with their Companions. Here the names seem less faulty than they are in the preceding.
[3] These things suffice for us to be able to judge that the seventeen Martyrs reviewed, with some anonymous Companions, suffered at Ancyra in Galatia. and together, to the number of seventeen, are attributed to Ancyra in Galatia: The same, however, can be confirmed from two other codices, although the order in them has been changed, and the former has the names very faulty. Take therefore the text of the Most ancient manuscript, thus published in Florentini: The 2nd of the Nones of September. In Ancira of Gallitia, the birthday of Marcellus, Gaianus, Belpida [], Antonius, Rufinus, Silvanus, Eustocus, Maximus, Eusebius. Likewise Gaianus, Italica [], Gausuntus, Magnus, Castus, Saturninus, Donatus, Decisus []. Of the Companions no mention is here made. The Martyrology of the Queen of Sweden, published by us after volume VII of June, indicates the seventeen Martyrs more briefly in these words: In Ancyra of Galatia, the birthday of the holy Silvanus, Marcellus, Maximus, with fourteen others. Here Silvanus is put first; in the preceding, Marcellus; but in the three earlier ones, Rufinus. But everywhere seventeen Martyrs are ascribed to Ancyra. The remaining abridged Hieronymian Martyrologies review only some of the aforesaid, as may be seen in the rest of those published by us, in the Gellone one in D'Achery, and in some of those which Martène published in volume 3 of the Thesaurus of Anecdotes, and in volume 6 of the Most Ample Collection of Ancient Records*.
[4] Now out of this class of seventeen named Martyrs with some anonymous Companions, only three did the author of the old or little Roman Martyrology announce, the names of some written variously. which Rosweyde published; and he recorded them in these words: At Ancyra, of the three boy martyrs, Rufinus, Silvanus, Vitalica. Him Ado, according to his custom, followed in these words: And at Ancyra of Galatia, the birthday of the holy martyrs, the three boys, Rufinus, Silvanus and Vitalica. Why these Martyrs are called boys, since nothing about their boyhood occurs in the Hieronymian Martyrologies, I shall not readily divine, unless perhaps that author saw something of the Acts of those Saints, or learned it from elsewhere. Wandelbert and Rabanus are silent about them: but Notker has it thus: And at Ancyra of Galatia, of the holy martyrs Rufinus, Silvanus and Vitalicus. Usuard too substitutes Vitalicus for Vitalica; and Notker seems to have imitated him, although he was unwilling to call them boys. That difference without doubt arose from the Hieronymian Martyrologies, because in some copies was read Vitalicæ, in others Vitalici, as even now is read in them, yet in more Vitalicæ; which therefore seems to be preferred: in one copy it is faultily written Italicæ. There can also be a doubt about the names of certain others: for he who in our title is called Marcellus is in a certain copy Macellus, in another Mamellus; nay, he is written Marcella in the Rheinau and Reichenau ones. But in more he is rightly named Marcellus, so far as I conjecture. Besides, Gaison, given in the title from two copies, is read in another Gaisutus, and in a fourth Gaisuntus. But Eusticus, again inserted in the title from two transcripts, is in another called Eustichus, in another Eustocus. So Castus in one place is written Cassus; and Eleusus once Decisus.
[5] Now, although it is abundantly clear that all these Martyrs belong to one class, Besides the Seventeen enumerated it can nevertheless be asked whether on the same day there are not to be placed another Magnus and Castus, whom Usuard recorded separately; and whether Maximus is to be added to them, as some have done, whom Baronius followed. The Hieronymian Martyrologies in some measure favor this opinion, since they again announce Magnus, Castus and Saturninus below, after Boniface the Pope. Take the words first from D'Achery's edition, which has it thus: At Rome, in the cemetery of Maximus, on the Salarian way, the deposition of Boniface the bishop. At saint Felicitas, the birthday of the holy Magnus, Castus, Saturninus, Firminus. In this place there occurs besides Firminus, as also in the same Corbie manuscript in Florentini, who gave fragments from that which D'Achery published entire. But that Firminus I find in no other place. The text of the Hieronymian published by Florentini, Firminus being omitted, is such: At Rome in the cemetery of Maximus; on the Salarian way, the deposition of Boniface the bishop. At St. Felicitas, the birthday of the holy Magnus. Castus. Saturninus. I have added the announcement of St. Boniface I, otherwise not belonging here, that the sense of the words may more easily appear. But on the texts alleged I observe two things: first, if Magnus and Castus are to be attributed to the cemetery of St. Felicitas, Saturninus too must be joined to them, and, if each name is straightway to be adopted, Firminus also. Secondly, that phrase, at St. Felicitas, probably belongs to Boniface the Pope, who is related to have been buried in the cemetery of St. Felicitas on the Salarian way, where Aringhi in his Subterranean Rome, book 4, chapter 29, shows that cemetery to have been. François Pagi, in his Breviary of the Roman Pontiffs under Boniface I, denies, from Ciaconius, that the cemetery of Saint Felicitas was on the Salarian way: but he would not have denied it, I think, if he had read Aringhi disputing about the cemetery of St. Felicitas, unless he had wished to prefer Ciaconius's assertion to all the ancients. But the place of St. Boniface's burial will be more examined on the 25th of October, on which he is recorded in the Roman Martyrology.
[6] some of the same name do not seem to be placed separately: But from what has been said I gather that no account is to be taken of the repeated names of Magnus, Castus, Saturninus and Firminus, of which the last is probably corrupted from one of the seventeen preceding. The reason is that to these names no place is added in those transcripts which otherwise have a place added: for to the seventeen Companions Ancyra is assigned, to Boniface, of whom they are certainly not Companions, Rome is set down; to Marcellus likewise, the martyr of Chalon, and to Paulinus, bishop of Trier, a place is added. Now from Gregory the Great, whose words I gave in volume 1 of September, page 614, we have it that the place of the passion used to be added in the ancient Martyrologies, and therefore I observed in the same place that interpolations are to be reckoned where bare names occur without a place in the Hieronymian Martyrologies, especially if there be other reasons which insinuate an interpolation. And here there are various things which bring in the suspicion of interpolation: for first, neither at Rome nor in any other place are three companion martyrs known who are called Magnus, Castus and Saturninus. Secondly, these are enumerated a second time in exactly the same order in which they were before reviewed among the aforesaid Seventeen. Thirdly, in various abridged Hieronymian Martyrologies Magnus and Castus are likewise placed after Boniface, with certain others of the first Seventeen, nay even with one of those three whom Ado, Usuard and the other praised martyrologists had announced separately in the first place. Silvanus certainly, both in the Gellone one in
D'Achery, and in the Augsburg and Labbean ones in our Work, is reviewed with the later ones. And from this observation it is evident that that class of seventeen Martyrs was divided variously and confusedly; and that from that confused division it could easily have come about that those collectors who wished no names of Saints to be lacking in their Martyrologies wrote out the same names again, because they thought them other Saints, whom they did not see joined to the same Companions, nor ascribed to the same place: for from this or a like occasion it must have happened that some Saints were repeated twice not only on different days, but on the same days also, as it is sufficiently established was in fact done.
[7] Nevertheless some reasons also can be alleged for doubling, the reasons which can be brought forward for the contrary opinion, or at any rate for distinguishing from the Ancyran Martyrs, Magnus, Castus and Saturninus. The first is the authority of Usuard for the two former: for he recorded them separately thus: On the same day, of the holy Magnus and Castus. I answer that Usuard was not sufficiently informed about those Saints, as is plain from the place of martyrdom being passed over. And since he doubted to whom they belonged, because he found them in the Hieronymian Martyrologies now joined with the other Ancyrans, now announced separately, he seems to have chosen the safer way, and to have announced them without a place, so that the announcement might be true, whether they were Ancyrans or others. The same doubt seems to have been Baronius's, who with a like caution omitted the place, although he joined Maximus to Magnus and Castus. Neither erred; but both gave a less exact notice about those Martyrs. Secondly, Florentini in his Annotations says that he doubted whether the words at saint Felicitas ought to be joined with Boniface the Pope, or with Magnus and his Companions, because it was established that Boniface was buried at saint Felicitas, and, on the other hand, because thus the place would contrary to custom be set after the Saint. And by this last reason he says he was led to join the words at Saint Felicitas with Magnus, Castus, and Saturninus. But since the burial of Boniface in that place is established, and nowhere is there mention of Castus, Magnus and Saturninus as having suffered at Rome, or as buried at Saint Felicitas; and since the place of burial is elsewhere too read as set after the names of the Saints, as may be seen in Florentini himself on the 15th of July; it is not probable to me that those words at St. Felicitas look to any other than St. Boniface; and therefore these Martyrs are not to be attributed to Rome; but it must be believed that they were repeated without an added place.
[8] Florentini objects besides that Saturninus the martyr was buried on the Salarian way, are of small moment. and this is certain enough. But that is another Saturninus the martyr, whose memory is kept in the Roman Martyrology on the 29th of November, as may be seen there in Baronius's Annotations on that day. This observation of Florentini's therefore does not avail for claiming Saturninus for Rome. Equally useless for attributing Magnus to Rome is Baronius's other annotation, conceived in these words: Of the translation of the body of St. Magnus the martyr, and of his relics laid up in the church of saint Michael the archangel near the Vatican in the time of Leo the fourth, Roman Pontiff, an old inscription carved in marble, placed in the same church, teaches. For since there are several martyrs of that name at Rome, it would first have to be inquired whose Magnus that body is, in order that anything might be inferred for the one of today: and this Baronius himself saw well enough, who did not dare to attribute Magnus, Castus and Maximus to Rome, even though Galesini had already done so; and who omitted Saturninus altogether. From what has been said therefore I conclude that the said Martyrs seem the same as the Ancyrans, with whom they are announced in the four ancient Martyrologies.
[9] [Certain Spaniards, from the pseudo-Dexter, claim for themselves Magnus, Castus and Maximus;] Now the obscure knowledge of these Martyrs, and the place of martyrdom passed over in the Roman Martyrology, gave occasion to the Spanish fable-mongers to try to claim for themselves those three who are joined in the Roman Martyrology, and forthwith to adorn them with certain fictitious Acts. Hear Juan Tamayo de Salazar in his Spanish Martyrology on the 4th of September: At Utica in Baetic Spain, of SS. Maximus, disciple of St. James the apostle of the Spains, and of Magnus and Castus, martyrs, who, being seized in the Neronian persecution, were crowned with martyrdom for the faith of Christ. In his annotations he designates for the year of the martyrdom the year of Christ 66. Nay, he notes that the Acts had utterly perished, but were written anew, brought back to life, in an elegant style — namely from the supposititious writings of the pseudo-Dexter: for from them everything was drawn, except certain verses, which he recites without the author's name: nor can it be doubted that those verses are supposititious and composed by a recent hand; just as the learned and more prudent Spaniards today acknowledge concerning the fictitious chronicles of Dexter and others, and as Nicolás Antonio pronounces without doubt about those verses in a writing presently to be cited. It does not please me to linger over refuting those fables, since that at this time is less necessary. Nevertheless I shall subjoin a brief refutation or recognition of them from the posthumous Writings of Nicolás Antonio, already frequently adduced in this Work.
[10] but Nicolás Antonio deservedly laughs at them. He, in a manuscript Opusculum communicated to us, at page 65 writes thus of them: Magnus, Castus and Maximus are celebrated on the 4th of September in these words in the Roman: "On the same day of the holy martyrs Magnus, Castus and Maximus"; of whom the last Usuard does not mention, the first two being praised. It was unknown who and whence the Martyrs were. Ready at hand to clarify them, like a certain ethereal sun, was Dexter, who says at the year 66: "Nor long after, at Utica in Baetica, Maximus, disciple of the lord James, suffers in Spain with his companions Magnus and Castus." Certainly he looked to that Maximus, the disciple of St. James the apostle, who is named among the other fellows of that sacred college in the History either of Pelagius bishop of Oviedo, to whom Juan de Mariana, book IV, chapter 2, also attributes this notice; or of Sampiro of Astorga, in whom it is today read in the edition, procured by Sandoval, of the four chief historians of Spain, the prelates of Beja, of Salamanca, this one of Astorga, and Pelagius of Oviedo. Whom he straightway believed opportune for the framing of a more brilliant history about him: and, finding this Martyr of ours of the same name ascribed to no place, he says: Be thou that Maximus, the disciple of James: and without delay he brought both him and his companions Castus and Magnus over to us, and girded Utica, a town of Baetica, with this triple diadem. The praised writer adds more, and when he had shown that only supposititious testimonies are adduced, he deservedly subjoins this: The matter must now be dealt with not by these testimonies, but by ancient ones and such as lack all suspicion. But what has been adduced suffices for me, because Tamayo's fables have become abundantly known to the learned.
AnnotataElsewhere, Marcelli*.
Elsewhere, Casti*.
Helpidi*
Vitalici or Vitalicæ*
Elsewhere, Eleusi*.