Salvius

ON ST. SALVIUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT ALBI IN OCCITANIA

IN THE YEAR 584.

HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

Salvius, bishop and confessor at Albi in Occitania (St.)

BY J. S.

§ I. The memory of the Saint in the calendars, and his ancient cult: his deeds were once confused with the deeds of St. Salvius of Amiens; but they can readily be distinguished from St. Gregory of Tours, who related the chief of them.

[ ] Albi, an ancient city of Aquitaine on the river Tarn, now enclosed within Occitania, The martyrologies announce St. Salvius of Albi today, has for many centuries venerated among the Saints its own bishop Salvius, a man distinguished for holy and wonderful deeds, and celebrated by St. Gregory of Tours, so that it seems strange that he was not known to all the martyrologists of the Middle Ages. Yet to most of them he was not known: for among the older writers I find St. Salvius of Albi announced in the Martyrology of Rabanus alone, and adorned today with this elogium: On the same day, the deposition of St. Salvius the bishop, of whose sanctity Gregory bishop of Tours wrote, relating that by a revelation he had seen a drawn sword of the divine voice hanging over the roof which king Chilperic had ordered to be built. And the truth followed upon that vision at once: for after twenty-two days the king's sons died in that same house. Afterwards the memory of St. Salvius was added to several manuscripts of Usuard, from which Greven and Molanus inserted it into their editions. The former has it thus, the Saint's name being somewhat corrupted: Likewise, the deposition of blessed Silvius, bishop of Albi and confessor, who, despising the world, entered a monastery, and forgetting the things that are behind, stretching himself out unceasingly toward the things that are before, was chosen abbot. But he himself, reckoning it more profitable to lie hidden among the monks than to bear the name of abbot before the people, entered a recluse's cell: whence being afterwards drawn out, he was compelled to preside over the aforesaid church, and at length, being called by the Lord, received the reward of his labour together with many others. I do not add the words of Molanus, because he abridged the elogium of Rabanus with slight alteration.

[2] In the Hagenau codex, in Sollier, there is read at this day: and especially the more recent ones: Likewise of Salvius, bishop and martyr. But the title of Martyr does not seem to fit the bishop of Albi. Wherefore a suspicion may arise that by the interpolator of that codex he was confused with St. Salvius, bishop and martyr, of whom we have treated at the twenty-sixth of June. In the manuscript Florarium Sanctorum St. Salvius of Albi is commemorated thus: Likewise St. Silvius, bishop of the people of Albi and confessor. The more recent martyrologists have everywhere commemorated St. Salvius of Albi today, but it is not necessary to transfer their words hither. I therefore subjoin the announcement of the Roman Martyrology alone: In the city of Albi, St. Salvius, bishop and confessor. The Benedictine martyrologists also inserted Salvius into their own calendars, as though he had belonged to the Benedictine Order. But Mabillon saw that this was not probable, and therefore placed St. Salvius among the Prætermissi of the first Benedictine century.

[3] I entirely judge that St. Salvius the bishop was venerated in the very sixth century the Saint's cult is ancient: a church dedicated to him. in which he died, not only because St. Gregory of Tours attributes to him the title of Blessed and Saint, but most of all because he wonderfully celebrates his outstanding holiness. Yet I gladly confess that I have no arguments by which I can make so ancient a cult altogether certain. But Denis de Sainte-Marthe recited various monuments in tome 1 of the Gallia Christiana, among the instruments of the church of Albi, from which it is certainly established that a church and a monastery were distinguished by the name of St. Salvius from the tenth century at least: and from that century the same Sainte-Marthe enumerates first the abbots and then the provosts of that monastery of St. Salvius, at column 49 and following, where concerning the church of St. Salvius and the relics of that Saint preserved in it he prefaces these words: The church of Saint Salvius, formerly an abbey, whether of clerics or of monks we do not know, now a famous collegiate church, passed after the middle of the eleventh century to the Canons Regular of Saint Augustine; from which time no mention is made of an abbot…

[4] However that may be, the church of St. Salvius was always distinguished, in which the Saint's relics are preserved: where the first bishops of Albi were buried, among them St. Salvius, whose sacred relics are still preserved there entire: the head is enclosed in a most precious casket of venerable antiquity, which was granted by Raymond duke of Toulouse, as is established from the inscription, though this has been almost rubbed away by the injury of time: but the chest in which the bones and ashes are covered was given by Louis of Amboise, bishop of Albi. From these things and others which are read in Sainte-Marthe among the instruments concerning the donations made to the church of St. Salvius, it is sufficiently clear that the cult of the Saint was famous among the people of Albi in the tenth century, and had probably begun some centuries earlier, namely shortly after the death of the holy bishop. Moreover, that his principal feast is celebrated on this tenth day of September is attested everywhere by the writers who treat of St. Salvius. But perhaps other feasts of St. Salvius are also kept: for Claude de Vic and Joseph Vaissete, in the History of Occitania, tome 1, book 6, page 287, report from the Proper of Albi that in the twelfth century it was unknown where the relics of St. Salvius had been laid, and that they were found in the year 1194 behind the altar of St. Saturninus. But since for that finding they cite the Proper of Albi at the eighth of October, a suspicion arises that on that day the memory of the said finding is celebrated.

[5] Besides, Baillet, in the Life of St. Salvius at this day, speaks of a twofold translation of the relics of St. Salvius, but does not indicate whence he took it. I transfer his words hither, rendered into Latin: His relics, some of them are said to have been translated to the province of Nevers, at least in part, are said to have been translated from the time of Charlemagne into a small town of the province of Nevers, which is now called from his name Saint Salvius (commonly saint Sauge, as may be seen in the maps of the duchy of Nevers.) A church was built in that place in his honour, and a monastery founded, which is now a priory, dependent on the abbey of Saint Martin of Autun. But the greatest part of the Saint's relics seems to have remained at Albi in the place of his first burial, where there is a collegiate church distinguished by his name, and where his cult has always continued without interruption. A translation of them was made in the eleventh century, the memory of which is renewed yearly on the twenty-second day of March. The head was afterwards separated from the rest and placed in a golden shrine: the remaining parts were preserved in a silver chest. Thus far Baillet, whose account of these matters I have not been able to find to be exact or certain. But if a part of the relics was translated to the province of Nevers, they are not now preserved entire at Albi, as Sainte-Marthe asserts above.

[6] but this is uncertain, although the Saint has a church there. In the Hagiology of Franco-Gallia, which Labbe published in tome 2 of his Bibliotheca Manuscriptorum, at the sixteenth of October a certain Salvius, confessor, is announced in the territory of Nevers. Castellanus at this day does not doubt that it is St. Salvius of Albi who is celebrated in the territory of Nevers, since he observes in the margin that in the province of Nevers he is commonly named saint Sauge. In his addenda, page 979, he says that he died about the end of November, and in the index he fixes the memory of St. Salvius of Albi on the tenth of September and the thirtieth of November. I have preferred to indicate all these things rather than to determine anything certain about them, since I do not find those monuments from which I could make certain the things I have given from Baillet concerning the translation of the relics of St. Salvius to the territory of Nevers. What suffices for our purpose, the ancient cult of St. Salvius of Albi — whose episcopal see was in the last century raised to metropolitan dignity — is certain and indubitable. But the opinion of Castellanus concerning the day of his death will be discussed toward the end of this Commentary.

[7] The Saint's deeds written by St. Gregory of Tours, The things concerning the deeds of St. Salvius which have come down to the memory of posterity were written by St. Gregory of Tours, who was not only his contemporary but also his friend and intimate. From this source flowed the things which other and later writers gathered. I have indeed two manuscript Lives, one from the Bödeken manuscript, the other from the Tongeren manuscript, and part of a third from the Fulda manuscript; but all are so faithfully excerpted from the works of St. Gregory of Tours that I find nothing added except the day of his death, so that it is not necessary to transfer those Lives hither, since we are about to give the very words of St. Gregory, and at the same time to examine whether anything can be added from elsewhere, or has been rightly added by others. First, however, the opinion of Le Cointe must be examined, who believed that the first chapter of the seventh book, which is wholly about St. Salvius of Albi, is not the work of St. Gregory of Tours but of some interpolator: for if it were really not Gregory's,

few things concerning the deeds of St. Salvius would be sufficiently certain.

[8] to whom chapter 1 of the seventh book is altogether to be attributed, The reasons of Le Cointe do not press very hard, and they have already been refuted by Ruinart. But since I would not venture to adopt everything that Ruinart wrote on that occasion, I shall give some of his words and add others of my own. First, Le Cointe objects, at the year 580, number 17, that this chapter is not read in the Metz codex. To this Ruinart rightly answers thus: First, the authority of the codices altogether favours us, as we have often said already, since we set many entire codices of the best quality and of greater antiquity against the single mutilated codex of Le Cointe, corrupted by the carelessness of the scribe and belonging to a later age. Secondly, Le Cointe objects that in that chapter the death of St. Salvius is referred to the year 584, whereas in Gregory, book 8, chapter 22, it seems to be referred to the year 585. But neither is this difficulty of great moment, since Gregory only says that Desideratus, the successor of Salvius, was given as bishop to the people of Albi in the year 585: for between the death of St. Salvius and the consecration of Desideratus some months could easily have intervened. Indeed, if a whole year had intervened, it would not be greatly to be wondered at, as will be clear from what is to be said when the time of St. Salvius's death is treated. Le Cointe objects nothing further in the passage cited; but in tome 4, at the year 686, where he treats of St. Salvius of Amiens, at number 6 he asserts that this whole chapter was stuffed into the History of St. Gregory by a bold impostor out of the Life of St. Salvius of Amiens. But I answer that this is asserted by Le Cointe without any probable reason, since it is clear enough that the Life of St. Salvius of Amiens was badly patched together out of Gregory and others, as Ruinart also observes, some of whose arguments I transfer hither.

[9] First, the genius and style of Gregory, and his own genuine modes of speech, shine out in that impugned chapter. as is proved against Le Cointe, Secondly, Gregory's narrative involves in itself absolutely no contradiction, and has nothing which could not have been said by an eyewitness and a contemporary writer. On the contrary it embraces many things which, as Le Cointe himself confesses, are so proper to Salvius of Albi that they cannot without error be attributed to the other Salvius. Thirdly, that author invokes God as witness that he writes true things (or rather things heard from Salvius of Albi himself), and accordingly he would have to be reckoned perjured and guilty of a most grave crime if he had spoken falsehoods: which indeed it is not lawful even to think of anyone without the greatest and most evident cause. Rather, all these things prove the narrative true and sincere. To these I add the following: Gregory most openly professes himself the author of this narrative, beginning thus: Although it is my purpose to pursue the History which the order of the earlier books has left off, yet devotion first demands that I say something concerning the death of the blessed bishop Salvius, who is proved to have died in this year. As for the author of the Life of St. Salvius of Amiens, it is certain that he confused many things and narrated them wrongly, and attributed various deeds of St. Salvius of Albi to the bishop of Amiens.

[10] One example will suffice, which I bring forward in the very words of Ruinart: who without just reason denied that chapter to Gregory. The author (of that Life) relates that the patrician Mummolus, when the city had been taken and its walls destroyed, sent many captives into Spain, who at the king's command were restored to Salvius. But that these things can be said of the city of Amiens, or of Salvius its bishop, is forbidden by the circumstances of times, persons and places: all of which agree excellently if they are understood of the city of Albi, which it is certain was occupied by Mummolus while St. Salvius was alive, as Le Cointe himself wrote after our Gregory. Whence he is compelled to confess that his author transferred some things from the deeds of Salvius of Albi into the Acts of the bishop of Amiens. Le Cointe indeed confesses this at the year 686, number 9: and from that fact he ought to have learned that the two Salvii were confused in the Life of St. Salvius of Amiens, and thence by sound criticism he could have further inferred that the account found in Gregory is rather to be believed than that Life, which is so clearly convicted of confusion. To these things I add nothing more, except that both the manuscript Lives of which I treated above have concerning Salvius of Albi everything that Gregory related of him, both in that chapter and in other places; and from all this I conclude that that opinion of Le Cointe has been deservedly rejected everywhere by all historians, since it is not a fit reason for doubting, much less for denying that narrative to Gregory.

§ II. The Saint's birth unknown: first a secular life, then a monastic one, in which, being elected abbot, he prefers to lie hidden: a wholly marvellous vision.

[ ] [The Saint's country and family are not sufficiently known: as a young man he practised as an advocate.] Of what stock or in what place St. Salvius was born, the bishop of Tours has not recorded, nor any ancient writer. But the writers of the History of Occitania, tome 1, page 286, allege a tradition by which he is believed to have been born at Albi. To this tradition Adrien de Valois, in book 19 of the Rerum Francicarum, page 142, adds his own conjecture about a noble stock, where he judges that he was born of a most splendid family among the Gauls, from which sprang the brothers Rusticus and St. Desiderius, both bishops of Cahors in the seventh century. The reason for this conjecture is, I suppose, that the father of St. Desiderius was also called Salvius, as is read in his Life. But that reason is uncertain, and consequently the conjecture itself. That St. Salvius was well instructed in letters in his youth is gathered from the office of advocate, which as a young man he discharged, as the bishop of Tours testifies, who in book 7, chapter 1, has it thus: For he (Salvius), as he himself was accustomed to relate, having long remained in the secular habit, pursued worldly cases with the judges of the world: yet never binding himself in those desires with which the mind of young men is wont to be entangled.

[12] [afterwards made a monk, and elected abbot: at length he shuts himself up in a cell.] Then he embraced the monastic life, and afterwards was elected abbot, but renounced this dignity in order to shut himself up in a cell. All these things Gregory briefly relates in these words: When now the fragrance of the divine breath had touched the inward parts of his heart, he left the secular service and sought a monastery, and the man, even then given to the Godhead, understood that it was better to use poverty with the fear of God than to follow after the gains of a perishing world: in which monastery he lived long under the Rule established by the fathers. But when he had advanced to greater strength both of understanding and of years, the abbot who presided over this monastery having died, he undertook the office of feeding the flock; and he who ought rather to have made himself public to the brethren for their correction, became, upon receiving the honour, more withdrawn. Straightway he sought for himself a more secret little cell. For in the former one, as he himself asserted, being worn away by excessive abstinence more than nine times, he changed the skin of his body. At last, having received the honour, when in this office he gave himself more intently to parsimony, to prayer and to reading, he often turned this over in his mind, that it would be better for him to be hidden among the monks than to have received the name of abbot before the people. What more? He is enclosed, bidding farewell to the brethren, and they bidding farewell to him. In this enclosure he remained in all abstinence, more than he had practised before: striving, in the service of charity, that when any stranger came he might both grant him a prayer and minister blessings full of grace, which very often brought entire health to many sick persons.

[13] Wholly marvellous is the vision which follows in Gregory. It is doubted whether St. Salvius really died, But he here so confirms it from the mouth of Salvius himself, that no critic would be reckoned prudent if he wished to withdraw credence from a holy and learned bishop, especially since other like visions have befallen holy men, as Ruinart has already observed in his preface, number 118, by whom are brought forward as witnesses Augustine in the book On Care for the Dead, Gregory the Great, the writer of the Passion of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas, and other authors everywhere of great name. Concerning this one point it may deservedly be doubted, whether St. Salvius really died, as St. Gregory believed: for Salvius himself could easily have been ignorant of that, and Gregory with him; seeing that the Apostle was ignorant, when he was caught up into the third heaven and into paradise, and there heard secret words which it is not lawful for a man to utter, in what manner it had happened, whether in the body or out of the body. Baillet, at this day, in his article on Salvius, determined that St. Salvius had not died, and so altered Gregory's whole account as though Salvius had known that he had not died. But he would have done better to omit corruptions of this kind of the ancient writers, by giving Gregory's own words where they are assigned as Gregory's words, and expressing his own opinion in words of his own. Whatever be the case with Baillet's opinion, which I would not certainly condemn, but which much less would I dare to approve, since I do not think that he could have been more accurately informed of the whole matter after so many centuries than St. Gregory was informed by the mouth of Salvius himself; I, leaving that doubt aside, subjoin Gregory's account.

[14] At a certain time, he says, being worn out by an excessive fever, when he was believed dead and had been laid on the bier. Certainly he had he lay gasping on his little bed: and behold, suddenly the cell, made bright with a great light, shook. But he, stretching out his hands to heaven with thanksgiving, breathed out his spirit. With mingled wailing the monks, together with his mother, carry out the body of the dead man, wash it with water, clothe it in garments, and place it on a bier, and pass the waning night in psalmody and weeping. But when morning came, the office of the funeral being prepared, the body began to move on the bier. And behold, with his cheeks reddening, the man is roused as though from a heavy sleep, and with his eyes opened and his hands lifted up he says: O merciful Lord, what hast thou done to me, that thou shouldst permit me to return to this dark place of earthly dwelling, when thy mercy in heaven was better for me than the most wicked life of this world? But while his own people were astonished and asked what such a prodigy might be, he answered nothing to their questions. But rising from the bier, and feeling nothing of the illness from which he had suffered, he remained for three days without the nourishment of food or drink.

[15] But on the third day, the monks and his mother being called together, a vision of heaven, and believed that he had been there, he said: Hear, O most beloved, and understand that what you behold in this world is nothing: but, according to that which Solomon the prophet sang, all is vanity. For happy is he who can so act in this world that he may deserve to behold the glory of God in heaven. And while he said these things, he began to doubt whether he should speak further or be silent. And while he kept silence, being pressed by the prayers of the brethren to set forth what he had seen, he said: When four days ago you saw me lifeless, the cell trembling, I was taken by two angels and borne up into the heights of the heavens, so that not only this squalid world, but also the sun and moon, the clouds and stars, seemed to be beneath my feet

as I thought: then through a gate brighter than this light I was led into that dwelling in which the whole pavement was as it were shining gold and silver, the light unspeakable, the vastness beyond telling; which a multitude of both sexes had so filled that the length and breadth of the throng could not at all be discerned. And when a way was being prepared for us among the crowding hosts by the angels who went before, we came to the place which we had already contemplated from afar: over which there hung a cloud brighter than all light, in which neither sun nor moon nor star could be seen, but above all these it shone with a radiance more splendid than natural light, and a voice went forth from the cloud, as the voice of many waters. There also men in priestly and in secular dress humbly greeted me, a sinner, whom those who went before me told me to be martyrs and confessors, whom we here honour with the highest service.

[16] but that he was sent back to earth, as he himself related, Standing therefore in the place in which I was bidden, an odour of exceeding sweetness covered me, so that, refreshed by this sweetness, I desire as yet no food or drink. And I heard a voice saying: Let this man return to the world, for he is necessary to our churches. For the voice was heard: but who spoke could not at all be seen. And I, prostrate upon the pavement, said with weeping: Alas! alas, Lord! why hast thou shown me these things, if I was to be cheated of them? Behold, today thou castest me out from thy face, that I may return to the fragile world, and be unable to come back hither any more. Do not, I beseech thee, Lord, take away thy mercy from me, but I pray thee to permit me to dwell here, lest falling back thither I perish. And the voice which spoke to me said: Go in peace. For I am thy keeper, until I bring thee back to this place. Then, being left by my companions, and descending with weeping through the gate by which I had entered, I have returned hither.

[17] not without a scruple that followed, because he had revealed those secrets. While he was speaking these things, all who were present being astonished, the Saint of God began again to say with tears: Woe is me, who have dared to reveal such a mystery. For behold, the odour of sweetness which I had drawn in from the holy place, and in which for these three days I have been sustained without any food or drink, has departed from me. But my tongue also is covered with grievous wounds, and so swollen that it seems to fill my whole mouth. And I know that it was not pleasing to the Lord my God that these secrets should be published abroad. But thou knowest, Lord, that I did these things in simplicity of heart, not in boasting of mind. But I pray thee to pardon me, and not to forsake me, according to thy promise. And saying these things he fell silent; and took food and drink. But I, writing these things, fear lest they be incredible to some reader, according to that which Sallust, writing history, says, where he speaks of the virtue and glory of good men: what each man thinks easy for himself to do, he receives with an even mind; what is beyond that, he holds as feigned and false. For I call almighty God to witness that I learned by hearing from his own mouth all the things which I have related. Thus far St. Gregory, to which I add nothing further concerning these matters.

§ III. The Saint promoted to the episcopate: his deeds in the episcopate: his happy death, and its year.

[ ] The Saint becomes bishop of Albi, After St. Salvius had rejoiced in the aforesaid vision, he returned to his little cell, and there led a holy life as he was wont, until in the year 575, or toward the end of the year 574, he was raised to the see of Albi. That beginning of his episcopate is certain from the time of his death, to be proved below, if he was then in the tenth year of his episcopate, as Gregory judged, who relates this promotion thus: But after much time the blessed man himself, being drawn out of his little cell and elected to the episcopate, was ordained against his will. Among the deeds of the Saint during the time of his episcopate which have become known, in the first place is to be related his outstanding charity, by which he redeemed the captives of Albi from Mummolus, the general of king Guntram.

[19] The matter is thus narrated by St. Gregory: In whose time, when the patrician Mummolus had led away many captives from that city, he frees many captives of Albi, he followed after them and redeemed them all. And the Lord granted him so great favour with that people that even those very men who had led the captives away both remitted to him their price and moreover gave him gifts: and thus he restored the captives of his country to their former liberty. The present-day writers of the History of Occitania, tome 1, page 285, attach this event to the year 576, and believe that Albi was then taken by Mummolus. Certainly Mummolus in that year overcame in a bloody battle Desiderius, the general of king Childeric, as Gregory relates in book 5, chapter 13; so that it is probable that many men of Albi were then taken captive by him, whether he stormed the city itself or refrained from it, which I leave undecided.

[20] About the year 580 occurred the meeting of St. Salvius with king Chilperic, he gravely condemns a writing of king Chilperic infected with error, who had first addressed Gregory of Tours on the same matter. I shall abridge the affair from Gregory, book 5, chapter 45. About the same time, he says, king Chilperic wrote a Tract, that the holy Trinity should not be named in a distinction of Persons, but only as God. That little work, concerning which Gregory adds more, Chilperic showed to Gregory himself; but when it was disapproved by him, as being infected with Sabellianism, the king, being moved, said: I shall lay these things open to men wiser than you. And I, replied Gregory, said: He will never be wise, but a fool, who shall be willing to follow these things which you propose. At this he, gnashing his teeth, was silent. But not many days later, when Salvius bishop of Albi arrived, he ordered these things to be read over to him, entreating that he would agree with him. Which he, hearing, so rejected that, if he could have got hold of the paper on which these things were written, he would have torn it into fragments. And thus the king desisted from this design. Thus far St. Gregory of Tours, who does not say that these things happened when the aforesaid bishops were going to the synod of Berny, as Baillet relates them to have happened, on a wholly uncertain conjecture, since this meeting seems to have occurred earlier.

[21] Yet St. Salvius was present at that synod of Berny, which was convoked by Chilperic in the year 580, he is present at the council of Berny, and held at Berny [a] in the territory of Soissons, because St. Gregory of Tours had been falsely accused before Chilperic of having brought forward a calumny against queen Fredegund, as may be seen in Gregory himself, book 5, chapter 50. That St. Salvius was present at that council is gathered from his vision, which St. Gregory in chapter 51 narrates in this manner: And although I ought to have recorded above the conversation of the blessed bishop Salvius, yet because it escaped my mind, I do not think it sacrilege if it be written down afterwards. When therefore, after the synod mentioned, having bidden farewell to the king already named, we wished to return home, it did not please us to depart before we should leave this man with kisses given. Him, being sought, I found in the courtyard of the house at Berny. To him I said that I was now about to return home.

[22] he foresees and foretells the ruin of king Chilperic's family: Then, having withdrawn a little, while we talked of this and that, he said to me: Do you see upon this roof what I am looking at? To whom I said: I see indeed the roofing which the king lately ordered to be set up. And he said: Do you not see something else? To whom I said: I see nothing else. For I supposed that he was speaking something in jest. And I added: If you discern something further, tell it. But he, drawing deep sighs, said: I see the drawn sword of the divine wrath hanging over this house. Nor indeed did the saying deceive the bishop: for after twenty days two sons of the king, whose deaths we have written of above, died. Concerning their death chapter 35 may be seen, where the elder is called Chlodobert; the name of the younger, there omitted, was Dagobert, as may be seen in the epitaph in Baronius at the year 583.

[23] he dies, having foreseen his death. Concerning the last deeds of St. Salvius and his precious death St. Gregory has this in book 7, chapter 1: In which (episcopate), as I think, when he was in his tenth year, the groin-plague growing strong in the city of Albi, and the greatest part of that people being already dead, when now few of the citizens remained, the blessed man, like a good shepherd, never would withdraw from that place, but always exhorted those who were left to give themselves to prayer and to persist earnestly in vigils: and always to turn over good things both in works and in thought, saying: Do these things, that if God shall will you to depart from this world, you may be able to enter not into judgment but into rest. But when, as I believe, the Lord now revealing it, he recognized the time of his calling, he himself prepared his own sarcophagus, washed his body, and put on his garment: and thus, ever intent upon heaven, he breathed out his blessed spirit. Now he was of great sanctity and of the least covetousness, never wishing to have gold. For if under compulsion he had received it, he straightway distributed it to the poor:… And I have heard many good things concerning this man: but since I desire to return to the history I have begun, I pass over very many.

[24] [It is doubted whether the Saint's death is to be fixed in the year 584 or in 585;] Concerning the year of his death the opinion of writers has been exceedingly various: for some have established the year 584, others 585, others 586 or even 587. Baronius, whose authority some have followed, referred the death of St. Salvius to the year 587; but that opinion has been everywhere abandoned by more recent writers, and deservedly. At this time it can only be doubted whether the Saint's death occurred in the year 584 or in 585, because Gregory himself supplies some foundation for this doubt. For in book 7, chapter 1, he says: Devotion demands that I say something concerning the death of the blessed bishop Salvius, who is proved to have died in this year. But that Gregory there speaks of the year 584, not only the editor Ruinart, but all the moderns everywhere, except Pagi, agree: and this is the chief reason by which Le Cointe denies that chapter to St. Gregory, because he believes that the death of St. Salvius is afterwards referred by Gregory to the year 585. The reason is that St. Gregory in book 8, chapter 22, having related the death of certain persons, subjoins this: After the death of the holy Salvius, in this year Desideratus was given as bishop to the people of Albi. But these words are by no means at variance with the preceding: for it frequently happens that a bishop does not receive a successor in the same year in which he died, but only in the following year, because the election and consecration of the new bishop is deferred for some months. Gregory himself, since he does not say that St. Salvius died in the year 585, as he expressly asserts of others in the same place, sufficiently hints that he is treating only of the election of Desideratus, and that he adds these words, after the death of St. Salvius, for no other reason than to hint

that Desideratus was substituted in the place of Salvius, with no one intervening. He could indeed speak thus the more securely, the more clearly he had fixed the death of St. Salvius in the year 584.

[25] But now, if we consider the time at which St. Salvius departed this life, [but since the episcopate must have lain vacant for a long while after the Saint's death;] we shall by no means be able to wonder that the election of a successor was deferred for some months. For St. Salvius died at almost the same time at which king Chilperic died, to whom Albi seems to have been subject. But after the death of Chilperic the people of Albi long did not know to which at last of the kings contending among themselves Albi was to be subject, as can be clearly gathered from the History of Occitania already cited, at the years 584 and 585. For Gundobald, who had been proclaimed king by the generals adhering to him in the province of Limoges, and who then died in that same year 585, was seizing what cities he could. But the kings Guntram and Childebert both desired to claim Albi for themselves together with other cities. Wherefore, since in the election of a bishop the consent of the king was required, and the people of Albi did not know whom they might safely obey, the election seems to have been long deferred. For this reason the annotation of Ruinart is useless, who observes that Theofrid is by some interposed between Salvius and Desideratus; especially since that Theofrid never sat at Albi, as is now sufficiently established, but was bishop of Amiens.

[26] For the same reason it is not necessary that we should say that St. Salvius died toward the end of the year, nor is any other day of death to be sought than the tenth of September; in the month of November or December, so that by this reasoning the delay of the election might be made smaller. I suspect, however, that this alone was the reason for Castellanus, who in the addenda to his Universal Martyrology, page 979, wishes it to be added to the announcement given at the tenth of September that he died about the end of November. Certainly I judge that the Saint's day of death was always believed to be the tenth of September, on which he is venerated, as is read in the title of each manuscript Life. In both Lives also it is asserted at the end that he died on the same day: and in the Tongeren manuscript indeed in these words: And thus, ever intent upon heaven, he breathed out his spirit on the fourth of the Ides of September. In the Bödeken manuscript: But the deposition of his body took place on the fourth of the Ides of September. Pagi, at the year 587, number XI, attempted by another method to reconcile the statements of St. Gregory, and thus referred the death of St. Salvius to the year 585. But he brought forward things more subtle than solid or true. Nay, he even draws a conclusion repugnant to his own statements: for first he says: Saint Salvius, bishop of Albi, died in the five hundred and eighty-fifth year. Then, wishing to show that Gregory's statements are easily reconciled, he concludes thus: For in this way, in the year 584, between the eleventh day of November and the first of December, Salvius passed to God. To this, I suppose, Castellanus had regard.

[27] nor does it seem that it may be further doubted that he died in the year 584. But that faulty passage of Pagi does not deserve so much attention that the common opinion concerning the day of death, the tenth of September, should be abandoned; since the statements of St. Gregory are reconciled with one another in a plainly natural and easy way, if we say that Salvius died in the year 584, on the tenth day of September, and that Desideratus was consecrated after some months in the year 585. On the contrary, Pagi's whole foundation lacks all solidity, because he attempted to reconcile what can in no way be reconciled, and what is by no means to be reconciled if Gregory is to be judged to have written correctly. He observes, namely, that Desideratus is said to have been elected in the twenty-fourth year of king Guntram; but that Salvius is said to have died in the ninth year of king Childebert. Then he strives to show that at least some days of the twenty-fourth year of Guntram could have coincided with the ninth year of Childebert, so as thence to conclude that the same time is assigned in both places in Gregory. But even if he could have proved that the ninth year of Childebert really coincided with the twenty-fourth year of Guntram, he would have gained nothing at all with the learned; since Gregory fixes the election of Desideratus not only in the twenty-fourth year of Guntram, but also in the tenth year of Childebert, which he has already begun in book 7, chapter 24, and carries down as far as chapter 37 of the eighth book. Therefore the death of Salvius was assigned by Gregory to the ninth year of Childebert; the election of Desideratus to the tenth year of the same Childebert, so that Pagi laboured in vain, who wished to prove that those two things were done at the same time.

a. Braine.