ON SS. PROTUS AND HYACINTH, MARTYRS AT ROME,
UNDER VALERIAN AND GALLIENUS.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Protus, Martyr at Rome (S.)
Hyacinth, Martyr at Rome (S.)
BY J. P.
§ I. Their memory in the most ancient monuments; eulogies from the Martyrologies; the cemetery called by their names; the inscriptions affixed to their tomb.
Of these most valiant Champions the memory in the Church is renowned, and has been so always from the time when they made it illustrious by their martyrdom. This is established not only from the Martyrologies, Their name in the most ancient but also from the other chief monuments which a most remote antiquity has transmitted to us, and in which they too are everywhere inserted among the few more illustrious Saints of the earliest centuries. Monuments of this kind are the ancient Calendars of the Roman Church, and among these there comes in the first place the Bucherian Calendar, so called from Ægidius Bucherius, who published it from most ancient parchments in his Commentary on the Paschal Canon, p. 267. That same Calendar we afterwards, on account of the value of its antiquity — for it was drawn up about the middle of the fourth century — inserted in vol. VII of June, p. 185. In it our Saints are thus noted: In the month of September, on the third of the Ides, Protus and Hyacinth in the cemetery of Basilla, where they are laid. Next to the Bucherian comes another Roman Calendar composed toward the end of the same fourth century or the beginning of the fifth, as Edmund Martène shows in vol. V of the Thesaurus Anecdotorum, in the Admonition prefixed to it, col. 63. In this the following is read at the XI day of September: The birthday of the holy Protus and Jacinthus; and there is presently subjoined the Gospel to be recited on that day, of which below.
[2] In nearly the same words our Saints are commemorated by three other Calendars, ancient indeed, in the Calendars, but more recent than those already cited. The first, as he who edited it, John Fronto, proves, was put together at the beginning of the eighth century; the second in the century following, not far advanced, and it is extant in Luc d'Achery, vol. X of the Spicilegium, p. 130; the third, finally, before the year 986, on the testimony of the said Martène in the Admonition likewise prefixed to it, vol. III, col. [ ]. To these I judge must be added the Calendar published by Leo Allatius in the Dissertation annexed to his work On the perpetual agreement of the Western and Eastern Church, col. 1487; in which, although it might seem that the memory of Saints distinct from ours is celebrated — for it is thus read: On the third of the Ides of September, the birthday of SS. Probus and James — I nevertheless cannot doubt that the author noted our Saints, and that the name of each was afterwards corrupted, so that Protus passed into Probus, and Jacintus into Jacobus, through the carelessness of copyists. There is the further consideration that this Calendar, as Sollerius observed in his Preface to Usuard, num. 110 and 278, differs not much in age, nay perhaps not even in author, from Fronto's Calendar, where it is thus written: The birthday of SS. Protus and Jacintus. With the Calendars recited, and others which I forbear to enumerate, agrees the Book of Sacraments of St. Gregory I, Pope, edited and illustrated with Notes first by Hugh Ménard, then by the Benedictines of the Congregation of St. Maur in vol. 3 of the Works of the same holy Pontiff. In both places the following are found: On the third of the Ides of September, the birthday of SS. Protus and Hyacinth; then are subjoined three Prayers customarily recited in the Mass of the same Saints: but there will be a fitter place below for treating of them; as also of the inscriptions and epitaphs affixed to their burial-place, which might otherwise be reckoned here among the ancient monuments. I pass on to the Martyrologies.
[3] and in the Martyrologies; So celebrated and so constant is the announcement of SS. Protus and Hyacinth in the ancient Martyrologies, that their names are wanting in none; in most, especially the briefer sort, theirs alone are found; in the rest they lead the train of the other Saints. Except, however, the Martyrology of Notker, in which he granted the first place to SS. Felix and Regula, the martyrs of Zurich, his own countrymen. Wherefore, amid so great a consent of all, it would be idle to enumerate them one by one, and those especially whose announcements are neither longer than those already given from the Calendars, nor at variance among themselves, except in this, that the names of the Saints are not everywhere expressed in the same manner, and that in some the title and the arena of the martyrdom, or the like, are added, which in others are passed over; as may be seen in those who have collected the Hieronymian and other sacred Fasti of that kind, and, committing them to the press, have brought them forth for the public benefit. Receive meanwhile the words of the Little Roman and of the genuine Bede; the former runs thus: At Rome, of Hyacinth and Protus, eunuchs; the latter thus: At Rome, the holy Protus and Hyacinth, who were eunuchs of St. Eugenia. But hear Wandelbert also:
Hence Protus and his brother Hyacinth honor the third day, Who taught Eugenia likewise the consecrated law.
[4] Just as, out of the innumerable Martyrologies of the briefer style, we exhibited only three announcements in the preceding number, eulogies from the Roman; from Ado so, passing over the rest, a very great many both ancient and recent, we shall here produce only three encomia of our Saints from Martyrologies of the more prolix style. I set first the present-day Roman, with which the Usuardine of Sollerius nearly agrees: At Rome, on the old Salarian Way, in the cemetery of Basilla, the birthday of the holy martyrs Protus and Hyacinth, brothers, eunuchs of blessed Eugenia, who, being apprehended under the emperor Gallienus because they were Christians, were compelled to sacrifice; but, not consenting, they were first most harshly scourged, and at last beheaded together. Much more extended is Ado's eulogy: At Rome, on the old Salarian Way, in the cemetery of Basilla, the birthday of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, who were eunuchs of the blessed virgin Eugenia, with whom, having been baptized by bishop Helenus, and for some time giving themselves to divine instruction alone, they persevered in their holy purpose; and in a monastery of the servants of God they lived with wonderful humility: and this in Egypt. Thence, having returned to Rome with the most blessed virgin, they were seized under the emperor Gallienus because they were Christians, and are compelled to sacrifice. But, not consenting, they are most cruelly scourged. And when, keeping faith with God, they rejoiced, they are beheaded together, on the third of the Ides of September. After these things St. Eugenia is held fast, and is ordered by Nicetius, prefect of the City, to offer sacrifices to Diana. She, standing before the temple, with hands outstretched poured forth a prayer. As she prayed, the image of Diana was so ground to pieces that only traces of its dust remained. But, reckoning this to be done by magical arts, they bound a huge stone about her shoulders and cast her headlong into the Tiber. But in what manner she completed the contest of her passion has been briefly noted above at the VIII of the Kalends of January. Thus far Ado, and, as to substance, Notker also.
[5] Much at variance with these is the text of Rabanus. Here it is for you entire in like manner: and from Rabanus. At Rome, of Protus and Jacinthus, who were eunuchs of the holy virgin Eugenia, and who, coming with her from the city of Rome to Alexandria, were received by bishop Helenus — to whom their arrival had been revealed by a vision — into a certain monastery, and lived among the monks in a man's habit; but afterwards, when Melanthia, a certain malicious woman, suspecting Eugenia, who lived in a man's habit, to be a male, had desired to be debauched by her, the secret being laid open, Eugenia was discovered to be not a man but a woman; and, compelled by an imperial command, she returned to Rome with her eunuchs: there, together with the virgin Basilla, the aforesaid two eunuchs were slain with the sword by order of Gallienus Augustus. But blessed Eugenia afterwards, that is on the VIII of the Kalends of January, suffering for the name of Christ, departed to the Lord with the crown of martyrdom. The eulogies of Rabanus and of Ado are remarkable, and exceedingly diverse from one another, yet they flowed from the same source, namely from the Acts of St. Eugenia the virgin: and consequently the truth of the history contained in the said eulogies depends upon the credit with which those Acts themselves are found to have been composed. These indeed have among the more recent learned men not a few adversaries; but, that I may not turn aside from the way I have proposed to myself — for I had determined first to set forth the posthumous glory of the Saints, and then at length to discuss their deeds in life — I reserve certain observations upon the said Acts of St. Eugenia for the last paragraph of this Commentary.
[6] The cemetery of S. Basilla Of the cemetery of S. Basilla, in which, after the Bucherian, certain other Calendars and most of the Martyrologies celebrate the festival of our Saints, there treat at large, in the Roma subterranea, Bosio, bk. 3, chapters 58 and 61, and Aringhi, bk. 4, chapters 34 and 37. Of the same also mention has been made by us in various places, and especially at the XX of May, when we gave Basilla or Basilissa the martyr, and at the XI of June, when we gave Basilla likewise a martyr, and, as Papebroch believes, distinct from the former; but most recently at the XXVIII of August, when we elucidated the Acts of St. Hermes, likewise a martyr. From these I note certain things which bear much upon the present matter: and first of all, that the said cemetery obtained its name not only from S. Basilla, but also from S. Hermes, and from SS. Protus and Hyacinth. Nay, Papebroch at the cited XI day of June thinks, with sufficient likelihood, that the said cemetery was in the second century distinguished by the name of S. Hermes, who was laid there about the beginning of that century; but that after the middle of the third century there were added the names of SS. Hyacinth and Protus, whose bodies were likewise then laid there; until at length it was enriched with the sacred remains of S. Basilla, in the year 304, on the XXII day of September: so that thereafter it began to be called by some the cemetery of the holy martyrs Hermes, Protus, Hyacinth and Basilla; by others simply the cemetery of Basilla.
[7] first of S. Hermes, then of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, Thus the author of the Bucherian Calendar, in commemorating the Saints of whom we here speak, attributes to the cemetery the name of Basilla alone, in this fashion: On the fifth of the Kalends (of September), of Hermes in Basilla's, on the old Salarian. On the third of the Ides (of September), of Protus and Hyacinth in Basilla's. Not that this place bore that name when those Saints were buried there; but because in the fourth century, while he was writing, it had begun to be so called on account of the very recent and more celebrated deposition of S. Basilla. For how, in the second century when S. Hermes, and in the third when our Saints were laid there, could that place have been named from S. Basilla, who was deposited there only when the fourth century had already begun, as we have said, and as is proved from the Bucherian Calendar itself? In it we read thus: On the tenth of the Kalends of October, of Basilla, on the old Salarian, in the consulships of Diocletian for the IX time and Maximian for the VIII. These consulships, answering to the year 304 of the common era, and so studiously added, certainly indicate one or the other of two things: either that in that year the bones of the holy martyr were first translated thither from elsewhere, or that she was slain in that very year and deposited there, as Papebroch thinks. Whichever be true, it follows at least that before this year the name of Basilla had not been imposed upon the cemetery. Further, that in the last text of the Calendar the words in Basilla's, denoting the cemetery, were not joined to the name of Basilla, as they are added in both the earlier texts to the names of SS. Hermes, Protus and Hyacinth, we believe to have come about because that place, when the Calendar was drawn up, had begun to be so celebrated under the name of Basilla that the author judged it sufficiently distinguished from the other cemeteries situated on the Salarian Way by the mere expression of the name of the martyr laid to rest on the said way.
[8] But however often, as we have already seen, the said cemetery was in the fourth and following centuries called after S. Basilla, and lastly called by the name of all together at once. Metrical epitaphs it did not on that account lay aside the names of SS. Hermes, Protus and Hyacinth: this is evidently established from a most celebrated writer of the ninth century — I mean Anastasius the Librarian — who in the Life of Pope Hadrian I, who died as the eighth century was growing old, writes as follows: He renewed the basilica of the cemetery of the holy martyrs Hermes, Protus and Hyacinth, and the Basilica (we must read: of Basilla) of wonderful size. And let these things said about the cemetery itself suffice; now I bring forward the epitaphs of which mention was made in num. 2. A double one, once carved on the tomb of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, is recited by Janus Gruter in the Appendix to the Ancient Inscriptions, pp. 1172 and 1173. The first runs thus:
The tomb lay hid beneath the farthest ridge of the hill. Damasus points it out, because it keeps the limbs of the holy. Thee, Protus, a better palace of heaven holds for itself: Thou followest, Hyacinth, approved by thy purple blood. Brothers german, both of them of mighty souls: The one here, a victor, earned the palm; the other, before him, the crown.
The second thus:
Behold the descent, thou wilt see a wondrous deed. Thou seest the monuments of the Saints laid open in their sepulchres. Here lies the tomb of the martyr Protus, and of Hyacinth: And when for a long while now hill, earth, and darkness covered it, Theodore the presbyter, pressing on, built this work, That greater works might hold the people of the Lord.
[9] These two epitaphs, like a very great many others inscribed on the sepulchres of holy martyrs, by S. Damasus, Pope, had St. Damasus the Pope for their author, as Bosio and Aringhi, praised in num. 6, and Baronius in the Appendix to vol. 12 of the Annals, p. 891, and others assert; and the very words of the first epitaph persuade it: Damasus points it out. Whence we learn that the bodies of our Saints were at first laid beneath a certain hill, and that by the said Pontiff — who, on the testimony of the author of his Life in the Librarian, sought out and found many bodies of the holy martyrs, whose resting-places also (doubtless cemeteries or sepulchres) he declared in verses — by the said Pontiff, I say, they were raised out of the earth and set in new monuments, built by the care of Theodore the presbyter, and that to these were affixed the verses recited, before the year 384, the year of S. Damasus's death; that is, a little more than a whole century after their martyrdom. Mabillon, vol. 5 of the Analecta, p. 483, from a parchment codex of the library of Einsiedeln, written, as he affirms, eight hundred years ago, produces eighty ancient Roman Inscriptions, among which at num. 67 comes the epigram already given by us in the first place from Gruter; at num. 68, under this title, On the sepulchre of Hyacinth, the following: Leopardus the presbyter adorned the sepulchre of the holy martyr Hyacinth. Deposited on the III of the Ides of Sept.; and finally at num. 69, with this title prefixed, On the Pincian Way, this is read: Pamphilus, Basilissa, Protus, Hyacinth, Hermes; where the Lord gave light to the blind man. Arcus, Murus. Between the Aurelian and the Portuensian, holy Processus and Martinianus, and Pancratius, Abdon and Sennen.
[10] and various inscriptions I have no doubt that both Inscriptions pertain to our holy Martyrs; and as to the former this is established from the characters denoting that the deposition took place on this day; as to the latter, both from the title, On the Pincian Way, so called because from the Pincian gate there was a road to the old Salarian Way, and from the other martyrs joined with them, especially SS. Hermes and Basilissa — whom Papebroch, as we noted in num. 6, believes to be distinct from S. Basilla, and whom in certain Hieronymian Martyrologies at the XX day of May I read announced thus: At Rome, on the Salarian Way, of Basilissa, Aureus and Nuscia or Nusca. I strongly suspect that Aureus and Nuscia or Nusca are the same as those who, with their names dislocated, are called in the Inscription Arcus and Murus; for what can these words mean, if they are not to be taken as proper names of Saints? Of Pamphilus, noted in the first place in the Inscription, William of Malmesbury also makes mention in bk. 4 On the Deeds of the Kings of the English; where, enumerating the gates and ways of the city of Rome, and the holy martyrs buried in these, he speaks thus: The fourth gate and the Salarian way, which is now called St. Silvester's. There, beside the way, rests holy Hermes, and holy Vasella (Basilla) and Protus and Jacinctus, Maxilianus, Herculanus, Crispus; and in another place nearby rest the holy martyrs Pamphilus and Quirinus, LXX steps down in the depth of the earth, etc. And the said Pamphilus is doubtless he whose memory is celebrated in the Roman and Usuardine Martyrology at the XXI day of September in these words: At Rome, of holy Pamphilus the martyr; for I find in no author mention of another martyr of the same name at Rome. Whence I gather that his body was laid on the Salarian way, which seems to have been hitherto unknown, as Ferrari appears to hint in the Catalogue of the Saints of Italy: Just as, he says, the time of this martyr's passion (S. Pamphilus) is unknown to us, since Usuard also, from whom the Roman Martyrology seems to have received it, made bare mention of him, so also where his body is laid is hidden from us. More about this Saint, if it be found, will be given at the aforesaid XXI day of this month.
[11] or preserved for their memory, For the rest, that the second Inscription, embracing the names of so many holy martyrs, was never affixed to or carved upon any sepulchre, cemetery or church, the circumstances sufficiently show; for the ways and gates called Aurelian and Portuensian, between which the sepulchres of SS. Processus and Martinianus, Pancratius, Abdon and Sennen are designated, lay far apart from the ways and gates called Salarian and Pincian, nay, in the opposite region of the City across the Tiber. I should therefore believe that this monument was drawn up in antiquity lest, on account of the continual persecutions of the Gentiles against the Christians, the places where so many illustrious martyrs had been buried should fall out of memory and lie hidden from posterity. Of SS. Processus and Martinianus there has been full treatment in our Work at the 2nd day of July; of S. Pancratius at the XII day of May; and of SS. Abdon and Sennen at the XXX day of July. But at what time, or on what occasion, a blind man received his sight by a divine favor at the tombs of the Saints resting on the Pincian Way, I nowhere find.
[12] Finally, although the former inscription, cited in num. 9, or carved upon their tomb by pious faithful displays nothing from which the time can certainly be elicited at which it was affixed to the tomb; yet, since in Anastasius the Librarian, in the Life of St. Innocent, Pope, the first of that name, I read of a presbyter not only of the same name as the Leopardus expressed in the inscription, but also occupied with like pious works, I much suspect that the same man was designated in both places. I report the words as they stand in Anastasius: He (Innocent I) dedicated the Basilica of the holy Gervasius and Protasius, out of the devotion of a certain illustrious woman Vestina, the presbyters Ursicinus and Leopardus and the deacon Livianus laboring at it. Therefore, if I suspect rightly, a new adornment together with that inscription must have come to a tomb erected not long before; for the said Pontiff presided over the universal Church from the year 402 to 417. But why do both the inscription itself and its title mention Hyacinth alone? Why likewise does the title of the first epigram or metrical epitaph, drawn from the ancient codex of the Einsiedeln library praised above in Mabillon, name Protus alone, in this fashion: On the sepulchre of Protus the Martyr? Certainly that the sacred remains of both Martyrs were enclosed in one and the same tomb is intimated by both epigrams, and especially by the following verses of the second:
Here lies the tomb of the martyr Protus, and of Hyacinth: And when for a long while now hill, earth, and darkness covered it, Theodore built this work…
[13] I should believe the matter is to be so explained that there is understood to have been indeed a single tomb; carved upon it after it was adorned. but either divided into two parts, or at least constructed in such form and position that it had a double aspect and a double sepulchral stone, of which the front one bore the name of S. Protus, the hinder that of S. Hyacinth, and that on the former was carved the first epigram, indicating the name of its author Damasus, and on the latter the other epigram containing the name of Theodore, who had built the whole work. These things being so arranged, we conceive without difficulty why the prose inscription, which was added afterwards, says that the tomb of S. Hyacinth was adorned by Leopardus, and is silent about S. Protus; namely, because it was carved on that sepulchral stone, or that part of the tomb, which looked most closely to S. Hyacinth, and which perhaps Leopardus alone had adorned.
§ II. The celebrity of the ancient cult; a basilica built for the Saints.
[ ] Their solemn festival From the sacred Fasti and other most ancient monuments reviewed in the preceding §, the immemorial cult of our holy Martyrs is abundantly established; and that this was most celebrated at Rome anyone will easily conceive, provided he observe that their names were written in the most ancient Calendars: for these did not embrace any and every Saint, but only those whose more solemn festival was wont to be kept in cemeteries or basilicas or title-churches. John Fronto learnedly observed this in the Prænotata to the Roman Calendar published by him, § III, where
he asks why few Saints are noted in the said Calendar, drawn up at least in part after the times of St. Gregory; seeing that this holy Pontiff writes in this manner in the Register, bk. 7, epist. 29: We have the names of almost all the martyrs, with their passions distinguished through the several days, collected in one codex, and on the days of every day we perform the solemnities of Masses in their veneration. But presently, I answer, says Fronto, that at Rome and everywhere holy martyrs are celebrated on every day in private Masses; but that those were set down in the Calendar whose day was celebrated with a festal concourse of the people and with public sacrifices. Thierry Ruinart, in the Preface to the Genuine Acts of the Martyrs, refuting Henry Dodwell's XI Cyprianic Dissertation on the fewness of the martyrs, adopts this reasoning of Fronto, and concludes its firmness from Gregory the Great himself, who, although he exhibits few martyrs in the Sacramentary, yet says elsewhere that he celebrated the memory of martyrs on every day.
[15] held at Rome from the 4th century. Supported by this reasoning, solid indeed and in my judgment certain, I likewise conclude that the day of the deposition of our holy Martyrs was celebrated at Rome with a festal concourse of the people and with public solemnities of Masses, if not immediately after their death, at least by the middle of the IV century; seeing that their names are written in the most ancient Calendar of Bucherius, in which Papebroch, vol. 2 of June, p. 464, judges the author to have aimed at this one thing, that he might weave a catalogue only of the chief festivals which were at that time held in the Roman cemeteries throughout the whole circle of the year, and that hence it came about that their number, not reaching forty, was so scanty. But as to the Mass of our Saints wont to be celebrated at that time, the Roman Calendar in Martène, praised by us in num. 1, does not permit us to doubt. For this, although much richer in the number of Saints than the Bucherian — because, namely, it prescribes festivals wont to be kept not only in the Roman cemeteries but also in the basilicas of the City and other sacred places — yet yields little to it in antiquity, and is thus entitled: Here begin the chapters of the lessons of the Gospel for the circle of the year at Mass; then at the XI day of September, with the names of SS. Protus and Hyacinth prefixed, it indicates that the following lesson of the holy Gospel is to be recited: According to Matthew, chap. LXXIX (according to the older division of chapters: now it is found at chapter 10 from verse 23) When they shall persecute you in this city, flee into another, as far as: I also will deny him before my Father who is in heaven. The same Gospel lesson is prescribed in the Calendar of Fronto, of which there was mention in num. 2.
[16] The Mass and Office That the festival of our Martyrs was no less celebrated in the following centuries is clear from the most ancient Rituals of the Roman Church, and especially from the Antiphonary or Gradual of St. Gregory the Great, and from his book of Sacraments. The Antiphonary, published by Pamelius in vol. 2 of the Liturgica, has the Introit of the Mass, the Gradual and the rest, as follows.
The Birthday of the holy Protus and Hyacinth.
Antiph. The Saints judge the nations, and shall have dominion over the peoples; their Lord shall reign for ever.
Psal. Rejoice, ye just, in the Lord.
Resp. Avenge, O Lord, the blood of thy Saints, which hath been shed.
Vers. They have given the dead bodies of thy Servants to be meat for the fowls of heaven, the flesh of thy Saints for the beasts of the earth.
All. Rejoice, ye just, in the Lord; praise becometh the upright.
Off. All they that love thy name shall glory in thee, for thou, O Lord, wilt bless the just: O Lord, thou hast crowned us as with a shield of thy good will.
At the Communion. Our soul, like a sparrow, hath been snatched out of the snare of the fowlers. Or: He that will come after me.
[17] The Book of Sacraments exhibits three prayers likewise to be recited at Mass, recited down to the 13th century. but I do not transcribe them; for the same are extant in the Roman Missals both older and present-day, yet with this difference, that in the former they are set forth together with a whole Mass, in the latter only for a commemoration; because after the institution of the Octave of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary — which is believed to have taken place in the XIII century — the Office of the same and the Mass began to be celebrated in the Church on this day; but of our Saints there is had only a Commemoration with the ninth Lesson. Nevertheless in certain particular churches, in which their sacred bodies or notable relics are kept, that even at this day the Office and Mass of them is celebrated will be evident from what is to be said, after I have dispatched in a few words one point which pertains to the older cult.
[18] That the cemetery on the old Salarian Way was once called by the names of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, A basilica erected to them and to S. Hermes and Basilla beside the cemetery. we showed in num. 8 from the words of the Pontifical Book in the Life of S. Hadrian, Pope, the first of that name: that a basilica was once erected in the same cemetery becomes evident both from the same words and from Paul Aringhi's Roma subterranea, vol. 2, p. 321 and following; where the said basilica, as it even now stands in a subterranean place of the villa of the Society of Jesus outside the Pincian gate, is graphically described, with a figure added. That very description we reported in our Work, vol. VI of August, p. 148; it remains that we inquire at what time, by whom, and to what Saint or Saints it was built. Each of these points Tillemont absolutely determined in the Monuments of Ecclesiastical History, vol. 4, p. 13; and Adrien Baillet followed him in vol. 3 of the Lives of the Saints at the XI day of September, whose words, faithfully translated from the French into Latin, run thus: The Pontiff Damasus, fearing lest the bodies of S. Protus and S. Hyacinth should remain hidden from the Faithful, ordered the earth, which in the course of time had been heaped over them, to be removed, and laid open their tomb. A little while afterward a certain priest, by name Theodore, ordered a church to be built there in their honor, afterward adorned and enriched by Pope Symmachus. So Baillet, and so nearly also Tillemont, who nevertheless, to prove that the said church was built by Theodore the presbyter, adduces the second epigram, which we gave in num. 8 as composed by S. Damasus.
[19] There is no doubt that the said basilica is very ancient, From the epitaph composed by S. Damasus it is not clear since in the VIII century Hadrian I, Pontiff, renewed it; nor does anything occur from which it can be shown to be false that it was founded by Theodore the presbyter; however much the foundation on which the praised authors rest does not appear to me so firm that I should be willing, with them, to affirm quite undoubtingly that this is true: and, to speak candidly, before I had considered their assertion more attentively I had for my part, after Bosio and Aringhi, gathered nothing from the cited epigram except that a more ornate sepulchre had been built by Theodore for our Saints, as I did not conceal above in num. 9 and 13. It is worth while to set the epigram itself again before our eyes:
[20] that it was built in the IV century, Certainly in the four earlier verses I detect nothing from which I could hammer out that a basilica was built by Theodore; but of the remaining two I had judged this or a like sense to be: Theodore built this work, that is, a new tomb, pressing on or intending that the People of the Lord — that is, our holy Martyrs and others formerly laid there in a lowlier place — should be enclosed in more ornate and nobler monuments. I do not deny, however, that it can be so expounded that the sense is: Theodore erected this tomb, pressing on or urging that a greater work, namely a basilica, should be founded, which might hold the Faithful assembling at the sepulchres of the Saints: but from this it is not certainly concluded that the basilica was built by him, or in his lifetime. Perhaps you will say that the sense is that Theodore built this work — to wit, a basilica — intending that a more ample place might hold the Faithful running thither. But besides that these things do not seem equally to cohere with the four earlier verses, on that opinion it will have to be admitted that the epigram was carved on the basilica itself; for this demonstrative in inscriptions commonly designates the place to which the inscriptions are affixed. But that the epigram was affixed to the basilica itself, and not to the tomb, appears to me less probable; because in it mention is made only of our Saints, and none of SS. Basilla and Hermes, to whom it is most likely that the basilica was consecrated equally with our Saints; and as to Hermes we proved this in vol. VI of August, p. 148.
[21] nor, from the Pontifical Book, that it was adorned by Pope Symmachus. Uncertain to me likewise is what Baillet asserts in his last words after Tillemont, namely that the said basilica was adorned and enriched by Pope Symmachus. The praised author indeed rests upon the Acts of the said Pontiff, where these things are read: He (Symmachus) adorned with silver the confession of holy Cassian and of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, weighing XXX pounds. A silver arch, weighing XII pounds. But since the whole context of the words, to which for brevity's sake I refer the reader, hints that the biographer was there intent solely on enumerating the oratories and other sacred places adorned by Symmachus within or beside the basilica of S. Peter the apostle, I incline rather to the opinion of Giovanni Vignoli in his notes on the recited text, who judges that in the basilica of S. Peter there once existed a confession or altar sacred to our holy Martyrs. Whatever be the truth of the matter, it is at least established that their cult was celebrated at Rome in the V and VI centuries, when the aforesaid Pontiff held the Pontificate.
§ III. Relics translated to Seligenstadt in the IX century.
[ ] Portions of the sacred bodies It is not established how long the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth rested in that basilica of which we have just treated. That this sacred treasure was kept there in the IX century, when Gregory IV governed the universal Church, is vouched for by Einhard, at that time abbot of Seligenstadt, in the History of the translation of SS. Marcellinus and Peter, reprinted by us in vol. 1 of June, p. 204; from which we cull a few things bearing on the present matter. In chapter 10, about to relate two miracles wrought in the basilica of SS. Marcellinus and Peter at Seligenstadt in his presence — one of these indeed at the coming of the relics of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, and beside the relics themselves — he thus preludes: Gregory, Bishop of the city of Rome, who succeeded Eugenius and likewise Valentine in the honor of the Pontificate, when he wished to enlarge the Title of S. Mark the Evangelist (nay rather, Confessor and Pontiff, as Anastasius writes in the Life of Gregory), in which he had been a presbyter, and to build a monastery in it, sought through the cemeteries and churches situated further from the City, if anywhere he might find bodies of holy Martyrs: and those he found he took care to bring into the Title which he had built with magnificent workmanship.
[23] It happened therefore by chance that at that time,
when he was about to open the sepulchre of the most blessed Hermes, sent from Rome and was about to take away his sacred body thence, one of our men, who in the same year had come to Rome for the sake of making supplication, as is the custom of penitents, was present with the other pilgrims among the multitude gathered at the basilica of the Martyr. He, having diligently inspected the business which was being transacted, conceived — with a simple heart indeed, yet not without cause — a hope of obtaining relics of the said martyr: and going to Deusdona the deacon, of whom we have made frequent mention in the first book, he earnestly begged that he would receive from the guardians of the place some little portion, however small, of these, and would grant it to him to be brought to me. He, at once assenting to his prayers, promises that he will do this without delay: and, a price being given to the guardians, he received relics not only of S. Hermes, but also of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, whose bodies had been placed in the same basilica. And these indeed he took care to send by a certain member of his household, whose surname was Sabbatinus, and at the same time by our man, who persuaded him to do this; but what he could obtain of the body of B. Hermes he himself, coming to us, brought as a mighty gift.* Thus far Einhard: whence we learn not only that the bodies of our Saints remained in their basilica down to the said century, but also at what time and on what occasion the people of Seligenstadt were enriched with their precious relics. It is worth while to follow these all the way to Seligenstadt, that we may learn with how great veneration they were there received and by how notable a miracle they were ennobled. Let us therefore hear the praised Einhard in the cited place.
[24] But when the arrival of the relics of the holy Protus and Hyacinth had been made known to us, they are received with honor at Seligenstadt we went forth to meet them, and receiving them honorably, as was fitting, and bringing them into the basilica with hymns and prayers, we placed them beside the bodies of the blessed Marcellinus and Peter, together with the bier on which they had come. And when on the morrow a certain woman from a neighboring little farm, which is called Baldradestat, possessed by a demon, had entered with the rest of the people, the wicked spirit began to rage, and to dash her prostrate upon the pavement, and to publish his malice by confessing it before all. And when he had been questioned by the presbyter who was exorcizing him — who he was, whence he had come, when and why he had entered into her — he answered to each point, and testified that he was not only a demon, but the worst of all living beings. And when the presbyter had asked of him the cause of so great wickedness, he confessed that an evil will had brought this upon him. Again, when he asked of him whether he had ever been in heaven, he confessed that he had been in heaven, and had been cast down thence on account of pride. To the same man, inquiring whether he had seen Christ the Lord or not, he said that he had been seen by him in hell, at the time when for the salvation of the human race he deigned to die and to descend thither.
[25] and grow illustrious by a notable miracle But when it came to this, that he asked him whether he knew the names of the Martyrs whose relics had the day before been brought into that same church, "Their names," said he, "are most well known to me: because, when they suffered, I stood by present, and was tormented with mighty envy at their everlasting glory; and even here I now suffer them as most hostile to me: for they torture me with incredible torment, and compel me unwilling to go out of this vessel, in which I long lay hid." To whom the presbyter: "When thou shalt have gone out," said he, "whither art thou to go?" "I," said he, "am to go into a most evil way, and to seek out far-off and desert regions." After these things, when at the presbyter's bidding he had set forth both the occasion and the manner of his entry, turning to the woman, "I," said he, "unhappy woman, before I go out, will dash together and break thy bones, and will leave thee crippled and mindful of our fellowship." And when she, as though conscious of her own weakness, had begun with a suppliant and lowered voice to implore the aid of the Saints, he at once, raging and railing through her mouth with mighty harshness, imposed silence on her who wished to speak.
[26] they become renowned, For it was to us, who were present, exceedingly wonderful to see, that that unclean spirit spoke through the mouth of the same poor woman in so diverse a manner, and now expressed so purely the quality of a masculine, now of a feminine voice, that there seemed to be not one, but two persons in her sharply altercating and provoking one another with reproaches. And in truth there were two, at variance with one another in diverse will: the one of the demon, desiring to dash together the body possessed by him; the other of the woman, desiring to be freed from the enemy by whom she was held: which diversity of wills could clearly and openly enough be understood from the disparity of the voices and the unlikeness of the words which they cast at one another. Therefore, the Office of the heavenly Mystery being completed according to custom, and we going forth from the basilica to care for our bodies, we ordered the woman to wait there with guardians until we should return, having confidence that through the power of Christ, and the merits of his Martyrs, her treacherous possessor would quickly go out. Nor did our hope deceive us. For after refection, returning to the church, we found her, the demon being driven out, sound and unhurt, and in all respects mistress of her own mind, and exulting in the praises of God. And this sign indeed, at the coming of the relics of the blessed martyrs of Christ Protus and Hyacinth, is agreed to have been accomplished in the manner set down by us.
[27] Although I cannot strictly define in what year precisely the things just related happened, between the years 828 and 830, I nevertheless believe that it can be more broadly settled, without danger of error, within the year 828, at the beginning of which Gregory IV entered on the Pontificate, and the year 830, on the XXVIII day of the month of August in which — after the people of Seligenstadt had already received the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth — a miracle happened there at the relics of S. Hermes the martyr, brought thither by Deusdona the deacon himself, as we proved from Einhard in vol. VI of August, p. 149. I do not sufficiently grasp what Baillet meant, when in the place several times cited, after he had asserted that the cult of SS. Protus and Hyacinth passed from Rome into Gaul in the times of Charlemagne, he subjoined the following, rendered into Latin from the French: It is said that under Louis the Pious his son a part of their relics came from Rome with many others to Einhard in the year DCCCXXVIII or DCCCXXX, and that they were laid up by this illustrious man — who at that time, in order to give himself to piety, had forsaken the court — at Seligenstadt on the Main, with the relics of S. Marcellinus and S. Peter; but that this was done is but ill proved. Certainly the History of the translation drawn up by Einhard himself appears, both on account of the circumstances of time, persons, and places, and on account of the authority of the writer, so genuine and approved that I do not see what more could be desired, especially by Baillet; since he himself uses it in the Acts of SS. Marcellinus and Peter at the 2nd day of June, where he has this: Einhard himself wrote the History of this translation, and gave testimony of the miracles done there; and it is known how much weight the esteem held of his learning and probity brought to his writings.
[28] Further, what and how great a man Einhard was, whom others have called Eginhart and Einard, The author Einhard, an eyewitness, and another contemporary. we have indicated in our Work in various places, and especially in vol. 1 of June, pp. 176 and 206. If anyone should desire a fuller account of him, let him consult Mabillon, Century IV, part 1, On the Acts of the Saints of the Order of S. Benedict, p. 414, where he will find a compendium of his Life; and Fr. Johann Weinckens, who in the work which he entitled Eginhartus illustratus set forth his Acts more fully in the first four chapters, and in §4 of the latter of these exhibited a series of the eulogies with which Einhard was deservedly adorned by ancient and more recent writers. Yet, lest any doubt should cling to one reading Baillet concerning the existence of the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth among the people of Seligenstadt, I bring forward a second testimony, that of Robert the presbyter, a writer contemporary with Einhard and worthy of credit, who in the Prologue of the Life of B. Rabanus Maurus, whose disciple he was, published by us in vol. 1 of February from p. 512, writes thus: The bones also of the blessed martyrs Marcellinus and Peter, Protus and Hyacinth, together with the relics of S. Hermes, shine daily with no less glory of miracles in the various healings of the sick: and these too, translated from Rome and brought to abbot Einard beside the Main, a river of Germany, in the village which was formerly called Mulinheim, but now Saligunstat, are venerated by the faithful with worthy celebration. An account of Seligenstadt and its chief relics;
[29] It is believed to have come about by occasion of the relics, and of the frequent miracles wrought there, that this place, formerly called Mulinheim, afterward began to be called Saligunstat or Seligenstat, which German word means the city of the Blessed. Now Seligenstadt is situated in the diocese of Mainz, between Frankfurt and Aschaffenburg, and it has a notable abbey of the Order of S. Benedict. Our Papebroch, in the manuscript Diary of his Italian journey, says that he came thither in the month of August of the year 1660, and was received by the abbot most courteously; then, describing each of the chief monuments of the abbatial church, he observes these few things bearing on our matter: On the doors of the high altar this inscription was read: The bodies of these Saints rest beneath this altar: of Marius, Martha, Audifax, Habakkuk, Protus, Hyacinth, Marcellinus and Peter. The headlong flight of the Swedish war jumbled the relics together in sacks, and there was no opportunity of seeing them.
[30] the impiety of the heretics against these, and the veneration of the Catholics Now that intermingling of the sacred relics happened about the middle of the century just past, when, the city with its monastery having been plundered by the French and the men of Weimar, who had come to the aid of the Swedes, the sacred building — which alone, at the persuasion of the French, had remained untouched — experienced likewise the ferocity and impiety of the men of Weimar, after the French had departed to their camps, as the praised Weinckens narrates at length in chap. 7, §6: And when, he says, they had raged thus against all things, at last they vent their fury upon the sacred remains themselves of our holy Patrons; for although these, throughout the whole time of the Swedish persecution, had until then been laid up in a place safe enough and had remained unharmed, yet, having found them (it is not known by whose doing), they poured them out of their coffers and scattered them over the pavements of the church, to be trodden under the feet of those walking by; so that what had remained untouched after so many centuries at last in this storm suffered a horrible dispersion, so that then that saying of Psalm LXXVIII could truly be applied: "O God, the heathen are come into thy inheritance, and they have defiled thy holy temple, they have given the dead bodies of thy Servants to be meat for the fowls of heaven." Although the same afterward, being carefully sought out, were taken up by priests with due reverence and laid up again with the highest veneration. The same Weinckens, who in the year 1714 was Prior of the said monastery, asserts in chap. 6, §3, that the altars of his church, all of which — he enumerates five — were entirely erected and consecrated in the year 1679; the chief one to SS. Marcellinus and Peter, Marius and Martha, Audifax and Habakkuk, Lawrence the arch-martyr, Protus and Hyacinth and S. Benedict, the others to other Saints, whose sacred remains are kept there in great number. And in the following paragraph a catalogue of the said relics
is subjoined, and among them he reckons the arm of S. Protus, and a part of the arm of S. Hyacinth. Hence I gather that those relics were not so intermingled after the plundering of the church but that they could easily be recognized and distinguished.
§ IV. Portions of the sacred bodies sent to Metz in the X century.
[ ] Relics are translated from Italy to Metz We saw in the preceding paragraph that the bodies of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, according to Einhard's account, were kept in the basilica of the Salarian Way down to the times of Pope Gregory IV. In both editions of d'Achery's Spicilegium — in the first in vol. 5, in the other in vol. 2 — there is extant an old document which d'Achery testifies was copied from a written codex of the monastery of S. Symphorian of Metz by Adrien de Valois, and granted to him by the latter, under this title: The Finding of the Saints discovered by lord Deodericus the pontiff. It is extant likewise in Gottfried Leibniz, vol. 1 of the Brunswick Affairs, p. 303, in the Life of Deodericus or Theodoric, bishop of Metz, drawn up by Sigebert of Gembloux, an author of the XI century, who inserted it entire into that Life with this prelude: Now then let that page be brought forward, most fully set in order by those who were present, concerning the translation of the Saints. Now from the said document we understand that the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth were translated to the city of Metz about the year 972, and besides we gather with sufficient likelihood that their sacred bodies remained on the Salarian Way down almost to that same time. The author of the writing is anonymous, but, as Sigebert hints, an eyewitness of the things narrated, inasmuch as he accompanied Deodericus not only on his Italian journey, but also on his return to his own bishopric of Metz, as will presently be seen.
[32] Thus the praised anonymous writer begins his account: by Theodoric, bishop of the people of Metz In the year of the Lord's Incarnation DCCCCLXX, when the great and most glorious Cæsar Augustus Otto, together with his namesake, a youth of admirable disposition, his son and likewise augustus, and with his consort Adelheid of great virtues — than whom nothing could ever be more just, more gentle, more prudent, nor anything more pious — were governing the scepters of Italy with pious and just control, peacefully and firmly as far as the borders of Calabria, the lord and venerable bishop of holy Metz, Deodericus, joined to that magnificent emperor by blood and by wonderful affection and familiarity, and by whose counsel, on account of the wonderful prerogative of his wisdom, all the business of the palace was conducted, being engaged in that same Italian expedition, in which he served for nearly three years; while, given especially to divine worship, he eagerly sought out whatever pertained to the honor, adornment, or defense of his holy see, and all things effectually answered to his wishes, he strove to bring into that same holy see of Metz a very great store of bodies of Saints gathered from divers places of Italy, by the help of divine grace, to be venerated by him with worthy cult and honor more excellently than elsewhere.
[33] Then the author, enumerating the bodies or relics of the Saints, with the places and persons added from whom Deodericus had received them, according to the account of an eyewitness, inserts the following, which bears on our matter: In Sabina, a region not far from the city of Rome, at about the XL milestone, the holy martyrs Protus and Jacintus were laid, with somewhat too negligent a guard. These a certain abbot of the monastery of holy Mary, which is called Farfa, when he was asking our venerable pontiff to become his intercessor with the emperor in his own case, because he had learned that he was delighted with no gift so much, first offered in part, but afterward, at the wonderful insistence of the lord prelate, he added whatever he could find thereof; he himself with his monks giving an oath upon the holy Gospels that these were truly the bones of the holy Protus and Jacintus. This was done after the Lord's birthday, while we were returning from Rome, in the neighborhood of the city of Horta. Then, after mentioning some things about the relics of other Saints, he writes thus toward the end: When now, the royal nuptials having been performed there with great glory, we were arranging our return from Rome to our own country, the lord Pope (he had before named John XIII) most richly heaped upon the venerable prelate a last benefit, and one more copious than many, out of four portions of the gridiron of holy Lawrence.* Thus the anonymous writer in d'Achery's latest edition, from which the earlier edition does not differ except in the place noted in the margin. In one place likewise the Leibniz edition differs, as I shall show below.
[34] whose accurate noting of persons Now certain things which might otherwise have been passed over I have thought fit to transfer hither from the anonymous writer, both that it may be clear that he was present at the things related, and that the reader may observe how accurately he everywhere noted the circumstances of times and persons. For first, the blood-kinship of Otto the Great — who is read to have borne the crown of empire from the year 962 to 973 — with bishop Theodoric is confirmed by the continuator of Regino at the year 965: In this year, he says, Thiedericus, a deacon of that church, is appointed successor to Henry archbishop of Trier, and Thiedericus, cousin of the emperor, to Adalbero bishop of Metz. This is confirmed likewise, besides others, by Sigebert in the Chronicle to be cited below, and in the Life of Theodoric in Leibniz, p. 312, where he brings forward the epitaph of the said bishop, which runs thus:
Here Deodericus, born of noble blood, Of the progeny of kings, having a famous name; Whom the line of Cæsar Otto's flesh touched, By whose counsels he gave laws to the peoples.
[35] and of times is commended, Secondly, the royal nuptials which the anonymous writer mentions — namely of Otto the second with Theophano, niece of John Tzimisces emperor of the East — were celebrated at Rome, as Sigonio narrates in On the Kingdom of Italy, book 7, in the year 972, and in the same year Theophano was crowned augusta by Pope John XIII, who in the said year, in the month of September, departed this life. The same year the author of the Hildesheim Chronicle, published by Du Chesne in vol. 3 of the Writers of the History of the Franks, p. 504, expressly states in this manner: DCCCCLXXII. To the emperor Otto the younger the empress came to Rome from Constantinople, on the XVIII of the Kalends of May, the Octave of Easter. Thirdly, the abbot of the monastery of S. Mary of Farfa, situated in the diocese of Sabina, and often mentioned by us on the preceding day in the Preliminary Commentary to the Acts of S. Thomas, its restorer, was John, the third of that name, who, as far as I gather from the Index of the abbots of Farfa in Muratori, vol. 2, part 2, On the Writers of Italy, col. 296, was lawfully elected about the year 967; but by the wicked machinations of a certain monk named Hildebrand he was compelled, about four years later, to prove his election before the emperor Otto, and in fact did prove it, as is established from the decree of the said emperor given at Ravenna in the year 971, and published by the praised Muratori, col. 475. Hence we easily conceive to what end that abbot asked Theodoric, most friendly with the emperor, to be his intercessor, and liberally offered the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth.
[36] and a fault which afterward crept into his writing is corrected. Fourthly and finally, the anonymous writer writes rightly enough that the Saints were laid in Sabina, a region not far from the city of Rome; since from the Salarian gate there is a road to the Sabines, and there is laid through the Sabines (the words are Strabo's, bk. 5 of the Geographica) the Salarian way, not a long one, into which the Nomentan runs at Eretum. But a difficulty occurs in the distance from the City there designated, at about the XL milestone. For Aringhi in the Roma subterranea, discoursing of the cemeteries of the Salarian Way in bk. IV, chap. 37, says, Further, two cemeteries among others … once existed on this old Salarian way, one namely which was called at the Cucumber Slope … but the other which was distinguished by the name of the holy Hermes, Basilla, Protus and Hyacinth, both which cemeteries indeed are distant at the THIRD milestone from the City: which distance differs much from that which is read in the anonymous writer. It must therefore be either that after the times of Pope Gregory IV the bodies of our Saints were translated from the Salarian Way further from the City, or that the anonymous writer erroneously designated so great a distance, or that a fault crept into his account through the copyists — which last appears to me most probable; chiefly because these words not far from the city of Rome are immediately prefixed, and because Sigebert in the Leibniz edition praised at num. 31 has at the XI milestone. I should believe that the author truly wrote at the III milestone, but either in a rather obscure character or in a blotted one; certainly Baluze in his notes to the second edition is said to have wiped away many blots from the codex which d'Achery used; whence it came about that one read at the XL milestone, another at the XI.
[37] The Sigebert just praised reports what has hitherto been given from the anonymous writer more briefly in his Chronicle at the year 970, in this manner: This translation, which some attach to the year 970, Theodoric bishop of the people of Metz, bound to the emperor beyond the rest by blood, affection, and familiarity, while for three years he served under him in the Italian expedition, gathered many bodies and pledges of Saints from divers places of Italy, in whatever way he could. Then, after reviewing the relics of other Saints, he subjoins this concerning ours: From the Sabines, parts of the bodies of Protus and Hyacinth, martyrs; and at last he thus concludes: All these, with … a part of the gridiron of holy Lawrence the martyr, given him by Pope John, together with many other pledges of Saints, the prelate Deodericus translated into Gaul in this year, and placed them in the church of holy Vincent the martyr, built by himself on the island of the city. To the same year the said translation of relics is attached in other Chronicles. But, so far as I grasp it, everywhere too hastily; the often-praised anonymous writer does indeed write that Deodericus … strove to bring a very great store of bodies of Saints from divers places of Italy … into his holy see of Metz in the year 970 (by which words the chronographers, and other writers following them, were doubtless deceived); but he does not say that in the same year he brought them thither. Nay, he plainly enough hints the contrary, where toward the end he asserts that portions of the gridiron of S. Lawrence were given by the Roman Pontiff to Theodoric, when now, the royal nuptials having been performed there with great glory, he was arranging his return from Rome to his own country; since these nuptials were performed only in the year 972, as I proved at num. 35, and as Sigebert himself notes in the Chronicle according to Miræus's edition.
[38] Therefore not all the relics enumerated by Sigebert were translated to Metz by Deodericus in the year 970; but neither were all translated at once by himself in the year 972: for, as will be evident to one who turns over the account of the aforesaid anonymous writer, many of these relics he sent into his diocese by various men at various times while he was staying in Italy; but the rest the prelate himself translated, and laid up in the church of S. Vincent the martyr, whose foundations he had laid in the year 968, as the author of the Chronicle of Metz in Labbe notes, and Sigebert in the Life of Theodoric in Leibniz, chap. 13; and the same Sigebert adds in chap. 18 that an altar was there dedicated to our Saints in the year 972, on the VI day of the month of August. Hear his text entire: Therefore, with fervent zeal for the work begun
of the fabric, and, the prelate of holy memory being by Christ's favor brought back from a long absence, two altars adjoining one another were dedicated in the same church, in the presence and with the cooperation of the most reverend Wigfrid of Verdun and Gerard of Toul, pontiffs, in the year DCCCCLXXII; the one indeed in honor of the great martyr, published to the whole world, holy Lucy of Syracuse; the other in the presence and honor of the holy Protus and Jacinctus, martyrs likewise spread abroad through the world, whose sacrosanct bodies — true ones, as surely as the faith of Christ is true, and no others — obtained in those parts of Italy by the help of the Augusti themselves and the lords of that time, and by the authority of Pope John, he translated hither with a happy omen, the Lord helping, together with the bodies of other holy martyrs: and the Kalends of that dedication are the VIII of the Ides of August, in the ninth year of his pontificate: that is, from the year 964, which, with the author of the Chronicle of S. Vincent of Metz, Sigebert in his Chronography fixes as the first of Deodericus; the Continuator of Regino, praised at num. 34, writes that the bishop was appointed a year later: which of the two is the more correct does not bear on our matter here.
[39] [in the church of the monastery of S. Vincent, where portions of their bodies are kept.] For the rest, nowhere do I find it committed to memory what portions of the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth the monastery of S. Vincent at Metz possesses — portions, I say, not whole bodies, as might be understood from the text of Sigebert just cited, and from the anonymous writer's account, in which it is said that the abbot of Farfa first offered a part of the relics to Deodericus, and afterward added whatever he could find thereof. For that all these things are to be expounded of portions only, Sigebert himself, who for some time dwelt at Metz in the said monastery, sufficiently declares in the Chronography in the words recited at num. 37: From the Sabines, parts of the bodies of Protus and Hyacinth, martyrs. I observe these things here, not because any of the writers whom I have seen attributes this whole treasure to the people of Metz, but because there are so many others who seem, as often happens, to claim it whole for themselves, or the greater part of it, that to reconcile them is a very difficult business.
Annotata* another reading: excellence
§ V. The various cities of Italy are enumerated which ascribe to themselves the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, or notable portions of them.
[ ] Their bodies or great portions of them are believed to be kept at Pavia; That in this matter of the various translations, which is greatly entangled, some order may be kept and confusion avoided, I shall first, without any examination, produce baldly whatever I have been able to find in the writers of the several places concerning the possession and cult of the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, meaning afterward to subjoin and discuss the reasons which they oppose to one another. There occurs in the first place the Monastery of S. Felix at Pavia, of which — and at the same time of our Saints — Giacomo Gualla in the Sanctuarium of Pavia, bk. 5, chap. XI, writes in this manner: Otto the German, the second emperor, founded a very beautiful oratory to our Savior, called in this our time St. Felix; which building indeed most holy virgins of the Order of the divine Benedict cultivate with wonderful devotion. And in it lie these venerable bodies of Saints, whose names are written below. Felix, Castulus, George, Felicitas, Protus, Hyacinth, Sergius and Bacchus, two Innocents, Marina, Felicula, the head of S. Stephen the protomartyr, the head of S. Valentine the presbyter, one gilded Cross of the most holy wood of the Cross, one casket in the middle of the high altar full of relics. All which venerable relics indeed are fittingly entombed in the subterranean oratory in three chests of wonderful beauty, of ivory-white marble and distinguished by excellent workmanship, which, preserved with faithful devotion, still exist there and are venerated. Thus far the praised Gualla, an author of the XV century well advanced, whose narration, as the learned reader easily perceives, will make no great business for us; as neither will the things handed down concerning the sacred remains of our Saints existing in the diocese of Parma.
[41] Secundus Lancellottus in the Olivetan History, bk. 2, in the abbey of S. Mary of Castiglione in the diocese of Parma; at Caiazzo; chap. 42, treating of the monastery or abbey of S. Mary of Castiglione, of the Order of S. Benedict and the congregation of Monte Oliveto, situated in the diocese of Parma already named, has this: It is an almost universal and settled belief that the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth rest in the church. But I neither took possession of it with my eyes, nor did anything weighty on that matter occur to me as I read. One thing only I noted from the records, that in the year already reckoned by us, MCCCCXCIV of our salvation, the first stone (of the new monastery and church, the old ones having been destroyed by war) was consecrated by the same (Daniele da Birago) archbishop (of Mitylene and commendatory abbot of the convent) with solemn ceremonies, To the praise of God, and of blessed Mary, and of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, whose glorious bodies rest in this church. To Lancellotto we join Ranuccio Pico, who in the Account of the relics of the diocese of Parma, prefixed to the Theatre of the Saints of Parma, likewise mentions a few things bearing on the present matter; the words, rendered from the Italian into Latin, run thus: The XI day of September. In the church of holy Mary of Castiglione, of the Marquises, of the Olivetan monks, the bodies of the holy Protus and Hyacinth, or at least parts of them, because Rome attributes those to herself. That this treasure is kept, at least in part, likewise at Calatia, commonly Caiazzo, an episcopal city of Campania Felix under the archbishopric of Capua, Ferdinando Ughelli vouches, in vol. 6 of the Italia sacra of the new edition, col. 440, where, discoursing of its cathedral church, he mentions these few things: It is rich in relics of Saints … there is venerated the right arm of S. Luke the Evangelist, remains of the holy Innocents, of Protus and Hyacinth and of Urban, martyrs.
[42] Primo Luigi de Tattis, often to be praised in the course of this work, at Mantua, who after the middle of the century just past drew up and committed to the press the Sacred Annals of the church of Como in the Italian tongue, and its Martyrology in Latin, reckons among those who, as he thinks, contend over the possession of the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth the Mantuans also, according to whose records the body of S. Hyacinth is kept there in the cathedral church, brought thither from Rome not many years ago. But, he says in the Annals, decade one, p. 119, it is not the body of S. Hyacinth the brother of S. Protus, as they suppose, although they celebrate his festival on that very day consecrated by the triumph of our Martyrs. Then, after a few words interposed, he says that he judges it to be the body of some martyr of the same name, such as several are commemorated in the Roman Martyrology, or perhaps the bones of an unknown martyr, on whom at the translation the name of Hyacinth was imposed by the supreme Pontiff. For my part, whether the praised author judges rightly or not I cannot determine, seeing that I have consulted, so far as was possible, the books which treat of the most celebrated city of Mantua and of its church, and have found nothing whatever committed to memory concerning the sacred remains of S. Hyacinth; and accordingly I leave this matter to be settled by the learned men of Mantua with him.
[43] [at Florence; a description is given of the translation made hither in the 15th century] In the series of those who ascribe to themselves the bodies of our Saints a place is likewise granted to the Camaldolese monks at Florence in the abbey of the Holy Angels or of S. Mary of the Angels, whom Augustine of Florence, a monk of the aforesaid abbey, writes to have been enriched with that treasure about the year 1428, in part 2, bk. 3 of the Histories of his Order, in the Life of Ambrose, General of the Camaldolese, p. 346, in these words: In the year from the Christian Nativity MCCCCXXVIII, the church of S. Salvator of Silva Munda in the Aretine territory having been demolished, the bodies of the holy martyrs of Christ Protus, Jacinthus and Nemesius were found. When this matter had come to Ambrose's ears, he began to burn with the utmost desire that the Angelic convent might possess that most precious treasure; and to that end he took pains that the abbot's consent should intervene, by the authority of Raphael Boncianus, General of the Order. But using chiefly the favor of Cosimo de' Medici, and in like manner of his brother Lorenzo, he was found worthy that those most illustrious men should thereupon hasten to Rome, that the translation itself might be permitted to be made by Apostolic authority.
[44] a description Who at their own private expense also set up in the church of the Angels that most honorable bronze sarcophagus on the III of the Ides of September, where the sacrosanct relics (which, with the highest applause of the whole city, were before all things carried in procession through the more frequented quarters of the city by the archbishop and the whole order of the clergy, a solemn rogation having gone before) are venerated, there composed. There issued likewise a diploma of Apostolic confirmation, given at Rome on the IV of the Kalends of Feb., in the V year of the pontificate of Martin V. And Eugenius (IV) afterward granted an indulgence of three years and as many quarantines, both on the day of their birthday and also on the VII day of Jan. of the translation thus made. Given at Rome on the VIII of the Kalends of May, in the 2nd year. Nicholas V likewise confirmed it. Given at Rome on the IV of the Kalends of March, in the III year. Having gained the sacred Relics, Ambrose judged that he would be doing something worth the labor if by his authorship the Life of B. Eugenia the virgin, whose eunuchs Protus and Jacinthus were, should pass from Greece into Latium — by whose good offices this memorable translation was made.
[45] and certain things from other Silvano Razzi agrees with Augustine in the Life of the said Ambrose, composed in Italian and appended to the Lives of the Saints and Blesseds of the Camaldolese Order; adding, however, that the names of the holy Martyrs are engraved on the bronze reliquary, and beneath it, on a marble stone, this inscription: The most illustrious men Cosimo and Lorenzo de' Medici, brothers, with religious zeal and most faithful piety, at their own expense took care that the long-neglected relics of the holy Martyrs should be laid up in these bronze coffers and honored. Further, although I have warned that I would say nothing about the true existence of the bodies or relics in this and the other places hitherto named, and likewise to be named, until the testimonies and reasons of all had first been heard, yet I have judged that a few things serving to elucidate the present account should be observed; and first indeed, that the church of S. Salvator of Silva Munda there mentioned, from which the sacred remains are read to have been carried to Florence, belonged to a monastery of the Camaldolese Order, situated in the diocese of Arezzo, commonly Arezzo, a suffragan of the archbishopric of Florence. Secondly, that among the Auctaria of the Usuardine Martyrology in our Sollerius the Florentine codex also mentions this translation, yet with this difference, that it says the year of the translation made was the one thousand four hundred and twentieth.
[46] For, after it has announced our holy Martyrs at this day, writers it thus proceeds: Their most sacred bones, together with the relics of holy Nemesius the martyr, were translated to the monastery of S. Mary of the Angels of Florence in the year of the Lord MCCCCXX, in the time of Pope Martin V. And rightly indeed; for that an error lurks in the account of Augustine of Florence praised above, and of Silvano Razzi who followed him, Augustine himself manifestly betrays in bk. 2, chap. 65 of his History, p. 238, where he writes that Raphael Boncianus, by whose authority Ambrose the Camaldolese planned the translation, was in the year 1419 substituted for Antonio of Parma, who was resigning the prefecture of the whole Order, and a little after hands down the following concerning the same Raphael: In the third year, setting out from Venice to Ravenna, he began by the fatigue of the journey to suffer from dysentery, and after the third day, loosed from the bonds of the flesh, he passed to a better life on the XVI of the Kalends of Novemb. MCCCCXXII, and was buried in the church of D. Apollinaris. The year and day of the death of the said Raphael
are noted the same by Thomas De Minis in the Catalogue of the Saints and Blesseds of the Camaldolese Order, p. 44, and by Arnold Wion, bk. 1 of the Lignum Vitæ, chap. 20, p. 38.
[47] Wherefore, since the year 1420 designated in the Auctaria of the Martyrology rightly agrees with the prefecture of Raphael Boncianus, observations are made upon it. and the year 1428 by no means agrees, that former year is doubtless to be established as the epoch of the translation. Otherwise it would have to be said that a fault crept not only into the Florentine codex, and that the year 1420 was set for the year 1428; but also into the account of Augustine — namely, that the name of Raphael Boncianus was thrust into it in place of the name of Benedict of Forlì, who, according to Augustine, Thomas de Minis, and Wion, presided over the whole Order from the year 1422 to 1431, and whom the often-mentioned Ambrose succeeded — a man adorned, for his erudition joined to integrity of manners, with the eulogies of very many writers, and perhaps to be adorned with like eulogies on account of the title of Blessed ascribed to him by certain persons, in our Work at the XXI day of October, on which according to most, or at the XX of November, on which according to fewer, he departed from among the living. Thirdly and finally I observe that SS. Protus and Hyacinth have a very notable cult in the church of the Holy Angels at Florence, inasmuch as there is celebrated there both the festal memory of their deposition today, and that of the translation on the VII day of January, confirmed not only by the decrees of three Roman Pontiffs, but commended besides by ecclesiastical favors added.
[48] There follows now the most celebrated translation of our Saints, [The translation of the bodies at Rome from the church of S. Salvator under Clement VIII] made at Rome toward the end of the XVI century, which Baronius reports in the Notations on the Roman Martyrology at the XI day of September: Their sacred relics, he says, under Clement VIII, Pontiff Maximus, were translated with solemn pomp from the church of S. Salvator, situated near the bridge of S. Mary across the Tiber, to the church of S. John of the Florentine nation, in the year of the Lord MDXCII, on the XXI day of June. Marzio Milesio Sarrazani, who flourished at the same time and illustrated with notes the Works of Pope S. Damasus, printed afterward at Rome in the year 1628 by the Vatican press, p. 185, having recited the words of the Most Eminent Baronius, presently subjoins: And we are eyewitnesses, and there was in the said church, which is called S. Salvator at the foot of the bridge, such a monument: Under this stone rest the bodies of the most glorious Saints Protus and Jacinthus. Panciroli, a writer likewise contemporary, sets forth the occasion and manner of this translation as best he may in his work On the Hidden Treasures of the fostering City, region 6, church 18, which is that of the aforesaid S. John Baptist of the Florentines, p. 494. I shall transfer his Italian words hither, that the reader may at the same time learn why that church received its surname from the Florentines.
[49] to the basilica of S. John of the Florentine nation, To that church, says Panciroli, two Florentine Supreme Pontiffs were munificent: the one was Leo X, who in the year MDXIX granted to it the title of a parish for all Florentines dwelling in whatever part of Rome, and for their households, of whatever nation they were; and that it should have a magistrate for the causes of the Florentine merchants, with many privileges and other favors. The other Pontiff was Clement VIII, who in the year MDXCII gave to it the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, which lay as it were hidden in the church of the Savior near the bridge of S. Mary across the Tiber. These had been the eunuchs of the most noble Roman virgin and martyr, holy Eugenia, whose sacred deposit is kept in the church of the Holy Apostles. These therefore the Florentines, gathered with great ceremony, placed in a great, beautiful and splendid chapel beneath the choir, which is before the chief altar; because there, by reason of the Tiber, a tribune could not be built (I understand some magnificent and raised work for placing the bodies). Besides the day of these Saints' martyrdom, which is the XI of September, the day of the Translation is also celebrated there on the XXI of June.
[50] and a notable cult there; That the sacred remains of Protus and Hyacinth afterward remained in the aforesaid chapel, and that an altar was dedicated to them, and that their festival is solemnly kept twice a year, we learn from Bartolomeo Piazza in the Sacred Hemerology, likewise composed in Italian. His words at the XI of September run thus: A solemn festival is held with plenary indulgences in the noble church of S. John of the Florentines, to which, by the grant of Clement VIII, in the year MDXCII, on the XXI day of June, they were translated from the parish church of S. Salvator across the Tiber. Their bodies rest in a magnificent chapel beneath the altar. Receive also what the same author hands down at the XXI day of June: There is solemnly celebrated in the church of S. John of the Florentines the translation of the bodies of the holy martyrs Protus and Hyacinth, made on this day by Clement VIII from the church of S. Salvator across the Tiber near the bridge of S. Mary, with plenary indulgences at their noble side altar, where they rest and are honored.
[51] as also of relics existing in other churches of the City There are also other basilicas of the city of Rome which both rejoice in relics of our Saints and keep their annual memory. Piazza, just praised, exhibits several in his Sacrarium or Roman Menology; his Italian words run about thus at p. 307: The XI of September. SS. Protus and Hyacinth, valiant martyrs. The feast at S. John of the Florentines; where a great part of their bodies is. At the Four Holy (Crowned Martyrs), where a part of the head is. At the Holy Apostles, there notable relics of them are in an honorable place in the middle of the church, and in the new church of the Fathers of the Oratory other relics of the said Saints are exposed. The same author mentions the same relics in the Hemerology at the same day, where, however, he seems to have been mistaken, when he wrote that a part of the head of S. Hyacinth is kept at the Four Crowned.
[52] For Anastasius the Librarian, in the Life of Pope Leo IV, exhibiting a series of the bodies of Saints existing in the churches, with which that Pontiff about the middle of the IX century enriched the said church, clearly says that they were placed beneath the altar together with the head of S. Protus and of S. Cecilia, etc. Add that the same series of bodies, carved on a stone at the foot of the same altar, as Ugonio hands down in On the Stations of the city of Rome, makes mention of Protus alone. The praised Ugonio produces it entire at p. 220, from which I transcribe these few things to our purpose: Blessed Leo the fourth … beneath this altar placed the bodies of the holy … Four Crowned … Besides these, the bodies of S. Protus and of S. Cecilia, etc. But, as Panciroli rightly warns, treating of the same basilica at p. 181, this inscription likewise is to be emended; seeing that Anastasius, a contemporary author, speaks only of heads, and that it is established that the bodies of SS. Protus, Cecilia, and the others who are subjoined are preserved in other basilicas.
[53] Fioravante Martinelli in the Roma sacra, p. 216, resting on many testimonies writing of the church of the blessed Virgin Mary in Equirio, brings forward an ancient inscription, dug out of a Vatican manuscript codex, from which we learn that at the close of the XIII century relics of our Saints likewise existed there: for thus it is read: In the year of the Lord MCCXCV, in the pontificate of the lord Pope Boniface VIII, Indiction IX, in the month of December on the VI day, on the feast of S. Nicholas, the consecration of that altar of holy Nicholas was made by the bishop of Negropont … in which altar are laid up the merits (bones or relics) of the holy … Protus and Hyacinth, and of many other Saints. Another inscription likewise the same Martinelli produces at p. 289, which he says is extant in the church formerly called of the Holy Forty Martyrs, now also of the Stigmata of S. Francis, and from which we gather the like as from the former: for the year 1298 is expressly marked, the fourth of Boniface VIII; then is subjoined: These are the relics which are in the altars of the church of the Holy XL. First of all, of the Wood of the holy Cross, of S. Agnes, of holy Saturninus, of holy Lawrence, of the holy Protus and Hyacinth … and of many others.
§ VI. The people of Como claim the same sacred bodies for themselves, and keep five translations of them; the cult there on this day.
[ ] Five translations of SS. Protus and Hyacinth at Como However much in three paragraphs already we have given a good long enumeration of the cities and churches in which the true bodies or relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth are said to be possessed and honored, yet it is not yet permitted to stop here; for there remains one translation, and that, as is believed, made long before the others. Yet I have judged that this should be treated after the rest, because it will be harder to reconcile with them, if each of the things handed down about it must be admitted. Como, which is also often called Novocomum, a city of Insubria in the duchy of Milan, episcopal and subject to the metropolitan of Aquileia, attributes this sacred treasure to itself entire, or at least for the greater part. It has not a few champions of this, and among them the Luigi de Tattis mentioned at num. 42, who beyond the rest contends with all his might that the bodies of our Saints existed there from the VIII century and even now exist in the cathedral church. According to our first purpose, we set forth first what is reported by him about this first and four other translations which happened there at various times, and the other matters pertaining to the cult.
[55] are mentioned. The first made in the year 724, on the 2nd day of April; According to the praised De Tattis, part 1 of the Annals of Como at the year 262, to which he attaches the triumphal contest of our Saints; likewise in the Martyrology of Como at the 2nd day of April, Liutprand king of the Lombards, having received from Gregory the second, Pontiff, the sacred remains of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, martyrs, eunuchs of S. Eugenia, brought them from the City to Como, and in the year 724, on the 2nd day of April, willed them to be laid up by Deodatus, bishop of Como, in the church of SS. Carpophorus and his fellow martyrs, which is distant a thousand paces from the city. Of this translation, he says in the Martyrology, which was the first of all the others, very many monuments of the church of S. Carpophorus bear witness, and the Breviary both old and new of the church of Como at the XIII of May. Then, having called in many authors to his support — of whom, as also of the monuments alleged, there will be occasion to speak below — he subjoins: Of the same translation there are extant these two little verses, which Benedetto Giovio asserts that he saw in a certain very old Breviary at the place cited (bk. 2 of the History of his native land, the chapter on the churches of the city and territory of Como):
King Liutprand brought the holy bodies from Rome, And laid them far off, not far from the Coman city.
[56] a second in the year 1096, on an unknown day; The second translation the same author mentions in the Martyrology at the XIII day of May in these words: A second translation of the same bodies was held before the pitiable destruction of the fatherland, by bishop Guido, while the war between the Milanese and the men of Como was raging with mutual cruelty; but the certain day of this second translation lies in darkness. Francesco Ballarini, part 3 of the Chronicle of Como, p. 177, marks the year 1096, in which from the sacred building of S. Carpophorus
they were secretly brought into the city and laid up in a subterranean place of the cathedral church; and to the two verses recited in the preceding number he joins the four following:
After a little while bishop Guido brought those Bodies away, and placed them in the depth of the Coman church. A third translation is agreed to have been made by the clergy When he brought the holy bodies back to a worthy place.
Further, about the third translation we noted a few things in our Work, vol. III of May, in the Prætermissi of the XIII day, p. 187, and p. 264 in the Prætermissi of the XIV day, on which some have judged that it occurred, and we referred the matter to the present day to be more fully examined. Let us therefore hear the praised De Tattis discoursing of it more at length.
[57] the third on the 13th day of May The third, he says at the cited XIII day of May, happened in the year of the Lord MCCCXVII, under Leo, the third bishop of Como of that name. And the chief cause of this translation was that, since the crypt in which these precious remains had been laid was always seen to be exceedingly damp, the citizens, fearing with Leo lest so great a treasure should suffer some harm, all came to this opinion, that they should be removed from that damp place and carried to a higher and safer part. Therefore, the clergy and a very great throng of people having been called together, he found the bones of the holy Martyrs covered with water as with linen cloths, and, raising them together with the bodies of SS. Liberata and Faustina, virgins, placed them behind the high altar in that same church, not without a joyful spectacle of miracles; for a man deprived of his eyes received sight, one suffering from a most sharp pain of the teeth received deliverance, and a priest with a dislocated right hand received his former health by their intercession. There was then placed at the back of the altar the following inscription by Valeriano Rusca, archdeacon of the cathedral, who at his own expense erected in the same year the altar under which the sacred bodies were to be kept. Thus far De Tattis, who presently subjoins the aforesaid inscription, conceived in these words:
[58] MCCCXVII. In the greater church of Como, there being present the reverend fathers and lords, in the year 1317, brother Leo de Lambertengis bishop of Como; brother Jacobus Subripa bishop of the Tartars, and George bishop of Epiphania ✠; and also the lords Valeriano de Rusca archdeacon; Gufredus de Pigociis archpriest; Fomasius de Græcis; Francius de Parede; Jacobus de Parma, and Conradus de Lambertengis, presbyters. Martinus de Pergamo, and Gufredus de Carnegrassa, deacons. Joannes de Regio, and Jacobus de Argenio, subdeacons. Musso and Joseph de Lauizariis; Princiualus de Lucino; Bartholomæus de Montecucho, and Francischinus de Burris; Petrus Zanus de Mantua; Guasparrus de Montesia, and Reinerius de Vercellis: all canons of Como, two prebends being vacant ✠. And with the whole clergy of the diocese of Como, and an immense people not only of the city of Como and its district, but also of other neighboring cities, there were translated the bodies of the holy martyrs Protus and Jacinthus, and of the holy virgins Liberata and Faustina; whose virgins' bodies rest in this altar. In the same year the aforesaid Lord Valeriano Rusca, archdeacon of Como, caused this work of the altar to be made at his own proper expense, in the first year of his archdeaconate ✠.
[59] The same author adds that of this solemn translation of the holy Martyrs a proper and peculiar Office was kept in the church of Como, [formerly celebrated with an ecclesiastical Office; the fourth in the year 1567 on the 20th day of July;] until, in accordance with the mind of Pope Clement VIII, Philip Archinto the bishop abolished it; and at last, after certain things interposed, he thus concludes: Some, however, treat of this translation on the following day, as among others Ferrari and Arturus; the reason of which is the concurrence of Offices; for since on this XIII day of May the Dedication of the cathedral basilica is kept under a double rite, while the translation was celebrated under a semi-double, therefore the translation was kept on the next unimpeded day; although formerly, together with the Dedication of the church, a commemoration of the translation of these Saints was held, but then it was observed under a simple rite. For the fourth translation De Tattis refers us to Tommaso Porcacchi, bk. 1 On the Nobility of Como, in whom alone he says the memory of it is alive, and whom he asserts to declare with a clear testimony that this solemnity was performed on the XX day of July of the year 1567, inasmuch as he composed his Work at the same time. Let us hear therefore the very words of Porcacchi, rendered from the Italian into Latin: In the year MDLXVII, on the XX day of July, the most illustrious lord Giovanni Antonio Volpi, most learned and most worthy bishop of his native land, being about to prepare a place for the new fabric of the church, translated them (the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth) with a procession appointed with much ceremony to another altar erected in the middle of the church, on that side where the most holy Sacrament is kept. So the praised author at p. 21. I return to Luigi de Tattis.
[60] the fifth in the year 1618, on the [ day of June.] At the V day of June in the often-mentioned Martyrology he announces the fifth translation in these words: The last translation of the holy martyrs Protus and Hyacinth, of the holy virgins Liberata and Faustina, of S. Provinus bishop and confessor, and of S. Juliana virgin and martyr; when their bodies, taken up out of their ancient sepulchres, were composed in more seemly little chests, and, a solemn procession having been proclaimed, were carried through the whole city. Then in the Commentary appended to this announcement he greatly commends the first historical letter of Quintilio Lucinio Passalacqua, in which he affirms that the triumphal pomp of this translation, and the incredible joy of the city, are set before the eyes of readers, and he proceeds in this manner: The day of this famous translation fell on the third Feria of Pentecost, which was the fifth of June in the year MDCXVIII, under the most illustrious and most reverend D. Philip Archinto, bishop of Como. The bodies of the holy martyrs Protus and Hyacinth, and also of the holy virgins Liberata and Faustina, were brought back into the same cathedral church, and placed more honorably beneath the high altar, as they had lain before … Beneath the little chests of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, as also of SS. Liberata and Faustina, exactly the same epigraph was read, only their names being changed.
[61] [There in the cathedral, where the bodies are said to rest, the Office is performed with a double rite at the XI of September.] Paul V being Pontiff Maximus; Philip III, the Catholic, reigning as duke of Milan. These are the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, martyrs, and of SS. Liberata and Faustina, virgins, replaced from the old greater chapel, in which they had been laid for CCCI years, into this new one, with solemn and notable pomp, by the most illustrious and most reverend Philip Archinto, bishop of Como, in the year MDCXVIII, on the V day of June, the III Feria of Pentecost. Francesco Gallio of Alba being duke and count, Papirio Magnocavallo, Doctor of Both Laws, Pietro Giacomo Gagio, Peregrino de' Peregrini, Ippolito Volpi being prefects of the fabric. From the epigraph recited I observe that the 301 years during which the sacred remains are said to have lain in the old chapel do indeed rightly agree with the year 1317, in which the third translation happened, but yet so that they might seem to conflict with the testimony of Porcacchi, who declares that in the year 1567 the sacred relics were carried thence to another altar; wherefore I should believe that they were after a short space of time restored to their former place, so that so slight an absence did not come into consideration, and that hence it came about that Porcacchi alone made mention of a fourth translation. For the rest, the present-day cult of our Saints is expressly handed down in the proper Offices of the church of Como, published in the year 1667 by order of the most illustrious Lazzaro Carafino, bishop of the same church. A copy of them is in my possession, in which at the XI day of September the Office of SS. Protus and Hyacinth is prescribed to be recited with a double rite in the cathedral church only. All things are said from the Common of many martyrs except the Prayer, which is read as in the Roman Breviary, and the proper Lessons of the second nocturn, taken from the Acts, of which there will be a fitting place below to treat.
§ VII. The considerations brought forward by the parties at variance with one another for or against the possession of the sacred bodies or relics are weighed, and it is determined in what way they ought to be reconciled.
[ ] Francesco Ballarini against Baronius, who wrote that the relics of the Saints Having at length heard the accounts of those who maintain the possession and cult of the sacred relics in various places, we proceed to the discussion of the testimonies and of the arguments which are or can be opposed to them. In paragraphs 3 and 4 we hinted plainly enough that no reason occurs to us for deservedly doubting the true existence of the relics of SS. Protus and Hyacinth among the people of Seligenstadt and of Metz, nor do writers contrary to us in this part present themselves, except Baillet, whose unfounded doubt as regards the people of Seligenstadt we seem sufficiently to have removed at num. 27, and Francesco Ballarini, whose crude assertion in part 3, p. 178 of the Chronological Compendium of Como, written in Italian, adjudges this sacred treasure away from both, if I grasp his mind. The said assertion runs thus in Latin: Cardinal Cesare Baronio writes in his Annals that the aforesaid bodies of the holy Protus and Hyacinth were in ancient times translated from Rome into Gaul; but (saving his peace) the matter is far from the truth, seeing that they truly rest in the said cathedral church (of Como). Whether these last things are altogether certain I do not yet examine: but I ask, what does the praised author intend by the former, or what does he understand by bodies translated into Gaul? Whole bodies? Or only portions? If the first, let him tell me with good leave in what place Baronius writes this. Certainly the Most Eminent Annalist at the year 829 brings forward nothing but the bare words of Einhard recited in §3, in which mention is made only of relics, in no wise of whole bodies: but at the year 969, after reporting the words of Sigebert which we too have given in §4, he expressly forewarns the reader, saying, Further, when thou hearest that bodies were translated, so understand it that they received a part of them, not the bodies themselves entire. And elsewhere I find in him nothing about relics or bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth translated into Gaul.
[63] Therefore, that Ballarini may not be judged to have falsely accused Baronius, were brought back into Gaul, he must be judged to have understood the second; namely, that it is far from the truth which Baronius writes about bodies translated into Gaul, that is, relics, or portions of bodies: and therefore, unless I am mistaken, he asserted this to be false because already from the year 720, as he thought, the whole bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth had been carried from the City to Como by king Liutprand. But let him observe, if he please, how many difficulties arise from such an assertion. For by what means will he prove that the said bodies arrived at Como so entire that neither in the basilica of the Salarian Way nor in the abbey of Farfa did anything of them remain which could in the IX century be sent to Einhard, and in the X be offered to Deodericus bishop of Metz? By what testimony will he show that Einhard imposed upon posterity, or suffered himself to be imposed upon, and that for relics of our Saints there were handed over the bones of others, for whose merits God wrought the illustrious miracle, related by us from the same Einhard, an eyewitness, in the church of Seligenstadt? On what foundation
will he show that the anonymous companion of bishop Deodericus, often praised in §4, was a liar, or that the abbot and monks of Farfa perjured themselves, or at least swore rashly, when they affirmed upon oath over the holy Gospels that these were truly the bones of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, who had been laid in Sabina?
[64] his reasoning is examined and exploded. Nay, according to Ballarini's assertion it would have to be said that nowhere save in the single city of Como are relics of our Saints possessed — not even at Rome in the church of S. John of the Florentines; whereas nevertheless the translation thither from the church of S. Salvator, made in the year 1592, is confirmed by the testimonies of so many contemporary writers that Luigi de Tattis, although in his Martyrology at the XI day of September he says it is more certain that the bodies of the holy Martyrs rest at Como than that it should need his proofs, does not dare to deny it: for there, about to answer the men of Pavia, Parma, Florence and Mantua, in accordance, as he says, with his duty, he takes his beginning from this translation and speaks thus: The Roman translation of SS. Protus and Hyacinth under Clement VIII from the basilica of the Savior to the church of S. John of the Florentine nation does not stand in our way; for this small part of the remains has been taken by synecdoche for the whole bodies, as the customary ecclesiastical practice shows. But in the Annals of Como at the year 262, p. 117: We grant indeed that Gregory, when he deprived himself and Rome of so precious a treasure, and enriched with it Liutprand, or rather the city of Como, … reserved some part of it there. Then he adds that this part is perhaps the same which, taken figuratively for the whole bodies, was translated under Clement VIII. And so, granting for the moment that the translation of the bodies to the men of Como in the VIII century is so certain that nothing whatever can be objected, yet the part left at Rome could be divided into smaller parts, of which some were granted to the people of Seligenstadt and of Metz, some to other churches; and thus Ballarini's opinion against Baronius is destitute of every foundation — not to say worse.
[65] Arguments brought forward by the men of Como against the other When I treated in num. 40 of the men of Pavia and of Parma, I said that the things handed down about the existence of the bodies there would make no great business for us; because, namely, these are easily expounded of a part taken for the whole, which is frequent in this matter. But Luigi de Tattis, who used that exposition against the Romans, uses another against them: But the men of Pavia, he says, and of Parma, although they suppose that they possess the bodies of the holy Martyrs in the churches mentioned above, yet frankly confess that they have never seen them, and that their belief is propped up by popular tradition alone; which, since it is strengthened by no other reason, totters very easily when it comes to establishing the rights over this treasure. As to the Florentines, who piously believe that they venerate these very pledges among the Camaldolese monks, since in a certain bronze chest the bones of our Martyrs are contained together with the body of S. Nemesius the martyr, we do not hesitate to affirm for certain that these are taken broadly for whole bodies, since no great portion of them is seen. Thus he in the Martyrology at this day. Nearly the same, but more at length, he has in the Annals of Como at the year just cited, p. 118 and following, where he adds against the Florentines that the body of S. Nemesius is to this day kept at Rome in the church of S. Maria Nova.
[66] Hear now in what manner he concludes his dissertation there, p. 120: claimants of this sacred treasure, For the rest, for the consolation of all we can say that both at Pavia and at Castiglione (in the abbey of S. Mary of the diocese of Parma), as also at Florence and at Mantua, the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, or parts of them, are truly found: but these will be either of other martyrs of the same name, or of unknown Saints, or of those on whom the Pontiffs, ignorant whose bodies of Saints they were, imposed names of this kind, when they wished to gratify some place with them, as those skilled in ecclesiastical rites know well enough. Rightly indeed; for we cannot but have recourse to that, if all lay claim to whole bodies for themselves, and none of them are content with portions. Meanwhile it remains to be seen whether the praised author is propped up, for his own possession of the bodies, by testimonies and weights of reasoning so solid and certain that he is absolutely to be excluded from the number of those against whom he has already pronounced.
[67] In his Martyrology at the 2nd day of April, for the translation from Rome to Como he cites first the monuments of the church of S. Carpophorus; and testimonies for his entire possession of the same, but he recites none, either here or in the Annals; which I wonder at the more, because in reporting translations far later he presently transcribes most diligently inscriptions of good length, whereas nevertheless in the first one the hinge of the whole matter among so many claimants turns. He does indeed produce at the end of part 1 of the Annals, p. 944, a double monument of the benefits which king Liutprand conferred in the years 721 and 724 upon the church of Como and its bishop Adeodatus, but of relics not even the least mention is made. He cites secondly the Breviary, both old and new, of the same church at the XIII day of May, but neither are these at hand for us, nor do they seem able to contribute much toward proving a translation made in the year 724. For I strongly suspect that there, beyond the rest, the translation is treated which happened on the XIII day of May in the year 1317. To the Breviaries he joins the proper Offices of the same church; but since their proper Lessons, as is read in the letter prefixed to them, were approved under Gregory XIII — that is, in the XVI century well advanced — and appended to the old Breviary, they prove the cult indeed, but do not establish a translation of the bodies, or of the greater part of them, made in the year 724.
[68] Hence the praised martyrologist proceeds to the testimonies of writers, many indeed, or of the greatest part but more recent, and moreover at variance with one another. In the first place comes Benedetto Giovio, an author of the XVI century, in whom, in bk. 2 of the History of Como, in the chapter on the Churches, I read this concerning the cathedral church: There are laid there behind the high altar the relics of the divine Protus and Hyacinth and Eugenia, martyrs, brought in antiquity from Rome by Liutprand king of the Lombards to this city, and placed in the church of the divine Carpophorus, which he himself had dedicated, as I conjecture from the little verses written below, found in a certain Breviary. To Giovio is joined Porcacchi, praised at num. 59, who also agrees with him in all things except the little verses, which he does not mention. There follow Paolo Morigia, bk. 1, chap. 8 of the History of Milan; Francesco Ballarini in the work mentioned above, part 1, chap. 6; and Ferdinando Ughelli, vol. 5 of the Italia sacra, among the bishops of Como, num. 21; but the first attaches the translation to the year 718; the second to the year 720; the third, without indicating the year of the translation, writes that Deodatus died in the year 721; all affirm that together with the bodies of our Saints the body of S. Eugenia also was carried to Como, as may be seen in them at the places cited. Besides these he adduces other authors, whose lucubrations we lack; but since these too are more recent, and accordingly no hope shines that we should elicit anything more certain from them, we have not judged that we should labor to procure them.
[69] nor are they sufficiently consistent with one another, Let the learned reader judge meanwhile from what has already been enumerated what support the authors appealed to by the praised martyrologist can bring him. He himself judges that the translation is absolutely to be fixed to the year 724; the three later ones dissent: he cites them all to show that the bodies, at least for the greater part, exist at Como; the first two speak only of relics: they write that the remains of S. Eugenia came to Como together with the remains of our Saints; he himself in his Martyrology at the said 2nd day of April rightly contends that all were mistaken on this point; although in his Annals, bk. 9, num. 133, discoursing on the same matter, he confesses that this very thing is hinted in the old Breviary at the XIII day of May, and handed down in the monuments of the church of S. Carpophorus: It is true, he says, that in certain manuscripts of S. Carpophorus Protus, Hyacinth, Eugenia are named together, as though those three bodies had been given at once by Gregory to Liutprand. But this he says at num. 134 must be attributed to the error or carelessness of the copyists.
[70] nor sufficiently solid to overthrow the considerations of his adversaries. And these are the chief arguments by which Luigi de Tattis contends for the possession of the sacred bodies, which to me — to open my mind candidly — do not appear solid enough for me to assent to him. For since, according to the accounts drawn up in the IX century by Einhard and in the X by the anonymous writer of Metz, from which I do not see why credit should be withdrawn, the bodies of our holy Martyrs were even then laid in Sabina; since it is proved that in so many churches, both at Rome and elsewhere, sacred relics of them, and those notable ones, are kept and exposed on this day to the devotion and veneration of the faithful; since the sacred bodies, as many trustworthy authors testify, rest at Rome in the church of S. John of the Florentine nation; who would prudently agree with one who asserts that these same bodies were carried, for the greater part, to Como about the year 724, so that only a small part of the remains, taken by synecdoche for the whole bodies, is granted to the church last named, and at most to the church of S. Mary of the Angels in the city of Florence? At most, I say; for he names the Florentines too, where he says that for the consolation of his competitors it can be said that among them are truly found the bodies of SS. Protus and Hyacinth or parts of them; but that these will be either of other martyrs of the same name, or of unknown Saints, or of those on whom the Pontiffs … imposed names of this kind.
[71] What is to be judged on this matter concerning them and others For the rest, since the relics of our Saints are scattered in so many places, there is no doubt that authors who call them bodies — even those who spoke of the basilica of S. John of the Florentines — used a figure; but not so broadly as de Tattis will have it. Certainly Piazza, praised at num. 51, is to be understood in the proper and natural sense when he says that on this day there is a feast in the basilica already named, where a great part of their bodies is. Nay, that there remained at Rome, or near Rome, after the VIII century, if not whole bodies, certainly great portions, is plainly enough gathered from this, that among the relics sent to Seligenstadt in the IX century there is reckoned the arm of S. Protus and a part of the arm of S. Hyacinth, as was said at num. 30. Wherefore it is necessary that we say one of two things: either that the sacred pledges which are honored at Como are bodies of other Saints, as Luigi de Tattis argued above against his competitors; or that they are only some portions of our Saints, by no means so great as the same author pretends; which last I should prefer to think, both on account of the antiquity of the tradition and on account of the celebrity of the cult.
[72] For it could easily have come about that Guido of Como
the bishop, may or must be granted, is determined. when in the year 1096, through fear of war, he was secretly carrying the relics of the church of S. Carpophorus into the city, mingled the bones of SS. Protus and Hyacinth, once obtained by king Liutprand, with the bones of other Saints, and enclosed them in the same coffer; whence in the lapse of time the whole mass was believed to belong to our Saints, whose names alone, as more illustrious, had perhaps been transmitted to the knowledge of posterity. Further, that we may at length put an end to these contentions, the men of Pavia, the Florentines, and the rest reviewed in the course of this work will be able to determine for themselves, from what has hitherto been discussed and from the quantity of the relics which they possess, whether their monuments are to be expounded of portions of the remains of our Saints, or of the bodies of other Saints; we, content to have illustrated the cult from the accounts which we have found, proceed to other things.
§ VIII. A compendium of the Life of S. Eugenia, virgin and martyr, which embraces the deeds of our Saints and has been relegated by the learned among the fables; the time of the martyrdom.
[ ] The judgments of Baronius on the Acts of S. Eugenia, The deeds and passion of SS. Protus and Hyacinth are inserted in the Acts of S. Eugenia, virgin and martyr, and their mistress on earth, concerning which Cardinal Baronius writes thus in the Notes of the Roman Martyrology at the XXV day of December: The Acts written out by Metaphrastes are extant in Lippomano and Surius; they have, however, some things which need censure; as what is there read about Philip the father of Eugenia, made (as the author says) bishop of Alexandria: which that it is plainly fabricated the tables of the bishops, which are written out by Eusebius in the Chronicle, and by Nicephorus bishop of Constantinople, and by others, manifestly declare. They are extant likewise in the Speculum historiale of Vincent of Beauvais, in the Lives of the Fathers published by Rosweyde, and in other books printed in great number, especially those which treat of the heroic deeds and contests of the most illustrious virgin martyrs; I say nothing of not a few manuscripts which are kept in our Museum, dug out of various ancient codices, and all flowing from the same source from which the printed Lives flow.
[74] of Papebroch, The plan of our undertaking would here require that what Baronius, with a single example adduced, warned to need censure, we should after mature examination set before the reader's eyes; then that we should judge how far these Acts are worthy of credit, and consequently what is to be thought of the deeds of SS. Protus and Hyacinth which are wrapped up in them. But that labor our Papebroch has forestalled for us, not against our will, both in the Responses to the Exhibition of the Rev. Fr. Sebastian of S. Paul, part 2, response to article 16, § IV, num. 90 and following, and especially in our Work, vol. 5 of the month of May at the XX day, on occasion of S. Basilissa or Basilla, whose conversion to the faith and martyrdom are comprised in the same Acts. Here, about to disclose the anachronisms and fictions detected in them, he preludes at num. 2 of the Commentary with the following judgment on the Acts: Those Acts are indeed exceedingly ancient: for Alcimus Avitus, bishop of Vienne, who presided over the council of Épaone in Gaul in the year DXVII, in the book which he composed on the Praises of Virginity to his sister Fuscina, had them before his eyes, and judged them worthy to be rendered in verse from line DLV to DCXV. Likewise also Metaphrastes believed them worthy to be commended to the Greeks in that elegant style of his: whence they became most well known to the Eastern churches as well as to the Western; inasmuch as, by a wonderful turn of events, they bring a most agreeable pleasure to readers and hearers, and make not a little for the commendation of Christian virtue, especially of chastity.
[75] and of Tillemont. Nevertheless, however much those Acts once pleased, now, if they be brought to the Lydian touchstone of historical examination, they will be found to be not gold but dross: so that from them nothing certain can be had about that Basilissa or Basilla who is inserted in the Hieronymian Martyrology for this day. That examination belongs to the XXV day of December, on which S. Eugenia is venerated: yet I am compelled to anticipate that time, at least by indicating in passing why they cannot be approved, but deserve to be despised as a fable: because there are not lacking those who think that from those Acts is evidently proved an antiquity of the monastic life in the East and West greater than that which we define elsewhere. Thus far Papebroch. A judgment not unlike this Tillemont passed on them in the Notes to vol. 4 of the Monuments of Ecclesiastical History, p. 585, where, mentioning what Baronius had reproved, he says that many similar things could have been added, and that their whole structure breathes nothing but fable and fiction. Judgments assuredly which greatly lessen also those things which are inserted in those Acts concerning our Saints, and so interwoven that they can scarcely, or not even scarcely, be excerpted and given separately; but to give the Acts entire does not suit this place, for that will properly belong — if indeed it be judged worth the labor — to the XXV day of December. Wherefore, until we come to that day, the curious reader will be able to consult the editions assigned at num. 73. Yet meanwhile, if perhaps to someone desiring some idea of them recourse to the said editions should not be convenient, I subjoin the most compressed Synopsis I can.
[76] A compendium of the same Acts Philip, a man of no lowly Roman nobility, was adorned by the emperor Commodus, in his seventh consulship, with the prefecture of all Egypt, and, having landed at Alexandria with his wife Claudia, his sons Avitus and Sergius, his daughter Eugenia, and the eunuchs Protus and Hyacinth, he banished all Christians from the city. Meanwhile Eugenia, already then a Christian in mind, is urged by her parents to marriage; but to decline it she meditates flight, and under pretext of relaxing her mind goes out to a suburban estate, accompanied by Protus and Hyacinth, who were furnished with philosophical learning no less excellently than she. To these she opens her plan, and, that she may lie hidden the more safely and live among Christians, she changes her habit and feigns to be a young man. As they went on thus, they met Helenus, bishop of Heliopolis, and with him more than ten thousand Christians chanting psalms to God: mingling themselves with that company, they understood the sanctity of Helenus, asked to be brought to him, were brought, and were duly instructed and baptized. Helenus, although aware of her sex by divine revelation, imposed on Eugenia the name of Eugenius, and granted that she should live with her Companions among the monks.
[77] Meanwhile Eugenia was anxiously sought for by her parents; is set forth but in vain; until at last Philip, to whom the sacrificing priests had falsely said that she had been taken up into heaven by the immortal gods, erected a golden statue of his daughter, and willed that she should be worshipped as a goddess. In the third year after, Eugenia — then Eugenius — was appointed in place of the deceased abbot of the monastery, and so shone with miracles that men ran to her from every quarter, and among these a matron of Alexandria named Melanthia, whom Eugenia freed from a quartan fever by making the sign of the Cross. But that woman, visiting her physician rather often, was wounded by his surpassing beauty, and at first concealed her wicked love; then began to open the wound, and, being often repulsed, to rage, to turn love into hatred, and to breathe revenge. And so she carries her complaints to Philip the prefect, charges Eugenius with attempted violation, and by wicked witnesses so far succeeds that Eugenia is dragged before the judge to be condemned to an infamous punishment. But presently all breaks out: Eugenia reveals her sex, brings forward Protus and Hyacinth, who had not deserted their mistress; the governor recognizes his daughter, Claudia hastens up, they fall into embraces, Melanthia is struck by fire sent from heaven, Philip with his whole household is converted to Christ, and for his sake peace is granted by the emperor to the Christians.
[78] Then Philip himself was appointed bishop of the church of Alexandria, is exhibited, and, a new persecution having arisen, was visited with martyrdom. But Claudia, Eugenia, Protus and Hyacinth and the rest of the household returned to Rome; Avitus and Sergius were received with joy by the Roman senate, and the one was appointed proconsul at Carthage, the other vicar of Africa. Many noble matrons were afterward led to Christ by Claudia, virgins by Eugenia, young men by Protus and Hyacinth; until at last Basilla, sprung of royal stock, was imbued with Christian laws through Protus and Hyacinth, whom Eugenia had sent her as a gift to that end, and was washed in the sacred font of Baptism by Pope Cornelius (others write Soter). For when she, out of love of Christ, rejected a heathen betrothed, she was denounced by him to the emperor Gallienus and obtained the palm of martyrdom; and on that occasion Protus and Hyacinth also were seized and led to the image of Jupiter, that they might sacrifice; but it fell down at their feet and was broken into fragments, which Nicetius, prefect of the City, ascribing to magical arts, ordered both to be beheaded. Eugenia likewise — at whose prayers not only the image of Diana but the shrine itself had fallen down, and whose constancy in the faith could be broken or shaken by no entreaties and torments — had her head taken off with the sword; and Claudia at last, forewarned by her daughter appearing to her, a few days later departed from prayer into heaven. These things, as to substance, from the Lives of the Fathers.
[79] and are reckoned among the pious fables. Indeed, when I consider at least the earlier part of that history, I find it sprinkled with events so wonderful and so very hard to believe, so filled with marks of open fiction, that I think no other name can be attributed to it than that of a pious drama, whose author — as is usual with the composers of similar little histories, namely to bring in more celebrated persons, that they may the more easily move the minds of readers — judged none among the martyrs fitter for his conceptions than SS. Eugenia, Protus and Hyacinth, most illustrious heroes of the Christian Church. There is the further point that not a few things are related both in its earlier and in its later part which can either with the greatest difficulty, or in no way at all, be reconciled with the profane and Ecclesiastical history of those times; for instance, the convents of monks in Egypt; the Alexandrian bishopric of Philip; the Roman prefecture of Nicetius, or, as it is in others, of Anicetus; the Baptism of Basilla conferred by Cornelius or Soter — for a fuller account of which, lest we spend time and labor on a new and tedious discussion, we refer the reader to Papebroch in the places cited.
[80] The time of the martyrdom. That SS. Protus and Hyacinth were brothers german is the common opinion of very many; such certainly they are called by S. Damasus, Pope, in the epitaph inscribed on their burial-place, by Wandelbert, and by the Roman Martyrology: but in what year they were crowned with martyrdom we nowhere discover. It is indeed commonly believed that this happened under the emperor Gallienus, but from this we have nothing for a determinate year, chiefly because Nicetius, to whom both in the Acts and elsewhere the prefecture of the city of Rome is ascribed, is nowhere found among the prefects of the City of that time, accurately written out in Bucherius. Peter de Natalibus fixed their death about the year of Christ 256; others prolong it to 261, 262, nay 263. We, since nothing occurs why we should attach it to the year 256 rather than to another, and since on the contrary many contend that the chief persecution under the emperors Valerian and Gallienus was begun only in the year 257 and ended in 260, when, Valerian the father having been taken by the Persians, Gallienus alone held the empire
and so restored peace to the Christians that thereafter he is not read to have violated it — we, I say, have preferred simply to note their passion as under the emperors Valerian and Gallienus. For that Gallienus alone is named where their martyrdom is treated, we believe to have come about because Valerian was then absent from the City.