ON ST. PRINCIPIUS, BISHOP,
AT SOISSONS IN GAUL.
At the end of the V century
SYLLOGE
Principius, Bishop and Conf., at Soissons in Gaul (S.)
BY J. C.
Saint Principius, in French S. Prince, is announced today by certain Auctaria of no mean repute in our Sollerius, in the Usuardine Martyrology. The Saint's memory among the martyrologists: his deeds The codex of Hérin celebrates the Saint in these words: On the same day, of S. Principius, bishop of Soissons, brother of blessed Remigius. The same is read in the transcript of the Register of the Carthusians of Utrecht, which both Grevenus and Molanus and finally Baronius inserted into their Martyrologies in almost the same words. S. Principius is reported by almost all the sacred Calendars of Gaul, and Saussay adorns him with a longer elogium than is his custom: Baillet also treats of him. Whatever is circulated as said of the holy Prelate has either flowed from two epistles of Sidonius Apollinaris, or is of no great merit. I have before my eyes a certain historical discourse which is entitled the Life of S. Principius, bishop of Soissons. Bolland noted in the margin of the transcript that it was excerpted from a manuscript of Belfort, and Papebroch added that a similar one is had in a manuscript of Longpont. Bolland moreover notes that Belfort received the aforesaid discourse from a manuscript of the church of Soissons itself, and that its author is Milo of Thérouanne; but that Belfort contracted the redundant style in many places; from what documents he drew these things I do not know, nor whence it was established for him that that discourse is by Milo, bishop of Thérouanne — that one, unless I am mistaken, who flourished about the middle of the XII century, and about whom some things have been said in our Work in the Prætermissi at the days XV of February, XV and XVI of July. The discourse, luxuriating in words, teaches scarcely anything particular about S. Principius, whom it praises for his zeal and pastoral care and like virtues commending great bishops. Let us hear the panegyrist speaking toward the end of his elogium, and from his words it will presently become clear how nearly nothing here can be of use to me, and at the same time how much credit the few things which he supplies deserve.
[2] These things therefore, he says, we have assigned to the holy confessor of Christ Principius as general ones, almost all uncertain. since about his particular deeds scarcely a slender narrative has shone out for us: since nothing is read of him but the place only of his birth and burial, and that he was the full brother of Bl. Remigius, and by this shone as a partaker of his brother's justice and virtue. But if he wrought any miracles which have not been handed down to posterity, either the sloth or the carelessness of writers passed them over, or the age of many years has abolished them. But as those live to the true God whose great deeds and virtues the writings of very many depict, so the silence of imprudence does not mutilate the merit of so great a Pontiff. Behold the few things which the anonymous author can teach us, bearing upon S. Principius's birth, burial, and kinship with S. Remigius; which, as he received them quite vaguely from an older monument, so he likewise reports them to us very sparingly: in which, as I cannot sufficiently admire his candour, so I believe that the few things which he records are of the best faith. Nor does Sidonius Apollinaris furnish us with more; indeed he speaks almost only of the episcopal virtues common to him with his holy brother Remigius. And yet these two are almost the only ones from whom we have received anything about S. Principius. From so great a scarcity the reader will already easily have foreseen that we must here treat of him in very few words, although some material is supplied by the conjectures of certain more recent writers about chronological arrangement and like commonplaces. I have indeed at hand a fragment of some other Life of S. Principius, extracted from a manuscript of Saint-Calais, and sent in the year 1638 by Fr. John Dardes, as a little note prefixed to the transcript states. The beginning is such: The lord Principius, bishop of the city of Le Mans, born in France, who was the successor of the lord Victurius, bishop of the aforesaid city, and brother of S. Remigius, bishop of Rheims. But it is soon clear that these Acts are of that kind which our Sticker at the XIV day of September complains were confused out of bishops of the same name, where he illustrated the deeds of S. Principius, bishop of Le Mans. His preliminary Commentary may be consulted by those who desire to be taught more about that confusion, for it does not please me to waste time in reporting them anew.
[3] Le Cointe's blunder, Since we have received nothing about our S. Principius from other authors, and since the things which the writers just cited committed to writing are vague and general, scarcely any chronological arrangement can be fixed. Yet Le Cointe in the Annals of France at the year of Christ 486, number 13, treating briefly of S. Principius, strives to deduce some sort of arrangement from conjectures, but relies on a gross blunder in the words of Sidonius Apollinaris. Principius, says Le Cointe, is said by Sidonius to have been in the monastery of Lérins a cell-mate of the Lupuses and the Maximuses. He then observes that S. Lupus was promoted to the bishopric of Troyes in the year 427, and concludes that, since Principius must have dwelt with Lupus at Lérins before that year, he seems to have been born at the beginning of the V century. But, as I said, Le Cointe's conjecture has an error for its foundation. Thus Sidonius writes to S. Principius: For a long time now, venerable father, although thy face has not yet been beheld, thy actions nevertheless have been observed. For the diffused praise of holy merits is not content to be confined within boundary spaces. Hence it is that, because no measure is set to a good conscience, neither is any limit found to a good reputation. Judge what I say to be false, unless a competent supporter shall come forward for my declaration, sufficiently in that former monastery
of Lérins a notable head, a cell-mate of the Lupuses and the Maximuses, and one aspiring by the leaps of his frugality to overtake the archimandrites of Memphis and Palestine. He is the bishop Antiolius, by whose report I anxiously strove to learn who was your father, and who and of what sort you brothers are, and by what prerogative of manners you both discharge the highest pontificate; and I remember that I rejoiced to have learned it.
[4] Baronius's errors These things Apollinaris asserts at the beginning of epistle 14 of book 8 among his Works, that everything which pertained to SS. Principius and Remigius he had heard from Antiolius the bishop, formerly in the desert of Lérins a cell-mate of SS. Lupus and Maximus. But neither here nor elsewhere does he insinuate that Principius dwelt at Lérins with the aforesaid prelates. And since he adds that he remembers what Antiolius had reported to him, probably some time had already intervened; and, Apollinaris's narrative being safe, Antiolius, now an old man, could have known SS. Principius and Remigius, and perhaps have already passed to the world above some years before these things were written by Sidonius; whence therefore nothing can be hammered out for the epoch of our Saint's birth. Baronius in the Notes to his Martyrology says that S. Principius was present at the councils of Carpentras and at the 1st and 2nd of Orange. In the Annals, volume 6, he had tied the later council of Orange to the year of Christ 463, but he corrects the error in volume 10, page 960, where he notes that that council must be tied to the year 529. The I council of Orange he had duly enclosed in the year 441: from which epochs compared it is abundantly clear that our holy Prelate was not present at both. At which he could have assisted, we shall presently see. At that of Carpentras, celebrated in the year of Christ 527, he certainly also was not present.
[5] Baillet, closing today's elogium of S. Principius, says and Baillet's uncertain opinion about the chronological arrangement, that he was unwilling to assent to the opinion asserted by Baronius and others, because it is little credible that the bishops of Belgica could at that time have set out for cities subject to the Goths and Burgundians. Besides, he says, our Saint was not yet bishop at the time of the first council of Orange, held in the year CCCCXLI, and he had died before that of Carpentras in the year DXXVII, and the 2nd of Orange, celebrated two years later. And indeed his successor S. Lupus is read as having subscribed to the I council of Orange (d'Orange: but he meant, I suppose, to say of Orleans, d'Orléans), which was celebrated in the year DXI. I shall gladly believe with Baillet that S. Principius was present at none of these councils, since the two later ones were assembled after his death, and his name is not found subscribed to the 1st of Orange: but that he could not have been present at this one, I do not see. Certainly the first reason seems to me ridiculous: for why could the prelates of Belgica hardly have been able (in his French it is n'étoient guère en état) to go thither? Would means for the journey perhaps have been wanting to Principius? What he alleges in the second place, although perhaps more likely, is certainly not certain; and the chronological arrangement would flow conveniently if from his subscription we had an epoch of his episcopate, as will appear. Let us hear the orator setting forth about the birth of S. Principius the things which he asserts he took from older testimonies. Which excellent Confessor, brought forth to the lands from the high blood of his parents, shone forth by his father Emilius as by his uterine brother S. Remigius; and as the latter was named for the remedy of his own people, so this one without doubt was named for the beginning of salvation.
[6] But Cilinia, venerable in nobility, the mother of both, was renowned, who, the heavenly clemency co-operating, poured forth both as a light to this world. which can scarcely be fixed at all It could also have happened (I marvel here again at the candour of the panegyrist, who does not assert what was probable as fact, but nakedly confesses what he draws from probability alone) that S. Principius was shown by the same divine oracle by which his brother too was to be born: because of those whose election and infusion of merits was not unequal, an equal calling of an oracle ought also to have preceded their entrance into this life: although this one was earlier, and that one later in birth. For the pious mother bore this one in the flower of youth, and that one, of her only husband Emilius, in the time of old age; whom an illustrious birth made equals by their descent, a most lofty course of most holy life made alike, and the departure of a most illustrious end made equal. According to these things S. Principius can be believed to have been born easily thirty years before S. Remigius, so that his mother Cilinia may be understood to have borne the latter about the 50th year of her age, in the time of old age, and the former about the 20th, in the flower of youth. Let us take, as things which may be examined at the 1st of October, the beginnings of S. Remigius's episcopate, tied by Henschen to the year of Christ 457. He was, when he was taken to the chair of Rheims, in the 22nd year of his age: he was therefore born in the year 435 or the following one, but Principius at the beginning of the V century. And these things indeed on the supposition of the truth of the panegyrist's assertions, and of the conjectures drawn thence about the space of years between the births of the two.
[7] It appears more likely that S. Principius was not the father, The things which in our Work at the XVII day of May, where S. Montanus is treated, were produced from Hincmar, at number 4 abundantly show that both parents were nearly aged when S. Remigius was born to them; whence the conjectures become more probable, and these standing, nothing on this side would forbid S. Principius to have been then a bishop of forty years, and to have been present at the I council of Orange in the year 441, as is clear. Now it will be well to have examined whether the Saint before his episcopate contracted a marriage and begot of a wife S. Lupus, afterwards his successor in the chair of Soissons. That he was the nephew of S. Remigius is beyond doubt from the testimony of that Saint himself and of other writers. That he was begotten by S. Principius, Baronius affirms in the Annals at the years 463 and 507, and others, among whom Longueval, History of the Gallican church, book 4, page III; against it protest Colvener in the Notes to Flodoard, and, adopting them, Sirmond, Robert Estienne, Savaro, Baillet and others. The continuators of the enlarged Christian Gaul lately left the matter untouched. If the suit were to be decided from Hincmar's words, I should not hesitate long. He speaks thus in the Life of S. Remigius: Who (Cilinia) in the flower of youth had borne of her only husband Æmilius Principius, afterwards holy bishop of the city of Soissons, and his brother, the father of blessed Lupus the bishop, the successor of that same Principius. Those who will have it that Principius was the father of S. Lupus take Hincmar's words as they suppose Flodoard understood them, book 1, chapter 10, writing, But this blessed mother (Cilinia) had long before in the flower of youth borne of her only husband Æmilius Principius, afterwards holy bishop of the city of Soissons and father of Bl. Lupus, the successor of that same Principius — namely in such a way that the pronoun his is referred to S. Remigius, and brother, father are continued titles of that same Principius.
[8] but only the paternal uncle of S. Lupus. The beginnings of his episcopate But not a little ineptly is Hincmar's phrase thus twisted, which altogether hints that his must be referred to Principius, who is immediately before named; whereas on the contrary the name or mention of S. Remigius nowhere precedes, of whom therefore he is not judged to be speaking. Flodoard's words too are not opposed to Hincmar's statements, and can be explained in the same sense, and that not with difficulty: so that on this side the opinion of Colvener and others appears far more probable, who contend that S. Lupus was begotten of a brother of SS. Remigius and Principius, whose name is hidden. What arguments the patrons of the contrary conjecture have for themselves, I have not ascertained. Which of the two the Testament which is commonly circulated under the name of S. Remigius rather favours, I do not know: therefore Colvener's opinion is to me more probable. Further, as regards the year of S. Principius's death, it is here no less uncertain than the year of his entering the episcopate. Le Cointe and Baillet assert that he lived down to the time at which Soissons began to obey Clovis: which I am easily led to believe. Certainly Sidonius's letters written to him seem to be after the year 474, in which he went to the chair of Clermont: for he seems to have written them as bishop already, since he calls Antiolius a competent supporter for his own declaration. Baillet doubts whether S. Principius was among the living when Clovis was baptized, namely in the year of Christ 495; but he alleges no reason for his doubt, just as I see no reason in his opinion that the Saint could not yet have been bishop in the year 441. We have one certain epoch about his death, but one which does not enclose his death even within a defined space of certain years.
[9] At the I council of Orleans, which was celebrated in the year 511, and the year of his death are uncertain. S. Lupus was present; therefore S. Principius had departed from the living: but how long before that his death happened is plainly unascertained. I have no reason to deny that the holy Prelate lived down to the beginning of the VI century, but neither is there anything at hand from which I might establish it: but since from such chronological arrangement as there is I have laid down above that he was born at the beginning of the V century, and since I am unwilling without testimonies to ascribe a hundred years to the Saint, I have noted his death at the end of the V century, in such a way that I would have not a few years comprised under it. For the rest, what Sidonius wrote to S. Principius it has not pleased me to insert here: for he reviews and praises only the episcopal virtues common to both holy brothers — charity, chastity, zeal. Even from what I have brought forward above it is abundantly clear how much Apollinaris esteemed the holy Prelate and his virtue — a man prudent in discerning persons, and not accustomed to pour out praises indiscriminately. Let us now subjoin what Milo testifies was left by older writers to posterity about the Saint's death. But when, he says, the time of his summoning drew near, suddenly the holy man of God Principius was deprived of his bodily strength, and from the muddy whirlpool of the world was raised by angelic aid to the brightness of the heavenly fatherland: whose body Bl. Remigius entombed with fitting honour outside the walls of the city of Soissons, in the chapel of S. Thecla, and heaped up his see with due gifts, advanced it and enriched it.
[10] The elevation of his body and his relics. For he bestowed certain things of his own means upon the church of Soissons, partly for the commemoration of his own name, partly for the remedy of the soul of his brother Principius. For thus it is read written in his testament: “I bequeath the salt-pits upon the Mora and ten solidi to the church of Soissons for the commemoration of my name. Likewise the sand-pits upon the Marne I have bequeathed to my heirs and to the soul of my brother Principius. To the little chapel of S. Thecla also, situated outside the walls of the city of Soissons, where I laid the most blessed body of my brother Principius, I bequeath four solidi.” So he — whence drawn, I do not know; certainly these things are not found in the testament of S. Remigius produced by Flodoard, book 1, chapter 18, nor in the other which Labbe published in volume 1 of the Manuscript Library, page 806. In our Work, in the Prætermissi at the 1st day of June, it has been observed that by Galesinius, Ferrari, Saussay and others an elevation of the body of S. Principius is marked, with the remains of certain other Saints, probably translated at that time from the suburban chapel of S. Thecla to the cathedral church. The continuators of the enlarged Christian Gaul note that the relics of the holy Prelate
were, with several other sacred treasures of the church of Soissons, reduced to ashes in the XVI century by the rage of the image-breaking Calvinists; that his arm, however — perhaps translated thither with the relics of SS. Amatus, Onesimus and Gurdinellus after the extinction of the persecution of the Northmen — is shown in the sacred treasury of the church of S. Amatus at Douai.