Nicholas of Forca Palena

ON BL. NICHOLAS OF FORCA PALENA, OF THE ORDER OF THE HERMITS OF ST. JEROME OF THE CONGREGATION OF BL. PETER OF PISA,

AT ROME.

The year 1449.

HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

Nicholas of Forca, confessor, of the Order of the Hermits of St. Jerome, at Rome. (B.)

BY C. S.

§ I. The certain cult of the Blessed one, passed over by Ferrari but recorded by Castellan: his native place, Forca Palena in the Abruzzi: the time of his birth: his priesthood: his eremitic life at Rome.

[ ] Our Daniel Papebroch, in illustrating the Acts of Bl. Peter Gambacorta of Pisa at the 17th day of June, Of this Blessed one, whose memory by Castellan alone discoursed learnedly on much concerning the Congregation of poor Hermits instituted by him toward the end of the fourteenth century at Montebello, of the diocese of Urbino in Italy, and concerning its names and progress, which may be read there. I only observe here that his followers flourish to this day, but bound since the year 1569 by a solemn profession of vows under the rule of St. Augustine, to which Pope St. Pius V brought them, since up to that time they were held only by simple vows. This Congregation Bl. Nicholas greatly illustrated and increased, surnamed from his native place among the Peligni "of Forca Palena"; who, since he too was set over Hermits of a peculiar institute both at Rome and elsewhere, when almost a hundred years old brought himself and his own over to it, in the eleventh year after the death of Bl. Peter the founder, whose virtues, while he lived, he had known well.

[2] Of the martyrologists there is one, Claude Castellan, who celebrates his memory is inscribed in a Martyrology, but his cult is certain, in his Universal Martyrology at this 29th day of September, but with the title of Venerable only, announcing thus in French: "At Rome the venerable Nicholas of Forca, of the Order of the Hieronymites of Montebello." Him too Philip Ferrari passed over both in his General Catalogue and in his particular one of the Saints and Blessed of Italy; as though he had been quite unknown to him. Yet that you may the less wonder at this silence, note that the cult of Bl. Nicholas, who died in the year 1449, is indeed older than Ferrari, but yet took its chief increases after he had already published both Catalogues. For indeed the things which we shall say below about the twofold raising of Nicholas's body solemnly and duly made within the church of St. Onuphrius in the city of Rome itself; about his image exposed there to public veneration with the title of Blessed; about his election as Patron of the town of Palena in Hither Abruzzo, made by the common counsel of the inhabitants and with the consent of the bishop of Sulmona, together with a vow to celebrate his yearly feast with cessation from servile work; and lastly about his relics obtained by the same and translated from Rome to Palena, and the other things pertaining thereto — these demonstrate that his cult is not only certain but even signal.

[3] we treat on this day, on which he is believed to have died. That Castellan assigned his memory to this 29th day of September, this seems to have been the reason, that it is generally believed that he departed this life on that day: and it is likely that his sacred body, which rests beneath the high altar of the church of St. Onuphrius at Rome, is on the same day more frequently visited by pious Romans. Yet no ecclesiastical Office of him, so far at least as I have been able to ascertain, is recited there on this or on any other day. But the people of Palena celebrate him every year with the Office and Mass of the Common of a confessor not a bishop, but on the 14th day of March, which also by vow, as I have said, they keep as a feast, and make more solemn by a solemn procession in which the relics and statue of the same Blessed one are carried about. But since my Predecessors, when their Work had reached that day, were not informed of that cult, I have judged that Bl. Nicholas must altogether be treated of today, on which he is believed to have happily died.

[4] We have no Life of him, but Saianelli Since we had no Life of him, and few things even about his cult had become known to us, we had recourse by letter to Rome, that from the aforesaid monastery of St. Onuphrius we might be informed on both heads to the glory of God and of the Blessed one himself. We received an answer that all things which pertain to him are read in the Historical Records of the aforesaid Order of Hieronymites, which John Baptist Saianelli, emeritus lector of the same Congregation, ex-provincial, doctor of theology of the college of Padua and consultor of the sacred Inquisition, formerly published, and has lately with new pains issued more fully and more correctly. These therefore we took pains to procure for ourselves at a price; and we received the first volume of this Work in folio, published at Venice in the year 1758, which contains eulogies of the Blessed and pious men of that Order; after which the author promises two others to be published, in which he will treat of the beginnings and progress of all the monasteries which the Order now possesses and has at some time possessed. From this plan of the writer it has come about that he in the first volume, which alone I hitherto have, makes mention indeed of the foundations of the monasteries, but only lightly, reserving more for those to be published; which has fallen out very inconvenient to me indeed, especially because of Bl. Nicholas's deeds we know few things besides the sacred buildings erected by him.

[5] From the same we also learn that the illustrious deeds of this blessed Man were either committed to writing by none of the ancients, yet very few things because of the poverty of records, or, if they were so committed, have perished, or at any rate for the greatest part lie hid; so that not so much a Life of him as an obscure abridgment of a Life can now be delivered. Hear Saianelli himself in the Proem to book 2 complaining of the slothfulness of his Elders in writing, or of the injury of the times. "But when," he says, "I turn my pen to the other Servants of God, who either had him (Bl. Peter Gambacorta the founder, whose deeds he had set forth in book 1) while he still lived as a master of Evangelical perfection, or, thereafter adhering to the laws given by him, attained the summit of sanctity; I see straits on every side, and almost everything lying in darkness; so that we may deservedly say that their life is hidden with Christ in God. For it profited little to search every paper in our archives: for either I have found their names scarcely, or not even scarcely; or the fragments which survive indicate indeed the time in which they lived, but have few things about their illustrious deeds.

[6] And what of this, that of those who lived in our own age, or come nearer to it, as he himself prefaced, greater and better things lie hid from us; so that posterity will with better right accuse the negligence of the present men (I mean of the Italians) than we accuse the carelessness of those past. But if we consult the historians; before the seventeenth century we have scarcely Ambrose Traversari, who makes mention of Beltram of Ferrara; the Chronicle of Rimini, which mentions Bartholomew of Cesena; Flavio Biondo, Leandro Alberti, Francesco de Sanctis, who mention Nicholas of Forca Palena; Girolamo Corte, who mentions Philip of St. Agatha; and lastly Carlo Tapia, who reviews some of the Blessed of our Order. But as many as have written after the sixteenth century have either followed false conjectures and common traditions, or have retailed much according to their own bent. It is therefore no wonder if concerning very many Servants of God (whom this book comprises), whose life shone in the world with virtues and miracles, and whose death was precious in the sight of the Lord, our discourse will be brief and involved: for a copious one is forbidden by the poverty of documents; a clear one by the obscurity of the writers."

[7] Thus far Saianelli, whose diligence in investigating and whose candour in confessing the poverty of records, but he wrote more about his cult in the Historical Records of his Order, and the sparingness in writing arising from this, are deservedly to be praised: for it is better to deliver a few things which are ascertained than many without fitting testimonies. Further, among the writers of the seventeenth century I find that Bernardino Pucci, a Religious of the same Order, and also Emilio de Matthæis, a patrician of Sulmona, wrote a Life of Bl. Nicholas of Forca. Neither has come to me; but, which is a comfort to me, Saianelli had both. It grieves me more that Peter Bonacciolo's Eremus Pisana, together with the Spicilegium of the same Order, published at Venice in the year 1692, which is entered in the catalogue of the books of our Museum, I have not been able by any diligent search to find, so that I do not know by what chance that book slipped from us, which perhaps might have been of use to me, especially in the foundations of the monasteries, of which Saianelli deferred a fuller discourse to volume 2 of his Work, not yet published, or at any rate not yet sent to us.

[8] to be gathered in this Commentary. Nicholas was born In so great a poverty of documents there remains for me only to review Saianelli's assertions, with the addition of my own observations, by which, so far as the obscurity of the matter permits, they may be illustrated or refuted. He collected them in book 2, chapter 5, to which he gave the title Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena, priest, where he discoursed of a few things about his deeds, of somewhat more about his cult. Opportunely too in the same book 2, after the eulogies of the Blessed and other distinguished men of the Order

he subjoined various authentic documents, chiefly about Nicholas's cult, which in this Commentary I shall partly cite and partly also transcribe entire. These things being premised, let us pass on to the Blessed one's deeds. The aforesaid historian of the Hieronymites, vol. 1, book 2, chapter 5, begins thus: "The third propagator of the Pisan Congregation" (for he had said that the first after the founder Bl. Peter Gambacorta was Angelo of Corsica, the second Beltram of Ferrara, to whom he applied the title of Blessed), "Nicholas, had for his native place a town among the Peligni, of the diocese of Sulmona, Forca Palena, which Flavio Biondo in the Italia illustrata, chapter Aprutium, calls also Pelignæ.

[9] at Forca Palena, He is read to be 'of Pozzuoli' in John Peter Crescenzi in the Præsidium Romanum, but Forca Palena is of the diocese of Sulmona, not of Pozzuoli. But occasion for Crescenzi's error was perhaps given by a certain bull of Eugenius IV of the year 1437, on the 2nd day of October, in which, through the carelessness either of the petitioner or of the abbreviator or of the scribe, 'of the diocese of Pozzuoli' is read." Flavio Biondo, just cited, was contemporary with Bl. Nicholas, and could have known him well at Rome, where both lived at the same time: and he in the place cited by the historian ascribes Forca Palena to the same Blessed one as his native place in express words, and at the same time assigns the situation and the name of the place. "The river Aventinus," he says, "rising in the district of the Superæquani of the Peligni at Forca Palena, increases on the right the river Sarus, or Sangro, and into that same Aventinus, likewise on the right, discharges itself the torrent Verde, rising out of Mount Majella between the monastery of St. Martin and the town of Fara… But to the river Aventinus, after it has been increased by the Verde, nearest on the right are the towns Taranto, and Letto Palena, and Palena, called by corruption for Pelignum*.

[10] For this is the other part of the Peligni, whom we have said were called by our Elders Superæquani; and so a little above the town of Forca, where the Aventinus rises, is now called Palenæ for Peligna; near which are seen the foundations of a town, as it appears, most ancient. But the town of Forca was adorned by that holy anchorite of famous repute Nicholas of Forca, who last year died at the city of Rome a hundred years old, and gleamed with very many miracles." With this agrees Leandro Alberti in his Description of Italy, under the title Peligni, whose words I likewise transfer hither. "Mount Majella having been described, it has seemed good to set forth the reason of the name Forca Palena. At the beginning of the river Aventinus is the most ancient town of Forca, assigned to the Peligni, whose district is now by the Italians called by corruption Palena for Peligno: thus they name the town of Forca Palenæ for Pelignorum. That Nicholas of Forca, a hermit, a holy man, greatly illustrated it a hundred and fifty years ago, who, dying at Rome, was renowned after his death for miracles, Biondo is the authority. There are also in this situation the castles Letto Palena and Palena, beside which are the traces of an ancient city, once the metropolis and head of the Peligni, where now the name Forca Palena flourishes for Pelignorum, as we have set forth."

[11] Forca Palena therefore was a town of the Peligni in Hither Abruzzo, now long since destroyed, of the diocese of Sulmona; a province of the kingdom of Naples, and it is marked on the geographical Tables a few Italian miles distant from the city of Sulmona toward the West. I have said that it was a town, because Saianelli in words to be given below writes that it was destroyed toward the end of the fifteenth century, when Ferdinand II reigned among the Neapolitans, and that its inhabitants removed to the neighbouring town of Palena (where I have said the cult of Bl. Nicholas flourishes). However it be about the time, its destruction is asserted also by others, and among the rest by the clergy of the land of Palena in letters given on the day before the Ides of November 1744 to the supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV for the canonization of the same Blessed one, out of which receive the following: "The aforesaid Blessed one, born of the Pelignian region not far from our native place (Palena), in the place called Forca Palena; which place indeed, although it was otherwise happy and fortunate, chiefly because it brought forth so great a Hero of sanctity, yet by the inscrutable judgment of God, after various injuries of the times (alas!) now lies desolate, and keeps only its name with slight relics of antiquity."

[12] That Bl. Nicholas was born in this place is established for certain, where he was born in the year 1349 or thereabouts, and this too is taught by the first metrical sepulchral inscription of his, to be given below, whose first two verses run thus:

In this tomb, O father Nicholas, you rest for ever, Whom the city of Rome holds, whom Forca Palena begot.

Nor is it less beyond doubt that that place is of the diocese of Sulmona, not of Pozzuoli, so that John Peter Crescenzi, and Ottavio Panciroli whom he cited here, do not undeservedly stand refuted, who said Bl. Nicholas was of Pozzuoli either by native place or by diocese. And this indeed about the place of his birth; about the time Saianelli subjoins this: "He was born in the year of human Salvation 1349, on the 10th day of September, as we have from Pucci, both in his manuscript Life of this Blessed one and in his historical Breviary." This year could likely have been derived from Flavio Biondo together with the two Roman epitaphs of the Blessed one: for since he is said by Biondo and in the later epitaph to have died a hundred years old, and from both epitaphs the year of his death was 1449 of the common Christian era, he who assigns his birth to the year 1349 can be astray by only one year one way or the other.

[13] As regards the month and day, let the credit rest with Pucci, of parents unknown to me. who, although he wrote in the middle of the seventeenth century, on Saianelli's testimony, yet perhaps saw some ancient record from which he determined the year and month and day of his birth. Concerning his parents and the name, condition and wealth of his family, since Saianelli is silent, he must be said, however diligently he searched the archives and libraries of his Order, to have found out nothing at all about them. Nor have I read anything on this matter save in the letters of the most illustrious senate of the city of Sulmona offered to Pope Benedict XIV in the year 1746 for his canonization, in which nobility of birth is perhaps ascribed to him in these words: "To the supreme throne of Pontifical majesty … we present with most humble and repeated homage him whom we judge rightly worthy of your Beatitude's regard, Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona… And we present him as one shining not indeed with the splendour of his birth, but admirable for the vast glory of his illustriously wrought deeds and miracles and for the long course of his whole life, most holily passed through a hundred years, furnished with an ample treasure of merits," &c. So there about the Blessed one's birth; what these words certainly indicate is quite unexplored by me. I return to the historian of the Hieronymites.

[14] Made a priest, he lived long in his native place; thence setting out to Rome, "Most piously brought up, and afterward initiated into the priesthood, many years having been passed in his native place, kindled with the desire of a stricter life, he came to Rome at the beginning of the fifteenth century, perhaps at that time when Innocent VII, a native of Sulmona, had scarcely ascended the Apostolic Chair" (who succeeded Boniface IX in the year 1404). "There lived at Rome at that time Brother Raynald of Piedmont, a hermit, to whom already long before, that is, in the year 1384, on the 23rd day of June, Raynonus de Raynonis had granted as a gift, for the perpetual use both of himself and of the other Poor of Christ, a certain tower with houses and a garden in the region of St. Eustace near the church of St. Salvator, which was formerly called in Thermis (for the baths of Nero had been there), now is called il Salvatorello; as is read in the Acts of John Peter de Surcalibus. Nicholas readily attached himself to Brother Raynald and to the other hermits living there; to whom also he was heir and successor in the aforesaid house. Yet for greater caution he obtained that the donation, formerly made to Brother Raynald, should be confirmed to him by the heirs of Raynonus, as is held from a bull of Eugenius IV of the year 1444, of which below.

[15] he joined himself to the hermits in the region of St. Eustace. From the same bull it appears that Nicholas was rector of the altar of St. Salvator, or of that sacred little building, which was and is in the region of St. Eustace" (not in the church of St. Eustace, as is read in the bull). The same things Bernardino Pucci relates in the Italian Life of Bl. Peter Gambacorta, chapter 25, likewise citing the bull of Eugenius IV, and he adds that the Blessed one and his companions are in it (as it appears) called Poor Followers of Jesus Christ. The bull itself neither of them sets out, which, if it be an original, I wonder that this error crept into it, that for "the region of St. Eustace" there was put "the church of St. Eustace." The aforesaid church of St. Salvator stands to this day, and is also called St. Salvator in Thermis, of which he who wishes for more may consult Ottavio Panciroli and others who have treated of the churches of the city of Rome. For the rest, that Bl. Nicholas was initiated into the priesthood is also clear from documents contemporary with him, of which I shall cite some in their places.

[16] Hélyot asserts that the Blessed one with his companions Further, it may here be asked whether Bl. Nicholas and his companions in the church just mentioned, and in the others which we shall say were erected by them before their union with the Pisan Congregation, followed any one of the received Rules, or lived only by their own laws: for on this matter Saianelli has nothing. But Hippolyte Hélyot, vol. 4 of the History of the monastic Orders, &c., chapter 2, affirms without hesitation that they were then of the third Order of St. Francis. His words I subjoin in Latin out of the French. "The Congregation of Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena, who himself too was of the third Order of St. Francis, was likewise united to the Hermits of Bl. Peter of Pisa. This Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena was so called from the place of his birth, which is a village of the Abruzzi, of the diocese of Sulmona in the kingdom of Naples. He was a priest, and lived many years with great esteem in his native place; but when he had resolved to dedicate himself more perfectly to God and to spend the rest of his life in works of penance, he put on the habit of the third Order of St. Francis; and, now of quite advanced age, he made for Rome, where he first dwelt in a certain small church with a single companion, called Raynald of Piedmont.

[17] Pope Eugenius IV, the Man's virtues being known, committed to him the care of a small church called of the Saviour, were at that time of the third Order of St. Francis, which at that time was very much and piously frequented by the faithful. There joined him in the same place five other companions of divers nations, with whom he gave himself to various exercises of pious works," &c. Thus far Hélyot, with no surety assigned for what he says: wherefore it must be seen upon what argument or upon what likelihood the asserted profession of the third Rule by Bl. Nicholas and his companions may seem to rest. It is certain that there were in Italy in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries some companies of Hermits, who, since they had come forth from the Tertiaries of St. Francis, kept the same Rule, accommodated to their manner of life, and partly also the habit; of whom, consult, if you please, Luke Wadding in the Annals of the Minors, and the aforesaid Hélyot. Such Hermits were the disciples of Angelo of Corsica, whom he gathered and governed under the aforesaid Rule, until Bl. Peter

Peter of Pisa took them over with himself, and subjected them to his institute and discipline, as may be seen in Papebroch in the Commentary on the same Bl. Peter at the 17th day of June, §5.

[18] From this union it came about that not only those who with Angelo had come over to Bl. Peter, which, although it be not improbable, because in a certain document but also the other companions of Bl. Peter, who had never been Tertiaries, were nevertheless commonly reckoned such, sometimes even in public documents, which Papebroch in the same place, and before him Pucci in the Life of the same Peter, chapter 25, cited. Nay, on that title too the Friars Minor wished to exercise a certain jurisdiction over Peter's Congregation, so that this Blessed one had need to have recourse to Pope Martin V, who by a bull given in the year 1421 declared him and all his companions free from their power. See Papebroch at the place cited. Wherefore the argument would be weak if for ascribing the third Rule to Bl. Nicholas before his union with Bl. Peter's fellowship there were produced some document later than that union, in which Nicholas was called of the third Order of St. Francis. But Pucci in the same place cites one certainly earlier; namely a charter of a purchase made by Bl. Nicholas himself and by his companion Dominic Zurlo on the 21st day of November of the year 1445 at Naples, in which he affirms that both are called of the third Order, "as," he says, "I have taught at greater length in the Life of that Blessed one, chapter 19." The same document Papebroch cited, with the same day and month, but with the year 1449 (in whose month of September the Blessed one is generally believed to have died) wrongly written for the year 1445.

[19] Pucci confesses that the document was made before Nicholas with his own passed over to the institute of Bl. Peter, they are called of the third Order, which he acknowledges happened in the year 1446. Hence he likewise rightly observes that that appellation of the third Order could not have been attributed to him on account of that union; but since he believed that Bl. Nicholas had never been of the third Order, he preferred to suspect that he anticipated that title out of the great desire with which he had long wished for that union already resolved on. But this reason does not indeed please me; both because it is asserted gratuitously, and also because the proper title of the Pisan Congregation was not "of the third Order" but "of the Poor Hermits"; by which name Bl. Nicholas's companions too were called, as we shall presently say. And so, so far as in a matter so obscure it is lawful to opine, it is not improbable that Bl. Nicholas before his union with the oft-mentioned Congregation was of the third Order, as is asserted in the Neapolitan document of purchase, which compels us in no way to interpret it otherwise with Pucci.

[20] yet it is not certain. The Rule itself of the third Order too was accommodated well enough to the institute of life which Nicholas with his own then followed, and such as Angelo of Corsica likewise kept when toward the end of the fourteenth century he joined himself and his own to Bl. Peter of Pisa. Nevertheless, since both in the document of the union of Bl. Nicholas and his companions with the Pisan society, and in the bull of Pope Eugenius IV approving the same union (which I shall recite in its place), no mention at all is made of the third Order, but both and each of the societies are called Poor Hermits, or Hermits of the poor life; a doubt remains with me whether the appellation of the third Order, added in the Neapolitan document to Bl. Nicholas and his companion, is to be taken in the proper sense, and not given in a wider sense on account of a certain likeness of their life to the Tertiaries. The doubt is increased by this reason, that if they had properly been of the third Order of St. Francis, it would have been of prudent counsel that mention be made of this matter in the Pontiff's bull approving the union, lest otherwise on this head they should be challenged by the Order of Minors, as I have said at no. 18 was done, because Angelo of Corsica and his companions had been of the third Order.

Letumque*

§ II. A hermitage erected by him at Naples: a monastery acquired near Florence: the confirmation of all his possessions and the privileges granted him by Pope Eugenius IV: the monastery of St. Onuphrius founded at Rome and enriched with goods, Pope Nicholas V confirming it.

[ ] The Blessed one, buildings having been acquired at Naples, The oft-cited historian of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, after the things which I have reported from him about Bl. Nicholas's first Roman dwelling, passes on thus to the church erected or enlarged by him in the city of Naples. "In the year 1417 he was at Naples, and there with other Hermits bought one house from the hebdomadaries of the church of St. Agnellus by a document under the date of the 27th day of August, the notary being Antonio Falconio: and hence the origin of our Neapolitan monastery, whose erection Brother Dominic of Pontiacum greatly promoted, partly by houses bought, partly by houses received as gifts, in the same square of St. Agnellus. Which Brother Dominic appointed Nicholas himself heir of all his goods in his testament of the year 1444, on the 29th day of January, the notary being Antonio Vigiliano." Pucci in the Life of Bl. Peter Gambacorta, chapter 25, writes that Bl. Nicholas on his Neapolitan journey turned aside to certain companions of his, Hermits, who dwelt at St. John of Sperlonga, or near Amyclæ, a ruined city in the Terra di Lavoro, between Gaeta and Terracina on the shore of the Tyrrhenian sea, and who already from the year 1412, on the 27th day of January, had procured for themselves a house at Naples in the aforesaid square of St. Agnellus, that they might build a monastery.

[22] erects a hermitage, Their names he reviews thus in Italian: "These were F. Peter of Trapani, F. Nicholas of Verona, F. Dominic the Catalan, F. Valens of Carpi, F. Antonellus of Naples, F. Francis the Venetian," and they are read to have been again at Naples in the year 1417, on the 27th day of August, and in the year 1419, on the 19th day of August, and there together with Bl. Nicholas to have bought other property in the same square. But Nicholas is called in the documents their superior and head. Above the rest, however, he praises Brother Dominic Zurlo, born of the most noble family of the Capece of the kingdom of Naples, whom he relates to have been most dear to Nicholas and his chief helper in founding the monastery there. I cannot confirm these assertions of Pucci from elsewhere; but perhaps this Dominic Zurlo was the very man whom Saianelli calls Dominic of Pontiacum, so called perhaps among the Hermits after their custom from his native place. This monastery and the adjoining church, called of St. Mary of the Graces, stand at Naples to this day, and still obey the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, but built far more spaciously and more richly adorned.

[23] Pompeo Sarnelli in his Description of Naples, to which he gave the title Guida de' Forestieri, which with the adjoining church of St. Mary of the Graces seems to place the beginnings of that monastery much later, saying this in Italian at chapter 13: "The church of St. Mary of the Graces, situated near the walls of the city of Naples, was anciently a very small church of the Grassi family, which in the year 1500 was granted to Brother Jerome of Brindisi, who first brought the Hieronymite Friars of the Congregation of Bl. Peter Gambacorta of Pisa into the city of Naples, to that place in which he founded a convenient monastery and enlarged the church, which is now one of the most beautiful and most richly adorned of Naples." These things must seem contrary to the aforesaid, unless perhaps that monastery, such as it was, erected by Bl. Nicholas at Naples did not pass over with him to the Pisan Congregation, and the said church was granted to the use of the same Blessed one and his companions, but not given to them, until at the beginning of the sixteenth century the aforesaid Jerome of Brindisi brought a colony of the aforesaid Congregation to Naples.

[24] But Saianelli doubts indeed whether this monastery was made of the right of the Pisan Congregation together with Bl. Nicholas; survives to this day, but larger and more adorned. yet in the same place, at chapter 14, weaving a eulogy of Jerome of Brindisi, whom he honours with the appellation of Blessed, he contends that he was the enlarger of it, not the first inhabitant from the same Congregation. "In the following year," he says (namely 1504), "from the government of the house of Ferrara (over which he twice presided for a few months) he betook himself to Naples, where he laboured wholly both at enlarging the monastery and at renewing the church of St. Mary of the Graces, which he also saw completed before his death." Lastly at the end of the chapter he subjoins: "I warn you, however, that Caracciolo, de Magistris, Sarnelli and Celano wrongly asserted that Jerome of Brindisi brought the Pisan Congregation to Naples, which fiction I shall refute in volume 2, where I shall speak of this monastery." Would that this volume, if it be already published, had come to me; for from the poverty of documents I am compelled to leave these things, like many others, undecided. I go on therefore with Saianelli to other matters.

[25] "While Dominic was doing these things at Naples, Nicholas was either at Rome Pope Eugenius IV gives him the monastery of Ricorboli or was giving his labour to the foundation of other places. Eugenius IV, when he was at Florence and still as Pontiff governed that church through Thomas Thomasinus bishop of Recanati, reformed many monasteries in that diocese, among which St. Antoninus in the Summa historiarum, title 12, chapter 10, §5, enumerates the monastery of Ricorboli, assigning it to Hermits. Now those Hermits were Nicholas and his companions; not indeed the Hermits of St. Augustine, as Herrera in the Alphabetum Augustinianum wrongly gathers from St. Antoninus. This monastery therefore of St. Mary of Ricorboli Eugenius granted to Nicholas by letters given about the year 1434, which we do not have, but which we read cited in the following letters. For since the right of patronage of that church belonged to the Florentine family de' Bardi, hence arose a suit between Nicholas of Forca and John and Rodolph de' Bardi.

[26] near Florence, the nuns of dissolute life For deciding which the same Pontiff appointed as judge, by letters under the date of the 28th day of April 1435, the aforesaid bishop Thomas, who in the following year, on the 17th day of March, decreed that Nicholas and his companions should be bound to pay every year to John and Rodolph and their descendants or nearer kin one pound of wrought wax candles on the feast of the Assumption of the Bl. Virgin Mary. Nevertheless Nicholas not long after withdrew thence for a cause unknown to us; and this probably before he was united to the Pisan Congregation; which last we shall see was done in the year 1446." Before we go on, it will help to have noted some things. Eugenius IV in the year 1434, fleeing the sedition of the Romans, went to Florence, and himself held and governed its archiepiscopal chair, vacant by the death of Amerigo Corsini, who died in the same year on the 18th day of March, until the October of the following year, when John Vitelleschi was raised to it, on the testimony of Ughelli in the enlarged Italia sacra, vol. 3, col. 168. About Thomas Thomasinus, or Buratto, the same work may be consulted, vol. 1, col. [ ], among the bishops of Recanati.

[27] being thence transferred to another monastery: Further, during that stay at Florence the aforesaid Pontiff Eugenius, on the testimony of St. Antoninus at the place just cited, "as a chief zealot of Religious conduct, emptied many monasteries of nuns who lived dissolutely and unbecomingly, extinguished the abbatial dignity, and transferred their nuns to other monasteries," &c. The monastery of Ricorboli, or of Ricolboli, therefore was

(as our Lyons edition of St. Antoninus of the year 1527 has it) one of those monasteries of nuns of dissolute life whom the Pontiff sent away elsewhere, that he might bring them back to good ways. Pucci in the Life of Bl. Peter of Pisa, chapter 25, teaches besides that it was of the Order of St. Benedict and situated outside the walls of Florence, and that the aforesaid letters of Eugenius are preserved in the monastery of his Order at Monte Baroccio. Herrera therefore was under a delusion when he judged that the Hermits, to whom St. Antoninus wrote that this was handed over by Eugenius IV, were his own Augustinians. Nay, the holy historian himself too seems to have distinguished the two sufficiently, by calling the latter "Hermits of the Observance," but the former simply "Hermits." For thus he speaks in the same place: "The monastery of Chiarito, by bestowing it on the Hermits of the Observance" (whom Herrera too acknowledges to be his own)… "the monastery of Ricolboli, by assigning it to Hermits."

[28] The same Pontiff confirms all his hermitages to him and bestows privileges. Meanwhile (on the testimony of the aforesaid Pucci) Brother Raynald of Piedmont, that Hermit with whom Bl. Nicholas had associated himself at Rome, departing this life, left him heir and successor of his hermitage in the region of St. Eustace and of his goods; and the Blessed one obtained letters from Eugenius IV, by which both this donation and two other hermitages which he had acquired should be confirmed to him. Hither therefore belongs what Saianelli has, continuing at the place cited thus: "In the year 1437 Nicholas was still at Florence, and obtained letters given by the same Pontiff on the second day of October, by which commissaries were appointed for the confirmation of the places hitherto erected; namely at Rome, at Naples, and of St. Christina in the Alps of Florence. By other letters too given in the same year and day the Pontiff granted the faculty of receiving other places, and granted many other privileges. See in our Bullary." How I lament that these things are recorded by the historian so briefly: for neither I nor generally others have the opportunity of consulting the Bullary of the Order of Hieronymites. But from Pucci in the Life of Bl. Peter of Pisa we learn only that the earlier letters of Eugenius were in his time preserved in the Neapolitan monastery; and that the monastery of St. Christina in the Alps of Florence was founded by a certain Brother Matthew of Hungary, a companion of that Blessed one. For the rest, the aforesaid Pontifical letters, if they be genuine, were likely given at Bologna, where Eugenius was staying at that time, as may be seen in Odorico Rinaldi, vol. 18 of the Annales Ecclesiastici, and others.

[29] Far better known and more famous is that other Roman building of the same Blessed one on the Janiculum, By the munificence of the same Pope and of other faithful which he himself founded with the annexed oratory or chapel of St. Onuphrius, and hallowed in his last age by his death and burial, and lastly still illustrates even in our times by the precious treasure of his body. Yet Saianelli's narration about this too is meagre, because he resolved to treat of it at greater length in the volume 2 to be published. Meanwhile receive those few things which he wrote here. "About the same time Nicholas, a lover of solitude, who, being now ninety years old, felt grievously the excessive concourse of the people at St. Salvator's in the City, thought of betaking himself to the Janiculum, where in the year 1434, on the 26th day of June, he had bought a certain vineyard from Nicolino de Carbonibus, in the Acts of Paulus Antonius di Muscianis. To this end Brother Nicholas Jacobelli of Core, a companion of Nicholas of Forca, procured other goods in the same place in the years 1439, 1440, 1441; and yet he is read to have dwelt at St. Salvator's until the year 1444. Not long after, the oratory on the Janiculum, dedicated to St. Onuphrius, was built with a hermitage; which happened before the year 1446, from what is to be said below. Eugenius IV bestowed alms upon this pious work, as Nicholas V, his successor, testifies in a certain bull of the year 1447, on the 26th day of August. It is in our Bullary."

[30] So much only Saianelli there, more (as has been said) being reserved for volume 2. he founds the monastery and church of St. Onuphrius This hermitage was founded in the region across the Tiber, in that part of the Janiculum which meets those going out from the gate of the Holy Spirit on the right and lies nearer to the Vatican. In the documents to be given below it is sometimes called the church or chapel of Monte Ventoso, whether by this name the whole hill of the Janiculum or only this part is designated. It is also said to be in the district of Monte Settignano or Septignano, perhaps corruptly for Septimianum, from the Septimian gate, which stands about the foot of the same Janiculum. Lastly, in the same place too the same church is read to be situated outside and near the walls of the City; the reason for which Saianelli gives: that that part of the Janiculum before the Pontificate of Paul IV was not yet girt with the walls in which it was enclosed by him. It will have helped to have observed these things, lest I be compelled to interrupt my discourse when I recite those documents. St. Onuphrius was an anchorite in Egypt, whose deeds have been illustrated in our work at the 12th day of June, on which day he is inscribed in the Roman Martyrology. To the holy Hermit Onuphrius therefore Bl. Nicholas the Hermit wished his church to be dedicated.

[31] Rightly too Saianelli asserted that the said monastery with its church was erected by Bl. Nicholas before the year 1446; for in this very year Nicholas handed it over with himself and with his own to the Pisan Congregation, at Rome on the Janiculum, as will be shown in the following §: but the year in which its first foundations began to be laid we cannot determine. In Saianelli at p. 263 there is cited a certain image of Bl. Nicholas painted on the wall of the same monastery, which, on the testimony given by two skilled painters of this eighteenth century, may have been made toward the end of the fifteenth century or thereabouts, and above which this may be read: "The ancient and true effigy of the divine Nicholas, founder of this monastery in the year 1434." Certainly this year can indicate nothing else than the time of the monastery's founding; but the inscription, as is plain, is not ancient, and perhaps marks only the year in which the ground was bought, not that in which the building was begun. The bull of Pope Nicholas V, which Saianelli cited above, he then sets out at p. 262 and the following, which, since it comprises the erection and increase of that place, I here subjoin entire.

[32] and increases it with a new possession, "Nicholas, Bishop, Servant of the servants of God. To our venerable brother the bishop of Volterra, greeting and Apostolic blessing. To those things we willingly give heed out of the office of our Apostolic service, by which provision may be made for the state and advantage of persons devoutly serving the Most High in a spirit of humility. For a petition lately laid before us on the part of our beloved sons Nicholas of Forca Palena, priest, and his companions, Poor Hermits dwelling in the City, contained that he had formerly caused to be built and erected a certain chapel, or a certain oratory, in the district of Monte Settignano of the said City, in honour and under the name of Saint Onuphrius, out of the charitable subsidies bestowed upon him by Pope Eugenius the fourth of happy memory, our Predecessor, and also out of the pious suffrages of Christ's faithful; and had procured a certain vineyard possession in the district of St. James of Septignano, lying on one side beside that of our beloved son Anthony de Caffarellis, a Roman citizen, and on another beside that of our hospital of the Holy Spirit in Sassia of the said City, and on another beside the goods and property of the said chapel or oratory, and belonging to the parish church of Saint Sebastian in the Via Papæ of the aforesaid City, and very necessary to the same chapel or oratory; and that he bought it from our beloved son Nicholas de Fundis, rector of that church, and with the consent of our beloved sons its parishioners, for the price of a hundred and twenty florins of the money current in the said City, and acquired it for himself by title of purchase for the work and advantage of that chapel or oratory and of those dwelling in it for the time being; as is said to be more fully contained in the public instrument drawn up thereupon.

[33] for the confirming of which he obtains letters from Pope Nicholas V, Wherefore on the part of Nicholas of Forca Palena and of the other aforesaid Hermits it was humbly besought of us that we would of Apostolic kindness deign to add the strength of Apostolic confirmation to this purchase and acquisition, for their firmer subsistence. We therefore, who have no certain knowledge of the premises, inclining to these supplications, command your fraternity by Apostolic precepts, that concerning the premises and all their circumstances you diligently inform yourself by our authority, and, if by that information you shall find it to be so, and the said purchase to turn to the evident advantage both of the chapel or oratory and of the church — whereon we charge your conscience — that by the same authority you approve and confirm the aforesaid purchase, and also all and singular that concerns it contained in the said instrument, and whatever has followed thereupon, supplying all defects, if any perchance have occurred therein. Given at Rome at St. Peter's in the year of the Lord's Incarnation one thousand four hundred and forty-seven, on the seventh of the Kalends of September, in the first year of our Pontificate."

[34] Consequently upon this the aforesaid bishop, by the authority committed to him, approved and confirmed the purchase at Rome, a bishop of Volterra being appointed to this end. but first "in the year from the Nativity of the Lord one thousand four hundred and forty-nine, in the twelfth Indiction, and on Friday, the twenty-eighth day of the month of March, in the third year of the Pontificate of the most Holy Father in Christ and our Lord Nicholas, by divine providence Pope the fifth"; that is, in the same year in whose month of September Bl. Nicholas is believed to have departed this life. The letters of the same bishop, in which this bull of Nicholas V is inserted, I here pass over, because they contain nothing besides. But they bear this title of the same prelate: "Robert, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See bishop of Volterra, and sole judge and executor specially deputed by the Apostolic See for the matters written below." He therefore seems to have been Robert Cavalcanti, bishop of Volterra, who in Ughelli's Italia sacra, vol. 1, col. [ ], is read, having been made bishop from an auditor of the Roman Rota, to have sat in the chair of Volterra from the year 1440 to 1450, nor have I found another besides him at that time who could be called Robert bishop of Volterra.

[35] There stands to this day, as I have noted above, the aforesaid monastery with the church of St. Onuphrius, That monastery and church survive to this day, which is a Cardinal's title. and it is inhabited by Hieronymite Hermits, followers of BB. Peter Gambacorta and Nicholas of Forca, but who from the year 1569, by the command of Pope St. Pius V, have pronounced a solemn profession of religious vows under the Rule of St. Augustine, whereas up to that time they lived bound only by simple vows. The supreme Pontiff Leo X raised the same church of St. Onuphrius into a Cardinal's deaconry, but Sixtus V into the title of a Cardinal-priest. He who wishes for more about it, let him consult Ottavio Panciroli in his Churches of the city of Rome, and the more recent author of Roma antica e moderna, reprinted in the year 1750, who, besides the munificence of Pope Eugenius IV, records also the family

de Cupis, praising their liberality in building the same monastery. Doubtless Saianelli will give more about it in volume 2 of his Work, and in this very Commentary of mine the discourse about it will often return.

§ III. The Blessed one aggregates himself and his own to the Pisan Society, Pope Eugenius IV approving and confirming it: the rest of his life passed at Rome.

[ ] Being now quite an old man he desires to aggregate himself and his own "Nicholas lived about three years" (again the words are Saianelli's) "on the Janiculum, and at this time saw himself and his companions and his places united to the Pisan Congregation; which he had long wished for. Pucci testifies in the Life of Bl. Peter, pp. 157 and 181, that Bl. Peter the founder was at Rome in the year 1425; and this he gathers from a transcript of an instrument of donation, made on the 2nd of May by two Brothers of Vivianus de Nobillaria, of the society 'of Fr. Peter of Pisa, now an inhabitant of the City.' Yet he had the autograph at Urbino, which is very often read in other documents about the same Bl. Peter. This is true, that Peter, formerly of John of Spain, was at Rome in the hermitage of Nicholas of Forca at St. Eustace's, where, lying grievously ill in bed, Brother Paul son of John Fravasti of Bertinoro, in the year 1430, on the 12th day of August, appointed the same Peter of Spain, Rector of the Hermits of Scolca (that was a hermitage of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa outside Rimini), his heir. This too is probable, that Bl. Peter the founder, who was more than once at Rome, turned aside to Nicholas of Forca, and was bound to him with a bond of intimate charity. Known therefore to Nicholas was both Bl. Peter's person and the plan of the Congregation instituted by him.

[37] to the Pisan Congregation: Yet not so known to us is the cause why the union of the two Societies was drawn out for eleven years beyond the death of the blessed founder" (Peter of Pisa, which happened in the year 1435). "This was proposed in the general chapter celebrated at Venice in the year 1446, on the 27th of June" (rather of May, as will appear below), "in which Jacob of Fermo of the Pisan Society was appointed procurator to this end, who, coming to Rome, completed the whole matter on the 8th day of August by an instrument drawn up by Paul son of Anthony de Muscianis." This instrument itself is very prolix; since it sets forth at large, in many words in the style commonly used by notaries, both what was done at Venice in the general chapter of the Pisan Congregation and what was done at Rome in the church of St. Onuphrius; and it stands in Saianelli at p. 238 and the two following, taken, as is there said, from the autograph preserved in the archive of the same monastery of St. Onuphrius of the City. I long doubted whether the whole should here be reprinted word for word; at length, lest I should breed too great weariness in the reader, I judged it better to reprint the rest entire from that part in which the management of the whole business was committed to Jacob of Fermo, the notaries' phrases being passed over. Thus therefore stands the aforesaid instrument.

[38] he and his companions, with Jacob of Fermo, "In the name of the Lord. Amen. In the year from His Nativity one thousand four hundred and forty-six, in the ninth Indiction, on the eighth day of the month of August, in the sixteenth year of the Pontificate of the most Holy Father in Christ and our Lord, Lord Eugenius the fourth. In the presence of me the notary and of the witnesses written below, specially called and asked to these things, there being gathered and assembled in the church or chapel of St. Onuphrius of Monte Ventoso, situated outside and near the walls of the City, the venerable and religious men, Brother Nicholas of Forca, Fr. Colla Jacobelli, Fr. Michael of Pescia, Fr. Francis of Slavonia, and Fr. Jerome of Slavonia, Brothers Hermits of the poor life; and the said Fr. Nicholas for himself and for his other Brothers and companions and for the other places of Hermits over which the same Nicholas presides, on the one part; and the venerable and religious man, Brother Jacob of Fermo, procurator and syndic of the venerable and religious chapter of the Congregation and Society of poor Hermits of the parish of St. Raphael of Venice, of Fr. Bartholus of Cesena, Rector general and Governor of that Society:

[39] who in the general chapter of the same Congregation, In which chapter there were present the Rectors of the places of that Society, namely Bartholus himself, father and Rector of the hermitage of St. Jerome of the diocese of Rimini; Fr. Archangelus of Gubbio, of the place of the poor Hermits of St. Mary Magdalene of Padua; George of Patras, deputy of Brother Benedict of Sicily, Rector of that place of St. Raphael; Nicholas of Chieti, of St. Mary of Lispia of the diocese of Padua; Gabriel of Ferrara, of the place of the Misericordia, of the diocese of Ferrara; Philip of Rimini, deputy of Jerome of Chieti, of the place of St. Mary Magdalene of Monte dei Famuli, of the diocese of Vicenza; Jerome of Soncino, of St. Mary Magdalene, of the diocese of Treviso; and Jacob of Fermo, of the place of the poor Hermits of St. Bartholus, of the diocese of Pesaro *, in his own name and in the name of Fr. Alexius of Scutari, of the place of St. Blaise outside Fano — the Rectors and governors of the aforesaid named places, making and constituting the greater and sounder part, and more than two parts of the Rectors of the said Society, unanimously and concordantly, and none of them dissenting.

[40] The same Fr. Jacob of Fermo having from the said Society a special mandate, held at Venice, had been appointed to this end, as is described below; and beyond the office of his said mandate and procuration the said Fr. Jacob of Fermo bound himself and his goods principally, and promised for ratification and for its being held ratified, and that he would so and in such wise do and take care with effect that the said Society of poor Hermits of the aforesaid parish of St. Raphael, and all the Brothers of the said Society, will always hold all and singular these things ratified, pleasing and firm, and will not do or come against them for any reason or cause, on the other part. Of which his mandate the tenor is this, namely: In the name of the Lord. Amen. In the year from His Nativity one thousand four hundred and forty-six, in the eighth Indiction, on the twenty-seventh day of the month of May, in the sixteenth year of the Pontificate of the most Holy Father in Christ and our Lord, Lord Eugenius, by divine providence Pope the fourth.

[41] The chapter of the Congregation and Society of poor Hermits of the parish of St. Raphael of Venice being called together, transact this business at Rome, by the command of Brother Bartholus of Cesena, Rector general and governor of that Society, at the sound of the little bell, in which there were present the Rectors of the places of that Society; namely Fr. Bartholus himself, father and Rector of the hermitage of St. Jerome, of the diocese of Rimini, &c. (whose names I have just recited at no. 39), none of them dissenting, they made, constituted and ordained the discreet man, Brother Jacob of Fermo aforesaid, a fellow of the same Society, being present and willingly taking upon himself and accepting the burden of syndicate and procuration, their actor, doer, syndic and lawful procurator, revoking all their other procurators hitherto constituted by those Brothers, to appear in the Roman curia and elsewhere in any place, especially to accept and receive into the said Society two places, one of St. Onuphrius of Monte Ventoso outside Rome, and the place situated at Rome in the parish of St. Eustace, which Fr. Nicholas de la Forca holds, and in the name of the said Society to enter, take and acquire the bodily and actual possession, or quasi-possession, of those places, and to rule and govern those places, the Lord granting it…

[42] I here omit the rest, which pertains to the procuration lawfully given to Brother Jacob of Fermo in the chapter of his Order at Venice, and, conditions having been agreed, after which it follows thus in the same Roman instrument. "And all the aforesaid" (namely Bl. Nicholas with the aforesaid companions, and Jacob of Fermo, procurator of the Pisan Congregation) "being thus gathered and assembled in the said church or chapel of St. Onuphrius, as above, for the performing of the things written below, and some conferences having been held among themselves, for themselves and in the names aforesaid, made on both sides a union in the said Society; so that the said Society of the said Brother Nicholas, and the said Society of the said late Brother Peter of Pisa, and of the said poor Hermits of the aforesaid parish of St. Raphael, be united and stand in union with one another; and thus all subjected themselves for themselves and in the aforesaid names under the obedience of the said Societies. And the said Fr. Nicholas for himself and in the said names placed in the union the goods and places of the said Hermits, both of the said place of St. Onuphrius and of the said place of the same Brother Nicholas of the region of St. Eustace; and thus conversely the said Fr. Jacob, procurator and syndic aforesaid, likewise made the said union with them, as above, and likewise placed the said goods and places of his said Society in the said union; so that all the goods and places of the said Hermits and Societies be and ought to be in the aforesaid union.

[43] The said parties promising to one another for all the others for ratification, as has been said and expressed above; join and subject themselves and all their goods in the year 1446 with this, that all the aforesaid of the said Society of the late Brother Peter of Pisa and of the said poor Hermits of the parish of St. Raphael must observe and shall observe all the aforesaid promised by the said Fr. Jacob in their names, as above, and all that the said parties promised in the aforesaid union, and shall stand to obedience, as has been said. Otherwise, if the contrary should be done, let this contract not be valid; nor let it hold, save so far as it may please our most Holy Lord the supreme Pontiff, to whose declaration and command the said parties have subjected and do subject themselves, for themselves and in the aforesaid names, and have willed and do will to stand; because so it was done and agreed between those parties for themselves and in the names aforesaid. All which things the said parties for themselves and in the said names promised always to attend to and observe, and to cause to be attended to and observed, and to hold and cause to be held ratified and firm, and not to do, say or come against them for any reason or cause, under the hypothec and obligation of all and singular their goods and of the said places and Societies, movable and immovable, present and future: with me the notary written below, as a public person, being present and lawfully stipulating, in the stead and name of all the aforesaid, and of all others whom it now concerns or in future may concern.

[44] to the aforesaid Congregation. Done in the church or chapel of St. Onuphrius of Monte Ventoso described above, in the presence of these witnesses, namely the reverend father in Christ and lord, lord Matthew, canon of the Congregation of St. George in Alga, of the diocese of Castello, chamberlain of our said most Holy Lord the Pope, and Raymund son of James of Siena, Marcellus

son of John of the region of Parione, specially called and asked to the aforesaid things.

And I, Paul son of Anthony de Muscianis, a Roman citizen, by the grace of God a public notary by imperial authority, because I was present and took part, together with the aforenamed witnesses, in all and singular the aforesaid things while they were so transacted and done; therefore I have written and published them, and for the faith of all the premises have set my accustomed sign, being asked concerning the aforesaid." Thus far the instrument of union, about which a few things come to be observed. At the beginning of the whole instrument, in my no. 38, the ninth Indiction is rightly put together with the year of Christ 1446, on the 8th day of August; but at no. 40 the eighth Indiction is joined with the 27th day of the month of May of the same year, for which therefore the ninth Indiction seems to be substituted. From this latter place it is also clear that the aforesaid union was decreed in the general chapter celebrated at Venice in the year 1446, not on the 27th day of June, as Saianelli by a lapse of memory had said above at no. 37, but on the 27th of May, as he himself afterward noted in his Chronotaxis at p. 311.

[45] We have just seen that in the same contract of union this condition was added, That these things may be ratified, they petition Eugenius IV, that it should not be ratified save so far as it should please the supreme Pontiff. "And so that it might subsist more firmly," says the aforesaid historian of the Pisan Congregation, "the same Nicholas implored the Apostolic authority, at whose prayers and those of his companions Eugenius IV, by a bull given in the year, by the style of bulls, 1446 (the beginning of the year being taken, namely, from the Lord's Incarnation, or from the 25th day of March), but of the common era 1447, on the 1st day of January, decreed 'that the same Nicholas and his companions, and their oratories, houses, hermitages and places, should henceforth for perpetual times to come in all things and through all things in like manner and without any difference be members of the said Congregation and Society' (of Fr. Peter of Pisa), 'and be held, reckoned and reputed of it,' &c. This bull is in our Bullary at the year cited." This Bullary we do not have; but opportunely Pucci published the same bull in the Life of Bl. Peter of Pisa, and from him our Papebroch in the deeds of the same Blessed one; yet since it pertains rather to Bl. Nicholas than to Peter, who had already died eleven years before when this was given, the place demands that we reprint it here.

[46] "The copious kindness of the Apostolic See willingly hearkens to the vows of persons devoted to us and to the Apostolic See, who, approving what is asked, especially of those leading the eremitic life in the pursuit of pious and religious poverty, by which the divine worship is furthered and the advantage of eternal salvation is procured, and, that they may obtain their wished-for effect, favourably interposes the cares of its vigilance. Since therefore, as a petition lately laid before us on the part of our beloved sons, the Rector and the whole body of the Congregation or Society of poor Hermits of the late Peter of Pisa, and of Nicholas della Furca and his companions the poor Hermits, contained; the same Nicholas and his companions the poor Hermits, dwelling in his houses, oratories and places situated both in the City and in other cities and places of Italy, considering the praiseworthy fame and the virtuous exercises before God by which the Rector and the Hermits of the aforesaid Society are laudably commended; and that their good odour has been manifoldly spread abroad in the Lord's field to the praise of the Most High; and considering that if they with their oratories, houses, hermitages and goods should be perpetually aggregated, united and incorporated to this Congregation or society , they would thereafter in a short time advance with healthful increases before God and men:

[47] We, who with intent desires desire that the increase of such worship and the propagation of Religious men should flourish and grow especially in our times, joins both societies wishing to provide for the direction and state of the aforesaid Hermits, hoping also that thereafter both they and their oratories, houses, hermitages and places will obtain many advantages and conveniences in spiritual and temporal things, inclining to the supplications of the same Rector, Nicholas and the Hermits in this part, do by Apostolic authority, of certain knowledge, by the tenor of these presents, aggregate, unite and incorporate for ever to this Congregation or Society the said Nicholas and these his companions, and all and singular their oratories, houses, hermitages and places existing anywhere (all which, whatever, however many and of whatever sort, and of whatever yearly value their fruits, rents and revenues may be, we will to be held as expressed in these presents), with all their goods and possessions whatsoever.

[48] perpetually, Decreeing that the same Nicholas and his companions, and their oratories, houses, hermitages and places, shall henceforth for perpetual times to come, in all things and through all things in like manner without any difference, be members of the said Congregation or Society, and be held, reckoned and reputed of it, and also must be united, ruled and governed under its customs, institutes, ordinances, privileges, rule and governance: and also may and must alike use and enjoy all and singular the privileges, exemptions, immunities, indulgences, graces and indults granted by Us or by the aforesaid See to the Congregation or Society and to their aforesaid oratories, houses, hermitages and places, in particular or in general, under whatsoever form of words; and that it be from now void and vain if anything be knowingly or unknowingly attempted against these things by anyone whomsoever * by any authority: notwithstanding, &c. Given at Rome at St. Peter's, 1446, on the Kalends of January, in the sixteenth year of our Pontificate."

[49] by Apostolic letters given Above I have already noted from Saianelli that the beginning of the year, according to the usage of the Roman chancery observed in Bulls, is here taken from the Lord's Incarnation, or from the 25th day of March, and therefore that the year 1447 of the common Christian era is designated. That this is so appears also from the sixteenth year of Eugenius's Pontificate assigned: for since Eugenius IV was created Pontiff in the month of March of the year 1431, he was completing only the fifteenth year of his See on the Kalends of January of the common year 1446, which began from those same Kalends. Papebroch, vol. 3 of June, p. 539 and the following, reciting the same bull, wrote in the margin the year 1446, which is read in the bull itself, with no observation added. But Hélyot, vol. 4 of the History of the religious Orders, &c., chapter 2, says this: "Father Papebroch sets out the entire Brief which Pope Eugenius IV ordered to be given for the union of the two Congregations. Yet a correction must be made in the chronological notes of this Brief, given on the Kalends of January 1446, in the 25th year of his Pontificate; since that Pontiff was made on the 3rd day of March of the year 1431, and governed the Church only fifteen years: and so it could not then have been other than his fifteenth year." So Hélyot, but in French words.

[50] in the year 1447 of the common era. But I do not know where he read in Papebroch in that place the 25th year of Eugenius's Pontificate assigned, who at the place cited most plainly sets out the same notes as I do, and namely the sixteenth year of Eugenius's Pontificate. In vain too did Hélyot note that the 15th year of his Pontificate should be assigned. For it is manifest that these letters of Eugenius were given after the aforesaid Acts of union, both the Venetian and the Roman, for whose confirming they were sought and granted. And yet in both the sixteenth year of Eugenius's Pontificate is joined with the year of Christ 1446, namely in the Venetian ones with the month of May, in the Roman ones with August of the same year. There cannot therefore be assigned to the aforesaid letters of Eugenius the 15th year of the same Pontificate, but the 16th year must be retained; while the year of Christ 1446, which is there appended, must be begun from the 25th day of March, as Saianelli judged, or the year 1447 must be put in its place. Further, on the Kalends of January of this year Eugenius was counting the 16th year of his Pontificate, to be completed on the 3rd day of March, before which, on the 23rd day of February, he died.

[51] As regards the hermitages and houses which by this aggregation were added to the Society of Bl. Peter of Pisa, It is not sufficiently established how many hermitages Saianelli in the Chronotaxis of his Order at the year 1446 noted the following: "Nicholas formerly possessed four places. The first, of St. Onuphrius of the City on the Janiculum hill, of which a member was the other hermitage at St. Salvator's in the region of St. Eustace. The second, of St. Mary of the Graces at Naples. The third, of St. Mary of Ricorboli near Florence. The fourth, of St. Christina in the Alps, likewise of the Florentine diocese. The two first came to us: about the other two it is not certain. Of each, however, I shall speak in volume 2." The matter is very obscure. In the Venetian Acts of the procuration given to Brother Jacob of Fermo, above at no. 41, mention is made of only the two Roman ones, power being given him "to accept and receive into the said Society" (the Pisan) "two places, one of St. Onuphrius of Monte Ventoso outside Rome, and the place situated at Rome in the parish of St. Eustace, which Fr. Nicholas de la Forca holds."

[52] In the Roman instrument of union too, at no. 42, Nicholas is read to have submitted to the Pisan Congregation only "the goods and places of the said Hermits, both of the said place of St. Onuphrius passed over at that time to the Pisan Congregation and of the said place … of the region of St. Eustace." But Saianelli in the same place took this up thus: "Only two places are enunciated in this instrument as belonging to Fr. Nicholas; but by these words 'all goods and places' the place of Naples must be reckoned as united, and also other places, if Nicholas then possessed any elsewhere." He judged therefore that only the two Roman places are expressly named, because these were the chief ones, on which the rest depended. This exposition is altogether favoured by the bull of Pope Eugenius IV, in which at no. 46 Nicholas (of Forca) "and his companions the poor Hermits dwelling in his houses, oratories and places situated both in the City and in other cities and places of Italy" are said to have demanded this union. But at no. 47 the Pontiff, assenting to their wishes, aggregated all of them, "and all and singular their oratories, houses, hermitages and places existing anywhere," all which he willed to be held as expressed, to the oft-mentioned Pisan Congregation.

[53] Nay, Saianelli too in his Chronotaxis at the year 1449 cites an instrument of a donation made in the year 1450, besides the Roman ones and the Neapolitan. from which it is clear that the Neapolitan monastery of St. Mary of the Graces was at least already in that same year 1450 of that Congregation, since in that instrument Fr. John of Urbino, Rector, and Fr. Paul Quirinus, procurator general of the same monastery, are said to have been appointed "by the religious man Fr. Jerome of the city of Chieti, then also general, and head or governor of the Congregation and Society of poor Hermits of the parish of St. Raphael of Venice." Of the monasteries of St. Mary of Ricorboli or Ricolboli, and of St. Christina in the Alps of the Florentine diocese, although he brings forward nothing of this kind, yet it is most likely

that these too, if they then also obeyed Bl. Nicholas, were added along with him to the Pisan Society.

[54] Further, Bl. Nicholas was at that time in the 97th year of his life or thereabouts, The Blessed one spent the rest of his life at Rome as superior. for three years later he died a hundred years old. From so grave an age the venerable Old Man likely foresaw that death was at hand for him, and reckoned that he could not better provide for his subjects in time to come than if he at length joined them to the Hermits of Bl. Peter of Pisa, whose institute was not much unlike his own, and whose virtues he knew and approved, and led them to it by his own example. But from this union it came about that he, who hitherto had been the head of his companions, was subjected to the Rector general of the Pisan Society. Yet he retained, as long as he survived, the government of the Roman house of St. Onuphrius, and perhaps also of the other, which we have said was situated in the region of St. Eustace. This is proved by the instrument made in the year 1449, on the 28th day of March, in which Robert bishop of Volterra, by the Apostolic authority committed to him (see above at no. 34), approving a certain purchase made by the Blessed one, calls him "the honourable man, lord Nicholas of Forca Palena, priest, and … Principal of the companion Hermits dwelling in the kindly city of Rome." With this agrees the same Blessed one's sepulchral inscription, set up in the year 1606 in the church of St. Onuphrius, in which it is read of him: "In this monastery he died as Prior, a hundred years old." Pucci in the Life of Bl. Peter Gambacorta, p. 178, cites a certain instrument of the year 1451, in which three Brothers of the aforesaid Congregation, Jacob of Fermo, George of Patras and Jerome Maria of Dalmatia, are called "of the society of the late Fr. Peter of Pisa and of Fr. Nicholas of Forca." But this appellation certainly did not last long, nor does Bl. Nicholas ever seem to have discharged in that Congregation any other office than that of prior in his Roman monastery.

or Pisauriensis*?

Congregationi*

Societati*

read quocumque, or add persona*

§ IV. The Blessed one's hundred years; his death with a fame of sanctity and of miracles, and his burial: the first raising of his body from the earth: his cult persevering after the inquiry made under Pope Urban VIII.

[ ] The Blessed one died at Rome a hundred years old in the year 1449, Saianelli found no more about the blessed Man's deeds, and passes at once to his death and cult, saying: "Nicholas lived after these things in the Pisan Congregation about three years, and died a hundred years old in the year 1449; of which fact we have as witness the marble sepulchral stone, in which the year of his death is read; and also Flavio Biondo, a contemporary writer, who in the Italia illustrata, chapter Aprutium, speaking of Forca Palena, Nicholas's native place, says this: 'But the town of Forca was adorned by that holy anchorite of famous repute Nicholas of Forca, who last year' (that is, 1449; for Biondo was writing this in the year 1450) 'died at the city of Rome a hundred years old, and gleamed with very many miracles.' But the day of his death is not so certain. Our Pucci in three places assigned the death of this blessed Man to the 18th day of November. First indeed in the manuscript Life of Bl. Peter of Pisa, which is in our library of Riva, which he wrote about the year 1650. Secondly in the manuscript historical Breviary, published in the year 1659, which is preserved in the same library. Thirdly in the same manuscript historical Breviary, enlarged and carried down to the year 1667, which is read in the library of Montebello.

[56] But in the Life of the same Bl. Peter published in print in the year 1666, but on an uncertain day, p. 183, he assigns the 29th day of September. This date Emilio de Matthæis, a patrician of Sulmona, first published, in the Life of the same Bl. Nicholas, written in the year 1660; and afterward other writers of ours followed, whence this opinion flowed into the Acts produced in the sacred Congregation of Rites. To this second opinion there seems to stand in the way what I have read in a certain old manuscript booklet of the archive of St. Onuphrius of the City, where are written out the receipts for the rents or canons which were paid in that century by the Brothers of the said place. For there at p. 2 it is thus read: 'In the name of the Lord. Amen. In the year of the Lord 1449, on the last day but one of the month of September. I, the priest Antonius' (Jacobonus) 'of Palombara' (it is a castle among the Sabines), 'rector of the church of St. John de Pinea, confess that I have had and received into my hand from Fr. Nicholas of Forca, a poor Hermit, for the yearly rent of one vineyard situated above St. Spirito, one florin; and for his security I have written this receipt with my own hand.' Then there was noted there by I know not whom: 'Within this year 1449 Fr. Nicholas of Forca died.'

[57] That receipt Pucci certainly saw, who a little before on the same page had noted which however is more commonly assigned to the 29th of September. that Brother Nicholas Jacobelli of Core was an intimate and among the first companions of Bl. Nicholas. Whence therefore de Matthæis had it that Bl. Nicholas died on the 29th day of September, on which day he paid the florin to the rector of St. John de Pinea, who could guess? I see the solution of the riddle which might be brought forward for this opinion. Namely, the rector of St. John de Pinea might have received the money into his hand from Nicholas of Forca one or more days before the 29th of September, and have signed the receipt under the date of the 29th. He might also have received and signed it on the same day, and Nicholas have died on the same day, worn out by his hundred years. But in so ambiguous a matter, in which Pucci fights with himself, I do not wish to determine anything." Thus far Saianelli; and rightly. For although that subscription of the receipt can in either way be reconciled with Bl. Nicholas's death having occurred on the 29th day of September, yet it remains uncertain from what record Emilio de Matthæis assigned his death to the 29th day of September; and while this doubt stands, the aforesaid reconciliation is superfluous. On the contrary too Pucci's own inconstancy in marking the month and day of the death sufficiently indicates that he wavered between the two opinions, and thus lacked a solid argument which should make either certain. I wonder that the day of his death is wanting in his epitaph.

[58] After this Saianelli subjoins this about the Blessed one's burial: But he died with a great fame of sanctity, "The same author (Pucci) asserts in the manuscript Life, and so too does de Matthæis, that his sacred body lay unburied for three days, that satisfaction might be made to the wishes of the people who flocked together, until by the command of Pope Nicholas (the fifth of this name, who in the month of March of the year 1447 had succeeded Eugenius IV) it was buried; and he testifies that he received this from the tradition of our elders. What fame of sanctity Nicholas obtained both before and after death we have proved by more than one argument, and should have far more, did not the want of diligence of our Elders stand in the way. The first is supplied by Flavio Biondo in the words reported above, in which he calls Nicholas 'holy and of famous repute,' who 'gleamed with very many miracles.' Indeed I do not see what more could be said of any other most holy man, worthy of or granted a public apotheosis *. Further, Flavio was writing at Rome, was writing about a Man most well known at Rome, who had scarcely died; he was writing about very many miracles which had lately happened. Biondo was known at Rome, as being secretary of Briefs to Eugenius IV lately deceased; he was famous for learning. Could he then, or would he, have imposed upon the Roman curia and the citizens and the whole world by writing about Nicholas as 'a holy Hermit of famous repute … who gleamed with very many miracles,' unless the matter were so?

[59] and was buried at St. Onuphrius, renowned for miracles, A second argument is furnished by the marble sepulchral stone, which was set above his tomb at the very time of his deposition, where is read at the head: To the divine Nicholas the hermit, of blessed memory, 1449. But around the stone is read the following metrical epitaph, which is also in Pucci, Bosello and others." I, since both the inscription just given and the added metrical epitaph are not rendered accurately enough by Saianelli, shall for clarity's sake set them out from the picture of the sepulchral stone itself, published in print by the same Saianelli in the same place, and shall then subjoin that picture itself, as our engraver has copied it. So then it runs, the letters being here and there interwoven with one another for want of space.

To the divine Nicholas the hermit, of blessed memory, 1449.

In this tomb, O father Nicholas, you rest for ever, Whom the city of Rome holds, whom Forca Palena begot. You heal diseases, while the art of Machaon yields *. O piety! O holy faith! O gifts of Christ! And now at last upon the Janiculum holy Onuphrius himself With gentle mouth defends the hermitage by your merits.

[60] "But it pleases me" (so the same historian goes on) as his epitaph too testifies, "to set out this stone printed on copper, that there may appear both the figure of the same Nicholas expressed to the life, and the form of our habit in that age.

[61] That sepulchral stone was set out at Rome before the eyes, so to speak, of the supreme Pontiff, with all Rome looking on, and thus certainly not without the knowledge of the supreme head of the Church or of his vicar in the City. Unless the miracles had been very many, which stands at Rome to this day; wherefore (as Biondo says) and most well known, would that stone have remained untouched for three centuries? It pleases me to add that I have heard from our Elders who lived a hundred years ago that Pope Nicholas V dictated this epitaph." Whatever be the case about the author of this epitaph, from Biondo's testimony it is certain that Nicholas was already from the year next after his death famous for very many miracles, and therefore that nothing stands in the way of our believing that the same epitaph was carved on that sepulchral stone, if not at the very time of his deposition or burial, at least not long after. I go on with the same historian to set forth the rest that pertains to the burial and raisings of that sacred body. "His sacred body was laid in the very church of St. Onuphrius which he had erected; and indeed before the altar; there it lay in an earthen chest, which the aforesaid stone covered, for about a hundred and fifty-six years. The lowliness of the place in which it lay in no way diminished the devotion and veneration of the Roman people; but the continual gifts of graces which the faithful carried away increased it day by day.

[62] It pleased accordingly the Rector of the Roman monastery, that most pious man Louis Guiduccio, his sacred body, with the leave of the sacred Congregation of Rites, to place it in a more becoming place; which however he was unwilling to carry out without consulting the sacred Congregation of Rites. The petition presented by the Rector we do not have, nor the decree that issued from it: for the Acts of that age have perished. This one thing is established from the Registers of that sacred Congregation under the date of the fifteenth day of April 1606, that that business was referred to Cardinal Dominic Tuscus, the titular, in these words: 'To the most illustrious lord the titular, provided it be not beneath the altar.' See our

Bullary." There was therefore permitted by the sacred Congregation of Rites the raising of Nicholas's body from the earth and its translation into any more becoming place of the church, provided it were not placed beneath an altar. This faculty having been obtained, Rector Guiduccio took care that a niche be prepared in the wall on the right side of the same altar. "But on the 23rd day of May, the sepulchral stone being removed, the earthen chest was drawn out, in which were the bones and ashes, and that same chest with the bones and ashes, in no way diminished or changed, was laid in the place prepared for this.

[63] Above the chest three great tiles were used as a covering, in the year 1606 it is raised from the earth, and over it with which the Vatican basilica was formerly roofed (namely the ancient part, which was standing at that time, and which was in that very year pulled down under Paul V, when he began to enlarge the new basilica), as was read on one of them. Further, the marble sepulchral stone was placed outside the church door, where it is seen to this time. Of this first translation an instrument was drawn up in the curia of the Cardinal vicar under the date of the 9th day of June of the same year 1606, which is in the Summary of the Acts for the canonization, no. 2"; in the same author at p. 249 and the following. But it is better here to produce an eyewitness of the deed from the Life of the same Blessed one, transcribed by John Anselm Trachses, and cited in the same place at p. 256, from which I have excerpted the following. "But now our discourse must be turned to those things which were done at the translation of the divine Nicholas, of which we were witnesses, and which we beheld with our eyes and our hands handled: what therefore we have seen, we announce to you.

[64] In the year of Salvation 1606, Brother Seraphinus Mazzolius being supreme superior of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, Fr. Louis Guiduccio, is solemnly laid in a more honourable place adorned in the manner of an altar Prior of the convent of St. Onuphrius, a man venerated by all with the utmost reverence and most skilful in ecclesiastical matters … clad in sacred vestments, with kindled torches shining on this side and that, taking a mattock, was of all the first digger with the utmost piety. Presently the marble stone laid over it was removed, and the earthen chest is found, likewise covered with an earthen lid. Then with skilful care and with the greatest reverence the aforesaid chest is raised, and, the lid being removed, it was granted to all to see, touch and venerate the relics," &c. Meanwhile, silken veils being laid over the chest, he hid the sacred relics that they might not be touched. "Presently a tomb is set up in the manner of an altar, beside the place in which it had long lain, and is conveniently enough adorned with marble stones. But when the 23rd day of May of the same year 1606 came, the sepulchre being now completed, the aforesaid Prior with solemn rite honourably placed in the built sepulchre that old chest which contained the body of St. Nicholas, covered with newer tiles, untouched and unchanged.

[65] together with other sacred relics, In which a leaden vessel too, teeming with relics of Saints, was at the same time placed, with the following inscription carved on marble:

*To the divine Nicholas, of the town of Forca of the Peligni, who in this monastery died as Prior, a hundred years old, in the year 1449. His body from a lowly into a more becoming place, the sacred Congregation of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church set over Ecclesiastical Rites approving, the Prior and Brothers translated in the year of Christ 1606. There are laid up in this place also the relics of very many Saints.*

The notary in the instrument which was cited at no. 63 teaches that these relics were of Martin the martyr, of the Holy Forty martyrs, of very many martyrs from the cemetery of St. Priscilla, and from the cemetery ad Catacumbas: and again of Agapitus the martyr, Sixtus the martyr, Donatus the martyr, Vitalis the martyr, Thaddeus the martyr, Leutius the martyr, and other martyrs whose names are unknown. But observe in a few words that that new niche wrought in the wall above the ground was indeed made in the manner of an altar, but was not properly speaking an altar. For it had been provided by the sacred Congregation of Rites that the Blessed one's body should not be placed beneath an altar, and thus not above an altar either: wherefore, when that same tomb is below called an altar, according to the aforesaid that word must be so interpreted.

[66] Under Pope Urban VIII they are challenged about this cult. Thus far all had gone forward happily for Bl. Nicholas's cult at Rome, when about twenty-two years later, on account of the decrees of the supreme Pontiff Urban VIII published concerning the veneration of Saints and Blessed, the Hieronymite Fathers living at St. Onuphrius were compelled to give an account of it. Let us hear Saianelli again. "Then in the year 1628 no light question was raised by the Apostolic visitors deputed by Urban VIII for the churches of the City. For under the date of the 21st of January, a Friday, they laid down this among other decrees for the church of St. Onuphrius: 'Let the Fathers show within eight (days) the decree of the sacred Congregation on ecclesiastical rites concerning the veneration of Nicholas of Forca Palena of pious memory.' And the Fathers answered in this manner: 'That the sacred Congregation of Rites in the year 1606 laid this business upon the most illustrious Cardinal Tuscus, titular of the same church, who, the things to be seen having been seen, and the things to be observed observed, translated the body of the blessed Man from a place too lowly into a more becoming one; as clearly appears from the note made by the late rev. Father Louis Guiduccio, at that time Prior of this monastery, which indeed appears written in that same Father's hand in the book of receipts and expenses, folio 204 on the back, of the tenor,' &c."

[67] There follows here the aforesaid prior's note in Italian, which I render in Latin. The Hieronymites present a petition or answer "'Expenses of the month of December of the year 1606. I have made the reckoning of all the expenses made for raising the body of Bl. Nicholas from the earth before the altar of St. Onuphrius and for placing it where it now is with all its adornment; and I have found that forty scudi and twenty-five baiocchi were spent: which was done with leave of the sacred Congregation of Rites, which deputed the most illustrious lord Cardinal Tuscus, our titular, to this matter. Among these expenses there comes also that which was made for setting the stone (namely the sepulchral one) into the wall outside the church, on the right of those entering, which was above the Blessed one's body while it lay under the ground: which body is in the same earthen chest in which it was buried in the earth, and which was raised thence entire, and so is even now,' &c." After this note of Guiduccio's reported in Italian, the aforesaid Hieronymite Fathers go on thus in Latin in their answer: "'And if it be more pleasing to the most illustrious lords, some Brothers still surviving may be required and examined, who at that time were living in the aforesaid monastery, namely,' &c. 'And meanwhile let the most illustrious lords not disdain to inspect the things here briefly noted.'"

[68] Then they subjoin the aforesaid epitaph of Bl. Nicholas and the testimonies of Flavio Biondo and Leandro Alberti, to the Apostolic visitors; which I have already given, and also of Sylvester Marulus, who in the Mare Oceanum of all the Religions honoured him with the title and eulogy of Blessed; and lastly they conclude their petition thus: "'To which relations of sanctity, if there be added the declaration made in the general Congregation of the Holy Roman Church and of the universal Inquisition, held before our most Holy Lord, Lord Pope Urban VIII, on the 2nd day of October 1625, of the tenor,' &c., 'declaring that by the aforesaid he does not wish nor intend in any way to prejudice those who are venerated either by the common consent of the Church, or by an immemorial course of time, or by the writings of the Fathers and of holy men, or by the knowledge or toleration of the Apostolic See or of the ordinary for a very long time: without doubt my most illustrious lords will judge that the same blessed Man was deservedly honoured with the aforesaid translation and place; and the more so because the same our most Holy Lord Urban VIII, when he was titular of the church after the most illustrious Tuscus, a thousand times visited the venerable deposit, and a thousand times consecrated in the neighbouring chapel of St. Onuphrius.'"

[69] This petition or answer of the Hieronymite Fathers had the wished-for end; and the cult persevered. for, on the testimony of their aforesaid historian, the Apostolic visitors decreed or replied nothing against these things: wherefore the venerable body of Nicholas remained in the same becoming place. But the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, as at that time the Fathers of St. Onuphrius did not have it at hand nor find it, so as to show it to the visitors, so still less was it granted them to find it a hundred years later, when the cause of the canonization was proposed, as we shall say.

* that is, canonization

cedente*

§ V. The solemn translation of his sacred body to the high altar, made in the eighteenth century: certain other matters pertaining to his Roman cult.

[ ] The Blessed one's veneration being increased among the Romans, After the aforesaid demand of the Apostolic visitors under the supreme Pontiff Urban VIII, and the answer given by the Hieronymite Fathers of St. Onuphrius, Bl. Nicholas's veneration was not only not diminished, but was even increased, both in his native place among the Peligni or in Hither Abruzzo, where in the same century he was elected patron by the people of Palena; and at Rome in the church of St. Onuphrius, within which his body, raised from the earth as has been said, remained, and continued in its honour among the faithful, until at length in the following century it was solemnly placed even more honourably beneath the high altar of the same church (which in the year 1606 had been forbidden by the sacred Congregation of Rites). I shall begin from the raising, although it is later in time, so that, the things pertaining to the cult shown him at Rome being completed, I may set forth in uninterrupted discourse that which he obtained in his own native place. Here again we have Saianelli as our guide, who, keeping the order of time, interwove the affairs of Palena with the Roman ones, and then, returning to the Roman, continued thus.

[71] his body is again translated. "In the following century" (namely the eighteenth) "the Fathers of St. Onuphrius planned a new translation. From the old burial-place or earthen chest the bones and ashes were drawn out on the 12th day of May in the year 1712 in the presence of Dominic de Zaulis, archbishop of Theodosia and vicegerent of the kindly City. These sacred remains were handed over to the knight Francis Anthony Pellegrino Villa Reale, that he might duly lay them in a marble urn. On the 21st day of June the urn was carried back to St. Onuphrius, and on the 12th day of December was placed beneath the high altar. This solemnity of the second translation was celebrated in the presence of the same Dominic de Zaulis, who at that time was assessor of the Holy Office, since Nicholas Caracciolo (afterward Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church) had lately succeeded him in the office of vicegerent. It was needful to note this for the removing of an obscurity from the more recent writers of the Life of Bl. Peter of Pisa, whom someone will think to disagree with me when they faithfully write that this happened when Caracciolo was vicegerent; whereas nevertheless it was not in his presence, but in that of de Zaulis, that Bl. Nicholas's bones were translated, whatever Bonucci writes to the contrary in the Life of Bl. Peter, chapter 10. But in that place of the chapel of St. Onuphrius where until then Bl. Nicholas's body had lain, this inscription is read: 'Here is preserved, laid up, the earthen chest, in

which for almost three centuries the body of the divine Nicholas of Forca rested, until his bones were placed in an urn beneath the high altar on the 12th day of December 1712.'"

[72] To this end in the year 1712, on the 28th day of May Of all these things a public instrument was drawn up, a copy of which, transcribed by Philip de Amicis, notary of the most Eminent Cardinal vicar of the kindly City, in the year 1742, is read printed in the same place in the cause of Canonization at p. 253 and the following, which for the illustrating of what has just been said it has seemed good to review here also. "By the present public instrument let it be evidently plain and known to all everywhere, that in the year from the saving nativity of the same our Lord Jesus Christ one thousand seven hundred and twelve, in the fifth Indiction, and on the 28th day of May, in the twelfth year of the Pontificate of the most Holy Father in the same Christ and our Lord Clement, by divine providence Pope the eleventh, the most illustrious and reverend lord Dominic de Zaulis, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See archbishop of Theodosia, vicegerent of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal vicar of the kindly City, both came and betook himself together with me the notary to the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius, and expressly to the chapel of the said Saint, being in the first place on the right hand at the entrance of the said venerable church, in which, at the Gospel horn of the altar of St. Onuphrius, there is the altar of blessed Nicholas of Forca Palena, with the image of that Blessed one, to the effect of recognizing the said altar of blessed Nicholas; which was found in the same manner and form as it was formerly, and under the date of the 18th of March 1647 (this year seems faulty), described through the Acts of me, &c.

[73] And then by the order and command of the said most illustrious and reverend lord vicegerent the said altar was demolished by masons, his sacred bones were meanwhile laid in another casket within which was found a certain earthen chest, covered with three stones likewise of earthenware, in which was found the body of the said blessed Nicholas, namely broken bones, the greater part of which were reduced to dust; and afterward the said bones and dust were laid from the said earthen chest, in which they stood, into another chest of albutium, of about one palm in height, and of five in length, covered with a lid of the same wood, and tied with a cord of white colour, and secured in three places by the most illustrious and reverend lord vicegerent with Spanish wax, and sealed with the seal of his most illustrious lordship; and the said chest was for the present laid in a great cupboard in the sacristy of the said venerable church, and so, &c. Done at Rome in the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius according to, &c., in the presence of, &c."

[74] Thus far the first instrument, or the first part of the instruments, and carried into the sacristy: which the aforesaid notary Philip de Amicis, somewhat abridged, joined together into one copy. It must be observed that the day on which the earthen chest containing the bones of Bl. Nicholas was uncovered, and the bones with the ashes were thence laid in another chest and so carried meanwhile into the sacristy, is here said to have been the 28th day of May; wherefore, since Saianelli writes above that these things happened on the 12th of the same month, a fault must lurk in one place or the other; but that the 28th day is to be retained will appear from what follows. Observe secondly that the altar which is said to have been demolished or destroyed for drawing out those same sacred bones was not properly speaking an altar consecrated for the celebrating of the most holy Sacrifice of the Mass; but adorned in the manner of an altar, as I noted at no. 64. Note also that in the aforesaid earthen chest there were not then all the bones of Bl. Nicholas; because we shall see below that already from the year 1647 one bone of the thigh was drawn out of it and given as a gift to the people of Palena. Further, what albutium is, of which the casket at the preceding number is said to have consisted, I cannot determine, but that it was a wooden material may be gathered from this, that it is presently subjoined that the lid of the same casket was "of the same wood": for lignamen seems to be a word of corrupt Latinity derived from lignum. Stringa, lastly, I judge to be used there for a tie, derived from the verb stringere.

[75] These things being observed, receive the second instrument, or the second part of the collection made by the notary Philip de Amicis. [but on the 21st day of June they were handed over to an illustrious and pious man,] "On the twenty-first day of June, in the same year, Indiction and Pontificate as above. In the presence of me, &c. The most illustrious and reverend lord Dominic de Zaulis, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See archbishop of Theodosia, vicegerent of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal vicar of the kindly City, known to me, &c., of his own accord, &c., and otherwise, &c., handed over and delivered to the most illustrious lord knight Francis Anthony Pellegrino Villa Reale, son of Anthony of good memory, a Roman, being present, the little chest closed and sealed, and in the same manner and form as it was formerly, and under the date of the 28th of May last past, described by me, &c., in which are preserved the bones and dust of blessed Nicholas of Forca Palena, to the effect however of carrying them to his own house, and there unsealing the aforesaid chest, and fitting them into an urn. Which the said most illustrious lord knight, led by pious devotion, and by reason of the particular devotion with which he has followed and follows the said blessed Nicholas, accepted and accepts, and by an oath, the Cross being touched, after the manner, &c., promised to fit the said bones and dust of the said Blessed one entire into the said urn, and, the said fitting being completed, to carry them back in the said urn to the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius, otherwise, &c., concerning which, &c. Done at Rome in the sacristy of the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius of the City, according to, &c., there being present, &c."

[76] that he might arrange them in a gilded cypress chest, There follows the third instrument, or the third part of the Translation. "On the twenty-fifth day of October, in the same year, Indiction and Pontificate as above. Whereas it has been and is, as is asserted to me the notary, that formerly and under the date of the 28th of May last past, at the instance of the Reverend Fathers of the venerable convent of St. Onuphrius of the City, of the Order of blessed Peter of Pisa, before the most illustrious and reverend lord vicegerent, the altar of blessed Nicholas of Forca Palena was recognized, and respectively the said altar was by the order of the same most reverend lord vicegerent demolished, in which was found the body of the lord blessed Nicholas, greatly consumed and almost reduced to dust, in a certain chest of baked earth, and was transferred into another wooden chest, sealed in three parts, and was placed in the sacristy of the said venerable church, as in the instrument under the aforesaid date drawn up through the Acts of me, &c., to which, &c., up to *; also that formerly and under the date of the 21st of June last past, likewise at the instance and requisition of the said Reverend Fathers, the said chest, sealed as above, was by the most illustrious and reverend vicegerent delivered to the most illustrious lord knight Francis Anthony Pellegrino Villa Reale, to the effect of placing and fitting the bones of the said Blessed one in a certain urn, who, led by pious devotion, received the said chest in which stood the said bones and dust of the said Blessed one, and solemnly bound himself to set them in order and to place them entire in the said urn, and afterward to restore them to the said Reverend Fathers.

[77] and, having been thus splendidly arranged by him, on the 25th day of October And whereas at present he has fitted the said bones into the said urn, and wishing now to come to the restitution and to obtain a quittance; and that the truth of the aforesaid and of what is to be said below may always appear; hence therefore it is that, in the presence of me, &c., before the aforesaid most illustrious and reverend lord Dominic de Zaulis, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See archbishop of Theodosia, vicegerent of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal vicar of the kindly City, being present and personally constituted, the very Reverend Father Brother Paul Andrellinus, prior of the venerable convent of St. Onuphrius of the City, of the Order of blessed Peter of Pisa, known to me, &c., of his own accord, &c., and otherwise in every way, &c., had and received from the most illustrious lord knight Anthony Pellegrino Villa Reale an urn of gilded cypress *, of a breadth of … (here something has dropped out) about palms, with a crystal in front, in which the bones of the said blessed Nicholas are placed and fitted, becomingly adorned with embroidery of roses (that is, among roses worked with the needle), to the effect of placing it in the high altar of the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius, and secured and sealed by the said most illustrious and reverend lord vicegerent in four parts of the said urn with his own accustomed seal…, and concerning it and the bones of the said Blessed one placed and disposed in it, as above, in due form he gave the said lord knight his quittance, and now by agreement, &c.

[78] And moreover the said lord knight said and declared that there remained with him a little of the dust of the bones of the said Blessed one, to the effect of reducing it into medals, being faithfully restored to the Fathers at St. Onuphrius, and afterward of restoring and delivering it to the said reverend Father prior, not only, &c., but also in every way, &c., and so, the breast and the Cross being touched, they respectively swore, &c., upon which, &c. Done at Rome in the house of the most illustrious lord knight, in the presence of, &c." There is subjoined lastly a fourth instrument too, which runs thus: "On the eleventh day of December of the same year, and the Indiction as above. Being required, I the public notary written below, on the part and at the instance of the most reverend Father Joseph Anthony Georgi, prior general of the whole aforesaid Order, went and betook myself personally to the said venerable church of St. Onuphrius, to the effect of describing the high altar of the said venerable church, in which is to be placed the urn of gilded cypress, secured in four parts with the seal of the most illustrious and reverend lord de Zaulis, the vicegerent, in which are preserved the bones of blessed Nicholas of Forca Palena; and having come thither, before the witnesses written below I described what follows."

[79] Of the Italian description given there let it suffice to have reported a few things. which they placed in the costly tomb of the high altar The altar is said to have been made in the manner of a tomb for receiving the sepulchral urn, of the marble which they call Ancient Green, in relief work, and splendidly adorned with other costly marble and with gilding. But at the front it is said to have a little window carved in the marble, which is closed with a small door of gilded bronze. Within this tomb, opposite the little window, was to be placed the cypress chest, about three palms long and as many broad, adorned with gold and secured on four sides with the seal of the oft-mentioned most illustrious and reverend lord de Zaulis, in which the bones of Bl. Nicholas, visible among roses worked with the needle and through the crystal fixed in front, had been arranged. There was also this inscription set on the wall: The divine Nicholas, of the Order of Bl. Peter of Pisa. A.D. 1712.

After this the notary closes the instrument, and at last the other notary, who collected the aforesaid, gives faith to them in these words: "And because John Dominic de Rubeis of good memory, formerly notary of the causes of the curia of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal vicar of the City, was asked to draw up the premises; I, Philip de Amicis, notary of the same curia, and successor of the said de Rubeis in his office, have at the requisition and instance of the most reverend Father Honorius Vivianus, procurator general in the venerable Convent of St. Onuphrius of the City, of the Congregation of blessed Peter of Pisa, extracted the present instrument from its own original, and published it, being required, &c. Given the 2nd of April 1742."

[80] From the aforesaid, again, Saianelli's narrative must (as it appears) be corrected, according to which at no. 71 the bones of Bl. Nicholas, on the 12th day of December they solemnly placed. already arranged in their urn, were carried back to the convent of St. Onuphrius by the most illustrious lord knight Francis Anthony Pellegrino Villa Reale on the 21st day of June. For in the instruments just reviewed, those sacred bones and ashes were indeed handed over to the aforesaid pious knight on the said 21st day of June, that he might lay them, not in a marble urn but in a gilded cypress one, but were not restored by him until the 25th day of October. Of the depositing itself of that sacred treasure beneath the high altar, which Saianelli says was done on the 12th day of December, I have found no public instrument; nevertheless that deposition is beyond doubt, and it is affirmed in the Acts for his canonization before the sacred Congregation of Rites, in the same place at p. 248, in these words: "A new high altar having then been built in the said church of St. Onuphrius in the year 1712, the most reverend Zauli the vicegerent granted to the Fathers of the Order the faculty of translating the body of Bl. Nicholas and of placing it beneath that newly built high altar, which was done in his presence and at his command, a public notary drawing up the solemn act: and there to this time (that is, to the year 1747) it is preserved, exposed to the public veneration of the faithful with a lamp continually burning, and is honoured with the greatest devotion of all."

[81] Certain other matters about his cult at Rome; These and other things pertaining to the cult paid him at Rome will be confirmed at §7 out of the letters of leading men offered to the supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV for obtaining his canonization. Yet I add a few things here also. In the Summary of the same cause at p. 263 and the following, men testified in the year 1744 that they had seen in the Roman convent of St. Onuphrius an effigy of Bl. Nicholas painted on the wall, adorned with a signal splendour or rays about the head, and visible through a crystal of about one palm, which they affirm seems to have been painted about the end of the fifteenth century, in the middle of which he died. They add that the following inscription (which nevertheless appears to be more recent) is read above his head: "The ancient and true effigy of the divine Nicholas, founder of this monastery in the year 1434." There is premised in the same place at p. 248, no. 27: "By the leave of superiors in the year 1640 there was engraved on copper and openly distributed to the people a rayed image of our blessed Nicholas with this inscription: 'Bl. Nicholas, of the town of Forca Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, propagator of the Order of the Hermits of St. Jerome, who in the year 1446, in the 97th year of his age, founded the monastery of St. Onuphrius at Rome, where also he died a hundred years old.'"

[82] and an observation about his miracles. Lastly all agree that he was renowned for miracles at Rome, and that through these his cult there was begun, nourished and increased; yet I have read none reported in particular by anyone save fires at Rome extinguished or checked, about which Bonacciolo, cited in the same Acts at p. 257, wrote this toward the end of the seventeenth century: "There is a pious and ancient tradition, which has long prevailed also by several pictures expressing it, that Bl. Nicholas three times freed Rome from fire; which I should readily believe: for since Flavio Biondo, a famous author of those times and one who outlived him, left in writing 'He gleamed with very many miracles,' since he does not review them, it seems credible enough that this was wrought among those very many." The same may be read in others also; but no one explains whether these things happened while the Blessed one was living or when he was already dead. For the rest, I have nowhere found any word about his Office, Mass or feast being customarily celebrated at Rome, so that he does not yet seem to be honoured there with this kind of cult.

seque*

existentem*

illos*

quos*

or atque*?

archiepiscopo*

urnam*

inauratæ*

§ VI. The Blessed one elected Patron by the people of Palena, the ordinary approving: his cult there: his relics obtained from the Romans and translated to Palena: some also honoured in the monastery of St. Clare at Sulmona: his cult elsewhere.

[ ] The people of Palena in Hither Abruzzo Not a little more famous is the cult of Bl. Nicholas among his own countrymen in the town of Palena, which I have said is of Hither Abruzzo in the kingdom of Naples, and whose situation I gave at nos. 9 and 10. Saianelli speaks thus on this subject: "Nicholas's fame grew day by day, moved by which the peoples of Palena (the town of Forca was destroyed not far from Palena in the time of Ferdinand II king of Naples, that is, before the end of the fifteenth century, and the people of Forca removed to Palena) on the fourteenth day of March in the year 1638 chose him as their protector with unanimous consent and voice, with the obligation of celebrating his feast; to which election, and to the appointing of the fourteenth day of March for the feast, the ordinary of Sulmona interposed his ordinary authority on the 25th day of the same month and year." There exist authentic instruments, written in Italian, both of this election made by the people of Palena, and of the petitions presented on that account by them to the bishop of Sulmona or to his vicar, and lastly of his consent, which Saianelli printed from the archive of St. Onuphrius of the City at p. 241 and the following.

[84] The first of these, rendered into Latin, is as follows: "On the 14th day of March in the year 1638, in the year 1638 by unanimous consent at Palena and namely in the mother church of St. Antoninus of the said land, during the solemnities being celebrated (these three words are so read there in Latin), before all the people. Whereas the very reverend lord Christopher de Blasiis, archpriest of the said land, has set forth to all the said people standing in the said church the Life, blessedness and fame of Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena, our countryman, who rests at Rome in the church of St. Onuphrius outside the walls, with such devotion of the Romans that they continually have recourse to the said Blessed one, from whom they also obtain innumerable graces, and whom they hold in the highest veneration; and that it would be fitting if this commune and all its citizens should take him as their protector, so that (while this commune, like all the rest, is in such great necessity and in innumerable straits) the said Blessed one may deign to obtain from the Lord for the said commune the graces which we ourselves know not how to ask: let each say what he thinks. The bystanders and the people are the following." There are recited here seventy-one names, which, that I may not breed weariness in the reader, I forbear to transcribe.

[85] But then is subjoined: "And by all the abovewritten it was established and fixed, choose Bl. Nicholas as Patron of their town, with one voice, one consent, and none dissenting, done and decreed, as they now do, decree and declare, that the said Bl. Nicholas is their protector, and they promise that on his feast day they will abstain from every servile personal work, and will observe and celebrate that day solemnly, with the consent and authority of their ecclesiastical superiors, from whom the faculty must be obtained. And thus they say, bind themselves and enact, in this and in any other manner." What follows is written in Latin, namely: "That the present public parliament and conclusion was written by my own hand, by the order of the undersigned reverend lord Christopher de Blasiis the archpriest and of all the aforesaid citizens, I, the notary Clement Lucchittus of the land of Palena, confess, who, being asked and required, have signed, &c." Likewise: "The present copy has been extracted from its own original in the ancient Book of public parliaments, folio 206 on the front, resting with me the undersigned chancellor in the archive of this commune of the Peligni, with which, a diligent collation having been made, it agrees word for word, always saving a better, &c., and in faith I have made the present, subscribed myself, and strengthened it with the accustomed seal of the same commune, &c. The notary Falcus Mascetta, ordinary chancellor." I forbear the other testimonies besides which are appended.

[86] and vow to celebrate his yearly feast solemnly, But that this decree of theirs might be carried into execution, the people of Palena presented a petition to the vicar of the bishop of Sulmona, which, as also the vicar's rescript, I shall review in Latin out of the Italian. "Most reverend lord. Whereas the commune of Palena in these calamitous times is vehemently distressed and stands in need of help, wishing to have recourse to the patronage of the Saints, which in every necessity is most efficacious, all its citizens, men and women, great and small, by the counsel of the reverend lord archpriest, in the public church, amid the solemnities of the Masses, before God with living voice chose for themselves as protector St. Nicholas of Forca Palena, and vowed to observe and solemnly celebrate his feast recurring on the 14th day of March. This Saint, buried at Rome, rests in the church of St. Onuphrius outside the walls, and on account of continual miracles is daily venerated, honoured and held in the greatest devotion by all the Romans.

[87] The said citizens, both because they desire to follow the footsteps of the said Romans, which, the ordinary approving, and because they are moved with great piety toward the said Saint, since he is their own countryman, and that devotion has been introduced into the said land with great edification of all; therefore beseech your most reverend lordship that you would deign to grant your consent, good pleasure and faculty, that henceforth it may be lawful to celebrate the said feast by the vow made and by the public election, and that you would enjoin its observance under precept, that the said Saint may deign to take up the patronage of the said land. Which, as it is just, so also will he have done a thing pleasing to God and to the said Saint; and they (the people of Palena) will hold it as a benefit. Whom may God, &c." To these pious requests the aforesaid vicar appended the following favourable rescript: "To these we grant leave and faculty to do what is asked in the name of the said city, provided there be the consent of all the citizens, and that it be approved in a general assembly, and entered in the book of the same commune, and in the book of the church with a distinct mention of the whole matter. And we for our part give the consent necessary to these things, the said conditions however being observed. In witness whereof, &c. Given at Sulmona on the twenty-fifth day of March, one thousand six hundred and thirty-eight. J. Anthony Tabassius, capitular vicar."

[88] There is subjoined again: "The present copy has been extracted from its own original, they religiously carry out. bound in the ancient book of public parliaments, folio 206 on the front, resting with me the undersigned chancellor in the archive of this commune of the Peligni, with which, a diligent collation having been made, it agrees word for word, always saving a better, &c. And in

faith I have made the present, subscribed myself, and strengthened it with the accustomed seal of the same commune. The notary Mascetta, ordinary chancellor." Further, although no mention is here made of the bishop of Sulmona, yet that these things were approved by him, at least afterward, and carried into execution, is established from the letters of Peter Anthony Corsignani, prelate of that see, given in the years 1744 and 1745 to Pope Benedict XIV in the cause of the canonization, from the latter of which I take some things here. "But that Blessed one was chosen as patron of the people of Palena too, at their instance, in the year 1638, by the faculty of my predecessor bishop, and his feast on the 14th day of March is celebrated there every year of precept with a solemn procession and carrying of his statue and of the said relics (of which I shall speak below), with a great concourse of the faithful, and with the celebration of the Mass and Office of the Common of confessors not bishops."

[89] Of the pious foundations made to this same end Saianelli too makes mention, In the same place, in the church of St. Antoninus saying: "That this feast might be celebrated in perpetuity with first and second Vespers and a solemn Mass, a yearly rent was assigned by Charles de Mari, doctor of both laws, of Palena, in the year 1640, on the 3rd day of January, in the Acts of Clement Luchittus, notary of Palena; and his heir, baron Amicus Angelus de Mari, assigned fixed goods to the church for the same end; likewise for the purchase of 'wax to be employed in the solemnizing of the festivity of the divine Nicholas of Forca in each year': as in the Acts of Dominic Anthony Trotius, notary, under the date of the 5th of November, 1720." He recites the first instrument in the same place at p. 252, out of which, the rest being passed over, it will be enough to have excerpted the following. "The aforesaid doctor of both laws Charles (de Mari) … gave in perpetuity, &c., to the said reverend archpriest and priests (of the church of St. Antoninus in the town of Palena), being present and receiving in good faith, &c., and accepting, seven ducats and four carlins yearly, of silver carlins, in and upon the first fruits, revenues and rents of the said Burgensatic territory, consisting as above, to be paid by the said doctor of both laws Charles and his heirs and successors, and to be received and obtained by the said reverend archpriest and priests, their portion every four months from this day.

[90] And the said seven ducats and carlins are, as they said, an altar erected and endowed under his invocation for the dowry and service of the chapel erected by the said doctor of both laws Charles in the venerable mother church of St. Antoninus, dedicated to blessed Nicholas of Forca Palena, in which chapel the said reverend archpriest and priests promised, and in the form of the royal Apostolic chamber bound themselves, their heirs and successors, to celebrate in perpetuity every week a Mass on the Sunday of each week, and on the feast of the said blessed Nicholas of each year to sing a Mass, and at the end of the said Mass to make and sing a commemoration of the dead. For the observing of all which, &c., both the parties themselves, and each of them, of their own accord bound themselves, and each of them, and the heirs and successors of each of them, and all their movable and fixed goods, present and future. I the aforesaid notary Clement Lucchetus of the land of Palena, who, being asked and required, have here subscribed myself, and have signed with the sign which I use in my writings, &c." Nothing indeed is read here about a stipend assigned by Charles de Mari for first and second Vespers, as Saianelli affirms; but perhaps Charles's heir, baron Amicus Angelus de Mari, added it afterward.

[91] stands, the bishops approving. From the same instrument the things which we have reported above about the Blessed one's yearly festivity are confirmed, and besides we learn that already from the year 1640 there existed at Palena in the church of St. Antoninus the martyr, which is parochial and collegiate, some chapel or altar sacred to the same Bl. Nicholas. This very thing too the most illustrious Peter Anthony Corsignani, bishop of Valva and Sulmona, testified in the letters cited above, writing thus: "In the parish church of Palena, under the name of the divine Antoninus the martyr, there stands an old altar dedicated to the same blessed Nicholas, founded and endowed formerly by the community and by other pious men, which in the holy visitations of my predecessor prelates has been deservedly praised." So he, when, as I have said, in the year 1745 he was petitioning Pope Benedict XIV for the obtaining of Bl. Nicholas's canonization. Further, the same piety of the people of Palena toward their Blessed countryman moved them also to demand something of the relics of his sacred body from the Roman convent of St. Onuphrius, which at length they happily obtained.

[92] The same people of Palena ask for relics of Bl. Nicholas "But in the year 1644" (so Saianelli writes again) "on the 27th day of April they (the people of Palena) appointed as procurator Don Francis de Sanctis, priest of Fara San Martino, that he might ask of our Religious some relic of Bl. Nicholas, to be carried to Palena. And so, with the previous consent of Ananias Andreotti bishop of Atri, vicegerent in the kindly City, on the 18th day of March 1647, the sacred sarcophagus being opened before Remigius Landus the Rector general and the other Fathers of St. Onuphrius, one bone of the thigh was drawn out and duly placed in a little chest, and handed over to the procurator. He, in token of a grateful mind, promised in the name of the people of Palena that, should the case of the building of some monastery in future arise, both in the said land and in its territory, they would prefer the Fathers of our Congregation to any other Religious body; as in the Acts of Leonard de Leonardis, notary of the Cardinal vicar." Those Acts are published in the same place at p. 242 and the two following, taken from the autograph preserved at Rome in the convent of St. Onuphrius, which, since they comprise all that was done in this matter, I have judged should be reprinted almost entire.

[93] from the Hieronymites of the monastery of St. Onuphrius, "In the name of the Lord. Amen. By the present public instrument let it be plain and known to all everywhere, that in the year from the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ one thousand six hundred and forty-seven, in the fifteenth Indiction, and on the eighteenth day of the month of March, in the third year of the Pontificate of the most Holy Father in Christ and our Lord, Lord Innocent, by divine providence Pope the tenth, there being gathered and assembled in chapter at the sound of the little bell, as is the custom, in the chapel written below, in which for the matters written below and other like business they are wont to gather, the most reverend Father General and the very Reverend Fathers of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa in the venerable convent of St. Onuphrius of the City, namely the most reverend Father Remigius Landus, General; the very Rev. Father Eusebius Gorettus, Provincial; the very Rev. Father Famianus Pacificus, prior; the Rev. Father Desiderius Fantinus, the Rev. Father Charles Pintus, the Rev. Father Anthony Fontus, the Rev. Father Joseph Maria de Benedictis, the Rev. Father Angelus Blagionus, the Rev. Father Giles de Grandis, the Rev. Father Francis Goraccius, the Rev. Father John Anthony Pacius, Fr. Urban Theodorus, Fr. Michael Bramantus, Fr. Peter Aloysius, Fr. Dominic Cinaldus, Fr. Jacob Andrew Ciampalantes, and Fr. Benedict Santinus, all of the said Congregation:

[94] Who, asserting that they are the greater and sounder part of them and more than two of the three parts of them, who, with the faculty of the vicegerent of the Cardinal Vicar and having a vote in chapter, and representing the whole and entire chapter, and nevertheless promising in due form for the absent and the sick, if there be any, that it be held ratified, so that, &c., otherwise, &c., having and holding in their hands a certain memorial presented to the most illustrious and reverend lord, the vicegerent of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal, vicar of our most Holy Lord the Pope, on the part and at the instance of the rev. Don Francis de Sanctis, procurator of the commune of the land of Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, with a Rescript at the foot of it, in which faculty is given to them of drawing out and giving the sacred relic written below, and to me the notary the needful leave at the end of this instrument to be drawn up, which he delivered to the effect of inserting it here, of the tenor to be registered below.

[95] Therefore the said Rev. Fathers, being thus, as above, assembled in chapter in the chapel of St. Onuphrius, assembled in chapter, take from the shrine which is in the first place on the right hand at the entrance of their said church, in which at the Gospel horn is the altar of Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena with the image of that Blessed one, at whose foot are read these words: 'Pray for us, Bl. Nicholas'; and also on the marble stone covering the said altar is read the following description, namely: 'To the divine Nicholas, of the town of Forca of the Peligni, a hermit distinguished for sanctity and miracles, who in this monastery died as Prior, a hundred years old; whose body from a lowly into this more becoming place the prior and Brothers translated in the year of Christ 1606, the Congregation of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church set over Ecclesiastical Rites approving': whose body indeed, that of Bl. Nicholas, is there preserved and lies laid up: wishing, I say, to use the said authority and to come to the drawing out and giving written below respectively, and to draw up a public instrument, that the truth may always shine forth; therefore, the litanies of the most blessed Virgin Mary having first been chanted, with several torches lit, the altar was afterward opened on the front part by Francis Lazzarinus of Massa Carrara, mason, by the order and command of the said reverend Fathers.

[96] Within which was found a certain earthen chest, covered with three marble stones, one bone of the thigh, and give it to the envoy of Palena one of which, namely the middle, being removed, there was found the body of the said Bl. Nicholas, much consumed, lying on its back; from which by the Rev. Father General one bone of the thigh was taken, and placed in a certain wooden chest among white cotton, tied with a cord, and by me the notary secured and sealed in four places with Spanish wax with the seal of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal Ginetti, vicar general of our most Holy Lord the Pope. Which sacred relic indeed, thus as above taken, laid up and placed, and secured with a seal, the said Rev. Fathers thus assembled in chapter, of their own accord, &c., in every better manner, &c., to the greater glory and honour of almighty God and of the said Bl. Nicholas, gave, granted and bestowed upon the commune and men of the said land of Forca Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, though absent; and for them upon the said Rev. Don Francis de Sanctis, their procurator, as he showed by a public instrument of mandate of procuration of the tenor to be registered below, being present and accepting, and lawfully stipulating together with me the notary, to the effect of exposing it and publicly placing it in whatever church, chapel or pious place shall seem good to the said commune and men, that it may be devoutly venerated by the pious faithful of Christ.

[97] to be carried to Palena, with certain promises: And the said Rev. Don Francis de Sanctis, the aforesaid procurator, with the greatest devotion and reverence he could, in the names respectively aforesaid, received it to himself, &c., to the effect of carrying it to the said land, to the commune and men: and to the abovewritten Rev. Fathers, in chapter,

as above, assembled and present, he rendered undying thanks. And further, out of gratitude of mind for so great a benefit received, in the aforesaid procuratorial name he promised and bound himself that, should the case arise of the building in future in any manner of some monastery or convent for Regulars, both in the said land and in its territory, he would hand over and assign that same monastery or convent to the said venerable Congregation and to the Fathers of Bl. Peter of Pisa then existing, and prefer them to any other Religious body; to whom also he promised freely to hand over and deliver the aforesaid Relic to be kept there, &c., otherwise, &c., even to all damages, &c. For which, &c., the said Rev. Don Francis, in the names aforesaid, bound the said commune and men, his principals, their goods and rights, &c., in the form of the Apostolic chamber with the clauses, &c. And he renounced, &c. And so, the breast being touched, after the manner, &c., he swore, &c.

[98] of all which there stands a public instrument, Upon all and singular which things, as duly and lawfully done, the said most illustrious and reverend lord vicegerent, and for him I the notary written below, specially delegated to this, according to and following the Rescript made at the foot of the memorial, granted and imparted to the said Rev. Fathers assembled in chapter the faculty and leave necessary and fitting thereupon, in every way, &c. They asking me the notary written below that I should draw up and hand over one or more public instrument or instruments, as should be needful and as I should be required. Done at Rome in the abovewritten chapel, there being present the Rev. Don Peter Paul de Benedictis, son of the late Francis, of Sulmona, and Don John Baptist Rapa, son of the late Falcus, of Palena, witnesses called, had and asked specially to all and singular the aforesaid." In this place there are recited the petition which the aforementioned Rev. Don Francis de Sanctis, procurator of the people of Palena, had presented in Italian for the obtaining of the aforesaid faculty to the most illustrious lord Alexander Victricius, bishop of Alatri, at that time vicegerent of the supreme Pontiff's Cardinal vicar in the City; and his rescript or consent; and lastly the instrument by which the people of Palena on the 27th day of April 1644 had appointed the same Francis de Sanctis their procurator in this matter; but these teach nothing besides, so that it is not needful to reprint them here.

[99] which is given here. But the whole instrument, comprising all these things, is closed thus: "I, Leonard de Leonardis, a Roman citizen, public notary of the curia of causes of the most Eminent and reverend lord Cardinal of the kindly City, vicar general of our most Holy Lord the Pope, being asked concerning the premises, have subscribed and published the instrument, being required, in faith, &c." I have called the vicegerent of the Cardinal vicar, by whom the faculty of giving these relics to the people of Palena was granted, Alexander Victricius, bishop of Alatri, because to the same instrument of concession in Saianelli at p. 244 there is read subscribed thus in Italian: A. Vescovo di Alatri vicegerente; which in the same place at the bottom margin of the page is thus turned into Latin: "Alexander Vitricius the Roman, bishop of Alatri." Agreeing with these things is Ughelli's enlarged Italia sacra, vol. 1, col. 294, where Alexander Victricius the Roman is said to have sat at that time in the bishopric of Alatri and also to have discharged the office of vicegerent of the vicar of the kindly City. Nevertheless the same Saianelli in the words given above at no. 92 called the aforesaid vicegerent Ananias Andreotti, bishop of Atri; most likely by a lapse of memory; since Ughelli reviews none of this name among the bishops of Atri, or of Hadria and Penne; and he who is there at col. 1152 said to have held that see at the time is named not Ananias but Sylvester Andreotti, nor is there any mention of an office of vicegerent held by him at Rome.

[100] The relics of Bl. Nicholas, desired and obtained, the people of Palena took care to have translated to their town, At the time of this translation and afterward at which translation, as also afterward, certain marvels are said to have happened by divine power, which the oft-cited historian of the Hieronymites briefly records thus out of, as he says, the process of Sulmona. "Many things worthy of memory happened when this sacred pledge was translated to Palena, which are established from the process held at Sulmona in the month of May of the year 1741, when the cause was proposed in the sacred Congregation of Rites. The priest Don Sylvius Campana, a witness, deposed that, when the sacred relic was translated to Palena, the mule upon which the sacred burden had been laid, passing near the ruined walls of the ancient castle of Forca, not only stood still, but fell upon its knees, as though it were venerating the native soil of the blessed Man. But the sacred burden having been set down, it straightway died. Likewise that, although on that day it rained and snowed everywhere in the mountains and places, yet upon the bearer of the sacred relic a ray of the sun always shone.

[101] Not long after, when the sacred relic was being carried in procession through the town of the Peligni, some miracles are related to have been done. a certain woman, Salome by name, being at the point of death because of a dead child in her womb, commended herself to the Blessed one; and straightway the lifeless child came forth from the womb, and the woman was saved. The same priest Campana testified that in the year 1720 he had been at the point of death, his recovery having been despaired of by the physicians. On the fourteenth day of March, when after the custom the relic of Bl. Nicholas was being carried in procession through the town, his nephews admonished him to commend himself to the Blessed one. The prayer being scarcely made, he began to recover, and the tapers which his nephews had prepared for the funeral were offered at the altar of the same Blessed one. The same things which happened at the first translation Don Matthew Galassi of Palena confirmed, and asserted that Bl. Nicholas is in great veneration among women in childbirth." The aforesaid process of Sulmona I have not seen; but from the time in which it is said to have been drawn up, namely the year 1741, it must be laid down that the Rev. Don Sylvius Campana and Don Matthew Galassi were not eyewitnesses of those things which they affirmed to have happened at the translation in the year 1647, unless we wish both to have been very long-lived; since between the two terms ninety-four years intervened. For the rest, from the letters given to the supreme Pontiff for the cause of his canonization it cannot be doubted that the people of Palena gratefully acknowledged that various benefits had been conferred on them by God through him, as we shall see below.

[102] His relics at Sulmona in the monastery of St. Clare: Among these there is read one written by the Poor Clares of Sulmona on the 12th day of February in the year 1746, which teaches that something of the sacred relics of the same Blessed one is honoured in the monastery of St. Clare at Sulmona. Their words in Latin out of the Italian are these: "From the time when one of his sacred relics has been preserved in authentic form in this monastery, we judge that we have a dear pledge of our confidence, which is day by day the more kindled to promote his glory." But from whom, or on what occasion, those nuns received these relics, I have not found out; but they allege this cause of their special affection toward the Blessed one himself: "It is so much the more just that we should add our prayers (for the obtaining of Nicholas's canonization), because we profess a singular devotion toward this Blessed one, since we hold him, as sprung from Forca (which is a fief of this our ancient monastery, given to it by its foundress and first abbess Bl. Florosenda, of the counts of Palena), as our own."

[103] some cult at Naples and Venice. That he is honoured also with some cult at Naples and Venice, we have from the letter of the most reverend lord Deusdedit, of the Order of Hieronymites of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, bishop of Samaria and suffragan of Sabina, given in the year 1744 to the Roman Pontiff on the same cause, and reported in the same place at p. 265 and the following. In this he speaks thus: "Which matter (namely Nicholas's sanctity and cult) there show to be most clear and attested … likewise also his very ancient painted images, both at Rome and at Venice, at Naples and elsewhere, furnished with golden crowns, to which always until the present sacred honour and cult has been paid." Again after some things: "Whence it comes that, Nicholas's singular sanctity demanding it, and illustrated day by day with clearer signs, sacred honours were first paid him there at Rome; as afterward was done at Naples, where he had already raised a notable monastery, and at Venice and elsewhere."

idem*

Congregationi*

§ VII. The cause of the solemn beatification and canonization of Bl. Nicholas attempted, and many petitions for it made to the supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV, with no prosperous outcome.

[ ] The Hieronymite Fathers, raised to hope of obtaining After Bl. Nicholas of Forca's cult had been begun and increased in the course of almost three centuries, there was still wanting the pronouncement of the Roman Pontiff by which he might be solemnly inscribed on the roll of the Blessed and the Saints. "And so, since these things were long since known" (so Saianelli continues) "to our Fathers — namely about the cult shown to Bl. Nicholas, both at Rome and at Palena — they were easily persuaded by the advocates of causes in the Roman curia that there was no need to dispute about an immemorial cult; but that petition must be made for the signature of a commission of introduction in statu et terminis, as they say. And so Joseph Luna, procurator of the cause, presented a Memorial, which begins: Quando postulatores, &c.; to which was annexed a very copious Summary. In it are reviewed two hundred and one instances made in the years 1745 and 1746 by princes and magnates for the cause of Bl. Nicholas's canonization." These things are likewise published in the same place from p. 245, from copies printed at Rome from the press of the reverend Apostolic chamber in the year 1747; but it would be long and wearisome to reprint them all here, especially since the same things often recur, and since I have already reviewed in this Commentary those which pertain to the Blessed one's deeds and cult.

[105] Yet that the reader may understand what the procurator of the cause aimed at, his solemn beatification and canonization, it will help to have recited some things out of the Memorial. It thus begins with words taken from the learned Work of Benedict XIV, then Supreme Pontiff. "'When the postulators contend that the cause falls among those excepted from the decrees of Urban the eighth, not indeed by reason of immemorial time, but by reason of concessions of cult made by the supreme Pontiffs or by the sacred Congregation; then there is no need of a special process upon the excepted case, or of a sentence of the Ordinary or delegated judge: but it is enough only that a Pontifical Brief or a decree of the Sacred Congregation be produced in authentic form.' So teaches and affirms our most Holy Lord in his most excellent Work On the Beatification and Canonization of Saints, book 2, chapter 17, no. 5. Since therefore this is precisely the case about which there must be discussion in this cause: and since this discussion cannot be had save with the previous signature of a Commission according to the irrefragable style of this Sacred Congregation; it follows hence that for the obtaining of this we now humbly petition, and we firmly trust that we shall obtain it from the kindness of the Sacred Congregation, since there concur in our blessed Nicholas all the requisites necessary to this effect, namely a fame of sanctity and

of miracles in general, together with the instances of princes and bishops.

[106] For the instances of princes and bishops appear from the catalogue of letters … they petition the Sacred Congregation of Rites whose originals are produced in the hands of the most Eminent Ponent. But the fame of sanctity and of miracles in general is established abundantly and more from the very decree of this Sacred Congregation (go to no. 62 above), which, since in the year 1606 it decreed that the sacred remains of our Blessed one should be translated from a lowly into a more becoming place, and thus granted them a public cult, it is most evident that this was not done save with the things to be seen having been seen, and the things to be observed observed, and consequently not save with a previous proof of sanctity and of miracles in general; since the Apostolic See and this Sacred Congregation in granting a public cult to any Servant of God proceed not timidly and blindly, but with the utmost maturity. But indeed, to the end that both the foundations of the Indult granted by this Sacred Congregation may appear at present on the one side, and on the other the continuation and increase of the aforesaid fame and of the granted cult may become known, we shall lay before the most wise eyes of the most Eminent Cardinals, first a very brief synopsis of our Blessed one's life: secondly the excellent testimonies of very many writers and historians concerning his sanctity and miracles: thirdly and lastly all the kinds of public cult with which from the very day of his death for three full centuries to this time our Blessed one is honoured, both in the City and in the whole diocese of Sulmona."

[107] After the postulator of the cause had performed these things, he at last concludes thus: [for the signature of a commission of the cause without a previous process of the ordinary.] "If therefore the instances of princes and bishops are not lacking; if the fame of sanctity and of miracles is not doubted; if of the continuation and increase of this same fame it is abundantly and more established from what has hitherto been set forth; we are raised to a sure hope that the most Eminent Cardinals will give a favourable rescript for the signature of the Commission, according to the style and practice of this sacred assembly, of which our most Holy Lord testifies in his admirable Work On the Canonization of Saints, and especially book 2, chapter 20 throughout, and chapter 17, p. 135 and following, and also chapter 38, p. 397, nos. 13 and 14, and everywhere else. Wherefore, &c.

Joseph Luna.

Revised, John Prunettus, sub-promoter of the Faith."

There is subjoined a prolix Summary of nearly thirty folio pages, to which in the aforesaid Memorial the procurator had often referred the reader, and out of which I have transcribed some instruments in this Commentary. But of the letters of the nobility, or, as they call them, instances made with the Supreme Pontiff for this cause, sixteen are recited entire in it; but the remaining hundred and eighty-seven are only indicated in a Catalogue, with the persons noted by whom they were made. As it would be long and useless to reprint all those sixteen in this place, so it will be of use to have given some for the confirming of what we have said about the Blessed one's cult.

[108] The clergy of Palena, for his canonization, Among other Ecclesiastical prelates the most illustrious Peter Anthony (surnamed, as I think, Corsignani), bishop of Valva and Sulmona, gave two letters on this matter to Benedict XIV, the first in the year 1744 on the 4th day of November, the other in the year 1745 on the 10th day of September, of which I shall give the latter, because it is more exact. Between the two there came the letter of the whole clergy of the land of Palena, which therefore receive here in the first place.

"Most blessed Father.

As soon as it came to our ears that very many petitions had been made to your Holiness for the introduction of the cause in the Sacred Congregation of Rites upon the beatification and canonization of Bl. Nicholas of Forca, of the Order of St. Jerome, of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, we exulted not a little; nay, an inexplicable joy seized our heart. Would that a work so pious and so long desired might at length in this our age, under the auspicious Pontificate of your Holiness, obtain a happy effect. For we are bound with just desert to join our own most humble prayers also to the wishes of the other faithful, chiefly for this (that other things be passed over in silence), that the aforesaid Blessed one was our fellow-citizen, born of the Pelignian region not far from our native place, in the place called Forca Palena; which place indeed, although it was otherwise happy and fortunate, chiefly because it brought forth so great a Hero of sanctity, yet by the inscrutable judgment of God, after various injuries of the times (alas!) now lies desolate, and keeps only its name with slight relics of antiquity.

[109] presented a petition with a signal eulogy of the Blessed one That Blessed one therefore, imbued with every kind of virtue, as he passed firmly and constantly from generation to generation to our people; and, being adorned with the priestly dignity, that he might better give himself to God and to himself, departed from his native soil, and, led by divine counsel, betook himself to Rome, where, leading for some while an eremitic life in the oratory called of the Most Holy Saviour, he afterward attached himself to the aforesaid Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa. And since for his innocence of life and integrity of manners he had been most dear to Eugenius IV and Nicholas V of holy memory, your Holiness's predecessors, by their signal munificence he erected the church and monastery of the divine Onuphrius, and after the rough ways of penance had been trodden and a holy life led, being made in the City a pattern of good works, at length, full no less of days than of merits, in a good old age, a hundred years old, he passed to the Lord in the year 1449, not without a bright fame of sanctity and of miracles, from that time spread abroad everywhere; so that, on account of the frequent graces granted by God to the faithful at his invocation, scarcely was he dead when by common voice he was as it were adored as a Saint, as various verses carved at that time upon his sepulchral stone testify, and also the records of writers, even of contemporaries.

[110] Whence it came about, most blessed Father, that here at Palena too, on account of the innumerable benefits received from God at various times by his intercession, and a testification of his ancient and continued cult he has from time immemorial been venerated as a Saint with an unceasing public cult, day by day ever increased, and successively the citizens of Palena, a hundred years ago and more, with the consent of the diocesan prelate, chose the said Bl. Nicholas as Patron of this place, and dedicated to him a chapel in this parish church, endowed it and adorned it more than once and again, and solemnized the feast of the same Blessed one of precept every year on the 14th day of March with the utmost devotion and with a great concourse of people flocking thither, and also with the celebration of the Mass and the recitation of the office of the Common of a confessor not a bishop, with the exposition of the relics of the Blessed one himself, and the carrying of his statue through the said town of Palena. Since these things are so, grant, most Holy Father, grant our prayers in the promoting of this cause: for these are the wishes of the Pelignian people, these the sighs of our peoples.

[111] May heaven therefore grant that those wishes and those sighs be heard, to our consolation and that of the aforesaid Order of St. Jerome to Pope Benedict XIV. and of the whole Christian world; and as the faith of Peter shall not fail, so we assiduously beseech God that the life of his Successor may not fail in your Holiness, whose feet we reverently kiss. Given at Palena on the day before the Ides of November in the year of restored Salvation 1744.

Of your Holiness

The most humble, most obedient and most obsequious sons

Dom Dominic Isacco, archpriest. Dom Falcus Galassi. Dom Joseph de Vitis. Dom Sylvius Campana. Dom Falcus de Vitis. Dom Joseph Giles Masciarelli. Dom Matthew Galassi. Dom Benjamin Ludovici. Dom Conceptius de Vitis. Dom Bernardine Perticone. Dom Celestine Galassi.

Ludovici, Secretary."

[112] But the letters of the most illustrious Peter Anthony, bishop of Valva and Sulmona, This same thing by repeated letters dated the 10th day of December of the year 1745, run thus.

"Most blessed Father.

Since it is pious and due to attend to the veneration of the Saints, I would that it be pleasing to your Holiness that I join myself to those devout men who with most humble and earnest prayers have asked of her that the cause of Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena be brought into the most holy judgment of the Holy See upon his solemn beatification and canonization. This indeed I have the more gladly long since asked of your Holiness with humble entreaty, and again beseech, because that Blessed one drew the breath of life in an almost deserted place of Samnium beside the town of Palena, from which it was thereafter called Forca Palena, of this diocese of Sulmona. And he step by step so shone forth with the brightness of all the virtues, that, being distinguished with the priesthood and leading an anchorite's life, he afterward embraced the Order of St. Jerome of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa. In which state * indeed he founded the church and monastery of St. Onuphrius at Rome by the Janiculum hill, through the liberality of the supreme Pontiffs Eugenius IV and Nicholas V, your Holiness's Predecessors: and they always held him in high esteem and used his counsel and industry.

[113] the bishop of Valva and Sulmona also did, At length, heaped with labours and merits for the glory of God and the salvation of souls, and worn out with old age, in the hundredth year of his age he closed his last day at Rome on the 29th of September 1449, and, being buried in the church of that same monastery — some ancient verses about his holiness existing to this time — he gleamed, God being the author, with unceasing miracles. Whence it has come about that the assiduous devotion and great cult of pious men, chiefly of the Romans, toward that Blessed one has always openly shone forth. But since these things, and very many other marvels of the same Blessed one hitherto at Rome, clearly appear to your Holiness's discerning eyes; other prodigies of his which we have attested here, that I may study brevity, I shall not omit to signify to your Holiness, out of the duty of the episcopal office which by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See I unworthily discharge in this territory. For the people of the said town of Palena, of this city, and of the whole diocese of Sulmona, almost from their cradles, most Holy Father, drawn by devotion to him, so frequently take refuge with him with such great faith that by his intercession and help they obtain many benefits from God; and, as fame has it, have long obtained them.

[114] setting forth his signal cult in his diocese: Wherefore in the parish church of Palena under the name of the divine Antoninus the martyr there stands an old altar dedicated to the same Bl. Nicholas, founded and endowed formerly by the community and by other pious men; which in the holy visitations of my predecessor prelates has been deservedly praised. And so his cult in that town — not to say among his own people and the neighbouring peoples — is assuredly settled from time immemorial; and moreover his holy relics, furnished with authentic letters, are exposed to public veneration in the said parish. But that Blessed one was chosen as patron of the people of Palena too, at their instance, in the year 1638, by the faculty of my predecessor bishop, and his feast on the 14th day of March is celebrated there every year of precept, with a solemn procession and carrying of his statue and of the said relics, with a great concourse of the faithful, and with the celebration of the Mass and Office of the Common of confessors not bishops.

[115] and, And accordingly, most blessed Father, to speak the truth, nothing would be more honourable to the aforesaid town, nothing more delightful to me, to the city of Sulmona, and to the people who seek it,

I think, than the awaited decree by which it may be lawful for us to venerate and honour Bl. Nicholas of Forca Palena with that religious cult which is shown to the Saints, whereby it may also come to pass that his examples be set before the faithful with greater confidence and greater profit. Grant therefore, most blessed Father, my lowly prayers, while I beseech and pray of God the Best and Greatest long life and safety for your Holiness.

Of your Holiness,

At Sulmona, the 10th day of December 1745,

The most humble, most devoted and most obliged true servant,

Peter Anthony, bishop of Valva and Sulmona."

[116] In the same place at p. 270 is read the following petitionary letter of the most reverend father Angelo Maria Fabri, and the General of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa. prior general of the whole Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa.

"Most blessed Father.

If it is at heart to very many that devotion toward Bl. Nicholas, priest and Hermit of Forca Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, the glorious founder of the church and convent of St. Onuphrius of the City, the most excellent pledge of the Order of St. Jerome of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa, should be increased day by day, how much the more must it be reckoned so for me, who am Superior general of that same Eremitical Order, in which the aforesaid Nicholas led his life with such great examples of the virtues, but am unequal and altogether unworthy to undergo so great a burden. Adding therefore my prayers to the instances of so many most excellent men, humbly and with that homage which is fitting I suppliantly demand of your Holiness that she deign to introduce the cause of the beatification and canonization of the same Servant of God, distinguished for so long a space of time with the name of Blessed; especially since for three centuries now no small cult has been paid him by the faithful of Christ, as the records exist in the chapel of St. Onuphrius, where he died, of which not only I myself can testify, but also the Romans and all the rest who visit that same church, when they daily adore his sacred bones laid up in the high altar. Again therefore I pray and beseech your Holiness, at whose feet most humbly prostrate I implore the Apostolic blessing. Given at Rome in the convent of St. Onuphrius on the [ ] day of May 1746.

Of your Holiness

The most humble, most devoted and most obedient son and subject, Brother Angelo Maria Fabri, prior general of the Order of St. Jerome of the Congregation of Bl. Peter of Pisa."

[117] I forbear to review other petitionary letters of this kind, which contain things very like the aforesaid; Many other illustrious persons are named: Cardinals, yet it pleases me to subjoin a catalogue of them in the order and in the words in which they are enumerated in the aforesaid Summary, namely in this manner.

Of the most serene James III, king of Great Britain, 1 March 1746.

Of the most Eminent Cardinal (Trojano) d'Acquaviva, 2 March 1746.

Of the most Eminent Cardinal (Peter Aloysius) Carafa, 16 March 1746.

Of the most reverend (A. Antenorius) archbishop of Auxianum, 10 March 1746.

Of the most reverend (Michael) archbishop of Chieti, 1 November 1744.

Of the most reverend (Deusdedit) bishop of Samaria, 1 December 1744.

Of the most reverend (John Baptist) bishop of Nocera in Umbria, 5 March 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of the city of Sulmona, the seventh of the Kalends of March 1746.

Of the most illustrious senate of the city of Sulmona, the fifth of the Kalends of March 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare of the city of Sulmona, 12 February 1746.

Of the commune of the Land of Palena, 20 December 1745.

Of the most illustrious (Joseph Anthony Nanni) baron of Roccascalegna, of the diocese of Chieti, 8 December 1745.

[118] The petitions of all these are set out entire, to which must be added the three which I have given, and likewise a fourth of the bishop of Valva and Sulmona, archbishops, bishops, of which I made mention above: but the rest, for brevity's sake, are only indicated in the same Summary in this manner and order.

Of the most reverend archbishop of Matera and Acerenza. Dated 21 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Lucera. Dated 10 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Aquila. Dated 8 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Montepeloso. Dated 23 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Melfi and Rapolla. Dated 20 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Caserta. Dated 8 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Vieste. Dated 18 February 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Malta. Dated 10 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of San Marco. Dated 10 March 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Nocera dei Pagani. Dated 10 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Castellammare. Dated 11 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Oria. Dated 14 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Alife. Dated 25 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Ischia. Dated 20 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Lettere. Dated 23 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Volturara. Dated 3 April 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Sant'Angelo and Bisaccia. Dated 17 January 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Mileve in partibus. Dated at Chieti, 6 May 1745.

[119] chapters of canons, Of the most reverend bishop of Ortona and Campli. Dated 26 April 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Feltre. Dated 26 February 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Fossombrone. Dated 23 April 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Cagli. Dated 1 December 1745.

Of the most reverend bishop of Pesaro. Dated 27 March 1746.

Of the most reverend bishop of Urbania and Sant'Angelo in Vado. Dated 1 January 1746.

Of the most reverend bishop of Ravello and Scala. Dated 12 January 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the metropolitan church of Naples, 10 February 1746.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral church of Chieti, 24 February 1746.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral church of Lanciano, 4 March 1746.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of Sulmona, the eighteenth of the Kalends of February 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral church of Pentima or Valva, 15 November 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral church of Pesaro, 19 March 1746.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral church of Urbania, 4 January 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of Feltre. Given at C. Penne, 26 February 1746.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of Fossombrone, 22 April 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of Cagli, 15 January 1745.

Of the most reverend chapter of the cathedral of Sant'Angelo in Vado, the Nones of December 1745.

Of the chapter of the collegiate church of St. Martin della Fara, of no diocese, in the Abruzzi, 25 December 1745.

Of the chapter of the collegiate church of the Land of Popoli, of the diocese of Valva, 17 November 1744.

Of the chapter of the collegiate church of the Land of Pescocostanzo, of the diocese of Monte Cassino, 21 November 1744.

Of the chapter of the collegiate church of the Land of Mercatello, of the diocese of Urbania, 26 February 1745.

Of the city of Pentima, of the diocese of Valva, 25 January 1745.

Of the commune of the Land of Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, 5 November 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Pescocostanzo, of the diocese of Monte Cassino, 8 September 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Colle di Macine, of the diocese of Chieti, 12 November 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Letto Palena, of no diocese, 30 October 1744.

Of the whole clergy and community of the Land of Casoli, of the diocese of Chieti, 2 April 1745.

Of the commune of the Land del Guasto, Palena, of the diocese of Chieti, 15 September 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Montenerodomo, of the diocese of Chieti, 8 December 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Taranta, of the diocese of Chieti, 16 December 1744.

Of the commune of Roccascalegna, of the diocese of Chieti, 12 November 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Torricella, of the diocese of Chieti, 5 January 1745.

Of the whole clergy of the Land della Lama, of the diocese of Chieti, 5 December 1744.

Of the whole clergy of the Land of Scanno, of the diocese of Sulmona, 9 November 1744.

Of the whole clergy of the Land of Rocca Raso, of the diocese of Sulmona, on the day before the Kalends of November 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Rocca Raso, of the diocese of Sulmona, 3 November 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Lama, of the diocese of Chieti, 6 December 1744.

Of the commune of the Land of Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, 5 November 1744.

Of the most illustrious baron of Roccascalegna, of the diocese of Chieti, 6 November 1744.

[121] Of the Provost and Fathers of the Congregation of the Oratory of Fossombrone, Religious and nuns, the fifteenth of the Kalends of May 1746.

Of the Reverend Fathers of the Order of Preachers of the city of Sulmona, the Ides of January 1745.

Of the Reverend Fathers of the Order of Carmelites of the city of Sulmona, 31 October 1744.

Of the Reverend Fathers Minor Conventual of the city of Sulmona, 15 October 1744.

Of the Reverend Fathers Minor of the Observance of the land of Palena, of the diocese of Sulmona, 9 November 1744.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare of the city of Sulmona, 6 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Anthony the abbot, of the city of Sulmona, 10 November 1744.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Monica, of the city of Sulmona, 5 September 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Andrew the apostle, at Naples, 11 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary of Jesus, at Naples, 13 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Gaudiosus at Naples, 21 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns della Sapienza at Naples, 17 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Bernard at Naples, 15 January 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary of Consolation at Naples, 14 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Marcellinus at Naples, 4 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of the Cross of Lucca at Naples, 30 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of Regina Cœli at Naples, 23 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary of Egypt the Greater at Naples, 14 January 1745.

[122] who for the same canonization Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Joseph at Naples, 26 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary of Constantinople, at Naples, 30 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary Magdalene at Naples, 21 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare at Naples, 18 February 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns di Donna Regina of Naples, 10 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of SS. Bernard and Margaret of Naples, 13 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns di Donna Romita of Naples, 10 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Francis of the Observance of Naples, 22 January 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of SS. Peter and Sebastian of Naples, 13 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns di D. Regina of Naples, 25 January 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of SS. Marcellinus and Festus of Naples, 13 January 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Francis, Capuchinesses, of Naples, 11 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Capuchiness Nuns le 33 of Naples, 15 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Anthony of the city of Penne, 19 February 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Catharine of Monte Cerignone, of the diocese of Feltre, 29 February 1746. Here an error lurks: for since the year of Christ 1746 was not a leap year, the month of February had only 28 days.

[123] gave repeated petitions to Benedict XIV. Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare, of the land of St. Agatha, of the diocese of Feltre, of the diocese, 19 February 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. John the Baptist of Pietrarubbia, of the diocese of Feltre, 4 March 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare of the republic of San Marino, 29 February (see the note just made) 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of Macerata, of the diocese of Feltre, 26 February 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Agatha of Fossombrone, 16 April 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Bernardino of Fossombrone, 16 April 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary Magdalene of Pesaro, 10 March 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of the Most Holy Purification of Pesaro, 7 March 1746.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Catharine of the City of Sant'Angelo in Vado, 8 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Bernardino, of Sant'Angelo in Vado, 8 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare, of Sant'Angelo in Vado, 8 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary of the Graces, of Sant'Angelo in Vado, 8 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare of the land of Mercatello, of the diocese of Urbania, 3 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Clare of the city of Urbania, 3 January 1745.

Of the Reverend Nuns of St. Mary Magdalene of the city

of Urbania, 10 January. Here the year is wanting. After these there are enumerated in the same place other instances or petitionary letters, eighty in number, made by the aforesaid persons, which, not to be longer, I pass over.

[124] Further, that we may put an end to this Commentary, to the Memorial and Summary of the aforesaid Joseph Luna, procurator of the cause, there were opposed after the custom, on Saianelli's testimony, his Animadversions by Louis de Valentibus, The cause however was not then obtained promoter of the Faith, which begin thus: "Sine ullo judiciali processu," &c. These the same procurator Joseph Luna attempted to dissolve by his Response, with the approval of the advocate Philip Azzo, which begins: "Etiamsi in præsentis dubii," &c. But when the cause was proposed in the Sacred Congregation under the date of the 7th day of September in the year 1748, God so disposing, it pleased the most Eminent and most wise Fathers to give this rescript: "Deferred, and let a Process be drawn up." Thus Bl. Nicholas remained indeed in possession of his cult; but whether anything was thereafter done for his solemn beatification and canonization I have not found out. The Animadversions of the most illustrious Louis Valens, promoter of the Faith, and the Procurator's Response, are published in the same place from p. 273.

* rather, before