THE MATERIAL UPON WHICH THE HISTORY OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR IS BASED
1. _The Documentary Sources in General_
The sources from which the history of the ecclesiastical year and the
festivals of the saints is drawn are first of all official documents,
namely service-books, decrees of councils, papal constitutions and bulls;
in the second place come the information derived from ecclesiastical
writers of various periods and countries which must be used and brought
into connection with the official sources.
Among the liturgical books of the Church, the missals and breviaries hold
the first place. In earlier times these were differently arranged and had
different names from those which they bear at present. The collects and
psalms in particular employed at the mass were not included in one volume
as they are now, but were taken from a number of books. The essential
prayers of the mass were contained in the so-called _Sacramentarium_,
in which were also to be found the collects, prefaces, and, in certain
cases, even the whole canon. The lections from Holy Scripture, the
Epistles and Gospels, were collected together in the Lectionaries, either
all together, or the Epistles and Gospels in separate volumes; another
name for this kind of book was _Comes_. The psalms and other portions to
be sung by the choir were contained in separate books, the Antiphonaries,
Graduals, and Hymnaries, etc. It was only in the Middle Ages that
for the sake of convenience all the different parts of the mass were
contained together in one volume, called a _missale plenarium_, but the
separate volumes still continued in use for certain occasions.
In the course of our investigations, we have often had to refer to the
so-called sacramentaries, of which the three most ancient belonging to
the Roman Church are also the most important. These are:—
1. _Sacramentarium Leonianum._ This is a collection of older formularies
which had been already drawn up by an unknown author, some of which may
well be the work of Leo the Great; the title, which gives rise to the
opinion that Leo was the author of the book, is due to the first editor.
The only existing codex is in Verona, and is unfortunately imperfect,
being deficient in all that relates to Lent and Easter. Since it contains
a prayer for Pope Simplicius († 483), Rome must be regarded as the place
where it was drawn up, and where it was used, while the date when it took
its present shape was the pontificate of Felix II. (483-492).
2. The _Gelasianum_, so called after Gelasius I. (492-496). This pope did
actually compose some liturgical books, but the _volumen sacramentorum_,
ascribed to him by Gennadius, cannot have been one of them, since it
contains the four festivals of our Lady which were celebrated in Rome
only after Gregory the Great. On the other hand it does not contain the
stations for the Thursdays in Lent introduced by Gregory II. (715-731);
consequently, it represents the liturgical usages of the seventh century,
_i.e._ of the period after St Gregory the Great, and bears the name of
Gelasius incorrectly. It consists of three books: (1) _De Tempore_,
beginning with Christmas; (2) _De Sanctis_, beginning with the 1st
January; and (3) masses for the ordinary Sundays, votive masses, and
masses for the dead. The number of prefaces contained in the sacramentary
amounts to over a hundred. The Stowe Missal, which is independent of the
_Gelasianum_, gives the _canon Gelasii Papæ_. This book was drawn up in
Rome and was intended for local usage, but we only possess the MSS.,
which were meant for the churches of France; the most ancient belongs to
the end of the seventh century, and was written apparently for the Abbey
of St Denys (Cod. Vat. Reg. Sueciæ, 316). The other existing codices only
give an edition specially adapted from the original Roman book for use in
the Frankish Empire; this is shown by the prayer, “Respice propitius ad
Romanum sive Francorum imperium.”
3. _The Gregorianum._ This represents the Roman rite of the period of
Pope Adrian I. (772-795) and Charlemagne. It is entirely a compilation of
Roman origin belonging to the eighth century, destined originally for the
use of the popes but afterwards adapted for general use. The canon stands
at the head of the work, which commences with Christmas, but Advent comes
at the end of the _Proprium de Tempore_. The _Agnus Dei_, added to the
text of the mass by Pope Sergius I., is given here in its place, while it
is absent from _Gelasianum_.[739] The earliest mention of this work is in
the collection of letters of the popes of the eighth century known as the
_Codex Carolinus_, in a letter of Adrian I. to Charlemagne who received
a copy of the work from Adrian between 784 and 791,[740] from which date
it was introduced into the Frankish Empire, copied, and circulated, and
also added to. In his letter Adrian ascribes a personal share in the
production of the work to his predecessor Gregory, relying, of course, on
the tradition of his Church.[741]
4. This last-named book gradually supplanted the ancient liturgies
and service-books of Gaul; of these we possess the _Sacramentarium
Gallicanum_, along with its lectionary, the _Missale Gothico-Gallicanum_,
and the _Missale Francorum_;[742] the Mozarabic missal and breviary are
also very important documents.
The ecclesiastical calendars and martyrologies come next under
consideration. As regards the former, the service-books of which we have
been speaking were on the whole drawn up in accordance with the local
calendar and added both the movable and immovable feasts as best they
could. In proportion as the number of feasts increased the calendars were
regarded as independent catalogues of festivals, and are found both as
separate documents, or bound up with the other liturgical books; in the
latter case, they are usually placed at the beginning of the volume.
While the calendars give merely the names of the saints or the date of
their feasts, the martyrologies or _Synaxaria_ contain more detailed
notices, giving the place, time, and circumstances of the saints’ death,
rank, etc., according as the compiler had more or less material at his
disposal; in many instances these notices have grown into considerable
historical narratives, and on this account, the character of the
different martyrologies varies greatly. As to their employment for
historical purposes, the shorter the contents the higher the value and
trustworthiness of a calendar. The martyrologies were usually compiled
by private individuals, even when intended for ecclesiastical use, but
the calendars shared in the official character of the liturgical books
of which they formed part, since alterations could not be made in them
without the knowledge and consent of the authorities of the church or
corporation to which they belonged.[743]
Manuscript calendars belonging to earlier centuries exist in large
numbers, for all missals and breviaries were provided with them. Their
value for historical research depends upon their age, and also upon our
knowledge of the locality for which they were drawn up, the best data
for discovering this latter point being afforded by the names of local
saints contained in the calendar itself. No calendar can be set aside
as altogether useless, for in case of need all can throw light upon the
history of at least their own locality. For this reason, and for others
as well, an increasing amount of attention has been given to them in
recent times, and a large number of them have been printed (see sect. 10
of this part). The days marked in the calendars are those of the saints’
deaths (_vid._ _ante_, p. 213); but the days on which their relics were
translated to some particular church are also marked as festivals in the
calendar of the church in question. When in different calendars different
days are given to the same saint, the date in the calendar belonging to
the church where he died is usually to be regarded as the day of his
death; the others are days on which his relics were translated.[744]
Another class of documents consists of the ordos drawn up for divine
service belonging to particular countries, dioceses, or the more
important ecclesiastical foundations (ordines, ordinaria; in Greek,
typica). These were not originally drawn up for the course of merely
one year, like our present ordos, but contained the list of recurring
festivals and fasts observed from year to year in some monastery or
cathedral, along with detailed directions for the performance of divine
service. The most important of these are the thirteen oldest ordos
of the Roman Church, collected and published by Mabillon, but other
dioceses and monasteries as well as the Church of Rome had similar ordos,
some of which have been already printed,[745] while others still await
publication.[746]
2. _The Earliest Christian Calendars_
The worship of the saints, especially of the martyrs, asserted itself in
various ways in the liturgy of the Church. Among the Latins, it appeared
even in the liturgy of the mass, since special masses in honour of the
saints were composed at an early date for the commemorations of the
most celebrated saints. These were included in the sacramentaries, and,
finally, as their number continued to increase, they were placed together
in a separate division of the book (_proprium sanctorum_), instead of
being distributed, as formerly, over the whole year. Among the Greeks,
this was not possible, since they repeat the same mass daily, and employ
only two or three mass formularies throughout the entire year.
In the second place, the cultus of the saints gained a footing in the
Canonical Hours, the Psalter, both among Latins and Greeks. It was
customary among the Latins as early as the sixth century to read a
portion of the account of the martyrdom (passiones martyrum), as Aurelian
of Arles tells us;[747] this was the commencement of the existing
lections of the breviary. Then collections of lives of the saints for the
whole year were drawn up on the lines of the calendar, which came to be
called martyrologies on account of the character of the larger part of
their contents. In course of time, two kinds of martyrologies came into
existence, those containing legends of greater length more suited for
private reading, and those distinguished by the brevity of their notices
intended for employment in the services of the Church. Even these have no
immediate connection with the liturgy, although the names of the saints
for the day were read at Prime, a custom which possibly the Council of
Aix-la-Chapelle of 817 had in view in its sixty-ninth canon.[748] These
martyrologies developed out of the diptychs and calendars of particular
churches, by way of compilation and expansion; like the calendars,
they contain simply the names of the saints, but with the mention of
the locality to which the saint belonged, and, in many cases, with an
indication of the date at which he lived.
The martyrologies aimed at completeness in other directions. First, it
was attempted to unite together the names of all the martyrs who had
ever suffered throughout the whole Church, along with the day of their
death, and secondly, an attempt was made, but only in later times, to
fill up the calendar by allotting every day in the year to at least one
saint. This latter attempt was made in the West only in the seventh and
eighth centuries, and achieved considerable success. While the first
efforts in this direction attained to only relative completeness, since
they took into consideration only a part, and not the whole, of the
universal Church, as the Arian and Carthaginian martyrologies had done,
yet the tendency towards universality appears unmistakably at a later
date, especially in the so-called _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_.
With regard to the Greek service-books, menology means the same thing
as martyrology—a catalogue of saints arranged in the form of a calendar
according to the days of the month, and merely giving the name of the
saint against the particular day set apart by the Church in his honour.
The lives of the saints arranged according to months and days are
called Menæa or Meniæa, and the shorter abstracts from it are called
Synaxaria.[749]
The list of calendars opens with two documents, the most ancient of
their kind possessed by the Roman Church, _i.e._ the lists of popes and
martyrs with the days of their death, which have often been referred to
already—the _Depositio Episcoporum_ from Lucius to Julius I., and the
_Depositio Martyrum_, a catalogue of the martyrs of the city of Rome,
extending only to 304, three martyrs not belonging to Rome being included
in this list, Cyprian, Perpetua, and Felicitas. The connection of these
two lists to one another is shown in their titles (_item_), and also by
the fact that Sixtus, who is placed among the martyrs, is omitted from
the list of popes. This latter list comprises the period from Lucius
(† 255) to Julius († 352) only; either the compiler had no material at
hand for the earlier period, or he set it aside as not bearing upon the
point he had in view. The list of martyrs contains the names of popes
who were also martyrs, such as St Peter, St Clement, St Calixtus, St
Pontianus, St Fabian, and St Sixtus; of martyrs, not bishops, we have
here the most famous saints of the city of Rome, St Agnes and St Lawrence
(but not St Cecilia), as well as many other quite obscure names. In
reply to the inquiry what principle was followed in drawing up this
list, Mommsen,[750] relying on the title which connects the document
with Carthage, replies that it contains “the names of those martyrs and
bishops whose commemoration was celebrated annually in the Church.” Both
these lists were first published by Ægidius Bucherius (Gilles Boucher),
and form a portion of the work on the Calendar of Dionysius Philocalus
(see above, p. 136 _seqq._).
Next in order comes a Calendar of the North African Church belonging to
the fifth century, and edited by Mabillon from a codex of the seventh
century formerly belonging to the Monastery of Cluny. The original
must have been completed after 505, for Bishop Eugenius of Carthage is
mentioned in it. It contains St John the Baptist, some apostles and
martyrs not belonging to North Africa, Sixtus, Gervasius and Protasius,
Lawrence, Clement of Rome, Eulalia, Felix of Nola, Agnes, Agatha,
Vincent, and the Machabees, who belong to the Churches of Rome and Spain.
Unfortunately, the list is not quite perfect owing to the bad state of
the MS.
The Calendar of Philocalus for the year 352 contains nothing definitely
Christian.[751] On the other hand, the Calendar of Polemius Silvius,
Bishop of Sion, drawn up between 435 and 455, is interesting as showing a
mixture of Christian and heathen entries. Destination, character, place,
and time of the compilation can be learnt from the calendar itself; it
was not drawn up for one particular year, at least there is nothing by
which to determine the year, for Dominical letters, movable feasts, etc.,
are all wanting; among heathen festivals we have the _Carmentalia_,
_Lupercalia_, _Terminalia_, _Quinquatria_, and _Lavatio Cereris_, all of
which recall heathen religious customs. The _Saturnalia_ are included on
account of their popular, not on account of their religious significance,
and appear as _feriæ servorum_ on the 17th December, as well as _feriæ
ancillarum_ on the 7th July. In addition, there are many other popular
commemorations, such as the 7th January, 13th September, etc., and a
great number of _natales_ of emperors. The number of ecclesiastical
feasts is very small, being limited to Epiphany, the 25th and 27th of
March as the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christmas, and six
saints’ days—_Depositio Petri et Pauli_ on the 22nd February instead
of the 29th June, Vincent, the Machabees, Lawrence, Hippolytus, and
Stephen on their usual days. Besides these we have the _natales_ of
authors—Cicero and Virgil, and finally, the days are marked on which
the Senate usually held sittings and games were given in the circus.
In comparison with the Calendar of Philocalus, the number of such days
is much reduced; in the former there are over a hundred, here only
fifty-three. The meteorological entries are numerous. The calendar was
evidently intended for the provinces of the western half of the empire,
and takes into account both the ecclesiastical and civil requirements,
although it deals with the former to a limited extent.
3. _The Arian Calendar of the Fourth Century_
(_About 370-380_)
One of the most interesting documents in connection with our subject in
virtue of its age, contents, and plan is the Arian martyrology, published
by W. Wright in 1865.[752] As is well known, the Arians were an active
party who, until about 380, attempted with some success to gain the upper
hand in the Church. As a means to this end, it was to their interest
to invest their followers as much as possible with the appearance
of sanctity, and the Arian historian Philostorgius devoted himself
especially to this; he characterises as saints and workers of miracles
Agapetus and a certain Theophilus who worked in India, and also Aëtius,
Eunomius, and Leontius, the ringleaders of thorough-going Arianism.[753]
As a consequence of this the Arians encroached in various ways upon the
domain of liturgy also. It goes without saying that they did not wish
to figure as heretics, but as forming the true Church, and so they
exhibited a corresponding activity in hagiology.
While, generally speaking, the local churches confined themselves each
to its own diocese, and the principle of individualism continued to hold
its own for a long time throughout the whole Church, the Arians early
abandoned this method, and even while they did not completely adopt the
principle of universality, yet they did so partially, their position as
a minority among Christians giving them an impulse in this direction.
Thus we find their martyrology embraces Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece, Mœsia,
Illyria; in fact, the entire eastern half of the empire, and even Italy
and North Africa are not passed over altogether.
We must first of all turn our attention to the external and historical
side of the document. Wright found it in a Syrian MS., belonging to
Nitria in Egypt, of the time of Porphyrius, Bishop of Antioch (404-413),
and written in the year 411.[754] It consists of two different parts,
of which the first is a martyrology drawn up in accordance with the
calendar, and originally composed in Greek. Unfortunately, the section
from the 1st to the 25th December is missing. This part is the original
document, and was early translated into Syriac, although, as we shall
see later, it is full of defects. The fact that, nevertheless, it
was considered worthy of being translated, and that by an orthodox
translator, shows that it was regarded as a remarkable piece of work.
What impressed its contemporaries was its universal character, then quite
a novelty. At the end, there is a somewhat mutilated appendix consisting
of a list of Persian martyrs arranged, not by the date of their death,
but according to their rank in the hierarchy, into three groups—bishops,
priests, and deacons.
The second part, originally composed in Syriac, was an addition of the
Syrian translator. Among the persons named in this part, it is noticeable
that there are no Arians, nor even Nestorians, who, when expelled from
the Roman Empire by Theodosius II. in 435, made themselves masters
of the Persian Church. Of the sixteen bishops mentioned in the first
section, at least eight are known to have been orthodox Persian martyrs,
all belonging to the period before 400, _e.g._ Simon Bar-Sabai, Bishop
of Seleucia-Ctesiphon († 17th April 344), his successor, Schahdust (†
346), and Sapor, Bishop of Beth Gormai.[755] Miles (Milles), Simeon,
Barbasimas, Joannes, Sapores, Gudiab, Sabinus, Abdos, Paul, and Ebedjesus
are mentioned by Sozomen as Persian martyrs of the reign of Sapor I.[756]
This very primitive calendar contains only the names of martyrs to the
exclusion of other persons who were even regarded as saints, such as
Mares, the second bishop of Seleucia († 82).[757] The compiler calls
those whom he included in his calendar the Holy Martyrs who had been put
to death in the East, while he regards those named in the first part as
the Holy Confessors of the West, regarding the Roman Empire as the West
in respect to Persia.
The first part, which concerns the West, differs from the second in many
respects. It was drawn up by another hand, and was written originally
in Greek. The latter is a document entirely historical in character,
while the former is liturgical; the one belongs to Persia, the other
to the Roman Empire, and probably to Nicomedia. It was then employed
in Antioch, where it was enlarged, and finally, as it appears, was
translated into Syriac at Edessa. It forms one of the most remarkable
documents of ancient Christian literature.
That this Arian martyrology belonged to the Roman Empire, and especially
to its eastern part, is proved by the calendar employed therein, _i.e._
the Julian, with the addition of the Chaldean names for the months,
the days of the month being given simply without reference to calends
and nones and ides. The author is well-informed with regard to the
eastern half of the Roman Empire; he knows names and date of death of
eight bishops of Antioch, the name Antioch occurs in all twenty-four
times, Nicomedia is named thirty-two times, but the name of no bishop
of Nicomedia is given, Alexandria is mentioned nineteen times,
Constantinople, Rome, and Jerusalem only twice.
The date of this work is fixed by the mention of the celebrated Bishop
James of Nisibis on the 15th July. He was alive after 350, when the
Persians besieged Nisibis, and flourished, according to the somewhat
vague expression of the Chronicle of Samuel of Ani, in the 283rd
Olympiad, _i.e._ 353-356.[758] Thus the martyrology was written in the
period between 370 and 400, and sometime about 380, when Arianism was the
dominant religion in the eastern half of the empire.
The Arian character of the martyrology is shown by the fact that Arius
himself is mentioned in it, while none of the adherents of the Nicene
faith of that date are included, and the only orthodox bishop whose name
appears is James of Nisibis. Since he was orthodox, and since Nisibis
belonged to Persia, his name could not have been in the Greek original,
which, besides being Arian, was limited to worthies belonging to the
Roman Empire, but the insertion of his name is probably due to the
orthodox Persian translator.
The compiler drew his information from the works of his predecessors,
to which he made additions of his own. One of these sources he names,
for he states with regard to the names of eleven personages, that they
are taken from the “Number of the Ancient Confessors.” He also used an
old list of martyrs, which he does not further describe. To judge by
the character of the quotations from this document, it must have dealt
with the same part of the Church as the new compilation. Antioch (four
times), Synnada, Nicomedia, Pergamus, and Heracleia are named in it,
while Alexandria is not mentioned. By the “Ancient Confessors” are to be
understood the martyrs before Diocletian, and it is probable that they
were taken from the lists of “Depositions” belonging to each city, just
as the chronographer has preserved for us those of Rome.[759]
As regards the contents, they resemble those of similar documents of
earlier and later date, and are fully described in the superscription,
which states that it “contains the names of the Lords, _i.e._ the saints,
confessors, and victors, and the days on which they received their
crowns.” One would expect to find the place of their death mentioned as
well, but many saints are given without any indication of the locality
to which they belonged, perhaps on account of imperfect information on
the part of the author. The date of death is on the whole correctly
given, a remarkable instance to the contrary being the commemoration of
SS. Peter and Paul, which is placed on the 28th December. This cannot
throw doubt upon the date observed in Rome itself, for the Greeks were,
as a rule, very imperfectly informed concerning ecclesiastical events
in the Latin portion of the empire. The sources from which the compiler
drew his information cannot have been very full, for there is no mention
of the famous Western martyrs, Agnes and Lawrence, and, indeed, beyond
the mention on the 1st Ab (August) of Aksitus, Bishop of Rome, by which
Xystus II. is probably intended (the day of St Xystus’ death was the 6th
and not the 1st August), and of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas, correctly
given on the 7th March, no Western saints are commemorated.[760]
Among the bishops of Alexandria there are two mentioned whose names do
not occur in the official lists, Artemon on the 3rd September, and Hodion
(Orion) on the 16th August. Similarly, among the bishops of Antioch,
there are two not mentioned elsewhere, Amphimelus (4th March) and
Philippus (27th March). Can these have been Arian prelates?
Besides St Peter and St Paul, the only two apostles commemorated are St
John and St James, who held the most important place in the eastern half
of the empire; they are placed together on the 27th December, on which
day the latter especially was formerly commemorated. St Stephen, also
called an apostle (schelico), appears on the day still consecrated to
his memory (26th December).
The bishops, priests, and deacons appear with their proper titles; all
the others have the designation, confessor (mandaya). This designation
implies martyrdom, for in the first three centuries _confessor_ means a
martyr whose sufferings stop short of death. It is also worthy of notice
that some who appear not to have been martyrs have to be content with
a mere commemoration (dukrana = _commemoratio_), as, for example, St
Xystus, James of Nisibis, Eusebius of Cæsarea, etc. The names, again, of
others are merely mentioned without any addition or title.
Finally, there are still some peculiarities in this menology which
ought to be mentioned. Some of these may be due to oversight, or to
the ignorance of the compiler, others seem to be mistakes made in
transcribing the document, and ought not to appear in documents of an
official character. Thus Marcianus of Tomi appears twice (on the 5th and
on the 10th June), Dius once as confessor and once as presbyter (11th
and 12th June). Especially remarkable is the circumstance that three
individuals, whose names occur in no other calendar, not even in the
_Menologium_ of Constantinople, are given three times, namely, Cosconius,
Melanippus, and Zeno, sons of Theodota, once for Nicea on the 19th
January, once for Asia on the 23rd February, and once for Nicomedia on
the 2nd September. As slips of the pen, we may notice Hadriopolis for
Hadrianopolis, Pedinthus for Perinthus, Tunjus (10th June) for Tomi,
which is elsewhere spelt correctly, Sindus for Synnada, which once (30th
June) has the addition, “in Phrygia,” and once (15th June) is without it.
The proper names are frequently wrongly spelt, or so confused as to be
unrecognisable.
Of the Church festivals, only Epiphany and Easter are marked. The MS.
is, unfortunately, imperfect where we should expect to find the 25th
of December. On the Friday after Easter the Commemoration of all the
Confessors, _i.e._ Martyrs, is set down.
The relation of the Arian martyrology to Eusebius’ work on the Martyrs of
Palestine deserves to be considered. One would expect to find this work
often referred to, but it is not so, and the compiler seems to have had
no knowledge of it. This is all the more remarkable since Eusebius always
gives the dates of the death of the martyrs. The two works have, however,
very few points of contact, but they confirm one another in the points
where they do coincide. Both place the death of the priest Pamphilus
and his eleven companions at Cæsarea on the 16th February; both mention
the martyr Romanus at Antioch, Eusebius placing his death on the 17th
November, the martyrology on the 18th—a trifling discrepancy which proves
their independence of each other. Hermes the Exorcist, Domnion of Salona,
James of Nisibis, etc., are given on the dates which they occupy in the
calendars of other Churches.
The so-called martyrology of St Jerome has many names in common with this
Arian martyrology. St Jerome often assigns to one place and day more
martyrs than this Arian Calendar, as, for example, on the 25th March,
Dulas, on the 4th, 18th, and 21st April, etc. Sometimes the Arian gives
more names than St Jerome, _e.g._ on the 11th March, the 2nd May, etc.,
while in some places they are in perfect agreement, _e.g._ on the 13th
March, Modestus and twenty-one companions—the _Hieronymianum_ gives the
names of the whole twenty-one, while here only the number is given—on
the 16th April, Leonidas and eight companions in Corinth, etc. We cannot
infer from this that the compiler of the _Hieronymianum_ incorporated the
work of his Arian predecessor in his own, but he certainly was acquainted
with it, and made use either of it or of common sources.
The comparison of the Arian martyrology with that of St Jerome has
further led to a curious discovery,[761] _i.e._ that the entries from the
6th (or more correctly from the 8th) to the 30th June are indeed included
in the martyrology of St Jerome, but have been bodily transferred to
the corresponding dates in July.[762] This latter month has only three
entries, and it has been thought that the mistake is due to the Arian
compiler or his transcribers, but it is just as likely that the change
of date was made by the author of the _Hieronymianum_. How this fact
is to be explained must be left to conjecture. Another important point
bearing upon the connection between the two documents is the fact that
the one mentions Bishop Eusebius of Cæsarea on the 30th May, but the
other in more detail on the 21st June, as follows: _In Cæsarea Palæstinæ
Dep. Eusebi Epi. Historiographi_. Which is correct? Certainly the
Syrian document, which also gives correctly the day of Arius’ death.
The entry on the 6th June clearly exhibits the Arian character of the
document: “In Alexandria, Arius Presbyter.” The fact that he is merely
commemorated, proves that it is incorrect to suppose, as many do, that
another Arius, a reputed, but otherwise unknown, martyr of Alexandria is
intended. The martyrs in this document are treated to more than a mere
commemoration (dukrana). Accordingly he did not regard this particular
Arius as a martyr.
From the description which we have given of this highly important
document, one is led to expect that it will throw fresh light on certain
historical questions, and so, as a matter of fact, it does. For instance,
we can fix the death of Arius by its assistance on the 6th June 336.
Arius died on a Saturday shortly before sunset. On the following day he
was to have been solemnly received into the Church.[763] The only year
which can be taken into consideration is 336, for in it the 6th June fell
on a Saturday.[764]
The historian Eusebius died about the time when Athanasius returned to
Alexandria from his first exile. This was shortly after Constantine’s
death († 22nd May 337). Since Eusebius died soon after he had finished
the life of Constantine, whom he did not long survive, his death is to
be placed on the 30th May 338. This takes for granted that the Bishop
of Palestine mentioned on the 30th May is identical with the historian,
which can scarcely be called in doubt. Cæsarea was the ecclesiastical
metropolis of Palestine, and this accounts for his title, Bishop of
Palestine.[765] His successor and heir and biographer was the energetic
Acacius.
A more important fact is that the martyrdom of Bishop Babylas of Antioch
can now be definitely established. We have in this document reliable
evidence that he suffered on the 24th January, which corresponds with the
evidence of Chrysostom, who stated that the Festival of SS. Juventinus
and Maximin, which was kept on the 4th February, followed closely on
that of St Babylas.[766] Moreover, St Babylas was generally commemorated
on the 24th January. According to Eusebius,[767] Babylas died in prison
under Decius, and, according to Jerome, in the first year of his reign.
Decius reigned from October, or, according to other authorities, from
August 249 to 27th July 251, and one of his first acts was to inaugurate
the persecution against the Christians. Accordingly the death of Babylas
must have happened on the 24th January 250. Since all authorities agree
in stating that he had been bishop for thirteen years, we are now able to
fix the year of the death of Zebinas, his predecessor, _i.e._ 237, and
the day of the month is given as 13th January in the Arian martyrology.
This document must be regarded as a thoroughly reliable source for the
dates of the death of the Antiochene bishops in particular, and we
can, therefore, place the death of Maximin, the seventh in the list of
bishops, on the 4th February 191, and the death of Serapion on the 14th
May 215.
It is scarcely necessary to observe that this calendar, although it is
an Arian document, contains not merely the names of Arian worthies, but
many which belong to Catholic antiquity. It is chiefly to this that it
owes its importance for the history of the Church, and it is also due to
this that it was capable of being combined with the catalogue of Persian
saints, which is an essentially Catholic document. On the other hand, it
is by no means a complete martyrology, and is in itself a liturgical, and
not a historical, document intended by its unskilful compiler to serve
party ends.
The Goths in Italy had also a menology of their own, of which a fragment
was discovered by A. Mai. Unfortunately, it contains only the month of
November. It is noteworthy that it mentions the Apostle Andrew, whose
name does not occur in the similar martyrology of which we have just
been speaking. The fragment, with this exception, contains Gothic names
alone. St Clement and St Cecilia do not appear, which proves its freedom
from Roman influence, and shows that it was essentially a national
production.[768]
4. _The so-called Martyrologium Hieronymianum_
(_Second Half of the Seventh Century_)
Already in the time of St Gregory the Great there existed in Rome a
complete and universal list containing merely the names of the martyrs
and the place where they suffered, arranged according to the days of the
year. Eulogius, the contemporary bishop of Alexandria, besought the pope
to send him the complete collection of the acts of the martyrs drawn
up by Eusebius in the time of Constantine. He believed these were to
be found in Rome. He had doubtless in view the “Collection of Martyrs”
(συλλογὴ τῶν μαρτυρίων) just mentioned. St Gregory replied that they had
in Rome a collection of the names of all the martyrs in one volume, but
no complete collection of their acts.[769]
The work of Eusebius here referred to was not forthcoming in Alexandria
either, and was already regarded as lost, but the fact that such a work
had once existed was not forgotten. A work of the same kind was also
attributed to St Jerome, which is also no longer in existence. The
senator Cassiodorus exhorts his monks to read diligently the histories
of the martyrs (_passiones martyrum_) who have lived throughout the
whole world, in order to stir themselves up to the practice of virtue.
These they will find in the letter written by St Jerome to Chromatius
and Heliodorus. These last words are somewhat obscure, for it would be
impossible to deal with the acts of all the martyrs in one letter.[770]
However, so much is plain that Cassiodorus ascribed to St Jerome a work
of this kind. Finally, it must be borne in mind that St Jerome had
translated some of the historical writings of Eusebius. This may have
given rise to the idea that he had also translated his collection of the
martyrdoms. It is not impossible that he may have done so, although we
have no evidence of the fact. Bede also speaks of a martyrology of St
Jerome, but with some uncertainty, for he had never seen it himself, and
thought St Jerome may have been only the translator and not the author of
the work.[771] In Bede’s day the so-called _Hieronymianum_ was already
in existence, as the researches of De Rossi and Duchesne have recently
shown. That it was also known to Gregory the Great and Cassiodorus cannot
be maintained, especially as the words of the latter are so obscure. It
is, however, certain from his words that Cassiodorus believed Jerome to
have been the author of a work of this kind. Further evidence for this
is, unfortunately, lacking, though the thing is not impossible in itself.
Abbot Hilduin, a writer of the ninth century, referred also to this
point, and was of opinion that Constantine had collected all the acts of
the martyrs from all parts of the empire, and had sent them to Eusebius
at Cæsarea.[772] This statement, however, is not of much importance,
since it represents a view originating in the interpolated letter of St
Jerome already referred to.
However this may be, there have existed since the eighth century
numerous MSS. of a collection of the names of the martyrs of all times
and countries belonging to the Roman Empire which went by the name
of the _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_, and to which was attached two
reputed letters of St Jerome to Chromatius, Bishop of Aquileia, and to
Heliodorus, Bishop of Altinum. The work corresponds to that mentioned by
Cassiodorus.
Upon close examination, it is quite clear that the work, as we have
it now, cannot have been composed by St Jerome. It includes the names
of many persons who lived at a date subsequent to St Jerome, as, for
example, to name one out of many, St Gregory the Great on the 12th March.
In other respect the names do not extend beyond the seventh century, as
appears upon an inspection of the earliest codices. In later recensions
we naturally meet with the names of many persons who lived at a still
later date.
As regards the date of composition, the personality of the compiler and
kindred questions, we are face to face with an historical and literary
problem resembling that of the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals and the
Donation of Constantine. Still some light has now been cast upon these
difficulties, since we have at last a thoroughly critical text of the
document, the investigations of De Rossi and Duchesne having determined
which of the existing MSS. is the earliest.[773]
Among the MSS. belonging to the eighth century, is one written for the
Monastery of Weissenburg in the diocese of Spires, now preserved in
Wolfenbüttel, _Codex Wisseniburgensis_, 23. De Rossi believed it was
written shortly before the death of Abbot Wando († 756) of Fontanelle
in the diocese of Rouen, because his death has been added by a later
hand on _XV. Kal. Mai_. It is certain that the codex was written before
772, because this date is referred to in it. Of about the same period is
the Parisian Codex 10 837, belonging to Echternach. It is written in an
Anglo-Saxon hand, and is perhaps somewhat later than the former, but is
derived from an original MS. certainly older than the Weissenburg Codex.
This view which is that of De Rossi gains support from the fact that the
two festivals in honour of the Holy Cross are not contained in the codex,
while they appear in the Weissenburg and all later codices. Both codices
are full of errors of grammar and spelling. The codex from the monastery
of Hilariacum originally belonging to Metz and now at Berne, is more
correct and better written, but unfortunately only extends to the 21st
November. The latest entries made in it by the first hand belong to the
year 766 and refer to Bishop Chrodegang. The text dates from the time of
Clotaire II. (584-628).
These three most ancient recensions do not differ from one another to any
great extent, but the MSS. belonging to later times, when the work was
often copied and used, show much greater divergencies, for alterations
and additions were continually being made in it corresponding to the
requirements of the local churches and monasteries where it was employed.
Since the two learned editors have succeeded in detecting the original
matter common to the three recensions, we are in possession of the
following result: the martyrology which formed the original source of
all later texts as far as they are known to us was written in Auxerre
between 592 and 600. The grounds for this conclusion are briefly as
follows: the compiler is evidently well informed as to ecclesiastical and
secular events in Gaul, in fact far better than with regard to any other
country. In naming the cities of Gaul, he gives the provinces in which
they are situated, and gives also many unusual details respecting the
individuals named, as for example when he gives in the case of bishops,
not only the day on which they died, but the date of their ordinations
as well; the names are also always given correctly, while in other
documents they are often frightfully distorted. A circumstance which
especially points to Auxerre as the locality from which the martyrology
originated is that this not very important city is mentioned thirty
times while the neighbouring and much larger city of Lyons is named
only twenty-six times. Moreover, all the bishops of Auxerre, with one
solitary exception, are named, while there are many gaps in the lists
of the bishops of Lyons and Autun. Thirdly, a _litania_ is enjoined on
the first of each month, and this custom was peculiar to the Church of
Auxerre, having just been introduced at that time by Bishop Aunarius.
Again, the day of the ordination of this not very famous Bishop Aunarius
is marked (II. Kal. Aug.), but not as we might have expected the day of
his death. The same holds good of Syagrius, Bishop of Autun; the date of
his consecration (natale suscepti episcopatus) is given, but not the date
of his death which happened in 599 or 600. The last Gallic bishop whose
death is noticed is Avitus of Clermont († 592).
On account of these facts, Duchesne arrived at the conclusion that
the so-called _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_ originated at Auxerre
between 592 and 600. This conclusion is not weakened by the fact that
personages belonging to the seventh century are included,[774] such as
Desiderius of Vienne († 606-7), Columbanus († 615), Eustasius, Abbot of
Luxeuil († 629), and Abbot Attala, the date of whose death is unknown.
Desiderius, indeed, appears in the Berne and Weissenburg Codices, and
the three others in that of Echternach, but they have been added by the
transcribers, and both De Rossi and Duchesne are agreed that none of
these codices represent the original text composed at Auxerre.
The editors go yet further, and show that the compiler was also very
well informed concerning ecclesiastical matters in Italy, especially in
Northern Italy and Milan; while he has comparatively little to say about
Spain, Rhætia, Dalmatia, Pannonia, and nothing at all about Scotto-Irish
saints. This postulates the existence of a yet older work, used by the
compiler of Auxerre, which may have been identical with the work familiar
to Cassiodorus.[775] This document, however, has entirely disappeared
without leaving behind it any other documents derived from it. If one
follows the perspective thus opened out, the connecting links may finally
come to light which connect this document with the work of Eusebius,
referred to by Eulogius of Alexandria and in the two letters attributed
to St Jerome.
However, we shall not follow these interesting suggestions further, but
shall content ourselves with the fact that in the _Hieronymianum_, in
the earliest form in which it has come down to us, we have a primitive
martyrology,[776] with additions and alterations made to it by a
Frankish transcriber or compiler between 592-600. In its original form
it contained only saints belonging to the Græco-Roman empire, and this
accounts for the absence of the Irish saints and those of Mesopotamia.
Thus at last the so-called _Hieronymianum_ has been made serviceable for
use in historical and liturgical investigations; the learned editors, in
giving us as far as possible the original text, have given us for the
first time a reliable edition of the document, and the Bollandists have
rendered the work still more serviceable by the addition of a reliable
alphabetical index, thus considerably lightening the labours of those
who use this work. This is no common gain for liturgical study, since
the _Hieronymianum_, obtained in the course of time, an increasingly
prominent position, more prominent indeed at last than it deserved;
moreover it has not been without its influence upon later martyrologies
and calendars, and has had an appreciable effect even on the development
of the Church’s cycle of festivals.
To know the number and condition of the Christians who had laid down
their lives for the faith within the limits of the Roman empire would
be of the highest interest now and always; to record the name, date,
and locality of each with statistical accuracy would have been a work
deserving the thanks of posterity. It might have been done immediately
after the cessation of the Diocletian persecution, but only with the
assistance of the secular authorities. Eulogius and the writer of the
letters ascribed to St Jerome were on the right track in thinking that
Eusebius had undertaken to furnish a work of this character with the
assistance of the emperor; the latter informs us that Eusebius actually
did so, and that the collection contained the names of from five to eight
hundred martyrs for every day of the year, thus giving a total of between
182,500 and 292,000 martyrs.
Our Latin compiler indeed has not brought together so many names, and he
states in the reputed letter of St Jerome that he only admitted those
martyrs whose commemoration was celebrated with special solemnity (qui
sunt in amplissima festivitate). However he has brought together in
round numbers 6000 names—quite a respectable number when compared with
the _Menologium Basilianum_, which belongs to a much later date, and it
remains a question how it was possible for a Frankish scholar of the
sixth century to get together so many names. Some of them certainly are
distorted, others are repeated in a remarkable way, and others again
have an unreal sound,[777] but when all deductions have been made, there
still remains so much that is historical and unexceptional that the whole
work cannot be dismissed as devoid of all authority. With regard to the
origin and value of this mass of names, one finds oneself confronted by a
question which seems equally insoluble, whether the compiler was a native
of Gaul, of North Italy, or of anywhere else. He certainly incorporated
into his martyrology the older lists of martyrs existing at his day,
many of which are known to us, and the two editors have displayed both
industry and insight in making this clear in several cases; yet all these
lists of martyrs taken together contain scarcely a thousand names. From
what sources has the compiler obtained the rest? This is the question
which still awaits an answer. On the other hand the compiler has given
expression to an important principle to which is due his influence on the
hagiology and liturgy of later ages. The Arian Calendar of which we have
spoken, concerned itself with the eastern half alone of the empire, and
is composed almost entirely of names belonging thereto, but the author
of the _Hieronymianum_ set to work on quite another principle; he had
in view the entire Christian world, East and West, Africa and Gaul. His
point of view is infinitely wider than that of his predecessors, and even
of many of his successors, and he made use of the fruitful principle of
universalism, rejecting all particularism in the ecclesiastical sphere.
While there had been calendars in the West containing the names of
martyrs belonging to a particular diocese or country, the compiler of
the _Hieronymianum_ regarded the Church as a whole—as catholic. The
meaning of this will be seen from a glance at the service-books, the
sacramentaries especially. In the ninth century and later, the Roman
sacramentaries, even those intended for use in other countries such as
those of St Gall, Mainz, Cologne, and Essen, contain only Masses for the
Roman saints, confining themselves to one or two local saints in the
supplement. The principle of universality only very gradually affected
the formularies of the Mass, and did not reach its full expression until
the sixteenth century, but it came to the fore much earlier in the
martyrologies, as early indeed as Ado, Usuardus, Notker, and Rabanus
Maurus, chiefly owing to the influence of the _Hieronymianum_.
This document is not without peculiarities of its own. In all recensions
of the text, the 25th March is given as the day of Christ’s death, and
since James the Lord’s brother, here called also “The Just,” died at
Easter, his death is placed also on the 25th March. In the Berne Codex
the sacrifice of Isaac is commemorated on the same day. There is a goodly
array of Old Testament names, _e.g._ Aggeus, Habacuc, Job, Joel, Aaron,
Eliseus, etc. In the Berne Codex, the 28th September is given as the day
of Noe’s going out of the ark, the 7th January as the day of the Exodus,
and the 1st May as the commencement of our Lord’s preaching.
Now that the date of its composition has been fixed, the _Hieronymianum_
is specially valuable for the information which it gives concerning
Frankish hagiography and its gradual development. Whoever will
devote himself in the future to investigating St Denys of Paris, St
Ursula, etc., must pursue his studies in the various recensions and
transcriptions of the _Hieronymianum_. It will well repay the trouble,
if someone would investigate how many of the reputed martyrs of Lower
Germany are named in this important document. It only knows of two
martyrs at Cologne, Asclinius and Pamphilus, in addition to the Moorish
martyrs whose numbers, however, vary greatly in the MSS.; their commander
is named Gereon. No saints are given for Mainz. For Treves we have
Valerius, Paulinus, Maximinus, and a Bishop Militius; Palmatius Thyrsus
and his Innumerable Company had not yet been discovered or invented. For
Bonn the connection in which Cassius, Florentius, and Mallusius stand to
one another on the 10th October is worthy of notice. We find some African
martyrs first of all on this day, and then, without indication of Bonn or
any other locality, we have: “Et alibi Cassi, Eusebi, Florenti, Victoris,
Agrippinæ, Mallusi cum alii trecentos xxx.” (_sic_). The later legends
omit Eusebius, and put Mallusius instead, who was buried at Birten and
discovered by Bishop Evergisil; the martyr Victor is said to have been
also originally buried at Birten.[778]
With regard to the Roman martyrs and the succession of the popes, the
_Hieronymianum_ is not altogether independent of the Philocalian list,
although it is fuller. The earliest pope mentioned in it is Cornelius,
and the last St Leo I., while the Philocalian list begins with Lucius
(† 254), and ends with Boniface I. († 422). The _Hieronymianum_ gives
also the days of the consecration of some of them, _e.g._ Miltiades,
Liberius, Innocent I., and Boniface I. On the other hand the earlier
martyrs are omitted with the exception of Clement I.
The indications of place are dealt with on various principles. For the
most part the city is naturally given where the martyrdom took place;
occasionally only the province is given, as, for example, Achaia, Asia,
Campania, Sardinia, and Sicily, this being especially the case in regard
to the last-named island. Remarkable on account of its vagueness is the
phrase _in Africa_ which occurs more than a hundred times without the
name of any town being given, but, nevertheless, in the case of many
African martyrs the town is given.[779] Often so many personal names
follow one another that one suspects that some indications of place have
dropped out, a conjecture to which one is all the more inclined as the
indefinite expression _et alibi_ is very often employed.
The martyrs themselves are only distinguished by their rank in the
hierarchy, when they belonged to the sacred ministry, _i.e._ deacon,
presbyter, bishop, but by far the larger number of personages are without
any indication of place, date, etc. In many cases it is evident that the
same person has been entered twice or oftener,[780] and mutilations,
disfigurements and alterations are very numerous, more especially in the
later MSS. The transcribers allowed themselves considerable freedom,
adding supplements and corrections, apart from the unintentional mistakes
they made. A hint of a literary nature is given by the remark, “cujus”
or “quorum acta habentur,” indicating the existence of the acts of such
and such a martyr. Later transcribers were not satisfied with this, but,
when the acts were forthcoming, added larger or shorter notices from them
to the text.[781] Had we the work as it came originally from the hands
of the compiler of Auxerre, these imperfections would disappear to a
considerable extent. A glance at any entry in the three recensions shows
how freely the earliest transcribers dealt with the original text; in the
new edition the three recensions are printed in parallel columns.[782]
All these remarks have an intimate bearing upon the question of the
sources and origin of the work. With regard to sources, the Roman
_Depositio Martyrum_ has been incorporated bodily, and a great part of
the Carthaginian Calendar as well, but the compiler must have had the
Arian Martyrology in a better copy than that which has come down to us,
or even in its original form; this is shown by the fact that frequently
he has quite correctly enlarged some of its indefinite entries.[783]
His use of this martyrology is clear from his inserting Eusebius among
the saints, in ignorance of his Arianism; he inserted the name in all
simplicity, a mistake avoided by the Greek menologies, and the same may
possibly have been the case with regard to Arius in the Weissenburg
Codex.[784]
This employment of earlier sources coupled with the numerous correct
entries in the _Hieronymianum_ entirely excludes the view that the
document is a fabrication. Indeed its composition can safely be said
to have come about in the following manner:—in the two first centuries
the persecutions were on the whole local, and the number of martyrs not
very large, although the persecution at Lyons in 177 caused the death of
more than forty martyrs, not counting confessors; a change took place
in the third century, when persecutions were commanded by the emperors
for the whole extent of the empire, and, under Diocletian, the martyrs
were to be reckoned, if not by millions, at least by thousands. At the
conclusion of the persecutions, it must have occurred to many to ask
how many had lost their lives in this troublous period, and the idea of
drawing up statistics of the martyrdoms must have sprung up. We have no
evidence of anything of this sort actually having been done, but in the
sixth century there was a widespread opinion that a work of this kind
had been accomplished by Eusebius under Constantine, and the passages
quoted from Cassiodorus and Gregory the Great show it was believed a
list of the martyrs for the whole year existed in Italy or in Rome. If
this work contained merely a list of names and dates, its interest must
have been merely statistical and in no wise scientific, since little
could be learnt from the names by themselves. In the seventh century,
however, either in Auxerre or in North Italy, it seems to have been held
in greater esteem; it found a transcriber and reviser, and finally was
brought into connection with the liturgy owing to its being read at the
choir-offices in monasteries and convents, and by this means, it won its
way to a position of widespread importance, which, however, did not have
an advantageous effect on the purity of the text.
With regard to the printed editions, there are several published
by various scholars who relied upon late MSS. of little value. We
may mention the editions of Fiorentini, Lucca 1668 (incomplete), of
D’Achery in the _Spicilegium_, ii. 1 (Migne, xxx.), and of Galesinius,
Milan, 1577. It used to be disputed which of these editions gave the
earliest text, but they are all quite superseded now. There are also
many abstracts of the _Hieronymianum_ in mediæval handwriting, as, for
example, the _Martyrol. Gallicanum_; Martène, _Ampliss. Coll. VI._,
called after Chauvelin (Migne, _Patr. Lat._, xxx. 607); the _Fuldense_;
_Anal. Boll. XIII._; the Reichenau martyrology, etc., but they are of
small scientific importance.
5. _The Lectionary and Martyrology of Silos_
Since the appointment of special Masses in honour of the saints is a
distinguishing feature of the Latin rite, Western liturgical books are
in themselves a source from which we can increase our knowledge of
the saints’ festivals, the most important in this respect being the
sacramentaries, but the other books used at the celebration of Mass, the
collections of epistles and gospels especially, also throw light on the
subject.
In addition to the books of this kind already named, the _Lectionarius_
of Silos has, in recent times, attracted much attention in this
connection.[785] It is of the highest importance both for the history
of the development of the ecclesiastical year and for the festivals of
the saints, for as it belongs to the period preceding the Carolingian
liturgical reform, it represents a very ancient rite of which, until its
discovery, all trace had disappeared. This rite is not the same as the
southern Spanish rite of the Province of Boetica from which the so-called
Mozarabic rite is derived, but belongs to the ancient ecclesiastical
province of Toledo. The codex in which it is contained was written
before the year 1062, for a later event, _i.e._ the translation of St
Isidore’s relics from Seville to Leon, is added by a later hand. This
codex, originally belonging to the monastery of St Sebastian at Silos and
now in the National library of Paris, contains two distinct documents, a
lectionary giving the lections from scripture for the whole of the year,
and a martyrology; the latter was compiled between 925 and 1000; but the
lectionary much earlier. Its antiquity is proved: (1) By the limited
numbers of saints’ days; (2) by the circumstance that the catechumenate
is still in force; (3) that the Saturdays in Lent are not fast days,
agreeing with the eastern custom; (4) the Sundays after Epiphany and
Pentecost do not appear as forming part of the ecclesiastical year, and
are not even numbered, but, as in the _Gelasianum_, there are added
twenty-four Masses called “dominicæ quotidianæ”; (5) there are five
Sundays in Advent; (6) with regard to saints’ days, Anastasius the
Persian is not yet placed along with St Vincent on the 21st January, and
the Apostle James is also omitted along with all reference to the Spanish
legend connected with his name. From this it is plain that St James, at
the time when this work was compiled enjoyed no special worship in Spain.
On these grounds the first editor, G. Morin, regards the lectionary as
certainly belonging to 650.
The book represents a rite hitherto entirely unknown but which can be no
other than the ancient rite of Toledo, since in it the Annunciation is
placed on the 18th December as is prescribed by the first canon of the
tenth council of Toledo. It differs from the Mozarabic rite as to the
number of Sundays in Advent, of which the latter reckons six, and also in
the eight Masses for the Sundays after Epiphany and Pentecost; another
peculiarity is that the Innocents’ Day is omitted on the 27th December,
but an “Allisio Infantium” is kept instead in the 8th January. None of
the Roman and Byzantine feasts of our Lady are mentioned, and only one
feast of the Holy Cross on the 3rd May, omitting the other on the 14th
September; all Masses for saints’ days have two epistles.
The martyrology of Silos also is an important document on account of its
original character, although it is some three centuries later than the
lectionary. It is entitled, _Martyrum Legium_, and it is considerably
richer in names of saints than the lectionary, and is quite independent
of the _Hieronymianum_, though influenced in a slight degree by the Roman
rite. The martyrs in the Moorish persecution, under, Abdurrhaman II.,
which lasted from 850 to 860, appear in large numbers. The historian of
this persecution, the priest Eugenius of Toledo, who was put to death
on 11th March 859, is entered, but placed on 1st June, the day of the
translation of his relics; St Pelagius of Corduba, who suffered death on
26th June 925 under Abdurrhaman III. is also entered, and this date gives
one limit in fixing the date of the work, the other limit being the year
1000. There are five additions by a later hand, _i.e._ on 12th March,
_Gregorii Papæ_; on 1st May, _Transitus Philippi Apostoli_, without St
James; on 28th April, _Prudentii et Sociorum ejus_; on 21st December,
_S. Thomæ Apostoli_, and on 22nd December the _Translatio corporis S.
Isidori_. Some personages are entered, who are not called saints, but
only _Domnus_, four of whom belong to Toledo, two being bishops: Julian
(† 6th March 690) and Eugenius II. († 29th May 647); on 14th January,
another Julian, and, on 13th March, _Depositio Leandri_. Half of the
entire names belong to Spain, the other half to Rome and the East; of the
Frankish martyrs, Denys of Paris, Afra of Augsburg, and Boniface of Mainz
are commemorated. As regards the feasts of our Lady, besides the ancient
Spanish feast on the 18th December, we have only the Assumption on 15th
August. Litanies are appointed for 10th September, 7th November, and
15th December, besides a fast on 2nd January. The name of the Apostle
St James is absent from the martyrology as well as from the lectionary.
Bishop Torquatus and his companions are placed on 1st May, in both
documents, but in the martyrology they are not described as disciples
of the apostles, which is favourable to their historical existence. The
Apostles Simon and Jude are on the 1st July instead of the 28th October,
and there is also a _Symon Apostolus_ on 19th October as well. Although
traces of later influence appear in this martyrology, it has still
preserved the independent character of the early Christian Calendars.
6. _Egyptian (Coptic) Calendars and Synaxaria_
The anglican archeologist, John Selden († 1634), has given us the
earliest Egyptian calendars in his work on the Jewish Sanhedrin which
was left unfinished when he died. In the third book of this work, Selden
intended to deal with the rite for the dedication of Christian churches,
although this lay beyond the immediate purpose of his investigations,
and he thought that some Arabic Calendars in his possession might have
some bearing on the question.[786] Unfortunately, he gave no information
concerning the MSS. from which these calendars were taken, and they seem,
moreover, when discovered, to have been by no means in a good condition.
Ludolf declared himself dissatisfied with these publications, and
Wüstenfeld remarked: “The Arabic MSS. employed, must have been faulty,
and were made still worse by the faulty reading and transcribing of the
editor and the printing is so incorrect that some words would be almost,
and others quite unintelligible, were there not other helps to their
meaning at hand.”[787] Still, in spite of these well-founded criticisms
from specialists, Selden’s work cannot be over-looked. There seem also to
have been gaps and undecipherable passages in the MS. itself.
There are three calendars edited by Selden: two short, and one long,
the latter being of later date than the others. The two first have a
supplement to each month, called _ordo alter_, both appear to have been
originally drawn up for the use of monasteries, but are distinguished
from one another in important points. We shall designate them by the
letters A and B. A is at any rate of Egyptian origin and is monophysite
in character, because the heresiarch Severus, who lived in the sixth
century, twice appears in it, on 8th February and 29th September. Other
peculiarities in the document are: 1. It has two feasts of the Holy
Cross, on 6th March _Inventio Crucis_, by which doubtless the recovery
of the Cross by Heraclius in 629 is meant, and _festum crucis gloriosæ_
on 14th September. 2. The Nativity of our Lady is on 26th April. 3.
The commemorations of the Mother of God in use in Egypt, are given on
the 21st of the months January, March, May, July, and October: B omits
these feasts. 4. A has the archangel Gabriel on the 18th December, but
no festival of the Annunciation, while B places _Evangelismus_ on the
25th March, and no feast on the 18th December pointing onwards to the
impending Nativity of our Lord. 5. A has the four living creatures of
the Apocalypse on the 4th November who appear also later on in Coptic
calendars: B omits them. 6. In A the conquest of Egypt by the Mahometans
is seven times mentioned, _e.g._ 26th May, 10th December, etc. 7. A
does not mention St Ignatius of Antioch, but B places him on the 20th
December. 8. B has the Emperor Theodosius on the 3rd March, St John
Chrysostom on the 7th May and 13th November, also Ephrem Syrus on the 9th
July, and Dioscorus of Alexandria on the 31st August.
From these entries we see that B is catholic and Syrian, and A
monophysite and Egyptian. Both certainly belong to the same period. B was
probably also used in Egypt, for the Patriarch Isaac I. of Alexandria is
mentioned, who died on the 10th Athyr = 6th November 688 or 689.[788]
The Athanasius mentioned on the 6th September must have been Athanasius
II. who became patriarch of Antioch in 629.[789] These calendars and
the following one as well are contained in the Arabic translation of
Abulaibsan Achmed Calcasendi who has prefaced them with a list of
Coptic festivals (see above p. 26). Had they come down to us in better
condition, they would be of the utmost importance in the investigation
of our subject, notwithstanding their heretical character. The third of
the calendars published by Selden has fared little better; it certainly
belongs to the same period as the others, although somewhat later in
date. The latest person mentioned in it seems to be the Patriarch
Isaac I., named already in A. It was thought that this was the second
monophysite patriarch of that name who died in 954, but it is not so, for
this personage is named on the 10th Athyr = 6th November, and the Coptic
Synaxarium, translated by Wüstenfeld, which mentions him on the same day,
expressly states that he was the immediate successor of John, surnamed
Semnudæus from the place of his birth, Sebennytos, who died on the 9th
Athyr 686, after having pointed him out as his successor. The predecessor
of Isaac II., however, was Sophronius, and his successor was called Job.
Accordingly Isaac I. must be intended here, and thus the calendar belongs
to the end of the seventh or the beginning of the eighth century.[790]
Its monophysite character is proved from the mention of the heresiarch
Severus three times, _i.e._ on the 26th April (_festum Severi_), on the
4th September, and on the 1st December. It has no feast of St Peter and
St Paul on the 29th June, but only a _Planctus Pauli_ on the 18th March.
The following points are worthy of notice:—25th March is the day of the
Crucifixion, the 28th May is kept as the _Inventio ossium S. Lucæ_ and
the 6th March as the _Manifestatio Crucis_, where the later calendar
adds, _per Heraclium imperatorem_. We have the beginnings of the Egyptian
custom of commemorating the Mother of God on the 21st of each month,
_i.e._ on the 21st Payni and the 21st Phaophi. The _festum Dominæ_ on the
2nd August is certainly a feast of our Lady, but the _festum Mirjam_ on
the 22nd July is probably a festival of St Mary Magdalen. There are many
things in this document the meaning of which can only be surmised.
A welcome addition to our knowledge of liturgical matters among the Copts
exists in a calendar of the ninth century in the Vatican library; it is
found along with a Coptic _Evangeliarium_ in a codex written in 1328.
The document is described and translated into Latin by A. Mai in the
fourth volume of his _Nova Collectio_.[791] The date is determined by
the fact that the Patriarch Amba Zacharias, who is entered as a saint
in the later Synaxarium on the 13th Athyr,[792] does not appear in the
calendar; he was patriarch, according to Le Quien from 1005 to 1032. The
last Jacobite patriarchs mentioned are those who succeeded one another
from Alexander to Michael (Chail). Michael was succeeded by John, after
a vacancy of ten years, who ruled from 766-799.[793] Accordingly this
calendar belongs to the ninth century. A striking peculiarity in it is
that the _Manifestatio Crucis_ is on the 17th-19th September instead of
the 14th as in all other calendars.
The circumstance that several saints, instead of having one
commemoration, have several, may give rise to confusion. St Thecla
appears no less than five times, twice with the title martyr (on the 25th
February and the 10th September), once as _apostola_ (on the 12th July),
on the 6th May and 3rd December she has no title. Although there was a
second St Thecla, still this would not altogether explain the entries.
Then James the son of Zebedee is mentioned on the 28th and 30th of April,
as well as James the Lord’s brother on the 12th July and 23rd October.
St Michael the Archangel occurs eight times. Our Lady’s Nativity is
celebrated on both the 26th April and the 7th September. No importance
is to be attached to these repetitions; they are purely arbitrary, and
are due to the desire to provide a name for every day in the calendar,
and to fill up vacant places.[794] This appears especially from the
circumstance that on the 29th of every Egyptian month, corresponding to
the 25th in the Julian Calendar, a commemoration of Christ’s Nativity is
given, and on the 21st of each month a feast of our Lady (Commemoratio
Dominæ S. Mariæ). The Death and Assumption of our Lady is placed on
the 16th January. St Joseph the Carpenter has his commemoration on the
20th July. Fides, Spes, and Charitas appear as three martyrs under
Hadrian on the 25th January; they are said to be daughters of a reported
Sophia. No St Catherine appears either in this calendar or in the later
_Synaxarium_ but the heretic Severus († 539) is twice commemorated: on
the 29th September (_Adventus Severi Patrarchæ in Ægyptum_) and on the
8th February, when he died.
Coptic calendars of a later date are still richer in names, but are full
of legends and absurdities which show the steady decline of culture among
the sect under Mahometan rule. This is especially the case with the
_Synaxarium_ or collection of legends compiled from ancient sources by
Bishop Amba Michael of Atriba and Malidsch at the end of the fourteenth
century.[795] The basis of the collection is an older work of the
same kind composed sometime about the year 1090 (see 3rd Athyr).[796]
Information concerning the saints who lived in monasteries was taken by
Bishop Michael from a so-called “Guide,” used by both the Egyptian Copts
and Melchites.[797] A “Guide” of this kind had been written especially
for Alexandria by Bishop Amba John of Kift. Michael refers in his work to
the years 1382 and 1387 (see 7th Bermahat and 19th Bermuda), and so must
have lived in the fourteenth century.
As the work contains much information drawn from the ecclesiastical
histories of the Copts and Abyssinians, it has been translated and much
used in spite of its faulty character. It affords many useful particulars
concerning the traditions and feasts of the Egyptian Church, and on this
account Stephen Assemani undertook to make an abstract of the whole work
which is printed in the fourth volume of Mai’s _Nova Collectio_. F.
Wüstenfeld made a translation of the first part containing the first half
of the Egyptian year, from September to February; the second half, from
March to August including the intercalary days, is unfortunately still
untranslated.
7. _The Menology of Constantinople (Eighth Century)_
The Eastern Church possesses a calendar of Saints belonging to the eighth
century, which occupies an intermediate position between a merely Eastern
Calendar, and one that is universal. Its title runs, Calendar of the
Gospels for Festivals (μηνολόγιον τῶν εὐαγγελίων ἑορταστικῶν), for it
gives the passage from the Gospels to be read on each day; it contains a
considerable number of saints belonging to the East, though the days are
far from being all occupied. March and April have remarkably few feasts;
this is owing to the ancient, but even then obsolete injunction of the
Trullan Council that the feasts of no martyrs were to be kept in Lent.
Several circumstances prove that Constantinople was the locality where
this document originated and was in use. Certain quarters of the
city, as for example, Blachernæ and Chalcoprateia, are mentioned; the
11th May is mentioned as the day of the city’s foundation; so too is
the earthquake which threw down the city walls on the 24th September
557. A large number of the patriarchs of Constantinople are included,
twenty-nine in all, beginning with Metrophanes (4th June 305-325)
and ending with Paul who was patriarch from September 686 to the 2nd
September 693. The absence of the twenty-one reputed bishops from St
Andrew to Metrophanes suggests the thought that when this document was
drawn up this invention had not been accepted.
Morcelli maintains that the Paul the younger mentioned on the 2nd
September is the Patriarch Paul II., under whom the Trullan Council was
held in 692, but he would, however, exonerate him from participation
in the schismatic council, since he opposed it at a later date; this,
however, contradicts the accepted chronology. No patriarch, not even
Germanus, and none of the many martyrs and confessors belonging to
the time of the Iconoclastic controversy under Leo the Isaurian and
Constantine Copronymus, are mentioned. From this one concludes that
the menology was composed immediately after the cessation of the first
Iconoclastic controversy, at a date when the judgment on the sanctity
of these personages had not yet been concluded, or when people were
unwilling to revive the painful recollections which their name evoked.
The martyrs, confessors, and doctors of the Eastern Church are there in
long array, at least all the celebrated ones, not only those belonging to
all four patriarchates, but also those belonging to other countries, such
as Anastasius the Persian († 628, on the 22nd January). The popes and
saints of the West are excluded with the exception of the three martyrs
Lawrence, Gervasius, and Protasius.
The names of many Old Testament personages are included: Moses, Aaron,
Elias, Jeremias, etc., also almost all the apostles and their immediate
disciples, but for the most part they occur on different dates from
those which they usually occupy in the Roman Calendar. For instance,
St John the Evangelist is on the 8th May and the 26th September, St
Barnabas on the 11th June, SS. Peter and Paul on the 29th June, St Titus
on the 25th August, St Thomas on the 6th October, St Philip on the 14th
November, St Andrew on the 30th November. SS. Joachim and Anna appear
on the 9th September, the day after our Lady’s Nativity, the Archangel
Michael on the 8th November, St Thecla (here entitled proto-martyr) on
the 24th September, and the Holy Innocents on the 31st December. For the
first time, Constantine and his mother Helena, appear as saints in the
calendar; they are commemorated together on the 21st May, a day which
falls before that on which Constantine actually died. Justinian and his
consort Theodora are commemorated also, but do not appear with the title
“saint”; they are placed on the 14th November, the day on which Justinian
died, Theodora having preceded him on the 28th June 548. Justinian was
called a prince of pious memory by the popes Pelagius II. and Gregory the
Great.[798]
From these indications it appears that this martyrology was
intended principally if not exclusively for the city and diocese of
Constantinople. The safest conclusion to arrive at is to regard it as
the martyrology of the patriarchate of Constantinople, since it steers
a middle course, as it were, between particularism and universality: it
is the most ancient of the Greek menologies known to us. Among the Greeks
St John Damascene is regarded as the originator of calendars of this
kind,[799] corresponding to Ado in the Latin Church. The menology has
been edited with an excellent commentary by Stephen A. Morcelli (Rome,
1788), having previously been published in Latin at Urbino (1727) from
the Codex of Cardinal Albani.
8. _The Menology of the Emperor Basil II., and the Syrian Lectionary of
the Eleventh Century_
This menology takes its name from Basil II. _Porphyrogenitus_ (976-1025),
and was given to the public for the first time in its entirety by
Cardinal Albani at Urbino in 1727, from two codices each containing
six months. It is distinguished from the menology which we have just
described by having a saint on every day of the year, and most of the
days have more than one; the saints are drawn from the whole extent of
the Eastern Church, and the Western Church, especially Sicily and Rome,
is more prominent than in the former document.
As regards Rome, there are a large number of popes given who are entirely
absent from the other menology: Silvester, Leo, Agatho, Gregory I.,
Celestine, etc. With the exception of Gregory I. they are generally
placed on different dates from those on which they are commemorated in
the West, _e.g._ Silvester on the 2nd January, Leo on the 18th February,
and Alexander on the 16th March, etc. It appears as if the sources which
the compiler had at his disposal for the West were insufficient, since,
for example, he gives St Perpetua, St Felicitas and companions once on
the 2nd February, and again on the 14th March, with the addition, “in
Rome”; from this it would appear that he thought the saints mentioned on
the first date had belonged to some other locality. St Agnes is given on
the 5th July.
Not so many patriarchs of Constantinople are given as one would have
expected, and many, indeed, are omitted who are included in the menology
of which we have spoken in the previous section, as, for example,
Nectarius, Paul II., Gennadius, Thomas II., but on the other hand we find
some who lived after the composition of the earlier document, especially
Germanus, Tarasius, and Antonius II., surnamed Cauleas († 12th February
896).[800]
In other points the _Basilianum_ resembles the former work, except that
it is fuller in every respect. The most striking feature is the large
number of saints belonging to religious orders contained in it, who
for the most part are specially designated; even the patriarch of the
Western monks, St Benedict, is not forgotten, and is given on his proper
day. Names from the Old Testament occur frequently, and from the New
Testament, we have almost all the disciples of the apostles whose names
are given, and these are designated as “belonging to the Seventy.” The
number of the days of apostles is considerable, though seldom coinciding
with the days observed in the Western Church, except in the case of St
Mark, St Barnabas, SS. Peter and Paul, and St Andrew. Both the St James
are absent, and so are deprived of veneration within the region in which
this document was followed,[801] but there is a feast of all the apostles
on the 30th June. St Anna appears on the 25th July; St John the Baptist
on the 24th June and 29th August. It is to be noticed that the first four
general councils have each a special day allotted to them, while in the
_Constantinopolitanum_ all are commemorated on the same day—16th July.
It is strange to find not only earthquakes, included, but also defeats
in the wars with the Persians, Arabs, and Bulgarians, but unfortunately
there is nothing to indicate the localities where these events happened
(see the 7th and 20th February, the 23rd March, the 24th May, etc.). This
exceeds the limits observed in liturgical documents.
As the day of the foundation of Constantinople (the 11th May) is again
included in this document, we must conclude that it belongs to this city.
Since, too, Goths and Persians find a place in it, it is ahead of its
predecessors in its attempts to achieve universality.[802]
While the admission of foreign names is to be welcomed as a step in
advance, it may yet, on the other hand, be a source of confusion and give
rise to mistakes later on. We find, namely, in this menology, that the
names of foreign saints are not always given on the correct date, but
are arbitrarily placed on other days than those to which they belonged.
Later redactors, when they found the same name on different dates, may
have thought that different persons were meant, and this may have been
the cause of the repetition of the names of saints. This shows that in
admitting names of new saints, and the correct day of whose death had not
been transmitted, they acted according to their fancy. This was the case
with regard to the majority of the Seventy Disciples, many of whom appear
here for the first time. The same must have taken place also with feasts
of our Lord, as when the Flight in Egypt is given on the 26th December,
and so placed before the Circumcision and the Presentation. The admission
of foreign names was left to chance or opinion. Thus, _e.g._ the Western
saints Ambrose, Martin of Tours, and Hosius are admitted, but Hilary,
Augustine, Jerome, etc., are passed over.
The impression made by the entire document is that the principles which
were on the whole followed in its composition were not maintained with
sufficient care, but yielded more than was right to opinion and caprice.
In many cases, too, the necessary knowledge of history, and a sufficient
supply of literary material seems to have been lacking.
A useful document, especially for saints’ days, is a lectionary of the
orthodox Syrians contained in the codex xix. of the Vatican Library.
It was written in the monastery of Mar Mussa at Antioch in 1030, and
contains in the first section the lections for the ecclesiastical year,
in the second, those for saints’ days, beginning with the 1st September
as New Year’s Day. In it are given the martyrs of the Iconoclastic
controversy, several orthodox patriarchs of Constantinople, Nicephorus
(† 2nd June 828) being the last; then come many names from the old
Testament, and many feasts of apostles, the _Catenæ Petri_ on the
16th January being one of them, four feasts of St John the Baptist,
and six of our Lady. There are no Roman or Western saints with the
exception of St Lawrence. This document has been published by Count F.
Miniscalchi-Errizzo under the title _Evangeliarium Hierosolymitanum_ (2
vols. 4to, Verona, 1682).
In using documents of this kind for purposes of historical investigation,
as for instance in order to determine the day on which a historical
personage died, the appeal must always be to the local sources. In
the case of saints belonging to the Western Church no importance must
be attached to the fact that the Easterns may have transferred them
to a different day, and _vice versâ_, as, for example, in the case of
St Ignatius of Antioch. Where the day is given in some local source,
otherwise deserving of credit, we can be then certain that it is correct.
This must be done with regard to SS. Peter and Paul, for whom the local
sources give invariably the 29th June, while foreign calendars give other
dates, as we find is the case with Polemius, Silvius, and the Arian
martyrology. The compilers of these calendars wished to celebrate the
Princes of the Apostles, but, being ignorant of the actual day of their
death, placed them on any day that seemed suitable. Finally, at a later
date the correct date came to the knowledge of foreign churches, and
found its way into their calendars.
9. _The Kalendarium Marmoreum of Naples_
In the ninth century, a time of great activity in matters relating to
hagiography, the Church of Naples undertook a revision of its calendar,
which exhibits noteworthy peculiarities.
First of all, nearly every day of the year is provided with the name
of a saint, which indicates considerable care and study. This result
was achieved by following the Eastern custom of admitting Old Testament
personages, although not to the same extent. The grounds on which the
selection was made cannot be discovered, for we have Abraham on the 9th
October, Isaac on the 17th March, Eliseus on the 28th November, Daniel
on the 17th December, Zacharias on the 13th May, while other important
personages, such as Isaias, etc., are omitted. We are also reminded of
eastern usage by the commemoration of the council of Ephesus on the 4th
August, and other traces of eastern influence are noticeable in the
admission of a few bishops of Constantinople, such as Metrophanes, and
also of the names of Constantine (without Helena) on the 21st May, and
Theodosius on the 10th November. With regard to Metrophanes, the compiler
is guilty of a remarkable oversight; he has placed him once on the right
day (the 4th June), without his title, and again on the 4th January with
his title, “_Patr. Const._” The confusion between the 4th of June and the
4th of January might easily escape a transcriber, and must have already
existed in the source which the compiler used. In order not to omit any
name the compiler preferred to enter the same name twice, once with, and
once without, its proper title.
This reminds us that St Mark also occurs twice, on the 25th April and
the 17th May. St Philip is united to St James on the 1st May (a trace
of Roman influence), and is found again alone on the 14th November. St
Silvester comes on the 31st December and a _Depositio Silvestri P.P._,
on the 2nd January; a _Jacobus Ap._ and Mattheus on unusual dates, the
15th and 16th November, other Apostles are on more usual dates, _e.g._
St Jude is commemorated on the 21st May. St Bartholomew’s day (the 25th
August) is given wrongly as _Nat. Pass._, being in reality the day of his
translation. The names of Apostles and their disciples are very numerous.
With regard to the worship of the Holy Cross, both days occur (_i.e._
the 3rd May and 14th September), with the title now in use, although
formerly, the feast of the 3rd May was alone observed in the West, and
that of the 14th September in the East. The reason for this circumstance
has been already given in this book. Bishops of Naples naturally appear
frequently; _e.g._ Maro (15th June) belongs to the third century, others
belong to the period from the sixth to the eighth century, such as Redux
on the 27th March († 584), Agnellus on the 9th January († 691), Adeodatus
on the 1st October († 671), Fortunatus on the 14th June († 600 circ.),
Paulus the elder on the 3rd March († 760). The last to be named is
probably Paul the younger on the 17th February († 820).[803] Paul III. of
Constantinople cannot be intended here, for his day is the 30th August.
We may add that the feast of All Saints had not yet been admitted, a
circumstance which throws light on the probable date when this calendar
was drawn up. Special importance attaches to this calendar on account
of its intermediate position between the calendars of the Eastern and
Western Churches.
It was discovered in 1742 in S. Giovanni Maggiore and edited incorrectly,
according to Mai, by Marinius, correctly by Mazzochius (Naples, 1744).
The most recent edition is by A. Mai himself.[804]
10. _Western Authorities from the Sixth to the Eighth Centuries_
In the West the worship of the saints exerted a much stronger influence
on the liturgy than in the East. The Roman and kindred rites provided
special Masses for saints’ days, while in the East the worship of
saints as far as it effected the liturgy continued to be limited to the
canonical hours. At first the lections used at the Psalmody were drawn
from the Holy Scriptures alone, but from the sixth century, passages
from the _passiones martyrum_ were admitted.[805] In course of time,
these became more numerous, and in this way the martyrologies obtained
an ever increasing importance. As regards the Mass, in the earliest
Gallican Masses published by Mone, we find one for the feast of St
Germanus,[806] and several in the _Sacramentarium Leoninum_, and for
many centuries the Masses for saints’ days remained considerably less
numerous than the Masses _de tempore_. Later on, however, they became so
numerous that they were finally indicated in a special calendar bound up
with the sacramentary, such as is now prefixed to the massal as one of
its integral parts. Equally important with the sacramentaries in this
connection are the service-books, containing the epistles and gospels,
called lectionaries. We shall examine these first, and then those of the
martyrologies specially bearing upon the subject we are investigating,
and afterwards we shall utilise whatever we find in the sacramentaries in
connection with saints’ days.
The lectionaries of Luxenil and Silos show very plainly that in the
seventh century the worship of the saints had as yet very slightly
affected the liturgy. The saints’ days are somewhat more numerous in the
_Leoninum_ and in the _Missale Gothico-Gallicanum_ edited by Mabillon and
belonging to the end of the same century.
In both the other Roman sacramentaries the increase of saints’ days is
noticeable. The _Gelasianum_ was originally drawn up especially for the
city of Rome, but the recension in which it has come down to us was
obviously compiled at the request of some other church; at any rate it
contains a number of saints who do not belong to the city of Rome. For
instance, on the 7th August we have the Confessor Donatus who belongs
to Imola, on the 19th a martyr called Magnus who can only be assigned
to Cæsarea in Cappadocia, and on the 27th a martyr Rufus belonging to
Capua; the appearance of the legendary family of martyrs Marius, Martha,
Audifax, and Ambacum or Habacuc is curious, and in addition to these,
there is also a number of saints whose names one would search for in vain
in the better and older recensions of the _Gregorianum_, _e.g._ Soter,
Vitalis, Felicula, Juliana, Euphemia, Juvenal, Nereus and Achilleus,
Cyrinus, Nabor, Nazarius, and Vitus. Of these many were certainly
venerated in Rome, yet had hitherto received no recognition in the
calendars attached to the service-books.
For the Gregorian Sacramentary, the edition most frequently employed is
that of Menard printed in Migne. According to the introduction, it is
taken from a _codex S. Eligii_ and a somewhat later _codex Rodradi_,
which, in Menard’s opinion, was written about 853, but even the earlier
codex has additions belonging to a later period, _e.g._ Projectus (25th
January)[807] and Leo (28th June), as a comparison with the Mainz codex
of St Alban shows. This codex (_i.e._ of St Eligius) according to the
received opinion, was written between 834 and 847, and consists of
three different parts, proceeding indeed from the same hand, but clearly
distinguished from one another. The first part contains the _Gregorianum_
(fol. 1-129) to which have been added as an appendix the Masses of St
Alban, SS. Sergius and Bacchus, All Saints’, and St Augustine, which the
transcriber did not find in the original. In the second part (Collectio
ii., fol. 165-183) the expressions _contestatio_ and _ad complendum_ are
used which show it to be of Frankish origin, and like the first part it
contains the ecclesiastical year, beginning with Christmas. The third
part (fol. 183-204) contains a few additions consisting of prayers and
Masses for special occasions.
It is to be observed that the first part still has the obsolete feast
of the 13th May, _Dedicatio S. Mariæ ad Martyrs_, and only the _Natalis
S. Cæsarii_ on the 1st November, the Mass for All Saints’ being placed
at the end, and not in its proper place (fol. 131). This recalls the
circumstance that Gregory IV. (827-844) transferred the feast of the
13th May to the 1st November. This change was also introduced into the
Frankish empire in 835. The original document was then certainly written
before 835, or indeed earlier, for the _litania minor_, introduced into
the Roman rite by Leo III. about 801, is not given; nevertheless the
three chief feasts of our Lady are already inserted in their proper
places. In the following period until the fifteenth century only a
limited number of new saints’ days were added to the Roman Missal. A
missal written in 1374—_Ordo Missalis secundum Consuetudinem Romanæ
Curiæ_—belonging to the Public Library of Munich, shows an increase of
only twenty-five Masses for saints’ days over the _Gregorianum_ after
more than five hundred years.
Fronteau, chancellor of the University of Paris, published a lectionary
which has important bearings on the study of liturgies; he took it from a
codex written in gold characters belonging to the Church of St Geneviève
in Paris.[808] The editor correctly described it as appertaining to the
city of Rome, because the Roman station churches are given, and the
saints mentioned almost all belong to the city of Rome. The omission
of the festival of St Petronilla (the 31st May) is of importance in
fixing the date of this document, for Gregory III. was the first to
add the Church of the _Cœmeterium S. Petronillæ_ to the other station
churches.[809] Petronilla had already been regarded as a saint in the
city of Rome, but her festival had not made its way into the liturgy
because no _statio_ was held in her Church or in her _Cœmeterium_. The
_Litania Minor_ on the three days before the Ascension, introduced into
the Roman rite by Leo III., is also not to be found here. The editor,
however, deduces that the Lectionary of St Geneviève is later than
Gregory II. from the fact that the Thursdays in Lent are provided with an
_officium_ of their own, an addition introduced first by this pope.[810]
Accordingly this lectionary was composed under Gregory II., between 714
and 731, and it is of great importance for the liturgical student. Its
manner of naming the Sundays after Pentecost deserves especially to be
noticed, the feasts of our Lady of the 15th August and the 8th September
do not fall on these days, but on the 14th August and the 9th September,
and the beheading of St John the Baptist on the 30th August. The only
Greek saint mentioned is Mennas and the only non-Italian, St Cyprian.
The _Cathedra Petri_, _Exaltatio Crucis_ (3rd May), and _Joannes ante
Portam Lat._ (6th May), are not yet known, and on the 28th June, where
_Leo II. Papa et Confessor_ now stands, we have a _Translatio corporis S.
Leonis_. Fronteau points out that this cannot refer to Leo II.[811]
11. _The Martyrologies of Bede, Florus, Wandelbert, and Œngus_[812]
Before the ninth century, the Frankish Church had produced no martyrology
of its own, apart from the so-called _Hieronymianum_, but on the other
hand the young Anglo-Saxon Church put out a work of this kind in the
eighth century, its author being the learned historian of the Anglo-Saxon
Church, the Venerable Bede. Whether he undertook the work spontaneously
or at the desire of his superiors, whether it was intended merely for
his own monastery, or for a wider circle are questions which cannot be
answered, for there is no introduction to the work to inform us on these
points. The work was used in the Frankish empire as is proved by the MSS.
of it found there as well as by the later additions of Florus.
Bede composed his _Martyrologium_ in 731, as he informs us at the
conclusion of his history.[813] It was his intention to give in addition
to the days of the saints’ deaths, the nature of their deaths, and the
names of the judges by whom they were condemned, for by this means the
date of their deaths could be determined with certainty. The basis of
his work was the existing Roman Calendar while he exceeded its limits
in many directions. In the first place, he added to it the saints of
England such as were then venerated; these were few in number, Alban,
Cuthbert, Augustine, Mellitus, Etheltrud, Victor and Paulinus (10th
October), Brigid, etc. Then a comparatively large number of names of
Frankish saints were also introduced, _e.g._ Maximin of Treves (31st
May), Clodoald (St Cloud), Remigius, Denys, Lambert († 17th September
709), the Theban legion, and a few others. Bede rises still further above
the standpoint of national churches and particularism by admitting some
names from the Old Testament, _e.g._ Ezechiel (10th April), Jeremias (1st
May), Eliseus (14th June), Isaias (6th July), Samuel (20th August), etc.;
the dates on which they are commemorated being taken for the most part
from Greek menologies.
Bede collected material for his _Martyrologium_ with great diligence, and
enriched his subject matter with notes from his own reading, as is shown
for instance by his reference to St Cyprian’s treatise _De Lapsis_ in
connection with the martyrs Castus and Æmilius (22nd May) who are named
in it; other sources upon which he also drew were the _Gesta Pontificum_,
the writings of Eusebius, St Gregory’s Dialogues, and especially a
number of _Passiones Martyrum_. Bede’s work shows both diligence and
originality, and an intelligent employment of the materials which came to
hand. Yet, in spite of his diligence, he found material to fill up only
a hundred and eighty days, and so the half of the year remains vacant;
still his compilation is fuller than the Frankish calendars of the eighth
century, and the notes attached to the names of each saint are remarkable
for brevity and precision.
Although the value of Bede’s work is incontestable it was soon found
insufficient; it was diligently copied, and used, but additions of all
sorts were made to it as is proved by the large number of variations in
the existing MSS. Perhaps it met with more acceptance abroad than at
home, for the thirteenth canon of the second council of Cloveshove which
met in 747, only twelve years after Bede’s death, enjoined the use of the
Roman martyrology, without even mentioning Bede.
As regards its publication, the martyrology of Bede was printed for the
first time in Cologne in 1616, but as in the text thus published, all the
days of the year are provided with the names of saints, it is impossible
that it represents the original text of Bede, for all old writers agree
in stating that in it many days were left vacant. The Bollandist Henschen
found first of all a fragment of the genuine Bede among the MSS. of Queen
Christina of Sweden, and then, later on, the complete text at Dijon.[814]
Bede’s martyrology was newly worked over and considerably enlarged by
a certain Florus; according to Wandelbert of Prüm,[815] this was the
subdeacon Florus of Lyons, who, later on, as deacon, wrote against Scotus
Erigena in 852, and died in 860; he was a contemporary of Wandelbert’s.
Against this must be set down the authority of Trithemius, who considers
that this Florus was a Monk of the monastery of St Trudo in the diocese
of Liège about 760. Although Trithemius gives no authority for this
statement, still writers on the history of literature, especially
Fabricius, are in complete agreement with him. Still which ever of the
two is correct, one is inclined to ask how it came to pass that so
striking an enlargement of the work—each day of the year being provided
with the name of a saint—could have appeared so soon after Bede and
before the appearance of the great martyrology of Ado.
Wandelbert of Prüm turned Bede’s martyrology into verse in the
twenty-fifth year of the Emperor Lothaire I. (848); his version is of
no importance for the history and development of this department of
liturgical studies, yet it may be consulted for questions connected with
local history.[816]
The martyrology of Œngus the Culdee, written in the ancient Irish
(Celtic) language certainly belongs to the same period. Nothing further
is known of the author except that he was a monk in the Monastery of
Conenagh in the ninth century. The martyrology is written in rhymed
verse, extends over the entire year, and contains for the most part
the names of Irish saints.[817] Certainly later is the similar work of
Gorman, Abbot of Louth in Leinster. It was written in unrhymed verse
between 1166 and 1174.[818]
12. _The Martyrologies of Ado, Usuardus, Rabanus Maurus, and Notker
Balbulus_
The most important document in this department of literature, and one
which bears directly upon scientific investigations, is the martyrology
of Ado, Bishop of Vienne. Ado was born in northern France about 800, and
entered at an early age the Monastery of Ferrières in the diocese of
Sens, from whence he was sent to the Monastery of Prüm where he lived
for many years under Abbot Markward (829-853). In consequence of some
misunderstandings he left Prüm and went to Rome, where he spent five
years and then went to Ravenna. He returned to France later and lived for
some time as a simple monk in a monastery in the neighbourhood of Lyons.
After the death of Bishop Agilmar of Vienne († 7th July 860) he succeeded
to the see and died on the 16th December 873.
He compiled the martyrology which bears his name in 858 before he became
bishop,[819] the basis of his work being a very ancient martyrology with
which he had become acquainted in Ravenna. If his information can be
trusted, a bishop of Ravenna, whose name he does not give, received this
ancient document from a bishop of Rome who is also nameless. The rest
of the material he collected himself, and in particular he made notes
of any information concerning martyrs which had come in his way. Many
of the sources at his disposal have since been lost, thus rendering his
martyrology all the more important for us.
It consists of three parts: 1. A calendar containing the names of one
or more saints for each day accompanied by notices naturally brief; in
the printed edition it bears incorrectly the title, _Vetus Martyrologium
Romanum_, given to it by its first editors, Jacob Mosander and Heribert
Rosweyde;[820] 2. _A Libellus de Festivitatibus SS. Apostolorum_;[821] 3.
The martyrology itself,[822] consisting of extracts from the acts of the
martyrs and other writings.
His preface contains matter which deserves attention.[823] He had often
been urged, he says, by holy men, by his superiors, and by Bishop
Remigius of Lyons to complete the martyrology; since the martyrology of
Bede, which Florus had enlarged, still leaves many days without saints,
he had undertaken to fill up these gaps, and for this purpose he had made
use of the MSS. describing the sufferings of the martyrs, from which he
had made quotations for the benefit of the weaker brethren; the ancient
martyrology which came originally from Rome, served him as a foundation
upon which to build.
The frank avowal of his intention to fill in the spaces left vacant by
his predecessors, might create a prejudice against the trustworthiness
and excellence of his work, but a closer inspection will dispel this
suspicion, and this would be still more the case had we the original form
of the work before us; in the existing editions there are additions of a
later date, such as the name Rictiovarus.
From the entries on the 20th April and the 17th November it is plain that
the Cologne MS. of this martyrology edited by Rosweyde comes from Stablo,
and it may have been that at Stablo the names of some Frankish saints
were inserted into it. Ado went much further than Bede in admitting names
from the Old Testament. Roseweyde’s conjecture that this calendar, the
so-called “Little Ado,” is the Roman martyrology mentioned by Gregory I.
in his letter to Eulogius, is devoid of proof and obviously mistaken,
for in that document there were no Old Testament names. This “Little
Ado” is not a martyrology at all, but a calendar, and displays none of
the peculiarities which characterise the calendars of the city of Rome
of that date; neither is it an independent work, but only an abstract
made by Ado from his own larger work, and a summary of its contents. The
preface prefixed to the two other parts is chiefly concerned with the
martyrology, and not with this abstract, and it is only the circumstance
that this abstract is found in MSS., with some later additions and
altogether separate from the larger work, which led the first editor to
regard it as a treatise by itself; it is merely the abstract used at
Stablo and Malmedy, and not an original Roman work, though it is plain
from Ado’s preface that the existing Roman calendar was employed in its
composition.[824]
Two or three decades later, Usuardus composed his martyrology after
Ado’s example, which he dedicated to Charles the Bald in 875. Usuardus
was a monk of St Germain des Près, then outside the gates of Paris, but
now surrounded by the city; his work is by no means so full as Ado’s,
but is more polished in style, and more uniform in its treatment of
the different entries, and on this account is more suited for use in
choir. It was accordingly used throughout the entire West, and in all
Benedictine monasteries,[825] and even in Rome itself with the exception
of the Vatican basilica. At the end of the fifteenth century it was so
to speak, the universal martyrology of the Western Church, and indeed no
other was known.[826]
The value of these works depends naturally upon the sources employed by
the redactor, and also upon his personal qualities, as, for instance,
whether he revelled in the miraculous or was inclined to be critical.
Two martyrologies by German authors must now be dealt with—those of
Rabanus Maurus and Notker Balbulus.
The former when Archbishop of Mainz completed a martyrology which he
had compiled from secondary sources; it is dedicated to Abbot Radleich
of Seligenstadt, who died in 853-54, and whose epitaph was composed by
Rabanus,[827] but the composition of the martyrology must be dated a few
years earlier, about 850, though the exact date cannot be discovered.
As sources, he drew upon the Acts of the martyrs which he found ready
to hand, and also the _Hieronymianum_, Bede, and Florus; the treatment
of the material is very unequal, sometimes a long account being given,
sometimes nothing more than the name; legends and historical errors are
frequent.
The same is true of the martyrology of Notker Balbulus who was a monk
at St Gall from 840 to 912, and composed his work under Pope Formosus
(891-896). He knew and used the _Hieronymianum_, as, for example, for
the 9th August, _V. Id. Aug._ First class sources were beyond his reach,
a loss of which he was himself conscious.[828]
All these martyrologies of which we have spoken, were private
compilations without anything of an official character about them. The
existence of so many following upon the _Hieronymianum_ shows that it did
not satisfy liturgical requirements and was little used. On this account,
martyrologies were drawn up at a later date containing full descriptions
of the lives and sufferings of the saints for each day of the year, which
would serve as edifying and entertaining reading for religious, priests
and other pious persons. However even the best of them were no longer
practicable in the sixteenth century, and Gregory XIII. conceived the
purpose of putting out one better adapted for use in divine service. A
further step was taken in 1580 when he commissioned the learned Cardinal
Sirleto to compare the martyrology used in Rome with the oldest and best
MSS. and to correct the errors which had crept into it in course of
time.[829] Sirleto associated ten other learned men with himself among
whom were Cæsar Baronius and Aloysius Lilius, the astronomer. Baronius
was the soul of the undertaking, and, after three years’ labour, the
_Martyrologium Romanum Gregorii XIII._ was completed, and a papal brief
of the 14th January 1584, prescribed the exclusive use of this work in
choir at the canonical hours. Baronius based his labours on Usuardus,
correcting and enlarging his martyrology by means of the materials then
forthcoming; could he have used the materials discovered later, or those
which we now possess, his work would naturally have been much better;
many, too, of the earlier mistakes remain uncorrected. The editors
were far from claiming freedom from errors for their work, and made
improvements in later editions, beginning with that of 1586. It is not
necessary to regard all the individuals named in the Roman martyrology as
saints in the liturgical sense of the word, and their admission there,
according to the expression of Benedict XIV. is in no wise equal to
canonisation.[830] Since the time of Baronius, the official martyrology
has indeed remained untouched, but science has not been inactive during
this long period; much has been explained and corrected, and, on the
whole, it has come to be recognised as a principle which must be followed
in investigating the histories of the saints of ancient times, that
recourse is to be had to the earliest existing sources of information,
and also, where the evidence is contradictory, local official sources,
where they exist, are to have the preference.
13. _Important Calendars from the Eighth to the Eleventh Centuries_
While the martyrologies were for the most part the outcome of individual
effort, the calendars, on the other hand, are entirely official in their
origin. In times when annual calendars, like our present ordos, had
not yet appeared, their place was taken by the official calendar, and
every one had to make out his ordo for himself with its assistance. From
many points of view they are more important for our purpose than the
martyrologies.
As complete missals took the place of the sacramentaries they were
usually provided with a table, like an index, which gave a list of
the saints’ days contained in the missal; these so-called calendars
have from then until now formed an integral part of written and printed
missals, and even appear by themselves like abbreviated martyrologies. A
remarkably large number of calendars of this kind have come down to us
from the Middle Ages, and, since they are important for the history of
local churches, they have recently been published, as, for example, by
Martène-Durand, Misset and Weale, Grotefend, Ulysse Chevalier, Lechler,
etc.[831] For our purpose, the following deserve to be noticed:
1. A Roman calendar of the seventh century, discovered by Prof. de Ram,
and printed in Binterim, Denkw. vii. 56-67. It begins with Christmas,
March is called _mensis primus_, the station churches of Rome are given
in Lent, on the 13th May there is the _Dedicatio Mariæ ad Martyres_, All
Saints does not appear. The only litany is the so-called _litania major_;
the Annunciation and the _Cathedra Petri_ are omitted, in March a _pascha
annotina_ is inserted without date, St Athanasius is passed over on the
20th January; there are only faint traces of Advent. This calendar is
very ancient and formed part of the codex of the gospels written under
Louis the Pious; in the time of Lothaire I., it belonged to the Monastery
of Münsterbilsen in the diocese of Liège.
2. A calendar belonging to Bologna. It is found in a codex of the
Monastery of Leno, was discovered by Giovanni Mercati in the Ambrosiana,
and published in the Révue Bénédictine, 1902 (353-355). It has the
_Ordinatio Episcopatus Jacobi Apost._ on the 27th December, and, on the
17th May a _natalis S. Marci Evang._, found nowhere else.
3. The so-called calendar of Charlemagne forms, along with an Easter
table, the beginning of an _Evangeliarum_ written in 781 by command of
the emperor and his consort by a scribe called Godescale.[832] It is only
deserving of notice from the number of names of Frankish saints inserted
into a calendar originally Roman, _e.g._ Bishop Maximin of Treves (31st
May), Boniface (5th June), Medard (8th June), Martialis (30th June)
Kilian (1st August), Mauritius (22nd September), Remigius (1st October),
etc. The Apostle Thomas is placed, strange to say, on the 3rd July, and
St Petronilla on the 31st May.
4. A calendar is incorporated in a treatise _De Computo_, by an unknown
author, written in 810 (published by Muratori, _Analecta_, iii. 108, and
also in Migne, _Patr. Lat._, cxxix. 1274). It seems to come from the
diocese of Sens on account of _S. Columbæ Virg._ on the 31st December;
All Saints is omitted. This calendar is Roman with Frankish additions;
for the date see chap. 153, Migne, cxxix., 1364.
5. The last four months of the year are unfortunately missing from the
calendar of Alt-Corbie (Corbeiense) given by Martène-Durand, _Thes. Nov.
Anced._, iii., 1591, Paris, 1717. The same is the case with a very old
calendar of Tours.
6. Codex 83ᴵᴵ. of the cathedral library in Cologne contains an ancient
calendar, fol. 72 B-76. This codex contains a large collection of
annalistical writings and computation tables and was written under
Archbishop Hildebold. The second treatise in the volume is Isidore’s
chronicle which concludes with the words: “Seven hundred and eighty-nine
years have passed since Christ’s Nativity”; further on, fol. 76 B, was
inserted after the death of Charlemagne, and also of Hildebold (818).
Thus the codex was written between 798 and 818, and belonged to the old
cathedral of Cologne which was dedicated to St Peter. The calendar,
however, does not belong to Cologne for the local saints are absent, but
there is a number of names of Frankish saints, pointing to the north
of France as the locality where it was drawn up; no explanation of the
legend of St Ursula can be learnt from it. For a calendar of its early
date, it is remarkably full of saints, while the Cologne Calendar,
shortly to be referred, to has many vacant days. The codex has been
described by Jaffé and Wattenbach, _Ecclesiæ Metrop. Colon. codices
manuscripti_, Berlin, 1874, 29 _et seqq._
7. The _Gellonense_ comes from the Monastery of St Guillaume du Désert in
the diocese of Lodève, and belongs to the beginning of the ninth century,
and has been edited by D’Achery, _Spicilegium_, ii. 25 _et seqq._ It
begins with Christmas and is preceded by a _Breviarum Apostolorum_ in
thirteen sections containing information concerning the apostles.
8. A _Kalendarium Gothicum_ (ed. Lorenzana) of the seventh century
(Migne, lxxxvi. 38 _et seqq._). Besides this, there is the Mozarabic
_Sanctorale_ (_ib._ 1031 _et seqq._) and a fragment of a _Kalendarium
Gothico-Hispanum_ (Migne, lxxxv. 1050 _et seqq._).
Of later date, but still always useful for historical investigation are:—
9. Two Anglo-Saxon calendars of the tenth century belonging apparently to
the diocese of Winchester (Migne, lxxii. 619 _et seqq._).
10. Two from Corbie; in Martène and Durand (_Thes. Nov. Anecd._, iii.
1571-1594).
11. A calendar of Floriac and a martyrology of Auxerre (Migne, cxxxviii.
1186-1258).
12. A calendar of Mantua and two of Vallombrosa (_Ib._ 1258 _et seqq._).
13. A calendar of Besançon of the eleventh century, which goes by the
name of _S. Protadii_ (Migne, lxxx. 411), and an old French calendar
called after the name of its first owner Chauvellin (Migne, lxxii. 607).
For convenience we separate the most ancient calendars of German origin
from the others, and consider them by themselves.
1. The oldest calendar of Mainz belongs to the first half of the ninth
century, and was published from a codex in the Vatican by Jostes in
the Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum (Schröder and Röthe) for 1896,
148-158. All Saints is absent, and the resurrection of Christ is entered
on the 25th March.
2. A _Kalendarium Verdinense_, from the Monastery of Werden on the Ruhr,
published by Bandini (_Catal. Bibl. Lauretianæ Suppl._, Migne, cxxxviii.
1203 _et seqq._). It contained All Saints, and the _Dedicatio S. Mariæ s.
Turris Vincentii_ on the 13th May as well. Among the special saints of
Cologne are given the two Ewalds, Kunibert, Gereon, the Moors, and the
eleven thousand virgins, but without Ursula, and designated as simply
virgins and not martyrs; it also contains the names of the two first
bishops of Halberstadt, Thiatgrim († 840) and Hildegrim († 21st December
888), which indicates the date of its composition, and it has the name of
the first abbot of Werden, Hetharicus, and the _Dedicatio Eccl. Majoris_.
Unfortunately the months from April to July are missing.
3. The sacramentary in the cathedral library of Cologne (codex 88, fol.
3-9) contains a complete calendar for this cathedral. It is essentially
the Roman Calendar of the ninth century, with the addition of the local
saints of Cologne, the two Ewalds, Kunibert, Brictius, Quintinus,
Severin, Gereon and his 318 companions, the 360 Moors, and the 11,000
virgins without Ursula, and designated simply as virgins. Other names
deserving notice are: Briga (Brigida) 1st February, Arealis (?) 28th
April, _Marcus episcopus_, Boniface the martyr, Medard, Lambert, and
Mauricius with 6666 companions. The calendar belongs to the second half
of the ninth century, and is proved to have belonged to the cathedral of
Cologne begun by Hildebold and consecrated by Willibert in 873, by the
fact that it gives the day of the consecration of the cathedral correctly
(23rd September), and is described as belonging to the Church of St
Peter, to whom the former cathedral was dedicated. The sacramentary, but
not the calendar, has been printed by J. Pamelius in his “Liturgicon
Ecclesiæ Latinæ,” tom. ii. (Col. Agr. 1571), but unfortunately with so
many arbitrary alterations that it is quite useless as an edition of the
text.
4. In the library at Düsseldorf there is a sacramentary, (codex D. I.)
written in the lifetime of Bishop Altfrid of Hildesheim († 874), which
contains (fol. 217-222) a calendar showing northern French influence.
Only the 11,000 virgins are given of the local saints of Cologne, and
here again Ursula is not named, and the virgins are not called martyrs.
The book belonged to the Convent of Essen on the Ruhr founded by Altfrid.
This MS. gives in fol. 64 A the order of the festivals observed within
the jurisdiction of the monastery during the ninth century: “Istas
præcipuas solemnitates in anno totus populus sabbatizare debet: In die
Nat. Domini dies IV., in octabas Domini, in Teophania, in Purificatione
Mariæ, in Pascha Domini dies IV., in Ascensione Domini, in Pentecoste
dies IV., in Nat. S. Johannis, in Nat. Sanctorum Apostolorum Petri et
Pauli, in Assumptione S. Mariæ, in Nat. S. Remedii [Remigii], in Missa
Michahelis, in Solemnitate Omnium Sanctorum, in Nat. S. Martini, in Nat.
S. Andreæ.”
Binterim published a Cologne calendar, apparently of the ninth century,
under the title _Kalendarium Ecclesiæ Germ. Coloniensis Sæculi Noni_
(Cologne, 1824), and Harless attributes it to the second half of the
same century (Archiv. f. die Gesch. des Niederrheins, vi. 67). It is,
however, much later, for it gives all the feasts of the apostles, and
provides them with vigils, and all the days of the year are filled in
with the names of saints. For these reasons I should date the calendar as
belonging to the eleventh century at the earliest.
5. The _Kalendarium Germanicum Pervetustum Sæc. X._, printed by M.
Fr. Beck (Aug. Vind., 1687). Gerbert (_Mon. Lit. Alem._ i. 455 A. I.)
correctly regards it as coming from Alsace and probably from Strassburg,
because it contains the saints venerated in that city, Arbogast (20th
July), Florentius, Ottilia and Aurelia. The basis of this document is
again the Roman Calendar, still many Frankish saints have been added, but
Gereon alone of the saints of Cologne. The latest date given in it is the
_Dormitio S. Uodalrici_ (4th July). It has only one name from the Old
Testament, that of the prophet Ezechiel.
6. A calendar of Freising, drawn up under Bishop Abraham, between 893 and
993. The 25th March is marked as _Conceptio Domini_. There is only one
feast of St Peter’s Chair. The calendar has been printed by Lechler,
“Mittelalterliche Kirchenfeste und Kalendarien in Bayern,” Freiburg, 1891.
7. The so-called _Martyrologium Stabulense_, the calendar of the
Monastery of Stablo. The date of the original MS. can be deduced from
the fact that on the _vii. Idus Junii_ the coronation of King Henry II.,
which was performed by Archbishop Willigis at Mainz on the 7th June 1002,
is entered by the first hand, while the ordination of Archbishop Tagino
of Magdeburg in the 2nd February 1004, has been entered by a second
hand. Archbishop Tagino’s death is not entered. The calendar has only
Gereon with 319 companions of the local saints of Cologne. St Ulrich of
Augsburg, although he died in 997, is entered by the second hand. The
calendar has been published by Martène, _Ampl. Coll._, and by Zaccaria,
_Antiq. Med. Ævi_ (see Migne, cxxxviii. 1194).
8. Hontheim has published the five most ancient calendars of Treves in
the _Prodromus Historiæ Trevirensis_, i. 378-405. According to him, only
the first belongs to the tenth century, all the others being later. For
a calendar of the tenth century, it is very full of names, many of them
being from the old Testament—Ezechial, Daniel, etc.; it mentions neither
the legend of the Innumerable Company of Martyrs at Treves on the 4th and
5th October, nor Palmatius, Thyrsus, etc.; neither does it contain All
Souls, St Catherine, or St Peter’s Chair, but it has Gereon and his 318
companions. It is only in the fourth and fifth calendars which belong
to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that Thyrsus, Palmatius, etc.,
appear.
When one considers the details presented by calendars, one is bound
to acknowledge that the Roman _Depositio Martyrum_ stands at the head
of this long line of liturgical documents, and was the model after
which they were composed. Like them, the _Depositio Martyrum_ was drawn
up according to months, and commenced with Christmas. Like them, it
contained the official list of the martyrs who received ecclesiastical
veneration in the local church of Rome in the fourth century. Were it
not so, it would not have deserved to be incorporated in the Philocalian
collection, the _Hemerologium Valentini_, since this comprised only
official documents; had it not been official it would not have been worth
transcribing.
CONCLUSION
All estates of men in the Church have had their share in the formation
of the ecclesiastical year, for the growth of the Church’s festivals has
continued without interruption from the beginning until now, and has
extended over all the countries of Christendom. Having wended our way
through the centuries and arrived at the conclusion of our work, it is a
pleasure to render our tribute of thanks and praise to the men who have
in the past made this sphere of study their own.
The few writers of the Middle Ages who treated the Church’s year and
the festivals of the saints in a comprehensive manner were entirely
occupied with contributing to the correct performance of ecclesiastical
ceremonies, and with explaining why each ceremony must be done in one
way and not in another. They not infrequently brought allegorical and
symbolical considerations to bear on the question.
In more modern times, Cornelius Schulting, a native of Steenwijk in
North Holland, and afterwards professor of theology at Cologne and canon
of St Andrew’s († 1604) undertook a full exposition of the matter; his
object was mainly practical, and his work can only be regarded as a first
attempt. The keen controversialist, Jacobus Gretser S.J. († 1625), is
more occupied with his polemic against the Calvinists than with lucid
demonstration. More in harmony with modern requirements, is the French
oratorian Louis Thomassin, a native of Aix in Provence, and a partisan of
Port Royal, who died in 1695; he wrote a small compendium which may be
used with profit at the present day.
The study of the ecclesiastical year was considerably advanced by the
labours of Adrien Baillet, born in 1649, in the diocese of Beauvais (†
1706), parish priest of a small country living at Baumont and librarian
to M. de Lamoignon; he was entirely devoted to the pursuit of knowledge,
and scarcely ever allowed himself any relaxation. He composed a great
work worthy of ranking alongside the labours of Tillemont, to whom he is
closely related in spirit. The course of his historical treatment of the
subject is considerably obscured by the superabundance of biographical
matter. Two valuable monographs were published by Prosper Lambertini
(Pope Benedict XIV.) when bishop of Bologna, which treat in a masterly
manner of the feasts of our Lord and of our Lady respectively.
Finally, the learned priest of Bilk, near Düsseldorf, Fr. Ant. Binterim
(† 1855) dealt with this subject in one volume of his _Denkwürdigkeiten_.
He treats in the first place of the observance of Sunday, then of the
Sundays of the Church’s year in general, and finally of the movable
and immovable feasts. Of these he naturally deals only with the most
important, following the order of the calendar, by which arrangement
Christmas comes last.
The author of this book commenced his researches by a comparative
study of the martyrologies, calendars, annals, and works dealing with
the computation of time, and then set to work upon the historical and
liturgical material which he had before him from the point of vantage
thus obtained. The fortunate circumstance that the most of the works
required for this branch of study are contained in Migne’s collection,
renders the labour of comparison possible, and frequently brings
remarkable parallels to light.
APPENDIX
I
(p. 16)
According to the existing Roman Calendar, feasts are classed as follows:—
DUPLICIA PRIMÆ CLASSIS. _Nativitas Domini, Epiphania, Annunciatio, Pascha
cum tribus antecedentibus et duobus sequentibus diebus, Ascensio Domini,
Pentecoste cum duobus sequentibus diebus, festum Corporis Christi, festum
SS. Cordis Jesu, festum S. Joseph sponsi B.M.V., Nativitas Joannis Bapt.,
festum SS. App. Petri et Pauli, Assumptio B.M.V., festum Immaculatæ
Conceptionis B.M.V., festum Omnium Sanctorum, Dedicatio propriæ ecclesiæ,
Patronus vel titulus ecclesiæ._
DUPLICIA SECUNDÆ CLASSIS. _Circumcisio Domini, festum SS. Nominis Jesu,
festum SS. Trinitatis, festum Pretiosissimi Sanguinis D. N. J. Chr.,
Inventio Crucis, Purificatio, Visitatio, Nativitas B.M.V., Sollemnitas
S. Rosarii, Dedicatio Michælis Arch., festum Patrocinii S. Joseph sponsi
B.M.V., Natales Apostolorum et festa Evangelistarum, festum S. Stephani,
Protomartyris, SS. Innocentium, S. Laurentii, S. Annæ matris B.M.V., S.
Joachim patris B.M.V._
DUPLICIA MAJORA. _Transfiguratio Domini, Exaltatio S. Crucis, festa VII.
dolorum B.M.V., Commemoratio B.M.V. de monte Carmelo, festa Ad Nives, S.
Nominis, de Mercede, et Præsentatio, B.M.V., Apparitio S. Michælis Arch.,
festum SS. Angelorum Custodum, Decollatio S. Joannis Bapt., Cathedra
Petri utraque, S. Petri ad vincula, Conversio S. Pauli Ap., Commemoratio
S. Pauli Ap., festum S. Joannis ante Portam Latinam, S. Barnabæ Ap., S.
Benedicti Abb., S. Dominici Conf., S. Francisci Assis. Conf., festum
Patronorum non principalium._
II
(p. 24)
(_A_) A marked increase appears in the statute of Lanfranc, Archbishop
of Canterbury († 1089). He divides the festivals into three classes.
In the first class he reckons five, the three chief festivals of the
Christian year, the Assumption, and the feast of the local patron; in the
second, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Gregory, the Annunciation, Low Sunday,
St Alphege, the Ascension, St Augustine of Canterbury, the Octave of
Pentecost, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the
Translation of the Relics of St Benedict, the Nativity of our Lady, St
Michael, All Saints, St Andrew, and the Dedication of the Church; the
festivals belonging to the third class were St Vincent, the Conversion
of St Paul, SS. Philip and James, the Exaltation of the Cross (3rd May),
St James (29th July), St Peter’s Chains, St Lawrence, the Octave of the
Assumption, St Bartholomew, St Augustine of Hippo, the Beheading of St
John the Baptist, the Invention of the Cross, St Matthew, SS. Simon and
Jude, St Martin, and St Thomas.
Lanfranc issued this decree as archbishop, still it was only to hold good
for the Benedictine monasteries and the Cathedral.[833]
(p. 25)
(_B_) The festivals of obligation for the archdiocese of Cologne were
regulated according to the months by the provincial synod of 1308.
January: the Circumcision, Epiphany, St Agnes, the Conversion of St
Paul. February: Candlemas, St Peter’s Chair, St Matthias. March: the
Annunciation. April: Easter and St George. May: SS. Philip and James,
the Invention of the Cross. June: the Nativity of St John the Baptist,
SS. Peter and Paul. July: St Mary Magdalen, St James, St Pantaleon.
August: St Peter’s Chains, St Lawrence, the Assumption, St Bartholomew,
the Beheading of St John the Baptist. September: the Nativity of our
Lady, the Exaltation of the Cross, St Matthew, St Michael. October: St
Gereon, the Eleven Thousand Virgins, St Severin, SS. Simon and Jude.
November: All Saints, St Martin, St Cunibert, St Cecilia, St Catherine,
St Andrew. December: St Nicholas, St Thomas, Christmas, St Stephen, St
John the Evangelist, the Holy Innocents. In all, forty-two days.[834] The
feasts of Easter and Pentecost extended over three days; the Ascension is
omitted. In the city of Cologne were celebrated in addition: the Arrival
of the relics of the Three Holy Kings on the 23rd July, the Dedication of
the Cathedral, SS. Cosmas and Damian, the Dedication and Patronal feast
of each parish church, and, finally, the feast of Corpus Christi was
enjoined in addition.
The Synod of 1549 under Adolf III. gives the following list: All
Sundays, Easter, Pentecost, Christmas—two days each, the third day _in
choro_ only—Circumcision, Epiphany, Ascension, the Holy Trinity, Corpus
Christi, these being feasts of our Lord. The feasts of our Lady are:
the Purification, the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Assumption, the
Nativity, the Presentation, and the Conception. Saints’ days are as
follows: all the Apostles, St John the Baptist, St Mary Magdalen, St
Lawrence, St Michael, All Saints, St Martin, and the Dedication of the
Church; there are also six other saints’ days which were optional for
places where they were customary. The feast of the Patron Saint is passed
over, and thus a decrease of fifteen festivals is brought about.[835]
(p. 26)
(_C_) The statute of Archbishop Baldwin of Treves, published in 1338,
contains fewer festivals, _i.e._ Christmas, Easter with the three
following days and Pentecost with two, Corpus Christi, Circumcision,
and Epiphany. Our Lady’s feasts were: the Nativity, Annunciation,
Purification, and Assumption; a few years later her Conception was added.
Then came the festivals of the twelve apostles, St Michael (8th May),
the Invention of the Cross, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, St
Lawrence, St Martin, St Mary Magdalen, St Catherine, All Saints’, the
Holy Innocents, the Dedication of the Church and the feast of the Patron
Saint.
III
(p. 35)
THE FESTIVALS OF OBLIGATION AS OBSERVED IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
Rome. Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, one day each; Circumcision,
Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph (19th March), the Annunciation, Ascension,
St Philip Neri (26th May), Corpus Christi, the Nativity of St John the
Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All
Saints, the Immac. Conc., St John the Evangelist (27th December). The
civil law of the Italian Kingdom recognises the following days as
legal holidays: the Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and
Paul, the feasts of Our Lady on the 15th August, 8th September, and 8th
December, Christmas and the patron saint of the city and diocese.
France. In accordance with the concordat of Napoleon four feasts were
celebrated: Christmas, Ascension, the Assumption, and All Saints. All
other festivals when they fell on a week day were transferred to the
following Sunday. Even in Belgium and in the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg,
in the part of Limburg belonging to Holland, and in the bailiwick of
Meisenheim in the diocese of Treves, this scanty provision of feasts
holds good.
Austria. The Cis-and-Transleithan countries observe the same holy days.
Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, two days each; the Circumcision,
Epiphany, Candlemas, the Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS.
Peter and Paul, the Assumption, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception.
The feasts of the patron saints were transferred by Joseph II. to the
following Sunday, but in each of the Crown-lands the local patron is
commemorated on his proper day, _i.e._ in Austria above and below the
Enns, the feast of St Leopold: in Upper Austria, St Florian: in Moravia,
SS. Cyril and Methodius: in Galicia, St Stanislaus and St Michael: in
Silesia, St Hedwig: in Bohemia, St Wenceslaus and St John Nepomuk: in
Styria, Carinthia, Camiola, the provinces of the Litoral, Salzburg, Tyrol
and Vorarlberg, St Joseph: in Sclavonia, St John the Baptist: in Hungary,
St Stephen the Confessor: in Croatia, St Elias: in Transilvania, St
Ladislaus: in Salzburg, St Rupert: in Dalmatia, St Jerome: in Goritz, St
Hermagoras and St Fortunatus.
In the eight old provinces of Prussia, the festivals recognised by
the state are: Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, two days each; the
Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter
and Paul, All Saints, the (Protestant) day of penitence and prayer, the
Annunciation and the Immaculate Conception. In the archdiocese of Posen,
the Nativity of Our Lady, and the Assumption as well as St Stanislaus
are observed, and in Gnesen, St George as patron of the diocese. The new
provinces have had also to adopt the Protestant day of penitence.
Hanover, the dioceses of Hildesheim and Osnabrück. Besides the days
observed in Prussia, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, the Nativity
and Assumption of Our Lady, St Michael, and the local patrons St Bernward
and St Martin.
For the countries of the Northern Mission in the diocese of Osnabrück,
the following are omitted from the list just given: Nativity of St John
the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, and all the feasts of Our Lady, thus
leaving only Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each with two days; the
Circumcision, the Epiphany, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, All Saints.
This applies to Bremen, Hamburg, Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, both the
Mecklenburgs and Denmark.
Bavaria. The following festivals are observed: Christmas, Easter, and
Pentecost, each for two days; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St
Joseph, the Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Nativity of
St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption and Nativity of
Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception. Each diocese of Bavaria
celebrates its own particular patron as well.
The Palatinate, diocese of Spires. Here the effects of the French
dominion are still observable, and the only festivals of obligation
observed are: the Circumcision, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the
Assumption, All Saints. Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost are kept each
for two days.
The Kingdom of Saxony. The festivals of obligation are: the Circumcision,
the Epiphany and Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter
and Paul, the Assumption, the Nativity of Our Lady, the Immaculate
Conception, All Saints; Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each for two
days.
In the ecclesiastical province of the Upper Rhine there are different
regulations in each diocese.
Würtemburg, diocese of Rottenburg. The Circumcision, the Epiphany,
Candlemas, the Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St
John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption and Nativity of
Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception; Christmas, Easter, and
Pentecost, each for two days.
Baden, archdiocese of Freiburg. The five chief feasts of Our Lady are
kept on the day itself; so too is the feast of St Joseph, and the other
festivals are the same as in Würtemburg, with the exception of the 24th
June.
Hesse-Nassau: the dioceses of Fulda and Limburg. Christmas, Easter and
Pentecost, each for two days; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas,
Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption,
All Saints; the Prussian day of penitence is observed in November, and
in Limburg, the patron saint on his own day.
Hesse-Darmstadt: diocese of Mainz. The same regulations as in the
Palatinate.
Alsace-Lorraine. The four French holy days. An edict of 10th October 1887
adds to these Good Friday, Easter Monday, and Whit Monday, as general
holidays in the legal sense, and as holidays and days of rest in the
sense of the Code de procédure civile.
In Holland, in the archdiocese of Utrecht, and in the diocese of Harlem,
the following rank as full holy days on which no work is to be done:
the day following the three chief feasts of the year, the Circumcision,
Epiphany, Annunciation, and the Assumption. It is of obligation to hear
mass only on Candlemas, the Nativity of Our Lady, and the Immaculate
Conception. In the dioceses of Breda and Bois-le-Duc, these three
festivals are days of full obligation.
For England, Pope Pius VI. appointed the following holy days on the
9th March 1777: Easter and Pentecost, each two days: Christmas, the
Circumcision, Epiphany, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Annunciation,
the Assumption, SS. Peter and Paul, All Saints, and the feast of the
patron saint. At the present time are observed, Easter, Pentecost and
Christmas, one day each, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus
Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, and All Saints. St Andrew’s
day is added for Scotland, and St Patrick’s day and the Annunciation for
Ireland. The Immaculate Conception is a purely ecclesiastical festival.
Switzerland affords an interesting study owing to the great varieties
existing within so small a space. The diocese of Basel-Soleure:
Christmas, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Corpus Christi, the
Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate Conception. In the canton of
Lucerne, St Joseph’s day and the Annunciation are celebrated, the latter
also in the canton of Zug. The three chief festivals are kept for day
only. The diocese of Coire, comprising the cantons of Grisons, Schwyz,
Uri, Unterwalden, Zurich, Glarus, and the principality of Liechtenstein:
the three chief festivals, each two days, the Circumcision, Epiphany,
Candlemas and St Joseph. The last two days do not rank as holy days
in the canton of Zurich, nor does the Annunciation in the cantons of
Zurich and Schwyz. The Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Nativity of St
John the Baptist, and SS. Peter and Paul are not kept in either of these
two cantons, but the Assumption and All Saints are kept everywhere. The
Nativity of Our Lady is not kept in Zurich and Schwyz, but the Immaculate
Conception is kept everywhere except in the canton of Zurich. The
following patron saints are kept, St Fridolin (6th March) in the canton
of Glarus, Nicholas von der Flu (21st March) in Unterwalden, St Martin
with an octave in Schwyz and Uri, St Lucius (3rd Dec.) in Coire. St Gall,
comprising the cantons of St Gall and Appenzell, keeps the Epiphany,
Candlemas, Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Assumption, All Saints, and the
Immaculate Conception; the three chief feasts, each for two days, and
St Gall’s day (16th Oct.) as patron of the diocese. In the diocese of
Geneva-Lausanne, consisting of the four French cantons: the Circumcision,
the Epiphany (with the exception of the cantons of Geneva and Vaud),
Candlemas, the Annunciation (with the exception of Vaud and Neuchâtel),
the Ascension, Corpus Christi, Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate
Conception (with the exception of Geneva, Vaud, and Neuchâtel). The three
chief feasts are kept for one day each. This is also the case in the
canton of Valais, diocese of Sion, but the following days are also kept
in this canton: the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Annunciation,
Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and
Paul, Assumption and Nativity of Our Lady and her Immaculate Conception,
and St Maurice as Patron Saint (22nd Sept.).
Russian Poland. The three chief feasts, each for two days, the
Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation, Ascension,
Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul,
Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception,
St Stanislaus as patron. This last named day is not observed in the
schools and law-courts on account of its nationalistic character.
Spain. The Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation,
Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul,
Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception,
Christmas. The three chief festivals are kept for only one day each.
Portugal. The three chief festivals for one day each. The Circumcision,
Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi,
the Sacred Heart, St Antony of Padua (13th June), SS. Peter and Paul,
Assumption, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception. Before the last
reduction, the Nativity of Our Lady, and from mid-day on Maundy Thursday
to mid-day on Good Friday were also holy days of obligation. Lisbon keeps
the feast of St Vincent (22nd January) as patron of the city.
The United States observe only six festivals which may fall on week-days;
all the others are transferred to the Sunday. These are Christmas, the
Circumcision, Ascension, Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate
Conception. The three chief festivals are kept for one day only. Since
the number of festivals varied originally in the different states, an
attempt was made after uniformity, and the council of Baltimore in 1852
desired to retain only four festivals as in France. Rome, however, was
not satisfied with this, and, in 1866, the six festivals mentioned above
were adopted. The provincial synod of Cincinnati in 1861 agreed to adopt
the Epiphany, Annunciation, and Corpus Christi as well.
Brazil. The three chief festivals, each for one day. The Circumcision,
Epiphany, Candlemas, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity
of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, Nativity of Our
Lady, All Saints and the Immaculate Conception.
Russia. Easter, Pentecost, Christmas, the Circumcision, Epiphany,
Ascension, Transfiguration, Candlemas, Annunciation, our Lady’s
Presentation and Assumption, and the Exaltation of the Cross (14th
Sept). All these are, of course, kept according to the Julian calendar.
To these are added the following feasts peculiar to Russia: the three
feasts of the Jordan so-called, _i.e._ the Blessing of the Water, and the
thirteen so-called Gala-feasts, _i.e._ the commemoration of the reigning
dynasty (see _Kirchenlexikon_, X., 2nd ed. 1399). The schismatics in
Austria-Hungary keep their festivals according to the Julian calendar, so
that where the population is mixed, each feast is as a rule kept twice.
IV
(p. 71)
For many centuries the liturgical vestments were exclusively white, like
the ordinary dress of classic times. The writers of the Carolingian
period in their desire to find parallels between the enactments of the
Old and New Testaments, were the first to remember that different colours
were used in the vestments of the Jewish high priest. In addition to the
white under garment which he wore in common with the simple priests, he
wore an upper garment of blue, and a particoloured shoulder-garment, the
ephod, of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine linen, interwoven with gold
thread. The repeated references to these vestments gradually led to the
adoption of coloured vestments for the mass.[836]
Their introduction was at first tentative. Neither Rupert of Deutz,
Honorius of Autun, Beleth, nor Hugh of St Victor mention the liturgical
colours in their writings, or, if they do, only with reference to the Old
Testament; Sicard of Cremona, a contemporary of Innocent III., clearly
alludes to them, although he only mentions two—white and red.[837]
Innocent III. was the first to speak of all the liturgical colours, and
to regulate their use in the Roman Church, but always with reference to
the regulations of the Old Testament. According to him, white was to be
used on the feasts of Confessors, Virgins, and Angels, and on Christmas,
Epiphany, Candlemas, Maundy Thursday, and the Ascension; it was used as a
matter of course on all other days where it was not otherwise specified,
since until then white had been the universal liturgical colour. Red
vestments were to be worn on feasts of Apostles and Martyrs. On feasts
of the Holy Cross a choice between white and red was allowed. Red was to
be used on Pentecost in memory of the fiery tongues, and on the feast
of SS. Peter and Paul. On the Conversion of St Paul and on the feast of
St Peter’s Chair, white was to be used. White was the colour for the
Nativity of St John the Baptist, red for his Beheading. On All Saints
many used red vestments, but the Roman Church used white, because it is
said in the Apocalypse that the saints stand before the Lamb in white
garments, with palms in their hands.
Black vestments are to be worn on days of penitence and abstinence, and
also on the Commemorations of the dead. They were also worn during Advent
and Lent, except, of course, on festivals falling within those seasons.
With regard to the Holy Innocents some decided in favour of black, some
in favour of red, but the Roman pontiff decided for violet. For ferias
and ordinary days the colour was green. One might, in addition, wear
scarlet for red, violet for black, and yellow for green.
In Durandus († 1296) we find the same rule, in parts verbally identical
with the above. The only point to notice in regard to what he says is
that he says black vestments are to be worn on Rogation days, violet
seems to have the preference over black for Advent and Lent, and the use
of the former colour is represented as peculiar to the Roman Church.[838]
There is accordingly nothing strange in the circumstance that in the more
ancient rituals, only _vestes solleminores_ in general are prescribed
for Maunday Thursday, without reference to colour. The Roman use,[839]
from the beginning, was to use white on this day, and this superseded the
customs observed elsewhere.[840]
V
(p. 79)
THE WORD MASS AS A NAME FOR THE SACRIFICE OF THE ALTAR
The term mass does not owe its position to theology, but became
established in the course of centuries by popular usage. The most
ancient writers of the church speak frequently, and with all the
precision desirable of the holy sacrifice of the altar, but they speak of
it by other names which fully indicate its essential character, such as
_oblatio_ and _sacrificium_, or even _sacramenta_ and _collecta_. These
two last names have a more general significance; _collecta_ is the late
Latin abbreviation for _collectio_, and means an assembly of men for some
given purpose, in this case for divine service. _Colligere_ appears in
the same sense in the Latin translation of Irenæus and in Tertullian; the
substantive is found in Jerome and other ancient authors; a survival of
this primitive usage appears in the name _collecta_ given to the first
prayer of the Mass.[841] It owes its name of _collecta_ to the fact that
according to the most ancient ritual it formed the commencement of the
Mass. In the service-books, _collecta_ was merely a name which served
to distinguish the prayers of the Mass from those which preceded or
followed. According to the Roman rite, the Mass began with the prayer of
the priest at the altar as soon as the _invitatorium_ sung by the choir
was finished, the psalm _Judica me_, the _Confiteor_, the _Kyrie_ and
_Gloria_ being later additions. Thus the name _collecta_ became attached
to this opening prayer, and is so given to it in most mediæval and Roman
missals, until the reform under Pius V., when it was replaced by the name
_oratio_ now in use. At the same time the name _postcommunio_ replaced
the older title _ad complendum_. Whenever we find in prayer-books and
explanations of the Mass, that the prayer was called the Collect because
the priest “collected” the petitions of the faithful, we can only regard
such an interpretation as silly and unhistorical; the same could be said
equally well of all, or, at any rate, of most of the prayers of the Mass.
The term _sacramentum_ or _sacramenta_ served also not unfrequently as a
name for the Mass,[842] and so gave rise to the name _sacramentarium_,
generally given to the missal in ancient times. In addition to these
names, _oblatio_ and _sacrificio_ were especially employed as having
the advantage of adequately expressing the essential character of the
rite. The former was the particular favourite of Tertullian, the founder
of Latin ecclesiastical terminology, and afterwards of St Cyprian, but
it may be said to belong to all writers and to all periods.[843] St
Augustine, who had already propounded a formal theory of the sacrifice of
the Mass, shows a preference for _sacrificium_.[844]
When we turn to the word _missa_, we must not treat it as a participle,
even in the _Ite missa est_, for there is nothing with which the feminine
participle can agree, and so it must be a substantive. In order to
explain the meaning of this substantive, and to show how it acquired its
position as the technical term for the most sacred act of the Church’s
worship, requires an excursus dealing with the matter from the point of
view of etymology, patrology, and liturology. As regards the etymology
of the word, attempts have been made from time to time to derive _missa_
from the Hebrew, (מסּה Deut., xvi. 10), in the belief the name must
be as old as the thing it signifies, an attempt abandoned as absurd at
the present day.[845] A better idea was that of the mediæval liturgists
who explained the word as equivalent to _transmissio_ in the sense of the
offering up and presentation of the oblation before God. But fortunately
there is one man, thoroughly conversant at first hand with primitive
usages and terminology, who has left us an explanation of the word and
of the origin of its application to the sacrifice of the altar. Bishop
Avitus, of Vienne († 518), flourished at the period between the ages of
antiquity and the mediæval period, and is, therefore, a reliable witness
in this matter. He was asked by his sovereign, King Gundobad of Burgundy,
what was the meaning of the word _missa_, and replied that _missam
facere_ was the same as _dimittere_, and was used by the Romans at both
audiences in the royal palace and sittings of the law courts to intimate
to the assembly that the audience or session was at an end and that
they were free to depart; it was used in the same way in the churches.
Avitus[846] himself uses _missa_ simply for divine service.
It is clear that the explanation given by Avitus is correct. For since
the conclusion of every session and assembly must be officially announced
with words such as, “The session is at an end,” so in church, where
a still greater number of men meet together, it is necessary to make
known to them the conclusion of divine service. Such was the custom
of the ancient Romans at their sacrifices and religious ceremonies,
and the Christians naturally did the same. Tertullian speaks already
of a _dimissio plebis_,[847] and we find the same thing in the Greek
liturgies, although the formulæ vary in some respects from that in use
among the Latins.[848]
It was not, however, the Mass which was first called by this name, but
the other services of the ancient Church—the Psalmody, or, in other
words, the Canonical Hours. From the striking account given by the
so-called Silvia,[849] we can see how important these services were and
what a prominent position they occupied in the worship of the Church.
“Every day, in the early morning, the doors of the church were opened,
and all the monks and nuns, as well as many of the laity, assembled, and
until sunrise, sing hymns and psalms, in alternate choirs, along with the
antiphons and prayers. About sunrise they begin to say the ‘_matutinas
ymnos_.’ The bishop arrives with the clergy and sings the prayer within
the chancel. Then he comes forth and blesses the people one by one. _Et
sic fit missa_,” _i.e._ so the service ends, which comprised Nocturns,
Lauds, and Prime, as they would now be called. The same ceremonies were
observed at the Little Hours which followed later. Vespers were performed
with more ceremony; at the conclusion the deacon directed the faithful
to bow their heads in order to receive the bishop’s blessing. Again the
pilgrim ends her description with the words, “_Et sic fit missa_.”
We must notice that the Psalmody took place daily in this way, while the
Mass, especially in the East, was not celebrated daily; in Lent, for
example, it was celebrated on Saturdays and Sundays only. At each hour
there took place a dismissal, _missa_, and thus it was brought about that
this word came to be used as a name for each of the canonical hours.
The name was far-fetched and unsuitable, but popular usage does not
form its nomenclature upon scientific principles, but from what most
strikes the popular fancy. Thus the pilgrim, who expresses herself in
popular language, speaks of _missa vigiliarum_, for Mattins, and _missa
lucernaris_ for Vespers. The word _missa_ in itself means dismissal
and nothing more. Once, in her naïve manner, she explains what sort
of dismissal she means; it is dismissal out of the church (“_missa de
ecclesia_,” c. 37, § 3, line 20). Which of the various dismissals out of
the church is intended in a given case is shown by an additional phrase,
as in the cases given above, when it is not clear from the context. Of
course it may mean the dismissal which took place at the Mass, but not
the sacrifice of the Mass itself. How far _missa_ is from being in the
pilgrim’s diary the technical term for Mass—which is all we are concerned
with here—is sufficiently clear from the circumstance that wherever she
lets slip the word _missa_ for Mass, she at once hastens to add that the
_missa_ of which she speaks is the _oblatio_.[850] When she wishes to
express herself with precision, she always calls the Mass _oblatio_, and
in a few cases _sacramentum_ (singular or plural). Of course _missa_, as
a general term, may have been used as a name for the Mass, since there
are one or more dismissals therein; had it not been so, _missa_ could
never have become the name _par excellence_ for the Mass.
The same terminology is found at a somewhat later date in Cassian, to
whom we are especially indebted for our intimate knowledge of monastic
observances. An important part of these observances were the daily hours
of prayer, the canonical hours, and we naturally expect to find the
technical terms for them in Cassian’s writings. And so, indeed, we find
the names formed with the help of the word _missa_, as in Silvia’s diary;
Mattins and Lauds are called _missa nocturna_ or _missa vigiliarum_,[851]
while the Mass, on the other hand, is called _oblatio_ or _sacrificium_.
From these passages it appears that _missa_ in its strict sense means
“dismissal,” and is a general term capable of receiving a particular
significance by the addition of _vigiliarum_, etc. The same thing appears
in Pope Innocent I. (_Epist._ 17, c. 12; MIGNE, xx. 535), where he
speaks of the priests belonging to the party of Bonosus, and asks if
they have celebrated Mass, which he calls _sacramenta conficere_, if
they have given Holy Communion (_si populis tribuit_), and if they have
performed the customary dismissals (_si missas complevit_). Apart from
the fact that in the same passage two different terms cannot well stand
for the same thing, the use of the plural shows that it is not the Mass
which is meant but the other _missæ_, the hours, the performance of
which concerned both the bishop and the priests. There is no doubt as
to which term Leo I. used for the Mass, for _oblatio_ and _sacrificium_
occur several times in his writings. When in one passage we find the
word _missa_ as well, this can only mean the dismissal, the conclusion
of divine service.[852] Thus even in the fifth century _missa_ by
itself always meant merely dismissal, never Mass; for Mass, the terms
_sacrificium_ and _oblatio_ were employed.
This was the correct use of the terms in question during that period. But
since, as we have said, the ceremonial dismissals (_missæ_) at the end of
divine service gave rise to the name, and since dismissals of this kind
occurred in the Mass,[853] once at the end and once after the sermon at
the dismissal of the Catechumens, it is not remarkable that _missa_ came
into use as a name for the Mass, and came to be regarded as its special
name in proportion as the canonical hours became less services for the
laity than of obligation for clergy and religious. There was however an
intermediate period before _missa_ became solely and exclusively the
popular name for the Mass. This transitional state of affairs extended
over the whole of the sixth century, and appears in the writings of
St Benedict and St Gregory the Great, who both employ _missa_ without
distinction as a name for the Mass and for the canonical hours.[854]
The same thing appears in Gregory of Tours and in other writers. The
last appearance of _missa_ as a name for both kinds of divine service
without distinction appears to be a passage in the life of St Ludgerus by
Altfrid.[855]