Epitome of the Canons

as daily you enrich us with ancient monuments previously unknown even to Baronius and Bellarmine. And indeed, in this infinite recess of sacred antiquity, it cannot be said with what eagerness I embrace your panepistemonous ^A wisdom. But among other things, you do not quite rightly prove this: if all those Lives of the saints that have the name of the Metaphrastes affixed to them seem to have flowed from the pen of the Metaphrastes, whether one should believe them to have lived in almost all the centuries of Christ, by a most ridiculous paradox, seeing that the Lives themselves, written for saints of the most diverse ages, most frequently produce their author as an eyewitness. But there is a point here which even now might perhaps be weighed: what if the Metaphrastes observed the same custom which Surius, in the memory of our fathers, recently followed? For he indeed edited many Lives of the saints, written—as some ancients of the Latins thought—in a rather base style, and he composed them in a more prolix style; and this, not in his own person, but in the person of the authors whom he was amending. Whether this action of Surius sufficiently benefits antiquarian erudition, I do not dispute. For me, certainly, no antiquity in sacred matters is base, nor do I think that the grey hair of antiquity needs foreign ornament. I say this: if someone among those who are to come a long time after us should at some point be ignorant of this fact of Surius, and with his prefaces lost, should find only the Lives of the saints edited by Surius (as we, alas! see to be the case in the writings on the Metaphrastes), would he not finally be left in total perplexity in recognizing the times of Surius, since Surius often speaks in the person of these authors, whose style he believed himself to be amending, and frequently supplies most ocular testimony for Saints of the most diverse times? See, therefore, most beloved Leo, whether the Metaphrastes might have done something similar, and therefore the Life of Alypius the Kionite, and other similar ones, none the less pertain to the Metaphrastes, who indeed seems to call himself an eyewitness of the most diverse ages, not indeed in his own person, but in the person of the authors whom he taught to speak more correctly. I await with wonderful eagerness what you think. Regarding that passage of the Metaphrastes, however, where he says he adhered to Himerius, as we are accustomed to see [τὸν πῶλον πρὸς μητρί], I here depart from the side of my Bollandus: for in truth, the Greeks abound in infinite ways in such [νοχορητικῶς] expressions, even when they speak of adults: just as Christ surely called His disciples not infants in age, yet [παῖδα] he called them. And so, for other reasons also presented by you, most illustrious sir, I have no doubt that the Metaphrastes was already an adult under Leo, the son of Basil the Macedonian. But those other writings of the Metaphrastes (since I have never seen anything other than the Lives of the saints and certain Odes in the Menaia under the name of Symeon the Logothete), those, I say, his other writings, which you write that you have seen to be many and most elegant in your leisure, I truly long to know. For in this noble Diatriba of yours, sent to me with the highest love, although you promised that you would enumerate the writings of the Metaphrastes below, I would believe it was perhaps due to other business that, besides that encomium of Psellus which is circulated among Surius and others under the name of Psellus, you added nothing as a catalog of the works of the new Metaphrastes. In those very lucubrations of Psellus, however, I marvel that you have not included his fairly long Epistle to Xiphilinus, in which that man of [πανεπιστήμονος] fame boasts of having forged true gold, and the patriarch most secretly indicates the manner of his artifice. I have it known to me from that manuscript in the libraries of Greece, which are more than twenty, which our Serene Lord possesses among the treasures of his Greek codices. But as for the fact that you suspect that this Metaphrastes of ours was never enrolled in the white-list of monks : in this, most friendly man, I ask you to weigh the sole foundation of the contrary opinion. For Joseph, Bishop of Methone, in his *Defensio* against Mark the Metropolitan (this book exists in the Greek-Latin councils of the Roman edition at the end of the Council of Florence), says that this Symeon the Metaphrastes was called by the Greeks [τὸν νέον], or the Younger: so that now one might deservedly feel that that Symeon the Younger Theologian (whose twenty-three orations our Jacques Pontanus edited from a Bavarian codex) is the Symeon the Metaphrastes, who finally became a monk and provost of the monastery of St. Mamas, perhaps moved by the examples of so many Saints, whose Lives he wrote. Certainly, just as the Greeks in the Menaia call the Odes of Symeon the Metaphrastes the Odes of Symeon the Logothete, because he was indeed at one time the Great Logothete, that is to say, the supreme Chancellor of the Greek Emperors: why could he not similarly, with the name of the Metaphrastes (which he received from the Lives of the saints) omitted, be called elsewhere only Symeon the Younger Theologian? Especially since Joseph of Methone read that he was designated in reality by the name of the Younger Theologian, in distinction to divine Nazianzen: who is indeed the old Theologian of the Greeks. I touched upon this matter a little more fully in the Prolegomena, no. 28, fol. 106, even according to the mind of Gretser. Regarding the elder Psellus, even before you wrote back to me, I was already thinking for a long time that you could not disagree with our Bollandus. For when the Metaphrastes in the Life of Saint Theoctiste (which the younger Psellus affirms to have been written by him, as he himself shows) demonstrates that he performed public duties under Leo, the son of Basil the Macedonian—a Caesar who, however, the elder Psellus far precedes—the elder Psellus could not at all be the one. Since the Metaphrastes had already died, and he [the Younger Psellus] had also written that encomium which is circulated under the name of Psellus among Surius and others. And so I do not know what happened to our most learned Bollandus, when he attributed that opinion about the elder Psellus to you; although he ranks you among the most learned and truly great men (as he speaks in the same place), whom he honors with his own plain merit. But this is a property of fragile life, that, absorbed either by excessive haste or by other difficulties, we do not always rightfully grasp what others think. Just as I also believe that our Lansselius in no way disagrees with you, even if he differs somewhat in words, when he placed our Metaphrastes in the tenth century of Christ. For as to what you said regarding the span of time from the nine hundredth year of Christ to the thousandth...

the ninth century, as you call it (that is, the one that has run its course and is now finished entirely)—our Lansselius calls that whole span of time the tenth century of Christ, that is, the one beginning and still running, and to be perfectly completed in the thousandth year of Christ.

On the *Parallage* of tones by John Lascaris, transcribed for my benefit, οἶδα μέν σοι χάριν τὴν πλείστην. I would have wished, however, that this writer had explained these bare differences of the tones with his own definitions. I marvel in a wondrous and incredible way at the abundance of your love for me, since you have been so generous in communicating to me so many things, which are remarkably useful and nearly necessary, from your manuscript codices. I shall act in my second part, just as I have already begun in the first: and with the utmost sincerity, as my own fatherland requires, I shall confess again how much, my dear Leo, I have learned from your excellent erudition. Our Franciscus Scorsus’s *Theophanes*, I have never seen until now: I do not doubt that he is a very learned interpreter. But concerning the age of his Cerameus and the sum of Roger’s φιλοτιμίᾳ in attaining the title of King, I am in full agreement with you for many reasons. Therefore, that subtlety regarding the name of Roger, as if it had been placed erroneously instead of *rhogas*, pleases me more than it moves me. What shall I say of Genebrard? Could so great a man err so shamefully in understanding those words of Suidas which make mention of Symeon Logothetes? But who is that Caminiata whom you cite in your lecture? For I believe him to be unpublished, as I do also that Cinnamus, whose edition our Possinus is now preparing. Indeed, I, who have long been studying to know all the Greek authors, see that infinite numbers still remain which I do not know. You may see here, my dear Leo, a reminder of that trite saying about the Macedonian who was angry at Democritus for his infinite worlds, for he had not yet mastered even one. I am sending this entire first part now once and for all; and I pray that your Lordship, δέομαι τῆς σῆς φιλανθρωπίας τῆς πάνυ, may deign to accept it as a pledge of our friendship. 29 May 1648.

To these most kind letters, returned at the beginning of the month of September due to new troubles that had arisen in Bavaria, I responded immediately as follows: "To the Very Reverend Father and most learned Simon Wagnerechius, Leo Allatius, greetings. That my statements concerning Symeon Metaphrastes have been approved by you, I triumph and rejoice; for now I shall be safe from the darts and biting of adversaries, and I will strictly be approved by a most learned man, and one most skilled in these matters. To tell the truth, I was wavering not a little beforehand, and hanging in suspense, and being ignorant, I feared in a way whether what I myself had disputed concerning the age of Metaphrastes and other things would be pleasing to you, or rather compared to correction than to glory. For what could I hope to accomplish in such obscure matters, and in relying on my own tiny strengths when they are treated so solidly by men of your Society who are so very learned? While meanwhile I am praised by you and please you, I do not regret the labor already undertaken, nor shall I regret it hereafter; rather, even without being asked, I invite the soul to similar inquiries. You do not approve of Surius’s *Factum*, nor do I praise it: nor do I think that others will, unless men who praise things from the dregs. To change the style, to change the appearance of things and persons, to assemble even the very limbs into a better state, as it seems, and afterwards to sell and publish them as if they were those very same originals, is cunning, it is fallacy, it is fraud; it is to daub the faces of pious authors, so that—to say nothing of the meaning—others may judge whether he has kept it firm in all respects, even with a changed style. Unless perhaps the fraud he himself invented may find favor with some by being openly avowed. But who will excuse the fact that it is not an open fraud, when the reader of the Surian edition is unable to distinguish it from the original words of the author? He could have distinguished his own characters in the edition itself by another type, as Stephanus and Portus did in the interpretation of Thucydides written by Valla. Then we would give thanks to Surius, because we would have the original author and, through his study, a more elegant one, and we would compare, at a glance, both the Surian and the Author’s words and sentiments. To me, indeed, as well as to you, that simple and in no way adulterated manner of speaking, which Christian antiquity has so greatly admired, is most pleasing, and truth, stripped of all ornament, excites the soul to piety with sharper stings: not, however, in such a way that those things explained in a more elegant style and distinguished by more pleasant flowers of color are to be rejected. I embrace elegant formulas of speech, and those joined with truth, from which, having become more learned, I simultaneously learn piety. But my discourse is about the style changed in the writings of others, and then sold as theirs, without any note of the change, under the name of the original Author. One must see whether Metaphrastes did something similar. Let us see. Psellus, who most accurately followed all of Metaphrastes’s studies in writing the *Lives* of the saints, although he said he recounted those that were poorly compiled and unurbane in a more elegant style, yet he never says that he changed the style in some, and in others left it as it was: and afterwards published that *Life* under the name of the first writer. Which is also true; for Symeon brought the *Lives* which he had proposed to write for himself into another style in such a way that they were already nearly different in elocution from those first ones, and therefore he called his own *Metaphraseis* (Metaphrases), that is, converted into another tongue, and he published them under his own name, with the old writer abolished. And although mention of the writer was made in antiquities, Metaphrastes, with his name suppressed—lest the times be confused—consigned the rest that were approved by him to writing. But when he wished to make mention of the older writer, he did it in such a way that it did not seem that the author of the *Life* which Symeon was commenting upon was the author, but someone else, who was circulated before him. For he admits that this or that writer had written that *Life* before him. This will be made clear by an example. In the *Life of Symeon Stylites* in the *Mandra*: of Symeon the great, the great marvel of the universe, and all those who happened to obtain some other part of the earth. Some, having received his things by sight, others by hearsay,

made him the delight of their tongue. Since he was therefore great and became widely renowned, he obtained many chroniclers; yet no one has ever gone through his acts in detail, nor did anyone dedicate himself to the whole, nor did he write down accurately how each event occurred. But having spoken of the former times in summary heads, they skipped over some of the intermediate events, and they did not even arrive at the very end of his actions; but for us, the account concerning him will be useful, as we begin from above and bring the narrative down to the last days of the man. ^A Today the humble John, he said, received no reward from anyone, nor did he possess any small nor even the slightest expiation to offer to Christ for his great and many errors; just as, indeed, he never had at any other time. Therefore the holy Sophronius, to whom the aforementioned statement was directed, said, "It was necessary today, most blessed master, to rejoice and be glad, because you have prepared the flock entrusted to you to live in peace."

Already, indeed, others who preceded us have philosophized most beautifully and loftily concerning this high priest and wondrous man, being capable in deed and speech—I refer to John and Sophronius, the God-fearing and virtuous men, and champions of piety. ^B Yet, even though they happened to be of such worth, they themselves fell short of the man’s virtue, and suffered the same thing, as do certain hardworking farmers harvesting a flourishing and fruitful vine, because they will certainly leave behind from the fruit of blessing, and not wishing to follow behind the poor, who are begging for the grapes—from whom we ourselves are the very least. For even if these all-holy men, with all their power, truly strove to harvest this fruitful olive—planted in the house of God, as the psalmist David says—by means of the rich olives in it, in their zeal for God; yet, nevertheless, the abundant fruit of the olive escaped them, and to accept our humble and cold eagerness, as the two mites of the widow. ^C For we did not hasten to write down the achievements of the righteous man because we were disparaging those men, nor as if we were able to imitate their God-given wisdom, but because it was revealed to me, the least brother Marcellus, with fear and trembling, in the form of a fiery star, having faith in the visions set forth. And He deemed me, His servant Marcellus, worthy to become a spectator of the vision set before me. For I saw in a vision of the night.

A certain Marcellus, illustrious in life and pious in manner, who was in charge of the monastery in the Cave, on a certain night of the middle week of the fasts, sees such a dream, which he also narrated to those under him, saying it word for word like this: "It was revealed to me, the least brother Marcellus, with fear and trembling, in the form of a fiery star, having faith in the visions set forth. And He deemed me, His servant Marcellus, worthy to become a spectator of the vision set before me. For I saw in a vision of the night." ^D A certain Marcellus, illustrious in life and pious in manner, who was in charge of the monastery in the Cave, on a certain night of the middle week of the fasts, sees such a dream, which he also narrated to those under him, telling it word for word as follows. For what others have in the series of events concerning themselves, while writing...

^A of Isidore, his brother, in the *Encomium of our Lord*. On the tradition of the singer to the singers. I have heard you all, O Christ-loving assembly and silence-loving gathering. On the restoration of the gift of our father among the saints, John Chrysostom. Behold the submissive grace. On the finding of the precious deposit of Saint Euphemia. [95]. We are the people of Christ; the holy soul. On the holy great martyr Theodore the Recruit. The feast is called that of the Purifications, which if any day... A discourse on the Presentation of our Lord Jesus Christ. The intention is to show by discourse, but what is desired is fulfillment. An encomium on Saint Dionysius the Areopagite. The pre-temporal kingdom of our Savior Jesus Christ had neither beginning nor does it have an end. I, having been caught, having become a willing net of impiety, and of grief, the precious one of Christ, great-minded, a certain George by name, who shone brilliantly in faith. I, the Patriarch, a servant of George, having followed in the impulse of grief, and all things, firmly bound the records. Take away from me the eager ones of the fulfillments, since also of the heavens. A discourse on the Veneration of the Cross. O Son, the ones who were sufficient to perfume all the ineffable words. On "Let us be strong in the Lord Jesus," his mother, and on the Theotokos. The pre-eminent and credible essence, the life and conduct of our father among the saints, Theodore the Archimandrite, from the... having descended under the holy Christ our God. A gift to us of the number of the apostles, on Meletius, Bishop of Antioch. To all everywhere a festival, a total feast. An encomium on Saint Theodore the Recruit. The [joy] of the festive joy of the Theotokos in the struggle. On the holy Unmercenaries and... known to the Theotokos. One must indeed trust the discourse, even if... Nevertheless, I set myself the task of adding to the achievements of the ancients, and those things now in our times accomplished for the benefit of the hearers, and the amendment of those who claim that such things cannot be accomplished now, as in the older times. ^{B C}

[143] I had written in my *Diatribe* that I had also dealt with other writings of Metaphrastes, which, however, were not transmitted in the *Diatribe* beforehand. This is so. And indeed, I dealt with them abundantly in the *Diatribe*. Those, however, were not transmitted, for not even the *Diatribe* itself is complete, but only that part in which the age of Metaphrastes, about which you had inquired, was discussed. It treats in it of other Symeons, whose memory exists among the ancients, or those of more recent times who have written something in Greek. Among them, Metaphrastes does not occupy the lowest place; most of his works are examined; the lives even written by him are separated from the supposititious; and other writings are numbered besides the Lives and Canons which you refer to having seen in the Menologion. These are various prayers, orations or panegyrics on saints, twenty-four moral orations from the works of the divine Basil, 131 sententious chapters of his own, 150 from Saint Macarius the Egyptian. Epistles, poems of various kinds, the *Dioptra*, which, however, are sought for wrongly in the Psellian *Diatribe*, where only the writings of Psellus are numbered: even if not all of them, since after the publication of the *Diatribe*, a manuscript codex was brought to me, consumed by moths and dampness, in which many more works of Psellus himself are found. Read, I pray, pages 45 and 88 of my *Diatribe*. There, among other lucubrations of Psellus, you will see a letter to Xiphilinus concerning *Chrysopoeia* more fully expressed.

Josephus the Bishop of Methone calls the Ephesian Metaphrastes a "younger theologian," from which one might rightly say that Symeon the younger theologian, whose twenty-three orations and other works James Pontanus published in Latin, is the same as Symeon Metaphrastes, who finally became a monk and ^D superior of the monastery of Saint Mamas. And indeed, the Greeks express this Symeon as they usually do by the name of Logothete, because he was indeed once a great Logothete. Why then could he not elsewhere, omitting the name of Metaphrastes, be called only the younger theologian, for the sake of distinction from the divine Nazianzen, who had claimed the name of Theologian for himself before him? Since I have dealt with this more fully in the *Diatribe* about the Symeons, I will explain myself briefly here. It is true that Symeon the younger theologian was a monk. It is true that Metaphrastes is understood only under the name of Logothete: yet it is wrong for Methonensis to confuse the younger theologian with Metaphrastes, deceived by the authority of certain manuscript codices, which note the treatises of Symeon, superior of Saint Mamas, under this title: *Of Metaphrastes Lord Symeon and the Younger Theologian concerning Attention or Prayer*. And, *Other chapters of Symeon Metaphrastes and the younger Theologian*. To omit the rest, that Symeon Metaphrastes and Symeon, superior of Saint Mamas, were one and the same person, the times themselves do not suggest. Metaphrastes lived under Leo the Wise, son of Basil; the superior of Saint Mamas under Alexius Comnenus, who, having ejected Botaniates, seized the empire, [148] Metaphrastes the younger almost seven years and two hundred. This is confirmed by the testimony of the same Symeon, who says in his Oration: "He himself, [the enemy] of men, that is, the devil," and so on. For six thousand six hundred and more years he has remained the enemy of men. He calculates, according to the Greek custom, from the creation of the world: wherefore this year will be 1092 of Christ. And it is described in the Palatine codex with the syllables *hexakosis*, six hundred. But if we read with others *diakosis*, two hundred, as Pontanus represented, those Symeons are still distinct in age, and Symeon Metaphrastes will be younger than the Theologian by at least 194 years, if Symeon at Xerocercus wrote in the year of the world 6200, which corresponds to the year 692 of Christ, under Justinian Rhinotmetus, about thirty years before the heresy of the Iconoclasts. But if he mentions Stephen the younger killed by Copronymus for the defense of the holy images in the year of Christ 767, then he will also be much older than Metaphrastes, perhaps by a hundred years. But how could someone living in the year 602 of Christ mention Stephen the younger, who suffered martyrdom in the year 767, being a hundred years older? Hence, from this second number, an error is manifest, and consequently the first number is more probable, by which this superior at Xerocercus is later than Metaphrastes. Whatever, however, the case may be, it is entirely concluded that he is another

^A Symeon Metaphrastes, and the other a superior at Xerocercus, and the argument collapses: for since these two are far different, it is wrongly inferred from the fact that a superior at Xerocercus was a monk, that Symeon Metaphrastes was a monk. But as I have said, he was such in the Diatriba.

But that Metaphrastes was not a monk, when even those things which are told about the superior at Xerocercus and others are not true, whence does Leo have this? He has it from the fact that he was bound to a wife in his already-confirmed age: nor did he ever marry again afterward, when she had died, or bind himself to another kind of life when released from the marriage bond. But he could, with his wife consenting, have committed himself to a monastery, or even have donned the monastic habit when near to death according to the custom of the Greeks, and especially of the Magnates. He could, I do not deny: therefore, he did. But this must be proven. I myself have the opposite view: until the contrary is established by authority, I will never give my hand. But, infected by the opinion of the Greeks regarding the notion that all sins were wiped away by the habit, he assumed the habit at the very end of life. This also must be proven for those who assert the contrary. Psellus, when he pursues his other praises, would not have been silent about such a prime monument of piety. Turn to the words. ^B

How many crowns of excellence would not this wonderful man ^C be crowned with? Or rather, with how many is he not already crowned, when he has ascended to God and leads the choirs of those whose morals and lives he transcribed? For even in the end he showed what kind of life he had lived: for those who saw him did not say that he seemed cut off or divided, but he seemed as if released from a certain bond, and with a joyful countenance he reached out to the angels leading him, in such a way as to commit himself into their hands, that he might quickly depart from the body. And he had died, indeed, in this way; but he immediately filled all things with the abundance of the highest fragrance. ^D He who pursues these minor details does not keep silent about the greater ones. You will say that an argument from silence concludes nothing. But when Metaphrastes himself speaks at an advanced age, he was hindered by his wife and children, whose happy success and abundance that old man from Paros promised, among other things: whom no one would doubt to have been surviving him. For thus God repays the deeds of his friends. Regarding the wife, since the opposite is not asserted, what worthily would you say? See by all means the Office of Psellus to the same, transmitted to you by me. In that work, indeed, when mention had to be frequently inculcated regarding the monastic life, and when he had been such, among his no-least praises was silence about all others; perhaps Psellus is more verbose than a reader would desire.

Joannes Caminiata, a cleric and Cubuclesius of Thessalonica, flourished in the times of Leo the Wise, Emperor of Constantinople. Noble in birth, flowing with riches, when Leo Tripolita, infamous for his shameful renunciation of the Christian faith, powerful in fleet and men, with walls cast down by assault, set [the city] on fire and destroyed it in miserable ways: he carried off as captives to the Tripolitan fields almost all, except for a few saved by the Emperor, whom he placed on his fleet; among these was this Joannes, with his father and entire family, who, wandering through foreign regions to a certain doctor, indeed a studious man named Gregory, and strongly requesting it, tracked the history of the entire destroyed fatherland not inelegantly: yet he executes all things so that he seems not to write, but to paint and place before one’s eyes. Surely he is harder than adamant, who can so control himself that during the reading he does not hold back tears, and does not stain the pages subject to his eyes? So great is the inhumanity of the Barbarians in attacking Christians, so great the savage cruelty in afflicting and destroying the human race, so great the perversity in demolishing sacred buildings. This Joannes the Lector, likewise of Thessalonica, I will publish regarding the siege and second destruction of Thessalonica under the Murate of the Turkish Amera, and Constantine Porphyrogennetus regarding the life and deeds of the Macedonian, with some others in Greek and Latin (if God shall grant it) for the utility of the literary Republic.

Cinnamus—I know not by what fate of his—is called Sinnamus by some, though the Vatican Codex—from which the other examples were transcribed—most openly resists this. The family of the Cinnamei is recognized as not unworthy in Greece up to these times, but of the Sinnamei there is none; and which, even if it existed, since that History asserts Cinnamus as the author, those who propose otherwise labor in vain, deceived by the carelessness of a later transcriber. Mention of the Cinnamei is held in Michael Psellus; he lived under Manuel Comnenus, whose deeds he himself, an eyewitness, digested in many books, just as he did those of the father of Joannes Manuel. In the Vatican codex, however, only the seventh is read, and no further. Which I think happened from this, because it was being transcribed from a codex, when Constan

[...], ^A tinople, besieged by land and sea, was assaulted by the Mahumetans with engines of war, as the copyist had noted in the margin. Later, the city having been delivered by the just judgment of God to the enemies, that copy also reached its end after a few pages, interrupted by the storming of the city, or by misfortune—would that it were not by slaughter—on the part of the copyist. Whatever the case may be, the author is elegant, if anyone ever was; he uses foreign figures of speech quite often, along with tropes from the storehouse of the Sophists. His periods are concise and full, except when they are made harsh and obscure by novelty of composition. To sum it up in a word, he models himself entirely on Procopius. And it is a wonder that, among so many other writers of the later age who rave in a tumultuous manner in their speaking and writing, he alone has been so wise. Someone might say that he indulged himself too much in narrating the affairs of the Greeks, making them greater than they were. Yet Thucydides will answer for these things: "Praise of others is acceptable only up to the point that each man thinks he himself is capable of doing some of the things he hears. But in that which exceeds their own capacity, they become envious and disbelieving." To that extent is the praise of others tolerable, insofar as ^B everyone thinks themselves equal to another of whom they speak: but if they are unequal, they envy them and have no faith. Regarding the Roman pontiffs, whenever the occasion presents itself, he is always sharply intemperate. But more equitable men examined these matters.

I have received the first completed part of the Marian piety of the Greeks. I give immortal thanks; I will rouse myself to read it, as it is so sweet and learned, and, as if sprinkled with gems, is adorned with most erudite notes. Do not yield to the burden, I pray, in such a great calamity of our times. May the very piety of Mary suffice as the greatest aid for your efforts in such a laborious task. Word has reached me that my synthesis on the "Perpetual Agreement of the Western and Eastern Church," with my dissertations—one on the Sundays and Weeks of the Greeks, the other on the Mass of the Presanctified—has already been finished and published in Amsterdam or Cologne. It has not yet been seen at Rome. Farewell, most excellent man, and love me, your most obedient servant, as you do. Rome, 25 September, 1648.

CERTAIN GREEK AUTHORS, In the first Indicator of Allatius, and others by the Metaphrast, who wrote Lives and Encomia of Saints. The numbers recall you to those whom we have placed in parentheses in the text.

A Alexander the monk, on St. Barnabas the apostle, 99. On the Invention of the Cross, 110. Ammonius the monk, on the monks slain at Raithu and Mount Sinai, 86. Amphilochius of Iconium, Life and Miracles of Basil, 81. On Great Sabbath, 92. On Symeon, 108. On the four-days-dead Lazarus, 113. On the Theotokos and Anna and Symeon, 107. Is by Theodotus of Ancyra. Anastasius Sinaita, on those who sleep in Christ, 111. On the Transfiguration, 116. Anastasius of Theopolis, archbishop, on events in Persia, 83. On the feast of the Meeting, 104. On the Annunciation, 109. On the same, 111. Anatolius, bishop of Thessalonica, on the Decollation of the Forerunner, 92. On the same, 104. On the same, 115. Andrew of Crete, on George the martyr, 87. On the Annunciation, 91. On the four-days-dead Lazarus, 98. On the Transfiguration, 103. On human life and the deceased, 103. On the life-giving Cross, 98 and 109. On Palm Sunday, 114. One praised on the Dormition of St. Mary, her praiser, 106. Antipater of Bostra, on John the Baptist, etc., 89. Antonius the monk, [on] Symeon Stylites, 101. His disciple, 8. Metaphrastes is poorly spoken of, 9. Archippus, hermit and Prosmonarios, on the Miracle of St. Michael at Chonae, 94. On the revelation of St. Michael, 113. Arsenius of Corfu, on Barbara the Virgin, 90. On Andrew the First-Called, 94. Asterius, bishop of Amasea, on the Holy martyrs, 92. On Phocas the martyr, 96. Athanasius, archbishop of Alexandria, on St. Anthony, ibid. Athanasius the scribe, on Catherine the martyr, 93.

B Barsaphthas, martyrdom of Ananias, 82. Basil, archbishop of Caesarea, on the Nativity of Christ, 88. On Gordius the martyr, 100. Basil of Seleucia, on the Acts of St. Thecla the protomartyr, 97. On St. Thomas, 102. On holy Pentecost, 108.

C Callistus, patriarch of Constantinople, on the Exaltation of the Cross, 101. Chrysippus, presbyter of Jerusalem, on John the Forerunner, 95. On the archangel Michael, 100. Constantine Acropolita, on the holy martyr Theodosia, 84. St. Neophytus, 105. Theodore the Recruit, 109. Constantine Chartophylax, Deacon of the Great Church, on all the holy martyrs, 81. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, on the image of Edessa, 111. Constantine, bishop of Tii, on the Invention of the body of St. Euphemia, 94. Cosmas, Vestitor, on the Translation of the body of St. John Chrysostom to Constantinople, 94. On Joachim and Anna, 95. On Zechariah the prophet and high priest, 100. Cyril of Alexandria, on the Transfiguration, 101. Genealogy of Joseph from Abraham to David, 106. Cyril the monk and presbyter of Scythopolis, on Saint Sabas, 93. Saint Theodosius, 96. Saint Euthymius, 102, 107.

D Daniel the monk of Raithu, on John Sinaita, 112. Demetrius Chrysoloras, on Demetrius the Myroblyte, 85. Demetrius Cydonius, on holy Pentecost, or on the Holy Spirit, 101. Diadochus, bishop of Photice in Epirus, on the Assumption of the Lord, 113.

E Ephrem, bishop of Cherson, on the miracles of St. Clement, 90. On the miracle concerning the boy, 96. Ephrem the Syrian, on the forty martyrs, 89. On the funeral of Basil, 88. On the Cross, 106. Epiphanius, bishop of Cyprus, on the burial of the Lord's body, 111. On Palms, 114. Epiphanius the monk, on Saint Andrew, 90. On the life of the holy Mother of God, 106. Authors therein praised by him, and criticized, 106. Evagrius the monk, on Saint Pancratius, 86. Evodius, on the forty-two martyrs, 113. Euripus, on the Decollation of John the Forerunner, 92. Eusebius of Alexandria, on the coming of John into hell, 82. On the Resurrection of Christ, ibid. On the betrayal of Judas, 84. On the Assumption of the Lord, 91. On the baptism of Christ, 91. On the second coming, 99. On the [... of] Christ

112. Eusebius the monk, Acts of Eustratius and his companions, 83. Eustratius the presbyter, of the great Eutychius, patriarch of Constantinople, 96. Euthymius the monk, on the Dedication of Saint Mary in the Chalkoprateia, 108. Eutolmius, on the Holy Martyrs Galation and Episteme, 85. Florentius, on the Holy Martyrs Senator, Viator, etc., 89.

G Georgius Alexandrinus, on John Chrysostom, 105. In him, wrongly rebuked by Savillio, 46. Georgius Grammaticus, of Saint Barbara the martyr, 92. Georgius Hagiopolita, on the Holy Spirits, 97. Georgius the monk and chartophylax, on the Presentation of Saint Mary in the temple, 113. Georgius Nicomediensis, on the Nativity of Saint Mary, 87. On the Conception of the Holy Mother of God, 94. On the doubt of Joseph, 98. On the Conception of Saint Anne, 103. On the Conception of the Holy Mother of God, 104. On Saint Mary standing at the cross, 108. On the Holy Cosmas and Damian, 110. On the attendance at the sepulcher, 113. Germanus, archbishop of Constantinople, on the Dedication of the Chalkoprateia, etc., 84. On the Annunciation, 92. On the Entrance of Saint Mary, 96. When she was offered at three years old, ibid. On the Dormition of Saint Mary, 104. On Saint Michael, 104. On the Deposition of the girdle of the Mother of God, 111. On the adoration of the life-giving cross, 113. Germanus, patriarch of Constantinople, on the Exaltation of the precious cross, 104. On the Sunday of the Fasts, etc., 114. Here plainly: nor perhaps all the other things of the senior. Gregorius Antiochenus, on the Burial of the Lord, etc., 90. Gregorius, archdeacon and Referendary of the Great Church, on the Edessene image, 105. On Demetrius the martyr, ibid. Gregorius Cyprius, patriarch of Constantinople, on George the martyr, 87. On Saint Euthymius, bishop of Madyta, the Wonderworker, 92. On Dionysius the Areopagite, 95. On the holy martyr Marina, 97. Gregorius Mitylenaeus, on the Passions of Christ, 109. Gregorius of Neocaesarea, on the Holy Theophany, or the holy Lights, 83. On the Annunciation, 92. On the same, 105. Gregorius Nyssenus, on Theodore Teron the martyr, 95. On Meletius, bishop of Antioch, 95. On the Forty Martyrs, 101. On the life and miracles of Gregory the Wonderworker, 102. On the Annunciation of Saint Mary, 103. On the life of his sister Saint Macrina, 112. On Saint Stephen the Protomartyr, 115. Gregorius Palamas, on the entrance of Saint Mary into the temple, 87. On the same, 103. On the incarnation of the Lord, 103. Gregorius the patriarch, Life and miracles of Saint Lazarus on Mount Galesion, 103. Gregorius the presbyter, on the life of Gregory Nazianzen. His disciple, 109. Gregorius the presbyter of Caesarea of Cappadocia, on the Nicene Fathers, 106.

H Helias the monk, on the Vigil of the Nativity, and on the Holy Fathers, 101. Hesychius, presbyter of Jerusalem, on the four-day Lazarus, 84. On the Meeting of the Lord, 95. On the holy apostles Peter and Paul, 98. On Saint Michael, 100. On Procopius the martyr, 108. On Saint Andrew the apostle, 109. On the four-day Lazarus, 113. Hieronymus the monk, 89.

I Isidorus, archbishop of Thessalonica, on the Nativity of Christ, 83. On the Dormition of Saint Mary, 87. On the Annunciation, 94. On the Holy of Holies, 97. On the Nativity of Saint Mary, 100. On the feast of Lights, 100.

J Jacobus the apostle, on the Nativity of Saint Mary from the Oracle, 89. Epiphanius the deacon, James the Hebrew: not himself praised, 106. Jacobus the monk from the monastery of Corcinobaphi, On the purple rendered to the priests, etc., 101. On the Conception of Saint Mary, 104. On the Presentation in the Temple, 107. On her Nativity, 109. On the Annunciation, 114. Joannes Calecas, on the Exaltation of the cross, 87. Joannes Damascenus, on Symeon Stylites of the Wonderful Mountain, 17, 18. On the holy martyr Barbara, 113. Joannes the Deacon and rhetor of the Great Church, on Saint Joseph the chanter, 97. Joannes the disciple, on the consummation of the Holy Mother of God, 110. Joannes, disciple of Saint Epiphanius, on the same Epiphanius, 92. Joannes, bishop of Euboea, on the Nativity of Christ, 102. Joannes the monk and presbyter of Euboea, on the Conception of Saint Mary, ibid. On the Holy infants killed in Bethlehem, and Rachel, 105. Joannes the monk, on the events of Saint Artemius the martyr, from the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, and others, 110. Joannes, Metropolitan of Euchaita, on Theodore the martyr, 82. On the Dormition of the Mother of God, 92. On the Synaxis of the Holy angels, 97. On Theodore Teron, 99. On the day of Pascha, 102. Of Dorotheus the Younger, 104. On the three holy prelates, Basil, etc., 105. On the holy martyr Theodore, that is, 105. On Saint Eusebia in Euchaita, 106. On the three holy prelates, 112. On the miracle performed against the barbarians, 115. Joannes Geometra, on the Passions of Christ, and on the Holy Mother of God, 94. On the Dormition of Saint Mary, 95. Thanksgiving to the Holy Mother of God, 114. Joannes Hagiopolita, on Saint Macarius of Egypt, 100. Joannes, patriarch of Jerusalem, on Saint John Damascene, 112. On his works, 44. Joannes Stauratius, Chartophylax of Thessalonica, on the miracles of Saint Demetrius, 102. Joannes of Thessalonica, That there is no discord in the evangelists, etc., 97. Hymn to God, and on Demetrius the martyr, 105. On the Dormition of Saint Mary, 110. Rebuked by Epiphanius the deacon in it, 106. Joannes Xiphilinus, on the 3rd Sunday of Lent and the adoration of the cross, 104. Joannes Zonaras, on the adoration of the cross, 95. On Saint Silvester, 101. On Saint Sophronius, prelate of Jerusalem, 101. On the Meeting of the Lord, 105. Josephus, on the holy apostle Bartholomew, 103. Josephus Briennius, on the Annunciation, 88. On that, They stood near the cross, 95. On the Annunciation, 96. On Great Friday, 110. Josephus, archbishop of Thessalonica, on the Exaltation of the Holy cross, 109. On the blessed Lazarus, etc. Palm feast, 114.

L Leo Centuripinus, on James the apostle, son of Zebedee, 113. Leo the Emperor, on Saint Clement, 81. On the Sunday of the Resurrection, 82. On the birthday of the Forerunner, 83. On the great John Chrysostom, 83. On Saint Nicholas, 90. On the Transfiguration, 91. On Pentecost Sunday, 91. On Palm Sunday, 91. On Saint Demetrius, 94. On the Nativity of Christ, 96. On the beginning of the Fast, 96. On the prophet Elijah, 97. On Stephen the protomartyr, 100. On the Dormition of Saint Mary, 100. On the consecration of the temple, 101. On the Annunciation, 103. On Demetrius the martyr, 103. On the Transfiguration, 106. On the Exaltation of the Cross, 108. On the Sunday of All Saints, 108. On the Holy Theophany, 108. On the reception in the heavens, 110. On the Transfiguration, 111. On the entrance of Saint Mary into the temple, 111. On the Beheading of the Forerunner, 111. On the feast of the Meeting, 111. Leontius, bishop of Arabissus, on the four-day Lazarus, 103. Leontius the presbyter, of Constantinople, on Job, Monday of the Great Week, 81. On the same, Tuesday of the Great Week, 93. On the Sunday of the Resurrection, 93. On the Palms, 94. On Great Friday, 99. On John the Baptist, 107. On holy Pascha, 109. On the man blind from birth and on Peter, 112. On the betrayal of Christ, Great Thursday, 115. Leontius of Jerusalem, on the parable of him who fell among thieves, 94. Leontius, bishop of Neapolis in Cyprus, on Symeon who for Christ was a fool, 101. On John the Almsgiver, 102. On the middle of Pentecost, 112. Leontius, presbyter and provost of the monastery of Saint Saba at Rome, on Saint Gregory of Agrigento, 113.

^A

INDICES IN DIATRIBAM

Lucianus presbyter, Revelation of the body of Saint Stephen the protomartyr, 112.

M

Macarius Chrysocephalus, Archbishop of Philadelphia, on John the Evangelist, 83. On the nine orders of Angels and on Saint Michael, 83. On the Exaltation of the Cross, 88. On Michael and Gabriel, 94. On the Transfiguration, 96. On the Nativity of the Forerunner, 97. Sunday of the Fast, on which the Adoration of the Cross is performed, 99. On the Resurrection of Christ, 99. On the Beheading of the Forerunner, 105. On the solemnity of Orthodoxy, 111. On the women bearing spices and on Joseph of Arimathea, etc., 111. On the feast of the Meeting (Hypapante), 113. On the Resurrection of Christ, 114. On the feast of Palms, 114. Manuel Calecas, on the Sunday of the Circumcision, 112. On Saint Stephen, 115. Manuel Palaeologus, that sin is the worst of all things, etc., 102. On the Dormition of the Theotokos, 114. Marcellus Archimandrite, on the Invention of the head of Saint John the Baptist, 100. Marcus the monk and provost of the monastery of Saint Saba at Rome, on Saint Gregory of Agrigento, 109. Matthaeus Camariota, on the three prelates, Basil, etc., 88. Maximus Planudes the monk, on the Sunday of the entombment, 82. On the Holy Apostles, 87. Methodius [alias Metrodorus], on Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, 99. Methodius, Bishop of Patara and martyr, on Simeon and Anna, 104. Methodius the presbyter, of Jerusalem [alias Timotheus], on the feast of the Meeting, 100. Michael Archimandrite, on Saint Nicholas, 103. Michael the monk, on the apostle Philip, 106. Of Saint Theodore the Studite, 107. Michael Psellus, on Saint Auxentius, 83. On the Annunciation, ibid. On Gregory Thaumaturgus, 180. On the Translation of the body of Saint Stephen, 102. On the miracle which occurred at Blachernae, 104. On Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, ibid. On the miracles of Saint Michael, 109. On Symeon Metaphrastes, 112. Concerning him, 22, 27, 32. Michael, Bishop of Synada, on the miracles of the Holy Archangels, 107. Michael Syncellus, on Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, 104. On the Holy Archangels and celestial Virtues, 112.

N

Nectarius, Archbishop of Constantinople, on Saint Theodore the Recruit, on the Saturday of the Fast, 115. Nicephorus Blemmydes, on Saint John the Evangelist, 93. On Saint Paul in Latros, 99. Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, on the Church of the Mother of God at the Spring (Pege), 88. Nicephorus Gregoras, on the Nativity and Presentation of Saint Mary, 82. Of Antonius Cauleas, Patriarch of Constantinople, 81. Martyrdom of Codratus, 88. On the Annunciation, ibid. On the Holy Martyr Mercurius, 97. Nicetas, Bishop of Paphlagonia, on Saint Theodore the martyr, 111. I fear he may be the Rhetor and Paphlagonian himself. Nicetas the Rhetor, on the Holy martyr Panteleimon, 96. On the Holy Apostle Bartholomew, ibid. On the Invention and Translation of the relics of Saint Stephen, 102. On Saint Nicholas, ibid. On the Holy Apostle John, 103. On the Holy Apostle James, 108. On the Holy Apostle Timothy, 111. On the Holy twelve apostles, ibid. On the princes of the apostles, Peter and Paul, ibid. On the Holy martyrs Cerycus and Julitta, 115. On the Holy Apostle Mark, ibid. Far more than these are in one codex of Cardinal Mazarin: from which more Latin [texts were taken] for the Bibliotheca Concionatoria. Nicolaus Cabasilas, on the Sunday of the Assumption, 82. On the saving passions of Christ, ibid. On the Annunciation, 97. On Saint Demetrius, 107. Nicolaus Pepagomenus, on the Holy martyr Isidore, 96. Nilus, martyrdom of Saint Theodotus of Ancyra, 86. Nilus the monk, on the slaughter of the Holy Fathers in Sinai and Raithu, 104. Nilus, Metropolitan of Rhodes, on Saint Matrona of Chios, 104.

O

Onesimus, disciple of Paul, on the Holy Xantippe, Polyxena and Rebecca, 112.

P

Pantaleon the deacon and chartophylax of the Great Church, on the miracles of the Holy Archangel Michael, etc., 99. On Saint Michael, 103. On the same, ibid. Pantaleo, Byzantine presbyter, on the Exaltation of the Cross, 105. Paphnutius, on Saint Onuphrius and others leading a solitary life, 89. Pasicrates, servant of Saint George, on the same George, 95. Petrus, Bishop of the Argives, on the Holy Cosmas and Damian, 83. Philotheus, Patriarch of Constantinople, on the Exaltation of the Cross, 91. On All Saints, 97. On the Adoration of the Lord’s Cross on the 3rd Sunday of the Fast, 108. On the three Holy Fathers, Basil, etc., 112. Photius, Skeuophylax and Logothete of the Holy Apostles, on the Holy martyr Lucillian and his companions, 104. Polycarpus the ascetic, on Saint Syncletica, 87. On Saint Syncletica, 105. Prochorus, Periods of Saint John the Evangelist, 109. Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople, on the Transfiguration, 84. On Holy Thursday, 91. On Saint Andrew, 97. On the Incarnation of the Lord and the light-bearing [feast], 98. On the Theotokos, ibid. On Holy Easter, 99. On Holy Easter, etc., 101. On the apostle Paul, 103. On the Theotokos, 105. On Holy Easter and the Theotokos, ibid. On the incarnation, 107. On Palm Sunday, 109. On the Sunday of the Resurrection, 113. On the Theophany, 114. On Chrysostom, 46. Procopius, chartophylax, on Saint John the Evangelist, 83.

S

Severianus, Bishop of Gabala, on the serpent of Moses, etc., 114. Sisinnius, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the miracle of Saint Michael at Chonae, 98. Sophronius the monk, then Patriarch of Jerusalem, on the Holy Cyrus and John, 82. On John the Forerunner, 100. On the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, 105. Stephanus of Byzantium, on Saint Stephen the Younger the martyr, 80. Symeon the Humble, on Symeon the Receiver of God, 100.

T

Tarasius, Patriarch of Constantinople, on the Presentation of Saint Mary, 113. On Theodore the Recruit, 115. Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrrhus, on Symeon the Stylite, 110. Theodoretus Scutariota, on the life of Saint Paul the apostle, 106. Theodorus, Bishop of Alania, on the entombment of the Lord, 82. Theodorus Daphnopata, on the Nativity of the Forerunner, 87. Vatican Codex of Theodoretus of Cyrrhus. On the translation of his hand to Antioch, 96. Theodorus the Younger confessor, on the Nativity of the Virgin, 99. He is the Studite himself. Theodorus Lascaris Doukas, on the Holy martyr Tryphon, 98. Theodorus the Master, panegyric of the apostle Paul collected from various sources, 111. Theodorus Metochites, Great Logothete, on the Holy martyr Marina, 88. On Gregory the Theologian, 103. Theodorus, Bishop of Paphos, on Saint Spyridon, 89. Theodorus, Bishop of Petrae, on Theodosius the archimandrite, 95. Theodorus, presbyter of the Great Church, on the robe of Saint Mary when it was translated to Constantinople, 98. Theodorus the Quaestor, on the Holy martyr George, 108. Theodorus the Studite, on the adoration of the Cross in the middle of Lent, 81. On the Nativity of Saint John the Forerunner, ibid. On Saint Plato, 109. Theodorus of Trimithous, on the life, exile, and tribulations of Saint John Chrysostom, 81. Theodorus of Ancyra, on the Nicene Symbol of the Fathers, 112. Theodulus the Abbot, on John the Baptist and Forerunner of Christ, 82. Theophilus, Archbishop of Alexandria, on the mystical Supper, 111. Theophylactus, Archbishop of Bulgaria, on the adoration of the Cross in the middle of Lent, 111. Theosteristus the monk, on Saint Nicetas the Confessor, 107.

Thomas, of Saint Febronia, 86. Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria, on the miracles of Saint Mena the martyr, 86. Timothy, presbyter of Antioch, on the Cross and the Transfiguration, 107. Titus, Bishop of Bostra, on Palm Sunday, 115.

V Varus, notary and keeper of the Records, of Saint Theodore the military commander, 115.

LIVES OF THE SAINTS OR ENCOMIA

A Acyndinus, martyr, 98, 18. Catherine, 93, 1. Agatha, 104, 22. Alexander, Bishop of Byzantium, 89, 10. Ammonius, monk, 85, 15. Ananias, martyr, 82, 26. Andrew, apostle, 90, 43; 94, 17; 97, 5; 109, 4. Andronicus, martyr, 90, 2. Anempodistus, martyr, 98, 18. Angelic Congregation, 47, 49. Anna, parent of the Mother of God, 95, 31; 103, 38. Anna, prophetess, 100, 15; 104, 27; 107, 42. See Occurs. Antonius Cauleas, 87, 22. Anysia of Thessalonica, 103, 36. Apostles, 87, 15; 111, 18. Archangels (SS), 112, 19. Artemius, martyr, 110, 9. Autonomus, martyr, 111, 2. His body’s incorruption, 42. Auxentius, 83, 14. Auxentius, martyr, 83, 26.

B Barbara, 90, 24, 27; 92, 32; 113, 7. Barnabas, 99, 34. Bartholomew, 96, 29; 103, 12. Basiliscus, martyr, 110, 11. Basil, 81, 30; 88, 20; 105, 7; 112, 32. Blasius, 84, 24.

C On the man born blind, 112, 7. Cassiodorus, martyr, 89, 36. Cericus, martyr, 91, 34; 115, 18. Christ’s second coming, 99, 38. Annunciation, 83, 16; 88, 23, 28, 44; 91, 38; 92, 26, 28; 94, 13, 22; 96, 17; 103, 5, 27; 105, 12; 109, 8; 111, 21; 114, 10. Baptism, 82, 32; 90, 26; 91, 29; 100, 40; 114, 19. Circumcision, 112, 36. Incarnation, 98, 4; 107, 21; 112, 25. Death and passion, 82, 5; 94, 20; 99, 22; 109, 10; 100, 5; 112, 20. Nativity, 83, 13; 96, 20; 99, 1; 102, 47; 105, 22. In Vigilia, 101, 6. Meeting (Hypapante), 95, 4; 100, 14; 104, 27, 34; 105, 11; 107, 40; 108, 8, 40; 110, 36; 113, 13; 114, 21. Assumption (into heaven), 82, 2; 90, 23; 91, 27; 110, 35; 113, 22; 116, 10. Resurrection, 82, 29, 33; 90, 26; 96, 11; 97, 10; 99, 3, 29; 100, 30; 101, 11; 102, 8; 109, 34; 110, 32; 111, 12; 113, 15; 114, 1, 4. Burial, 82, 24, 26; 90, 26; 111, 28; 116, 4. Transfiguration, 91, 20; 96, 16; 101, 14; 103, 8; 106, 5; 107, 43; 111, 31; 116, 1. Chrysanthus, martyr, 110, 26. Chrysostom, 81, 29; 83, 1, 7; 87, 13; 88, 18; 94, 36; 105, 7, 19; 111, 23; 112, 31, 35. Clement, 81, 41; 90, 23; 93, 14; 96, 7; 112, 33. Codratus, martyr, 88, 40. Cosmas, martyr, 83, 19; 110, 40; 11, 26. On the Cross, 106, 1; 109, 20. Adoration of the Cross in the middle of Lent, 81, 32; 95, 19; 99, 38; 104, 32; 108, 60; 111, 12; 113, 34. Exaltation, 87, 37; 89, 1; 91, 19; 98, 34; 101, 4; 104, 39; 105, 14; 108, 22; 109, 22. Finding, 100, 30. Cyrillus, martyr, 174, 30. Cyrus, martyr, 89, 15.

D Damianus, martyr, 83, 22; 110, 44; 114, 29. Daria, martyr, 110, 26. Dedication of the temple, 86, 35; 101, 7. On the departed, 111, 28. Demetrius, martyr, 85, 1, 3; 94, 13; 96, 4; 97, 22; 102, 24; 103, 38; 105, 35; 107, 4, 5. Dionysius the Areopagite, 95, 7; 99, 40; 104, 14. Domnata, 89, 27. Dorotheus the Younger, 104, 8. Dresta, martyr, 84, 14.

E Elias, prophet, 97, 18. Ephrem the Syrian, 98, 34. Epiphanius, Bishop of Cyprus, 92, 25. Episteme, martyr, 85, 8. Eugenius, martyr, 83, 25. Euphemia, Finding of relics, 94, 39. Eustathius and companions, 108, 4. Euthymius, abbot, 102, 45; 107, 19. Eutychius, patriarch of CP, 96, 25.

F Febronia, martyr, 86, 2.

G Galaction, martyr, 85, 8. Gabriel, archangel, 81, 35; 74, 28; 112, 24. George, martyr, 85, 31; 87, 16, 27; 95, 10; 101, 84; 108, 27. Gordius, martyr, 100, 28. Gregory of Agrigentum, 109, 14; 113, 30. Gregory Thaumaturgus, 100, 1; 102, 38. Gregory the Theologian, 88, 20; 103, 6; 105, 8; 109, 28; 112, 32, 38.

I Image of Christ at Edessa, 103, 48; 105, 32. Restoration of images, on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, 111, 42; 114, 30. Innocent martyrs (Holy Innocents), 105, 10. Ismael, martyr, 98, 11.

J James, apostle, 108, 40. James, son of Zebedee, 113, 4. Beginning of the Fasts, 93, 13; 96, 37. Joachim, 95, 31. Joannicius, 110, 21. John the Baptist and Forerunner, 81, 39; 82, 10, 27; 85, 18; 85, 6; 87, 30; 89, 5; 97, 4; 107, 27; 115, 21. John, beheading of, 92, 38; 33, 104, 48; 105, 4; 106, 9; 111, 40; 115, 2. Finding of his head, 110, 11. John Chrysostom. See Chrysostom. John of Damascus, 112, 4, 46. John the Almsgiver, 102, 20. John, martyr, 82, 15. John of the Ladder (Sinaita), 112, 14. John the Theologian, 83, 3, 5; 93, 6; 101, 9; 106, 12; 119, 6. Job, 81, 42; 93, 8; 99, 21; 115, 16. Joseph the Hymnographer, 97, 11. Julian, martyr, 110, 12. Julitta, martyr, 91, 35; 115, 18.

L Lazarus at Monte Galesino, 103, 5. Lazarus, raised on the fourth day, 84, 33; 94, 28; 98, 48; 113, 23, 24. Longinus, centurion, 101, 24. Lucilianus, hieromartyr, 104, 30.

M Macarius the Egyptian, 100, 6. Macrina, 112, 11. Concerning her, Gregory, brother, 46.

Mark the Evangelist, 104, 38; 115, 19. Manuel the martyr, 98, 11. Mardarius the martyr, 83, 27. Mary (Saint), eulogy, 98, 37; 105, 46, 48. The garment brought to Constantinople, 96, 12. Dedication of the temple, 84, 32; 88, 35; 108, 2. Nativity; Presentation in the Temple, and education therein, 82, 6; 83, 22; 87, 24, 34; 89, 25; 92, 21; 95, 34; 97, 7; 101, 20; 102, 26; 104, 16, 18; 106, 19, 38; 111, 38; 113, 17. Visitation, 89, 5; 103, 10. Attendance at the cross and sepulcher, 94, 31; 95, 22; 108, 26; 113, 29. Congratulatory address for the Son’s resurrection, 96, 23; 113, 36. Dormition (they now customarily call it the Assumption), 87, 23; 92, 15; 95, 32; 104, 24; 110, 22, 39; 114, 25. Dedication of the temple; veneration of relics, 84, 32; 88, 35; 96, 13. Mary of Egypt, 100, 19; 102, 19. Mary the Younger, 91, 37. Marina the martyr, 88, 37; 97, 40. Martinian the monk, 85, 36. Martyrs (Holy), 82, 1; 92, 34. Martyrs, the Forty-two, 78, 31; 101, 13. Martyrs, the Forty-two, 92, 10; 113, 11. Matrona the martyr of Chios, 104, 41. Melania, 93, 26. Meletius, bishop of Antioch, 95, 17. Menas the martyr, 86, 15. Mercurius the martyr, 97, 15. Metrophanes, bishop of Byzantium, 89, 13. Michael the Archangel, 81, 32; 94, 21, 28; 96, 2; 109. Michael the Syncellus, 100, 40. Monks, massacre of, in Sinai and Raithu, 82, 21; 86, 36. Neophytus the martyr, 100, 23; 105, 31. Nicene Fathers, 106, 12; 112, 13. Nicetas the confessor, 107, 48. Nicholas the Myrovletes, 102, 32; 103, 2. Onuphrius the hermit, 89, 8. Orestes the martyr, 83, 27. Orthodoxy Sunday; or, The Restitution of the Icons, 111, 41; 33; 114, 22. Palm Sunday, 91, 37; 94, 30; 109, 17; 112, 33; 114, 4, 6, 13, 17, 40. Pancratius the martyr, 86, 22. Pantaleon the martyr, 96, 9. Paul the Apostle, 98, 6; 103, 32; 105, 2; 106, 7, 44. Paul of Latros, 99, 19. Paul the Theban, 89, 21. Pegatius the martyr, 98, 18. Pentecost Sunday, 91, 26; 101, 19; 108, 46; 110, 38. Perside in the acts, 83, 23. Peter the Apostle, 98, 7; 105, 2; 111, 44; 112, 7. Philip the Apostle, 106, 4. Phocas the martyr, 90, 30; 91, 2, 26, 46. Plato the hegumen, 109, 1. Polyxena the martyr, 112, 31. Probus the martyr, 90, 2. Procopius the martyr, 98, 28. Good Friday [Quinta Magna], 91, 34; 111, 27. Raphael, 99, 26. Rebecca the martyr, 112, 39. Sabbas (the Great), 93, 21. Holy Saturday, 92, 11. Sabellus the martyr, 98, 11. All Saints, 108, 28. Senator the martyr, 89, 26. Sylvester, 101, 16. Sophronius, prelate of Jerusalem, 101, 34. Stephen the Younger, 81, 1. Stephen the Protomartyr, and his relics, 86, 80; 100, 33; 102, 9, 12; 112, 1; 115, 15. Symeon the Just, 107, 39; 118, 34; 110, 32. Symeon Metaphrastes, 112, 17. Symeon the Fool for Christ, 110, 32. Symeon the Stylite, 101, 1; 110, 4. Tarachus the martyr, 90, 2. Theodora of Thessalonica, 88, 38. Theodore the martyr, 111, 18. Theodore the Tyro, 105, 40. Theodore the military commander, 115, 27. Theodore the Studite, 107, 30. Theodore of Sykeon, archimandrite, 93, 17. Theodore the Tyro, 82, 20; 95, 7; 99, 8, 15; 109, 42; 115, 9. Theodosia the martyr, 84, 27. Theodosius the archimandrite, 95, 32; 96, 13. Theodotus of Ancyra, martyr, 86, 38. Theophano the Empress, 107, 39. Thomas the Apostle, 102, 35. Timothy the Apostle, 111, 15. Tryphon the martyr, 98, 37; 99, 15. Viator the martyr, 89, 35. Xantippe the martyr, 112, 33, 112, 3. Zacharias the pontiff, 100, 20. The Girdle of the Theotokos, 43.

INDEX OF PRINCIPAL MATTERS

A Alexander, brother of Leo, a luxurious and idle man, 58. Aloysius Lipomanus on Metaphrastes, 36. Alphonsus Villegas, on the age of Metaphrastes, refuted, 40. Life of Alypius, written by someone other than Metaphrastes, 40. Aphrodisianus the Persian, concerning St. Mary: a rejected author, 106. Andreas, Prelate of Rhodes, on the age of Metaphrastes, 36. B Baronius, his shaky opinion on Metaphrastes, 48. Bellarmine on Metaphrastes, and his credibility refuted, 25. His corrected censure concerning him, 43, 45, etc. C Casaubon on Metaphrastes: ineptitude and spite, 25, 47. His refuted opinion concerning his age, 38. Cinnamus, who is he? Wrongly called Sinnamus, 149. His character, 150. E Esaias the monk on Metaphrastes, 36. F Francis Bivarius, his shaky opinion on Metaphrastes and Theophanes Cerameus, 60 et seq. That Theophanes lived under Roger, King of Sicily, 63. G Gennadius on Metaphrastes, 36. George Acropolita, grand logothete, a refuted conjecture, 38. Gesner, on Metaphrastes as a schoolmaster, refuted, 25.

157

Regarding his era, the rejected opinion, 38. On the confusion of Hippolytus the Theban with the Portuensian, 37. Goduvinus’s censured critique of Metaphrastes, 47. Regarding his era, the approved opinion, 72. Gregorius Corinthius on Metaphrastes, 36.

H Hippolytus the Theban, admirer of Metaphrastes, 34. He is ineptly confused with the Portuensian, 37. Hospinianus, exposed as a schoolmaster regarding Metaphrastes, 25. Regarding his era, the rejected opinion, 38.

I Ignatius the Deacon, author of the Life of St. Nicephorus, 56.

J Jacobus Goarius, praised in Codinus, 33. Joannes Bollandus, the discussed opinion concerning the era of Metaphrastes, 49, 57. Joannes Caleca, patriarch of Constantinople, his see; Gretserus corrected on this, 87. Joannes Caminiata on the destruction of Thessalonica, 51, 119. Joannes Morinus, on Symeon the Thessalonian, 139. Joannes the pseudo-theologian, on St. Mary, 106. Joseph Methonensis on Metaphrastes, 36.

L Lanselius, the rejected opinion on the era of Metaphrastes, 71. Leo Allatius, opinion reconciled, 138. Leo Centaripinus on Metaphrastes, 34. Leo the Emperor, *Gubernatrix animorum hypotyposis*, 132. Logothete, prefect of public accounts, 28. Logothetes for soldiers, Justinian: Censitores. Logothete, a name of multiple offices, and *genikos*, of the *dromos*, of domestic affairs, of the military catalog, of the herds, of the secrets, 29, 30. Grand logothete, habits, office, 31, 32.

M Macarius the Hieromonk on Metaphrastes, 35. Dignity of Magister, 25, 26, 28. Michael Glycas on Metaphrastes, 36. Molanus, error regarding the era of Metaphrastes, 41. Muzalon, the great logothete’s cap, 30.

N Nicephorus Callistus’s opinion on Metaphrastes, 36. Nilus Doxapatrius, on the five patriarchal sees, 65.

P Psellus the Elder: nothing to do with Metaphrastes, 59. Paulinus the Magister, 28.

158

R Raphael Volaterranus, a poor authority on the era of Metaphrastes, 23. Ribadeneyra, error on the era of Metaphrastes, 40. Rogerius, King of Sicily: Theophanes Cerameus under him, 63 et seq.; called *basileus* by him, through Greek adulation, 66.

S Simon Wagnerechius, inquiries concerning Metaphrastes, 36. Surius maligned, regarding the style of restoring the *Lives of the Saints*, in the very person of the authors, industry, 137, 139. Another rationale of the Metaphrastic aim and works, 140. Symeon the Younger, the Theologian, distinct from Metaphrastes, 72. He is the abbot of St. Mamas at Xerocercus: his era and various short works, 143. Symeon Mesopotamita, 24. Symeon Metaphrastes praised, 24. Calumnies of heretics against him refuted; magister, a dignity of the highest rank in the court; schoolmaster and trivial; trifles, 25, 26. His birth, studies, and other decorations from Michael Psellus, 26, 27. Symeon the same as logothete, 23. The career from logothete to promotion to grand logothete, 32. The authority of this man in the Greek Church: encomia of various authors regarding him, Psellus, Hippolytus the Theban, Leo Centaripinus, etc., 33, 34, etc. The era of Symeon Metaphrastes: the vexed opinions concerning it, 38, et seq. 49, 136, et seq. The narrator of those Lives which were held to be recorded in approved monuments, 46. His works within them, 45, 73. His fidelity vindicated, 46, et seq. The person who redeemed Thessalonica with money under Emperor Leo, to be seen 51, et seq. Metaphrastes the double, exposed, 72. Symeon Metaphrastes, regarding the double collection or index of the Lives of the Saints, 80, 119. Which are held to be his genuine works, 124. His other writings, orations, troparia, prayers, epistles, 130, et seq. Orations collected from the works of Basil, 131. Proper sententious chapters; other works by Macarius, adorned by the metaphrasis, 132. Metaphrastes’ Commentary on Luke, nonexistent in the Gospel of Luke, 131. The *Dioptra* ascribed to Metaphrastes, 136. The vexed question of the era and Metaphraseis for Simon Wagnerechius, ibid. Allatian responses: how much difference there is between Metaphrastes and Surius, 139. Symeon Metaphrastes and the Logothete, not the same as the superior of St. Mamas and the new theologian. The Methonensian refined on this. The man’s monasticism exposed, 143, et seq.

T The Life of Theoctista, the first of Metaphrastes’ writings, 49. Theodorus Balsamon on Metaphrastes, 35. Theodorus Metochita, from the office of the public treasury, grand Logothete, 31. Theodorus the monk, logothete, 29. Theophanes Cerameus on Metaphrastes, 35.

ON THE AUTHORITY AND TESTIMONY OF METAPHRASTES

§ I. — Scholars regard the authority of this Greek author as nil, or at least as very weak. Metaphrastes (1), who is no less known for his lack of accuracy than for the collection he made of the Lives of many saints, is presently so discredited among some scholars that it suffices to support a history with the testimony of this Greek author for it to be looked upon as fabulous. It even seems that this writer carries in his name (2) his own condemnation. Scholars believe that Metaphrastes flourished; the most common opinion is that he began to appear with brilliance at the end of the 9th century and the beginning of the next; that he was invested with the first offices of the empire; that he was the head of all the offices of the court and of the emperor’s household: and finally logothete, that is to say, chancellor. Around the year 912, at the solicitation of Emperor Porphyrogenitus, he began to work on the *Lives of the Saints*.

(1) It is not known precisely at what time Metaphrastes flourished; the most common opinion is that he began to appear with brilliance at the end of the 9th century and the beginning of the next; that he was invested with the first offices of the empire; that he was the head of all the offices of the court and of the emperor’s household: and finally logothete, that is to say, chancellor. Around the year 912, at the solicitation of Emperor Porphyrogenitus, he began to work on the *Lives of the Saints*.

(2) M. Baillet, in his *Discours sur la Vie des Saints*, pag. 58, says that this surname was given to this author because he changed the style and method of the *Acts of the Saints*. He adds, in the note he made on this passage: "Metaphrasis signifies something more than Paraphrase and translation. This word encompasses the other two. Thus, Metaphrastes means all at once translator, glossator, and interpolator." However, METAPHRASIS, according to its meaning, is nothing other than *mutatio in aliud genus orationis*.

^A Its own proper condemnation. The learned discover there I know not what kind of repulsiveness, which not only prevents them from establishing anything based on the testimony of this author, but which even makes them so scrupulous that they only name him in their works in order to provoke disgust and aversion for him.

M. de Tillemont, speaking of the testimony of the Fathers of the Church (*Avertissement*, p. 13): "One has not," he says, "been obliged to have the same respect for the Menaia of the Greeks, nor for the Acts that are of Metaphrastes, or of other newcomers in times when the truth of history was altered by popular traditions, and often by fictions invented on purpose. It has been thought, I say, that no regard should be paid to histories of this kind." And in note 3 on Papias (T. II, p. 663, col. II), where he speaks of the Acts of Saint Abercius: "It is a piece," he says, "recognized as being by Metaphrastes, and we see nothing in it that obliges us to esteem it more than the others that come from the same source. We have," this learned critic says further (Ib. not. 3, on Saint Ignatius, p. 620, col. 1), "the Acts of Saint Ignatius, which are read in Metaphrastes: their author is sufficient to show that one cannot see much credibility there."

M. Baillet does not speak more advantageously of Metaphrastes: "One can be sure," he says (*Disc. sur la Vie des Saints*, p. 59), "that it is for having known too well how to lie that some heretics have looked upon this author as an impostor ^B and a forger, born to produce monsters, exaggerated beyond what pagan Greece imagined in fables in favor of its gods." Following this, he has Casaubon say that he found much vanity and little judgment in the work of Metaphrastes, and that he remarked there all the faults of poets and declaimers, in that excessive itch to feign and to overwhelm the truth under fables. After having reported the judgment of some other Protestants, he has not forgotten that of several other Catholic authors who do not approve of his falsifications or his infidelities.

His authority seems so slight, and his name so hateful to M. Baillet, that he would make it a point of conscience to cite him, and even to name him in his work; and this is what he thought he should warn the public about, in these terms (*Avertiss.*, p. 14): "I have refrained ^C much more still from using and even from naming authors deemed disreputable, such as Metaphrastes and Nicephorus among the Greeks." Finally, M. Baillet and M. de Tillemont have such disgust for everything that comes from this legendary author, that when they want to mark that a fact or a history is false or fabulous, they content themselves to say that it has passed through Metaphrastic hands; or else that it is in the style of Metaphrastes.

However just this censure may seem, it is nonetheless not approved of by everyone. There are many learned men who have testified to much respect for Metaphrastes, who have praised his work and the services he rendered to the Church, and who have even undertaken his defense. But as this is not what is at issue here, I leave it to those who may wish to take upon themselves the task of examining the reasons on both sides, to decide if the complaints made against Metaphrastes are just, or if they are exaggerated.

What concerns us, therefore, is to make some reflections on what M. de Tillemont and M. Baillet tell us about Metaphrastes. It is certain that these scholars almost never cite this author, except to discover and censure his faults: and if one excludes four or five places, one will find that they have never cited him to support a fact, nor for what concerns the history of the life of a saint who lived outside of his country and before his century.

§ II. — The learned critics have derived several things from Metaphrastes.

One cannot deny that there were great gaps in the collection of the Lives of the saints given by M. Arnaud d'Andilly, in the *Actes sincères et choisis* of Dom Thierry Ruinart, in the *Mémoires* of M. Tillemont, in the *Vie des Saints* of M. Baillet, and in the works of other scholars who have worked on the same subject, and who show so little esteem for Metaphrastes, if one were to remove from them all that comes from this writer: for if one goes back up to the source of several Acts of the martyrs and Lives of the saints, with which these scholars have filled their works, ^D one will see that a very large number of these pieces were given by the Greeks to Metaphrastes. Michael Psellus made a very beautiful panegyric in his honor. Theodore Balsamon praised his collection of the Lives of the Saints highly, in the Council of Constantinople, can. 63. Leo Allatius maintains that Metaphrastes was very sincere, and that it is for having been too upright that the heretics rose up against him. Roland, whom one places among the most learned critics of the last century, undertook his apology against Bellarmine. He endeavors to show by several reasons that the excesses of Metaphrastes are not as enormous as one has wished to publish, and to justify the conduct he held in his Collection of the Lives of the Saints.

^A One will see that a very great number of these pieces were composed by Metaphrastes, or at least that he reviewed, touched up, and preserved them for the Church; which well deserved, it seems, that he should be cited at least once and that some justice should be done to him.

If one had asked M. Arnauld d'Andilly from where he had drawn the histories of several saints that are found in their entirety in his book printed at Paris in 1664, which bears the title: *Lives of several illustrious saints of various centuries*, for example, the Life of Saint Porphyry, bishop of Gaza in Palestine; that of Saint John the Calybite; that of Saint Auxentius, abbot; that of Saint Theodosius, superior of a monastery in Palestine; that of Saint Sabas, founder of several ^B monasteries in Palestine; that of Saint John the Hesychast, bishop of Colonia, then abbot of the Laura of Saint Sabas; that of Saint Eutychius, patriarch of Constantinople; that of Saint Theodore, abbot of the monastery of Siceon and bishop of Anastasiopolis in Galatia; that of Saint Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople; the Treatise on the exile and the translation of the relics of Saint Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople; that of Saint Nicetas the abbot, and perhaps a few others: if one had, I say, asked this great man from where he had drawn all these Lives, he would have answered without doubt that they are reported by Surius and by Bollandus. But if one had asked these two legendaries what is the source from which they drew them, they would have admitted one ^C and the other that they come to us from Metaphrastes, who composed them or who at least preserved them: *Auctore Symeone Metaphraste*, or *ex Metaphraste*, says Surius.

Although there are several Acts of the martyrs in the collection of Dom Thierry (*Acta selecta Martyrum*) that have not passed through the hands of Metaphrastes and that he did not even know, there are nevertheless some that he has preserved for us and for which we are in his debt. It is through this channel that we have received the Acts of Saint Justin the Philosopher, as M. de Tillemont acknowledges; the Acts of Saint Agape, Saint Chionia, and Saint Irene, sisters, and their fellow martyrs; those of Saint Didymus and Saint Theodora the virgin, martyrs; those ^D of Saint Pherbute or Tarbula, virgin and martyr, and other martyrs of Persia under Sapor; those of Saint Sadoth, bishop of Seleucia and Ctesiphon in Persia, martyr; those of Saint Sabas, Goth by nation, martyr; those of Saint Bademus, abbot in Persia, martyr. All these Acts, and several others that Surius attributes to Metaphrastes, are found among the chosen Acts of Dom Ruynart. M. de Tillemont has written the history of all these saints, which he drew from the collection of the sincere Acts of that learned Benedictine, and consequently as coming from Metaphrastes. One could indeed mark others still that come from the same source and with which he loaded his Memoirs.

We do not undertake to collect here everything that M. Baillet borrowed from Metaphrastes in his work on the *Life of the Saints*; that would lead us too far. It suffices, therefore, for my purpose to remark that this learned critic has gathered all the Lives of the Saints given by M. Arnauld, and which we have noted were drawn from Metaphrastes. One must add to these the Acts of the martyrs from the collection of Dom Thierry Ruynart, which we have reported and which come from the same source. But these are not the only Metaphrastic histories that M. Baillet has inserted into his work: here are others that are found in full in this Greek author, if one excepts six or seven from which M. Baillet only borrowed some fairly considerable excerpts. Such are the Lives of Saint Marcian of Constantinople, of Saint John the Almsgiver; of Saint Cyrus and Saint John, martyrs in Egypt; of Saint Polyeuctus the martyr; of Saint Theophanes surnamed the Confessor; of Saint Carpus, bishop of Thyatira in Asia, and his companions; of Saint Marina, virgin solitaire; of Saint Arsenius, tutor and governor of the Emperor Arcadius, then solitaire in Egypt; of Saint Pantaleon the physician martyr, and his companions; of the saints Faith, Hope, and Charity, sisters, virgins, martyres, and their mother Saint Sophia; of Saint Anastasia the widow, abbess of Timia in Greece; of Saint Andrew, tribune or colonel, martyr, and his companions; of Saint Cyriacus or Quiriacus, anachorite in Palestine; of Saint Arethas and his companions, martyrs in Arabia; of Saint Joannicius, hermit, abbot in Bithynia; of Saint Theodore of Amasea in Pontus, martyr; of Saint Menas, martyr in Phrygia; of Saint Nicholas, bishop of Myra in Syria; of Saint Daniel, surnamed the Stylite, solitaire; and of several others that we omit so as not to be too long.

One must remember that when one asserts that M. Arnauld, M. de Tillemont, and M. Baillet have reported in full some of the Lives of the Saints that one attributes to Metaphrastes, it means that they have preserved the substance of the history and that they have only trimmed away some miraculous facts, some wonders that were not to their taste, or some slight circumstances that they judged appropriate to omit. But as for the Acts of the martyrs that come from Metaphrastes, and that Dom Thierry Ruynart placed in his collection, they are there without any alteration, and in the same manner that he found them in the manuscripts and in the printed editions: for although these Acts have passed through the channel of Metaphrastes, they have received no stain from it.

It seems, after that, that one must agree on two things: the first, that these learned critics have drawn many things from this Greek legendary, although M. de Tillemont had said that he did not believe himself obliged to have any regard for the histories of this author; and that M. Baillet had promised the public...

that he would refrain from employing in his work, and even from naming, disparaged authors such as Metaphrastes. The second [reason] is that they have been persuaded that the name of this author could hardly serve as authorization for the facts they might have supported by his testimony, nor do much honor to their works. It is doubtless for this reason that they do not cite him, and that they believe themselves dispensed even from naming him in things that come from him. ^A We see, in effect, that they are content to say that a history is found in Lippoman, Mombrice, Surius, Baronius, Bollandus, without making any mention of Metaphrastes. But if one consults these legendaries, one will see that they do nothing but report these facts, and that they attribute them to this Greek author: *Auctore Simeone Metaphraste*, or *ex Metaphraste*, as one finds in a hundred places in Surius, Bollandus, and the others.

I do not know if this manner of citing has appeared sufficiently accurate to these scholars: but there is much appearance that they would not approve the conduct of a writer who, having put into French the history of the martyrs of Lyon, would cite for it Surius, *apud Surium*, or would be content to say that it is reported by Surius (Vol. III, 2 June). For, although it is true that this learned Carthusian inserted into his collection the letter of the Churches of Lyon and Vienne concerning their martyrs, nevertheless, as he acknowledges that Eusebius has preserved this piece for us and that he inserted it into his history, it seems that the ordinary manner of citing this letter would be to give it first in our language and to put in the margin as a note, *apud Eusebium*, and not *apud Surium*, as these scholars practice: why then should there be any exception for Metaphrastes?

^B § III. *Examination of the reasons for which the critics claim to be authorized not to cite Metaphrastes, even in the things they have drawn from him.*

Although we may have, these scholars will perhaps say (Baill. *Disc.* pag. 58), a quantity of Lives of the Saints that are attributed to Metaphrastes, nevertheless Leo Allatius, making the distinction of what belongs to this legendary from what is foreign to him, has recognized only one hundred and twenty-two Lives of his making, and five hundred and thirty-nine Lives that are Panegyrics or historical Eulogies, ^C which bear his name falsely. Do we not find, in effect, that the Life of Saint Porphyrius, bishop of Gaza, was written by Mark, his disciple; that of Saint Auxentius by a contemporary author; that of Saint Sabas, superior of several monasteries in Palestine, and of Saint John the Silent, by Cyril, a religious of Saint Sabas? Does one not know that Eustathius, a priest, composed that of Saint Euthyius, patriarch of Constantinople; George Eleuse, that of Saint Theodore, abbot; Ignatius, bishop of Nicaea, that of Saint Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople; Theophanes, a priest, the treatise on the exile and translation of the relics of Saint Nicephorus; finally, Theosterictus, that of Nicetas the abbot, his master? One is still persuaded, these critics will add, that all the Lives of the Saints written in Greek that remain to us are not by Metaphrastes: one can place in this number the history of Saint John Calybites, that of Saint John the Almsgiver, that of Saint Xene or ^D Eusebius, whose memory the Church celebrates on the 15th, 23rd and 24th of January; and several others that it would be useless to report here.

Furthermore, these scholars will still say, even if we had some Lives of the saints of the fashion of Metaphrastes, and even if several had passed through his hands, one could only grant him the title of glossator, or interpolator, and if one wishes, that of author, but of a pitiful author: for one believes oneself to be in the right to hold, with regard to his collection, the same conduct that two great cardinals held with regard to the *Golden Legend*. The first, who is Bellarmine, did not judge its author worthy of being named in any place (Baill. *Disc. sur la vie des saints*), and Baronius, who is the second, fearing to diminish the price of his notes on the Roman Martyrology if one saw there a name that the monstrous fictions of the *Golden Legend* had dishonored, preferred to name another less known who gave a new edition of it. The excesses, the impostures, and the lies of Metaphrastes have so disparaged him that he has lost all the reputation that his works might have merited for him: so that the scholars do not believe themselves obliged to name him in their works, fearing to diminish their price, and to repel the reader if he saw a name that his monstrous fictions have dishonored. Thus they prefer to name Surius, Baronius, Bollandus, and the others who have collected some of the Lives of the saints, although they come from this corrupted source.

If someone wanted to interest himself in what concerns Metaphrastes, could he not reply to the reasons of these critics? Why not cite him for what comes from him, they would be asked (Bolland. *tom. 1, Janv. in praef. p. xvii, col. 1*)? Why not say that it is from him that we have the Lives of the saints that he composed, and which are of his fa-