ANALECTA
Concerning the unguent or oil miraculously flowing from the tomb of St. Demetrius and other miracles of the same Saint, taken partly from writers already published through the benefit of the printing press, and partly from the works of John Stauracius and Demetrius Chrysoloras not yet published.
§ 1. Miracles later than the tenth century, which the Saint is said to have performed in Thessalonica.
1. That in truth, while Maurice held the reins of the Roman Empire, Thessalonica was defended against the united force of the Avars and other barbarian nations in a thoroughly miraculous manner by St. Demetrius, its patron, and simultaneously snatched from the most imminent danger of being stormed and plundered, is made indubitable by John, Archbishop of Thessalonica, cited very often above, who was present at the event, in the first book of the miracles performed by St. Demetrius, already provided, chap. 43 and the two following. And indeed, as is clear from the Annotations subjoined to the said 13th chapter, this happened toward the end of the sixth century, or in the year 597. Furthermore, that the same city was, in the seventh century, when the same John whom I have just praised was already governing the Thessalonian church, and even later still, namely in the eighth century, protected against the Barbarians by our Saint in a manner likewise absolutely miraculous, appears, if not absolutely indubitable—because the author of these (see the preliminary commentary, no. 24) does not merit complete faith in every respect—at least highly probable, from the second book of the miracles performed by him, also already cited. And truly, that not only in the seventh and following centuries, but even up to the year 904, Thessalonica remained superior to the attack of all enemies, with St. Demetrius patronizing it, and was snatched from various perils of war, John Cameniata, cited above, who flourished at that time, in his work on the destruction of Thessalonica by the Saracens, and Patriarch Nicholas, who then governed the Constantinopolitan church, in his Monody on the same mournful event, indicate not obscurely. A
2. But that city, once very famous, as an eyewitness—the same one whom I shall praise again shortly, John Cameniata, published by Berthold Nihusius at Cologne in 1653, and later reprinted by Combefis in the *Byzantine History* after the writers of Theophanes in 1685 at Paris—attests that it was stormed, plundered, and devastated by the Saracens who were warring against Leo of the East, surnamed the Wise, under the leadership of the impious apostate Leo Tripolites, while a large number of inhabitants were led away into captivity. And indeed, given that up to that time Thessalonica had stood unshaken against all the machinations of its enemies under the patronage of St. Demetrius, as was believed everywhere by everyone, this B event resulted in the greatest wonder. Hear how Nicholas the patriarch speaks, fittingly for our present purpose, in the place cited above, in Greek words, which I will join to the Greek text translated into the Latin language: "Where, for me, Demetrius martyr, is the invincible alliance in war? How did you disregard your city while it was being plundered? How, under you as its guardian, did it come to experience such evils, from the time the sun first shone upon it, when it had been inaccessible to enemies? How did you endure the brow of the impious as they began to attack your holy protection? How did you bear these things and endure to the very end?" Thus that illustrious man, also called the Mystic, patriarch of Constantinople, C reveals his astonishment regarding the captured and devastated Thessalonica—which, up to his own time, had been safe under the powerful patronage of St. Demetrius—and there is no doubt that this was the common feeling of all men at that time, which Nicholas expresses in the given words.
3. But why Demetrius, who, as can be seen in the earlier books of his miracles, had once protected his city so often and in so many diverse and miraculous ways against the fiercest enemies, should have permitted it then to be stormed and overthrown by the Saracens, the enemies of Christ, are the deep judgments of God, which are also to be feared by us. Meanwhile the Saint, who at that time both on account of miracles of every kind performed in great number, and especially because Thessalonica had been miraculously saved from enemies more than once, had been adorned with the most glorious titles of a great martyr and wonder-worker by the Greeks, both in the work of John of Thessalonica mentioned above and in the work of the anonymous writer who continued John, D protected that native city of his once again by his aid against its enemies after it had risen from the ruin brought about by the Saracens and had repaired the past disaster, although at length it was stormed by the Turks in the year 1429—which are again the deep and inscrutable judgments of God—and held in firm possession, remaining so up to this present day.
Cedrenus, in his Historical Compendium, when he treats of the events under Michael IV, brings forth the following to memory: “In the year of the world 6549, in the ninth indiction, in the month of September, Alusianus, patrician and prefect of Theodosiopolis, the second son of Aaron (this man had once been the brother of Samuel, king of the Bulgarians), suddenly fleeing from the city (Constantinople, of course), betook himself to Deleanus (he was a Bulgarian who, having been incited by them to revolt from the Greeks, had been assumed as king).” A
4. “For when he had been accused of injustice, before the cause could be investigated, John (the emperor’s minister) had exacted fifty pounds of gold from him; he had also taken away from him a most elegant wife, whom he had in Charsianum; and when, through many petitions to the emperor, he had not obtained that his case should be considered, despairing of his circumstances, he had assumed the habit of an Armenian, feigned that he was a servant of Basil Theodoranus and was traveling to Thessalonica to the emperor, and secretly fled from everyone. He arrived at Ostrobus, where Deleanus then had his camp with his entire army. Deleanus received him with great joy, fearing lest the Bulgarians incline rather toward him; as one born of royal blood, he assumed him as a partner in power, as he claimed, and sent him with an army of forty thousand to attack Thessalonica, which was then commanded by the patrician Constantine, a cousin of the emperor. Having set out there, Alusianus B encircled the city with a rampart and, bringing up siege engines, attacked it with the utmost industry. But when he had attacked it in vain for six days and was repelled on all sides, having abandoned hope of capturing it by storm, he decided to take it by siege.”
5. “The townspeople came on a certain day to the tomb of the martyr Demetrios, and after supplication had been continued throughout the entire night and they had used the oil which flows from that tomb, they opened the gates with a single charge and threw themselves upon the Bulgarians. Having with them the ‘Magnanimous’ legion, they terrified the enemy with the sudden impact and threw them into flight, with no one daring to stand his ground or defend himself. The leader of the Roman line was the martyr himself, and he leveled the way; this the captive Bulgarians confirmed with an oath, saying that they had seen a young horseman who was leading the Roman phalanx, from whom fire leaped forth and burned the opposing enemies. More than fifteen thousand of the Bulgarians fell, and not a few were captured; the rest escaped to Deleanus in a most shameful flight.” This is the first military expedition in which, after the defeat suffered in the year 904 at the hands of the Hagarenes, it is narrated that Thessalonica was aided in a miraculously clear way by Saint Demetrios. And this event, since it took place in the year of the world 6549, as is understood from the already cited words of Cedrenus, ought to be linked to the year of Christ 1041, as becomes manifest from the subtraction of the 5508 years—of which the Greeks posit that the last, as it was passing, was the birth of Christ—from the 6549 years, in the last of which the defeat of the Bulgarians narrated by Cedrenus occurred.
But since the Bulgarians, having been seen openly to be led and to fight for the city, were driven from the siege of Thessalonica and cast into flight with a great slaughter of their own men, as is narrated by Cedrenus, C Zonaras now looks to the wonder. In his Annals regarding Alusianus, and likewise the Bulgarians, who, led by Deleanus, during the year 1040 shook off the yoke of the Greeks—which had been imposed upon them for some time past by Basil the Third, who had therefore earned the cognomen ‘Bulgaroctonus’—he institutes a discourse under Michael IV, yet he makes no mention, not even by a word, of the miracle by which Alusianus was compelled to retreat from the siege of Thessalonica, with Saint Demetrios bringing aid to his city. But since that writer does not even mention the expedition undertaken by Alusianus against Thessalonica, and consequently could not appropriately commemorate the miracle by which that success was frustrated, there is no reason why his silence on this should seem very strange to anyone. Yet perhaps there will be someone who might consider it even more strange that the same miracle is passed over in silence by John Stauracius as well—as I discover to be the case in the work of his which is extant in our possession. This, indeed, since this writer, who (as I demonstrated in the previous Commentary, no. 26) flourished in the thirteenth century, had proposed to himself to commit to writing all the miracles performed by Saint Demetrios up to that time, and certainly among these the miracle that (as reported from Cedrenus above) happened in the year 1041 occupies a place that is not of the lowest, it strikes me—to tell the truth—as quite strange. But what if the miracle about which we are here discoursing was indeed committed to writing by John Stauracius and yet, in the manuscript of Leo Allatius which is extant with us in our codex no. 193, it was omitted by the scribes?
7. What if Stauracius found only those things entrusted to writings, and deemed that the miracles were to be brought into his work, and by chance happened to have no writing at hand which embraced the miracle related by Cedrenus? Be that as it may, even if it is said that the wonder—which is also reported by John Curopalates—is in some way supported by the fact, mentioned in the previous Commentary no. 138 and the two following, concerning the brothers Peter and Asan, princes of the Bulgarians: for these, in order to incite their fellow countrymen—who, after the above-mentioned defeat at Thessalonica in 1041 by Michael IV, had been completely brought under the empire of the Greeks and had remained peacefully annexed until the time the reins of empire were first taken up by Isaac Angelus in the year 1185—to revolt again, they slyly feigned that Saint Demetrios had departed from Thessalonica and the protection of the Greeks, and had withdrawn into Bulgaria, to which he would bring aid, and even strove to win belief for this fabrication of theirs by false wonders. But the two above-mentioned princes seem to have done this primarily because, when they heard of the defeat near Thessalonica inflicted upon their ancestors in the year 1041 by Saint Demetrios...
A Since it suffices to have discussed, in whatever way, the miracle of our Saint regarding the relief of Thessalonica as it is reported by Cedrenus, let us turn our conversation to another matter.
8. Since Peter and Asan, the brothers already mentioned, through whose insistence the Bulgarians had shaken off the Greek yoke after the year 1185 in their native Bulgaria—a land they had labored to bring into freedom, and where, having met with successful results, they had reigned for some time—had been removed from the living, the Bulgarian kingdom passed to their brother John, who is called by others Calo-John, or Joannitza, or even Joannitius. This man, furthermore, after many wars, finally besieged Thessalonica in the year 1207 with a vast army; but in this military expedition, no less than with the aforementioned Alusianus, he had poor fortune, as George Acropolita, a writer of the thirteenth century, testifies, having found Saint Demetrios himself to be his enemy. As to this final point, there is in our manuscript—in the long narrative taken from the manuscript of Leo Allatius and noted there, and in the annotations to the history of Acropolita compiled by Allatius himself and appended to the thirteenth chapter—the account of John Stauracius, who has been cited here more than once. I shall quote some of the words of this writer, which are most relevant here as published by Du Cange in the place soon to be cited, having first brought forward some words of George Acropolita which likewise pertain to the matter. B Thus this writer, in his *History* published in Paris in the year 1651, provides the following words, which almost all appear later again in the *Chronicon Compendiarium* published in Paris in the same year on page 115, in the chapter concerning the aforementioned John or Joannitius or even Joannitza, king of the Bulgarians: "He razed to the foundations Philippopolis, a very illustrious and eminent city which lies near the Hebrus, and subsequently all the others—Heraclea, Panium, Rhaedestus, Chariupolis, Trajanupolis, Macre, Claudiupolis, Mosynupolis, Peritheorion, and very many others besides, which it is not worth the labor to enumerate. He settled them with his own colonies, compensating, as he himself used to say, for the losses with which the Emperor Basil had afflicted the Bulgarians; and he confessed that he was called the Bulgar-slayer, while he himself styled himself the Roman-slayer. Continuing as far as Thessalonica, he lost his life to a side-ailment C or, as others asserted, was executed by the wrath of the Divinity. For he dreamed that he was struck in the side by a spear by an armed man; for no one—and I do not lie—ever afflicted the Romans with as many calamities in human memory as this man, so much so that the name 'dog' was imposed upon him, and he was called Scylo-John by everyone." Thus far Acropolita. That the death of John, king of the Bulgarians, while he was besieging Thessalonica, did not occur by natural causes, but was inflicted by divine power because the Divinity was angered by the crimes perpetrated by him, is here quite openly taught; and that this divine power, by which the Bulgarian king John, while besieging Thessalonica, perished in a miserable manner, proceeded from Saint Demetrios according to the opinion of some, John Stauracius recounts in the aforementioned place in Leo Allatius in Greek words. So that I may keep my promise, I transcribe them here now together with a Latin version added at the foot.
10. Therefore, they have it thus: D "Then, yes, then at the dead of night, God finally polished the sword of His own vengeance, and set it on fire with the zeal of the martyr. And suddenly the truly vigilant guardian and patron of us, the great soldier of the great King, Demetrius, is seen by the Bulgarian king on a white horse, and he immediately casts a mortal blow upon the wretch. And he, crying out with a mighty voice, called out to the high commander of his army, Manastras, as if he had been wounded by him; for he seemed to see him riding on a noble white horse, entering the inside of the tent, and plunging the spear which he was carrying into his heart. And because of this, and many times over, he was rattled by the very shouts, and he leaped from his bed—for his tent was in the neighborhood—and he came in, and he saw, and he appeared, and he heard: 'Did you not, just a little while ago, appearing here on your white horse, slaughter me with a spear?' And he was terrified and said, 'Not I, O King, have compassion, have pity; it is not this, it is not this. A phantom has come to you, not the truth.' The other, having received the wound deep within, was writhing terribly, and he cried out and wailed. A great amount of the purest blood flowed from beneath, so that your foot might be bathed, Demetrius, in the blood of your enemies for the sake of this city of yours. And he already began to lose consciousness. Seeing this, the high commander of his forces, Manastras, having quickly lifted him onto his back, flees headlong, and stealing his safety, retreats with all the speed he has, and with him and in his company is all that myriad-fold army, so quickly, as if some Bulgarians were pursuing these boasted ones. For fear and trembling came upon them by some strange countermanding force; but indeed, he was not to live long, but on that very day toward sunset, according to the living creature one-day-living in the histories..."
A He dies violently; thus the wretch, having reaped the fruits of his own wickedness and vanity, having drained the empty dregs of wrath and poured out the righteous recompense of his entrails, full of much unjust blood, he was later called, he whom the great Demetrius clearly slew when he marched against Thessalonica, as is recorded in his miracles.
14. Does John, or Joannitius, King of the Bulgarians—as the account handed down in these words, recited here in both Greek and Latin, reports—when he was besieging Thessalonica, truly and in fact perish, having been slain by Saint Demetrius, who brought aid to this his native city, through the mediation of some strange turn of events? The author, as I showed in preliminary commentary no. 26, flourished most probably in the thirteenth century, and therefore it happened in the same century in which John, King of the Bulgarians, was killed at the siege of Thessalonica, as mentioned above. But since, as I shall show below, our manuscript no. 193, page 93, not obscurely indicates that the event that occurred to the Emperor Emmanuel Comnenus (who reigned from 1143 to 1180) at the hands of Saint Demetrius happened long before his time, and it seems that he flourished no earlier than late in the same thirteenth century, so from the death of John, King of the Bulgarians, which occurred in 1207 according to the texts, he was much further removed than he could win certain and unquestionable credit for by attributing it to Saint Demetrius while he was alive. Nor, even if he had said it was at the beginning of the said century, would it be necessary to speak otherwise about it in this matter. For that John, King of the Bulgarians, was killed by Saint Demetrius rested only on the rumor of the common people, which prevailed in his age—so that I might say no more—and he committed it to writing. This is especially clear from the fact that George Acropolita, who also flourished in the thirteenth century, records in the words transcribed above that the death of the aforementioned Bulgarian king was attributed by some to at least divine power, and thus he seems to indicate that the rumor was born from the people who did this.
15. But everyone knows how often rumor is wont to be false, especially if it is not common; I would wish it to be observed from the words of Acropolita that that rumor was not common, and that it may easily have happened that, from the dream of King John, which the same Acropolita mentions there, that sinister rumor regarding the death inflicted upon that prince by Saint Demetrius was spread, and was soon admitted by the overly credulous too easily, even though meanwhile John had finished his life not by a violent, but by a natural death. Moreover, Acropolita, whom some might perhaps think supports Stauracius, makes mention only generally of the wrath of the divine Power, by which John, King of the Bulgarians, was killed, but he does not expressly mention Saint Demetrius, nor have I been able to find as yet any writer of known faith or authority who agrees with John Stauracius. Allatius indeed adds to the words of John Stauracius which he transcribed at the place cited above: "In the Vatican manuscript CLXIII, in the margin of the History of Choniates, it is read: This is the impious Scylo-John, who was later called that, whom the great Demetrius clearly killed when he marched against Thessalonica, as is recorded in the miracles of the same."
These words clearly and elegantly convey how John, or Joannitias, king of the Bulgarians—also called Scylo-John, as Acropolita likewise teaches above—was killed by the holy Demetrius during the siege of Thessalonica. However, since Allatius does not disclose the author of those words, which it is certain should not be attributed to Choniates, and since he is not known from any other source, these are by no means sufficient to establish the faith in the miracle as they report it, even though they might seem to provide support for John Stauracius in the meantime, unless perhaps he who appended them to the margin of the Choniates history was himself moved to do so by the narrative of John Stauracius which he had read.
§ II. Miracles occurring after the tenth century, which are said to have been performed by the holy Demetrius for others besides the Thessalonians.
16. Gabriel, who is called Radomirus by others, or also Romanus, succeeded his father Samuel to the kingdom of Bulgaria in the year 1014, after the latter was taken from the living; he held the kingdom for but a brief time, and, as is understood from Cedrenus and others, ended his life in the month of October in the following year. John Stauracius, lauded above, depicted this prince in the darkest colors in our codex signed + ms. fol. 86, adding that when he was raging most cruelly against the inhabitants in the small, unknown region of Soski, and they, in order to be freed from his depravations, had invoked the holy Demetrius, he too was given over to death, just as the John mentioned above. It pleases me to present to the reader the words pertaining to this, omitting, however, those lines in which the author describes the character of Gabriel or Radomirus, having also added a Latin translation at the end of them. They are as follows:
The translation of the passage
He was wont to move along the crags with threats, and if the one being pursued did not catch the prey with his own feet, the blow would land on his head instantly, and he would lie dead among the mountains. And thus did he scourge them cruelly and inhumanly; but the great Demetrius, swift to aid and quick to succor, arrives at the most wretched one as fast as lightning, as he was hunting and riding in the midst of the mountains, and he strikes the wretch a telling blow, having sent his horse far away. A They saw the Great One following clearly visible to Radomirus, how with a mighty rush he approached him, and killed him with his spear. And the martyr immediately vanished; but he was killed instantly, and his bones were scattered by Hades, and that oppressed people rejoiced in the great one's deliverance. In this place, therefore, this beast in human form, lingering, was tearing everyone apart and devouring them; there was wailing for them, and lamentation, and woe, and the cry of blood which they shed day by day was shouted to the martyr, and they sought vengeance, and the swift liberation of their tormentor. But he, B even when he heard them often calling on the name of the martyr, would mock and sneer at him, and rather increased the blows upon them, saying, "Let us see if Demetrius comes from my hands to save them." Demetrius arises on account of the voice of those in chains, and the groaning of the poor, and for the salvation of this, his own flock, he has gone forth; then, applying the words of the Lord, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; and these I must tend." And he led that crushed and oppressed people to the hunt, and C commanded the wretched crowd to walk on foot to the outskirts of the mountains and the wooded glens and the ascents, and he would threaten that unless those who were hunting the capture on their own feet followed it, a blow would immediately be struck upon their head, and they would fall dead in the midst of the mountains. And thus indeed he would strike them inhumanly and brutally; but Demetrius, ready to offer help and swift to succor, appearing as a horseman, approaches the most wicked one hunting in the midst of the mountains as he sat upon his horse, like a lightning bolt, and he inflicts D a lethal wound upon the wretch, hurling him far from his horse. That he who followed Radomirus, and who attacked the great one with a violent charge and killed him with a spear, is clearly seen. And the martyr indeed immediately disappeared; but he died instantly, and his bones were dissipated upon the earth, and all that people, who had been vexed, celebrated a feast of liberation in honor of the great one.
19. Such is the narrative concerning the death of Radomirus, or Gabriel, king of Bulgaria; now we shall examine what should be concluded about this. The oldest of all the authors who have mentioned the death brought upon Radomirus are, without controversy, Cedrenus,
A Zonaras and Lupus Protospatha—and these men—record with unanimous consent that this prince was killed by his kinsman John, who was also called Vladisthlabus, without any mention whatsoever of Saint Demetrius. Cedrenus, in his Compendium of Histories (Paris 1647 edition), while commemorating the events that took place under Basil the Macedonian, provides the following words, which pertain to our subject: "He was succeeded by his son Gabriel (that is, of Samuel, King of Bulgaria), who was also called Romanus; he was more robust than his father, but far inferior in prudence, born of a certain captive woman of Larissa. On the fifteenth of September, in the thirteenth indiction, when he had not yet reigned for a full year, he was killed while out hunting by John, also called Vladisthlabus, the son of Aaron, whom he himself had once rescued from death." And a little later, the same author writes again: "On the fifth day, Cheirotmetus Romanus [sent] to the Emperor Basil, who was staying at Mosynopolis, bringing with him the servants of John Vladisthlabus, son of Aaron, and letters by which he signified that he had taken the life of Gabriel, and that the Bulgarian empire had now returned to him; he promised that he would be a servant and subject to the Emperor."
20. Cedrenus most clearly records that all these things—that Radomir, or Gabriel, who was also called Romanus, was killed not by Saint Demetrius but by John (or, as he was otherwise called, Vladisthlabus). Zonaras records this no less clearly. Listen to how he speaks in the Annals, edited by himself and printed at Paris in 1687, vol. II, page 226: "By a sudden death," he says, concerning Samuel, King of the Bulgarians, "he perished, with the Bulgarian principality transferred to his son Gabriel, who was also called Romanus: whom, before a year had passed, his cousin Vladisthlavus John (for he also had two names), the son of Aaron, killed." And, with a few words interposed, he adds: "But Samuel’s son Romanus Gabriel (for he had not yet been killed), through envoys to the Emperor (Basil the Macedonian), promised servitude, and after some time had passed, the minister of John Vladisthlabus is present, reporting the murder of Gabriel committed by his master, and many other illustrious Bulgarians flock to the Emperor." B And even the words of Lupus Protospatha, who himself is found in Muratori, vol. V of the *Rerum Italicarum Scriptores*, page 41, attributing the death of Radomir not to Saint Demetrius but to John or Vladisthlabus, his kinsman, speak to this matter. They are as follows: "In the year 1016, the son of the aforementioned Samuel was killed by his cousin, the son of Aaron, and he himself reigned." Since, therefore, three writers esteemed above for the task at hand record most clearly—as is evident from their recited words—that Gabriel was killed not by Saint Demetrius but by John or Vladisthlabus, without any mention of the Saint, certainly no prudent person, as I believe, would give credence to Stauracius, who ascribes that slaughter to our Saint, especially since, according to what I have set forth in the preliminary commentary, no. 26, it is clear that he lived two hundred years remotely [from those events], and he has no other writer, whether more ancient or even merely more recent, to support him, as anyone who has examined the matter will discover.
21. Furthermore, regarding Radomir lying in the middle of the mountains, being killed while laboring at the hunt, and the same Stauracius in his narration, exhibited above in Greek and Latin, also affirms it: that this was done by our Saint, is far from the truth, even though, in the meantime, I would prefer to assent to Cedrenus, who reports in the words transcribed above that he was killed not when he was in the mountains among the company, laboring at the hunt, but at the time when he went out to the hunt, or was already standing in readiness as if he were about to begin the hunt; having been content to warn the reader of this, I proceed to another matter in which our Saint is similarly narrated to have had a father. Christians, having undertaken holy expeditions for the recovery of the Holy Land, had already brought Antioch under their power in the year 1098, when, not long after, they were enclosed in that city by an innumerable army of Saracens and reduced to the greatest straits by a most intense siege. But when at last, in order to extricate themselves, they emerged from the besieged city and attacked the enemies, an army of white-clad men, C whom Demetrius and other Saints were seen to lead, was seen to emerge from the mountains to their aid against the Saracens. Thus, in the collection of various writers which is titled *Gesta Dei per Francos* and was printed at Hanau in 1611, Robert the Monk, Baldric, Archbishop of Dol, and Guibert the Abbot, all of whom were contemporaries of the event, bear witness.
22. I transfer here the words of the individuals that most pertain to our matter. Robert the Monk, page 61, in the Jerusalem history adorned by him, lib. VII, writes as follows: "While they were struggling thus (the Christians having gone out from Antioch), and the length of such a long battle could become tiresome; and the number of the enemy did not seem to decrease, an innumerable army of white-clad soldiers was seen to descend from the mountains, whose standard-bearers and leaders are said to have been George, Maurice, and Demetrius: whom, as soon as the Bishop of Le Puy saw, he exclaimed with a loud voice, saying: O soldiers, behold, the help that God promised you has come. And certainly our men would have been very terrified, had it not been for the hope they had in the Lord. A great tremor fell upon the enemies, and with faces turned, they covered their backs with shields, and began to flee, wherever opportunity gave each one place. The part that was fighting on the side of the sea, as it saw the flight of its own, scattered fire over the grass of the field, which
A It burned slightly, for the heat of summer had dried it out. They did this for this reason, that by this sign those who were in the tents might flee at once and steal richer spoils. But they, seeing the sign, those who were in the mountains, fled immediately with all the spoils they could carry." Thus far the praised monk Robert: I now come to Baldric the archbishop.
23. In the aforementioned Collection, p. 121, in the Jerusalem history composed by him, the following is brought to memory: "Lo, thanks be to God, from the mountains themselves (while the Christians were, in fact, fighting the Saracens near Antioch in the greatest danger), an innumerable army was seen to emerge, mounted on white horses, and bearing white banners in their hands. Many of the Christians saw this, and as they think, the pagans too; and they hesitated and wondered what it might be. At length, both sides recognized that the leaders of the army were Saint George, Saint Demetrius, and Saint Mercurius, bearing their standards in front. This vision, therefore, struck great fear into the Saracens, but it increased better hope in the Christians; it animated the latter and exhausted the former. Many who were present have testified that this happened; yet not all were able to see it, but rather those to whom the Lord wished to reveal His secret; He revealed it to some for their confusion, to others for a demonstration of the coming triumph. Furthermore, let no one convict us of a lie, because we invent nothing from our own heart; but what we have heard, that we attest, and our testimony is true based on the mouths of those who were present."
24. Thus Baldric B records and most clearly confirms the words of Robert the monk recited above. And Abbot Guibert no less clearly does the same in his own *Jerusalem History*, also compiled by him, which forms part of the aforementioned collection and is inserted there on p. 523, writing thus: "And lo, the innumerable forces (while the Christians, in fact, were struggling against the Saracens near Antioch) began to emerge from the mountains, whose horses and banners shone with great whiteness; but the greatest astonishment grew in our people at the sight of them, fearing, indeed, that they might be coming to provide help to the opposing side, until they discovered that this was even visibly the help of Christ granted to them. They believed the leaders of these were specially the glorious martyrs George, Mercurius, and Demetrius, after their military service. These, seen by very many of our people, were believed with full faith, as was fitting. And if it is read that celestial aid once appeared clearly to the Maccabees fighting for circumcision and swine flesh, how much more was it owed to these who, for the sake of purging the churches and defending the state of the faith, offered to Christ the service of poured-out blood." C Nor do only these three writers, inserted in the aforementioned Collection whose words we have already given, attest to the vision of white-clad soldiers, in which Saint Demetrius and two other saints were seen to lead, being offered to the Christians in the most celebrated battle at Antioch; but even in the fourth volume of the *Collection of French Writers* by Chesney, an eyewitness to the matter, the priest Peter Tudebodus of Civray, or rather the one who condensed into a summary the longer commentaries of Tudebodus, with the intermediate narratives that they contain, has faithfully expressed it.
25. And indeed, since the matter stands thus, here are the words of the writer that pertain to the present undertaking: "The turmas of the Turks began to exit from both sides, and were surrounding our men on all sides, throwing javelins, shooting arrows, and wounding them. Countless armies also emerged from the mountains, who were leading white horses, whose banners were all white. And our men, seeing this army, did not know who they were, until they recognized that it was the help of Christ, as He commanded them through the priest Stephen, whose leaders were Saint George, the blessed Theodore, and Saint Demetrius. These words are to be believed, because many of our people saw this." And so we have confirmed the prodigious event described here, by contemporary writers, one of whom even saw the matter with his own eyes; although these do not all agree in assigning the third leader, all with unanimous consent acknowledge Saint Demetrius together with Saint George as having helped the Christians. D And these saints are reported to have assisted not only in the aforementioned battle at Antioch, but also in another, which preceded this one by a few days' journey from Nicaea in the year 1097, when the crusaders joined battle.
26. In the aforementioned work which is inscribed *Gesta Dei per Francos* in the *Collection of Various Writers*, the unknown author, describing the deeds of the Franks who took Jerusalem, in the account where the infidels were routed with great slaughter by the crusaders after the capture of Nicaea, immediately adds: "It was reported later by some that two knights, dressed in white, sitting on white horses, were pursuing the Turks for three days, saying that one was George, and the other Demetrius, the glorious martyrs." Indeed the author, who holds to what is asserted in these words, and also has Peter the Deacon in the *Chronicle of Monte Cassino*, lib. IV, cap. 11, supporting him, shrouds the wonderful vision of the white-clad soldiers, who came to the aid of the crusaders with Saint George and Demetrius as leaders in the battle at Antioch related above, in silence, which is what Peter the Deacon also does in the recently praised work; hence some, perhaps, will contend that the vision that occurred at the battle at Antioch is wrongly attributed by those writers to the battle that took place a few days' journey earlier from Nicaea. But even if, especially from the fact that no other writers at all mention the vision that was offered to the Christians in the fight immediately after the capture of Nicaea, the error of the aforementioned writers might not undeservedly be considered apparent, yet it is possible that there were two similar visions of the Christians…
A
It is possible that two similar yet different visions were presented to the Christians, one in the battle at Antioch and another in a prior battle. The former, since the two authors mentioned by us last had no clear perception of it, they did not narrate; but the latter, other writers passed over in silence, as it were, perhaps because only a few, as the words just given suggest, had seen it, and they considered it less certain.
27. Furthermore, it is said that Saint George, Demetrius, and Mauritius, who brought aid to the Christians who were marked with the cross B when they were besieging the city of Antioch in the year 1098, appeared in a vision to the Turks themselves, and that a certain leader of the same Turks, named Pyrrhus, spoke of this. This man, during a short truce that had been agreed upon while the siege was ongoing, spoke familiarly from time to time with the Prince of Tarentum, Bohemund, to whom he would later betray Antioch after the towers which he had been entrusted to guard were handed over to him, just as the aforementioned monk Robert recounts in his *History of Jerusalem*, Book V. One day he asked him where the camp of that innumerable host, by whose aid the Christians were supported in all their battles, was located. For he said that the Turks could never withstand their arrival, but that as soon as they saw them, they began to fear, whereas they themselves overwhelmed them like a whirlwind, and the others were wounded, the others were crushed, and they were slain. C
Bohemund said to him: "Do you think there is any other host than this one of ours that you see?" To which he replied: "I swear by my master Mahomet, if they were here, this whole plain would not contain them. They all have white horses of wondrous speed, and garments and shields and banners of the same color. But, by the faith which you have in Jesus, where is their camp located?"
28. Bohemund, therefore, enlightened by the Spirit of God, immediately sensed that this was a vision of God which he had seen, and that it did not proceed from temptation, but from good will; and he answered, saying: "Although you are a stranger to our law, because I see that you are animated by good will towards us and a good spirit, I will reveal to you a certain sacrament of our faith. If you had so profound an understanding, you ought to render thanks to the D Creator of all, who showed you the white-clad host: and know that they do not dwell on earth, but in the supernal mansions of the kingdom of heaven. These are they who endured martyrdom for the faith of Christ, and fought against the unbelievers in every land. Chief among them are the standard-bearers George, Demetrius, and Mauritius, who in this mortal life bore military arms and were beheaded for the Christian faith. As often as it is expedient for us, at the command of the Lord Jesus Christ, they bring us aid, and through them our enemies are cast down. And that you may know the truth, inquire today, and tomorrow, and the next day, if their camp can be found in this whole region; if it is found, having been refuted in your presence for a lie, we shall blush. And when you cannot find them in the whole region, if it is necessary for us, you will see them present tomorrow. Whence, therefore, do they come so quickly, if not from the supernal abodes in which they dwell?" To which Pyrrhus (for such was his name) replied: "And if they come from heaven, where do they find so many white horses, so many shields, so many banners?" To which Bohemund replied: "You are inquiring of matters that are great and beyond my understanding; therefore, if you wish, let my chaplain approach, who will answer you regarding these things." To this the chaplain said: "When the omnipotent Creator disposes to send His angels to earth, as ministers, then they take upon themselves aerial bodies, so that through them they may become known to us. But they appear armed now, to indicate that they come with divine help in war."
29. Yet as to whether this vision, which is said to have been presented to the Turks themselves, was related in these words—the colloquy between Bohemund and Pyrrhus—only the aforementioned monk Robert remembers it, and he has no other writer who in any way supports him, among those who have treated the holy expeditions of the Christians to Palestine. I confess it is so; indeed, when the speeches which the same writer attributes to Bohemund and Pyrrhus are such that they seem to have been carried out back and forth between them, even if only for the reason that they represent Pyrrhus as clearly ignorant of the mysteries of the Christian faith, and yet it might appear unlikely that he had once been a Christian, I would not dare to assert that the vision which Pyrrhus mentions in his conversation with Bohemund at the monk Robert's really took place; but be that as it may, whether of this vision or of others related above by various writers—many of which have been ascribed by some to imagination (whether rightly or otherwise, I do not define) by those who said they were presented to them—it seems likely enough to me that the three saints mentioned in the colloquy of Bohemund and Pyrrhus, and specifically Saint Demetrius, brought aid to the Christians signed with the cross, not only in the battle joined at Antioch, but also in other sacred expeditions, and specifically in the most serious battle which occurred on the journey of a few days from Nicaea, although meanwhile, I would not dare to assert this as entirely certain. Such is the opinion, first, that it appears that our saint and the other two saints mentioned were then frequently invoked by the Christians, and they would not likely have left the prayers directed to them in vain; then, indeed, because when Bohemund, in responding to the vision related by Pyrrhus, asserted that the Christians had been aided in the dangers of war by the saints George, Demetrius, and Mauritius (as noted in the immediately preceding number), and that this was then commonly held in opinion, it may be an argument that it is found by experience that it not rarely happens, that
A
30. Whatever opinion I may hold regarding the entire narrative of Stauracios, and I leave it to the reader to further judge and weigh these matters, I shall proceed with the sequence of events to be treated here. Following the chronological order in which each occurred, I now come to Manuel Komnenos, who presided over the Eastern Empire from the year 1143 until the year 1180. If John Stauracios—whom we have already praised very often above—recounts the truth in our codex (MS. 193, fol. 92 and following), then the Emperor had made for himself a garment of purple, distinguished by the most precious pearls, which he used on the more solemn feast days and when foreign princes' embassies were to be received. It happened that on the day before the Lord’s Resurrection, from the Emperor’s treasury—where it was to be worn for that solemn feast—it had been taken out, secretly removed by Saint Demetrius during the night, and placed upon his sacred tomb in Thessalonica, spread out from head to foot. In the morning, the officials who were in charge of the wardrobe were greatly disturbed, for the imperial garment that they had removed from the treasury the day before could not be found. However, the sacristan of the basilica of Saint Demetrius in Thessalonica, having entered early in the morning and seeing it—that same garment mentioned above, spread out over the saint’s tomb—stood B astonished. He ran out of the temple, then entered it again; he was almost blinded by the radiance of the pearls with which that garment was decorated. He observed the garment more attentively, and immediately spread the news. The elders gathered and beheld that precious purple garment. They opined that it was a thing pertaining to the Emperor, and they sent messengers to the one who had informed them of what had occurred. When the Emperor inquired on the day the purple garment was found lying on the saint’s holy tomb, he discovered it was the very same one that, as he had been informed by his officials, the imperial garment had been stolen the previous night, and he recognized the miracle, being at first quite stunned, along with his entire court.
31. But indeed, to come to the point toward which this mainly looks, he says: “The martyr seems to correct us on account of neglect, and I might say, on account of ingratitude. For since he himself frequently fought for us in battles and overthrew our enemies, we did not offer even once a small gift of any kind to the victor, nor did we care about any retribution; so, in his victory in those contests, he was forced to take away the purple garment.” This is in Greek, which we have provided here in a Latin summary. John Stauracios, immediately adding certain words, notes how Emperor Manuel Komnenos at that time gave thanks by name to the holy martyr for the assistance granted to him by him in the wars, and also mentions the goods which he conferred upon him—as if to offer thanks of some kind besides. If, therefore, one is to believe that writer, there was also, C for Emperor Manuel Komnenos, a successor to the twelfth emperor, aid granted by our Saint in war, and that not once, but frequently. However, as to my own opinion concerning the whole of the Stauracios narrative, I will say now: I greatly fear that from beginning to end it is a fabrication, invented solely for the purpose—if not by Stauracios, then by some other little Greek, greatly addicted to fables by the nature of his race—that he might, perhaps, having learned that the most precious garment had been donated to Saint Demetrius by Manuel Komnenos, impose upon the ignorant and credulous rabble some cause for this donation, since the true one was not known.
32. Be that as it may, that John Stauracios in his summary already provided does not merit the certainty of faith is evident from the fact that at the end of the same he writes thus: «But leaving aside the miracles of the martyr (for who could enumerate and narrate them?), let us occupy ourselves with those which are recent and newer, of which many spectators and witnesses still remain in life.» In these words, he indicates—not obscurely—that he had withdrawn himself not a little from the timeframe of the facts which the said narrative embraces. Moreover, writers, in order to gain firm faith for themselves in such matters—as being quite difficult to believe—are not sought to be suspected from any quarter for being close in time; and this is especially true when that which they record is passed over in silence by absolutely all others, as happens here. Besides, Emperor Manuel Komnenos usually met with almost always unfavorable fortune in wars, and I find no victory whatsoever reported by a writer worthy of trust that he had achieved through the miraculously prostrated enemies of Saint Demetrius. Nor, indeed, does it seem that even when he was fighting against the Saracens or other enemies of the Christian faith, does that prince appear to deserve to have experienced heavenly aid—he who, as is established by the almost unanimous testimony of contemporary writers, caused a most flourishing Christian army, marching to Palestine against the infidels under the leadership of Emperor Conrad, to be destroyed in a criminal manner, partly by flour to which he had caused lime to be added, and partly by the ambushes of the Turks, to whom he had ignobly betrayed it. Therefore, having carefully weighed everything, it appears to me doubtful—not to say something worse—whether Saint Demetrius ever miraculously assisted Manuel Komnenos in war.
33. And nor, with regard to that which remains here to be said, shall I now proceed; but I would dare to assert as a certainty that to Andronikos the Younger, the fourteenth-century Greek emperor, in the military expedition by which he occupied Thessalonica in the year 1327, aid was brought by Saint Demetrius, just as John Kantakouzenos
(this is the first page of the chain) had heard that in the monastery of that region, where he was living a solitary life—and since he was staying not far from the city of Thessalonica, which is itself situated in Macedonia—that from the tomb of the holy martyr Demetrius, which is located in his basilica at Thessalonica, an oil or unguent was continuously dripping in a vast and astonishing quantity. He had often heard many people speaking about it.
A
34. Yet he lacked faith in this prodigious event. Indeed, he would say that since St. Demetrius had met his end by being pierced with a lance—and had not undergone other torments—his martyrdom possessed nothing particularly unique compared to other holy martyrs who, having endured all sorts of extremely cruel tortures, had earned the palm of martyrdom. Was that grace, he asked, which causes the salutary unguent for the healing of diseases to spring forth so prodigiously from his tomb, truly divinely bestowed upon that Saint? Moreover, since he heard that this unguent or oil was drawn by the multitude in vast quantities daily, yet did not diminish in the slightest, and since he could not reconcile in his mind that it was dripping from the body of our Saint, he was greatly distressed to believe it. He therefore inclined to the opinion that the oil or unguent was prepared elsewhere beforehand, and that he should assume it was being poured out or supplied to the people not by any divine power of the martyr, but rather by some human artifice. But a heavenly vision was revealed to this monk, by which his incredulity was corrected. It pleases me here to present this to the reader in the very Greek words which John Stauracius provides in the aforementioned place, with a Latin translation added at the end. It reads as follows:
Vision of the Monk Vitalius
It seemed to him in his sleep that he had arrived at the city of Thessalonica and was entering the temple of the martyr; he found the sacristan and spoke to him, and heard B someone say: "Do you wish to see the martyr?" And Vitalius replied, and he was so intensely thirsty to see him and to embrace him that he replied: "I do." And so, the sacristan led the way, and Vitalius followed. Whereupon they entered both of them into the holy shrine, and they moved the doors, and they shifted the sacred sarcophagus, and lifted seven marble slabs from the midst; and they dug into the earth that was there, now C one after another. After the earth [was removed], another clean soil was drawn out from there, filled with a very sweet scent. When the digging had reached about three cubits, and a little more, the sarcophagus appeared to them, covered with white marble; and having lifted this also from there, and uncovered the sarcophagus, they saw the martyr lying inside, radiating light, living clearly, and appearing as if asleep, smiling and cheerful. And behold, countless streams were flowing [from his body] to the ears, just D as bees [to] their cells, which were sprouting [them], violently as if from below, moved by the Spirit; and these men were almost overwhelmed by the streams of myrrh that were leaping up. And Vitalius, seeing this, and being beyond
A measure amazed, both worshipped and kissed that divine body of the martyr; and bearing in his hands a certain vessel, as it seemed, vernaculously called a "cutribion," he filled it with the oil gushing forth from there. Therefore, they again closed that chest from which the oil was gushing, and placed upon it that earth of good odor, and thus again that muddy substance from the myrrh, and the marble stones, and the chest, which is visible to all from above. Then, having sealed the venerable and again-martyrial box as before, they went out both from the temple and the city; Vitalius indeed turning back on the journey to where he had, as it seemed, arrived, and the verger as if to see him off to a certain place, Almurus being the name of the place. From there, therefore, having taken leave of him, he returned again, having requested that he might receive from Vitalius some of the myrrh which he had drawn from the martyr's body; but, not having obtained what he asked, he merely received some small drops, with which he anointed his forehead in the form of a cross. What follows this? Vitalius awoke, and behold, he was carrying the martyr's myrrh in his hands, and was all soaked with the myrrh; and he was all filled with its fragrance, entirely unraveled, all ecstatic, seized with trembling and joy. "Could it be," he said, "that I am still dreaming, and that I fancy myself in my sleep to be carrying the myrrh of the martyr? But, as it seems, these things that I see are not a dream, nor a re-enactment of the imagination; but a bodily visitation to the precious casket of the martyr; the Great One himself (O divine, prodigious, and audible event!) having arranged all things so that I might not fall into the precipices of blasphemy."
38. "Truly, it seems to me that it was not a fiction of a vision in a dream or of the phantasy, but a bodily one, such that I even venerated the casket of the martyr, he himself appearing in his great C (O divine, prodigious, and provident power!) presence, watching over me entirely, so that I would not fall into the abyss of blasphemy." Stauracius, in the place cited above, adds these things along with more that, for the sake of brevity, we omit here as they do not contribute much to the matter at hand. He adds them to the monk Vitalius at his own discretion, as it appears, through which this monk offers the most brilliant testimony to the stupendous prodigy of the great abundance of unguent gushing from the tomb of Saint Demetrius, having been taught by the vision which we have already presented, having been entirely cured of his own incredulity through this. But Stauracius supplies nothing that would suffice in any way to determine the age of the monk Vitalius or the epoch of the vision which he narrates; yet from this it happens that when such an abundance, as is hinted at in the related vision and the narrative encompassing it, of the unguent gushing from the body of the Saint took place, cannot be defined—although in the meantime it is an entirely certain conclusion, from the fact that the aforementioned vision precedes the narrative in the lucubration of the same author, that it had its beginning long before the age of Stauracius. But Stauracius also provides such things as most manifestly teach that in his own age, or the thirteenth century, this same prodigy of the greatest abundance of unguent gushing from the Saint's tomb or body also held true.
39. For after the narration regarding the king of the Bulgarians, Seyloannes, which he recites in section 32.
A Who does not know the fountain of myrrh gushing from the most precious body of Demetrius, and how great it is in multitude, so that it overflows even the collection vessels surrounding his divine tomb? These, receiving the fragrant flow from the fountain of the blessed one's myrrh until it reaches them, for those of the Christ-named who desire it at any hour, stand as a most ready infirmary; and every race and every age, becoming wealthy from the abundant public fountain of the martyr's myrrh, draw it to themselves; men, women, and infants draw the myrrh from thence with their whole hands as much as they might siphon; and some sanctify their eyes with it, others their mouth and ears; others anoint their chests and the whole integrity of their body with the myrrh, and to speak simply, they are insatiable in the anointing they perform through it. B Therefore, also in a dream the Great one appears to him, and reproaches him for the act, and says, "Why have you begrudged the faithful the flow that from my blood is daily poured forth by God in abundance, and why have you blocked the unguent-receiving vessels for the Christ-loving? And I indeed propose the myrrh without measure, but you behave so sparingly and enviously. But that you may learn not to block the sanctification from the honor-lovers of the martyrs in any way, here I open the door of my myrrh to the faithful." He spoke, and holding a thin staff in his hand, with it he traced the path of the myrrh, having moved it from the myrrh-bearing tomb, and having configured a straight line upon the floor of the temple, and immediately a conduit of myrrh flowed from thence and settled smoothly and gently upon the temple's floor. And a river, behold, according to David, applauded with hand the miracle, so that from this, he who served the martyr's chest was at a loss, and quickly opened again the myrrh-receiving vessels he had previously closed, and asked forgiveness for his ignorance, and thus with difficulty the myrrh-streaming river flowing into the middle of the temple came to a stop. C But what is this? The holy body of that one lay slaughtered and cast away, to which those approaching 41. "Thus, therefore, in a dream the Great one (Demetrius, to be sure) appears, and reproaches him for what he had done, and says, 'Why, you who have seen so much of the flow which is daily supplied in abundance by God from my blood, have you closed the receptacles of the myrrh to the lovers of Christ? And I indeed propose the unguents not by measure and drop by drop, but to satisfaction, yet you behave so sparingly and enviously. But, that you may not ever learn to close the holy place to the lovers of the martyrs, I have here opened the gate of my own unguents to the faithful.' He spoke, and holding a staff in his hand, he traced the path of the unguent with it, leading this away from the unguent-bearing tomb and forming it in a straight line on the surface of the temple floor, and soon a rivulet of unguents flowed from thence and rippled evenly and gently on the temple floor; and behold, miraculously according to David the river applauded with hand, so that he who served the martyr's tomb, lost in his own design, might collapse, and soon again open the unguent-receiving receptacles he had first closed, and ask pardon for his error, and thus with difficulty stop the flow from which the unguent was gushing into the middle of the temple. D The vision related in these words by Stauracius is to me suspect even from this: that the action of the monk who closed the receptacles containing the unguent would not appear worthy of reproach if what Stauracius says concerning the women, that they indecorously anointed themselves continually in the temple with the unguents, is consonant with the truth. 40. Stauracius, having premised these things, subjoins nearby that a certain monk, to whom on account of the sanctity of his life the care of Demetrius's sepulcher had been entrusted, when he saw daily, without any observed manner, men of whatever sort and age taking away the unguent gushing from the Saint's body, and was forced to watch this matter — and especially because of the fact that women were also continually anointing their cheeks and chest and breasts and arms with it — indignantly closed the receptacles containing the unguent. But this, as Stauracius adds, did not at all please our Saint, who wished that not only the just but sinners also should be healed of diseases by his salutary unguent, and therefore he rebuked the monk in a vision, which Stauracius sets forth in Greek words, and also to be recited in Latin at the end of these, in the following manner: ...by the custodian of Demetrius, Stauracius narrates, in the age of this writer or in the thirteenth century, as is clear from what has been said above, [the prodigy] undoubtedly existed; hence it follows that in the same century the prodigy of the greatest abundance of unguent gushing from the Saint's body still obtained. And that it had a place not only then, but also in the fifteenth century, is shown to us by him who (see the previous Commentary, no. 28) after he had discoursed most profusely in his oration on Saint Demetrius, part of which we have described from the Medicean Library, codex 13, concerning the Saint's martyrdom and the miracles performed by him, proceeds thus:
A those who love God buried with love that which is dear to God by night; and after some time, a new spring is born above the body, an ointment—O, what a miracle!—flowing instead of water. From it a river brings streams of fragrance, from which pools are filled with every scent, from which another ocean, possessing waves of ointment, which is not water in its character, bears a thicker substance. Nor is it like any other of the things on earth, or others about it, whether more humid or more dry, nor is it equal to any of those made by art. One might deem the visible phenomenon to be flesh, and yet, on the other hand, it is more wondrous than all kinds of scents, not only those prepared by art, but also those naturally produced and existing from God. And deservedly so, for God bestows a common fragrance gratis upon everyone, but He grants the present ointment to him who has struggled on His behalf, as is fitting. The martyr receives this by his own toils, not by grace gratis; and the ointment, as it comes forth, is divided into two sources, which pipes receive. And having become elevated, they raise it to a height as if something from below were pushing it; and against nature, that which is heavy is borne upward. And upon reaching the level of the temple, it rests firmly, and each of the pipes remains quiet, as if keeping it fixed, or as if it were sent back and restrained, its forward flow checked as if by invisible reins.
B using reasons to deceive the pious, just as the demons did of old to the first man; therefore, let him be silent, whoever he may be. But this suffices for us concerning these matters, since life would not be enough for those who wish to speak of them at length.
44. For all that has been said is small concerning the miracles of the martyr; wherefore, O admirable and noble Demetrius, courageous soldier of Christ, you who have often rescued this city from the hands of foreigners and from all manner of evils, and became an excellent physician for diseases, and had mercy upon our race, we pray to you: even now, raise up that which lies here and needs help, liberate and assist those who are failing. Set the one storm-tossed in a waveless harbor, dissolve the fire of the barbarians still igniting, cure with your warm dew their burning rage, and do everything for the healing of souls and bodies alike, by the intercessions of the all-immaculate Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom is due glory, power, honor, and adoration to the ages of ages. Amen.
C 45. For the pipes of ointment are always full and rejoice when being drawn, yet are not diminished; being gathered, yet not lessened; being shared, yet seen to be intact. And what comes forth is almost infinite; for it is granted to every pious person to take as much as each may wish, yet the source remains whole and the diminution comes from nowhere. And the sight is strange, not only to the pious but to all the impious as well; for even if any heretic or godless person be there, he is altogether unable to blaspheme, so great is the glory of the ointment that is present. And the greater thing, which does not even have a comparison to the things mentioned, is that certain vessels that have become full of ointment from the pipes, when each of the pious carries them home, he dedicates each to some sacred place, having it not only for the healing of bodies, but also of the souls of those in the house, and their neighbors, and often of irrational animals, which, indeed, when naturally emptied, if only each person uses it with a vessel pure in the memory of the martyr—O, what a miracle!—each vessel of ointment is immediately filled, just as it was from the beginning. What could ever be greater or equal or near to this? The children of the Greeks maintain lakes and springs, each possessing the miracle in a different way. If, therefore, what is said of them is not a myth, then the present reality is far greater than those. But if it is indeed a myth, to me, this signifies a reality that is clear, and a thing wondrous to those seeing and to those hearing, a sight that cannot be compared to any other. And why do I speak of things on earth that are wondrous, where it is no less than those things miraculously performed by God of old? Let not heretics send their tongues here, nor let them imitate the foolish. Yet they are unable, having fabricated their excuses.
for to all the pious, as each may wish, so much is given; but the fountain remains inexhaustible, nor does it appear diminished in any part, and it is a wondrous spectacle not only to the pious but even to all the impious. For even if any heretic or enemy of God should exist, he cannot altogether blaspheme such a work of the ointment, whose glory is manifest. But what is greater, and bears no comparison to the things mentioned: when certain vessels have been filled from the tubes with the ointment, and taken home by any of the pious, they deposit them in some sacred place, and use them for the healing not only of their own bodies, but also of the souls of their household and neighbors, and often even for irrational animals. And when these have naturally been emptied, if only someone pure uses that vessel in memory of the martyr, immediately every vessel (O miracle!) becomes full of the ointment, as it had been from the beginning. What greater, or equal, or similar thing has there ever been? The heathens celebrate ponds and fountains, of which one has encompassed one miracle and another another, in various ways. If, then, what they have said is not a fable, the thing concerning which I am now speaking is far greater; but if, as it seems to me, they are fables, then this present thing is truth clearly realized, a spectacle for those who see and hear it to marvel at, nor can it be compared to anything else—and why should I say "anything else"?—is it not even less than those miracles wrought of old by God, which are produced from the earth as signs? A
46. Therefore, let not the heretics stir here, nor let them imitate the demons. By feigning opposing causes, as the demons did to deceive the first man, they will not prevail equally. Therefore, let no one, whoever he may be, keep silent. But if we wished to commemorate these things broadly, life would not be sufficient; for all time is short to celebrate the miracles of the martyr, because you, O wondrous and excellent Demetrius, stupendous soldier of Christ, have often liberated this city from the hands of foreigners, and have stood forth as the best physician of various diseases, and have had mercy on our race. Therefore we pray to you, and now still that which lies prostrate, raise up; and that which implores aid, liberate; and bring assistance to the struggling. Establish the one tossed by the tempest in a tranquil harbor; loose the one scorched by the fire of the barbarians by your continued kindness; and heal those burning with their furies with your warming dew, and do all for the healing of our souls as well as our bodies through the prayers of the immaculate Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom belongs glory, power, honor, and adoration unto the ages of ages. Amen. Thus far the praised Demetrius Chrysoloras, who, as I taught above, flourished in the fifteenth century, and who records these things, which are contained in the words already recited, to memory; at that time, truly, the miracle of the ointment, in greatest abundance gushing forth from the body of Saint Demetrius, clearly remained. B Nor do we learn this only from the recited words of Chrysoloras, but also, as will be evident to one weighing these things, other matters sufficiently worthy of note concerning the miraculous ointment of Saint Demetrius, the credibility of which I meanwhile wish to leave with the author. Furthermore, whether now, since the holy temple of Thessalonica has been converted into a Turkish shrine (as I taught above in the preliminary Commentary, no. 92), the miracle of the ointment, exceedingly stupendous, and such as other Saints are even now known to be distinguished by God, or were certainly distinguished of old, still persists today as a great abundance distilling or gushing forth from the body of Demetrius, I have no certain knowledge. C D
ORDER OF THINGS CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME
SIMEON METAPHRASTES. OF THE LIVES OF THE SAINTS (continuation). MONTH NOVEMBER. Day 2. Martyrdom of the SS. Acindynus, Pegasius and companions. 9 Day 4. Life of S. Joannicius the abbot. 35 Day 4. Life of S. Barbara. 301 Day 6. Life of S. Nicholas of Myra. 517 Day 8. Life of S. Patapius. 357 Day 9. Martyrdom of S. Menas and companions. 567 Day 5. Life of the SS. Galaction and Episteme. 93 Day 12. Life of S. Spyridon. 417 Day 7. Martyrdom of S. Hieron and companions. 109 Day 13. Martyrdom of the SS. Eustratius, Auxentius and companions. 467 Day 9. Martyrdom of S. Orestes. 119 Day 15. Martyrdom of the SS. Gurias, Samonas and Abibus. 127 Day 14. Martyrdom of S. Thyrsus and companions. 507 Day 22. Life of S. Cecilia and companions. 165 Day 21. Martyrdom of S. Thomas the apostle. 539 Day 23. Life of S. Clement the martyr. 179 Day 23. Martyrdom of the ten holy martyrs of Crete. 565 Day 23. Life of S. Gregory of Agrigento. 189 Day 25. Life of S. Mercurius. 269 Day 25. Life of S. Catherine. 275 Day 25. Martyrdom of S. Anastasia the Younger and companions. 575
ORDER OF THE MATTERS CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME
Day 25. Martyrdom of S. Eugenia. Day 26. Life of S. Theodore Graptus. Day 27. On S. John the Evangelist. Day 29. Life of S. Marcellus the Archimandrite. 609
Chapter I. The Saint preaches the faith, is apprehended, brought to Maximian, commanded to be kept in custody by him, is met by Nestor who is about to contend against Lyæus, and is blessed by him. Chapter II. Maximian, angry on account of the killing of Lyæus, commands that first Nestor and then also Saint Demetrius be killed, and the latter, afterwards shining forth in miracles, is honored in the places built for him.
Day 30. Martyrdom of S. Anysia of Thessalonica. Day 31. Martyrdom of S. Melana of Rome. Day 20. Life of S. Sebastian and companions. Day 3. Contest of S. Blaise and companions. Day 12. Contest of SS. Acepsimas, Joseph, and Aithalas. Day 4. Life of S. Ambrose of Milan. Day 7. Life of S. Paul of Constantinople. Day 19. Life and contest of SS. Nazarius, Gervasius, Protasius, and Celsus. Day 8. Life of S. Pelagia of Antioch. Day 8. Life of S. Matrona, martyr of Chios. Day 25. Life of S. Amphilochius of Iconium.
THIRD PASSION, by the author Symeon Metaphrastes. 1185 Chapter I. The Saint’s country, family, education, dignity, the preaching of Christ, his arrest, and casting into prison. Chapter II. Lyæus is killed by Nestor; Maximian, angry at this, commands Nestor and Demetrius to be killed, and the latter is distinguished by miracles and honored as a saint.
MIRACLES. Book I, by the author John, Archbishop of Thessalonica. 1203 Chapter I. Concerning Marianus, Prefect of Illyricum, afflicted with a most serious illness and restored to health through Saint Demetrius. Chapter II. Concerning the Prefect of the guards, healed by the Saint from an incurable flux of blood. 1219 Chapter III. Concerning the miraculous deed performed by the Saint for the Thessalonians in the time of the plague. 1225 Chapter IV. Concerning those possessed by demons, healed by the Saint’s patronage. 1253 Chapter V. He who requested the Saint’s relics, but obtained them not, Emperor Maurice. 1259 Chapter VI. Concerning the silver that the Saint did not wish to have used for his burned ciborium when a throne was being established. 1241 Chapter VII. He who, being Onesiphorus, the custodian of the temple, sinned against the Saint and was punished by him on that account. 1247 Chapter VIII. Concerning the great solicitude and care with which the Saint miraculously succored the Thessalonians during a time of famine. 1251 Chapter IX. He who at another time, when Thessalonica was pressed by famine, was miraculously succored by the Saint. 1255 Chapter X. He who was also succored by the Saint during an internal war and civil sedition in Thessalonica. 1261 Chapter XI. Concerning the Prefect of Illyricum who blasphemed the Saint and was therefore punished by him. 1269 Chapter XII. He who, after a fire was started in the ciborium, was liberated from the enemy in Thessalonica through the Saint’s providence. 1273 Chapter XIII. He who, when the Avars unexpectedly attacked Thessalonica, was resisted by the Saint, yet the city was nevertheless besieged by them and reduced to the greatest straits. 1283 Chapter XIV. A vision offered to Eusebius, Archbishop of Thessalonica, and the arguments by which John contends that the siege of Thessalonica mentioned in the preceding chapter was miraculously broken through the patronage of Saint Demetrius. 1293 Chapter XV. A man illustrious in dignity and virtue is honored during the time of the siege of Thessalonica by a heavenly vision, and being informed by it that Saint Demetrius stands for Thessalonica, he stirs up the citizens to fortitude. 1313
MIRACLES, Book II, by an anonymous author. 1325 Chapter I. The Slavs are driven from the siege of Thessalonica by the appearance of Saint Demetrius, and their leader is captured and then put to death. 1325 Chapter II. The Slavs again attack Thessalonica and, experiencing the Lord and Saint Demetrius as opposed to them, are forced to retreat with their purpose unaccomplished. 1333 Chapter III. Concerning earthquakes and a fire sent by God. 1345 Chapter IV. The Slavs, when one of their princes was unworthily carried off into captivity, being enraged, again press Thessalonica with a siege and force her to the straits of famine, but are nevertheless compelled to withdraw by Saint Demetrius coming to the aid of his people, and furthermore a great slaughter of them is carried out by the Emperor’s army. 1349
CORNELIUS BYEI, S. J., PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY. § I. The multiple writings found concerning S. Demetrius, especially the Greek ones, are reviewed. 1081 § II. Which of the writings reviewed in the preceding paragraph ought to be edited, and what degree of faith or authority each possesses. 1087 § III. The Saint’s undaunted fortitude in preaching the faith of Christ, and what is to be thought of those things told concerning his origin, country, and condition. 1099 § IV. What is to be thought of those things handed down concerning Nestor by Metaphrastes and the anonymous writer who came before him. 1105 § V. Demetrius is captured and suffers martyrdom. When this happened, and who Lupus, who is said to have been his servant, was. 1111 § VI. The memory of the Saint in the sacred Fasti, and the ecclesiastical cult which he enjoys among the Greeks universally to this day, and which he formerly enjoyed. 1118 § VII. How excellent the cult was that was offered to the Saint in Thessalonica, and how ancient it is. 1123 § VIII. When the miraculous oil first began to flow from the Saint’s tomb or body, and what else is to be believed concerning this sacred pledge. 1156 § IX. How famous the cult offered to the Saint in Constantinople was, even by the Emperors of the East themselves, and how ancient it is. 1147 § X. The ecclesiastical cult offered to the Saint among the Latins and other nations for a very long time already. 1158
FIRST PASSION, written by an anonymous author and translated from Greek into Latin by Anastasius the Librarian. 1167 Prologue. 1167 Unique Chapter. The Saint preaches the faith, is presented as a captive to the Emperor Maximian, who was hastening to a gladiator spectacle, and by his order is first committed to custody and then also killed. 1169
SECOND PASSION, by an anonymous author. 1173 Chapter I. The Saint preaches the faith, is arrested, brought to Maximian, ordered to be held in custody, is met by Nestor who is about to fight against Lyæus, and is blessed by him. 1173 Chapter II. Maximian, angry at the killing of Lyæus, commands that first Nestor and then also Saint Demetrius be killed, and the latter is distinguished by miracles and honored as a saint. 1177
THIRD PASSION, by Symeon Metaphrastes. 1185 Chapter I. The Saint’s country, family, education, dignity, the preaching of Christ, his arrest, and casting into prison. 1185 Chapter II. Lyæus is killed by Nestor; Maximian, angry at this, commands Nestor and Demetrius to be killed, and the latter is distinguished by miracles and honored as a saint. 1191
MIRACLES. Book I, by John, Archbishop of Thessalonica. 1203 Chapter I. Concerning Marianus, Prefect of Illyricum, afflicted with a most serious illness and restored to health through Saint Demetrius. 1205 Chapter II. Concerning the Prefect of the guards, healed by the Saint from an incurable flux of blood. 1219 Chapter III. Concerning the miraculous deed performed by the Saint for the Thessalonians in the time of the plague. 1225 Chapter IV. Concerning those possessed by demons, healed by the Saint’s patronage. 1253 Chapter V. He who requested the Saint’s relics, but obtained them not, Emperor Maurice. 1259 Chapter VI. Concerning the silver that the Saint did not wish to have used for his burned ciborium when a throne was being established. 1241 Chapter VII. He who, being Onesiphorus, the custodian of the temple, sinned against the Saint and was punished by him on that account. 1247 Chapter VIII. Concerning the great solicitude and care with which the Saint miraculously succored the Thessalonians during a time of famine. 1251 Chapter IX. He who at another time, when Thessalonica was pressed by famine, was miraculously succored by the Saint. 1255 Chapter X. He who was also succored by the Saint during an internal war and civil sedition in Thessalonica. 1261 Chapter XI. Concerning the Prefect of Illyricum who blasphemed the Saint and was therefore punished by him. 1269 Chapter XII. He who, after a fire was started in the ciborium, was liberated from the enemy in Thessalonica through the Saint’s providence. 1273 Chapter XIII. He who, when the Avars unexpectedly attacked Thessalonica, was resisted by the Saint, yet the city was nevertheless besieged by them and reduced to the greatest straits. 1283 Chapter XIV. A vision offered to Eusebius, Archbishop of Thessalonica, and the arguments by which John contends that the siege of Thessalonica mentioned in the preceding chapter was miraculously broken through the patronage of Saint Demetrius. 1293 Chapter XV. A man illustrious in dignity and virtue is honored during the time of the siege of Thessalonica by a heavenly vision, and being informed by it that Saint Demetrius stands for Thessalonica, he stirs up the citizens to fortitude. 1313
MIRACLES, Book II, by an anonymous author. 1325 Chapter I. The Slavs are driven from the siege of Thessalonica by the appearance of Saint Demetrius, and their leader is captured and then put to death. 1325 Chapter II. The Slavs again attack Thessalonica and, experiencing the Lord and Saint Demetrius as opposed to them, are forced to retreat with their purpose unaccomplished. 1333 Chapter III. Concerning earthquakes and a fire sent by God. 1345 Chapter IV. The Slavs, when one of their princes was unworthily carried off into captivity, being enraged, again press Thessalonica with a siege and force her to the straits of famine, but are nevertheless compelled to withdraw by Saint Demetrius coming to the aid of his people, and furthermore a great slaughter of them is carried out by the Emperor’s army. 1349
MIRACLES, Book III, by another anonymous author. 1383 Chapter I. Concerning a man who recovered what he had lost and was cured of an eye disease through the patronage of Saint Demetrius. 1383 Chapter II. A blind man prays for a cure at Saint Demetrius and finds him favorable in double fashion. 1385 Chapter III. Concerning men visiting sacred places who fall into the hands of the Saracens; the Saint miraculously prevents them. 1387 Chapter IV. A man afflicted with a most severe illness, having been ordered in a dream to go to Saint Demetrius near Thessalonica, recovers his health. 1395 Chapter V. He who, in order that the Saint might have a temple for himself in Cappadocia which had collapsed, restores it. 1395
An analysis of the oil and the miraculous, spontaneously flowing oil from the tomb of S. Demetrius and other things of the same Saint, partly already published for the benefit of scholars by the efforts of print, and not yet obtained by John Stauracius and Demetrius Chrysologus for their lucubrations. 1399 § I. Miracles, the tenth and following, which are told to have been performed in Thessalonica out of favor. 1399 § II. Miracles, the tenth and following, which are related to have been performed out of favor to others, as well as to those of Thessalonica, by Saint Demetrius. 1407 § III. A little elderly woman, who is brought forward among those things presented concerning the memory of the miraculous oil and the sacred stream flowing from the body of Saint Demetrius. 1417
END OF THE SIXTEENTH VOLUME.