σιτοφάγῳ. Ἵνα εἴπω τι καὶ τῶν ἔξωθεν, οὐδὲ ἐῴκει ἀνδρὶ σιτοφάγῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἄγγελος ἦν ἀτεχνῶς τοιούτῳ σώματι χρώμενος. Οὗτος δὴ μετὰ τὸ χειραπτῆσαι τὸν Κύριον, καὶ τῆς Ἡρώδου ἀκολασίας ἔλεγχος γίνεται· Οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι, λέγων, ἀδελφοῦ κοίτῃ συγχραίνεσθαι· τί σαυτὸν αἰσχύνεις λέχος ἐνυβρίζων ὁμόγνιον, καὶ ἐπιδέμνια βαίνων παράνομα; Οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι ἔχειν τὴν γυναῖκα Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου. Ἀλλὰ ταῦτα λέγων, ᾅδειν πρὸς ὄνον ἐδόκει, καὶ κωφῷ διαλέγεσθαι. Ὁρῶν γὰρ Ἡρώδης ῥαγδαίως τὸν προφήτην τοῖς ἐλέγχοις τοῦτον μαστίζοντα, ἀνυποστόλῳ τε θράσει τὸ δυσειδὲς τῆς φαύλης πράξεως ἐκπομπεύοντα, πολλοῖς ἐμερίζετο τὴν ψυχήν, αἰσχύνῃ, ἔρωτι, καὶ θυμῷ· ᾐσχύνετο τοῦ κήρυκος τὸ ἀξίωμα· ὀργίζετο ἐλεγχόμενος· ὁ ἔρως τὴν ὀργὴν ἐπὶ πλέον ἀνέφλεγε, καὶ τέλος ἡ φιληδονία νικᾷ τὸ ἀνδράποδον. Ἀμελέτητος γὰρ ὤν, καὶ λίαν ἀπαιδαγώγητος, οὐκ εἶχεν ἀναπαλαίσαι λογισμῷ γενναίῳ τὴν ἔφεσιν. Ἡ δὲ μοιχαλίς, ὡς ᾔσθετο τὸν Ἡρώδην ὑποτρέσαντα τοῦ προφήτου τὸν ἔλεγχον, B Ἐφοβεῖτο γάρ, φησίν, ὁ Ἡρώδης τὸν Ἰωάννην, καὶ ἡδέως αὐτοῦ ἤκουε, ταῦτα βλέπουσα ἡ μαινὰς, καὶ φοβηθεῖσα μὴ ὁ ἔλεγχος ὀφθῇ κρείττων τοῦ ἔρωτος, ἑαυτὴν σχηματίσασα πρὸς τὸ σκυθρωπότερον, καὶ λοιβάδα δακρύων ἐξεστάξασα, πρὸς τὸν θηλυμανῆ ἐσχετλίαζε· Τί τούτου γένοιτ’ ἂν δεινότερον, λέγουσα, τὸν ἐπὶ θώκου βασιλικοῦ ἐφεζόμενον, καὶ λαμπρυνόμενον ἁλουργίδι καὶ διαδήματι, ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίου σακκοφοροῦντος καὶ αὐχμοῦντος ὑβρίζεσθαι, καὶ ἀπείργεσθαι πληροῦντα θυμήρη, καὶ φίλα, ἐξὸν βασιλικῇ ἐξουσίᾳ τεμεῖν τὴν γλῶσσαν τὴν ἀναιδῆ, καὶ ὑβρίστριαν, ἢ θηρίοις τὸν τολμητίαν ποιῆσαι βοράν, ἥκιστα δὲ ὑποπτήσσειν καὶ μαλθακίζεσθαι. Ὑποχαυνωθεὶς οὖν τοῖς λόγοις τῆς καστωρίδος ὁ δείλαιος (πειθανοὶ γὰρ λόγοι μαχλάδος πρὸς ἐραστὴν βλάκα δάκρυσι κεκραμμένοι) θανάτῳ μὲν σβέσαι τὸν λύχνον οὐκ ἐδοκίμαζε, τὴν ἀρετὴν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς σεβαζόμενος, καλύπτει γε μὴν τοῦτον ὑπὸ τὸν μόδιον, ἐγκλείσας εἰρκτῇ, καὶ ποδοκάκκῃ ἐνθείς. Ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε τοῦ προφήτου τὸ στόμα σεσίγηκεν, οὔτε ὁ θυμὸς τῆς μαχλάδος ἐλώφησεν. Ἔρις δὲ συνειστήκει ἀμφοῖν· τοῦ μὲν προφήτου, ὅπως τοῦ μύσους ἀπαλλάξῃ τὸν βασιλέα· τῆς δὲ μαχλάδος, ὅπως τὸν κωλυτὴν τοῦ πόθου ἀποσκευάσηται, καὶ εὐκαιρίαν ἐζήτει τὸν ἀκόλαστον ἐμπλῆσαι θυμόν· καὶ μέντοι τετύχηκε τοῦ βουλεύματος· ἀεὶ γὰρ τὰ χείρω νικᾷ. Γενομένης γὰρ ἡμέρας εὐκαίρου, καὶ τῶν γενεθλίων ἐνστάντων, καθ’ C D [index: entries preserved]
καθ’ ἦν ἡμέραν ὁ προφητοκτόνος οὗτος, ὡς οὐκ ὤφειλε, τῆς μητρικῆς νηδύος ὠλίσθηκε, πολυτελὴς μὲν εὐωχία τούτῳ ἡτοίμαστο, καὶ δαιτυμόνες πολλοὶ, καὶ μεγιστάνες ἐκέκληντο, καὶ χιλίαρχοι, καὶ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ὅσοι τὴν τύχην ἐπίδοξοι. Ἤδη δὲ τοῦ δείπνου ἀκμάζοντος, ὁ δειπνοκλήτωρ γενόμενος πάροινος, ἄλλην παρασκευάζει τοῦ δείπνου τρυφήν, θυγάτριον ἦν τῇ Ἡρωδιάδι ἐκ τῶν τοῦ Φιλίππου νομίμων κηδευμάτων τεχθέν, ἀστεῖον μὲν καὶ τὴν ὄψιν οὐκ ἄωρον, ἄλλως δὲ ἱταμὸν, καὶ προπετές, καὶ ἀναίσχυντον, καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς τῆς ἀσπίδος μητρὸς ἀπεικόνισμα. Ταύτην κοσμήσασα ἡ μοιχαλὶς μήτηρ ἀβρότερον, καὶ νυμφικῶς περιστείλασα, πρὸς τοὺς εὐωχουμένους ἐρχησομένην ἐξέπεμψεν. Ἡ δὲ ὡς ἐν μέσῳ γένοιτο τῶν δαιτυμόνων, πρὸς τὸ μὴ αἰσχυνθῆναι κορικῶς ἀποξέσασα τῶν προσώπων αἰδῶ, ὥσπερ κορυβαντιῶσα ἐβάκχευε, σοβοῦσα τὴν κόμην, ἀσέμνως λυγιζομένη, ἀνατείνουσα τὴν ὠλένην, παραγυμνοῦσα τὰ στέρνα, θάτερον τοῖν ποδοῖν ἀναστέλλουσα, τῇ ταχείᾳ τοῦ σώματος συστροφῇ παραγυμνουμένη, καὶ τάχα τι καὶ τῶν ἀπορρήτων ὑποδεικνύουσα· ἀναιδεῖ τε προσώπῳ τοὺς τῶν παρόντων ὀφθαλμοὺς εἰς ἑαυτὴν ἐπιστρέφουσα, καὶ σχήμασι παντοδαποῖς ἔκπληκτα ποιοῦσα τῶν θεατῶν τὰ φρονήματα. Ἦν δὲ ἄρα τότε ὁ κτηνώδης Ἡρώδης σωφρονοῦσιν ἀνθρώποις, ὡς εἰκὸς, καταγέλαστος, μείρακα παρθένον τό γε δοκεῖν ὄψεσιν ἀρρένων οὕτω παρασκευάσας ἀναισχυντεῖν· πρόσθεσις δὲ τοῦ κακοῦ, ὅτι καὶ ἤρεσεν αὐτῷ τῆς μαιναδογενούς ποδοστρόφου ἡ ὄρχησις. Τῷ δὲ τῆς μητρὸς αὐτῆς ἔρωτι καὶ τῇ μέθῃ κάτοχος ὢν, καίτοι μηδὲν αἰτησάσης τῆς νεήλυδος, ἄχρι τοῦ τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτῇ διελεῖν ἐπηγγείλατο ἀντὶ πορνικῶν λυγισμάτων, καὶ ποδῶν ἀτάκτου στροφῆς, καὶ ὅρκον τῇ ἐπαγγελίᾳ ἐπέθηκε τὸ τῆς ἀκολασίας ἀνδράποδον. Τί οὖν τῆς ἐχίδνης τὸ γέννημα διδάσκεται παρὰ τῆς μητρός; οὐχ ὅρμον αἰτῆσαι μαργύρων, οὐ πέπλον βασιλικόν, οὐχ ἱμάτιον σηρικόν, οὐ θέριστρον, οὐδὲ κρήδεμνον, ταῦτα δὴ περὶ ἃ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ τῶν νεανίδων ἐπτύονται, ἀλλ’ ἀντ’ ἄλλης πάσης φιλοφροσύνης τὴν κεφαλὴν αἰτῆσαι τοῦ τὸν ἔρωτα λῦσαι σπουδάζοντος, καὶ ταύτην ἐξ αὐτῆς. « Δός μοι γάρ, φησίν, ἐξ αὐτῆς, ἐπὶ πίνακος τὴν κεφαλὴν Ἰωάννου τοῦ Βαπτιστοῦ. » Ἐδεδοίκει γὰρ ἡ Ἡρωδιάς, μὴ ἐξοινήσας Ἡρώδης ἀπείποι τὸ δώρημα. Ὁ δὲ· ἄθρει δὴ ψυχὴν παρασυμβληθεῖσαν τοῖς κτήνεσιν· Ἐλυπήθη A μέγιστον ὅτι τιμῆς ὀρεγόμενος παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως ἢ παρὰ μεγιστάνων Ἡρώδης, ἐν παρονομασίᾳ ἦν δὲ χοιρώδης Ἡρώδης.
Ἡρώδης. He says, "but because of the oaths and those reclining with him, he did not wish to slight her." This appearance of grief was a fabrication and a pretext. For the sworn promise he had made extended to half of the kingdom. This would include land, estates, money, and herds, not the head of a prophet, for which not even the whole world would be a sufficient price. The all-holy head is therefore severed—a head to be honored even by the angels themselves. O detestable mind, which plotted such a murder! O execrable tongue, which decreed such a sentence! O audacious hand, which served this end! And it is brought in on a platter, dripping with blood, a somber spectacle for the guests—for those who were reveling and drunken—that man who, through his abstinence from food, vied almost with the angels themselves. And that lascivious harlot took delight and mocked the one who was passionless and a virgin, seeing at last that most pleasant sight for her, and one long desired. And as if fearing that it might be united to the rest of the body and come to life, and once again fasten upon its customary reproofs, she hides it in the depths of the earth, while the disciples took the remaining holy body and committed it to the ground.
Thus, then, did the events concerning the holy Forerunner come to pass. For it was fitting, it was truly fitting, that he who was born from the Levitical loins, and who, being from both lines of descent, was an Aaronite, should clothe himself in the sacred scarlet, dyed by the stains of his own blood; and that the one who was the greatest among those born of women should not be left behind by those who attained perfection through blood. And just as he was endowed with other titles of honor, neither was he devoid of the title of martyr. He departs, therefore, just as he had done on earth, so also to those in Hades to proclaim the descent of the Savior—the cessation of the old, the beginning of the new; the mediator between both; the voice, the lamp, the daystar, the angel, the apostle, the Levite, the Aaronite, the prophet, the mountaineer, the Baptist, the herald, the forerunner, the virgin, the teacher of repentance, the reprimand of sin, the martyr; for this he has placed as a sort of most beautiful seal upon his names.
We, therefore, O Christ-named assembly, let us celebrate his holy martyrdom spiritually, and let us take great heed to ourselves, lest the things of Herod happen also to us; for it happens in any case, in a different manner, to those who do not watch carefully. For whenever the mind turns away from the daughter of King Aretas, who is joined to it according to the divine law—you understand, "Aretas" to signify virtue, for this is the most honorable and natural spouse of the mind—whenever, then, it pushes her aside and embraces the intruding and adulterous vice, having become greedy for bodily pleasures, then it becomes Herod outright. For "Herod" is interpreted as "fleshy," or else [the text continues]
A that which is depicted as earthy in its mindset. When, therefore, desire masters the mind through sin, then, truly then, it persuades the one who is rebuking, John, to be delivered into prison. Understand what is hidden in this enigma: John is the grace of the Word given to us by God, or the conscience of each person that troubles him while he is sinning. Sin seeks to make this grace of God disappear from us so that, not being goaded by the rebukes of conscience, we may not cast out the intruder through repentance and receive the rightful spouse. And, by advising us, it persuades—as it mostly does those who are not vigilant—and the one rebuking is shut up in prison. You might understand "prison" to be the habit of evil. The Word is thus hidden from us once the habit of sin has taken hold, and the mind is drunk with its own companions—that is to say, with its own thoughts. The daughter of sin, pleasure, dances wildly against our foolishness B, fawning upon us from every side and seeking as a reward the death of John. For she fears that, once released from prison, he might unravel that unlawful marriage with his frequent rebukes. How much wisdom the history indicates through these things! Once the devil has brought us into the habit of evil, he still fears lest we should recover our senses, and so he drives us toward despair. This indeed is the murder of John, and thus the grace of the Word within us dies, as it were, beheaded by the sword of despair. When, therefore, this happens, salvation departs from us: "For having heard," it says, "Jesus departed." That this may not happen to us, let us strive to flee that "Herodias" formed of skin, and instead to embrace and desire the spouse of the mind, virtue, the daughter of the King, Christ, following the example of the patriarch Abraham who, having cast out the handmaid C according to the divine command, kept the free woman. For it is not right for malice to dwell in the soul of the patriarch alongside virtue, which the Word hinted at through the handmaid and the free woman. For in truth the offspring of vice shall not inherit with the noble descendants of virtue, nor shall it set foot on the intelligible land of promise which the meek shall inherit according to the divine voice. May we also set foot upon it, and may we enjoy the everlasting goods within it, through the intercessions of that great prophet, forerunner, and Baptist John, and by the grace of the super-luminous and life-originating Trinity, known in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the undivided and consubstantial nature, to which belongs all honor, glory, praise, and magnificence, now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
HOMILY XII. On the Drought That Occurred
"Who will give to my head water, and to my eyes
A a fountain of tears?" B Let Jeremiah, that most compassionate of the prophets, provide me with the proemium of my discourse. But while he lamented the desolation of a single city, Jerusalem, I, seeing the scourge that has come upon all this surrounding region, am moved to lamentations and tears. For the heaven has been shut up because of our sins, and by the solar heat the clouds have been scorched as if they were chaff. The springs of the waters have been dried up, and the streams of the perennial rivers have failed. The earth, scorched by the heat, refuses to yield its accustomed fruits. Alas for our misfortunes! Even the irrational animals themselves are in jeopardy because of our sins. For the grass for them has dried up—or rather, it did not even sprout—and they are perishing with hunger; and the ox bellows pitifully, as if in the throes of death; and the flocks bleat with a mournful bleating, as they gaze upon the drinking-water set before them as though it were a burning crater, and the crops are withering before their time, so that the words of the prophecy of Joel seem to be fulfilled in us now: "The herds of cattle have wept, because there was no pasture for them, and the flocks of sheep have perished, because the outpourings of the waters have dried up." To such an extent have our offenses provoked the merciful and gentle nature of God into just wrath. And since we do not cease to light the fire of sins every day, it is fitting that we are being punished with drought and heat. Perhaps the prophet also cries out to us: "Walk in the light of your fire and in the flame which you have kindled." C For He promised the Israelites through the prophet that if they kept His commandments, He would send the early rain and... D [The remainder of the Greek column is lost in the current page structure; the Latin column below acts as a scholarly discursive apparatus concerning the historical context of the drought mentioned.]
THEOPHANES CERAMEUS
...may Jeremiah, that prophet most apt for compassion, afford me the proemium of his speech. But he, indeed, lamented the desolation of one city—Jerusalem; I, however, because I see this plague now pressing upon this whole surrounding region, am moved to lamentations and tears. For the heaven is, as it were, shut up because of our sins, and the clouds are dried up by the sun's fire as if they were chaff. The fountains of the waters have dried up, and the springs of the perennial rivers have failed. Indeed, the earth, scorched by the heat, refuses to yield its accustomed fruits. Woe to our miseries! Even the very animals that lack reason are in danger because of our sins. For the hay has been dried up for them, or rather, it did not sprout, and they are wasting away with hunger. And the ox indeed bellows in a wretched manner, as if at the point of death; and the flocks cry out with a mournful bleat, while they see the potion of water set before them as if it were a burning crater, and the crops withered before their time: so that that prophecy of Joel seems now to be fulfilled in us: "The herds of cattle have wept, because there were no pastures for them: and the flocks of sheep have perished, because the outpourings of the waters have been dried up." So far have our transgressions provoked the mild and placable nature of God to just wrath; and since we do not desist from daily kindling the fire of our sins, we are deservedly punished by drought and scorching heat. Perhaps, indeed, the prophet cries out against us: "Walk in the light of your fire and in the flame which you have kindled." C He promised the Israelites through the prophet that if they kept His commandments, it would come to pass that... [Note: The rest of the Latin text provides a long historical analysis and scholarly conjecture by Franciscus Scorsus regarding the chronology of the drought and the authorship of the homily, concluding that it was delivered by Theophanes at Tauromenium.] [index: entries preserved]HOMILY LXII
A ...God would send "the early and the latter rain, and the barns would be filled with wheat and the winepresses with wine." But for us, this promise has been turned into the opposite, or rather, the imprecation of Jeremiah has overtaken us: "The heaven that is over thy head shall be as brass," B by which threatening words a total drought and lack of water is signified. And has this not just now been fulfilled for us? For the earth, cracked by drought and as if turned to stone, has rendered the labor of the farmers vain, admitting neither plowing nor digging. The crops, having sprouted a little and offered good hope, withered and perished before the ear could fill. Only the leafage of the vines and plants remains, perhaps also revealing the imminent withering that is to come. Such is the fruit of sins, such are the crops of wickedness. For we did not walk in the ways of the Lord, but we were enslaved to evil deeds, envying one another, being arrogant toward the lowly and poor, desiring to be filled with the goods of others, rejoicing in the misfortune of our neighbor, consuming one another with slander, being led by absurd desires, having become "lustful stallions," as the Scripture says, and ravenous wolves, and nursing grudges like camels, showing no mercy to the poor, having no sympathy for those who stumble, neglecting the holy assemblies of the Church, despising the saints, not honoring their memories; avoiding confession as those who are delirious avoid their physicians. C The priests have become a bad example to the people, abusing others, holding grudges, harboring enmity, plotting, being respecters of persons, neither reproving nor correcting the offender, but by their silence becoming participants in the injustice, like that ancient Eli. The laity, for their part, neglecting to examine their own affairs, scrutinize the affairs of the priests, and are implacable judges. Do I not speak the truth? Is our city not full of these evils? And do I not testify to these things every day? Did I not labor, crying out and admonishing them to abstain from... D
do I not predict that the Lord would vent His anger against us, seeing the holy Gospel A held in contempt, and grasped by rapacious hands shamelessly and without reverence? Take, therefore, the fruits of that field which you acquired through perjury, which will not even yield the seeds that were sown. Nor will your vineyard, which you seized through greed, bring you a vintage. For the things that God once threatened to the Jews through Micah, these have now been fulfilled in us: "You shall sow, but you shall not reap; you shall press the olive, but you shall not be anointed with oil, and you shall not drink wine."
What then? someone might say, surely not everyone is greedy, nor is everyone perjured. How then, when only a few sin, is the wormwood of God’s anger poured out upon all in common? For it would seem just that only the wicked should bear the punishment. But just as in one body, if an infiltration of fluid occurs in a single member, the whole body requires purgation, so too with us; since we are one body, and all members of Christ, when one part is afflicted, we all become partners in the sorrow. Thus, once, when the son of Saul sinned, the whole army was chastised. And when David numbered the people contrary to the pleasure of God, a common destruction ensued. External learning also says this: that often an entire city has suffered for the wickedness of one man. Therefore, the cup of God’s anger is seasoned for us unmixed. "For," it says, "a cup is in the hand of the Lord, full of unmixed wine." B Do you see how the nature of this cup is ambivalent? For if it is unmixed, how is it full of a mixture? For what is mixed is certainly not unmixed. Here, however, both terms are used. And it is "unmixed" as being untempered by divine mercies for those who fail in ways that go uncorrected, due to the justice of the judgment; but it is "mixed," as being from the diverse scourges with which God knows how to punish those who persist in known evils. For just as those who heal the diseases of the body, and have practiced the skill of being able to cure, cleanse the more callous wounds with hot water and sharp medicines, and thin out by the remedies derived from their art the thickness of the corruption existing in them; so too God, who knows all things, burdens those who do not feel the lighter punishments with harsher wounds, the onset of which it would be better to avert before the ordeal. What then shall we say to these things that have come upon us? Just is the judgment of God; or rather, the most benevolent Lord has lightened the punishment far beyond His just wrath, providing not as much as we deserve to experience, but as much as is needed to gain a perception of the things for which we have sinned. C For look at the long-suffering of God: we have sinned, [but] will not yield the seeds that were sown,
elements are punished; we offend, and the earth is chastised; we live an evil life, and inanimate things are scourged; by our shameful deeds we do injury to the Creator, and those that have sinned in nothing receive the penalty: just as if someone, upon his son’s failing, were to subject the slave to torment. Such a good Master do we have; in this way He admonishes us, so that He may lead us back to correction. He stretches the bow of threatening, but He holds back the arrow of wrath. For He does not desire the death of our soul, but awaits our conversion and repentance. Let us therefore, brethren, come to a perception of what is fitting; let us render the compassionate Lord propitious to us; let us not prove ourselves worse than the Ninevites. They, although they were Gentiles and unbelievers, as soon as they learned from the prophet of the destruction of their city, showed such repentance that they compelled even the infants and the cattle to fast, and they clothed themselves in ash and sackcloth, and thus were delivered from the just wrath of God. Let us also weep, then, and let each one of us confess his own transgressions; let us take to ourselves the saints as intercessors to God, as well as others, and in particular the most holy Lady, the swift and invincible protection; let us fall before her, praying with tears. O sovereign Lady, who conceived the Word, God, in your womb beyond reason, who deified our nature by your birth-giving, who acted as mediator between God and men by your childbirth, have mercy upon your people and your inheritance; have compassion upon this your city, which glories in your name. Intercede for us, your unworthy servants; entreat your only-begotten Son to be long-suffering regarding our transgressions, and to dissolve this just wrath against us, and to command the clouds to pour down rain as they are accustomed, and to break the drought, and to cool the burning of the earth. Yes, Lady, the recovery of the world, have mercy on the suckling infants, the exhausted old men, the impoverished who are withered up; do not allow us to perish by our sins. We have sinned, we have acted unjustly, we have defiled the pure garment of baptism, we have disregarded the commands of the Master; but even if we have stumbled, we do not know any other God, except your only-begotten Son, who with the Father and the Holy Spirit is glorified unto the ages. Amen.
Nilus Doxapatrius Notice
Nilus, or Nicholas, surnamed Doxapatrius, originally archimandrite of the Greek Church, whose place of birth is uncertain and unknown, later became patriarchal notary of the Great Church of Constantinople and protoproedros of the syncelli, and at the same time nomophylax of the Roman Empire. That he lived for some time in Palermo, in Sicily, he himself is our witness. He flourished in the year 1144. Prompted by letters from Roger, King of Sicily, he wrote a short work, *On the Sees of the Major Patriarchs*, which he later elaborated into a fuller work in the aforementioned year, in which he clearly treats of the five patriarchal thrones, the archbishops, metropolitans, and bishops subject to them, and the institution, order, and proper names of the patriarchal sees. Of this *Notitia* of the patriarchates, Leo Allatius presents many very ample and truly illustrious fragments in *De concordia Ecclesiae Orientalis et Occidentalis*, Book 1, chapters 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 24. A complete book, described from a manuscript of Bonaventura Wulocanius from a more recent hand in 1631, was brought to light in Greek and Latin by Stephanus Le Moine in the volume *Variorum sacrorum*, page 211, at Leiden in the year 1685, in quarto. William Cave is significantly mistaken when he makes this writer one hundred years older than he almost certainly was, asserting that he flourished in the year 1043 of the eleventh century. He would have had a different opinion if he had attended, even for a moment, to the work of his which he had in his hands. For there he states explicitly that he composed this short work, as he himself testifies, in the year 6651 of the Greeks of Constantinople, that is, in the year of Christ 1143. Certainly, Nilus Doxapatrius is explicitly referred to the year 1143 by Charles du Fresne, Lord du Cange, in the index of authors which he appended to the end of his *Glossarium mediae et infimae Graecitatis*, columns 57 and 58, in these words: "Nilus Doxapatrius, archimandrite, concerning the five patriarchal sees, of whose books excerpts are described by Leo Allatius in his book *De consensu utriusque Ecclesiae*, pages 15, 160, 165, 167, 173, 195, 215, 239, 255, 409, 522, 532. He lived under King Roger in Sicily in the year 1143. Published recently by Stephanus Le Moine, 1685." In the Parisian edition of all the works of St. Athanasius, 1698, by the Anisson brothers, among the *Lives and Eulogies of St. Athanasius* in the Preludes, page clxiv, is mentioned the Doxapatrius who wrote by hand the Basilian codex of Athanasius's works, and the discourse *Against the Arians* on the praise of Athanasius at the beginning of this codex, edited by Peter Felckmann in Greek at Heidelberg in 1600, and in the Parisian edition of 1698. It also exists in a manuscript Greek historical codex of the Imperial Library of Vienna, codex 47, number 2, as Petrus Lambecius has it, in volume VIII of the commentaries of this library, page 457, in these words: "Secondly, and indeed from folio 125, page 1, up to folio 153, page 1, of Nicholas, patriarchal notary of the Great Church of Constantinople, and protoproedros of the syncelli, and at the same time nomophylax of the Roman Empire, by the surname Doxapatrius, Exposition on the Tetrastich Iambics of St. Gregory of Nazianzus, and some other poems of his." It is inscribed and begins in this way: "Exposition of the Tetrastich Iambics of our Father among the saints, Gregory the Theologian, by Nicholas, patriarchal notary of the Great Church of God of Constantinople, and protoproedros, surnamed Doxapatrius. The epigram of the verses: I am the toil of Gregory, observing the tetrastich, etc." When this preface is finished, follows the beginning of the Tetrastichs themselves: "Opinion 1. Prefer action, or contemplation, etc." The exposition which follows begins with these words: "Since true philosophy, which Christ and the apostles have handed down to us in the Gospels and the remaining holy books of the Acts and the Epistles, is twofold, being on the one hand practical and on the other theoretical, etc." More about these Tetrastichs and other poems of St. Gregory of Nazianzus, see volume II of his works, edited in folio in Greek and Latin at Paris by Frédéric Morel in 1611; and indeed primarily page 156, where those very Tetrastichs exist, and column 1405 and following, where the commentary of Nicetas of Dadybra on the same Tetrastichs is exhibited in Latin, with the inserted scholia of Jacques Billi. But concerning the Exposition of that Nicholas Doxapatrius, which exists in the present imperial manuscript codex, no mention at all is made there, because it was unknown to both Billi and Morel. Bernard de Montfaucon, a Benedictine monk of the congregation of Saint-Maur in France, took care to publish the *Diarium Italicum* at Paris in the year 1702 by Jean Anisson, in which very many things pertaining to the libraries of Italy are contained. There, then, in chapter 15, he speaks of the monastery and library of the monks of St. Basil the Greek in Rome. Which monastery, formerly very small and of no name, is now adorned by the zeal of the Reverend Father Petrus Mennitius, prefect of the order, with a festive abundance of Greek codices. For he, because he had received these codices lying untouched and neglected in the various monasteries of Calabria subject to him, due to the almost obsolete use of the Greek language, removed them from the impending exile and brought them to the city for use.
ANNO DOMINI MCXLIII
NOTITIA ON NILUS DOXAPATRIUS
The learned Bernard de Montfaucon attended to this. He relates this in chapter 15, page 210, and then on page 216, among the manuscripts of this library, one stands out about which he writes thus: “In a paper manuscript of the 12th century, the Nomocanon of Doxapatrius, edited by the order of Emperor John Comnenus, as the title indicates, for it reads thus: ‘Nomocanon, through God assisting, compiled in summary, containing all the canons of the holy and ecumenical seven synods, and of the holy apostles, and of the great Basil, and of other God-bearing Fathers; given interpretation by the order of the most pious emperor, Lord John Comnenus, by the work of the most learned deacon of the Great Church of God, and nomophylax (or guardian of the laws) of the Roman empire, patriarchal notary, and protoproedros of the protosyncelli, Doxapatris.’” In the same place, “Nomocanon” occurs twice as described above, so that there may be no doubt about the reading. I translate the preceding as follows: Nomocanon, by the favor of God, compiled, comprising in the manner of a synopsis all the canons of the holy and ecumenical seven synods, and of the holy apostles and of the great Basil, and of other God-bearing Fathers; having been donated with an interpretation by the order of the most pious emperor, Lord John Comnenus, by the work of the most learned deacon of the Great Church of God, and nomophylax of the Roman empire, patriarchal notary, and protoproedros of the protosyncelli, Doxapatris.
Then follow the canons with the explanations of Doxapatris, namely: canon 1 [of the first and second council], canons 102 of the Apostles; canons 17 of [the council of] Sophia; canons 3 [of the first and second council], canon 1. A rescript at Constantinople to Martyrius, bishop of Antioch, canon 1. Two canons. Two canons, that is, chapters or canons of the Golden Bull of Justinian, which is in the Great Church no. 6. Of [the measure of] sins, of the Great Basil on the title and time of sins, canons 27. Of Peter of Antioch, which is numbered as, it reads thus: “Peter of Antioch against the bishop of Venice; this occurred in the time of the patriarch, Lord Alexius. Nowhere is it written that the presiding bishop of Aquileia, or of Venice, is to be called patriarch. For we know of only five patriarchs in the whole world: the Roman, the Constantinopolitan, the Alexandrian, the Antiochene, and the Hierosolymitan; for just as our body is governed by five senses, in the same way the body of Christ, that is, the Church of the faithful, is governed by five senses, namely the same number of thrones.”
Then follow these: Questions of John, a monk of the Sacred Mountain. Euphemianus, metropolitan of Thessalonica, solutions in 12 chapters to Gerasimus, a monk of the Sacred Mountain. To the same, he who has the surname Chumnus, responses. Some things from the Novels of Justinian. We omit the rest of this manuscript codex, which the cited Bernard de Montfaucon enumerates on pages 218 and 220, as not suiting our purpose. There follows in the same codex the encomium of Theodore the Studite on saint John the evangelist. Likewise, some questions. The procession concludes with the work of the Great Basil on the sacred liturgy not to be despised. Therefore, Nilus Doxapatris or Doxapatrius wrote this Nomocanon by the order of Emperor John Comnenus, and at the same time others of the same age wrote on the same subject, Alexius Aristenus and Simeon Logothete, or the one called Metaphrastes, of whom we treat here in the same age. The same Bernard de Montfaucon discusses this collection of canons in more detail in his book *Palaeographia Graeca*, chapter 6, page 320, and book IV, chapter 6, page 302, which he had printed in Paris in folio in the year 1708 at the house of Ludovicus Guerin, the widow of Joannes Boudot, and Carolus Robustel. Besides Allatius in the cited places, Petrus Lambecius in volume VIII of the *Commentaries of the Imperial Library of Vienna*, page 457, and in the *Catalog of writers of this volume*, and Guillelmus Cave in the *History of ecclesiastical writers*, century XI, treat of Nilus or Nicolaus Doxapatrius.
NILUS DOXAPATRIUS’ NOTICE OF THE PATRIARCHAL THRONES
A A treatise composed by Nilus, archimandrite of Doxapatrius, at the order of the most noble great king Roger, concerning the five patriarchal thrones, and the archiepiscopates and metropolises subject to them, and the bishoprics subject to the metropolises, and the parishes of each patriarchal throne; and how and when each patriarchal throne was established, and concerning their order, and the proper names of each, and what place they hold. Composed in the year 6651, indiction 6.
Most noble lord of mine, I remember the subject about which you wrote to me, that when I was in the castle of Panormus, I wrote to your Excellency, though not as extensively as you have now requested. But now the things asked of me are many and require a more detailed writing and account. For this reason, disregarding all labor (for this is a debt that must be paid, to fulfill with my whole soul what is commanded me by your most magnificent highness, especially with the added exhortation of my holy Father), I will attempt, as briefly as my capability allows, to set forth in a clear writing all that has been commanded.
We must begin thus. According to the ancient wise men, historians and geographers, the whole world is divided into three parts: into Asia, that is to say the East; into Europe, namely the West; and into Libya. Why each part was so named is not the time to say. Therefore, the four great kingdoms, which the prophet Daniel foretold, two of them were in Asia: the first, namely, that of the Babylonians and Assyrians and Medes, and that which followed it, the Persian kingdom; but the other two were in Europe, the third, namely the...
Macedonians, and the fourth and last, being the greatest of all, the Roman. There were also, in various regions, very great kingdoms and partial domains, as in Egypt and in Jerusalem, and in other places. Since, therefore, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was born in the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus Caesar, who was the first to rule as monarch in Rome and who performed the census of the whole world, and after the Lord’s ascension into heaven, the most wise apostles traversed the entire world and proclaimed the pious and true faith therein, it was absolutely necessary that the things of the faith should not be limited to the duration of their own lives, but should remain unshaken until the consummation of the age, and should be preserved by those who succeeded to their thrones. For this reason, as they traveled through the regions, they appointed bishops in them—men capable, faithful, and worthy of trust in every aspect of a life pleasing to God.
Therefore, even the great apostle Peter, before the other Gentile cities that first believed—namely those in Antioch in Coele-Syria (for it took precedence over all the cities in Asia and the East)—established a Church there, and having ordained Euodius as bishop in his place, he departed for Rome, the ruler at that time of all cities, the one that holds the preeminence over all the cities of Europe; and having established a Church there, and appointed Linus as bishop in it (as some say, that having found Linus already set in place by the holy Paul, he accepted him, and after the death of Linus, he appointed Xystus as bishop, and then after him, Clement). And thus, having himself acted as bishop first in the two parts of the world—namely Asia and Europe—in the preeminent cities, and having appointed others in his place, he took care also to install a bishop in the third part of the world, Africa (Libya). And so, from Rome he sent to Egypt and to Alexandria, the chief city of all Libya, the apostle and evangelist Mark, who, having arrived at Alexandria and established a Church, illuminated all of Libya.
But the remaining apostles also, going everywhere and preaching, appointed bishops in every city to which they arrived. Yet the preeminent ones were the three aforementioned: he of Asia—that is, of the whole East—the one of Antioch; he of Europe—that is, of the West—the one of Rome; and he of Libya, the one of Alexandria, under whom was also all of Palestine, in which is Jerusalem; for Palestine is Libya. In Jerusalem, however, there remained the bishop established there by the Lord Himself, the blessed apostle James, the brother of God. Jerusalem, therefore, was also under Libya. D The bishop of Rome possessed all of Europe, up to the borders of the Mazes, and the Gauls, Spain, Francia, and Illyricum, as far as Gades and the pillars of Hercules, the Ocean which lies toward the setting of the sun.
A In which there are dead and marshy waters, and an island near the ends of the Ocean abounding in men, and it is a vast multitude of Christians, extending its ecclesiastical boundaries as far as Ravenna, the Longobards, and Thessalonica, the Slavs, the Avars, and the Scythians to the Danube river; and Mancaria, and a part of the western regions, and a part of Sicily and Calabria; in which blow the winds North, Pareas, Clobeus, Zephyrus, Western, and Libonotus; and the entire western shore as far as Byzantium, and all the islands lying between, namely Sardinia, Sicily, Crete, Euboea, and Majorca itself. And the Peloponnese, and all Hellas, and all the provinces and regions of Europe, and Spain and the upper Gauls, and those extending beyond the Alps, and the British islands as far as the western Ocean and Gades and the Herculean pillars; and the lower Gauls, which are the Italies, or Lombardy—or what is now called Longobardia—and Apulia, and Calabria, and all Campania, and also the province of Byzacium, in which is Carthage, and Mauritania, and Venice, and the provinces which extend beyond the Adriatic gulf, namely Pannonia, and all Illyricum, Macedonia, and Thrace, where Byzantium is, and all the western regions extending beyond them—all these were subject to Rome. B Again, the [Patriarch] of Antioch possessed the whole of Asia and the East, and India itself—into which even to this present time he ordains and sends a Catholicus called the Romogyreos—and Persia itself, and even Babylon, which is now called Bagdad; for thither also the Antiochene used to send a Catholicus into the city of Irenopolis, called the [Catholicus] of Irenopolis, and the Armenias, and Abasgia, and Iberia, and Media, and the land of the Chaldeans, and Parthia, and the Elamites, and Mesopotamia. C There are, therefore, thirteen metropolises today: 1. That of Tyre, which has under it thirteen bishops; 2. That of Tarsus, which has under it six; 3. That of Edessa, which has under it eleven; 4. That of Apamea, which has under it seven; 5. That of Hierapolis, which has under it nine; 6. That of Bostra, which has under it twenty; 7. That of Azardum, which has under it nine; 8. That of Seleucia of Isauria, which has under it twenty-four; 9. That of Damascus, which has under it eleven; 10. That of Amida, which has under it eight; 11. That of Sergiopolis, which has under it five; 12. That of Dara, which has under it ten; 13. That of Emesa, which has under it four. Antioch also has other metropolises, D not having bishops under them, which are eight in number. For these were episcopal sees previously subject to other metropolises, but were honored as metropolises themselves, and [decreed] to be subject not to another metro-
metropolis, but to the Patriarch of Antioch himself, and to be autocephalous, as [are] the other metropolises. Therefore, because they were formerly episcopal sees, they do not have bishops under them, as the ancient metropolises do. There are, therefore, these eight metropolises: 1. Berytus; 2. Heliopolis, which was severed from the throne of Damascus; 3. Laodicea; 4. Samosata; 5. Martyropolis; 6. Mopsuestia; 7. Adana; 8. Pompeiopolis. Furthermore, Antioch also possesses eight great archbishoprics: 1. Beroea; 2. Chalcedon; 3. Agaballa; 4. Seleucia Pieria; 5. Anasartha, which is also called Theodoropolis; 6. Paltus; 7. Gabala; 8. Balaama. Furthermore, it possesses five simple and exempt archbishoprics: 1. Salamias; 2. Bercum; 3. Rhasus; 4. Agathem; 5. Barcusorum. B All these churches are subject to the throne of Antioch, because, as we have said, it holds many provinces and regions under itself. For in addition to Babylon and India, and Persia, it holds the province of Coele-Syria, the first, where Antioch is; and the second; and Cilicia; and Isauria, which is also the province of Euphratensis; and Agiupolis; and Theodoriados of Osrhoene in Mesopotamia, that is, the fourth Armenia; and the borderlands; and the boundaries of Syria and Persia. It also possesses other diverse provinces, and not a few regions. It formerly held [territory] as far as Chalcedon, which is opposite Byzantium—the [city] now called Constantinople—situated on the Propontis, where there is also the place called Damalium. For a certain heifer—*damalis*—made of marble, was standing, erected upon a column. The Bishop of Antioch, therefore, held all these things. C But the Bishop of Alexandria also held all of Libya and Ethiopia, as far as Marmarica and the African Tripoli, and the whole of Egypt, and Palestine itself, where Jerusalem is. Therefore he too has various provinces and thirteen metropolises: the first province, the first of Stamnica, in which the first metropolis is Pelusium, having various episcopal sees; and the second province of Stamnica, in which is the second metropolis, Leonto, having various episcopal sees; and the first province of Egypt, in which is Alexandria, the head of them all; and the second province of Egypt; and the province of Arcadia, in which is the third metropolis, Oxyrhynchus, having various episcopal sees; and the second province of Thebais, in which is the fifth metropolis, Ptolemais, having under itself various episcopal sees; and the province of Libya, in which is the [sixth] metropolis, Darinco, having some episcopal sees. D Furthermore, Alexandria has another metropolis, which is the seventh, Maria, and an eighth, Tonesis, situated at the seventh mouth of the Nile. For the Nile has seven mouths, in which are various cities. These, then, are the eight metropolises of Alexandria, which have various episcopal sees under them. There are also five other metropolises of it that do not have episcopal sees under them. These are Damiata, Sata, [the one] of the Red Sea, Pharan, and Are; altogether thirteen. The Alexandrian [throne] also had other diverse thrones,
but after the coming of the heresy of Severus, they were snatched away by the Severians, just as it had also the entire hold over Jerusalem, and Jerusalem itself, and all the chairs that now fall under the jurisdiction of the chair of Jerusalem. For it had also all of Palestine at that time, as we said before, and other provinces. It still holds the province of Libya Pentapolis and the province of Tripoli of Barbary, so that from this the dispute between the [patriarch] of Alexandria and the [patriarch] of Carthage is resolved. For there are two Tripolises: one is from the East, and it is the thirteenth bishopric of Tyre under the province of the Phoenician coast. And Tyre, as was written before, is the first metropolis of Antioch. This, then, is the one Tripolis. The other Tripolis is under the Egyptian administration, which is also the Libyan, called that of Barbary, subject to Alexandria, not itself a prototype. For it is not a metropolis, but a bishopric subject to one metropolis from among those of Alexandria. In vain, therefore, does the [patriarch] of Carthage seek this, he who is subject to the one presiding over Europe, namely [the patriarch] of Rome. In these [matters] are also the affairs of the chair of Alexandria, that is, of Libya, even if the whole East was called Asia, and all the West Europe. But there are some regions of the East which specifically use the name of Asia, as Ephesus in the Thracesion [theme], and Smyrna, and all those cities as we shall explain in order. Likewise, there are also in the West regions which use the label of Europe, as Heraclea in Thrace, near Constantinople. Similarly, even in Libya there are some regions specifically called Libya, as the province of Libya Pentapolis, as we wrote before. For this reason, as I think, these specifically employed the general names because each part began from there, namely the European from Thrace, and the Asian from Thracesion, and likewise the Libyan from Pentapolis. Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch administered the jurisdictions under them in this way: with no one daring to infringe upon the jurisdictions of others, nor to ordain, nor in any way to manage the clergy, they divided their jurisdictions one by one into exarchates, into metropolises, into archbishops, and into bishops; for since it was impossible for them by themselves to manage all their own jurisdictions, and to choose the bishops, and to ordain, and to examine, and to judge, and to investigate on account of the great length of the road; for this reason in the superior provinces and regions they established exarchs, and in the other provinces one metropolitan in each; but since under the same province there are many cities, they used to make one metropolitan, as has been said, the one in the superior city of the whole province, because this was, as it were, the mother of the cities under the same province; for this reason they also called the chief priest in it a metropolitan; but in the remaining lesser cities they used to make bishops. And if there were some cities in the same province that were [great]
major ones, and differing little from the first, caused them to be archiepiscopal sees; these had no bishops under them, for it was judged improper for two metropolitans to be in the same province, unless later, through imperial generosity, some bishopric was severed from a metropolis and honored as a metropolis by the emperor, or as an archiepiscopal see because of the virtue of the bishop at that time. And this also is called a metropolis, even if it does not have other cities under it or bishoprics of which it would be the metropolis. Now the exarchs of the provinces held the metropolitans under them, as it were, and ordained them, and likewise the archbishops, and judged them, while the metropolitans judged the bishops under their own provinces. The exarchs were each subject to their own head and to the greater throne. All of these—both the exarchs, and the metropolitans, and the archbishops, and the bishops—were each subordinate to a greater throne; and if the metropolitans or archbishops were dissatisfied with the judgments of the exarchs, or the bishops with those of the metropolitans, the former would appeal to higher authorities, and the bishops to the exarch, and from there to the greater one if they so desired. Meanwhile, exarchs were also called archbishops.
It must now be stated how those three great Churches governed all the Churches under themselves—namely Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch—and how the other two Churches, that of Constantinople and that of Aelia, or Jerusalem, became equal to them in dignity. For Jerusalem was later called Aelia from Aelius Hadrian, the Caesar of Rome. For he, after Vespasian and Titus, having destroyed Jerusalem because the Jews had rebelled again, was moved to anger and scattered them throughout all the inhabited world, selling them cheaply, having commanded that each one be sold for a small measure of barley; and having razed the city and the temple, he rebuilt the city in his own name, and the temple, where he set up his own idol for worship—the truly abominable thing of desolation—and commanded that from then on the city be called Aelia after his own name. After this, the throne of Jerusalem was honored by being severed from the diocese and power of the Alexandrians, and it became autocephalous, and a head, and equal in dignity to the three thrones. However, it was ordained that it should be honored, referred to, and take its seat after the throne of Antioch. The bishop of Jerusalem was also called a patriarch, although he was originally a bishop under the [bishop] of Caesarea in Palestine; for Palestine had Caesarea as its metropolis, under which Jerusalem was subject as a bishopric of it. It also had other metropolises possessing various bishoprics under them: namely, the second, Scythopolis, or Basan; the third, Petra; the fourth, Bostra, or Arabia. It also has twenty-five autocephalous bishoprics, having no bishoprics under them, which are subject to the throne of Jerusalem: 1st, of Diospolis, or
Lydda; 2nd, of Jericho; 3rd, of Azotus; 4th, of Gaza; 5th, of Anthedon; 6th, of Diocletianopolis; 7th, of Eleutheropolis; 8th, of Neapolis; 9th, of Sebaste; 10th, of the Jordan; 11th, of Tiberias; 12th, of Diocaesarea; 13th, of Maximianopolis; 14th, of Capetoliadem [Capitoliade]; 15th, of Muros; 16th, of Gadara; 17th, of Nazareth; 18th, of Mount Tabor; 19th, of Cyriacupolis; 20th, of Adria; 21st, of Gabala; 22nd, of Aelia; 23rd, of Phara; 24th, of Eusinoupolis; 25th, of Mount Sinai. A And thus these four great heads remained: Rome and Alexandria—each named Pope—then Antioch, then Jerusalem—each named Patriarch. By a common name, indeed, all are called bishops, archbishops, and fathers, whether greater or lesser; but the first three patriarchs obtained the name of "Pope," that is, fathers, for "papa" in translation means father. Yet they are also called archbishops. Nevertheless, by ancient custom, it has prevailed that the Roman is specifically called Pope, and similarly the Alexandrian Pope; but the Antiochene is proclaimed Patriarch of the whole East, according to the custom that held sway from the beginning. B The bishop of Jerusalem was also called a Patriarch, although he was formerly a bishop—namely, under the bishop of Caesarea in Palestine. Thus says the sixth canon of the holy and ecumenical first council of Nicaea: "Let the ancient customs prevail—those in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis—so that the Bishop of Alexandria may have authority over all these, since it is customary for the Bishop of Rome as well. Similarly at Antioch and in the other provinces, let the privileges be preserved to the Churches." In general, it is evident that if anyone becomes a bishop without the opinion of the metropolitan, the great synod decreed that such a person must not be a bishop. C The seventh canon of the same synod, regarding the bishop of Aelia, that is, Jerusalem, says: "Since custom has prevailed and an ancient tradition that the Bishop of Aelia be honored, let him have the order of honor, while the metropolitan dignity is preserved." What, then, is this? Caesarea, as has been shown, was the metropolis of Palestine, and it possessed the bishopric of Jerusalem. Thus the canon says: "Not because Jerusalem has become a patriarchate will that [metropolis] be diminished of its proper honor, nor will the bishopric fall from being a metropolis; D but it shall remain a metropolis even in this way, yet under the Patriarch of Jerusalem. And the Caesarean shall ordain, as before, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and this metropolis shall possess its proper dignity without innovation; since the metropolitan of Heraclea in Thracian Europe also ordains the Patriarch of Constantinople. For Byzantium was an under-bishopric of Heraclea, and the Heraclean himself used to ordain the bishop of Byzantium, where Constantinople was subsequently built. D Therefore, for the sake of the aforementioned canon, the Heraclean again ordains the [Patriarch] of Constantinople. But we shall speak of this immediately hereafter, when we discuss the throne of Constantinople—how it was honored...