Acts of the Martyrs

ACTS OF THE MARTYRS. -

I. ACTS OF THE GREEK AND LATIN MARTYRS

Under the name of acts of the martyrs (acta martyrum) we include that abundant literary production which has as its object the narration of the sufferings of the martyrs of the first Christian centuries in bearing witness to their faith. Less properly, therefore, one might include with them the inscriptions, panegyrics, and lyric poems that were composed in honor of the martyrs themselves. Such narratives are usually divided into three groups: 1) official documents drawn up by public scribes during the judicial proceedings, to be preserved in the archives (acta, gesta); for the most part, these have come down to us within a framework compiled by Christian writers in such a way as to render them edifying accounts: the best example is that of the acts of St. Cyprian; 2) narratives by eyewitnesses or by writers who had direct communication with eyewitnesses, always from Christian writers, who sometimes speak in the name of an entire Christian community, such as the acts of St. Polycarp, and thus offer the best guarantee of authenticity; 3) accounts (passiones) by authors who were not contemporaries and often centuries later than the events they narrate; in this case, it is the critic’s task to examine whether they worked from good sources and to extract from those accounts the kernels of reliable information that may have been preserved in them, discarding everything fantastic, anachronistic, or unhistorical, and rejecting those compilations that preserve nothing genuine. A simpler and clearer division of this entire literature, however, results in: truly historical and original narratives; narratives reworked in various ways by later writers; and fantastic narratives, that is, true sacred romances.

It is important to note at once that the historical existence of a martyr is in no way compromised by the lack of any narrative concerning him, or by a clearly fabulous narrative, or even by an entire particular literature of fantastic accounts, often in full contradiction with one another. The Church never had a particular office that supervised or favored the compilation of acts of martyrs or concerned itself with their genuine preservation; and in particular, this preservation is due to various circumstances depending on the individual documents. It is true that in the Liber Pontificalis of the Roman Church, mention is made of seven notarii instituted by Popes Clement (d. c. 97) and Fabian (d. 250), also recalled in the biography of Anterus (d. 236), for the purpose of collecting the memories of the martyrs; but this information, if reliable, would apply only to the Roman Church. Instead, it is now established that those notarii were instituted later and for a completely different purpose. The Church sometimes intervened in quite the opposite sense: that is, to suppress the audacity of writers who compromised with their imagination the seriousness of the genuine tradition. The first hagiographer of whom we have memory is a completely discredited figure: having pretended to compile the Acta Pauli et Theclae with the aim of honoring the apostle more by working with his imagination, he was removed from the presbyteral office (Tertullian, De baptismo, 17; Jerome, De viris illustr., 7). He had imitators who fared better, but they were not encouraged. The Decretum Gelasianum (ed. E. von Dobschütz, Leipzig 1912) clearly expresses the distrust inspired by the acts of the martyrs that were then in circulation: «therefore, according to ancient custom, with singular caution they are not read in the Holy Roman Church, since the names of those who wrote them are not known at all and they are presumed to be by infidels and private individuals... for example, the passiones of SS. Quiricus and Julietta or those of St. George and others like them, which appear to have been composed by heretics. Therefore, as has been said, so that not even a shadow of derision may arise, they are not read in the Holy Roman Church». St. Gregory the Great, in his letter to Eulogius, almost comments on this provision: in the Roman Church, the martyrs were commemorated on the anniversary of their martyrdom, but in the list that was kept, only the name, place, and day of the martyrdom were indicated; as for their deeds, none were preserved in the pontifical archives or in the city’s libraries «except for a very few in a single codex» (Registrum, VIII, 28).

Not only were the acts of the martyrs in Rome excluded from liturgical reading, but they were ignored. They were introduced very timidly into the office: only under Pope Adrian I did they begin to be read in the Vatican Basilica; before that, they were read only in the churches that bore their title. In Africa, Gaul, and Spain, the custom was much older. St. Augustine, in one of his sermons, summarizes the passion of St. Fructuosus, which had been read to the people; on the day of St. Stephen, the account of the Acts of the Apostles had been read, and the same holy doctor was forced to say that «of the acts of the martyrs we can find very few to be read on their solemnities» (Sermo, 315; PL 38, 1426). Yet in Africa we find a body of excellent documents, indeed the best that ancient Western hagiography has preserved for us.

In Gaul, alongside the Scriptures, the lives of the saints were admitted into the liturgy. Avitus of Vienne (MGH, Auctores Antiquissimi, VI, II, p. 145) and St. Gregory of Tours (In Gloria Martyrum, 85; De virtutibus s. Martini, II, 29, 49) mention this. For Spain, Braulio, bishop of Saragossa, bears witness, speaking of a life of St. Emilianus that he wrote to be read on the day of his feast (PL 72, 208).

In the Greek Church, too, hagiographic literature initially did not enjoy official favor. Canon 63 of the Trullan Council of 692 prohibited the dissemination of apocryphal accounts of the martyrs, which offered occasion for contempt and disbelief among listeners, ordered them to be burned, and excommunicated those who accepted them as truthful. At the beginning of the 9th century, the patriarch Nicephorus repeated such a condemnation, targeting in particular the acts of St. George and those of SS. Quiricus and Julietta. It is certain, however, that hagiographic texts entered the office relatively early thanks to liturgical poetry.

An exposition of the history of the martyrs was intended by the historian Eusebius of Caesarea, but only the section concerning the martyrs of Palestine has survived, while we know that the great work was unknown both in Rome and Alexandria in the time of St. Gregory the Great. In his Historia ecclesiastica, among the other documents he reports, there are also those of famous martyrs such as St. James the Apostle, Simon of Jerusalem, and the martyrs of Lyon, or of figures like St. Dionysius of Alexandria, who, though not having suffered martyrdom, were tried and persecuted. After him, no one took up the subject with the seriousness of a historian, and for this reason, many documents, especially from the Western Church, were lost or miserably distorted. In any case, it is striking that while Eusebius in the Historia repeatedly speaks of the great number of martyrs, there are not many of whom he provides detailed accounts; and the authentic and reliable Acta are far from numerous. Many of these may certainly have been lost, but most were never written. The trial, condemnation, and execution of the martyrs were most often of a simplicity and uniformity so arid that only some special and extraordinary circumstance could enliven the narrative; yet even in these cases, it is not certain that a written record was always preserved. The title of martyr was more than sufficient to evoke in memory a generic, but no less glorious, scene of a Christian defying death rather than betray the faith, obeying the law of God without heeding that of men. Contemporaries easily completed the scene with their personal recollections; it was posterity that reconstructed it according to their tastes and their historical and literary abilities. In compensation, Christian antiquity has handed down to us sincere accounts of inestimable beauty; while some, in their protocol-like aridity, provide only good testimony to the manner in which proceedings were conducted, when legal forms were observed, against Christians, and serve as a benchmark for judging the authenticity of others. The first document of this kind to reach us in its entirety is the Martyrium Polycarpi, a letter that the community of Smyrna had sent to that of Philomelium and to the other Churches of Asia in the very year of the Saint’s martyrdom (in 156). In his second apology, St. Justin narrates the martyrdom of Sts. Ptolemy and Lucius and of a third unknown individual. Contemporary are the Acta ss. Iustini et sociorum, written in Greek, which reproduce in their central part the protocol of the trial; the martyrdom took place in Rome under Junius Rusticus, prefect of the city. In 177–78, the Christian community of Lyon and Vienne sent to the East a letter recounting the persecution they had then suffered and the heroism of their martyrs. More controversial regarding the original text are the Acta s. Apollonii, an illustrious and esteemed figure who defended the faith before the Roman Senate and was condemned by the praetorian prefect Perennis (185) and who is also mentioned by Eusebius in his history. These Acta exist in Greek and in an Armenian version. To the persecution of Decius, according to Fr. Delehaye and other critics, belong the Acta ss. Carpi, Papyli et Agathonicae, martyrs at Pergamon, and the Acta s. Pionii, martyr at Smyrna, which others date back to the time of Marcus Aurelius. Eusebius recounts the martyrdom of Potamiena and Basilides in Alexandria and of the centurion Marinus at Caesarea in Palestine (Hist. eccl., VI, 5; VII, 15). The Acta of the martyrdom of Maximus in Asia under Decius, those of Conon the gardener at Magydus in Pamphylia, those of Claudius, Asterius, Neon, Domnina, and Theonilla at Aegae in Lycia are recognized as reliable. As for the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste in Armenia, only their testament is considered genuine. For Illyricum, we have the Acta of Julius the veteran, martyr at Durostorum in Moesia, those of Sts. Agape, Chione, and Irene at Thessalonica, and those of Irenaeus, bishop of Sirmium, all under Diocletian. Spain has preserved the Passio Fructuosi, Augurii et Eulogii, martyrs at Tarragona in 259; Sicily, in Greek and Latin, that of Euplus at Catania during the Diocletianic persecution. To the second half of the 4th century belong the martyrs of Anaunia and St. Vigilius, bishop of Trent, killed by fanatical pagans.

Africa is the region that has preserved the greatest number of authentic documents regarding its martyrs. First in chronological order are the Acta Martyrum Scillitanorum, killed at Carthage on 17 July 180; of these, the shorter Latin text contains essentially only their interrogation before the proconsul. The Acta Perpetuae et Felicitatis (202) and their companions in martyrdom are among the most moving documents of early hagiography; embedded in them is the account that the martyr Perpetua herself gave of her sufferings, to which an eyewitness added the narrative of the final trial in the amphitheater. To the persecution of Valerian (258) belong the most celebrated Acta of St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, of Sts. Montanus, Lucius, and companions, also killed at Carthage, and the Passio Mariani et Iacobi, martyrs at Lambaesis. The year 295 brings us the Acta Maximiliani, martyr at Theveste, and 298 the Passio Marcelli centurionis, killed at Tingis in Mauretania under wholly particular circumstances. Under Diocletian in 304, we have the brief Passio Crispinae, martyr at Theveste; the Acta Saturnini, Dativi et sociorum take us to Abitinae, though a Donatist later revised them according to the conceptions of his sect. Of Donatist origin, on the other hand, are the Passio Donati, the Passio Marculi, and the Passio Isaac et Maximiani. It is generally agreed that the early use made in the African Church of these accounts in the liturgy contributed to their preservation, as they were thus shielded from the boldness of the revisers who elsewhere exercised their harmful activity so extensively. It should not be forgotten, however, that even these accounts, considered authentic, did not always traverse the centuries in their original integrity: they were subject to abridgments or expansions, underwent revisions, and thus gave rise to more or less differing versions that have sometimes severely tested the acumen of critics.

There are then cases of accounts in which an important part must be considered original and authentic, while the rest cannot be accepted as historical, having been introduced into the document only to complete what seemed lacking or was truly incomplete. To this special group may be assigned the Acta of St. Dasius, martyr at Durostorum in Moesia, those of the Four Crowned Martyrs in Pannonia, the Disputatio Acacii before the consular Marcianus, after which Acacius was released by Decius, and the Passio s. Sabbae de Gothia (Scythia), which refers to an episode at the end of the 4th century.

Some writers, though well-informed and compiling their accounts from good sources, could not entirely detach themselves from the circumstances of their own times, nor accurately reconstruct those of their hero’s era. Instead, they produced works that were not entirely precise, completing the original narrative with their own suppositions and embellishments. This is the case with the compiler of the Passio of St. Filippo, bishop of Heraclea. The author who, at the end of the 4th century, composed that of St. Teodoto of Ancyra worked with even greater freedom. Pope Damasus, in his metrical epitaphs, and Prudentius, in his hymns in honor of the martyrs, sometimes proceeded with less critical rigor.

As for the legends of the martyrs of Rome and its surrounding areas, it is easy to observe that they generally sought to group together, in a single narrative, figures who had no real connection with one another. Typically, one among them was assigned the leading role, becoming the hero of an entire cycle. Sometimes, imaginary characters were added as necessary embellishments, or familial ties were invented. The most characteristic example of this approach is the Passio of St. Sebastiano. Some of these passiones date back to the 5th and 6th centuries and became popular due to the boldness of their inventions and a certain vividness of style, which ensured their widespread acceptance.

When the practice of reading passiones began in Rome, a careful selection of what could be accepted from the abundant literature of the genre—much of which had formed at the expense of historical truth—would have been necessary. However, only what could serve for edification was considered, and everything was admitted without the prudence advised by St. Gregory the Great. The popularity of these accounts grew even further when they entered the martyrologies, becoming known throughout Europe, and when the transfer of real or supposed relics led to the foundation of new sanctuaries.

What occurred in Rome was widely repeated in the West and the East, wherever memories of martyrs existed. For many of them, local tradition could offer little certainty beyond the fact that they had borne witness to the faith with their death. Even when a characteristic episode could have been recounted, none of their contemporaries took the trouble to leave a written record. What remained entrusted to oral tradition soon underwent the contaminations and transformations typical of such cases. But those who, in later ages, flocked to venerate the martyr at his tomb, or who heard of him in distant lands, or who believed they possessed his relics (once the eager search for these began), were not satisfied with so little. They demanded more extensive accounts, better suited to the martyr’s fame, for such details heightened their veneration and glorification. The writers who set out to satisfy these public demands were anything but learned individuals, conscientious historians, or gifted authors. Just as relics multiplied without scruple to satisfy devotion, so too were narratives compiled without any concern for research—which, in any case, would often have yielded no noteworthy results. One may even wonder whether the truth was sometimes deliberately set aside to serve other purposes.

Most of these compilers were obscure and unknown writers. They were not contemporaries of the events they narrated and were forced to work from distant memories, scant information, and unreliable rumors. They generally lacked even an approximate knowledge of the times and historical circumstances in which the martyrs had lived. Hence, their works are marked by puerile conceptions and historical anachronisms. Devoid of taste and literary tradition, they resorted to low-grade rhetoric, employing a tired and unimaginative style, along with the commonplaces deemed necessary for such compositions. Often, lacking literary skill, these authors did nothing more than transcribe or clumsily adapt writings intended for other figures.

Despite this, the compilers of passiones sometimes rendered us a great service by inserting into their texts documents that we would no longer possess. For example, the author of the legendary Vita of Abercius included the text of his funerary inscription, which was also considered apocryphal until, in recent times, a large fragment of the stone on which it was carved was discovered. The writer of the Passio of Barlaam and Josaphat, drawing even on Buddhist elements, interpolated the Apology of Aristides, which would otherwise have been lost. The legend of St. Arianna (v.), spurious in its first and last parts, preserves in its center a fragment of excellent origin. Something similar occurred with that of St. Trifone. At other times, however, the careless writer resorted even to pagan tales. Thus, the episode of the tyrant Phalaris reappears in the Passio of St. Eustachius; the punishment of the treacherous schoolmaster of Falerii from early Roman history recurs in that of St. Cassian of Imola; the death of Hippolytus, torn apart by horses, is inserted by Prudentius into the martyrdom of St. Hippolytus; the rescue of Arion by a dolphin is repeated for St. Lucian. Other examples of this kind could also be cited.

Nor is it methodologically sound to conclude that, once the inadmissible, extravagant, and even repugnant elements of such a narrative are removed, what remains can be accepted as true. The compiler may well have worked from a framework of good origin, but this does not mean that, in other cases, he did not borrow from another document that was readily available. Similarly, while panegyrists often drew on passiones to exalt their heroes, the authors of passiones also turned to panegyrics for material, as happened with the panegyric of the Forty Martyrs, written by St. Basil and St. Gregory of Nyssa; that of SS. Gioventino and Massimino, composed by St. John Chrysostom; and that of St. Theodore the Recruit, by St. Gregory of Nyssa.

It is therefore unsurprising that, for the same figure, entirely different passiones—or nearly so—sometimes exist, or that the same passio, passing through different hands, underwent insertions, expansions, abridgments, or modifications. Such material was treated with the utmost freedom and a complete lack of critical scruple. It is also established that, in the Carolingian era, many passiones were rewritten in style to satisfy more refined tastes or to remove glaring anachronisms, and these revisions often went beyond mere form.

It is evident that from this literature, which continued to be produced throughout the Middle Ages, no true utility can be derived by the historian of the Church. The only certain datum that can often be extracted from it is that of the place and day of the annual feast celebrated in honor of the martyr or group of martyrs, since, as the passion was written expressly to glorify them, the author was able to transmit with certainty, as the conclusion of his generic information, at least this precise and specific indication. As for the indication of the year in which the martyrdom would have occurred, the matter was different, for preference was given to some emperor famous for the violence of his persecution: most often Nero, Decius, or Diocletian, though, for some inexplicable whim, Hadrian or Numerian were sometimes chosen. It is not surprising, however, that this kind of literature, both artificial and banal, met with favor; it flattered, at little cost, that taste for the marvelous and the extraordinary which lies deep in the popular soul and seemed to satisfy better than exact truth the glorification of the heroes of Christianity. Even today, legendary and romantic tales satisfy more than genuine history. As for its value, Fr. Delehaye rightly wrote: « There is between the historical acts written under the impression of events and the accounts of martyrs that follow them the difference we place between the work of an artist and an industrial product » (Les Passions des Martyrs et les genres littéraires, Brussels 1921, p. 236).

Studying the immense mass of passions and the rhetorical form of their redactions, Fr. Delehaye, in the same work, believed he could reduce them to several classes. The first and perhaps most numerous is that in which the martyr plays the role of an epic hero (epic passions): he converts pagans by the thousands, causes temples to collapse and idols to fall, overcomes the most cruel and prolonged torments, with his eloquence confounds judges and idolatrous priests, and can only die by the sword, because he himself asks God to grant him at last the eternal joys. A second class is that of passions compiled on the model of Greek adventure novels, rich in plots, recognitions, and unexpected encounters: the passion of s. Eustachio and his companions is one of the most characteristic examples. A third class is that of passions with a predominantly idyllic and familial character, such as that of s. Cecilia. A fourth class is that of passions directed toward a didactic purpose, such as demonstrating how martyrdom grants complete spiritual rehabilitation even to those who had once apostatized or were stained by grave sins; or to highlight the value of virginity over the married state; or to inculcate the obligation to observe some evangelical precept, such as the forgiveness of enemies (passion of Niceforo). Another task of the passions is also to complete in all their parts authentic documents, as was done with the passion of s. Ignazio d'Antiochia in relation to his letters, or with the narration of the life of s. Policarpo as preparation for the authentic account of his martyrdom.

In imitation of what had been done early on with monastic narratives, the Middle Ages began to gather the passions of martyrs together, though not with the aim of creating complete and exclusive collections. The Passionari (v.) and Sinassari (v.), respectively among Westerners and Byzantines, did indeed include mostly martyrs' accounts, but without excluding confessors, and, being intended for choral reading, they preferentially collected the accounts of the saint whose celebration was being held in the church. One can speak similarly of other collections made for edifying reading, such as the Legenda aurea by Giacomo da Varagine or da Varazze (v.), archbishop of Genoa in the 13th century; the Chioggia (v.) de Natalibus (v.); in the 14th century, the Sanctuarium Mombrizio (v.), printed in the second half of the 15th century. In the 16th century appeared the collection by Luigi Lipponano (v.), bishop of Verona, Surio (v.), a German Carthusian monk, compiled with an initial concern for historical criticism. A general and complete collection of hagiographic documents is that begun in Louvain in the 17th century BOLLANDISTI (v.), which was therefore called the Bollandists. However, the first to conceive the idea of sifting through the immense mass of Acta or Passiones to identify that group of accounts that could truly be considered historical Ruinart (v.), with his work, published in Paris in 1689, Acta primorum Martyrum sincera et selecta, in which, after a critical introduction, one hundred and seventeen documents were included, not all of which can truly be called Acta and passions; each is illustrated by critical notes by the author himself. Ruinart's work, reprinted several times thereafter, received a good Italian translation in 4 volumes in 1777 by Francesco M. Luchini; it provoked profound discussions and opposition; later criticism eliminated many of those documents while introducing some that came to light later. In any case, together with the Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire ecclésiastique des six premiers siècles, published by L. Le Nain de Tillemont in Paris in 1693 and later reprinted, it constitutes the first scientific guidance for the evaluation of hagiographic material concerning the ancient martyrs. Alongside the Acta SS. of the Bollandists, who continued to collect hagiographic documents, the periodical publication Analecta Bollandiana, begun in 1882, aims to complete the collection by publishing new texts or republishing texts imperfectly edited in the past, or accompanying them with critical dissertations.

As regards Rome and Italy in particular, we recall the much-discussed work of A. Dufourcq, Etude sur les Gesta Martyrum romains, 6 vols., Paris 1900-1908, which represents an attempt to classify the legends studied in their origins and mutual relationships; H. Delehaye, Etude sur le

The Roman legendary: Les saints de novembre et de décembre, Brussels 1936. Lanzoni (Studi e Testi, 35) summarizes and completes his previous studies in relation to the legends concerning the ancient episcopal sees. Finally, we recall the works on various particular topics published by P. Franchi de' Cavalieri in his Note Agiografiche, 8 vols., Rome-Vatican City 1902-1935 (Studi e Testi, 8, 9, 22, 24, 27, 33, 45), and in Bagiographica, Rome 1908 (Studi e Testi, 10). A good manual edition of texts considered authentic is that by R. Knopf, Ausgewählte Märtyrerakten, 3rd ed. edited by G. Krüger, Tübingen 1929 (cf. Anal. Boll., 48 [1930], pp. 369-71). Useful are the small volumes by S. Colombo, Atti dei Martiri, Turin [1928]; C. Gallina, I martiri dei primi secoli, Florence 1940; V. AGIOGRAFIA. Pio Paschini

BIBL.:
In addition to the works cited in the text: H. Delehaye, Les Passions des martyrs et les genres littéraires, Brussels 1921; Id., Les origines du culte des martyrs, 2nd ed., Brussels 1933; Id., Cinq leçons sur la méthode hagiographique, Brussels 1934; P. Allard, Histoire des persécutions, 5 vols., Paris 1903-1908; O. von Gebhardt, Acta martyrum selecta, Berlin 1902; H. Leclercq, Les Martyrs, 2 vols., Paris 1902-1903; J. Ruinart, Acta primorum martyrum sincera et selecta, Amsterdam 1713 (reprint Paris 1950); A. Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, 4th ed., Leipzig 1924; E. Vacandard, Vie de saint Victrice, évêque de Rouen, Paris 1903; G. Lazzati, Gli sviluppi della letteratura sui martiri nei primi quattro secoli, Turin 1956.

II. ACTA OF THE ORIENTAL MARTYRS

1. Syriac Acta

Among the Oriental acta, these are the most important for their historical value. Many have already been published by S. E. Assemani, Acta sanctorum martyrum orientalium et occidentalium, Rome 1748 (ASM); by P. Bedjan, Acta martyrum et sanctorum, Paris 1890-97 (AMS); and by the Bollandists both in the Acta SS. and in the Analecta Bollandiana (An. Boll).

Martyrs of Edessa. - We possess rather uncertain acta, written toward the end of the 4th century, of St. Šarbil, formerly a pagan priest, and of Bishop St. Barsamja (ed. AMS, I, 95-130), martyred, it seems, under Decius. To the time of Diocletian belong instead St. Gürja and St. Šemona (ed. I. Rahmani, Acta sanct. conf. Guriae et Shammae, Rome 1899), and the deacon St. Habib (ed. AMS, I, 144-60), whose acta, written by a certain Theophilus, contain chronological errors and inaccuracies that render them somewhat suspect.

Persian Martyrs. - Before the great persecution of Shapur II, special acta, said to be written by the witness Isaiah bar Haddābō, report the martyrdom of Sts. Bērīkīšō and Jāunān in the year 327-28 (ed. ASM, I, 211-24; AMS, II, 39-51), though in a form that raises some doubts.

The persecution of Shapur II, which began in 339-340, struck Bishop St. Simeon Barsaba of Seleucia-Ctesiphon and many other martyrs. Generally speaking, the acta of this period are substantially historical, written by contemporaries and even by witnesses, and partly collected during the persecution itself and partly toward the end of the 4th century through the efforts of Mārūtā of Maipherqat. Two collections can be distinguished: the first, arranged chronologically, includes the acta of St. Simeon Barsaba (the oldest recension in the edition by O. Kmosko, Patrologia Syriaca, II, Paris 1907, 715-77), the massacre in Bēt Hūzājē, of Tarbō, of Sāhdōst, of 111 men and women, of Barba'šmīn, of 40 martyrs, of Bādēmā, of 'Agebāēmā, and of other anonymous figures (ed. ASM, I, 1-59; 83-91; 104-20; 141-207; AMS, II, 248-60; 276-81; 291-306; 325-96). The second collection, or Passionario of Adiabene, presents, also chronologically, the martyrs of that region (ed. AMS, II, 307-16; IV, 128-41; ASM, I, 121-31. Cf. P. Peeters, An. Boll., 43 [1925], 261 ff.). To this period belong the three martyrs Milēs, Baršabjā, and Daniel (ed. ASM, I, 60-80; 92-95; AMS, II, 260-75; 281-84), whose acta form a single whole; Bishop Narsai of Šāharqad, killed in Bēt Garmai (ed. Acta SS. Novembris, IV, cols. 424-32); a group of war prisoners martyred in 362, whose account was written 11 years later (ed. ASM, I, 131-39); the martyrs of Karkā of Bēt Sēlōk (ed. AMS, II, 284-86); a group of Persian soldiers killed in 350 in Ģilān (ed. AMS, II, 166-70); the priest Baddāj of Argūl (ed. AMS, II, 63-65); and, somewhat later, 'Abd al-Masīh of Singar, known not only from Syriac acta (ed. An. Boll., 5 [1887], 5-52) but also from Armenian and an Arabic version (ed. An. Boll., 44 [1926], 270-341), which seems closest to the original Syriac. In any case, these documents are accepted with certain reservations due to anachronisms.

Of the period of the persecution of Yazdegerd I, we have the authentic acta of St. 'Abdā and companions (ed. AMS, IV, 250-53), of St. Narsai of Bēt Rāziqājē (ed. AMS, IV, 170-80), of St. Sabor (ms. British Museum 7200), of the royal page St. Tāṭāq (ed. AMS, IV, 181-84), and of a group of 10 martyrs of Bēt Garmai (ed. AMS, IV, 184-88).

Among the acta of the persecution of Bahram V, those historically reliable of Miharšābōr (ed. ASM, I, 234-36), of Peroz (ed. AMS, IV, 253-62), and of the notary Ja'qōb (ed. AMS, IV, 189-200) contrast with the spurious ones of St. James the Mutilated (ed. AMS, II, 539-558). Those of St. Petion, killed in 447, seem to have had a primitive recension contemporary with the events (ed. An. Boll., 7 [1889], 8-44).

Finally, from the time of the persecution of Khosrow I, though not written by eyewitnesses, the acta of St. Gregory and St. Jazdpanāh (ed. P. Bedjan, Histoire de Mar Jabalaha, Paris 1895, 347-451) have historical value. Greater suspicions are raised by those of Prince Gābarlāhā and his sister Qāzō (ed. An. Boll., 9 [1891], 11-103), which bear a strange resemblance to the acta of St. Dādū (ed. AMS, IV, 210-21).

Versions from Greek. - Besides the oldest martyrology, composed in Nicomedia by an author probably Arian in the second half of the 4th century and preserved in a Syriac codex of 411 (ed. Nau: PO 10, 2 ff.), numerous Greek legends have been translated into Syriac. Among the versions belonging to the earliest period (end of the 5th, beginning of the 6th century), we recall those of the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste (ed. AMS, II, 355-75), of Sts. Cosmas and Damian (ed. AMS, VI, 107-19), of St. Pantaleon and companions (mss. British Mus. 944; Vatic. Syr. 461), of St. Babylas, and others. The Jacobites continued these translations later.

2. Armenian Acta

They have not yet been the subject of a systematic and critical study, made difficult by the lack of editions of the abundant material, which has largely been published by the Mechitarist Fathers of Venice, especially in the Vitae et passiones sanctorum, Venice 1874 (VP), and in the Sanctorum acta pleniora, I-IX, XII, Venice 1810-13; XI, Venice 1814, by J. B. Aucher. Alīšan also collects abundant material in the Bibliotheca armena, Venice 1853-61. I. Manandian-Adjarian, Valarsapat 1903, has published the acta of modern martyrs from 1115 to 1843.

The Armenians have translated many Greek and Latin legends, such as those of St. Antimus of Nicomedia (VP, I, 113-34), of St. Blaise of Sebaste (VP, II, 382-89), and many others. Often, however, the Armenian translations are made directly from Syriac. Among the Syriac acta preserved today only in the Armenian version, we cite those of the Persian martyr under Khosrow I, St. Izbozet (Acta SS. Novembris, IV, 200-16).

The most important for their originality are the acta referring to Armenian martyrs. Here are those published so far: Atom and companions under Yazdegerd II (Aucher, Sanctorum acta, II, 86-87); David Dune (d. 693; ed. Bibl. arm., XIX, 85-96); Isaac and Hamazasp (d. 785-86; Bibl. arm., XII, 61-80); Joseph of Karni (d. ca. 808; VP, II, 266-71); the martyrs of Oski (d. 130; ed. Bibl. arm., XIX, 59-66); the virgins Rhipsime and Gaiana of the 3rd century, to whom the pseudo Moses of Chorene dedicated a panegyric (ed. Venice 1843, pp. 304-25); St. Sanducht of the 1st century (Bibl. arm., VIII, 77-83); Sukhias, Lucian, and Polyeuctus in Lesser Armenia (d. 107; Bibl. arm., XIX, 33-56); the virgin Susanik (d. 458; ed. Bibl. arm., IX, 11-47), of whom there exists a Georgian passion translated by P. Peeters (An. Boll., 53 [1935], 5-49; 245-308); St. Theodore Salahunio, 3rd century (Ališan, Eclogarii ex Armeniae historia, I, Venice 1901, 175-79); and St. Vardan with his companions (d. ca. 454; ed. Mechitarists, Venice 1893). The critical judgment on these acta cannot be uniform. They range from empty legends devoid of value to contemporary documents worthy of trust. The Armenian Synaxarion of Ter Israel has already been published in PO 6, 181-355; 345-556.

3. Georgian Acts

These largely depend on Armenian literature and thus hold a twofold interest. In the field of translations, in which the great translator Seith (late 8th to early 9th century) distinguished himself, we note the collection of lives and passions compiled by him (26 are known), all unpublished except for the life of St. Agathangelos of Damascus, edited by C. Kekelidze in Christiansky Vostok, 4 (1916), fasc. III. Imitators of Seith include, in the 10th century, Davide of Tbethi, and in the 12th century, a certain Theophilos, whose works have been partially published by C. Kekelidze in Monumenta Hagiographica Georgica, I, Tiflis 1918 (vol. II appeared in 1946). Among the Georgian versions, we find, in addition to those mentioned above, the martyrdom of the nine youths of Kola, killed in the 5th-6th century and described in a document that appears to date from the 8th century. It is contained in the "polycephalic" codex no. 57 of the Iberian Monastery of Mount Athos. Furthermore, the passion of St. Theodore and his companions has been published (An. Boll., 44 [1926], 70-102). Regarding specifically Georgian martyrs, the following are treated: 1° a fine 12th-century account of the protomartyr St. Raideni, martyred in the 5th century (ed. Sabinin, Il paradiso della Georgia, St. Petersburg 1882, pp. 169-80; Latin trans. An. Boll., 33 [1915], 294-317); the narrative draws on ancient sources. 2° Ioane Sabanisdze, who in the 8th-9th century describes the martyrdom of St. Abo of Tiflis (d. 780-90; ed. M. Brosset, Vite dei santi georgiani, pp. 321-41). 3° Stefano of Tbethi, who at the beginning of the 10th century recounts the martyrdom of St. Gobroni. These two contemporary authors hold great historical value. Other martyrs killed by the Arabs are recorded in later memoirs (cf. M. Brosset, Catalogue des livres géorgiens, p. 141). The Georgian Synaxarion or Martyrology has been published by N. Marr in PO 19, 5 ff. Vedi anche GEORGIA (letteratura).

4. Coptic Acts

In addition to the Coptic Synaxarion, composed in Arabic at the beginning of the 15th century (ed. Corpus Scriptorum Christ. Orientalium. Scriptores arabici, 3rd series, XVIII, Paris 1905), which mentions Egyptian martyrs, there also exist ancient Acts of the Martyrs written in Coptic. Some are known only through an Arabic or Ethiopic version. Fr. Delehaye (Les martyrs d'Égypte, in An. Boll., 40 [1922], 5-154; 299-352) conducted a historical and literary critique of this material. Derived largely from Greek sources, the Coptic passions offer little or nothing to the historian. Imagination, often in poor taste, permeates them all, elaborating certain types or cycles of martyrs that are then applied as a template to various saints. Thus, there is the cycle of Basilides or of Diocletian and that of Julius of Aqfahs. The martyrs are generally attributed to the time of Diocletian. There is no need to review this mediocre literature by name. The Coptic Acts have been published especially by Hyvernat and Balestri in the Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Scriptores Coptici, by Winstedt (Coptic Texts of st. Theodore), by von Lemm (Bruchstücke koptischer Martyrien, in Memorie dell'Acc. di Pietroburgo, 8th series, XII), by W. Budge (Coptic Martyrdoms in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, London 1914), by W. Crum (Anecdota Oxoniensia, semitic series, XII, 1913), and by W. Till (Koptische Heiligen- und Martyrerlegenden, in Orientalia Christiana Analecta, nos. 102 [Rome 1935] and 108 [ibid. 1936]).

Ethiopic Acts. - These refer to versions almost always derived from Coptic. Pereira published a good portion of them in the Corpus Scriptorum Christ. Orientalium. Scriptores aethiopici, 2nd series, XXVIII. They consist of versions of uncertain date, prior to the 16th century, and of almost no historical interest. The same can be said of other versions discussed by I. Guidi in Storia della letteratura etiopica, Rome 1932, pp. 32-34.