CIRILLO di SCITOPOLI. – One of the finest Greek hagiographers, known above all for the care he takes to document and establish chronology by every means at his disposal. Born at Scitopoli, anciently Bethsan, today Bejsan, in Samaria, around 524. His pious parents often offered hospitality to passing monks. In 530 the most illustrious of these guests, St. Saba, declared the young C. his disciple, and from that moment his vocation was determined. In 543 C. received the monastic tonsure and went to Jerusalem, where he attended the dedication of S. Maria Nuova; he then visited Giovanni l'Esicasta at the Great Monastery. Despite the advice given him by this experienced man, the young C. did not enter the cenobium of S. Eutimio but, victim of that ardent desire for solitude which animates all Eastern monasticism, devoted himself to the life of an anchorite in the monastery of Calamone (of the reeds) on the banks of the Jordan. But an illness struck him as a punishment for his presumption. He recovered his health by setting out for S. Eutimio in July 544. This was the period of the Origenist disputes in Palestine. When the heterodox monks were expelled from the New Monastery, C. was among the Orthodox religious designated to go and repopulate it (21 July 555). Two years later he moved to the monastery of S. Saba. The common opinion that he died as early as 558 is based only on an argumentum e silentio of very little force.
Cyril of Scythopolis
BIBL.: C. left seven biographies devoted to St. Eutimio, St. Giovanni l'Esicasta (this sobriquet was erroneously transmitted by the Silentiary), St. Ciriaco, St. Teodosio, St. Teognio, and St. Abramio. E. Schwartz published a critical edition of them: Kyrill von Skythopolis (Texte und Untersuchungen, 49, II), Leipzig 1939. E. Stein wrote a very acute and, on the whole, laudatory review of this publication in Analecta Boll., 62 (1944), pp. 169–86. Schwartz’s great failing was that he did not accept the chronology established by Mons. F. Diekamp (Die originistischen Streitigkeiten im sechsten Jahrhundert, Münster 1899, pp. 11–15). Diekamp had proved that the indictions found in C.’s narrative from April 531 onward are one year behind. This demonstration had won general approval. E. Stein rejects the arguments advanced against it and gives (loc. cit., p. 179 ff.) a table of the actual dates established by Diekamp and of the erroneous dates proposed by Schwartz. For the earlier editions of C.’s works, consult S. Vallhé, s. V. in DThC, III, II, col. 258i.
Cite this article
“CIRILLO DI SCITOPOLI.” Enciclopedia Cattolica, vol. III (1949), p. 1006. Azione Romana digital edition, https://azioneromana.com/article/cirillo-di-scitopoli.