Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T14:32:53.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Suffering and Innocence in Latin Sermons for the Feast of the Holy Innocents, c. 400-800

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Paul A. Hayward
Paul A. Hayward*
Affiliation:
St John’s College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has long been recognized that medieval representations of the Holy Innocents are much concerned with the horrendous cruelty of their passion. They are often cited as evidence that the Church, putting a high priority on loving parenthood, attempted to raise the standard of Christian child-care, and it is indeed clear that their rhetoric depends upon a degree of sympathy for suffering children. This paper aims to suggest, however, that the history of this theme shows how the construction of their sanctity was influenced by the changing place of childhood in matters of theology and spirituality. It will show, I hope, that the emphasis on the Innocents’ suffering needs to be seen in the context of the Origenist controversy, that there was an erosion of this theme’s importance in later representations of the infants, and that this shift reflected a desire on the part of monastic authors to adapt the now established cult of the Innocents to new-found spiritual needs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 31: The Church and Childhood , 1994 , pp. 67 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Recent examples include Boswell, J., The Kindness of Strangers: the Abandonment of Children in Western Europe from Late Antiquity to the Renaissance (Harmondsworth, 1988), p. 177 Google Scholar; McLaughlin, M.M., ‘Survivors and Surrogates: Children and Parents from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Century’, in The History of Childhood, ed. Mause, L. De(New York, 1974), p. 133 Google Scholar; Forsyth, I. H., ‘Children in Early Medieval Art: Ninth through Twelfth Centuries’, fournal of Psychohistory, 4 (1976), pp. 34–5.Google Scholar

2 Prudentius, ‘Liber Cathemerinon’, 12.116-20, ed. Thompson, H.J., The Poems of Prudentius, 2 vols (London, 1939-53), I, p. 108.Google Scholar

3 The origin of the feast in the West may be placed in the early fifth century (although belief in the sanctity of the Innocents is much older, see n. 57 below), as the oldest reliably attributable sermon (Maximinus the Arian (fl. 420s), ‘In natale infantum’ = ‘Sermones de sollemnatibus’, 8, ed. Gryson, R., Scripta Amana Latina, CChr. SL, 87 (1982), pp. 69–72)Google Scholar seems to have been composed then, while the earliest evidence of its celebration on 28 December is supplied by the early sixth-century ‘Calendar of Carthage’: see ‘Kalendarium antiquissimum ecclesiae Carthaginensis’ in PL 13, cols 1219-30, at col. 1228, dated by H. Leclercq, ‘Kalendaria’ Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, 8.1, cols 642-5. The earliest extant Greek sermon for the feast is Basil of Seleucia (d. 468), Oratio 27: see Barcellona, F. Scorza, ‘La celebrazione dei Santi Innocenti nell’omiletica greca’, Bollettino della Badia greca di Crottaferrata, ns 29 (1975). pp. 105–35 Google Scholar. It should also be noted that the liturgical celebration mentioned in the fourth-century ‘Itinerarium Egeriae’, section 42.1-8, Franceschini, R. and Weber, R., eds, in Itineraria et Ceographia, 2 vols, CChr. SL, 175–6 (1965), 1, p. 84 Google Scholar, is unlikely to have been a feast of the Holy Innocents: see Bastiaensen, Y., ‘Sur quelques passages de I’Itinerarium Egeriae’, AnBoll, 108 (1990), pp. 272–4.Google Scholar

4 This much is the burden of Barcellona, F. Scorza, ‘La celebrazione dei Santi Innocenti nell’omiletica latina dei secoli IV-VI’, Studi Medievali, 3A ser., 15.2 (1974), pp. 705–67 Google Scholar, an exhaustive survey which identifies twelve pre-seventh-century sermons for their feast, and another three Christmas sermons and twenty-three sermons for Epiphany in which the infants are ‘covered’. J. Lemarié, ‘Nouvelle édition du sermon pour les saints innocents’, AnBoll, 99 (1981), pp. 137–8, edits a further sermon of probable late fifth- or sixth-century African origin, but his attempt in ‘Le sermon Mai 193 et l’origine de la fête des ss. Innocents en Occident’, ibid., pp. 135-50, to show that a Carolingian homily (Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo Mai 193’, ed. ibid., pp. 141-2) derives from a now lost sermon for the feast by Chromatius of Aquileia (d. 408) rests upon mistaken assumptions about the transmission of this text. ‘Sermo Mai 193’ is an abbreviated version of an eighth-century sermon (now preserved in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS elm 6233, fols 121v-125r and Cologne, Diõzesan and Dombibliothek, MS 171, fols 17V-20V, and discussed in detail below) whose text precludes the verbal parallels on which the argument rests. See R. Étaix, ‘Le sermonnaire d’Hildebold de Cologne’, Recherches Augustiniennes, 23 (1988), p. 117.

5 See, for example. Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo 218’, section 2, ed. PL 39, col. 2150; ‘Sermo 219’, section 2, ed. PL 39, col. 2151; ‘Cum uniuersus mundus’, cols 24-5 and 35, ed. J. Lemarié, ‘Nouvelle édition’, pp. 137-8, and so on. See also Prudentius, ‘Liber Cathemerinon’, 12.101–4, ed. Thompson, p. 108. I know of only one sermon which deploys the topos of active maternal encouragement to martyrdom, a standard scene in the lives of infant-martyrs: namely, ‘Sermo Caillau-Saint-Yves 2, app. 77’ = ‘Sermo Mai 149’, section 2, ed. PLSupp., 2.1246. On the ideological function of this scene, which relates to the desire to promote Christian teaching in the home, see my forthcoming study, The Idea of Innocent Martyrdom in Earlier Medieval England.

6 Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo Mai III [in epiphania Domini]’ = ‘Sermo Caillau-Saint-Yves 2, app. 21’, section 2, ed. PLSupp., 2.1212.

7 Notice should be made, for example, of the argument, derived from Cyprian of Carthage, Ep. 58.6, ed. Hartel, G., CSEL, 3.2 (1871), p. 661.21–7 Google Scholar, that the massacre is a sign that no Christian should expect to escape persecution as even infamia innocens was martyred for Christ’s sake. This theme was known in northern Europe through the letter itself, through excerpts made to provide a reading for the feast of the ‘Infantes’ in the early eighth-century Gallican Lectionary of Luxeuil, ed. P. salmon, The Lectionary of Luxeuil (Paris MS Lat. 9427): Édition et Étude comparative, 2 vols = Collectanea Biblica Latina, 7 and 9 (Rome, 1944-53), 1, p. 17; see also A. Wilmart, ‘La lettre LVIII de saint Cyprien parmi les lectures non bibliques du lectionnaire de Luxeuil’, RBen, 28 (1911), pp. 228 and 230). It was also known through a Donatisi sermon falsely attributed to Optatus of Milevi, which takes it as its central theme: Pseudo-Optatus, ‘In natali infantum [recte. Chris ti], qui pro domino occisi sunt’, ed. Wilmart, A., ‘Un sermon de saint Optat pour la fête de noel’, Revue des sciences religieuses, 2 (1922), pp. 282–91 Google Scholar. This sermon is preserved in a ninth-century manuscript from the Benedictine Abbey of Weissemburg: Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August-Bibl., MS Weissemburg 4096, fols 8v-12r. See R. Grégoire, Homéliaires liturgiques médiévaux: Analyse de manuscrits = Biblioteca degli ‘Studi Medievali’, 12 (Spoleto, 1980), pp. 394 and 401.

8 Peter Chrysologus, ‘Sermo 152’ = ‘De herode et infantibus’, ed. A. Olivar, Sancii Petri Chrysologi. Collectio Sermonum, 3 vols, CChr. SL, 24-24A-24B (1975-82), 3, pp. 947-57, and ‘Sermo 153’, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, pp. 956-7; Caesarius of Arles, ‘Sermo 222’, ed. G. Morin, Sancti Caesarii Arelatensis, Sermones, 2 vols, CChr. SL, 103-4 (1953), 2, pp. 877-81); Pseudo-Auguste, ‘Sermo 218’, ed. PL 39.2149-50, ‘Sermo 219’, ed. PL 39.2151-2, and ‘Sermo 221’, ed. PL 39.2154-6; and Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Senno Caillau-Saint-Yves 2, app. 79’, ed. Caillau, A., S. Augustim Hipponensis Episcopi Opera Omnia, 24bis (Paris, 1842), pp. 418–24 Google Scholar, a sermon which survives in four distinct recensions: see J. Machielsen, Ctavis Patristica Pseudigraphorum Medii Aevi: Opera Homiletica, 2 vols, CChr. SL, 1A-1B (1990), nos 1487, 1717, 1733, the most widely known of which is that attributed to John Chrysostom in the Homiliary of Paul the Deacon, ed. PL, 95.1176-7.

9 For Paul the Deacon (in which ‘Herod and the Infants’ by Peter Chrysologus is attributed to Bishop Severianus), see Grégoire, Homéliaires liturgiques médiévaux, pp. 436-7; for Alan of Farfa, see ibid., pp. 148-9 and 234. The only subsequent homily to approach these in ‘popularity’ seems to be Bede, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’ = ‘Homeliarum evangelii libri III’, 1. io, ed. Hurst, D., Bedae Venerabilis. Opera Exegética, CChr, SL, 122 (1955), pp. 68–72.Google Scholar

10 Compare ‘Old English Martyrology’, 27 Dec, ed. G. Kotzor, Das aitenglische Martyrologium, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften Phil oso phis ch-H istoriseli e Klasse Abhandlungen — Neue Folge, Heft 88, 2 vols (Munich, 1981), 2, pp. 7-8, with Peter Chrysologus, ‘De Herode et infantibus’, 2.14-16 and 8.73-80, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, pp. 949-50 and 9S4. See also J. E. Cross, ‘The Use of Homilies in the Old English Martyrology’, Anglo-Saxon England, 13 (1985), pp. 109-11.

11 Compare jŒlfric, ‘In natale innocentium infantium’, 118-23, ed. Whitelock, D., Sweet’s Anglo-Saxon Reader in Prose and Verse, 15th ed. (Oxford, 1967), p. 73 Google Scholar, with Peter Chrysologus, ‘De Herode et infantibus’, 8.72-80, 83-5, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, pp. 954-5. Ilfric also used Caesarius of Aries, ‘Sermo222’ and Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo 218’: see C. L. Smetana, ‘Itlfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, Traditio, 15 (1959), pp. 184-5.

12 Peter Chrysologus, ‘Sermo 152’, section 2.14-16, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, pp. 949-50. Compare also, ‘Cum uniuersus mundus’, lines 15–16, 21-2 and 25-6, ed. J. Lemarié, ‘Nouvelle édition’, pp. 137— Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo Caillu-Saint-Yves 2, app. 77’ = ‘Sermo Mai 149’, section 2, ed. PLSupp., 2.1246.

13 Peter Chrysologus, ‘Sermo 152’. section 7.57-69, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, pp. 953-4.

14 Ibid., section 8.72-80, pp. 954-5. Sec also section 8.83-5, p. 955. The idea that they were baptized in their mothers’ milk and by their very baptism is anticipated by Chromatius of Aquileia: see ‘Sermo 14’ = ‘De paradyti sanatione et de baptismo’, section 2.32-41, eds R. Étaix and J. Lemarié, Chromatid Aquileiensis Opera, CChr. SL, 9A (1974), pp. 62-3.

15 Peter Chrysologus, ‘De Herode et infantibus’, section 8.50-83, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, p. 954. See, likewise, Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo Caillau-Saint-Yves 2, app. 77’ = ‘Sermo Mai 149’, section 1, ed. PLSupp., 2.1245-6: they died without the pain of martyrdom, ‘because even if they loved their mothers, the unknowing infants were mutilated unjustly: the conscience of the unknowing infants did not care about the sword of the persecutor, because they were rejoicing with Him, innocents of the saviour in flight [to Egypt]’.

16 Peter Chrysologus, ‘De Herode et infantibus’, section 9.86-9, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, p. 955. His other sermon for the feast is much shorter, but its central point is essentially the same: see ‘Scrmo 153’, section 2.24-9, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, p. 957.

17 See, for example, ‘Cum uniuersus mundus’, lines 6–7, 38, 43–7, ed. J. Lemarié, ‘Nouvelle édition’, pp. 137-8; Augustine, ‘Sermo 199 [in epiphania Domini]’, section 1, ed. PL 38.1027, and ‘Sermo dubius 373’, 3, ed. PL 39.1664.

18 See, for example, Augustine, ‘Sermo 199 [in epiphania Domini]’, section 1, ed. Pi., 38.1027: it was happier for them than for the Magi, since they, not yet being capable of confessing Christ, could suffer for him in their ignorance without knowing the terror of Herod. See also Leo the Great, Tractatus 32’, section 3.64-74, ed. Chavasse, A., Sancii Leonis Magni Romani Pontifias Tractatus Septem et Nonaginta, CChr. SL, 138-138A (1974), 1, pp. 165–9, at p. 168 Google Scholar, who develops this idea.

19 This might be said to be the central theme of the sermon attributed to John Chrysostom in the Homiliary of Paul the Deacon, ed. PÍ.95.1176-7. On this theme, see also Leo the Great, ‘Tractatus 32’, section 3.64-74, ed. CChr. SL, 138, p. 168.

20 Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Senno 218’, section 2, ed. PL 39.2150, and quoted in Pseudo-Eusebius, ‘De epiphania Domini et de Innocentibus’, section 4.75-85, ed. Fr. Glorie, Eusebius Gaìlicanus. Collectio Homiliarum, 3 vols, CChr. SL, 101-101A-101B (1970), 1, no. iv, p. 48.

21 On the importance of this issue, see further Clark, E. A., The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of an Early Christian Debate (princeton, N. J., 1992), pp. 194–247, esp. pp. 194 and 238 Google Scholar. See also F. Refoulé, ‘Misère des enfants et péché originel d’après saint Augustin’, Revue Thomiste, 63 (1963), pp. 341-62.

22 See Augustine, ‘De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum’,I.9.9, 24.34, and III. 2.2, ed. Urba, C. F. and Zycha, j., CSEL, 60 (Vienna, 1913), pp. 10–11, 34, and 130 Google Scholar, arguing against the Origenist view that souls committed sins in heaven prior to being born, which he finds implausible and contrary to scripture. See also i.22.31 and iii.9.17, pp. 29-30 and 143.

23 Julian, ‘Ad Turbanrium’, in Augustine, ‘Contra Julianum’, ii.1.2, ed. PL, 44.673. See also Augustine, ‘De nuptiis et concupiscentia’, ii.27.44, ed. C. F. Urba and J. Zycha, CSEL, 42 (1902), pp. 297-8.

24 Ibid., ii.13.27 and 27.44, pp. 280 and 298.

25 Augustine, ‘Contra julianum “Opus impcrfectum”’, iii.236.34–56, ed. M. Zelzer, CSEL, 85 (1974), pp. 349-50, and ‘Contra Julianum’, iii.3.8, ed. PL 44.705-6.

26 Augustine, ‘Contra Julianum’, vi.5.11, ed. PL 44.705-6; ‘De nuptiis et concupiscentia’, ii.29.51, ed. CSEL, 42, pp. 307–8; ‘De origine animae hominis’ = Ep. 166.9.28, ed. Goldbacher, A., CSEL, 44 (1904), pp. 584–5 Google Scholar. For in fant baptism as the apostolic custom of the Church, see Augustine, ‘De Genesi ad litteram’, 10.xxiii.39, ed. Zycha, J., CSEL, 28.1 (1894), p. 327 Google Scholar. 1-4; ‘De baptismo’, 4.XXÍV.31, ed. M. Petschenig, CSEL, 51 (1906), p. 259.2-4. But notice also that, as Julian pointed out (‘Ad Turbantium’, in Augustine, ‘Contra Julianum’, vi.13.40, ed. Pi. 44.843), Augustine’s idea of ‘original sin’ implies that baptism is not a completely efficacious rite, since Christians cannot escape transferring this legacy to their children through baptism. The Pelagians, on the other hand, held that baptism created completely new beings (Clark, The Origenist Controversy, pp. 210, 220).

27 Augustine, ‘De libero arbitrio’, iii.23.68.231, ed. Green, W. M., Sancii Augustini Opera, pt. 2.2, CChr. SL, 29 (1970), p. 315.Google Scholar

28 Augustine, Ep. 166.7.18-19, ed. CSEL, 44, pp. 571-4; and ‘De dono perseverantiae’, 11.27, 12.30, ed. PL 45.1009-10. See Clark, The Origenist Controversy, pp. 229, 235, 241.

29 Some confirmation of this point is supplied by Augustine, ‘Sermo dubius [de epiphania Domini] 373’, section 3, PL 39.1664-5, where he argues that those who doubt the custom of baptizing infants question the martyrdom of the infants. Note also ‘De Genesi ad litteram’. 10.xxiii.39, ed. Zychag, J., CSEL, 28. 1 (1894), p. 327 Google Scholar. 4-6. Here Augustine argues that it is important to baptize infants, because, as the first age to witness for Christ, their age carries great importance.

30 A point noted by Leo the Great: ‘Tractatus »i section 3.56-8, ed. CChr. SL, 138, p. 163: Christ bestowed the dignity of martyrdom on those on whom he had not yet spent his redeeming blood.

31 For an early African solution, see Quoduultdeus of Carthage (size Aft. c. 428-39), ‘Sermo de symbolo II’, iv.65-9, ed. R. Braun, Opera Quoduultdeo Carthaginiensi Episcopo tributa, CChr. SL, 60 (1976), pp. 335–49. at p. 340): ‘Christ vouched for them as they had died for Christ, vouched for them so that they were cleansed of original sin with their own blood. They were born to death but returned straight to life.’

32 Caesarius of Aries, ‘Sermo 222’, sections 1-2, ed. CChr. SL, 104, pp. 877-8.

33 Ibid., sections 3-5, pp. 878-7.

34 See Bede, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, 120, ed. CChr. SL, 122, p. 7m.

35 Ibid., 31-7, p. 69. The point is repeated at 121-6, p. 71.

36 Ibid., 154-8, p. 72, quoting Rev. 7.17 and 21.4.

37 See esp. ibid., 1-89, pp. 68-70. Haimo of Auxerre, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, ed. PL 118.75-82, is organized to the same end, taking its narrative from Rufinus’ translation of Eusebius, ‘Historia Ecclesiastica’, i.6-8, ed. E. Schwartz and Th. Mòmmscn, Eusebius Werke, 2, Die Kirchengeschichte [mit] der tateinischen Ûbersetzung des Rufinus, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 11, 1-3 (1903-9), 1, pp. 63-9, and its exegesis mainly from Bede. On Haimo’s homiliary, see H. Barré, Les boméliaires carolingiens de l’itole d’Auxerre: Authenticité — inventaire - Tableaux comparatifs - Initia — Studi e Testi 225 (1962), pp. 146-60.

38 Bede, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, 4-5, ed. CChr. SL, 122, p. 68, after Matt. 18.3. For an allusion to this passage in Haimo of Auxerre, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, see PL 118.79A. See also ‘Sermo Casinensis 3’, p. $8, ed. PLSupp. 2.1322, a sermon of similar date (?), where the ‘sinlessness’ of the infants becomes an exhortation to self-mortification.

39 Leo, ‘Tractatus 37’, section 4.77-83, ed. CChr. SL, 138, pp. 200-4, at p. 203. Compare ‘Tractatus 31’ (written in 441), section 3.61-8, pp. 163-4, where Leo takes Christ’s infancy as an exhortation to humility, but not the martyrdom of the infants which he also describes.

40 Ibid., section 3.48-64, pp. 202-3.

41 The influence of this passage is stressed by C. Gnilka, Aetas Spiritatisi Die Überwindung der naíüralichen Altersstufen ah Ideal jrühchristlkhen Lebens = Theophaneia, 24 (Bonn, 1972), pp. 106-11.

42 Leo, ‘Tractatus 37’, section 4.68-73, ed. CChr. SL, 138, p. 203.

43 The desire to limit the application of the verse comes through most clearly in Ambrose, ‘Expositio Evangelii Secundum Lucani’, viii.57-9, ed. M. Adrìaen, Sancii Ambrosii Mediolanensis Opera, CChr. SL, 14 (1957), pp. 319-20, and as developed by Maximus of Turin, ‘Sermo 54’. sections 1.18-2.49, ed. Mutzenbecher, A., Maximi Episcopi Taurinensis. Collectio Sermonum, CChr. SL, 23 (1962), pp. 218–19 Google Scholar. Here Jesus himself is made the ‘child’ whose example was being referred to. The meaning of this exegetical tradition is discussed in my forthcoming study. The Idea of Innocent Martyrdom.

44 See Augustine, ‘Confessiones’, 1.vii. 11.19-20, ed. Verheijen, L., Sancii Augustini Opera, CChr, SL, 27 (1981), p. 6,Google Scholar Augustine’s belief in the innate adult nature of children is eminently compatible with the doctrines of original sin and infant baptism: see O’Donnell, J. J., Augustine, Confessions: Introduction, Text and Commentary, 3 vols (Oxford, (1992), 2, p. 44.Google Scholar

45 This sermon is nowhere printed in full, but Lemarié, ‘Le sermon Mai 193’, pp. 141-2, edits an abbreviated text (see further, n. 4 above), while J. E. Cross, ‘The Insular Connections of a Sermon for Holy Innocents’, in Stokes, M. andBurton, T., eds, Medieval Literature and Antiquities for Basil Cottle (Cambridge, 1987), pp. 61–6 Google Scholar, has shown that this sermon was used by the author of a homily preserved in, amongst other manuscripts, an eleventh-century Bury St Edmund’s homiliary: today, Cambridge, Pembroke College MS 25, fols 19v-21r, ed. ibid., pp. 69-70.

46 Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl. MS elm 6233, fol. 124r.

47 Ibid., fol. 122V. See also ‘Sermo Mai 193’, section 3.24-7, ed. Lémarie, ‘Le sermon Mai 193’, p. 142. For the topos that the infants prefigure all the martyrs, see Pseudo-Op ta tus, ‘In natali infantum’, section 4.37-8 and 40, ed. Wilmart, ‘Un sermon’, p. 283; Prudentius, ‘Liber Cathemerinon’, 12.129-32, ed. Thompson, 1, pp. 108-10; Chromatius of Aquileia, ‘Tractatus VI, in Matthaeum 2.13–18’, section 2.63-74, ed. CChr. SL, 9A, p. 222; Caesarius of Aries, ‘Sermo 222’, section 2, ed. CCfir. SL, 104, p. 878. In Bede, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, 1-3, ed. CChr. SL, 122, p. 68, their deaths ‘signify’ the passions of all Christ’s martyrs.

48 Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl., MS elm 6233, fol. 122V, reproduced with some rearrangement or order in ‘Sermo Mai 193’, section 4.28-30 and 33-5, ed. Lémarie, ‘Le sermon Mai 193’, p. 142.

49 Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl., MS elm 6233, fol. 122V-123V. The author is probably following the form given by Jerome, ‘Commentariorum in Mattheum’, iii. 18.4.500-5, ed. Hurst, D. andAdriaen, M., Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera Exegética, CChr. SL, 7 (1969)Google Scholar, p. 157, who seems to have derived the idea from Hilary of Poitiers, ‘Commentarius in Matthaeum’, xviii. 1, ed. J. Doignon, Hilaire de Poitiers sur Matthieu, 2 vols, SC, 254 and 258 (1978-9), 2, pp. 74-5.

50 Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl., MS elm 6233, fol. 122v: ‘Hiis sunt quos eligit Dominus quorum innocentia sicut paruulorum pura et munda est.’ This idea is deleted in ‘Sermo Mai 193’, but expanded in ‘Omelia in Natale Innocentium’, lines 54-9, ed. Cross, ‘A Sermon for Holy Innocents’, p. 69.

51 The earliest known Roman lectionary, the eighth-century Comes of Würzburg, has this lection. Sec G. Morin, ‘Le plus ancien “Comes” ou lectionnaire de l’Eglise romaine’, RBen, 27 (1910), p. 47 (item xiii). See also the tenth-century Corbie (and St Germain-des-Pres) ‘Liber Comitis’, item vii, ed. W. H. Frère, Studies in the Early Roman Lectionary, 3, The Roman Epistle Lectionary = Alcuin Club Collections, 32 (London, 1935), p. 2.

52 Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl., MS elm 6233, fol. 124r. Note, again, that whereas ‘Sermo Mai 193’ eradicates all reference to Apocalypse 14.1-5, the more radical later sermon, ‘Omelia in Natale Innocentium’, ed. Cross, ‘A Sermon for Holy Innocents’, p. 69.47-9, adds a further reference to Apocalypse 14.4. See also lines 70-9, p. 70.

53 The Gallican Rite used the title infantes, while employing readings from Jer. 31. 15-20, Rev. 6.9-11, and Matt. 2.1-23; Salmon, ed., The Lectionary of Luxeuil, 1, pp. 18-20; J. Mabillon, ‘De liturgica Gallicana libritres’, PZ. 72.176, the Mozaiabic rite the same title (under 8 January), while employing readings from Jer. 31.15-20, Heb. 2.9-3.2, and Matt. 2.16-23 (see J. Perez de Urbel and Ruiz-Zorilla, A. Gonzalez y, eds, Liber commicus, 2 vols. Monumenta Hispaniae sacra, series liturgica, 2–3 (Madrid, 1950-5), I, pp. 47–9)Google Scholar. In the Armenian Lectionary the readings for their feast are Matt. 2.16-18, Acts 12.1-24, Heb. 2.14-18, and Ps. 103. See the table inj. Wilkinson, tr., Egeria’s Travels to the Holy Land, rev. edn (Jerusalem, 1981), p. 272, item 55. See also Duchesne, L., Christian Worship: Its Origins and Evolution, 5th edn (London, 1919), p. 268, n. 4.Google Scholar

54 I know of only one potentially early sermon (namely, ‘Sermo Casinensis 3, p. 38’, ed. PLSupp., 2.1320-3) which alludes to Rev. 14.1–5, but it is likely to be relatively late. As Scorza Barcellona, ‘La celebrazione dei Santi Innocenti’, pp. 760-1, points out, most early sermons mention Ps. 78.1C—n and Rom. 8.35 when refering to the Lections for that day (see, for example, Pseudo-Augustine, ‘Sermo Caillau-Saint-Yves 2, 87’, section 2, ed. PLSupp., 2.1101, also citing Apocalypse 6.9-10). Bede, ‘De ss. Innocentibus’, 127-57, ed. CChr. SL, 122, pp. 71-2, draws heavily upon Apocalypse 7.9-17, implying, perhaps, that they and not 14.1-5 supplied the epistle in the early eighth-century Northumbrian church.

55 ‘Sacramentarium Veronense’, nos 1284-93, ed- L. C. Mohlberg, Sacramentarium Veronense (Cod. Bibl. Capii. Venn. LXXXV [80]) = Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, series maior. Fontes I (Rome, 1956). These prayers would seem to date from the mid-fifth century, but see further, Bourque, E., Étude sur les sacramentales romains, pt, i. Les textes primitifs = Studi di Antichità Cristiana, 20 (Vatican, 1948), 1, esp. p. 143.Google Scholar

56 Ibid., no. 1286, p. 165. See also no. 1291, pp. 165-6.

57 This belief is a premise in rhetorical arguments advanced by both Irenaeus of Antioch and Cyprian of Carthage: see Irenaeus, ‘Adversus Haereses’, 3.16.4, A. Rousseau and L. Doultreleau, eds, Irénée de Lyon Contre les Hérésies Livre III, 2 vols SC, iio-n (1974), 2, p. 304; Cyprian of Carthage, Ep. 58.6, to the Congregation of Thibaris, ed. CSEL, 3.2, p. 661.21-7. See also Fahey, M. A., Cyprian and the Bible: a Study in Third-Century Exegesis (Tubingen. 1971), pp. 203–4.Google Scholar

58 See, for example, Peter Chrysologus, ‘De Herode et infãntibus’, esp. section 8.82-3, ed. CChr. SL, 24B, p. 955.