FIVE ANASTASIAE AND TWO FEBRONIAE: A GUIDED TOUR IN THE MAZE OF ANASTASIA LEGENDS PART TWO: THE ROMAN DOSSIER. II. ANASTASIA BETWEEN BASSILLA AND PETRONILLA (CONCLUDING PART) Текст научной статьи по специальности «Философия, этика, религиоведение»

www.volsu.ru

DOI: https://doi.Org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2024.6.4

UDC 25(37) LBC 86.313.3-574

Submitted: 13.03.2024 Accepted: 13.05.2024

FIVE ANASTASIAE AND TWO FEBRONIAE: A GUIDED TOUR IN THE MAZE OF ANASTASIA LEGENDS

Part Two: The Roman Dossier. II. Anastasia Between Bassilla and Petronilla

(Concluding Part) *

Basil Lourie

HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation

Abstract. In this concluding part of the study of the western hagiographical dossier of St Anastasia, the attention is focused on two main problems: the earliest cult of St Anastasia in Sirmium (replacing the cult of St Bassilla with the cult of St Anastasia) and the cult of Anastasia and Petronilla in the St Andrew church created by Pope Symmachus near St Peter's cathedral. The development of the cult of St Petronilla (the legendary daughter of Apostle Peter) is related to a specific commemoration of St Peter established by Pope Leo the Great.

Key words: St Anastasia, St Bassilla, St Petronilla, Old St Peter's cathedral, Pope Leo the Great, Pope Symmachus, Sirmium.

Citation. Lourie B. Five Anastasiae and Two Febroniae: A Guided Tour in the Maze of Anastasia Legends. Part Two: The Roman Dossier. II. Anastasia Between Bassilla and Petronilla (Concluding Part). Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. History. Area Studies. International Relations], 2024, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 36-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2024.6.4

УДК 25(37) Дата поступления статьи: 13.03.2024

ББК 86.313.3-574 Дата принятия статьи: 13.05.2024

ПЯТЬ АНАСТАСИЙ И ДВЕ ФЕВРОНИИ: ЭКСКУРСИЯ ПО ЛАБИРИНТУ ЛЕГЕНД ОБ АНАСТАСИИ

Часть вторая. Римское досье. II. Анастасия между Вассиллой и Петрониллой

(заключительная часть) *

Вадим Миронович Лурье

Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», г. Москва, Российская Федерация

Аннотация. В настоящей заключительной части исследования западного агиографического досье св. Анастасии основное внимание уделяется двум проблемам: древнейшей форме культа св. Анастасии в Сирмии (процессу замещения культом Анастасии культа св. Вассиллы) и культу свв. Анастасии и Петрониллы в устроенной папой Римским Симмахом церкви Св. Апостола Андрея, примыкавшей к собору Св. Петра в Ватикане. Развитие культа св. Петрониллы (легендарной дочери апостола Петра) оказывается связанным с особым днем памяти апостола Петра, учрежденным папой Львом Великим.

Ключевые слова: св. Анастасия, св. Вассилла, св. Петронилла, собор Св. Петра в Риме, папа Римский

<n Лев Великий, папа Римский Симмах, Сирмий.

20

г Цитирование. Лурье В. М. Пять Анастасий и две Февронии: экскурсия по лабиринту легенд об чи Анастасии. Часть вторая. Римское досье. II. Анастасия между Вассиллой и Петрониллой (заключитель-§ ная часть) // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 4, История. Регионоведение. ►3 Международные отношения. - 2024. - Т. 29, № 6. - С. 36-58. - (На англ. яз.) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/ @ jvolsu4.2024.6.4

Introduction

The present concluding part of the study will focus on two parts of the western dossier of St Anastasia: its earliest part related to Sirmium and its latest part related to Rome, where the cult of St Anastasia became entangled with the cult of St Petronilla. In Sirmium, the image of St Anastasia emerged gradually from the image of the historical saint Bassilla. In Rome, the new form of the cult of St Anastasia together with the legendary daughter of Apostle Peter, St Petronilla, developed in the church of St Andrew, created by Pope Symmachus in a rotunda adjacent to Old St Peter's cathedral in the Vatican.

8. Anastasia's Relics: From Rome to Sirmium

In the present section, we summarize the available data related to St Anastasia's relics in both Rome and Sirmium.

8.1. What Was Said in the Latin Legend

After having explored the hagiographical coordinates of time in the common cult of Bassilla and Anastasia, we have now to explore its coordinates of place. For this purpose, we have to revisit, for the third time, the question of the burial of Anastasia (see above, section 2.3.4, for the relevant quotation from LLA, and 4.5, for the discussion of the date).

The "anti-Roman" Aquileian editor removed any explicit geographical markers but left some implicit ones. Among the latter, the most important is the fact that Apollonia received permission to take the body of Anastasia thanks to the wife of the prefect (per matronam praefecti). The wife of a Roman prefect lived certainly in Rome; there was no prefect in the Pontine islands. If Apollonia was acquainted with her sufficiently to make this request, it is implied that she too lived in Rome. A rich Roman matron would hardly have lived in remote islands, especially those known as a place of exile for women from the nobility; were she exiled herself, she would have never been rich enough to build a basilica.

These considerations prove Lapidge's hypothesis that LLA implies Anastasia to be buried in Rome. To Lapidge's considerations based on the requirement of geographical coherence in the plot, we can add even more striking observations

related to the implied local proximity of the two matrons, Apollonia and the wife of the prefect. The two groups of arguments together - from geography and from the two matrons - point to Rome as the burial place of Anastasia.

The most important argument against the burial of Anastasia in Rome is the fact that the church of St Anastasia on the Palatine has never claimed to have the relics of her patron saint 1. The same argument prevents Lapidge from insisting on his own hypothesis concerning the burial in Rome. He considers the location of the basilica built by Apollonia to be "unclear" and adds that, in Rome, there was no titulus--church in the name of Apollonia. "What is odd," he said, "is that the author makes no attempt to link the martyred Anastasia with the titulus--church of S. Anastasia on the Palatine"2.

For us, this argument has no force, because we have demonstrated that the connection of the cult of St Anastasia with her titulus church and Christmas is a secondary phenomenon. Therefore, we can insist that the Anastasia who was commemorated on September 7 was buried in Rome.

8.2. Where in Rome?

The text preserved for us in LLA contains a vague but somewhat consistent description of Anastasia's burial place. It was located within the private garden of a Roman matron (viridarium domus suae), in a basilica constructed by its owner, who was the same matron. This matron was somewhat connected to the praefectus urbi (perhaps through his wife). Such descriptions need not be directly applicable to any historical landscape, but they must be recognisable in the landscape of the "imaginary Rome" of the hagiographer and only then in the sacred topography of the real material Rome. This description can become "readable" only against the background of other Roman legends.

Unfortunately, the original name of the matron known to us from LLA as Apollonia seems to be concealed. We have seen that the name Apollonia was borrowed from another legend, BHL 643 (see above, section 5.1.1), unrelated to the deposition of the relics of Anastasia. The name Apollonia was, among the Roman Christians, exceptionally rare 3. Therefore, it hardly has another meaning than a link to BHL 643, perhaps deliberately concealing the matron's name in the earlier legend.

The phrase viridarium domus is ambiguous, depending on whether we read it in the Latin of Late Antiquity or in the Latin of the Christian Middle Ages. In the former case, it would mean a garden in an internal yard of a Roman villa (within or outside the city), whereas, in the latter, "a field sown with forage"4 (in a suburb) or even a cemetery near a monastery 5. This is not to exclude that our hagiographer played on this variety of meanings.

Looking for the historical prototype of Apollonia as the owner of the viridarium and the basilica, we have to verify, first of all, the female companions of Anastasia (other than those she acquired in Constantinople, that is, not Theodota and Irene, Agape, and Chionia). In the presently accessible legends, she has only two companions, Bassilla and Petronilla (the legends of Petronilla we will examine below, section 9). Moreover, Anastasia was, at the least, closely connected to the legends related to Flavia Domitilla. Let us translate this data into the language of sacred topography.

Topographically, Flavia Domitilla and Petronilla (if we consider the early period, before Pope Symmachus ca 500) mean the same, the Catacombs of Domitilla, where Petronilla was said to be deposed, while Flavia Domitilla was considered to be the founder 6. Bassilla, of course, thus would refer to the Catacombs of Bassilla. It is of course possible that the daughter of Gallus and Constantina was buried in one of these cemeteries.

Therefore, it is tempting to check the Roman Christian funeral inscriptions in search of the burial of an Anastasia who "fits." The total number of such inscriptions (datable from the very late fourth to the early fifth century but without those dedicated to the children when their age is indicated) is not especially big, only seven or six 7. Among them, the most interesting to us are those related to the catacombs mentioned in the hagiographical cycles related to either Bassilla or Domitilla 8. They are the following:

ICUR 6552.a (Anastasia / in pace) datable to the second half of the fourth century, from the Catacombs of Domitilla (in situ; Via Ardeatina);

ICUR 12267 ([--si]ve Anastasia- / [---] m(ensibus) V d(e)p(osita) IIII id(us) iun(ias)) datable to the last quarter of the fourth century, from the anonymous cemetery on the Via Ardeatina (thus, not so far from the Catacombs of Domitilla);

ICUR 26692, undated, from the Catacombs of Bassilla.

The text of ICUR 26692 is restored by the publishers (D. Mazzoleni and C. Carletti in 1992) as pertaining to some Anastasius: Anastas[io? qui vixit ann—] / et mens[—] / Anastas[ius? fecit?]. One can see that a restoration with the name Anastasia is no less possible, and the second mention of the name is not necessarily connected with fecit. This inscription was relatively long, thus revealing some importance of the defunct.

These indications are too weak for proving anything, but they are, nevertheless, not negligible. At least, they demonstrate that, in the period we are interested in, a historical prototype of St Anastasia might have been buried in Roman cemeteries, including those of Bassilla and Domitilla. The possibility of her burial in the Catacombs of Domitilla would be fitting with the mutual connection between the legendary Anastasia and her maj or hagiographical prototype. The alternative possibility of her burial in the Catacombs of Bassilla would provide a very natural explanation for the origin of the legend where the two saints, Bassilla and Anastasia, act together.

Both catacombs, of Domitilla and of Bassilla, included subterranean basilicas. The relics of Bassilla, however, were deposed in an open-air basilica near the catacombs, which is now destroyed without any trace 9. This basilica could have a good chance of being the prototype for the basilica erected by Apollonia for the relics of Anastasia, especially because the most venerated saint of the adjacent catacombs, Hermes, was, according to his legend, a Roman prefect. In historical Rome, there was no such praefectus urbi, but he actually (I would insist on this word) existed in the imaginary Rome of hagiography. In this way, Bassilla must have approached this Roman prefect to obtain permission for an additional burial within or near her own domus (the basilica of St Bassilla).

The Passio of St Hermes is not preserved as a self-standing text, whereas there could be hardly any doubt that such text(s) existed, given that St Hermes was one of the most venerated Roman martyrs (especially after the sixth century). The available recension is preserved "encapsulated" within the Passio of Sts Alexander, Eventius, and Theodulus (all of them being deposed in other

cemeteries), the earliest recension of which is BHL 266; its date is now defined variously by various scholars 10. The date of BHL 266 is not the date of the legend of St Hermes but its terminus ante quem. The terminus post quem, according to the widely accepted hypothesis, could be defined with a Damasian epigram (Nr 48), two marble fragments of which were found in the catacombs of Hermes/Bassilla (ICUR 26669). This epigram, however, does not mention the name of the saint to whom it is dedicated. It is dedicated to a martyr who arrived in Rome from Greece and, therefore, must have had a low social status, perhaps even that of a slave 11. Be this as it may, the legendary biography of St Hermes as an urban prefect is datable to the fifth century. According to P.A.B. Llewellyn, Hermes's titulature provided by the hagiographer is datable to a period after 438 [45, pp. 292-293]. Probably, it belongs to the "encapsulated" original legend of Hermes.

According to this legend, the prefect Hermes was martyred for the conversion of his whole family (spouse, sister, and sons) and his 1,250 slaves, not to mention the families of each of them 12. This is a story compressed into one sentence. The spouse of Hermes might have played a more active role in the original account.

We can cautiously suppose, without insisting on this conclusion, that the burial of Anastasia took place in the basilica of St Bassilla or nearby. The episode with the wife of the Roman prefect -which is certainly not a negligible detail - would have been, in LLA, an echo of the topographical connection of St Bassilla and St Hermes.

8.3. The Fate of the Relics of Anastasia

Regardless of the exact place of her burial, the historical Anastasia, who was buried somewhere in Rome, was the daughter of Gallus and Constantina. In the fifth century, but not immediately after her passing, her biography started to change; she became a companion - or rather the principal companion - of the martyr Bassilla/ Basilissa, then highly venerated in Rome 13.

The Roman legend of Bassilla/Basilissa and Anastasia then acquired a higher status, thus becoming a legend of female companions of the apostles. The alternative path of development led to the establishment of a link between Anastasia and Sirmium. The mutual connections between the respective legends are represented at Stem 3.

The marginalisation of the pair of Bassilla and Anastasia was a natural consequence of the reshaping of the Roman stational liturgy under Leo the Great, when the titulus church of Anastasia became one of the most important churches of the city and, therefore, the main site of Anastasia's cult. This site lacked any relics, and this fact must have contributed to Anastasia's tomb falling into oblivion. The legend of Bassilla and Anastasia was replaced by the prototype of BHL 401, the Latin Passio ipsius Anastasiae, where the burial scene with Apollonia was introduced. Thus Apollonia replaced Bassilla.

The same period (roughly, the pontificate of Leo the Great) was especially favourable for creating a cult of Anastasia in Sirmium, given that she was no longer venerated in relics in Rome, although she was still connected with Bassilla, the common martyr of Rome and Sirmium. If some relics, previously venerated in Sirmium as those of Bassilla, were still preserved in this city, the appearance of relics attributed to Anastasia would have been logical to expect somewhere nearby. I would not exclude an even more radical scenario, when the relics of Bassilla would have been reattributed to Anastasia. If so, the relics translated to Constantinople from Sirmium under the name of Anastasia would have been those of Bassilla.

8.4. St Anastasia's Cult in Sirmium

Unfortunately, very little can be said about the cult of St Anastasia in Sirmium.

The fragment of a Latin inscription from Sirmium that was published in 2013 and interpreted by its publishers as mentioning a basilica of St Anastasia (I. Popovic, S. Ferjancic [57]) has now been read more carefully. It turned out to be unrelated to a basilica of Anastasia and, very probably, it does not mention Anastasia at all (it contains letters ANAST that could be restored to the name Anastasius as well). Mirkovic [50, pp. 121, 206].

Nevertheless, the existence of a great church of Anastasia in Sirmium is evidenced by the so-called Vita altera of St Demetrius of Thessalonica (BHG 497) 14. Prefect Leontius, known as the builder of the basilica of St Demetrius in Thessalonica according to the Vita prima (BHG 496) 15, is, in the Vita altera, the builder of such a basilica as well - but not in Thessalonica.

According to the Vita altera, prefect Leontius, having been healed by the saint, wished to transport the latter's relics from Thessalonica to Sirmium but was prevented by a miraculous intevention from the saint himself. Therefore, he took into Thessalonica only a cloth of the saint called ^ n^ia aopog (funeral chiton?) and deposed it in Sirmium, as the Vita altera specifies (§ 17) (PG 116 [49, col. 1184 BC, quoted 1184 C]),

év тф пар' aùxoù KTicBévTi éKeïce navcénTœ vaф toù âyiou ^àpTupoç Дпдптрюи n^noiov toù cepac^iou oî'kou t^ç KaHivÎKou ^àpTupoç ÂvacTaciaç.

in the most esteemed temple of the holy martyr Demetrius built by himself [sc., Leontius] near to the venerable house of the victorious martyr Anastasia.

According to Hippolite Delehaye, the historical situation was exactly opposite: Leontius built the temple in Thessalonica and deposited there some "secondary relics", whereas the body of the saint remained in Sirmium. Serbian and Macedonian archaeologists prefer to consider this legend as an adaptation of an earlier Sirmian legend 16 and attribute to prefect Leontius the Demetrius church in Sirmium built, according to them, before 441 17. Our interest, however, is not in these facts but in the attitude of the hagiographer. He shared the Thessalonician version of the story that claimed to place the relics of St Demetrius in Thessalonica, although buried and inaccessible. However, he placed the two cults, those of St Demetrius and St Anastasia, "near" to each other and almost on the same level but with a slight preponderance of the cult of Anastasia: it is the church of Demetrius that is "near" her church but not vice versa.

Important considerations on the Sitz im Leben of the Vita secunda have been put forward by Peter Toth, who paid attention to several mentions of Sirmium there; such mentions are unexplainable if the author himself did not belong to a Sirmian or rather ex-Sirmian milieu. According to Toth, the author belonged to the former population of Sirmium that left the city in 582 18. These people were going in different directions, and this one was among those who found their home in Thessalonica. "...the Passio

altera seems but a reconciliation of two distinct Demetrius traditions, the Sirmian and the local Thessalonician, but <...> strictly from the point of view ofthe 'receiving party', the Thessalonicians," wrote Toth [66, p. 168].

The author of the Vita altera of St Demetrius, although having become a Thessalonician author, did not completely leave his Sirmian predilections - including expressing very high esteem for St Anastasia. His attempt to reshape the Thessalonician cult of St Demetrius would have found there a grateful audience, even though it ultimately was unsuccessful. However, he wrote around the year 600 19; such an author would be hardly imaginable in mid-seventh-century Thessalonica.

Thus, the evidence for a great church of St Anastasia in Sirmium already in the time of the prefect Leontius (praefectus Illyrici in 412-413) belongs to a later author. This author knew Sirmium very well, but his Sirmium was that of the sixth century. We have no way to decide whether he anachronistically placed a sixth-century church into the realm of the early fifth century or whether he was faithfully following his sources.

To sum up, we know nothing certain about the cult of St Anastasia in Sirmium before the translation of her relics from there to Constantinople.

9. Pope Symmachus: Making the Apostle's Family Open to the Goths

The name of Anastasia appeared in a certain legend related to Apostle Peter and his (legendary) daughter Petronilla 20. For the Passions épiques, the time of action of the legend depends on the importance of the respective cult (the more important, the closer to the apostles). It is no wonder that the cult of Anastasia, as its importance increased, pushed Anastasia into apostolic times, thus resulting in the multiplication of her avatars. This development was unconnected to the martyr of Sirmium; it took place in Rome.

Unlike the pair of Basilissa and Anastasia, the pair of Anastasia and Petronilla is ordered in the opposite direction: Anastasia is the first, whereas her companion is the second. This fact reveals a fundamental feature of the respective cult: the cult of Petronilla was grafted onto the cult of Anastasia, and not vice versa.

9.1. A Byzantine Commemoration:

Anastasia and Petronia/Petronilla

Anastasia and Petronilla are commemorated in the Synaxarium of Constantinople on September 29, where the text of the Synaxarium quotes almost verbatim the text of the Typikon of the Great Church for the same day: ^v^n Tng ayiag oaio^dpxupog Avaaxaaiag x^g aaKnxpiag Kai nsxproviag ^apxupog (Delehaye [17, p. 90]) ("commemoration of Saint nun and martyr Anastasia the ascetic and martyr Petronia"), whereas, in the Typikon, these saints were at the end of a rather long list of commemorated saints: ...Kai x&v aytrov ^apxuprov Avaaxaaiag x^g aaKnxpiag Kai nsxproviag x^g ^apxupog (J. Mateos [47, p. 50]) ("...and of saint martyrs Anastasia the ascetic and martyr Petronia"). This commemoration is absent from some translations of the Synaxarium (Armenian, Slavonic, and Arabic), but it is preserved in the Georgian: ^9o^ob5 ¿Bib^iboi 9ro^gbob5Q,

9m^gbob5Q (^o^o b3oB53b56o [72, p. 31]) ("...and Saint Anastasia the martyr and Petronia the martyr"). Apparently, there is no such commemoration in the Latin liturgical documents (but we will see that the situation is more complicated). The legend itself became even less lucky than the legend of Basilissa and Anastasia: it is not preserved in even a short entry of the Synaxarium. We know the commemorative note only.

The name Petronia is an almost exact equivalent of the Latin name Petronilla, because both are derived from the masculine name Petronius and not Peter. Transformation of the Roman martyr Petronilla into the daughter of the Apostle Peter is a secondary phenomenon, if certainly prompted by the false etymology of "Petronilla" from "Peter." "Petronia" and "Petronilla" were interchangeable in Greek (see below, section 9.3).

We are in the presence of a legend where a certain Anastasia is acting together with Petronia/ Petronilla while being the leading figure in the pair.

In the Passio of Nereus and Achilleus, we have seen a similar situation: the leading figure was Domitilla, whereas Petronilla was an auxiliary character, despite her status as the daughter of Apostle Peter. This legend, as is known quite well, evolved from the sacred topography of the

Catacomb (cemetery) of Domitilla, which became the place of the cult of a certain historical martyr Petronilla, and this martyr, in turn, was eventually transformed into the daughter of the Apostle Peter. Domitilla, however, remained the main character in the legend, as she was the "owner" (actually, the founder) of the respective catacombs 21.

The commemoration of Anastasia and Petronilla (not of Petronilla and Anastasia) fits with the pattern of the Passio of Nereus and Achilleus (Domitilla and Petronilla), but the name ofAnastasia replaced that of Domitilla. In LLA and its Byzantine and Roman predecessors, we have seen the same situation: Anastasia's exile to the Pontine islands is patterned after that of Domitilla, whereas the name of Domitilla disappeared.

The date of this commemoration, September 29, is certainly remarkable, and we will have to return to it after having reviewed the other dates related to Petronilla.

9.2. The Uniquely Western Date: May 31 (or 29)

At present the main piece ofthe hagiographical dossier of Petronilla is the respective part of the Passio ofNereus and Achilleus (BHL 6061); there is no mention of Anastasia there. The Petronilla of this legend, whose commemoration date is connected with that of Felicula (who died bis septem diebus later, that is, on the fourteenth day after Petronilla counting inclusively), is commemorated on May 31 (in some manuscripts, on May 29) with the commemoration on Felicula on June 13 (corresponding to May 31 as the day of Petronilla) 22.

It is generally accepted, after Duchesne, that this commemoration day of Petronilla is related to the annual statio "in St Petronilla's cemetery" (in cymiterio beatae Petronille) established by Pope Gregory III (731-741), even though the Liber Pontificalis does not provide the exact date of this annual commemoration 23. The cemetery meant is that of Domitilla, which previously had never been called after Petronilla. This fact does not contradict the possibility that the commemoration date itself existed earlier. Indeed, it is unknown to the eastern sources, and the manuscripts of the Martyrologium Hieronymianum, which contain it, are not earlier than Pope Gregory III. Nevertheless, even though these manuscripts do not allow us to know which of the two dates,

May 29 or May 31, is the earlier one, scholars consider that one of these dates goes back to the fifth-century archetype of the Martyrologium 24.

This commemoration is relatively early, but it is unknown to the eastern sources. This means, with a high likelihood, that, by the Byzantine period, there was, in Rome, no important celebration on this day.

9.3. The Common Western and Eastern Date: October 8

9.3.1. Eastern Dossier

In the Synaxarium of Constantinople, there is a commemoration of Petronilla on October 8: Kai x^g ayiag nsxproviag x^g Buyaxpog xou ayiou nsxpou xou anooxo^ou (Deleheyae [17, p. 122]) "And (commemoration) of St Petronia, the daughter of Saint Apostle Peter". In the twelfth-century manuscript Vaticanus gr. 2046, which is the closest one to the Greek original of the Slavonic translation (made in the eleventh century), the wording is slightly different: ...Kai x^g ayiag nsxpoviAlag Buyaxpog xou ayiou anooxo^ou nsxpou xou Kopu^aiou 25 ("...and Saint Petronilla, the daughter of Saint Apostle Peter the koryphaios (of apostles)"). Here, the spelling of the name Petronilla is preserved with minimal distortion (nsxpoviMa instead of nsxproviAla). In the Greek translation of the Passio of Nereus and Achilleus, BHG 1327, the name of Petronilla is spelled correctly as nsxpawiAla, but quite often, in Byzantium, this name was transformed to Petronia.

The commemoration of October 8 is absent from the ancient documents in Greek, including the Typikon of the Great Church. Moreover, one can see that, in the recension published by Delehaye, it was inserted in the text received by the Synaxarium from the Typikon. In the Typikon, the entry for October 8 was concluded by the phrase Kai aBAnoig yuvaiK&v xivaiv ayirov (Mateos [47, p. 64]) ("...and the contest of some saint women"), whereas, in the recension of Delehaye, the cited passage about St Petronilla is followed with the phrase Kai aB^norg sxsprov yuvaix&v xivrov ayirov ("And the contest of some other saint women") (Delehaye [17, p. 122]), taken from the Typikon but with an addition of "other".

The easiest way to interpret these data is to accept that the commemoration of Petronilla in Constantinople was established in the first half

of the tenth century (before the completion of the Synaxarium but after the formation of the Typikon of the Great Church) 26. However, our knowledge of the pre-900 liturgical calendar of Constantinople is too fragmentary to allow us to draw any definitive conclusions. At the present stage, we can take the mid-tenth century only as the terminus ante quem for the appearance of the commemoration of Petronilla on October 8.

9.3.2. Western Dossier

The western documents that mention Petronilla on either the 8th or 9th of October are rare, and their data have never been presented systematically in the scholarly literature 27. Apparently, they contradict each other in the date, the 8th or the 9th, but they certainly confirm each other in stating that this commemoration was established in connection with the new church of St Petronilla where her relics were deposed by Pope Paul I in 757 28. This church was established in the west rotunda adjacent to the transept of Saint Peter's in the Vatican at the north side. On the east side, this rotunda was connected to the east rotunda, the church of the Apostle Andrew (see the reconstruction of the two rotundas near Saint Peters's in Figure 29). The west rotunda was demolished between 1513 and 1532-1535 30, and the east rotunda, in 1777.

All presently known documents containing the commemoration at issue on either October 8 or 9 are the following:

1. The abbreviated martyrologium in the Ottobonianus latinus 38, the ninth-century Italian manuscript where the recension of the martyrologium is datable to the pontificate of Gregory IV (827-844) 31: VIII. Id. Octob. [= October 8] Roma, translatio sanctae Petronillae 32.

2. The capitularium evangeliorum (calendar of the gospel readings attached to the liturgical gospel) from Lucca, 9th/10th cent.33: Die VIII. mensis suprascripti [Octobris]. Translatio Corporis Sanctae Petronillae. F. A. Zaccaria [70, p. 211].

3. Two ninth-century capitularia evangeliorum from the Frankish kingdom (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale lat. 93 and 13171) 34: Die VIIII mensis supra scripti [Octobris] dedicatio ecclesiae scae Petronellae. Th. Klauser [39, p. 181, Nr 259].

The 9th of October had a special meaning for the Carolingians and, therefore, for the Popes Stephanus II and Paul I, because it was the commemoration day of St Dionysius of Paris 35. It is certainly not accidental that the Vatican commemoration of Petronilla was indicated as October 9 only in the documents from Francia, the state of the Carolingians, whereas, in the Italian documents, the date is October 8. These dates, however, mark different events: the documents having October 8 commemorate translatio (the translation of the alleged relics of Petronilla from the Catacombs of Domitilla to the Vatican rotunda), whereas those having October 9 commemorate dedicatio (the dedication of the church of St Petronilla in this rotunda).

With recourse to the calendar, we can clarify the matter definitively. In 757, October 8 was Saturday, and October 9 was Sunday. The dedication of a church was normally performed on Sunday. Thus, we have a sequence of the two events resulting in the two commemorations: the translation of the relics on October 8, Saturday, and the dedication of the church on October 9, Sunday. Given the coincidence of the dedication day with the day of St Dionysius, one can understand why, for the Franks, the date of the dedication became more important. In Rome, however, the most notable event (described in the interpolation to the Liber Pontificalis already in the eighth century) was the translation itself.

Therefore, de Rossi was right when he considered October 8 to be the genuine date of the feast. One can only add that, probably, in eighth-century Rome, the original commemoration was established as a two-day cycle on October 8 and 9 with the focus on the first day. Only the most important date, October 8, passed from Rome to Constantinople at some time before the mid-tenth century.

We have just confirmed the common scholarly opinion that the date of October 8 (and its Frankish alternative October 9) does not predate the eighth century. Nevertheless, a church in the west rotunda existed already in the 640s. We have to review these earlier data.

9.4. Saint Anastasia between the Imperial Mausoleum and Saint Petronilla

In 75 7, the west rotunda was dedicated as the church of St Petronilla. A roughly contemporaneous

description of the liturgical organization of this church is preserved in the eighth-century addition to the Notitia ecclesiarum urbis Romae. Glorie [32, p. 310]. The author of this guide described the church of the Apostle Andrew in the east rotunda and then passed to the east rotunda that he called "Saint Petronilla", in accordance with the 757 dedication (I add in the translation below numbers referring to Figure).

Egrediente uero accipiet sanctus te Martinus, et deducet ad sanctam Petronellam; ibi te primo accipiet Saluator mundi, adsignatque sanctae Anastasiae, et illa sanctissimae Genetrici Dei, quae te commendat sanctae Petronellae, ut te deducat, ad filium suum Saluatorem mundi, qui te per beatum Theodorum mittit ad sanctum Michaelem archangelum.

When you come out, Saint Martinus will accept you [perhaps A8] and will guide you to Saint Petronilla. There, the Saviour of the World will accept you first [B4] and, then, will recommend you to Saint Anastasia [B3], and she to the most saint Theotokos [B2], who you will send to Saint Petronella [B1], for guiding you to her son Saviour of the World [B5], who will transmit you, through Blessed Theodore [B6], to Saint Archangel Michael [B7].

This arrangement of the altars in the exedrae blatantly contradicts the dedication of the church to St Petronilla. St Petronilla's altar occupied the second-ranked place, whereas the first-ranked one belonged to St Anastasia. It is the altar of St Anastasia that was coaxial to the main altars of both Saint Peter's and the church of Apostle Andrew (A1) in the east rotunda, being in mirror symmetry with the latter. Eventually, in 1470, the altar of St Anastasia was rededicated to the Virgin Mary, but, up to this date, the ancient dedication of this altar was preserved.

This fact suggests the idea that, before the church of St Petronilla was established in the west rotunda in 757, another church had already been there, where the main venerated saint was St Anastasia, and perhaps the second one St Petronilla. We know, however, that, in 483, the west rotunda still did not contain any church, being a mausoleum of the Western imperial family (see below, section 9.7.2). Therefore, a church dedicated primarily to St Anastasia

and perhaps secondarily to St Petronilla was established there some time between 483 and 757. The relics of St Petronilla were deposed there because an altar of this saint had previously existed in the church, and, after the deposition, the church was rededicated.

The preeminent place of the altar of Anastasia in the west rotunda is striking but only seldom has this fact has been dealt with in the literature. One of the rare exceptions was Walter Schumacher who supposed that this rotunda served as the mausoleum of Anastasia, a sister of Constantine the Great 36. This hypothesis of Schumacher's, while immediately supported by Francesco Tolotti [65, pp. 308-309] has been criticised and rejected 37.

Our present conclusion on the existence, at the west rotunda before 757, of a church dedicated to St Anastasia and (perhaps) St Petronilla follows from the arrangement of the altars that was preserved even after 757. It does not fit with the dedication of a newly constructed church to St Petronilla. The church of St Petronilla dedicated in 757 was not the first church established in the west rotunda. We have to posit, instead, a previously overlooked period of the history of the west rotunda, when a church of St Anastasia was established there.

If the above conclusion is right, some traces of this church would have been preserved in liturgical and/or hagiographical documents. Such traces are, indeed, preserved. We will turn to them now, before returning to the history of the two rotundas near Saint Peter's.

9.5. Establishment of the Feast on the 29th of September by Leo the Great

The commemoration of Saints Anastasia and Petronilla on September 29 is worthy of our attention, even though it is preserved in no document in Latin. This pairing is a unique phenomenon, distinct from the usual cults of Anastasia or Petronilla. Moreover, the order in this pair, where the daughter of the Apostle Peter is the second and not the first, is quite remarkable. Therefore, it is unlikely that this pair of saints in the calendar of Constantinople and the arrangment of the altars in Saint Petronilla in Rome would have been mutually independent.

In Latin, however, is preserved a corpus of five sermons on September 29 by the Pope Leo the Great commemorating his election that took place on this day. They were delivered at Saint Peter's, according to a supposition by Salzman 38, which I hope to further substantiate in this section. Leo celebrated a mass on the day of his election

Two rotundae adjacent to Old St Peter's

every year, but the sermons are preserved only from 440 (the very day of his consecration), 441, 443, 444, and some year after 445.

It has often been noticed that the motif of the primacy of Peter becomes more and more decisive from the second sermon (441) to the fourth (444); the latter became a theological treatise on this subject prompted by the conflict between Leo and Caesarius of Arles 39. The liturgical side of these sermons has, however, so far been overlooked.

In the liturgical respect, two sermons are important, the fourth and the fifth. Leo's wording in the fourth sermon (444) points directly to the establishment of a new feast. After having proclaimed the primacy of Peter over the whole Church, he continues:

Si autem hanc pietatis suae curam omni populo Dei, sicut credendum est, ubique praetendit, quanto magis nobis alumnis suis opem suam dig-natur inpendere, apud quos in sacro beatae dormitionis thoro ead-em qua praesedit carne requiescit? Illi ergo hunc seruitutis nostrae natalicum diem, illi ascribamus hoc fes-tum, cuius patrocinio sedis ipsius meruimus esse consortes... Leonis Magni [11, p. 21 (Tractatus IV, 4)].

If, moreover, he extends this devoted concern to all the people of God everywhere - as indeed it has to be believed -how much more is he willing to lavish his assistance upon us, his adopted children? Among us does he rest on the sacred bed of blessed sleep, with the same flesh in which he presided [over the Church]. Let us, then, attribute this day on which our service was born, let us attribute this feast to him. It is under his patronage that we have merited to have a part in his see... St Leo the Great [43, p. 29]._

Subiunget autem se ad rationem solemni-tatis nostrae, non solum apostolica sed etiam episcopalis beatissimi dignitas Petri, qui sedi suae praeesse non des-init et indeficiens obti-net cum aeterno Sacerdote consortium. So-liditas enim illa quam de petra Christo etiam ipse petra factus ac-cepit, in suos quoque se transfundit haeredes... Leonis Magni [11, p. 24 (Tractatus V, 4)].

Giving further reason to our solemnity is not merely the apostolic but also the episcopal dignity of most blessed Peter. He does not cease to preside over his see but unfailingly maintains that fellowship which he has with the eternal Priest. That stability which he received from Christ the rock (by having himself been made "rock") has poured over onto his heirs as well... St Leo the Great [43, p. 32].

Leo thus explained the difference between the two feasts of Peter, this one and that of June 29. Unlike the June feast of Peter and Paul, the feast of September is dedicated not only to the apostolic dignity of Peter but also to his episcopal dignity (non solum apostolica sed etiam episcopalis... dignitas Petri). In other words, the commemoration of Leo's own election was transformed into a specific commemoration of the Apostle Peter as a bishop or, more exactly, the first bishop. Given that the feast became dedicated to Peter, it is certain that the respective pontifical mass was celebrated at Saint Peter's, as Salzman supposes.

9.6. From the Episcopal Dignity of Peter to Anastasia and Petronilla

The cult established in Saint Peter's on September 29 by Leo the Great might have hardly been abrogated immediately after his death. It is therefore a priori likely that the Byzantine commemoration of Anastasia and the daughter of Apostle Peter on the same day, September 29, was a trace of the respective transformations of this cult. If this cult existed in Rome during the Byzantine period and was, for Rome, sufficiently important, then it must have been at least mentioned in the calendar of Constantinople.

A posteriori, we see, in the west rotunda, within a single church complex in Saint Peter's,

The phrase illi ascribamus hoc festum could be undestood as a performative speech act, the establishment of a new feast of the Apostle Peter. The fifth sermon delivered some years later is precise about the nature of this new feast, thus confirming that, indeed, a new feast of St Peter had already been established:

a church where the liturgical arrangement fits perfectly with the dedication to the pair of St Anastasia and St Petronilla, where St Anastasia is the first, and St Petronilla, the second.

The only possible conclusion is the following. At some point, the cult of the Apostle Peter as the first bishop, which was established by Leo the Great on September 29 having Saint Peter's as its statio, was transformed into the cult of Anastasia and Petronilla, on the same day and with a new statio at the church of Anastasia and Petronilla adjacent to Saint Peter's.

There are serious reasons to attribute this transformation to Pope Symmachus.

9.7. Pope Symmachus and the Two Rotundae

The history of the two rotundae near Saint Peter's was, in the late twentieth century, a hotly debated question. Richard Gem's 2005 reconstruction of this history could be considered as so far decisive. According to Gem, the east rotunda was constructed in the early third century, perhaps as an imperial mausoleum (if so, it was most likely never used), and was converted into the church of St Andrew's by Pope Symmachus (r. 498-514), as it is claimed in the biography of Symmachus in the Liber Pontificalis. The west rotunda was constructed "with a direct physical and functional relationship to St Peter's" as an imperial mausoleum for the burial of the Empress Maria (between 404 and 407). Access to the east rotunda (which was from the west, Fig) thus was obstructed. Then, a structure connecting the east rotunda with Saint Peter's was created, although it is impossible to define its original shape. The bi-apsidal narthex between the two rotundae "...is likely to have replaced an earlier entrance arrangement with steps, and it may be attributed to the conversion of the (east. - B. L.) rotunda into a church by Pope Symmachus."40

9.7.1. The St Andrew Church of Pope Symmachus

Even before Gem's architectural reconstruction, Joseph Alchermes provided a highly convincing reconstruction of the liturgical arrangement of Symmachus's St Andrew church [3]. Alchermes considered this church within the context of Symmachus's situation during the schism between two Popes, Symmachus and Laurentius (r. 498-506; the schism lasted after Laurentius's abdication in 506 until the death of Symmachus

in 514 and perhaps later 41). Between 498 and 506, Symmachus had no access to the churches in Rome or to the St Paul basilica outside the walls. The Lateran cathedral was occupied by Laurentius. It is in this situation that Symmachus transformed Saint Peter's into the new pontifical cathedral replacing the Lateran basilica. Symmachus thus followed in the steps of Leo the Great (see above, section 6.2.6), but apparently having removed any high theology and eschatology. Instead, he tried to erect a church complex minimally sufficient for the pontifical stational liturgy. Nevertheless, this complex was overloaded with contemporary ideology expressed in symbols related to ecclesiastical politics. The building campaign was "begun probably in 501 and largely completed by 506". Alchermes [3, p. 12].

The Seven Altars of the Symmachan St Andrew Church

The altars in the church of St Andrew in the east rotunda are identified in different sources with contradictions due in particular to the later rededications of some altars 42. Alchermes's attempt to identify the dedications under Symmachus resulted in the list that I place in the respective column of Table 8.

Alchermes opted for Sossus instead of Sixtus (A4) not only because the sixth-century biography in the Liber Pontificalis is closer to the lifetime of Symmachus than the eighth-century guide, but also because Pope Sixtus was the pope of deacon Laurentius, whereas Laurentius's cult was unimaginable in the Symmachan rotunda while the "Laurentian schism" was in full swing 43. Laurentius's commemoration in altar A7 ca 800 "...is better understood as the post-Symmachan (and ironical) transformation of the original dedication". Thus, under Symmachus, there was no Laurentius and no Sixtus, but altar A4 was dedicated to Sossus. Alchermes [3, p. 30]. Alchermes's other achievement is the demonstration (using epigraphical material) that Protus and Hyacinthus were commemorated at this new place, as was usual starting in the fourth century, as a pair, and, therefore, they shared a single altar (A7) [3, pp. 21-25]. The most problematic remained, for Alchermes, altar A6. The only available name that remained was that of Vitus. However, as Alchermes has acknowleged

himself, there are no data for Vitus's veneration in Rome before the mid-eighth century. Therefore, his supposition that altar A6 was dedicated to Vitus is highly conjectural [3, p. 29]. I would simply consider it unlikely.

Anyway, for six altars out of seven, Alchermes managed to provide a highly convincing attribution. He also provided several helpful explanations of the martyrological programme established by Symmachus. As for Protus and Hyacinthus, the relative proximity of their burial in the Catacomb of Bassilla must have played a role 44. However, their relics remained intact in the original places in the catacomb, despite the inscription ICUR 4106 (originally located in their exedra of the rotunda), which claimed the presence of theirpia corpora ("blessed bodies"). These relics must have been, according to Alchermes, secondary, "apparently contact relics" [3, p. 25].

The same reason of the proximity of the respective catacomb would have contributed for selecting, for the nearby altar A6, the dedication to Bassilla. Such a possibility must be considered closely. The original dedication of this altar was already forgotten by the biographer of Symmachus in the Liber Pontificalis, who worked under Pope Hormisdas (514-523). This fact is a forceful argument for identifying this "lost" saint as Bassilla. During the sixth century, the importance of the cult of Hermes increased, and this cult displaced to less visible positions the previously most important cult of Bassilla (see above, sections 8.2 and 8.3). Under Symmachus, Bassilla was still one of the most venerated martyrs of Rome. Shortly after, she became overshadowed by

Hermes. Therefore, a hypothesis that altar A6 was originally dedicated to Bassilla is, even though not proven, at least, well-founded.

The Meaning of the Symmachan Dedications

For the altars other than A6 and A7, Alchermes proposed an ingenious solution: they were dedicated to the patron saints of the dioceses that were hostile to Symmachus. It seems to me that this principle works, at least, in three cases related to the "Laurentian schism": Ravenna (St Apollinaris, A3), Misenum (St Sossus, A4), and Imola, or Forum Cornelii (St Cassianus, A5). The respective sees did not acknowledge Symmachus by 499 but acknowledged him by 502. However, there were other Italian sees that did not acknowlege Symmachus by 499 (e.g., Milan and Aquileia). Perhaps Alchermes's explanation is not perfect but, for these three altars, it is very plausible.

Most problematic remain the two major altars, those of Apostle Andrew (A1) - and the dedication of the church as a whole - and of Apostle Thomas (A2).

Alchermes expanded his approach (recognising the holy patrons of Symmachus's adversaries) to the schism that then separated the patriarchate of Rome from the four patriarchates of the Orient (484-519). For him, the Apostle Thomas was a symbol of Edessa, where his tomb was located, and, therefore, his cult was a weapon of Monophysitism, whereas the Apostle Andrew was a symbol of Constantinople, the main rival of the Old Rome [3, pp. 35-36]. I would prefer to provide other explanations.

Table 8. The Altars of the Symmachan East Rotunda according to Different Sources and Reconstructions

Altar Nr Liber Pontificalis 8th-Century Guide Correspondence between the Two Sources Reconstructions

Alchermes Lourié

A1 Enumerated without precise locations: Andrew, Apostle Thomas, Cassianus, Protus and Hyacinthus, Apollinaris, Sossus Andrew Andrew Andrew Andrew

A2 Apostle Thomas Apostle Thomas Apostle Thomas Apostle Thomas

A3 Apollinaris Apollinaris Apollinaris Apollinaris

A4 Sixtus Sossus vs Sixtus Sossus Sossus

A5 Cassianus Cassianus Cassianus Cassianus

A6 Vitus Protus vs Vitus Vitus? Bassilla

A7 Laurentius Hyacinthus vs Laurentius Protus and Hyacinthus Protus and Hyacinthus

Dedication to Apostle Andrew

Alchermes was aware of Francis Dvornik's study of the St Andrew cult in Constantinople but has argued against Dvornik's thesis that the Apostle Andrew became the holy patron of the City par excellence only in the seventh century 45. His argumentation is, however, based on a misunderstanding. Instead of refuting Dvornik's arguments related to the idea of apostolicity and, therefore, the uniqueness of St Andrew in such a role, he argues that the relics of three apostles, which were translated to Constantinople in the fourth century (Andrew, Luke, and Timotheus), were considered together as defenders of the City. Indeed, this is true, but it is far from becoming the single holy patron of Constantinople - as Apostle Andrew became in the seventh century, when the idea of the apostolicity of the see of the New Rome was eventually accepted in Constantinople. Before the mid-seventh century, starting in the sixth century but nevertheless after Symmachus, the single patron of Constantinople par excellence was the Theotokos 46, and, before her (including Symmachus's time), the holy martyr Mocius, whose commemoration day is May 11, the day of the dedication of Constantinople itself 47.

Instead of Alchermes's explanation, I would prefer to return to that of Dvornik who mentioned the Symmachan rotunda in the context of St Andrew's cult in the west, noticing that "[t]he cult of St Andrew grew in Rome particularly during the Acacian schism" (that is, during the separation of Rome from the other patriarchates in 484-519), and that "[t]he Goths seem to have had a particular veneration for St Andrew"48. The cult of St Andrew was considered to be a support for the cult of Apostle Peter, already interpreted in the sense of Roman primacy, and perhaps also as a sign of solidarity with the Gothic rulers. Let us recall that Symmachus won his war against Laurentius exclusively because he managed to gain the support of the Gothic - and Arian - king Theoderic.

Dedication to Apostle Thomas

The dedication to the Apostle Thomas (altar A2) seems hard to understand. The tomb of the Apostle in Edessa was visited by western pilgrims, but nothing specific is known about Thomas as a symbol of "monophysism" in either west or east.

In Rome and in the west in general, there was no particular interest toward the Apostle Thomas before Symmachus.

In Constantinople, however, under Emperor Anastasius (r. 491-518) the church of St Thomas was rebuilt (in place of the earlier one that was destroyed by a fire in 461). The tenth-century Patria (III, 96) (T. Preger [58]) provides the date (under Emperor Anastasius), which is corroborated by Byzantine historians, but these sources say nothing about the importance of this church 49. In 610, this church became the place of the coronation of emperor Heraclius, but not due to the importance of the church itself. At that moment, Saint Sophia was occupied by adversaries, whereas the port of Julian (also known as the port of Sophia, being located at the foot of the respective hill) was the jumping-off place of Heraclius's army that arrived in Constantinople by ship. The St Thomas church was one of about five churches in this port and served Heraclius as headquarters 50. A miracle allegedly took place in this church in 674 51. In sum, we know nothing about the importance of this church in the time of Emperor Anastasius and Pope Symmachus.

Perhaps the two dedications to St Thomas, those in Constantinople and Rome, marked the same or similar changes in the cult of the apostle. But perhaps not.

The Meaning of the Symmachan Church of St Andrew

The general meaning of the new church was understood by scholars long ago: enforcing the cult of St Peter in the Vatican along with the cult of his brother. We can add that this fit with the growing popularity of the St Andrew cult in the west, among both Romans and Goths.

Regardless of other details, especially interesting to us is a connection between the new church and the Catacomb of Bassilla. Even if our hypothesis about the existence of Bassilla's altar in exedra A6 fails, the link with this catacomb through Protus and Hyacinthus is beyond doubt.

9.7.2. St Andrew Church of Pope Symmachus

The church in the west rotunda was created, in the former imperial mausoleum, as a church dedicated to St Anastasia, perhaps together with St Petronilla. A dedication to St Petronilla would have been fitting with Symmachus's programme

of gathering the Apostle Peter's family around his tomb in the Vatican, but this might certainly not have been the main raison d'être of the church where St Petronilla had only the second place.

By 483, there was no church in the rotunda. Then, a synod or simply a meeting of senators and clergy gathered by Caecinia Basilius, chief minister of King Odoacer, took place in this rotunda called "the mausoleum which is next to blessed Peter the apostle" (In mausoleo quod est apud beatissimum Petrum apostolum) 52. By the late fifth century, there were at least three imperial burials in the mausoleum. These burials in the crypt of the rotunda were discovered in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 53. The existence of other imperial burials cannot be formally excluded but is not very likely (a situation when they would not have been discovered during reconstructions or demolishing of the rotunda is entirely impossible, while we have to reckon with the possible incompleteness of the available Italian chronicles).

The church must be dated according to the place of the cult of St Anastasia in it. This cult became important for Rome already under Leo the Great but, then, could hardly have overshadowed the cult of the daughter of the Apostle Peter. The situation must have been different under Gothic rule, when St Anastasia became the patron of the Goths and one of the most venerated saints in both the east and west of the Roman Empire (under Theoderic, the Roman Empire continued to be united de jure). St Anastasia's cult lost this importance by the beginning of the Gothic war (536) at the latest 54. The preeminent place of Anastasia's altar (B3) in the rotunda is certainly a hallmark of the Gothic period.

Another remarkable feature of the church is the dedication of one altar (B6) to a certain martyr Theodore. To my knowledge, this dedication has never been explained by scholars. The author of the liturgical arrangement of the new church placed this St Theodore at the third position after St Anastasia and St Petronilla, thus elevating his cult to a very high degree. Given that we are in Gothic Rome, there could hardly be a doubt that such a veneration of St Theodore alluded to his namesake, King Theoderic. Theoderic was an Arian, but Symmachus was indebted to him for his papacy. Such a combination of the cult of Anastasia with the cult of Theodore could point

only to Symmachus as the founder of the church in the west rotunda. Therefore, this church must be dated, most probably, to the period from 501 to 506 (Symmachus's building campaign) and certainly to the period from 501 to 514.

The silence of the Liber Pontificalis on Symmachus's role in establishing a "Gothic-friendly" church is easily explainable as avoiding a rather delicate matter - Symmachus's gratitude to the Arians for gaining support against his own coreligionaries. What looked good in the lifetime of Symmachus would not have looked not so good starting under Hormisdas, when the schism between the followers of the two popes, Symmachus and Laurentius, eventually was healed.

As it appears, Symmachus continued, in the west rotunda, the "Petrine" programme of the church of St Andrew, thus dedicated the second altar to Petronilla, but now within a "Gothic-friendly" programme, establishing a church of the patron of the Goths Anastasia with an altar to St Theodore alluding to Theoderic personally.

The three remaining altars of the west rotunda would have been somewhat connected with three imperial graves in the mausoleum. At least, the altar of the Theotokos (B2) marked the burial place of Empress Maria discovered in 1544. In the sixth century, the respective exedra had to be occupied by some funeral monument at the floor level. The other two imperial burials found, respectively, in 1458 (an adult and an infant together 55) and 1519 (an adult 56), remain unlocated and identified only conjecturally. It is natural to suppose that the two altars of the Saviour (B4 and B5) mark the places of these burials. It is most likely that, under Symmachus, the funeral monuments at the floor level of the three imperial burials were still in place and, therefore, the respective exedrae were unavailable for erecting altars. Symmachus thus used the three exedrae that remained free.

9.8. The Date of the Cult of Anastasia with Petronilla

Symmachus's St Anastasia was still Gothic, that is, the same as was then venerated in Constantinople, but not a character of the Anastasia and Petronillia legend who allegedly lived in apostolic times. The legend of Anastasia and Petronilla must have been a secondary phenomenon with respect to the Symmachan

Anastasia church: it was inspired by the liturgical arrangement when, near St Peter, the place of St Anastasia was the first and that of Peter's own daughter, the second.

This legend must be dated to the Byzantine period (given that it was accepted in the calendar of Constantinople) and, more precisely, to the beginning of it: the cult of St Anastasia was still very important but her role as the patron of the Goths was forgotten. This points to the middle of the sixth century.

9.9. The Feast of the 29th of September

The cult of Anastasia with Petronilla appeared as a modification of the cult of both saints in the Symmachan church. It is rather obvious that the commemoration date of St Anastasia with St Petronilla must have been that of the patronal feast of this church. There was hardly a reason to change the date of the patronal feast before 757, the reconstruction and rededication of the church to St Petronilla alone.

The commemoration date of September 29 must have been earlier than the secondary legend of the apostolic companions Anastasia and Petronilla. It must be the original date of the patronal feast of the Symmachan church. Then, the question arises: why did Symmachus choose this date if it was never connected to either Anastasia or Petronilla?

The Symmachan church was created as an epiphenomenon of Symmachus's Petrine politics. In the time of Symmachus, the Petrine feast established by Leo the Great could not have been forgotten. If Symmachus took its date for his new church - that was, in a way, Petrine - he did so deliberately. Thus, Symmachus made the feast of the 29th of September more visible providing

it with a separate statio adjacent to its former statio, Saint Peter's. At the same time, however, Symmachus changed the meaning of the feast. The former commemoration of the Apostle Peter as the first bishop was thus transformed into something new: a kind of adoption of the Gothic patrons, St Anastasia and St Theodore (as the personal patron of the king) into Peter's family, near Peter's own daughter Petronilla.

In the historical circumstances of the sixth century such a programme had no chance for longevity. Nevertheless, Symmachus made the attempt.

9.10. Recapitulation: Sts Anastasia and Petronilla on September 29

The evolution of the feast of September 29 is summarised in Table 9.

As it appears, in Rome, the feast of September 29 fell into oblivion after 757. Nevertheless, a note on this feast was preserved in the liturgical calendar of Constantinople.

A short note in the Synaxarium of Constantinople works as a hyperlink to Leo the Great's programme of establishing the primacy of Rome and Symmachus's programme of the integration of the papacy into the state ruled by the Arian Goths. As might be expected, the Gothic background of St Anastasia's cult in the fifth century in Rome was no less important than in Constantinople.

10. Conclusion

In Part Two of the present study, we have considered the development of St Anastasia's and related cults from the very beginning (in the early Christian legends) up to about the eleventh century. The main results are summarised in Table 10.

Table 9. The History of the Feast on September 29 in Rome

Date Event Statio

440 Consecration of Leo the Great on September 29; establishment of its annual commemoration. Saint Peter's

444 Transformation of this commemoration into the feast of Apostle Peter as the first bishop. Saint Peter's

501-506 (501-514?) Creation of St Anastasia church in the west rotunda with its patronal feast on September 29. West rotunda

Mid-sixth century Creation of the legend of Anastasia and Petronilla with their commemoration on September 29. West rotunda

757 Rebuilding of the earlier church into the church of St Petronilla; the feast of September 29 is replaced with the two-day feast on October 8 (Translation of St Petronilla's relics) and 9 (Dedication of St Petronilla's church). West rotunda

Table 10. Development of St Anastasia's and Related Cults in the West

Historical Date Cult Place Liturgical Date

Early fifth century Sts Bassilla and Anastasia: Early Roman cult related to the historical Anastasia (daughter of Gallus and Con-stantia) and based on earlier Roman legends (especially those related to Bassilla of Sirmium and Domitilla). Anastasia subordinated to Bassilla. Rome, Catacomb of Bassilla (?) September 7

Second quarter of the fifth century The Anastasia church (originally dedicated to the Resurrection of Christ, being the Roman equivalent of the Jerusalem Martyrium basilica) is reconsidered as dedicated to St Anastasia. Cult of St Anastasia alone as one of the principal Roman saints. Rome, Anastasia church December 25 (Christmas) and January 6 (Epiphany)

Middle of the fifth century Marginalisation of St Bassilla among both Romans and Goths. Anastasia becomes the main saint of Sirmium and the patron of the Goths. Rome and Sirmium

From the mid-sixth century to the seventh century Proliferation of the marginalised Bassilla/Basilissa cults within the cults of St Eugenia and St Julian. Rome, Catacombs of Apronianus and of Bassilla (with St Eugenia) and unknown location (with St Julian) December 25 (with St Eugenia) and January 6 (with St Julian)

468-470 Creation of the Byzantine legend of St Anastasia and its immediate reception in Rome. Constantinople, church of St Anastasia December 22 (Constantinople), December 25 (Rome)

501-506/514 Symmachus's church of St Anastasia. Rome, west rotunda near Saint Peter's September 29

Mid-sixth century Cult of Sts Anastasia and Petronilla.

Seventh century The Aquileian edition of the Byzantine Anastasia legend and its remaniement in Grado (creation of LLA). Aquileia (and Grado) December 25

Since the seventh century up to ca 1000 Transformation of Sts Anastasia and Chrysogonus into local saints of Grado. Grado November 23

These transformations of St Anastasia's cult would have been untraceable without taking into account the Oriental dossier of St Anastasia.

The most important results of this study of the Western hagiographical dossier allow us to shed light on several fields. Namely,

- in the history of liturgy: (1) the earliest stages of the Roman stational liturgies of Christmas and Epiphany, including the role of the Anastasia church as that of the Roman equivalent of the Jerusalem Martyrium and the original role of Santa Maria Maggiore as the Roman equivalent of the Jerusalem Sion basilica with its feast of the Theotokos on the fourth day of the Epiphany; (2) the liturgical arrangement of the earliest church in the west rotunda of Saint Peter's;

- in the history of theology: the formulation (and liturgical expression) of Leo the Great's understanding of Apostle Peter as the first among the bishops;

- in ecclesiastical history: the pro-Gothic ecclesiastical policy of Pope Symmachus.

Some additional observations have been made in relation to either early Roman cults of martyrs or to the later hagiography in the patriarchate(s) of Aquileia.

I would like to finish with the words of Hippolyte Delehaye: "Qu'on ne nous demande pas encore la solution définitive de toutes les questions qui s'agitent. Nous voulons simplement marquer le point où elles sont arrivées, et d'où on pourra repartir à la recherche de lumières nouvelles" [19, p. 6].

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was accomplished with financial support of RFBR grant No. 21-012-41005 "Jerusalem and Understudied Apocrypha in Slavonic Translations: Textology, History, and Doctrines."

The author expresses his gratitude to André Binggeli, Elizabeth Castelli, Megan Dixon, Alexandra

Elbakyan, Habib Ibrahim, Kai Juntunen, Maria Lidova, Fiodar Litvinau, Nicolai Markovich, Ugo Mondini, Oscar Santillino, Peter Shuvalov, Alexander Simonov, Pavel Turkin, Antonello Vilella, Andrey Vinogradov, and Nataliya Yanchevskaya.

NOTES

* See the previous part: Lourié B. Five Anastasiae and Two Febroniae: A Guided Tour in the Maze of Anastasia Legends. Part Two. The Roman Dossier. II. Anastasia Between Bassilla and Petronilla. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. History. Area Studies. International Relations], 2023, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 104-150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2023.6.10

1 This observation was an important part of Delehaye's argumentation against burial in Rome: [19, p. 162].

2 Lapidge [41, p. 87, fn. 113]. Nevertheless, elsewhere Lapidge put forward a hypothesis that could explain this oddity - namely, that "...the body of St Anastasia would have been taken by the matron Apollonia back to Rome, and buried in her garden (on the Palatine?), over which a basilica - the basilica subsequently known as S. Anastasia? - was subsequently constructed" [41, p. 61].

3 Preserved in a unique inscription (ICUR 20014, dated to the second or third quarter of the fourth century but with the suspicion that it is a fake), which is the burial plate of a baby.

4 Cf. J.F. Niermeyer [52, p. 1111].

5 W.-H. Maigne d'Arnis [46, col. 2307]; A. Blaise [8, p. 961].

6 U.M. Fasola [27]. Cf. Pergola [56, pp. 211-215].

7 The exact number depends of whether we take into account ICUR 544 (Anastasia et Laurentiapuellas dei <...>) datable to the fourth century. The Anastasia of this inscription was a consecrated virgin and a companion of another consecrated virgin Laurentia. Obviously, this inscription is irrelevant to us, and the number of the inscriptions in consideration should be restricted to six.

8 Other inscriptions are the following (according to their ICUR numbers): 14010, 17691.d, and 17496.a.

9 Ph. Pergola [56, p. 118]. On this basilica, see especially the Notitia ecclesiarum urbis Romae: Deinde uadis ad australem uia Salaria donec uenies ad sanctum Ermetem; ibi primum pausat Bassilissa uirgo et martir; in altera et martir Maximus, et sanctus Ermes martir longe sub terra (ed. Glorie [32, p. 305]); tr.: "Then you go south on the Via Salaria (Vecchia), until you come to St Hermes, where

first of all St Bassilla, virgin and martyr, rests in a basilica; in another (basilica) is the martyr Maximus, and St Hermes the martyr lies there deep beneath the ground (in the catacomb)" (Lapidge [41, p. 660]).

10 Lapidge [41, p. 557] opts for the first half of the seventh century (without any detailed argumentation), whereas many others allow an earlier date; Lanery proposes the date of the fifth or sixth century as the current consensus [40, pp. 301-302]; for a more detailed bibliography representing this consensus, see V. Fiocchi Nicolai [28, p. 219, note 1142].

11 Cf. Lapidge [41, pp. 560-561], with former bibliography.

12 ...& Prwfectum Urbis quoque, Hermen cum uxore & sorore & filiis baptizaret, cum mille ducentis quinquaginta servis suis, uxoribus quoque & filiis eorum...; ed. by G. Henschenius [34, col. 371 C].

13 Before the sixth century, the most venerated saint in the cemetery of Bassilla was Bassilla herself; the cult of St Hermes overshadowed her in the sixth century: H. Leclercq [42, cols. 2303-2304]; Lanery [40, p. 302].

14 The terms Vita prima (for BHG 496) and Vita altera were coined by the Bollandist editor of St Demetrius's hagiographical dossier Cornelius De Bye (Byaeus). The Vita altera was first published in the Acta Sanctorum, Octobris, IV (1780) by De Bye [63] and conveniently reprinted in PG 116 [49, col. 1173-1184]. The Vita prima, after De Bye's 1780 editio princeps, was republished critically by Delehaye [9, pp. 259-263].

15 For Leontius, see esp. ch. 8 Delehaye [18, pp. 262-263].

16 The existence of an early Sirmian legend of the martyrdom of a Sirmian deacon Demetrius during the Great Persecution (ca 304) is now proven thanks to the critical edition of the Passio of Pullio of Cibalae (ch. I, § 4; Tamas [64, p. 27]), where Demetrius's Passio is summarised in a short passage in the introduction dealing with those martyrised in the same persecutions as St Pullio (this passage has been damaged in the manuscripts available in the earlier non-critical editions). This passage allowed Efthymios Rizos to write "...that Demetrius [of Sirmium] was not as obscure as has so far been assumed, but rather that he was one of the most prominent martyrs of the Pannonian capital, with a fully developed cult and hagiography by c. AD 400" [60, p. 199]; nevertheless, Rizos argues for the plausibility of the hypothesis (shared mostly by Greek and Balkanic scholars) of "two Demetrii" - that there were two different homonymous martyrs in Sirmium and Thessalonica, whereas later their cults mingled with each other [60, pp. 198-204].

17 Cf. esp. Panov [54] (a discussion of possible political considerations for removing the cult of

St Demetrius from Sirmium to Thessalonica), (Jeremic [36, pp. 188-196]) (on the excavations of a church built on the ruins of a pagan temple near another building, most likely a church; these two objects are identified as the churches of St Demetrius and St Anastasia, but without pretending to decide which is which). The identification of the St Demetrius church in Sirmium is quite hypothetical (Mn^omeBHh [2, p. 176]).

18 Toth [66, pp. 166-170]. Cf., for the early cult of St Demetrius in Thessalonica and Sirmium, also B. A. Bauer [5, pp. 29-39], who follows Toth [66] in many respects.

19 This dating has been proposed by Toth on the presumption that the hagiographer's words about the location of the St Demetrius church are exact; cf. Toth [66, p. 167]: "Such topographic awareness requires a forensic knowledge of the location, which would have only been possible during Byzantine rule of the city, or immediately afterwards, among exiles fleeing from their home". Indeed, the hagiographer's topography is exact, but it is another matter whether it is imaginary or not. Toth excludes such a possibility, supposing that "[t]he Passio altera then obviously attempts to explain the origin of the St Demetrius church in Sirmium, which for some reason regained importance at the time of its composition" (Toth [66, p. 167]). If a church in an abandoned and devastated city "regained importance" among those who had lost an access to it, when it was abandoned and perhaps demolished, this means that their interest was not in the church building but in the respective cult. However, such an interest would have been able to produce an imaginary church within a more or less imaginary topography of Sirmium. Even in this case, however, the date of the Vita altera proposed by Toth would be relatively exact, because its Sirmium background would have been relevant for barely more than two or three generations after the emigration of 582.

20 The most exhaustive study of Petronilla's hagiographical dossier is provided by Caroline Goodson [33]. This study, however, does not take into account the calendar and liturgy, and does not mention the legend of Anastasia and Petronilla.

21 See, for the details, C. Goodson [33]; R. Giordani [31]; U.M. Fasola [27]; Ph. Pergola [56, pp. 211-216].

22 Delehaye, Quentin [20, pp. 280-286, 317]. See esp. Th. Klauser [39, S. 185]; cf. R. Davis [12, pp. 2526, note 41].

23 Duchesne [22, pp. 420, 424]. Cf. reserves by Pierre Jounel [37, p. 242].

24 J. P. Kirsch [38, S. 75-78] followed by Quentin and Delehaye [20, pp. 280, 283-286]. The former opted for May 29 as the genuine date, whereas the latter were inclined to May 31.

25 Славяно-русский Пролог [1, p. 187]; cf., for the Slavonic [1, p. 186]. This commemoration is absent from the versions of the Synaxarium other than Slavonic.

26 See, for the interaction between the popes and the Byzantine authorities when Byzantium reconquered some parts of southern Italy, V. Ramseyer [59, pp. 127130].

27 The seminal article is G. B. de Rossi [15, anno 3, pp. 125-146; anno 4, pp. 5-20, at pp. 6-7]. Cf. Davis [12, p. 80, note 6]: "Some later calendars record the date of Petronilla's translation as 8 October, presumably in 757..." (with no reference at all). It seems that such references go ultimately to Louis Duchesne [23, p. 34], who provided no reference to the sources, but certainly kept in mind de Rossi. Cf. also R. Giordani [31, p. 422]: "l'8 o il 9 ottobre 757". Cf., for a discussion of this date, A. Angenendt [4, p. 49]; A.M. Voci [68, p. 10]; Jounel [37, p. 242].

28 The year is not explicit in the account of the Liber Pontificalis (contained in the late eighth-century interpolation: Duchesne [22, p. 464]; Davis [12, p. 80]) but follows from the internal logic of the events: Paul I, who became pope on May 29, 757, after the death of his brother Pope Stephanus II, continued Stephanus's politics in relation to the Franks. The cult of St Petronilla, as the accomplishment of a project of Pope Stephanus, was then reshaped to a cult of the heavenly patron of the Carolingians. It is therefore reasonable, as the present scholarly consensus does, to date the translation of Petronilla's relics and the dedication of her church to the first year of the pontificate of Paul. Cf. esp. Angenendt [4].

29 Sible de Blaauw provides this reconstruction for the eighth and ninth centuries; his reconstruction for the time of Pope Symmachus is different, because he thought that, under Symmachus, the west rotunda still did not contain a church.

30 The west rotunda was already absent in the drawing by Marten van Heemskerck, ca 1532-1535; see esp. Richard Gem's detailed study [29, p. 2, fig. 1].

31 On this manuscript, de Rossi in de Rossi, Duchesne [16, pp. XXXII-XXXIII].

32 There is a single publication by Domenico Georgio as an addition to the Martyrologium of Adon:

Martyrologium Adonis archiepiscopi Viennensis ab Heriberto Rosweido Societatis Jesu theologo jam pridem ad mss. exemplaria recensitum, Nunc ope Codicum Bibliothecae Vaticanae recognitum & Adnotationibus illustratum [30, p. 686].

33 On this manuscript: Klauser [39, S. LI].

34 On these manuscripts: Klauser [39, S. LIX and LXII]. Manuscript BN 93: early ninth century, Saint-Riquier (north of France); BN 13171: ninth century, St-Germain-des-Pres.

35 As it was pointed outby U. Nonn [53, S. 386-387].

36 Schumacher refers to the inscription of Gallus "son of Anastasia" ICUR 4122 (see above, section 5.1.2) supposing, in a purely speculative way, that this Anastasia might have been the homonymous sister of Constantine the Great [62, p. 226].

37 Scholars reject Schumacher's thesis that the imperial mausoleum was built in the fourth century and accept, instead, an early fifth-century date, near to that of the death of Empress Maria (between 404 and 407), the spouse of Emperor Honorius. See esp. Gem [29, p. 45, note 130]; cf. S. Diefenbach [21, S. 161, Anm. 309].

38 Salzman [61, p. 216 and 219, Table I (among the locations "proposed by Salzman based on allusions in the text and/or external evidence")].

39 Cf., e.g., Léon le Grand [44, p. 18-21].

40 Gem [29, passim; cit. p. 13 and 45, note 137]; with previous bibliography and a discussion of alternative views.

41 See esp. E. Wirbelauer [69].

42 The sources are the Liber Pontificalis (Duchesne [22, p. 261]) and the eighth-century addition to the Notitia ecclesiarum urbis Romae already quoted above (section 9.4) (Glorie [32, p. 310]). Cf., in Alchermes [3, pp. 20-21], a discussion of the earlier reconstructions of the dedications of these seven altars, namely, those of Duchesne [22] (cf. [24]), Rohault de Fleury [14], Schumacher [62], and de Blaauw [13]. The scholarly consensus is limited to the identification of the altars of Andrew, Thomas, and Cassianus.

43 On this conflict, see esp. E. Wirbelauer [69].

44 To Protus and Hyacinthus, Symmachus ".. .was drawn... mainly for reasons of personal devotions and convenience: their tombs were in a Roman catacomb just across the Tiber from the Vatican, and it would have been an easy matter to secure [i.e. to achieve in American English] their relics"; Alchermes [3, p. 31].

45 F. Dvornik [25, pp. 138-146]; cf. Alchermes [3, pp. 36-40].

46 See A. Cameron [10].

47 See A. Berger [7].

48 Dvornik [25, pp. 150-154, esp. p. 153 and 151, note 47d, respectively].

49 Janin [35, pp. 249-251]; Berger [6, S. 596-597].

50 The relevant events were described in chs. 109 and 110 of the Chronicle by John of Nikiu, a highly reliable Coptic historian who worked with otherwise unknown Constantinopolitan documents of this epoch. His work is preserved in the Ethiopic translation from Coptic: H. Zotenberg [71, pp. 195-197/431433 (txt/tr.)]. A critical edition is in preparation by Daria Elagina; cf. D. Elagina [26]. At the moment of Heraclius's arrival to Constantinople, he was supported by "the Greens", whereas "the Blues" escaped to Saint

Sophia. The captive usurper Phocas was put before Heraclius in the church of St Thomas; from this fact I conclude that there was, there, a kind of headquarters. The same church was used for the coronation of Heraclius.

51 BHG 1835m (unpublished), preserved in Paris. gr. 1596, pp. 425-426 (available online at https:// gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b107240765/f195. item) and its copy Marc. II. 70, f. 153v-154. F. Nau erroneously attributed this story to the two collections of the Narrationes animae utiles by Anastasius the Sinaite (repeated by Janin [35, p. 249, note 10]); André Bingelli, who is preparing a critical edition of these collections, explained the situation to me and provided the references. The miracle is dated to the seventh year of Emperor Constantine, then, to either 674 (if the name of Constantine IV is spelled correctly) or, less likely, 647 (if "Constantine" is spelled instead "Constans", as sometimes occurred). A thief called simply "the Egyptian", without a proper name, stole a golden cross that decorated the icon of St Thomas and, after having given a false oath to the Apostle, became paralysed. To bring this story to a happy end, the emperor ordered an all-night vigil and fast. Such a direct involvement of the emperor, even if imaginary, would point to a relatively high status for the church. The nickname "Egyptian" would point, in the usage of the epoch of the Monothelete union, to a non-united monophysite; cf. use of the the verb aiyraxiaZœ (that had in antiquity the meaning "to be sly and crafty" enforced by Exodus allusions in Christian usage) in the phrase aiyunxiaZovxeç xàv voùv ("those who egyptianise with their mind") by Anastasius the Sinaite (Viae dux, 15) [67, p. 266].

52 Acta Synodi a. CCCCXCVIIII [51, S. 445].

53 Cf. the most detailed study of these graves by Fabrizio Paolucci [55], partially summarised in Meaghan McEvoy's chapter [48]; cf. also Gem [29, pp. 36-37 and notes, pp. 44-45].

54 We can recall the dynamics of St Anastasia's veneration as it was traced in Part One of the present study as well as the decreasing role of the St Anastasia church in the Roman stational liturgy in the sixth century (see above, section 6).

55 Possibly the one-year-old prince Theodosius (414-415), whose body was translated to Rome in 450, and his mother Empress Galla Pacidia who died in 450.

56 Paolucci [55, pp. 240-241] proposes an identification with either Honorius (died in 423) or Valentinian III (murdered in 455).

ABBREVIATIONS

ICUR - Inscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae.

CCSL - Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina.

REFERENCES

1. Prokopenko L.V, Zhelyazkova V, Krysko VB., Shevchuk O.P., Ladyzhenskiy I.M., eds. Slavyano-russkiy prolog po drevneyshim spiskam. Sinaksar (zhitiynaya chast Prologa kratkoy redaktsii) [The Russian Slavonic Prologos According to the Earliest Manuscripts. Synaxarium (Hagiographical Part of the Short Recension of the Prologos). In 2 Vols.]. Moscow, Izd. tsentr «Azbukovnik» Publ., 2010, vol. 1. LXXIX, 824 p.

2. Milosevic P. Arheologija i istorija Sirmijuma [Archaeology and History of Sirmium]. Novi Sad, Matica srpska Publ., 2001. 218 p.

3. Alchermes J.D. Petrine Politics: Pope Symmachus and the Rotunda of St Andrew at Old St Peter's. The Catholic Historical Review, 1995, 81, pp. 1-40.

4. Angenendt A. Das geistliche Bündnis der Päpste mit den Karolingern (754-796). Historisches Jahrbuch, 1980, Bd. 100, S. 1-94.

5. Bauer B.A. Eine Stadt und ihr Patron: Thessaloniki und der Heilige Demetrios. Regensburg, Schnell und Steiner, 2013. 488 S.

6. Berger A. Untersuchungen zu den Patria Konstantinupoleos. Bonn, Dr. R. Habelt GmbH, 1988. 791 S. (Poikila byzantina; 8).

7. Berger A. Mokios und Konstantin der Große. Zu den Anfängen des Märtyrerkults in Konstantinopel. Leontaritou V., Bourdara K.A., Papagianni E.Sp., eds. Antikensör. Timetikos tomos S.N. Tröianou gia ta ogdoekosta genethlia tou. Athens, Ant.N. Sakkoula Publ., 2013, pp. 165-185.

8. Blaise A. Lexicon latinitatis Medii Aevi praesertim ad res ecclesiasticas investigandas pertinens. Turnhout, Brepols, 1975. LXVIII, 970 p. (Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis).

9. Bollandus I., Henschenius G., eds. Acta Sanctorum Feburarii. T. II. Antverpiae, Iacobus Meursius, 1658. xvi, [20], 901, [39] p.; digital edition: Acta Sanctorum: The Full Text Database, Februarii II. Cambridge, Chadwyck-Healey, 1999.

10. Cameron A. The Theotokos in the Sixth-Century Constantinople. Journal of Theological Studies, 1978, N.S., vol. 29, pp. 79-108.

11. Chavasse A., ed. Leonis Magni. Tractatus septem et nonaginta. In 2 vols. Turnhout, Brepols, 1973. Vol. 1, pp. I-CCXVIII, 1-208 (CCSL; 138).

12. Davis R. The Lives of the Eighth-Century Popes (Liber Pontificalis). The Ancient Biographies of Nine Popes from AD 715 to AD 817. Translated with and Introduction and Commentary. 2nd ed. Liverpool, Liverpool University Press, 2007. 261 p. (Translated Texts for Historians; 13).

13. De Blaauw S. Cultus et decor. Liturgia e architettura nella Roma tardoantica e medievale.

Basilica Salvatoris, Sanctae Mariae, Sancti Petri. In 2 Vols. Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1994. 921 p. (continuing pagination), 16 figs. (Studi e testi; 355-356).

14. De Fleury (Rohault de Fleury) G. Saint-André au Vatican. Nuovo Bulletino de Archeologia Cristiana, 1896, vol. 2, pp. 33-39.

15. De Rossi G.B. Sepolcro di S. Petronilla nella Basilica in Via Ardeatina e sua translazione in Vaticano. Bullettino di archeologia Cristiana, 1878, ser. III, anno 3, pp. 125-146; 1879, anno 4, pp. 5-20.

16. De Rossi G.B., Duchesne L. Martyrologium Hieronymianum. de Smedt C., de Backer J., van Otroy F., van den Gheyn J., Delehaye H., Poncelet A., eds. Acta Sanctorum Novembris. Tomi II pars prior. Bruxellis, Socii Bollandiani, 1894, pp. II-LXXXII, 1-195; digital edition: Acta Sanctorum: The Full Text Database. Nov. II. Pars I. Cambridge, Chadwyck-Healey, 2002.

17. Delehaye H. Synaxarium Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae, e codice Sirmondiano, nunc Berolinensi, adiectis synaxariis selectis. Acta Sanctorum, Propylaeum Novembris. Bruxellis, Socii Bollandiani, 1902, [3], LXXVI, 1181 p.; digital edition: Acta Sanctorum: The Full Text Database, Nov. Propylaeum. Cambridge, Chadwyck-Healey, 2002.

18. Delehaye H. Les légendes grecques des saints militaires. Paris, A. Picard et fils, 1909. IX, 271 p.

19. Delehaye H. Étude sur le légendier romain: les Saints de novembre et de décembre. Bruxelles, Société des Bollandistes, 1936. 273 p. (Subsidia hagiographica; 23).

20. Delehaye H., Quentin H. Commentarius Perpetuus in Martyrologium Hieronymianum. Acta Sanctorum, Novembris. Tomi II pars posterior. Bruxellis, Société des Bollandistes, 1931, [3], IX-XXIII, 721 p; digital edition: Acta Sanctorum: The Full Text Database. Nov. II. Pars II. Cambridge, Chadwyck-Healey, 2002.

21. Diefenbach S. Römische Erinnerungsräume. Heiligenmemoria und kollective Identitäten im Rom des 3. bis 5. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Berlin, New York, W. de Gruyter, 2007. XI, 635 S. (Millennium Studies; 11).

22. Duchesne L. Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire. T. I. Paris, E. Thorin, 1886. CCLXII, [2], 536 p. (Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome; 2e série).

23. Duchesne L. Les premiers temps de l'état pontifical (754-1073). Paris, A. Fontemoing, 1898. 224 p.

24. Duchesne L. Vaticana (suite). Notes sur la topographie de Rome au Moyen Âge. XI. Mélanges de l'École française de Rome, 1902, vol. 22, pp. 385-428.

25. Dvornik F. The Idea of Apostolicity in Byzantium and the Legend of the Apostle Andrew. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1958. X, 242 p. (Dumbarton Oaks Studies; 4).

26. Elagina D. The Textual Tradition of the Chronicle of John of Nikiu: Towards the Critical Edition of the Ethiopie Version. PhD Thesis. Hamburg, University of Hamburg, 2018. CV, 125 p. (Unpublished).

27. Fasola U.M. La basilica dei SS. Nereo ed Achilleo e la catacomba di Domitilla. IIa edizione aggiornata. Roma, Arte della Stampa, s.a. 1960. 91 p., 1 map (Le chiese di Roma illustrate; 44).

28. Fiocchi Nicolai V. I cimiteri paleocristiani del Lazio. II. Sabina. Città del Vaticano, Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 2009. 512 p., 6 tavv. (Monumenti di antichità cristiana; serie II, 20).

29. Gem R. The Vatican Rotunda: A Severan Monument and its Early History, c. 200 to 500. Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 2005, vol. 158, pp. 1-45.

30. Georgio D. Martyrologium Adonis, archiep. Viennensis, ab Heriberto Rosweido. Pars prima. Rome, Ex Typographia Palladis, 1745. L, 746 p.

31. Giordani R. AVR(ELIAE) PETRONILLAE FILIAE DVLCISSIMAE. Qualche considerazione sulla legenda di Petronilla presunta figlia dell'apostolo Pietro. Studi Romani, 2005, vol. 53, pp. 411-430.

32. Glorie F., ed. Itineraria et alia geographica. Turnhout, Brepols, 1965. XIII, [5], 495 p. (CCSL; 175).

33. Goodson C. To Be the Daughter of Saint Peter: S. Petronilla and Forging the Franco-Papal Alliance. West-Harling V., ed. Three Empires, Three Cities: Identity, Material Culture and Legitimacy in Venice, Ravenna and Rome, 750-1000. Turnhout, Brepols, 2015, pp. 159-188. (Seminari internazionali del Centro interuniversitario per la storia e l'archelogia dell'alto medioevo; 6).

34. Henschenius G., ed. Acta Sanctorum Maii. T. I. Antverp, M. Cnobarus, 1680. [11], lxxxii, 796, [32] p.; digital edition: Acta Sanctorum: The Full Text Database. Maii I. Cambridge, Chadwyck-Healey, 2000.

35. Janin R. La géographie ecclésiastique de l'Empire Byzantine. Première partie: Le siège de Constantinople et le patriarcat œcuménique. T. III. Les églises et les monastères. 2me éd. Paris, Institut français d'études byzantines, 1969. XXIII, 605 p.

36. Jeremic M. Les temples païens de Sirmium. Starinar, 2006, vol. 56, pp. 167-200.

37. Jounel P. Le culte des saints dans les basiliques du Latran et du Vatican au douzième siècle. Rome, École française de Rome, 1977. 470 p. (Collection de l'École française du Rome; 26).

38. Kirsch J.P. Die hl. Petronilla in Martyrologium Hieronymianum. Römische Quartalschrift, 1916-1922, Bd. 30, S. 75-78.

39. Klauser Th. Das römische capitulare evangeliorum. I. Typen. Münster/Westf., Verlag der

Aschendorffschen Buchhandlung, 1935 [2. Aufl., 1972]. CXX, 199 S. (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen; 28).

40. Lanéry C. Hagiographie d'Italie (300-550). I. Les Passions latines composées en Italie. Philippart G., ed. Hagiographies. Histoire internationale de la littérature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550. Vol. 5. Turnhout, Brepols, 2010, pp. 15-369. (Corpus Christianorum).

41. Lapidge M. The Roman Martyrs. Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. XVII, 733 p. (Oxford Early Christian Studies).

42. Leclercq H. Hermès (Catacombe de Saint-). Leclercq H., Cabrol F., eds. Dictionnaire d'Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie. T. 6, Partie 2. Paris, Letouzey et Ané, 1925, cols. 2301-2349.

43. Freeland J.P., Conway A.J., eds. Leo the Great. Sermons. Washington, D.C., The Catholic University of America Press, 1996. XII, 435 p. (The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation; 93).

44. Dolle R., ed. Léon le Grand. Sermons. Paris, Cerf, 1973. T. IV. 458 p. (Sources chrétiennes; 200).

45. Llewellyn P.A.B. The Passions of S. Alexander and His Companions, of S. Hermes and S. Quirinus: A Suggested Date and Author. Vetera Christianorum, 1976, vol. 13, pp. 289-296.

46. Maigne d'Arnis W.-H. Lexicon manuale ad scriptores mediae et infimae latinitatis. Paris, J.-P. Migne, 1858. 2336 cols.

47. Mateos J. Le Typicon de la Grande Église. Ms. Saint-Croix no 40, Xe siècle. Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes. T. I. Le cycle des douze mois. Roma, PIO, 1962. XXVI, 389 p. (Orientalia Christiana Analecta; 165).

48. McEvoy M. The Mausoleum of Honorius: Late Roman Imperial Christianity and the City of Rome in the Fifth Century. McKitterick R., Osborne J., Richardson C.M., Story J., eds. Old Saint Peter's, Rome. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 119-136.

49. Migne J.-P., ed. Symeonis Logothete, cognomeno Metaphrastae, Opera Omnia. T. III. Parisiis, J.-P. Migne, 1864. 1430 cols. (Migne J.-P., ed. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca; t. 116).

50. Mirkovic M. Sirmium. Its History from the First Century AD to 582 AD. Sremska Mitrovica, Novi Sad, Faculty of Philosophy, Novi Sad; Historical Archive "Srem", 2017. 316 p. (University of Novi Sad. Faculty of Philosophy. Department of History. Center for Historical Research. Monographs, 1; Historical Archive "Srem". Sremska Mitrovica. Monographs, 13).

51. Mommsen Th., ed. Acta Synhodorum habitarum Romae a. CCCCXCVIIII. DI. DII. Berlin, apud Weidmannos. CLXXXIV, 597 S. (Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Auctores antiquissimi; XII.2).

52. Niermeyer J.F. Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus. Leiden, Brill, 1954-1964. XIX, 1139 p.

53. Nonn U. Zur Königserhebung Karls und Karlmanns. Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter, 1975, Bd. 39, S. 386-387.

54. Panov M.B. The Creation of the Cult of St Demetrius in Thessalonica: Byzantine Invention? Glasnik na Institutot za nacionalna istorija, 2008, vol. 52, pp. 75-86.

55. Paolucci F. La tomba dell'imperatrice Maria e altre sepolture di rango di eta tardoantica a San Pietro. Temporis signa. Archeologia della tarda antichita e del medioevo, 2008, vol. 3, pp. 225-252.

56. Pergola Ph. Le catacombi Romane. Storia e topografia. Catalogo a cura di P.M. Barbini. Roma, Carocci, 1997. 263 p.

57. Popovic I., Ferjancic S. A New Inscription from Sirmium and the Basilica of St Anastasia. Starinar, 2013, vol. 63, pp. 101-114.

58. Preger T. Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum. Fasc. II. Lipsiae, Teubner, 1907. XXVI, 135-376 p. (Bibliotheca auctorum graecorum et romanorum Teubneriana).

59. Ramseyer V The Transformation of a Religious Landscape: Medieval Southern Italy, 850-1150. Ithaca; London, Cornell University Press, 2006. XVII, 222 p. (Conjunctions of Religion and Power in the Medieval Past).

60. Rizos E. Martyrs from North-Western Balkans in the Byzantine Ecclesiastical Tradition: Patterns and Mechanisms of Cult Transfer. Bugarski I., Heinrich-Tamaska O., Ivanisevic V., Syrbe D., eds. Grenzübergänge: Spätrömisch, frühchristlich, frühbyzantinisch als Kategorien der historischarchäologischen Forschung an der mittleren Donau. Akten des 27. Internationalen Symposiums der Grundprobleme der frühgeschichtlichen Entwicklung im mittleren Donauraum, Ruma, 4.-7.11.2015. Remshalden, BAG Verlag, 2016, S. 195-214. (Forschungen zu Spätantike und Mittelalter; 4).

61. Salzman M.R. Leo's Liturgical Topography: Contestations for Space in Fifth-Century Rome. The Journal of Roman Studies, 2013, 103, pp. 208-232.

62. Schumacher W.N. Das Baptisterium von Alt-St Peter und seine Probleme. Mit einem Beitrag

von Thomas Bart. Feld O., Peschlow U., eds. Studien zur spätantiken und byzantinischen Kunst Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann gewidmet. 3 Bde. Bd. I. Bonn, R. Habelt, 1986, pp. 215-233. (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz, Forschungsinstitut für Vor-und Frühgeschichte; 10, 1).

63. Suyskenus C., Byeus C., Bueus J., Ghesqui-erus J., Hubenus I., eds. Acta Sanctorum Octobris. T. IV. Bruxellis, Typis Regiis, 1780. [32], 1100, [58] p.

64. Tamas H. Passio Polionis (BHL 6869). Inroduction, Critical Text and Notes. Sacris Erudiri, 2012, vol. 51, pp. 9-34.

65. Tolotti F. I due mausolei rotondi esistiti sul lato meridionale del Vecchio S. Pietro. Rivista di archeologia cristiana, 1988, vol. 64, pp. 287-315.

66. Toth P. Syrmian Martyrs in Exile: Pannonian Case-Studies and a Re-Evaluation of the St Demetrius Problem. Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 2010, Bd. 103, S. 145-170.

67. Uthemann K.-H., ed. Anastasii Sinaitae Opera. Viae Dux. Turnhout, Brepols, 1981. CCXLVII, 455 p. (Corpus Christianorum. Series graeca; 8).

68. Voci A.M. Petronilla auxiliatrix regis Francorum anno 757: sulla memoria del re dei Franchi presso San Pietro. Bullettino dell' Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo e Archivio muratoriano, 1993, vol. 99, pp. 1-28.

69. Wirbelauer E. Zwei Päpste in Rom: der Konflikt zwischen Laurentius und Symmachus (498514). Studien und Texte. München, tuduv-Verl. Ges., 1993. 377 p. (Quellen und Forschungen zur antiken Welt; 16).

70. Zaccaria F.A. Bibliotheca ritualis. 2 tomi. T. 1. Rome, Sumptibus Venantii Monaldini Bibliopolae, 1776-1781. LXXXVIII, 364 p.

71. Zotenberg H. Chronique de Jean, évêque de Nikiou. Texte éthiopien publié et traduit. Paris, Imprimérie Nationale, 1883. 488 p. (Extrait des Notices des manuscrits; t. 24, partie 1).

72. Dolakidze M., Chitunashvili D., eds. didi svnaksari giorgi mtats 'mindeli. t'ekst 'i gamosatsemad da sametsniero ap'arat'i daurtes manana dolakidzem da dali chit'unashvili [Great Synaxarion by George the Hagiorite]. Tbilisi, s.n., 2017. 045, 635 p.

Information About the Author

Basil Lourié, Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Visiting Lecturer, Faculty of Humanities/Institute for Oriental and Classical Studies, HSE University, Pokrovsky Bvd, 11, 109028 Moscow, Russian Federation, [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6618-2829

Информация об авторе

Вадим Миронович Лурье, доктор философских наук, приглашенный преподаватель, факультет гуманитарных наук / Институт классического Востока и античности, Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», Покровский бульвар, 11, 109028 г. Москва, Российская Федерация, [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6618-2829