Download pdf - The origins of the cult of St James of Compostela

The origins of the cult of St James of Compostela

Jan van Hewaarden

The cult of St James the Great, and especially the pilgrimage to his sanctuary at Santiago

de Compostela in north-western Spain (Galicia), plays a significant role in the history of the middle ages. It is perhaps of especial importance that the cult was centred at that particular place, and that the pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela was fkequently undertaken Corn every part of Latin Christen- dom; we are thus led to ask the question how did it happen that the cult of St James was localised in Galicia? Recent publications on piigrimaga in general and on that to Santiago in particular (Vaquez de Parga 1948-9 ;

Kendrick 1960; Our& 1963; Bottineau 1964; Sumption 1975; Barret 1978) all give some attention to the origins of the tradition, but their treatment is chiefly based on an article of L, Duchesne of 1900, and few modem authors provide additional information

(Georges 1971). What follows here is an attempt to elucidate certain aspects of the origins and earliest spread of the cult of St James. In reviewing this subject once again, we shall concentrate on three problems: the significance of the apparently eighth-century hymn 0 Dei wbum p&is are pruditum (Chevalier1897:~0~2890;DiazyIT~z1959~ no 432); the first mention outside Spain of St Jams’ presence in Spain, in the nu+vr- ologium of Usuard, who died in 877; and the possibility that tAe saint’s bones were taken ’

firm Jerusalem, aria St Catherine’s monastery in Sinai to the St Mennas monastery in Karm Abu Mena near Ahandria in Egypt and subsequently to Compostela. Although I have -tasHly borne in mind Keudriclc’s (1970: 187) remark that The honest beginning to any enqitiry about the origins of the cult of Sa~iago is to admit that we know ncthing about it at all”, 1 intend for all that

Figure 1 l Sccr~w from the lift of St ,Jamcv the Great, In the margin: the story of thr magician Hrrmogcnvs ; St James. Ccntre: the P&n Jacdi. Miniature, 1425.

2

to provide some further insight into the context within +Nhich the St James legend arose - a legend which may possibly be based on falsehood, but which has obtained more real power thereby than ever could have been provided by truth. Proof that St James the Great is not buried in Spain would not deter a single pilgrim.

Introduction

James, called the Great (1Maior) was the brother of John, son sf Zebedee, Three of the evangelists give little more information than his origins, calling and particular positicn among the twelve disciples @latthew 4:2L, 22; 17:1-13;20:2&8;26:36-&;Mark 1~19, 20; 3:B7; 5:37; 9:2-13; l&35-45; 14:32-42; Luke 5~10; 8:51; 9:2%-36; 22:394). His martyrdom is dacribed in the Acts of the Apostles (12~2). Later writers add to this (LipGus 1884:201-Q; frequently the persons named James in the New Testament are con- fused with each other (Lipsius 1884:2QlK, 208-g; Schermann 1907:255; Haasc 1922 :253 especially ; Klijn 1965 : 1 Wff., 25 I ). In the third-fourth centuries a narrative originated which, at the rnd of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century, was incorpor- ated into a fassio Jticubi, probably written in the area between Narbonne, Lyons and Marseilles (Lipsius 1884 :201 ff. ; Diaz y Diaz 1965 :640-2).

James preached the faith throughout Palcs- tine and converted the magus Hermogencs and his pupil Philetus, but he was arrested by Lysias and Theucritus, the centurions qui prueerun~ Himsdymis. While he was in priscJn a disputation was held in front of a large crfpwd and many, convinced by James’s words, \riere converted; but the high priest Abiathar ~.onm

trived to provoke an uproar for which James was blamed. He was thereupon led by the scribe Josias with a rope round his neck to Herod (Agrippa), who ordered him to be beheaded. On the way to the execution JiLrncs healed a cripple, which had the effect oil converting Josias: both of them were beheaded. This account is partly - for instance, the conversion of the companion - found in Clemens Alexandrinusl (about 200 AD; LipGus 1883: 177-8), and is mostly taken up

in &e Hisioriu edesiastica of about 330 AD of Eu ;ebius of Caesarea (Lawson 1928 : 126-7) ;

it 1s preserved, with variants in numerous manuscripts, dating back to the ninth or tenth century (Lipsius 1883 : 124ff.) ; and the name ofz certain Abdias, who had been acquainted with Jesus, is sometimes cited in the tradition as its author (Lipsius 1883: 127fF., 177ff. ; Schermann 1907 : 169).

The despatch of the apostles throughout the world is described in an apocryphal gospel of the twelve holy apostles, derived from various sources: every apostle obtained the facility to speak a foreign language, and Latin was a&gned to James, which shows that his missiol;ary region was in the West (Haase 1922 : 26) .2

Only in the possibly seventh-century

on GrecoiByzantine originals, is James’ preaching in Spain and other Western regions mentioned; this source also records his death and burial (Diaz y Diaz 1958 ~472) :

On the grounds of Paul’s Epistle to the

Remans (15 :24-g), in which he showed signs of being willing to go to Spain, later writers have actually attributed such a journey to him (Dvomik 1958:35-6 and note 98; Gams 1956b : l-54) ; Hieronymus and Didymus Alexandrinus, in about 4UO AD, described how Spain had been converted by ‘an apostle’ (Garcia Villada 1929: 26ff. ; Vazquez de Parga 1948-9a:27). Pow Innocent I main- * tained in a letter of 416, apparently on the evidence on Eastern sources (Haase 1922:35, 51, 53-5; compare Dvomik 1958:34K), that all the regions of the West were converted by Peter or his disciples, and that in consequence they are bound to follow the teaching of the see of Peter, namely the episcopal see of Rome (MPL 2id : Epistle 25: cols, 551-Z ; Duchesne 1900: 148fK). In this letter of innocent I one can detect disapproval of possible apostolic traditions which might derogate from the pope’s preeminence in the West through being coupled with a tendency towards independence from papal authority. This may have been significant in attempting to restore the prestige of Rome after its eclipse by Alaric in 410, as well as in establishing the Roman form of Christianity as the true faith, In North Africa and particularly in Carthage a Peter-tradition appears likewise to have existed up to the Vandal invasion of about 430 (Dvomik 1958:34K).

The preaching of an apostle in Spain did not, however, lend support to the pretensions which apparently caused concern to Pope Innocent I. On the contrary, as late as the eighth century the apostolic tradition played no significant role. Neither in the ancient church in Spain, nor in the era of Recared’s (586-601) convoCation of a ‘national’ Visi- gothic church (589), was there any talk of an apostolic see (Garcia Villada 1933 :65, 185 ;

Gams 1956b:2, 16; Dvomik 1958:33ff.). The noti.Jn of apostolicity played so limited a role in the organization of the Spanish church that mention of Paul’s possible Spanish activity in Spanish sources can only be found ii1 the Pseudo-Isidore and in a later, eighth- century, breviary ofToledo (Lipsius 1884:216 and n. 3, 218; compare Dvornik 1958:36). In Spain itseffmuch earlier mention was made of the tradition of a conversion by seven preachers sent to Spain by Paul or Peter (Gams 1956a:76ff., 218-21; with mention of an apostolic tradition, 1956a: 1 ff., 1956b:2, 8, 173ff.; compare Garcia Villada 1929:27- 104, 147-68; Dvornik 1958:36).

Outside Spain the possible preaching of Paul in Spain was of some importance. Pope Gelasius I denied that Paul had journeyed to Spain, but a century later Gregory I accepted such a journey as historical fact (Lipsius 1884:217-8 and n. 5). On the one hand it was of importance for the prestige of Rome& capital city of Christendom to be able to show that in any case Christianity was preached in the West by those apostles whose names were linked with Rome: Peter and Paul. On the other hand an apostolic tradition could imply dangers through a hankering for independence by ‘national’ churches, which could ma& use of such a tradition just as effectively as could Rome,

In its organization also, the Spanish church after 589 was in large measure independent of Rome, like the ancient Irish and Anglo- Saxon church= before the synod of Whitby of664; but, acmrding to the first canon of the council of Toledo of 589 (Gams 1956b : 11,36), decisions of the authorities in Rome must be obeyed. No use was made in Spain of any apostolic tradition which could be a source of prestige, and a tradition to Paul would point

toward Rome, where that apostle was buried. Thus the conclusion of Garcia Villada (1933 : 353) in his great. work Histm’a txclkzstica de Espaiu: wim?s; vista que la Iglesia e~pQn’oh e Aposttilica, h&em& retibido lu fe de Sun Pablo, de lus diete v~rones Apusttitos, y se&a trudicih, qw se rumonta al sigh IV, rle Suntiugu, must at the wry least be placed in doubt. From St Paul’s Epistle to the Remans, all that can be inferred is the existence of a Spanish Christian community, however that be interpreted.

The apostolic tradition counted for no more in the early history of the church of Constantinople. The Andrew-cult only dates from the eighth century and inter-church disputes, especially that between iconoclasts and iconodules, contributed more to its development than thought3 of independence from Rome (Dvornik 1958: 161 fI’- ; compare IIaase 1922 : 32 : Syrian text mentioning Con- stantinople as the place of Andrew’s death).

Apart from the doubtful testimony attributed to Isidore of Seville’s disciple Braulio (died 651, he names Isidore as a successor of James in teaching in Spain just as Pope Gregory I had succeeded Petter as a teacher in Rome, Lipsius 1884:216), which should be dated about 730 according to Ayuso Mara- zuela (1961: 144-53) but was probably not written until after the end of th e tenth century (Dlaz y Diaz 1965 :650-l), it is only in the eighth century that starting-points can be found for a connection between James the Great and Spain, and these are apparently based on the above-quoted Bretiarim apes- tolmm2. Nonetheless, an Italian manuscript from Nonantola, dating apparently from the first half of the eighth century, mentions Jentsalem as his burial place (dc Gaiffier 1967 : 363-4). The first of thee mentions of James in connection with Spain is in the

6

Ctirm~n in d&&m opostorotrcm ark ofAldhelm of Malmesbury (died 709) : His qwq~JaGobus

Primhs Hispanas convertit &mute gmtes &wald 1919~23). The second is an eighth- century int<-rpolation in a text called De srltr et obitu patrum attributed to Isidore of Seville, which we shall cite hereafter in the shortened form De artu (Diaz y Diaz 1958 :469; de Gaiffier 1963:108-11).

The possibly Irish (Diaz y maz 1965 :644) author of this interpolation in the text of Isidore, besides the prexhing throughout Spain and the burial of James, mentions also the letter which James is supposed to have sent to the ‘twelve tribes in the dispersion’, that is, to the Christians (of Jewish origin?) living in all parts of the world; perhaps this is an allusion to a possible analogy between the dispersal of the Jews and the missions of the apostle after Christ’s death. This mention ofJames the Great derives from a mingling of the Abclias-tradition of Palestine as James’s missionary area, and the beginning of the above-mentioned letter of St James (James 1: 1; Lipsius 1884 :208-9; ScheImann 1907 : 255; compare Klijn 1965 : 166) ; a mingling which is taken up in a fifth-century C!+optic account of James the Great irk which he is said to be buried in Bugte und Mtzrh (Lipsius 1884:213-4). This combination of james the Great and the James-letter occ~lrs repeatedly in Greek texts from the sixth century on- wards. It is noteworthy that in Latin sources the ‘twelve tribes in the dispersion’ as re- corded in De U?~U do not appear except in the Chrmhn of Freculf, bishop of Lisieux in about 840, who mentions James’s letter to ‘the twelve tribes’, his preaching in Spain and other Watem regions, his death in Jtrnamlem and his burial-place intra ikfamuricam (MPL 106:col, 1147; see Lipsius 208 and n. 1, 209

and nn. 1-3 and de Gaiffier 1963: I 1 I).

Other mentions of St James in connection with Spain are in a deed of foundation of a monastery, dating from 757, which had been dedicated k ~OWTWZ Sa~ti ja&i A/mtoli qm

lu [SC. Dew] edtart in ghiam hum fecisti et n&s Domi?E Patrwuim irlstituisti (Rico 1796: 362), but this is a very suspect document

(D a’ _ 1947 : 146-7, there the date 747) which may only date from about 1100 (Barrau Dihigo 1921:323-+); in the CumWtq otl tk &MZ!I!~S~ of Beatus of Liebana (776) where, in a list of missionary regions, St James is assigned Spain (Sanders 1930: 116) ; and finally in the hymn 0 Dei u&urn j~tris ow prod&m which has been attributed by some authors aLso to Beatus (Perez de Urbel 1926:125-7; 1952:16-9; 1953:515-8; 1956: 54 ; Vazquez de Parga 1948-9az27-8; Fkbrega Grau 1953:198; Htiffer 1957:Zl; Stegmtiller 1958; S&ha Albomoz 1974 : 385-94).

The supvition of Beatus’ authorship was based mainly on parallels between the text of the hymn and Beatus’ Com~~~&ry on tlhe &cQ&&? and his letters against the Adoption- ist Elipandus, writtm in collaboration with a certain Etherius. After scrutiny of the text of the hymn and possible parallels in texts of the bible and in works of a wide range of authors, it has emerged that all the parallels between the hymn and Beatus’ works are related to commonplaces de&A from the bible, arly Christian authors like Ambrosias, Arator, Avitus, Braulio, Isidore of Seville, Venantius Fortunatus and Victorinus Mer, or other, older, hymns. Where the himn is apparently original there is no connection at aIi to Beatus’ work. The conclusion is that Beatus cannot be the author of the hymn. The same conclusion was arrived at by D’raz y

Diaz (1966:642) ; although this author had earlier cited Perez de Urbel’s conviction that Beatus was the author (1959: 114). This conclusion is confirmed by circumstantial evidence, as we shall see hereafter. Several other problems concerning the James-tradi ti r>n are raised by this hymn, which merits tiirtfier discussion here.

The hymn 0 Dei verbum patris

ln both medieval manuscripts3 of the hymn 0 Dti ve7hm patris ore proditum, which came originally from Toledo (MT, of the tenth century) and San Domingo de Silos (LSd, of the eleventh century), it is placed after the fe;lst-day of the Apostle John, 29 December: according to the Visigothic and Mozarabic rites it is attributed to the feast of St James, namely 30 December (,cIPL 86 :coI.1306 and Blume 1897 : 186). Onlv with the twelfth- century CO&X Calixtinus’ is the emphasis in Spain on the 25 July feast-day, in accord with the Roman calendar, The mention of 30 December as the day of the translation of St James is naturally more recent than the Visigothic and Mozarabic rites (HPmel 1950 : 46-q.

In both manuscripts the hymn dedicated to John is preceded by a ninth- or tenth-century hymn dedicated to St James the Less (Justus) :

Clara sun&rslm au, Jerusulnrt (Blume 1097 : 189; dating: Perez de Urbel 1926:123, ninth century; D’laz y Diaz 1%9:no. 655 and &6fbrRy 1964:344-5, tenth century). StifkfFy% statement (345) that the p&k mentioned in the hymn is Spain and that the war against the Arabs is alluded to in the assertion that the fatherland must be defended, seems questionable: Spain as such is not named in the hymn, and while James the

i 7

+ . .

r .,_- ,*“b , .

, , .,

later versions of’ it, notably that of Ephrem Syrus, who died in 372, az*e well known (Peters 1939).

The influence of Eastern, allegorical interpretations on the West was considerable (Fontaine 1959a: 145-6,15%4; 1359b:543fK, 852 and n. 2) : both the Priscillianism fiourish- ing in Spain (Goosen 1976) in the fourth and fifth centuries and eighth-century Spanish Adoptionism borrowed much of their doctrine from Eastern sources (Kelly 1958: l&9, 140, 316ff.). But this does not serve to identify the source of inspiration fur the poet uf the hymn 0 Dei verburn pa&is : the combination of the precious stones taken from Exodus and the Apostles is found neither in the works of patristic authors, nor in those of the Priscil- lianists and Adoptionists. The only elaboration of the parallel between the twelve Apostles, the twelve tribes of Israel, and Aaron’s twelve precious stones is to be found in an anonymous monophysite writing of which an Ethiopian text has been preserved (Haase 1922:48).

The text with the parallel between the Exodus precious stones and the twelve Apostles appears in the famou Ghent manuscript (University Library, MS. 92) of the Libel- Flu&m, written by Lambert of St Omer (1120) and illustrated with a picture of the Holy City and the twelve Apostles and their precious stones (Derolez 1968 : 13 1, MS. f.65r), A remarkable fact is that in the Paris and Bodleian MSS. of the Liber Fhridus the text of the parallel has been altered so that, instead of those of Exodus, the precious stones of the Apocalypse are mentioned (Paris, Giblicr- theque Nationale, MS. Lat.8865, f.42v ; Ox-

ford, Bodleian Library, MS. Bodley 352, f. 13r). There is no ‘orthodox tradition’ of the parallel and the confusion is made complete

by Caesarius of Heisterbach, who in his Dialogus miraculor~m (about 1220) gives an elaboration of the importance of the number twelve, and mingles the precious stones of Exodus with those of the Apocalypse (Strange 1851:128-9):

Duodecim Apstoli duodecim signa coeli, duxlecim menses anni, dwdecim horn diei, duodccitr_ stella in corona sponsae (Apoc. I2 : I). Christus vero cc&m est, annus actcrnitatis, lux est, corona sanctorum est. &~loli duodecim sunt filii Jacob @en. 35:22). duodecim f<xws dcscrti (Ex. 15 :27), duudtcim hpidt~ irr IWQ po~r+zli (Ex. 28:2 I), duodccim paws prrqmsitimis (Lcv. 24:5), ducwkcim lapides altaris (Ex. %I:+), duodecim lagdcs dc jordani suhlati (JcJSua 4:8). durldrcim haves sub aenco mari (1 Kings 7 :25). dticldd rirll jirnth- mtifn coeledis Jtv-u&w (Apw. 2 1 : l-t),

The Apostles with their missionary areas are named in strophes four and five of the hymn (compare also de Caiffier 1967 :364-5) ;

but here there are striking divergences between the two oldest manuscripti of the hymn which merit close consideration. Thus far attention has been given to the sixth- or seventh-century Breviarium apustdorum and the eighth-century interpolation in De orltl in which the missionary regions are named and in which Spain is attributed to St James the Great, as is also the case in tht: Poema de ark of -4fdhelm of Malmesbury. As far as St James himself is concerned, the poet could ‘have found his source in this tradition, but for the origins of the list of Apostles and their missionary regions we must look further afield, for the lists of Apostles and their missionary regions are based on apocryphal traditions and came to the West from the East.

According to MS.LSd the list in the hymn 0 Dei uerbum putris is the same as the version in De artu (de Gaiffier 1963: 115), where Judas and Thaddeus are identified with each

other, and almost the same as the version of Beatus, who in his CO~W@V on ti A@ypse does not mention Thaddeus in the series of Apostles, but eisewhere, though giving him there the same missionary area - Edessa - as MS,LSd of the hymn. Moreover, in most manuscripts of Beatus, Ma&as is not named among the Apostles but elsewhere; he too is given there the same missionary region as in MS.LSd of the hymn, namely Judea.

The omission of Thaddeus in MS&T of the hymn could have been due to uncertainty about him, and this appears to be the case when the text of De ortu =md the list of Apostles in it is examined, but the number of eleven Apostles could also be due to the mbarras du chok to name or not to name Judas Iscariot; the traitor, who however was one of the twelve. Besides, there is a tradition going back to Tatianus, according to which Thaddeus is identified with James the Less, son ofAlpheus :

in Tatianus’s Diatessmn ,Judas Iscariot was very probably named in the series of Apostles while Thaddeus went unmentioned (Scher- mann 1907:208). Add to this the fact that Judas Xscariot had no missionary region so that, in that respect, he did not fit into the hymn. It is remarkable that Ephrem Syrus’ version is not followed in the hymn, seeing that Ephrem does not identify Thaddeus with James son of Alphaeus. The influence of Ephrem must not be overestimated (compare Peters 1939 : 94ff.).

Pontus as Matthias’ missionary area remains so far unexplained. Just as with the parallel between the precious stones from Exodus and the Apostles so here, it seems that the Apostle-list of Ephrem Syrus as it has come down to us in his commentary on Tatianus’s Diatessaron can lead to a solution. Since there are carelessnesses in the manu-

script tradition of the Diatessaron, some doubt must be attached to the Latin translation of Ephrem’s commentary (Peters 1939:94 and n. 1). Thus a certain James described as @&us in the Syrian-Armenian and Latin versions is really Mz-ttheus (compare Leloir 1966:115 and n. 1). While Mattheus was

pirblkzfks, the Levi mentioned farther up in the list of Apostles is apparently Ma&as, Confusion often occurs between Mattheus and Matthias (Schermann 1907 : 184). The Apos- tle called Levi by Haase (1922 &I,) after the Latin translation of Ephrem’s commentary on Tatianus had Pontus as his missionary area.

When these difficulties a.re correctly sorted out the connection of Matthias with Pontus becomes explicable: the Fzxt of the version of the hymn 0 Dei v&m in MS. MT followed a tradition which apparently derived from Sytis in a purer form than is now available to us. The @&anus of this tradition was Levi-Mattheus, and the other Apostle Matthis. Thus the MT-version of the hymn points us towards Syrian sources for the second time. Tatianus’ Diatessaron was ex- tremely influential, either directly or through texts deriving from it, both on the Velw tit& and on the liturgy (Peters 1939 : 149- 65).

The version of the hymn 0 Dei v&urn @tris in MS. LSd, which, in conjunction with the Latin t&Won, connects Matthias with Judea and Thaddeus with Edessa, was written in the eleventh century in the abbey of San Domingo de Silos. It is perfectly possible that its sti@~4~~sz$c~tm was aware of the diver- gent interpretations of the Apostle-tradition in the MT-version of the hymn and thengefore combined Matthias with Judea and, to restore the number twelve without naming Judas

14

Iscariot, added Thaddeus (with Edessa). The incongruence between tha- fourth and fifth stropha, in which the Apostles and their missionary areas are named, and the second and third strophes, which provide an alle- goric-al prelude to the list of Apostles, like that in the MT-version where eleven Apostles are named but twelve alluded to, is thus removed in the LSd-version. Just as in the traditions, however ‘orthodox’ they are intended to be, relics of information going back to Tatianus have survived (Peters 1939 : 139fE), so likewise in the L&l-version of the 0 Dei hymn the outward form was adjusted (twelve disciples, Matthias in Judea, Thad- deus named), while the allegotical interpretation of the precious stones of Aaron’s clcxhing to the twelve Apostles proved attrac- tivc to the poetic mind of the smtij%r.

In the third and fourth strophes of the 0 Dei verburn hymn Eastern elementi clearly play a significant role in the list itself, but with an important exception: St James the Great has. in the Spanish sources, {BbtaintTd Spain as his missionary area, while according to Ephrem Syrus Paul had preached in Spain, James in Gaul (Haax 1922:44), Further on in the hymn, in the tenth strophe, James himself is named as @!rotuar UHII&.U. This might refer to a local tradition (Messenger 1946: 172-3), but in this connection the difficulty of the word U~TIZ&U must be pointed out. A local tradition which set up promising rumouTs before the acceptance of the dis- wvery of the saint’s grave around 800, facilitating a wider expansion, seems to be logical, but it would lx dangerous to base this on the word umulw. It appears also in a hymn dedicatedi to St Sebastian, ~ebasiime, smote noshw uemh (Blume 1897 : 237), which is found - as the 0 Dci hymn - in MS. MT, at

would be going tcm far tn regard this as a local hymn in honclur of St Seba&an in the land of the i)asqlles, 4lowever much Sebasti- anus was revc:l*ed as a saint in this area and in Spain (compare Simonet 1903 : 336,408). An interpretation of the word vernulus in the sense of ‘helpfulness’ seems more appropriate? After all, it :~as only about I1 70 that King Ferdinand II of Galicia and Leon claimed St ,James as the national patron saint of Spain (GonzZtlez-Lopez 1976 ~96) - in agreement with some hymns inserted in the twelfth-century Co&x Calixtinus, in which the scattered traditions about the Spanish cult of St James were compiled (Whitehill 1944 :228, X7,404-16).

The fact that the hymn 0 Dei aerbum putris contains some Eastern, especially Syrian, ele- ment5, need occasion no surprise. Existing overseas connections between the Eastern Mediterranean basin and Spain, for a while interrupted by the appearance of the Vandals in the fifth century, were in frequent use. From Constantinople or Alexandria ships plied to the south of Spain and thence via the Guadalquivir to Seville or via the Guadiana to %Wida. Sailing round the Iberian Pen- insula, ships could reach Braga or continue further north: Martinus of Braga reached the town direct by ship from the East in about 550, Travellers took books with them in their baggage, among other things, often by Greek authors but mostly translated into Latin (Hillgarth 1961 :44&5). Apart from all kin& of works of art (Hillgarth 1961:443 and nn, 1, 2), theology and philosophy (Martins 1950:23ff,), the liturgy (Baumstark 1935:3ff., compare de GaifFier 1967: 133) and the cult rf saints (Baumstark 1935 : 1 Sff. ; David 1947 : 231 ff. ; Fhbrqa Grau 1953 : 191-216, 2224, 2324) were 311 subject to marked Eastern

l

15

influences. The origins suggested here for parts of the hymn 0 l)ce’ attat the strength of that influence and at the same time show that substantial changes were brought about that are nat without significance. Yet ultimately this hymn is a product of Spain and especially of the Asturia-Galicia region.

The hymn 0 Dei wbtm @tris is an acrostic which speILs out the sentence: 0 I~X regsrm regnn piivm Mazwmmn uexuvdi cud proue UC tvo tunorepme. Maurecatus is King Mauregatus, who ruled over Asturia from 783 to 788. The acrostic is a remarkabie pauegyric of a ruler who, as an usurper, enjoyed a dubious rqx.~ta~ tion (Perez de U&e11956 :38-g; Menendet y Pelayu 1917 :292). When King Silo of Asturia died in 783 his nephew Nfonso should have succeeded him with the agreement of Silo’s widow Adosinda. Alfonso was the son of Adosinda’s brother Fruela who had occupied the throne before Silo. Fruela’s and Adosinda’s bastard brother Mauregatus, son of Alfonso I, rejected this settlement of the succession and usurped the throne, possibly aided by Arab allies, and Adosinda and her nephew had to flee (Levy Prover@ 1950 : 117,

n, 2; BalTau Dihigo 1921:149; Perez de Urbel 1956:38ff.; Bleye 1958~479; compare Diaz y Dinz 1966 : 630-4). Adosinda, whose puedugogsu. Beatus of Liebana was, apparently entered a monastery in 785 (MPL 96: cob. 894-5).

.

Mauregatus’ bad reputation rests for the most part on a single source: a chronicle ascribed to Alfonso III, dating from about 877, which runs in part as follows:

Silonc defuncto regina Adosinda cum omni officio palatino Adefonsum filium fiat& sui, Froilani regis, in sulio constituerunt patemo; sed pracventus fraude Maurecati, tii sui, filii AdtfonJ maioris, de seierva tamen

natus, a rqpo dejectus, spud p’opi+‘los mat& suac in Alabam [the prwince in which Burgos lk] corn- moratus est, Maurecatus autem regnun?, quod caI1ide invasit, per sex anm vinckavk Mme pro@ &is- c&t, et sepultus in ecclesia SC Joannis in Pravia [in _4sturia] fuit era DcCC?CXVI [ =AD 7&B],

ln two manuscripts of the Chronicon ul&GEdetlse of about 880 quoted by Gomez Moreno (1932 $02) it is said of Mauregatus that he reigned for five years tymice ac~epto regm, The Chronkon db&me is little more than an extract from the chronicle ascribed to Alfonso III, in the second redaction of which the above-mentioned information is repeated (Garcia Villada 1919: 72, 120; Barrau Dihigo 1919b : 323-32,34ZfK, 363 ; Arteta 197 1:40-l ;

compare too Diaz y Diaz 1966 ~63 1-2). There is 110 earlier mention of Mauregatus; a document dated 27 March 832, in which he is described as an usurper supported by the Arabs, is a forgery (Barrau Dihigo 1919 : 76ff., 1ZG2) apparently inspired by the Pseudo Alfonso chronicle, parts of the text of which reappear in the document.

Apart from this rather negative view of Mauregatus, another view of his appearance on the scene is possible which fits in better with the acrostic ofthe hymn 0 Dei. Adosinda and her immediate followers wanted Alfonso (II) to succeed Silo, who had died childk, but the magnates and bishops were unaware of this. According to a pronouncement of the thirteenth Council of Toledo, Adosinda had to accept the veil immediately after the death ofher husband. Considering Alfonso’s youth, it seems possible that her action was inspired by a desire for power; in any case, ilt was unsuccessful. Mauregatus was invited by “a considerable number of magnates and bishops” to ascend the throne, and Adolsinda had to flee with Alfonso, As king, Mauregatus defended his kingdom against an invaskn of

Berbers who had established themselves in Astorga and Leon. They threatened Oviedu, but Mauregatus forced them back over the River Minho after a labourious victory (Dozy H%O: 135, 138-9 and Appendix 4, p. xxviii).

In this context Mauregatus becomes a defender of Christendom in north-west Spain, and St James the Great, as ww and ‘helpful patron’ (pczt~u~ vernul~), is associated with him in this struggle. It is notable that the battle against the unbeliever forms an essen- tial element in the later Jame&gend. But, for the Asturian royal tradition, in which the very Alfonso driven out by Mauregatus played a major role, it was difficult to appre- ciate that an usurping bastard could earn such praise. Something else may also have played a role. It appears l?om the Pseudo- Alfonso chronicle that Mauregatus seized the throne from a base in the region around Burgs. DL;ring several centuries rival rulers had made north-west Spain into a divided region; a situation which Sancho III around looci and above all tifonso VI in the lmt decade of thr: elmenth century managed to bring to an end. Mauregatus’ emergence into the light of history c-an be ~-en as an episode of this same rivalry.

sy attributing the 0 Dei hymn to Beatus Perez de Urbel was able to Gonsider Maurege atus as an enthusiastic opponent of the Adoptionism which had taF=eoi root in Spain, After all Beatus attacked the Adoptionist enors of Elipandus uf Toledo (Perez de Urbel 19I2:16ff., 1956:53-4, compare Z&9). From a letter sent by this same Elipandus to Akuin it can merely be concIuded that As&a- Galicia had remained free of Adoptionist errors, possibly because of the succe%g of k~tus’ counter-attack. Although Beatus’ let- terj against Elipandus, written in coll&xa~

tion with Etherius, can be dated to 785 and thus to the time of Mauregatus’ reign, it is hard to see how the paedagogus of Adosinda, who precisely ill the first of these letters gives evidence of his attachment to his pupil, could have been in Mauregatus direct entourage and could have written an encomium of this ruler. Nevertheless, the first strophe of tie hymn can be interpreted as having been directed against Adoption&m (Perez de Urbel 1952:X%--7,1953:525;compareElorduy 1962: 339ff.), but that is not proof enough to con- sider Beat fi as its autlior. The struggle against Adoptionism was ba.:ked by Alcuin and by Pope Adtian I, who wrote about it, among other matters, to Cilarlemagne and tc the Spanish bishops. It was condemned by the Frankishcouncilof Frankfurt in1194 (Menen- dez y Pelayo 1917 :2 78-320 and Appendices 11-13, pp. cxxxiv-xl; Gams 195Gb: 261-98).

With this we reach the reign df Alfonso II (789&O), during which, according to the legend, James’ grave was discovf red in am- postela. Frankish influence in north-west Spain was at that time considerable: Alfonjo 1I regarded Charlemagne as his friend (Pertz and Kurze 1895: 102-5; MPL 123:col. 129). If the hymn 0 Dei verbrun was written after Mauregatus’ death in honour of his memory, which is probable, this homage to him and the mention of James’ patronage could be seen as an exprasion of an aspiration to independence OR the part of north-west Spain, a reaction against foreign influenq especially that of the Franks, which appears clearly too in the eleventh century in the H&&2 she (Horrent 1956:287-93).

In all probability the news of the discovery of the &nt’s grave became for Alfonso III the starting-point for a new emphasis on the independent of his kingdom (see Kempe

17

1958 :2 l-2) ; moreover, through the identifica- tica of St James with Compostela, he took th& wind out of the sails of potential internal and external opposition. An inclination to emphr&ze one’s own identity can also be seen in the restomtion of the Asturian church by the Council of Oviedo, which was held in 821 during Alfonso’s reign (Shnchez Albornoz 1974:638j. Beatus of Liebana can by no means be credible in this context as the poet of the 0 D&i z&urn hymn, especially as he addresse.c; himself to the foreign Franks in his campaign against Adoptionism.

It was the same with the St Andrew-cult at Constantinople, an Apostolic tradition which took shape at a time of internal divisions in ecclesiastical affairs in the Byzantine Empire. In Spain too the appearance of the Adoption- ists had brought about doctrinal dissension. The vindication of an Apostolic tradition can lie in its being directed against hetero- doxy. The James-cult in Spain in this early period, just like the Andrew&t in Con- stantinople, was not inspired by aspirations of independence from Rome. Such pretensions are on1y noticeable in later years, when in 1004 Pope Leo IX excommunicated Bishop Cresconius who supported the im- ierial pretensions of the kings of Leon by naming himself bishop of the Apostolic See of Saint James; or a century earlier, in 954, when Ordofio III, king of Leon, had called a Bishop Sisnandus “bishop of our patron saint and tivereign of the whole world” (Vazquez de Parga 194%9a:45), or when Diego Gel- mirez, bishop of Santiago de Compostela from 1100 to 1142, hoped to become primate of Spain and to occupy a sedes u~ostolicu, and called his canons by the title ‘cardinal’ (Sumption 1975: 166).

Thus, the 0 Dei hymn poses many prob-

lems. A remarkable fsct about it is that, whiIe in the twelfth-century C&x Calzirtinz~ there is a collection of hymns in praise of St James, some of them calling him patron saint of Spain, this old and very interesting hymn about the Spanish James-cult has been left out, notwithstanding the tendency to try to find a? much ancient agd authoritative evidence as possible about St James in Spain. The James-cult was too much identified with the royal tradition in north-west Spain and too much attached to the imperialism within that tradition, for it to be possible to insert the hymn 0 Dei pa&is verbum ore ~uditum in the Coda Calixtims; after all it referred to a black stain in that royal blazon. Moreover, the hymn did not fit into that other great theme in the St James-tradition : the role of Charlee magne as elaborated in the C&o&e of Pseudo-Turpin, %a& IV of the Co&x Calixtinm.

Of coLrse, Charlemagne was a far more attractive lay patron for the cult of St James than that rather obscure and controversial King Mauregatus. Or must all this be interpreted more as a proof of the mighty French influence on the creation and elaboration of the St James-legend, in which there was no place for any sign of that regional independence celebrated in the hymn?

The mention of 3mes grave in Usuard? Martyrologium of about 865

The preaching of the Apostle St James the Great in Spain was definitely f&d in the Latin James-tradition in the eighth cenrury; in 804 James’ activities in Spain were taken up in the Martymlogilrm gelhem in almost the same words as in the De UT& (MPL 83 XXI~S. 15 J-2, no. 125). The earliest mcntica of James’ grave in Galicia is to be found in the

Mar~&gk~?~ of Usuard, who died in 877, which was completed about 865; it w= dedicated to Charles the Bald in about 875 (Dubois 1965: 122, 135 ; Quentiri MB; Aigrain 1953 $3) : khan sucr&sima ossa ab husolimis ad Hi5finius tranrlata, et in ultimis earwn J&bus condita, celherrtmn ihum gentium v~ratiun~ ~x~oluntur (Dubok 1965 : 272). Up to now it has ken generally accepted that this mention comes from Ado of Vienne (about $04 to 875), who re.fers to James’ grave In Spain in his revision of the Mar~rologk of

Florus of Lyons (about 800-W) (Duchesne 1900:163; Quentin 1908:243,3X& 385; Vaz- quez de Parga 134l3-9;t:34,190 J Wiiffer 1957 : 26-7); mme scholars (Quentin 1908:587; Perez de Urbel 1952 : 25 ; Elorduy f 962 ~347 ; Bottineau 1964: 16, n. 1: attribute the mention to Floms of Lyons himself., The facti of the CZHC are obscure here; their elucidation bepen& on the manuscript tradition of these source.

The original version of FIorus of Lyons’ M~~t~~~iogium has disappear& (see Cabaniss

1958 :226; Quentin 1908 :390-Z) ;Ado’s,date= abie to between 850 and 859 (Quentin 1908 : 385-408; Dubois 1965 : 136), has been handed down in a revised form. In the Migne text of the Nellus & feduitutibw SS Ap~stdm~m ascribed to Ado, the grave of St James in Spain is mentioned in an addition to the entry on St James’ day, 25 July: Hujus beatissimi af&uli sacrrr ossa ad Hispa& f Yanslata

et in ultimum earum jKbur, ve&kt?t co&&a mdr4f Brittankum condita, c&bem*mu illarum genlium senemtione excoluntur (MPL 123 :col. 183 ; corn- pare Quentin 19U8:4G9, 482, 5845, 587). But no mention of James’ grave is to be found either in the Vetw romawn mar@@m which has been connected with the works of Florus and Ado, or in the Litaniae in&& pub- lished under Ado’s name by Migne? Still less does Ado mention the grave in his Chronicon; on the contrary, in that work he leaves the possibility open that Paul may have preached in Spain : Quo temflre creditur Paulus ad Hilrpanius pnksse et Arelatae Trophimum, Vk Cxs- centem dis+ulos sues ad praedicandum r&quisse (MPL 123 : col. 80). Ado wrote his chronicle after the Libellus and the section ascribed to him extends to 866, so the discove;yj of the grave would certainly have been mentioned, the more so since Ado devotes attention to Gaiician affairs (MPL 123 ~01s. 125ff., 129, on Alfonso II). Tne possibility arises of a later inter+ation in Ado’s Lib&-s and in the Mtirtyrologkon which goes back via Ado to Florus’s authorship. Examination of the sur- viving manuscripts will help us here.

Apart from Usuard’s Mar&rologium, the most important manuscripts are the’ oldest MS. of Ado’s Lib&s, which dates from the tenth century and corna from St Gall, and MSS. E and T of the Martyologium of which Florus of Lyons is supposed to be the original

author. E is a twelfth-century MS. from Echtemach; T is a fourteenth-century MS. from Toui, Still another version exists in a twelfth-century MS. from St Peter’s at M&OII, in which neither the translation of the Apostle Bartholomew (of which more hereafter) nor James’ grave in Spain are mentioned. From this Quentin deduced that the date of the original version of Flonts’ work must be before 837, since the translation of Bartholomew took p&e in 838. The grave of St James is mentioned in the Libellus and in versions E aild 1 T of the Marpologium in nearly the same words, but in the MISS, of the Maftyrologium it is an addition, made at Metz at an uncertain date.

The problems connected with the mention of St James’ grave were evaded by the pre- eminent authority in the field of martyrologies, Dom H. Quentin: in his treatment of Ado’s Marf~rologium (rhe Libel/z@ he limited himPelf to the pronouncement that Ado took over Florus’ mention of St James, while this mention itselfwas a later, undatable, addition (Quentin 1908:225, 245, 247, 372, 389-90, 482). The mention of the translation of the Apostle Bartholomew from Lipari to Bene- ver,to (see Pertz 1838: 173, 504; ASS 25 August:42) is written in MSS. E and T in the same hand (Quentin 19U8:372) as the mention of the grave of St James in Spain. Nowhere in the works of Ado of Vienne is any mention of this translation to be found, even though he had travelled in Italy. Since Ado is supposed to have supplemented the M’arp- ralogium of Florus of Lyons, he would certainly have mentioned the translation of Bartholo- mew in his own L,ibellw if he had known about it, just as he would have the grave of St James. We must look elsewhere for the origin of both reports.

20

Wandelbert of Ptim mention the tranda- tion of Bartholomew in his martyrology, completed in 842 or 848, but he says nothing of James’ grave in Spain. In the preface to his work Wandelbert praises the @ and subsidium of the archdeacon Florus of Lyons, of whose works Wandelbert made grateful use, Ado of Vienne had been to Priim, where he could have become acquainted with Wandeibert’s works, but he still does not mention Bartholomew’s translation. This path thus leads nowhere, but confirms the doubt surrounding Ado’s and, a forttiri, Florus’ authorship of the mention of St James’ grave in Spain (MPL 121 :cols. 576-7,608; Querli-in 1908:398K, 4C%l; Cabaniss 1958:226, n. 10).

So far the oldest manuscript, from St Gall, of Ado’s i%ellur has been left out. of consideration, James’ grave io Spain is mentioned in it, but this dm not necessarily imply that the report was supplied by Ado himself. It should be pointed out that Notker Balbufus of St Gall (about 840-912), who knew Ado’s Lib&s (Quentin I908 : 679, compare 4-66, n. I), also wrote a martyrology, for which he borrowed much infomation from other martyrologies and in which he mentions James’ grave in Spain in much tke same words (but with beati in p-&e of beatikmi, sands- sima in place of sana) as the L;belhs, with an addition on James’ preaching in Spain (MPL 131 x11. 1125) ; but Notker says nothing of Bartholomew’s translation.

Because of the lack of proof of Ado’s authorship of the mention of James’ grave in Spain - there is more evidence against it than in favour - the origins of the mention in the St Gall MS. should perhapa be sought in St Gall itself. A cult of St James is &den& by south German and Swiss @~&II&I (Htiffer

1955:127ff.; 1957;42ff.). Although this evidence from saints’ patronage of churches should be used -with caution, there are some grounds - increased by Notker’s mention in his martyrology - for supposing that the mention in the St Gall MS. of Ado’s Libehs of St James’ grave in Spain may have been due to the srri@or of the MS., who may have heard or read a-bout this local cult.

Let us return to the Mar&ralog&z of Usuard, in which both St James’ grave in Spain and the translation of St Bartholomew are mentioned. According to his prologue, Usuard used martyrologies of St Jerome, the Venerable Bede (who revised Jerome’s work), and Florus, for his work, as well as a second work of Florus (MPL 133:wls. 599-600; Dubois 1965:41-3, 48). Usuard wrote between 850 and 865 (Duhois 1965 : 135), thus at about the same time as Ado of Vienne, whose Martyrotogium-the revision of Florus’ Mar6ymlogium - dates from between 850 and 859-4) (see Quentin 1908:tU, 403; Dubois I959 : 136). Both Ado and Usuard name Bede and Flon~r of Lyons in their prologues, Usuard adffing the mention of a second work of Florus, It is certain that a version of FLorus’ Murtydugium was .available before 850, from which date Ado of Vienne was busy with his revision (Quentin 1908 :383,389-90 ;

Cabaniss 1958:22&7). The two works of Floras mentioned by Usuard could therefore have been Florus’ own Maftyrologiwn and the first version of Ado’s r&sicn of it (see

Quentin 1908:404ff., 674; Dubois 1959:38). But it is also possible that Usuard used two different versions of Florus’ Ahrpdogium itself, namely the version mentioned above of the m MS. and the E or T version (this as against Quentin 1908:4&, 674).

It thus appears that borrowing either of the

21

mention of St James’ grave in Spain or of the report of St Bartholomew’s translation from the works of Florus or Ado is out of the question. Apart from Usuard’s M~rt~~ologiwn, the only source which mentions both these events is the additional material in MSS. E and T of the &rtyrologium originally compiled by Florus of Lyons. The possibility that these additions are of older date than Usuard’s Mar~u&u7z cannot be entirely excluded, but there is no evidence fbr this. On the contrary, it should be borne in mind that there is no mention of St Bartholomew’s translation, which is one of the additions, in Ado of Vienne’s Libellw.

Whence Guard derived his knowledge of these events does not emerge from all this. Wandelbert Df Priim could have been the source for the translation of St Bartholomew, but it is also possible that Usuard himself heard both reports directly ; this is especially true of the news of the discovery of St James’ grave, because Usuard had visited Spain (Dubois 1965:96, 128ff.). The wording of his Martyrologium is somewhat less full than the other sources: he says that St James was translated from Jerusalem to Spain but does not mention his burial contra mare brilttinnitin.

Usuard’s martyrology was not one of Notker Balbulus’ sources - Notker does not mention St Bartholomew’s translation. Tak- ing into account the c?bove remarks on the unlikelihood of Ado as the author of the mention of St James’ grave in Spain in his Libellw and the probability that this addition to the text was made at St Gall, though without mention Df the translation of James’ bones but with thr: indication that James was buried contra mare brittannk, the possibility arises that a traveler from Great Rritain, who had been in Spain, brought news of

St James’ grave to St Gall. This surmise, which would also explain the more exact mentions of the buria! place, is certainly not elitirely groundless. A special relationship existed between Britain and Galicia: apart from t5e f&t that the ‘British’ tonsure was allowed there until the fourth Council of Toledo of 633, Galicia was a favourite place of travel for the British, who had their own bishopric there until the tenth century (Posch- mznn 1930:589; see Hillgarth 1961:45+--5). This added to the known love of travel of British monks and their known relationship to St Gall (Levison 1946:136, 146; Prinz 1976 : 169fK), seems to provide a. satisfactory basis for this hyp&esis (see too Hillgarth 1962 : especially 182ff:).

No final solution of these problems can be offered here : this could only be achieved after a detailed study of the manuscripts and the circumstances surrounding their production. The peremptory assertions of Duchesne, Q+entin and, after them, Vazquez de Parga, Dubois, Bottineau and others, that Ado or Fiorus was the author of the earliest mention ofSt James’ grave in Spain, must however be placed in serious doubt. Duchezne (1900: 163) supposed that Ado’s source was an enthusiastic monk on pilgrimage to Santiago; but in that case Ado’s silence about this sensational event in his other works is in- explicable. Usuard, who had himself been in Spain, seems more likely to have been the first witness of this event.

It is remarkable that the Spanish sources only begin to speak later: the grave in Spain is mentioned in a document of 883 (Vaaquez de Parga 19489a:30), in which control of the grave is granted to a group of monk and Bishop Sisnandus of lria Flavia, who had been elected and installed by a provi*ncial

22

council (see too Duchane 1900 : i58fK ; Garcia 1954: 19ff4. The eariiest mention of Stjames grave in Spain coma from outside Spain, from France - a reminder that French influence on the James-cult should not be underestimated.

Ail whmses of this affair are agreed over the place of St James the Great’s death: Jerusl alem, But there is less agreement over his burial place. Some name the Mount of Olives, for example Antoninus of Piacenza in the sixth century and Ado of Vienne in the ninth century (Tobler and Molinier 1966 : 100;

MPL 123:coIs. UN-5) ; in some Greek sources it is said that James was buried Ev &RE~ Gjc MapClarp rtc@ (Lipsius 1 W :209ff. 1, which was corrupted to a meaningless &V &q fJIC

Mappt~pt~&, and Thai in )lis turn led to the Latin version in A&ii Marnzatia or something similar (Bmriarium Apstohum, De or!u, MartyJologium gdhense, Freculf) and in arcis tnarnzanlcis or something similar (Lipsius 1884 : 222 ; Duchesne 1980 : 159fF. ; Vazquez de Parga 194%9a:30; Bottineau 1964:28-9), The bishop of the region Thdemir, finder of the grave (Elorduy 1962 :324-38), and King Alfonso II ofAsturia-Galicia were however convinced of the authenticity of the discovery (Vazquez de Pargz 194%9a :3 1 ff, ; Lipsius 1884:289 and nn, 2, 3; Duchesne 1900: 159fF.). Nowhere in the James-tradition is there any mention before $00 of any place in Spain as a possible burialoplace of St Jam=. Excavations in the neighbourhood of Compostela have brought Roman and Suevian remains to light (Kirschbaum I%1 :

235, 240, 243-X)), but ological tidence f& the

1 here is no arche- burial of Jama in

Spain, though Theodemir’s sarcophagus has beon found (Kirschbaum 196 1: 253ff.). Elorduy (1962) made use of this finding to argue that the story about James’ burial place had a hard core. Thevdemir really had lived and had been, according to the epigraph on his tomb, bishop oi Iris Flavia. Later sources tell us about the restoration by Theodemir of a sanctuary in Compostela (Florez 1765:cQ) dedicated to Saint James, so there must ha\-4: been a cult of St James before Theodemir’s Wetime (he died in be7). Never- theless, this p-xws nothing about the burial place but oni 11 indicates that in the eighth I century a cl+ of St James in Galicia was growing, as we have already seen. For all that, attempts have again recently been made to demonstrate the existence of St James’ bones at Compostela, in spite of the fact that the 1056 account of the Liegeois (Stiennon 1958) raised sufficient doubts about it, and around 1499 Arnold von HarK demonstrated all necessary scepticism, having received no satisfaction in response to his request to see the saint’s mortal remains: sue wee nyet gen&&~ g&l@ - l l van stunt an moisste er unsyn- nkh wtrQh wit eyn Taesm hunl: “that anyone who did not believe truly. . . would immediately become mad iike a mad dog” (Van Groote 1860:233; Letts 1946:175).

From the ninth century on, the James- legend included the saint’s translation from Jerusalem to Spain; the bald mention in Usuard was gradually ‘dressed up’ into a detailed account (van Herwaarden 1974:s 9) of a series of miracles: burial in a marble tomb, oblivion, then heavenly signs accom- panying the tomb’s discovery, finally, the numerous wonders of the place of pilgrimage (see in general Delehaye 1955: 12& qecially 30). In later times the miraculous story of

23

Figure 7. Tomb of Theodcmir, bishop of iris Flavia (died 847).

the translation was coiisidered Icss worthy of belief, but it was supposed tha:; the legend concealed a kernel of historical truth and attempts were made to buttress the translation story with facts. Jn the last century Gams arrived at the hypothesis Jerusalem-St Catherine’s Sinai-Zaragoza-Lugo-Compost tela (Gams 195Gb:2,363ff.). others thought they had found an intermediate resting- place for the saint in M&lda (Navascub 1948 : 349-50 ; Perez de Url beI 1956 : 5 1-7 ; Hiiffer 1937:24-5) : relics of St James and other saints were buried in Wrida and from there removed to Composteli in the face of

the Arab threat in the middle of the eighth century. Certainly this transference of relics out of I&-ida did take place, but the remains ascribed to St James the Great were more likely those of St James the Less (Porteia Pazos 1953:23ff.; Hendrick 1960:187Kj. The removal of relics here and there more or less under the threat of anti-Christian force5 is common property far into the middle ages. Thus there is a great deal of confusiorl over the authenticity of these relics and over thr reliability of descriptions of thr7r translations. Nevertheless it proves attractive to test those stories against more trustworthy data, though

24

the argumentation used in this process needs

to be treated with raenye. According to the reconstruction of the

Hells (1966:3!-6), the bones of St James the

Great were deposited in the time of Justinian in the monastery founded by him in the Sinai Peninsula, later known as St Catherine’s_ They were brought from there to the LMennas monastery near Alexandria in the seventh

century. When that place threatened to fall victim to destruction by the Arabs, Coptic Christjam carried the precious treasure to Iris Flavia in Spain. Written tradition here falls short of prooc archeofom and art history must fill the gaps, ReporLs ofexcava-

tions in Sinai (Skrobucha 1959:38ff.) and the Mennas monzteq- (Kaufmann l90&8) hp_ve given no suppG;rt to this hypothesis. hut in St Catherine’s monastery in Sinai thcrc

are two representation5 of James: in a sixth-

centulr): mosaic and in a fresco. kbth were

seen by tbc &Us a. ‘proof of the prcsrtncc

there of the bones r)f St James. The LIOS& shc+ws Christ, Elijah, #John.

Moses, James and Peter and is therefore a

representation of the Transfiguration, at

which the three above-named Apostles arc always said to have 5ecn present @Matthew 17%13; Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9228-36). This mosaic offers no kdication of a special consideration for St James (,sec Talbot Rice 1962:91). The 5ezond ‘pr& is the fresco

avhich shows Chri? t, James, St ,John Chrygjs-

tom, Mq, Basil and Moses. Although the James shown her-e could be Jam= the Great, it is more prob&Iy James Myhaei, the first bishop ofJerusatcrn. An appeal to the juxta- position (Hell M&31 ) of James and john

the Evangelist ift the nr~saic cannot be accepted as prnnf of the supposition that the James of the frexg is James the Great. John

Chq+,,ostom became patriarch of Con- stan!kopk, was twice deposed, blJt was still

thereafter much revered in his diocese, and

his mortal remains were brought there in 438

by the emperor Theodosius II. The nick- name Chqsostom was given to this John in the sixth century; it came into use in the East

in the eighth century, so that the word

Chrysostom in the fresco is probably not

from earlier than the eighth centur): (Baur NO7 : f 5, n. 3, 49ff., especially 59). In this

contcx; James should be the counteepart of the patriarch of Constantinople: James the

Less, the firs; bishop ( = patriarch) of Jerus-

atem is clearly intended ; while Basil, the

earliest Cappadocian church-father whose works lvere fundamental to the Eastern church, rspccially his monastic rules, can be

seen a the counterpart of Moses, whose

representation of course can also be explained

by the geographical position of the monastery.

Again, there is no evidence ht. re of a specific

James-cult, *Justinian kit dcfenc. s in Sinai and

founded a monastery there which still stands (Stein 1949:300). It is qujsc possible that at

the same time, in spite ( Y his decree pro-

hibiting the displacement If relics (Kijtting

196.5), fkom which he ca,lld have granted himself’ c*xcmption, he ha 1 relics brought thorc, q&ally since the;,- wa5 a belief in

rchcs as supernatural defr rxkrs (see Baynes MB :248K), but there is no proof of the

removal of relics of St Jan t>s the Great from, for example, the Mount it’ Olives to Sinai - moreover’, it is the bones of James Alphaei \vhich are probably referred to.

The basis of this story - Gams dates the

tranktion from =Jcrusalean to Sinai to about

528-38 (1956b:Z, 363) - thus falls to the ground, and the same goes a f~rliori for the

2.5

translation from Sinai to the Mennas monastery, which should have taken place around 640 (Hell 1!%6:32-3), since it was then that Sinai was conquered by the Arabs (Hussey 1966:3C). Qniy fantasy can contribute any- thing more to the transference of James’ relics from the Mennas monastery to Com- postela. The Hells invoke as argument for their case reaction to Arab expansion, Coptic influence on the James-cult, the parallel between Mennas and James, who were both horsemen and shared a common attribute, the scallop-shell, the similarity between the basilica of the Mennas monastery and the cathedral at Santiago, and the existence of a church of St James in Jerusalem on the site of a Mennas sanctuary.

The supposed translation of St James’ relics from the Mennas-monastery to Spain must have taken place at the latest early in the ninth century: the Mennas-monastery remained unoccupied by the Arabs until about 840. It would fit perfectly into the whole James-tradition if the real body of the Apostle had been brought to the West by Christians of the East. That Coptic Christians were involved could be made understandable by referring to their position in Egypt where, after having welcomed the Arabs as their liberators from the Byzantine yoke in about 641 (Copts were heretics in the eyes of the Byzantine church), they were prosecuted by the iTmayyad and Abbasid rulers of Egypt, and their insurrections, especially between 725 and 773, were violently put down and were followed by their subjugation in about 830 by the Abbasids, In this context Coptic

Christians Aed to the West and it is certainly true that they brought with them intti alia relics of their venerated saints. But there is no evidence at all that they translated St James’

bona, nor is there any proof that these bones were ever in Egypt. Thus Gams abandons the Mennas monastery as an intermediate phase in the translation of James’ relics, Certainly Coptic influences in the West can be traced (Hillgarth 1961), but a connection between these and James the Great cannot be oub stantiated (compareWessel1%3:128fX, 170).

An appeal to the parallel between Mennas and James as horseman-saints is equally fruitless, for this image, so far as James is concernlzd! is of later -date : the holy kn!ght Santiago was inspired by the appearance of the Apostle in a battle against the Moor-s at Clavijo in 834 or 8+3, a section of the legend which only took shape in the twelfth century (Kendtick 1960: 19fK, 34ff., 193K). The role of the shell both in the Mennas-cult anti the James-ctlt is still Iess a proof of their connection: this symbol also dates from later centuries, when memories of the Mennas- cult had already long faded, and must be connected wi,;h the position of Compustela by the sea and with the strange translation h> boat over the sea from Jaffa to El Padror, described in the elaborated legend.

The comment on the similarity betweer, the basilica at Karm Abu Mena and the cathedral (which?) of Santiago de Compost& misjudges both the nature of the basilica as a generalized architectural type and the history of the building of the chu?-ch at Compostela. An appeal to the great French pilgrim cht rches would be no less valid. Finally, we come to the last argument of the Hells: the church of St James in Jerusalem which was built in the twelfth century on the site of a shrine dedicated to hlennas since the ,ffth century, In the church there is a ch;apel dedicaied to Mennas, which demonstrates a relationship between the two saints, ami in

26

one of the pillars of the church a stone from Sinai wa exhibited, which hints at a wn- nection with Sinai (Hell I 966 : 34). This may be so, but this church, which was consecrated in 1136 by a legate of Pope Innocent II, was built in honour of James the Less, the first bishop of Jerusalem (Midin 186Qb:4ti3).

Scepticism is the only possible response to this kind of reconstruction. Yet for all that the burial place of St James the Great has still to be considered. As we have seen, the word found in the Greek sources is Marmztika, which is perhaps a region between the Nile and Cyrenaica ; this wuld .point in the direction of the Mennas-monastery. In the Latin sources up to and induding Freculf in around 840 a place-name - albeit wrrupt - was taken up; later this became in arca mamtorica, “in a marble tomb”, So the document which accompanied the building of a new church of St James stated that James was buried in arcis mannotis (Vaqua de Parga 19489a: 29). The story of a translation from Marmarika to Compostela is, a one would expect, nowhere to be found in the early sources, since this place-name disappeared in the Latin-Spanish tradition, Neither it nor variants of it are found in copttic sources (Lip&s 1884 :221 ff, ; Haase 1922 :253) ; only the mentiotj of James’ burial place in a fifth-centuv Coptic text translated by Lip&s as Bagtt utuI *UtiTh can be interpreted in this sense (Lip&s 1884:214), but Haase name the place Bati (see Malan 1871: 17881). This place-name does indeed a-r later in the Syrian chronicle of Michaei of Antioch and in an Armenian ve&on of it (Haase 1922:59ff.). The theory that Western influence hzs played a part here, though it was precisely in :)le Wet that this place-name fell by the wayside, and that Marmarika &errs

to the missionary area of James Alphaei and that here again there is confusion between James the Great and James the Less (Haasc 1922 :62), is hard to substantiate in the light of the Apostle-lists, but in an anonymous Greek-Palestinian text the death of James Alphaei in II&z Mawnarica is mentioned (Schermann 1907:278).

After this we can turn to other sources

about the legend of Saint James in Spain. A letter of a fictitious Pope Leo (a forgery from the end of the ninth century) and the Hi&via Cumpo~tellanu (about 1HIO) tell us about the translation to Spain of the corpse, including the head, of St James immediately after his death and the burial in a place later called Gompostela. There Christianity flourished until by through pagan persecution and oppression Christian belief f;tded away and the knowledge about the burial pIace of Saint James also disappeared. Bishop Theodemir, guided by heavenly signs, rediscovered James’ tomb (Florez 176516-8). In this context there is no place at all for a translation with halting- places, for, according to the mentions in the Codex Calixtil#w, which are based on the Leo-forgery, the translation took place immediately after James’ death (Whitehill 1944:135,291, %4-5,4UWO). Ofcourse this provides no sound arguments against suppositions like those of Gams or the Hells. But both the legend and the suppositions are hbrications to prove the unprovable.

Where exactly James the son of Zebedee, nicknamed Major or the Great, really is buried can no longer be cenainly established. &npo&a is a most ;mlikely burial place and all efi~rts so hr t0 demonstrate its authenticity have been doomed in advance to failure. It is unprofitable to try to ascertain exactly when the term i71 artis marmorin’s

27

originated (Garcia Vilfada 1919:9:5; Garcia 1954 : I %23), in spite of all the later mentions

of this, because if is based on the corruptk of a Greek place-Dame. An unquestionmg

belief and the attitude that anyone who does not share it is a hypercritic mus: support assertions of this kind: vlhen reas: #n can no longer provide a decision, belief must sexe to elucidate. From the ninth centuv on many believed, but Gthout an element of doubt.

ever disappearing.

Cunclusion

The quest for the origins of the Spanish James-tradition leads along paths ful of confusion and uncertainty. First and foremost the confusion hctween James the Great the sun of Zebedee and James the Less the son of

AOphaeus complicates the tracing back of the tradition, leading, among other things, to the mention ofJames the Great as the author of

the James-!etter and to the confusion ahut its identity and that ofthc widespread James- relics. Then the manuscript tfaditim suffers from substantial lacunac, demanding great care in putting foa%orard hypotheser?. A major role is played in it t;y Syrian ekments, especially when the hymn 0 Dei W&HZ j~lriJ ow prunirum is closely scrutinized. Through

the possibly heterodox origin of the data an

association awi th diverging strarlds of Christi-

ani ty like PrisciBBianism and Adoptionism

in Spain is tempting, but no firm grounds for

this are discutcrable. Duchesne and Perez de Urbel eesp~ctivel~

found the origins of the Spanish James-c&

in fifth-century Prisci%li~~ist circles and in

eighth-century A$optionism. A hank bctwecn

Priaciliianism and the cult of St James the

Great can be advanced on othe; grounds.

The body of Priscitlian, who was beheaded in Trier in 385, was, according to Sulpicius

Severus (Hahn 1866 : 1 M-5), taken to Galicia,

where his teaching won many foHowers. The

possibility that the grave sl Priscillian lies under the confessio of the cathedral of Santiago

de Compostela cannot be entirely excluded. &Miguel Morayta took up thL ided a? the end

of the last century in his His/aria ~~ne,-al de

Es~afia and in 1951 Juan Larrea again

brought it forward, Archeological researches have only recently got under way (Chamoso

Lamas 1956-7) but so far these haye not

provided fresh insights either into the possible

burial place of PrisciKan or into the James-

tradition. A complicating factor is that, even

if a headless body of ancient origin were to be unearthed, the problem would not be solved: both James and Priscillian were beheaded.

Accurate measurement of the age of the bones

would naturaIIy then be csscntia1 to obtain a

dccisian. Apart from the possibility of a connection

between Priscilhanism or Adoption& and

the James-cult, the parallel Andrew-c&

which arose in Con!;tantinopIc especially in the &$lth century clcmands attention. This shows that a similar apostolic cult can have a

unifying tcndcncy in times of religious dis- putcr in C..kxWantinople it was bet*tiecn the

iconc;cfasts and the iconodules. A similar

tine of thought persuaded America Castro

(1957 :B6) to see’ Santiago as a striking ex-

ample of syncretism, in which Roman-pagan traditions combi,Pcd with Christian-Arian and

Visigothic-PrasciElianist ones. He rejected the above-men t ioned theory concerning Pris-

cillian’s last :*esting place (Castro 1957 $5 ;

see Gonz&z-Lopc;z 1976 I%!). I here put asidr: Castro’s stimulating, but in my view ~ancwhat hypothetical, considerations on the

origins and implicatiuns of the James-cult in Spain; since they have been repeatedly sub- jected tosevere criticism by S&nchez Albomoz (195W66-87; 1958; 195&b:W2; see Ken- drick l!XO : 183ff.). In the Christian tradition, even in that of RGman orthodoxy, elements of heterodox origin can be abrbed; in Spain indigenous attitudes enjoyed a long life apart from Rome, and at the time of the Rctoqu;sla the introduction of the Roman rite presented a substantial problem (Knowles 1968:27&l ).

In conclusion, we may discern six phases in the origin of the cult of St James the Great in Spain:

(1) James preaches in Jerusalem and Pales- tine and dies at the hands of Herod Ayrippa (‘Abdias’ ; Eusebius of Caesarea; till about 330).

(2) James preaches in Jerusalem and Pales- tine, writes a letter to the twelve tribes in the dispersion, dies in Jerusalem at the hands of Herod and is buried in ‘Mar- marika’ (Graeco-Byzantine sources of the

&&Q&II u~ustol~~urn, fifth+eventh century; further Eastern tradition).

(3) James preaches in Palestine and Spain, writes the letter f~ the twelve tribes, dies

at the hands of Werod in JerusaIem and is buried in ‘(Achaia) Marmarica’ (BrtvG ariurn a~sttdonun ; De urtu ; Mtzrtydogium gdlmw; Freculf; seventh century till about 840).

(4) James preaches in Spain (Aldhelm; Beatus; eighth century) and is considered in Asturia-Galicia as WON and /I&O~U W?Wilzis (hymn).

(5) James preaches in Spain, dies in Jerus- aiem at the hands of &rod, his body is brought from Jerusalem to Galicia and is enthusiasticalIy revered there (Usuard, about 860).

(6) James preaches in Palestine and Spain, dies in Jerusalem at the hands of Herod, his body is brought to Galicia (Notker Baibulus,about900; undatabicadditions in the Libelh of Ado of Vienne and in versions of the martyrologies originating with Florus of Lyons),

Appendix

The hymn texts according to the Madrid and Lo&on manuscripts.

Madrid London 0 d je)i uerbum pat& hore proditum, 0 dei uerbum patris ore prditum, ferum creator et uerum principium, rerum creator et ufzrum Frhcipium, auctar perennis, lux origo luminis, auctof perennis, Iux origo luminis, enixus ah0 gloriose uirginis, enixus aluo gloriose uirgilk, Xriste, tu nctiter reuera EmmanueI. Xriste, tu ncbster reuera Emanud.

Rex et sacerdos, cui sacri lapides Rex et sacerdos, cui sacri lapides en ter quaterni-onicinus agates- en ter quaterni-onicinur agates- nitent, uerillus, saffirus, carbunculus, nitent, killus, E&US, CarbunculuS, uel ametistus, sardius, tupazius, uel ametistus, sardks, topaz& zmaracdus, iaspis, ligurius, crisolitus, zmaracdus, yaspis, ?igurius, crkditu.

Mdd

Riteque gemmis sol, dies duodcnis enitens oris margaritis obtimis, inluxit mundo iam fugath tenebris; et candaiako tibi superposito micans iucernis his s&s apostaiis :

Petrusquc Romam, fI ater eius Acaiam, India Tom=, Levi Macedoniam, Iacobus Iebus et Egiptum Zeiotes, Bartoiomeus tcrens Lkaoniam, Mathtias Ponto et Fiiippw Galk ;

Magni d&de 4% tonitrui, adepti fulgent prece matti inciite utrique uite cuiminis insignia regens Ioannes dextra .soius Asiam, eiusquc fratcr potitus Spa&am.

Clari magjstro ciateriv innoxia ads&i, dextra pack unus federa tractus, sinistra alter in sententia, utrique regna bis eiecta pignora metridcpoii properant ad gloriam

Aduectus in quam gloriosw premlo electus instie abitus martirio Xristi, uocatus Zeb&ei Iacohu~, apostolarus iure inpiens deuita uictorquc rapit passic nis stigmata

Diuino quippe ohsidcn.5 wffragk~ idem magorum some; iras demonum coercens uirus punit L muiantia; uiuaxque dernum in :,toiis oracuiis iskgno detur penitem car creduIum.

fez-plexus olim uo(?) conpos commoda rima petendi egro amminicuia obtandi pandit fidei carismata, uexiiia pacis ad salutrs copiam en%eque functis se communit g&am,

C) ueredigne sanctio: apwolc, caput reculgeus aureum Spank, tutorquc nobis et patronus uernuius, uitando pestem csto salw ceiitus, omnino p&c mrwbum, uicua, facinus.

Adwo kbens gregi pius crcdiw, nh*kque pastor gregi, clew, p~putrr ; ape wpema ut fruamur gaudia, regni p&i uestiamur gloriam, etema per tc euadamus tartara.

London

Kitetquc gemis, sol dies duodecim enitens horis margaritis obtimis, gliscitque mundi ia m fugatis tenebris ; et ckndeiabra tihi superposita micant iucernis bis senis apostoiis :

Petrusque Rome, frater eius Acak, Indie Tomas, Levi Macedonie, Iacobus Iebus et Egypt0 Zeiotes, Bartoiomeus Licaon, I udas Ed&e, Math& Iudee et Fiiippus Gallie;

Magni deinde fiiii tonitrui, adepti fulgent prece matris inclite utriusque uita cuiminis insignia regens Pohannes dextera soius i;siam, eiusque frater potitus Spania.

Ciari magi& carceris innoxio ads&i, dexteram pacis unus federa tractus, sinistra aiter in sententia, uarieque regno bis clecta pignera mitriti poli properant ad gloriam.

Aducctus in quam gioriosus premio ckctus instigabitur martirio X&i, uocatus Zebedci Iacobus, apostolatum iure implcns de&to uicrorque rapit passionis stigmata.

Diuino quippe obsidcns suffragio rdem magorum sontcs iras dcmonum coerccns uirum punit emulantium ; uiuaxquc demum stoiido oraculum insigne datur penitcns car creduhm.

Perplexus enim uot0 conpos comoda rima petendi egro adminicuia obtandi pandit fidci carismala, uexilio pack ad salutcm copiam cnseque functus seque munit gioriam.

0 uerc digne sanctior apostolc, caput refulgens aureum Spank, tutorqur nutsis et patronus uernuius, uitandu pwem cstu rahs (odd.) celitus, omnino pelir morbum, ulcus, facinus.

Adesto fabeus gregi @us credito, mithque pastor regi, ciero, popdo; ape superna Jt fruamur gaudia, regna p&rum sublimati gbria, etema per te euadamus tartara.

Presta quesumus unita poteutia, replcnsque gIobi cuncta solus macina, eterna cui laus ct clcmentia, birtus permnis, ingens adesst gloria et honor iugis affatim in secula.

Acrostichon : o raex renu(m) reietn piibm Maurecatum aexaudi cui prove oc tuo amore prebe

Presta quesumus trinitas potentia, replensque globi cuncta solus ma&a, eterna cuius laus et clementia, uirtus perennis ingena [adcst gloria et honor iugis affatim per r,ecula]*

o raex renu (m) negem piibm Maurecatum aexaudi cui prove oc tuo amore preu(e)

*The words in square brackets are lacking in the Landon MS.

6 The author is very much indebted to Prof&or Richard Vaughan of the University of Hull who translated the original Dutch version of this paper into English. 1 See also the allusions to his work in the C&x G/~&W (Whitehill 1944 : 36, 74, 13 I, 220, 253, 338, 370, 374; the joGas-episode, especially p. 253). e Peter:Hebrew; JohnGreek; Andrew:Palestin- ian; Philip:Egyptian; Bartholomew :Elamitic; Mat- thew :Parthian; Thomas:Indian; James the Lcss:the language of Mesopotamia on the other side of the river ; Thaddeus : African ; Simon the Canaanite:Medish; Matthias:Pe&an (an elaboration though of the Acts of the Apostles 2 14-13). 3 MT = Madrid, Biblioteca National, MS. IO001 (olim Cap. Toletani 3%1), the‘ hymn: p. XVIII, Elorduy 1962 :339-42. LSd = London, British Library MS Add. 30851, ed. by Gilson 1905; the hymn: f. 124 r/v, Gilson 1905:208-10. 4 The enumeration in Revelation 2 1: 19-20 is different. In the Vulgate-venion eight out of twelve are the same (Sparks 1954): ksjis, supirirw, carcedonius, marag&, sardonix, sardi(n)trs, cry.&ur, bqlius, fe@z- ius, crusopassus, iacinthus, ameihys~. This enumeration is precisely the one given in Beatus’ commentary on the Apocalypse (Sanders 1930:618). Compare too the Exadu+text according to the Septuqint : sardion, topazion, smaragdus, anthrax (carbunculus), saphdros, iaspis, lugkourion (ligurius), achates, amethustos, chry- so+, berulloq onuchion (cited by Bolman 1938 :73) ; all the stones mentioned here are also in the hymn. Beatus’ enumeration is to be placed in a long tradition of comparising the passus ,about the Heavenly Jesus- alem with the twelve Apostle as stated in Revelation 21 :i4: Victotintts Afer, fourth ccntuq (IMPL 8:col. IOIO), Primasius, sixth century (MPL 68:col. 9%7),

(MPL ?O:col. 1416) have which also is alluded to in 35:2451). These authors

Cassiodorus, sixth century pointed at that parallelis& Pseudo-Augustinus (MPL have directly or indirectly influenced Beatus (Ramsay 1902). 1 Another possibility is a certain mrfith$ who died in 649 (Baumntark 1910: 10). 6 Vernz&s appears in Arator (MPL 68:col. 122) and in various hymns (Blume 1897: 121, 125, 2371, in con- tL%ts which indicate an interpretation in the direction of ‘helpful’. Only J, F. Niermeijer, bfedke f&it& kxicw mirzus, Leiden, 1976, s.v., gives .some explana- tion; he associates W&US with ‘serf’ and posGbly with ‘allodial’, which might indicate full ownership or, since alladial is associated with landed-property, and thus might point to a certain region, to ‘belonging to the RgiOd. Those conjectures are based on later wurces; for me, the association with ‘serf - subseGent - helpful, seems to be the best interpretation. 7 MPL 123 : cch. 163,303. Compare Quentin 1908 : 409-64, where the relationship of ihe Wtcs mor& roiogium to versions E and T of F’lorus’s MariyroIg& is demonstrated; but this does not apply to the James- mention, which occurs in both E and T, but not in the VeW martyologium. Aigrain (1958 :238) however again nameS Ado as author of the V&s rtnnunum marpthgiun. Qucntin d:tes this latest work to after 848; he supposes it to be derived from the E and T versions of F’Iorus’ A larlprologium.

Litmzture

Aigraix~, R, 1953. L’hagiographie. Ses sources,. scs m&odes, son histoire. Paris.

32

Amta, A. (cd,) 197 1. Ctonica de Alfonso 13 I. ‘Fcxtos medievales, 3. Valfxc;a.

Ayuso Maraz*iela, T, 1461. Mgunos problemas dcI text0 bibiico de Isidoro. In: Isidoriana: 144-53. Leon. Ayw Marazutla, T, 1967. La Vetus Latina Hispana,

2. El octateuco. Madrid. Barrau Dihigo, L. 1919a. Etude SW les actes d&s ruis

asturiens (718-910). Rauc hispanique %: f-191. Barrau Dihi~o, L. I919b. Remarques sur Ia r;hronique

dire d’AIphonse III. Revue hispanique 46 : 32%-81. Barrau Dihigo, L. 1921, Rcchtrches sur I’histoire

politique du royaume asturien, 7 18-910. Revue hispanique 52: l-360.

Barrel., P. and J-N, Gurgand. 1978. Priez pour nous g Cornpostelle. La vie des p&zrins SW Ies chemins de S&t jaulues. Paris.

Baumstark, A+ 19lO. Festbrevier und Kirchenjahr dcr syrkhe Jakobiten. Stud&r zur Geschichtc und

Ku!tur da Altertums, 3 (3-5). Paderbom. Baumstark, A. 1935. Orientalischcs in Altspanische

Liturgie. Oricns christianus D.S. 10: Id37. Baur, thr. 1907. S, Jean Ckysostomc et scs oeuvres

dans I’histuire ~ittbire, ILouvain. Baync, x’. H. 1960. Byzantine studies and athcr ways.

Lx&on- Bleye, P. A, 1958, Manual de historia dc Espafia.

1, Biadrid, SIume, C, @xi.) 1897. AnaIecta hymnica medii a&, 27.

Leipzig (reprinted Frankfurt am iMain, 1961). Barman, j_ 1938. De edelstencn uit den bijbel g&en in

hot Iicht dcr hedendaagschc cdcbteenkunde. Amster- dam.

Bathe; U, Y. 1964. Les chemins de Saint Jacques. Paris.

Cahank, ;I. l!Wl. Florus of Lyons. Clasliica et medisevalia, 19. K&benhar ,I.

Castro, A. l957, Spanien. Vision und Wirklichkeit. German translation of La r&dad histrjtica dc Espafia, Kdn-Berlin.

Castro, A. 1971, The Spaniards. An invoduction to their history. English translation af La real&d by W. F. King and S. L. Margaretten. Berkeley.

Chamtlso Lamas, ,M. 1956-7. Ntiicia de las exava- cion~ arclueol&$as que w’ realizan en la Catedral de Santiago. Compcstelanum I : -8, 275-328; 2: 225-274.

Chevalier, U. 1897. Rcpertorium hymnologicum. Louvain.

David, P. 1947. ktudes historiqucs SW la GaliGe et Ie Pwtugal du We au XIk si&Ie. Li;boa-Park

Delehaye, W. 19f5. Us I&wks hagiographiques. Subsidia hag@* p&a 18, Fourth edition. BruxclIm.

Dcrotcz, A. (cd.) VI68. Lamberti S, Audomsrri liiber Floridus (Gentse dex). Gent.

Diaz y Diaz, M. C. ISfiG, Die Spanischc fakobus- Legcnde bei Isidor van SeviHa. Histc,ri ,chesJahrbuch 77 : 467-72.

Diaz y Diaz, M. C. 1959. Index scriptorirm latinorum medii aevi hispanorum. 2 ~01s. IMadtic:l.

Diaz y Diaz, M. C. 1965. LaliteraturaJacobea anterior al codice Calixtino. Compostdanum i 0: 63941,

Diaz y Diaz, M. C. 1966. Estudios sobre Ia antigua fiteratura relacionada con Santiago el Mayor. Corn- postelanum 11: 621-52.

Dozy, R. 1860. Recherches SW I’histoire et la litterature de I’Espagne pendant le moyen gge, 1, ihien.

Dub&, J. 1959. Le martyvdoge d’usuard. In: klimorial dir XVe centenak de l’abbaye de Saint Germain des P& Paris.

Dubois, J. fed.) 1965. Le martyrologe d’ Wsuard, Bfllxek

Duchesne, L. i900. Saint Jacques en Galice. Annales du Midi 12: 145-179.

Dvornik, F. 1958. The idea ofapustoliciry in Byzantium and the lqSend of the Apostle Andrew. Dumbarton Oak Studies 4. Cambridge, MA.

Ehwald, R, 1919. Aldhelmi opera. h1GI-l Auctorum Antiquissimorum, 15. Berlin.

Elorduy, E. 1962. La tradition Jacobca de Galicia en cl sig1o IX. Hispania. Revista espafiola de historia 22 : 323-56.

F&brcga &au, A, 1953, Pxaionario hisphnico (sigtos VI I-Xl). AMadridlBarcelona.

FIorcz, H, ted.) 1765. Historia Compostebna. In: E,s@ia sagrada, 20. Madrid,

Fontaine, P. 1959. lsidorc dc Seville et la culture clas- sique Jars I’Espagne wisigothiqur. 2 vols. Paris.

Gaiffier, B. de. 1963. Le Breviarium Apostolorum (BHL, 652). Tradition manuscrite et oeuvm ap- parant&. Analecta bollandiana 81: 89-l 16.

Gaifier, B,de, f967. Etudescritiquesd’hagiographiect d’iconologie). Suhsidia hagkgfaphka 43. Bruxelles.

Gacns, P. 8. 1956 a and b_ Kirchengcschichte von Spa&n. 2 vols. (Reprint of lhc Regensburg 1862 editian). Graz.

Garcia, J. C. 1954. Estudios Jacubeos, Santiago de &mptela.

Gcrrcia V&da, 2. 19 19. Cronim de Alfonm II I, Madrid,

Garcia Villad;i, 2, 1929 and 1933. Historia ecclesiastica de Esptia. 2 vols. Madrid.

G-es, A. 1971. Le p&rinage h Compostelk en Wgique et dans lc Nerd de la France, Brux~llcls.

Gilson, J. P. {ed,) l905. The Mozxahic Pelter (Ms. British Museum Add, 30851), &my Bradshaw Swiay, 30. Won.

Gumcz Moreno, M. 1932. taS primera- ctinicas dc la Recoraquista. Bolctin de la Real ?&emia dc la

33

Gonz&z L&z, E. 1976. The myth of Saint jam, and its functional reality, In: J_ R. Earcia ed., Am&&t Castrr, and the meaning of Spanish civilization. Berkeley.

Goosen, A. B. f. M. 1976, Achtcrgrundcn van Prism cillianus’ christelijke ascese. Nijmegen.

Groote, E. von (ed.) 1860. Die Pilgerfahrt des Ritters Arnold von IIarfF. . . Kiiln.

Guenther, 0. (ed.) 1898. Avellana collectio 2. Prag- Wien-Leipzig.

Haase, F. 1922. Apostel und Evangelisten in den orientalischen Ueberlieferungcn. Ncutestamentische Abhandlungen 9( 1-3). Munker.

Hamel, A. 1950. Ueberlieferung und Bedeutung des Liber Sancti Jacobi und des Pseudo-Turpin. Sit- zungsberichte der bayerischen Akademie der Wissen- schaften, philosophische-historische Klasse, jahrgang 1950, Heft 2. Munchen.

Halm, C. (ed.) 1866, Sulpicii Severi Chronicon. Corpus scriptorum ecclesiae latinae, 1. Wien.

Hell, V. and H. Heli. 1966. The great pilgrimage of the middle ages. The road to St James of Compost&. English translation from the German Tubingen 1964 edition, London.

Herwaarden.. J. van. 1974. Pelgrimstoch ten, Bussum. Hillgarth, J. N. 196 1. The East, Visigothic Spain and

the Irish. Studia patristica 4:442-56. Hillgarth, J. N. 1962. Visigothic Spain and early

Christian Ireland. Proceedings of the Irish academy 62 : 167-94.

Horrent, J. 1956. Chroniques espagnoles et chansons de gate, 3. Le moyen dge 72: 27999.

Hiiffer, H. J. 1955. Die spanischeJacobusverehrung in ihren Ausstrahlungen auf Deutschland. IIistorisches Jahrbuch 74: 124-38,

Huff&, H. .J_ 1957. Sant’Jago. Entwicklung l*qd Bedeutung des jacobuskultes in Spanien und dem Rtimisch-Deutschen Reich. Mtinchen.

Hussey, J. M. (ed.) 1966. The Cambridge Medieval History 4: The Byzantine Empire, part 1: Byzantium and its neighbours. Cambridge.

Kal;fmann, C. M. 19@%8. Belichte iiber die Ausgrabung der Menasheiligtum in der Mareo- tiswiiste. 3 ~01s. Cairo.

Kelly, J. N. D. 1958. Early Christian doctrines. New York

Kempe, R. 1958. Jakobdand, Wanderungen durch die span&he Geschichte. Mtinchen.

Kendrick, T. D. 1960. Saint James in Spain. bndon. Kirschbaum, E. 1961. Die Grabungen unter der

Kathedrale von Santiago de Composteta. Ramische Quartalschrift fiir christliche Altertumskunde und

Kirchengcschichtc 66 : 234-54. K&n, A, F. J. 1965. De wordingsg~hicdenis van hct

Nieuwe Tatament. Utreeht and Antwerpen. Knowles, M. D. 1968. De kerk in de micldeleeuwen, 1,

Geschiedenis van de kerk 3. Dutch translation from the English London 1968 edition, Hilvmum.

Kiitting, B. 1965. Der ftihchristliche Reli@enkult u;td die Bestattung im Kirchenge&ude. I&in.

Larrea, J, 1951. La religi& de1 lenguaje espaiiol. Lima, Lawson, H. J. and j. E. L. Qlten (tranrl. and ed.)

1928. Eusebius Pamphili, bishop of Caesarea, Eccle& astical history, 1. London.

Leloir, L. (ed.) 1966. Ephrem de Nisibe, Comment&e de l’&angile concordant ou Diatessaron, iraduit du syriaque et de l’armenien. Sources chr&iennes 121, Paris,

Letts, M. (ed. 2nd transl.) 1946. The pilgrimage of Arnold von HarK London.

L&on, W. 1946. England and the continent in the eighth century. Oxford.

Leery ProvenCal, E. 1950. Histoire de I’Espagne musulmane I : La conqu&te et l’kmirat Hispano- Umalyadr (7 1 O-792). L&den,

Lip&, R. A. 1883 and 1884. Die apokryphen Apostel- geschichte und Apmtellcgenden. 2 ~01s. Braun- schwcig.

MaIan, S. C. 187 I. The conflicts of the holy apostles trailslated from au Ethiopic manuscript. London.

Lve.rendez y Pelayo, M. 1917. Historia de 10s hetero- doxes cspaiioles, 2. Madrid.

Messenger, R. E. 1944. The mozarabic hymnal. Tran+ actions of the American phiIologica1 association 75: 103-26.

Messenger, R. E. 19%. Mozarabic hymns and con- temporary culture in Spain, Traditio 4: 149-77.

Mislin, J, 1860 a-c. Die heiligen Ortc. Pilgerreise nach Jerusalem . . _ 3 vols. Wien.

Navascues, J. M. de. 1948. La dedicacibn dc la igIesi;r de Santa Mafia y de todas las mrgines de M&da. Archive espaiiol de arqueologia 21: -59.

Oursel, R. 1963. Les p$lerins dtt moyzn Age. Les horn- mes, les chemins, les sanctuaires. Paris.

Perez de Urbel, J. 1926. Otigen de 10s himnos motirabes, 2. Bulletin hispanique 28: I 13-39.

Perez de Wrbel, J. 1934. In : Dictionnaire d’histoirz et de gbographie ecclCsiastique 7 :cols. 89-90. Pal’is.

Perez de Urbel, J. 1952. Oiigenes de1 cult0 de Santiago en Espaiia. Hispania sacra, 5: 1-31 l

Perez de Urbel, j. 1953. Primeros contactos de1 lslam con el r&no asturiano. Arbor, Revista gener;iJ dc investigation y cultura 24: 508-25.

Perez de LJrb& J. 1956. In: IIistoria de Espaiia ii;, cd. R. Menendez Pidal. Ma&id.

34

Pcrtz, G. H. fed.) 1838. Annala bxneventani. Chrona icon safernitanum. MGH Scriptores 3: 173-85, 467-56 1. Hannover.

Pertz, G. H. and F. Kune (ed.) 18%. Annales rcgni Francorum. MGH. Hannovcr.

Peters, C. 1939. Das Diatasaron Tatiaz, seine Ueher- licfcrung und S&I Nachwirkung ira Morgen- und Abendland sow-ie dcr hcutige Staz~t seiner E&r- schung. Oricntalia c&&ma analecta 123. Roma.

Port& Pazus, S. 1953. Origincs dcl cult0 al apostcil Santiago en Fqafia, Arbor. Revista general de investigadon y cultuta 25 : 455-7 f ,

Poschmann, 8.1930. Die abendltindische Kirchenbusse im f&hen ,Mittdalter. Breslau.

Prinz, F. 1976, Friiha ,MSnchtum in Siid\;est- deutschland und die Antinge der Reichenac. In. F. Print (cd.), Mtichtum und Gesell~haft im Friihmittelah~r. Wept dcr Fowhung 312, Darm- stadt.

Qucntin, H. 1908. Les martyrologes hiqtoriques du moyen Age. Paris.

Ramsay, H. L. 1902. Le commentaire de I’Apocalypse par Bea;.rs de Liebana, Revue d’histoire et dp lit- tkrature r&gieusrrs 7 : 4 19-47.

Rtau, L. 1958. Iconqraphie de l’art chrbtien, 3: lconographie des sa;r,!... Paris,

R&o, M. (4.) 1796. E6pafia sagrada, 40, *Madrid. Sgnchez Albrnoz, C. 1956. &p&a, un enigma

hist&i~, 1. Buenm Aires. Sinchez Albornoz, C. 1958. Santiago dc Espaiia.

Buenos Aires. Sgnchez Albomoz, I:,, ‘19581,. El cult0 de Santiago no

deriva de1 mite di&rido. Cwaderna historica dr Espaiia 28: -2.

Shnchcz Nhornoz, C. 1974. OrGgines dr la nacibn Espafiola. Studios ciiticos whrc Ia his&ia drl r&w de Asturias, 2. Oviedo.

Sanders, H. A. (ed.) 1930. Beati in Apocalypsin Libri XII. Rome.

Schermamn, Th. I9U7. Propheten- und Apostellegaden nebst Jiing&ataJogm des Dmothms md wrwandtcr Texle. Ttsxte und Untenuchungen zur Geschichtc der altchristlichen Literatur 31 (3). Leipzig,

Simonet, F. J. 1903. Histofia de 10s ma&ah dc Fqaiia. Mcmurias de la Real academia de la hirtoria, 13. Madrid.

Skrobucha, H. 1959. Sinai. Olten and Lausannc. Sparks, H. F. D. and A. White Adams (cd.) 1954,

Kovum Testamenturn sccundum dtionem Sancti Hieronymi, 3. Oxford.

Stegmtiler, F. i958. Bearus van Liebana. In: tilror~ ftir Theologic und Kirche, 2 (2). Freiburg im Breisgau.

Stein, E. 1949. Histoire du Bas-Empire. De la dispari- tion de 1’Empire d’occident i la mart d;: Justinien (476565), 2. Paris.

Stiennon, J. 19.58. Le voyage des Liege& & Saint- Jacques de Gjmpostelle en 1056. In: M&lamp Felix Rouseau. fitudes sur I’histoire du pays mman au moj-en 9ge: 553-8 I. Bruxelles.

Strange, J. (ed.) 185 1. Caesar& Heisterbacensis mon- achi . . . Dialogus miraculorum . . . . K&L

Sumption, J. 1975. Pilgrimage. An image of medieval rehgion. London.

SziiRrlTf, j. 1964. Die Rnnalen der \ateXschen Hymn- ncndichtung, 1. Berlin.

Talbot Rice, D. 1962. Byzantine art. Third edition. Harmon&worth.

Tobler, T, and A. lMolinier (ed.) 1966. Itinera Hiero- scllymitana et descriptiones terrae sanctae bellis sacris anteriora, 1, 2. Reprint in one volume of the 1879 and 1885 editions. Osnabriick.

Vazquez de Parga, L. and others. 194~9a-c. Pere- grinaciones a Santiago. 3 vols. Madrid.

Weasel, K. 1963. Koptische Kunst. Die Spgtantike in Aegypten. Recklinhausen.

\‘C’hitehilI, W. %I. (pd.) 1944. Liber San& Jacobi. Codm Calixtinus, 1. Texto. Santiago de Compostda.

35