Chapter II: Part 2

And ſaynt Gregory recordeth in the thirdde booke of his dyalogues / that whanne andrewe Biſſhop of the Cyte of Fundane ſuffred an holy noune to dwelle with him / the fende[42] thenemy beganne temprynte in his herte the beaulte of her / in ſuch wiſe / that he thought in hys bedde wycked and curſyd thynges / and on a daye a Iewe cam to Rome / and whanne he ſawe / that the day fayled / and myghte fynde no lodgynge / he wente that nyght / and abode in the Temple of appolyn /. And bycauſe he doubted of the ſacrylege of the place / how be hit / that he hadde no faythe in the Croſſe / yet he markyd and garnyſſhed hym wyth the ſigne of the Croſſe / then at mydnyght whan he awoke / he ſawe a companye of evylle ſprytes / whiche went to fore one / like as he hadde ſomme auctoryte puyſiance[43] above thother by ſubiection / and thenne he ſawe hym ſytte in the myddes among the others / and beganne to enquyre the cauſes and dedes of everyche[44] of theſe evylle ſprytes / whyche obeyed hym / and he wold knowe / what evylle everyche had doo / But Gregory paſſyth the maner of this vyſyon / bycauſe of ſhortnes / But we fynde ſemblable in the lyf of faders / That as a man entryd in a Temple of thydolles / he ſawe the devylle ſyttynge / and all his meyny[45] aboute hym. And one of theſe wycked / ſprytes cam / and adouryd hym / and he demaunded of hym / Fro whens comeſt thow / and he ſayd / I have ben in ſuch a provynce / and have moeved grete warres / and made many trybulacions and have ſhedde moche blood / and am come to telle it to the / and Sathan ſayd to hym / in what tyme hath thow done this / and he ſayd in thyrtty dayes and Sathan ſayd / why haſt thow be ſoo longe there aboutes / and ſayd to them that ſtode by hym / goo ye and bete hym / and all to laſſhe hym / Thenne cam the ſecond and worſſhiped hym / & ſayde Syre I have ben in the ſee / and have moeved grete wyndes and tormentes / & drowned many ſhippes / & ſlayn many men / and Sathan ſayde how longe haſt thow ben aboute thys / & he ſayd +vvii+ dayes / & Sathan ſayd haſt thou done no more in this tyme / & commanded that he ſhold be beten / and the third cam / & ſaid / I have ben in a Cyte & have mevyd ſtryves and debate in a weddynge / and have ſhed moche blood / & have ſlayne the hoſbond / & am come to telle the / & ſathan ſayd / in what time haſt thou done this / & he ſaid in ten dayes / & he ſayd haſt thou done no more in that time / & commanded them that were aboute hym to bete hym alſo / Thenne cam the fourth & ſayd / I have ben in the wylderneſs fourty yere / and have laboured aboute a monke / & unnethe at the laſte I have throwen & made hym falle in the ſynne of the fleſſhe / & when ſatan herd that / he aroos fro his ſete / & kyſſed hym / & tooke hys crowne of his hede / & ſet it on his hede / & made hym to ſytte with hym / & ſayde / thou haſt done a grete thynge / & haſt laboured more / than all thother / and this may be the maner of the vyſyon / that ſaynt gregorye leveth / whan eche had ſayd / one ſterte up in the myddle of them alle / & ſeyd he hadde mevid Andrewe ageynſte the name / & had mevyd the fourth part of his fleſhe agenſt her in temptacion / & therto / y^t yeſterday he drough[46] ſo moche his mynde on her / that in the hour of evenſonge he gaf to her in Iapping[47] a buſſe[48] / & ſeid pleynly y^t ſhe muſt here it that he wold ſynne with her / thenne the mayſter commanded hym that he ſhold perform y^t he had begonne / & for to make hym to ſynne he ſhold have a ſyngular Vyctory and reward among alle the other /. And thenne commaunded he that they ſhold goo loke who that was that laye in the Temple / And they wente / & loked / And anone they were ware / that he was marked with the ſigne of the croſſe / And they levynge aferd eſcaped / and ſayd / veryly this is an empty veſſel / alas / alas / he is marked /. And with[49] thus wys alle the company of the wykked ſprytes vanyſſhed awaye / And thenne the Iewe al amoevyd cam to the biſſhop / and told to hym all by ordere what was happend / And whan the biſſhoppe herd this / he wept ſtrongly / and made to voyde all the wymmen oute of his hows / And thenne he baptyſed the Iewe.

[Sidenote: 50 _Bit._]

Seynt Gregory reherceth in his dyalogues that a nonne entryd into a gardyne / and ſawe a letuſe / and coveyted that / and forgate to make the ſigne of the Croſſe / and bote[50] it glotonouſly / And anone fylle doune and was ravyſſhed of a devylle / And ther cam to her ſaint Equycyon[J] / And the devylle beganne to crye and to ſaye / What have I doo / I ſatte uppon a lettuſe / and ſhe cam / and bote me / and anone the devylle yſſued oute by the commaundement of the holy man of god /. It is redde in thyſtorye Scolaſtyke / that the paynyms had peynted on a walle the armes of Serapis / And Theodoſyen dide doo putt them oute / and made to be paynted in the ſame place the ſigne of the Croſſe / And when the paynims & prieſtes of thydolles ſawe that / anone they dyde them to be baptyſed / ſayenge / that it was gyven them to underſtonde of their olders / that thoſe armes ſhold endure tyll / that ſuche a ſigne were made then / in whiche were lyf / And they have a lettre / of whiche they uſe / y^t they calle holy / & had a forme that they ſaid it expoſed and ſignyfyed lyf perdurable.

Thus endeth the exaltacion of the holy Croſſe.

* * * * *

Having read theſe extracts from the Golden Legend, we ſhall be able to underſtand the accompanying illuſtrations, which repreſent ſome freſcos of the fifteenth century, which formerly adorned the walls of the / Chapel of the Gild of the Holy Croſs, at Stratford-upon-Avon; which ſtands cloſe by New Place, Shakeſpeare’s houſe. Theſe freſcos, alas! no longer exiſt, for, in 1804, the Chapel underwent conſiderable repair, during which, under the whitewaſh, were diſcovered traces of paint, and theſe, being ſcraped, a ſeries illuſtrating the legend of the Croſs was found in the chancel, which was built in 1450. In other parts of the Chapel were found repreſentations of the Reſſurection, and the day of Judgment, St. George and the Dragon, and the death of St. Thomas a Becket, beſides others.

Luckily, a gentleman from London, a Mr. Fiſher, was then ſtaying at Stratford-on-Avon, and he drew, and painted them—afterwards, in 1807, publiſhing them—and it is from his ſketches that theſe illuſtrations are taken. The barbarians of Stratford hacked the plaſter on which the Holy Croſs ſeries was painted to bits, and whitewaſhed all the other paintings. It is preſumed they ſtill exiſt, for, when the Chapel was thoroughly reſtored in 1835, traces of the other pictures were viſible under the whitewaſh.

Theſe pictures of the Invention, and Exaltation, of the Holy Croſs are eſpecially intereſting, not only on account of their age and artiſtic merit, but from the fact that they are of Engliſh work, and ſhow the Engliſh idea of treating the ſubject. I have reproduced them all but two; one, the fight on the bridge over the Danube between Heraclius and the ſon of Choſroes, and the other repreſenting Heraclius ſmiting off Choſroes’ head.

Plate =A= repreſents the viſit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon. Her name was Balkis, and, in her legendary hiſtory, it is reported that Solomon, having heard of her riches and power, ſent her a peremptory meſſage to ſubmit herſelf to his rule. She, dreading war with ſo potent a ſovereign, ſent an embaſſy to try and find out whether Solomon was as wiſe as he was repreſented to be. With this object ſhe dreſſed five hundred boys as girls, and a like number of girls as boys, and, among other preſents, ſent a pearl, a diamond cut through in zigzags, and a cryſtal box; and ſhe ſhould be able to judge of his wiſdom and power, if he could tell the boys from the girls, pierce the pearl, thread the diamond, and fill the goblet with water that came neither from the earth nor the ſky.

Needleſs to ſay, Solomon paſſed through the ordeal triumphantly. He ordered ſilver baſins to be brought, ſo that the ambaſſadors’ ſuite might waſh their hands after their long journey, and the boys were eaſily diſtinguiſhed from the girls, for they dipped their hands only in the water, whilſt the girls tucked up their ſleeves and waſhed their arms as well as their hands. Then he opened the box containing the pearl, diamond, and goblet, and, taking out the pearl, he applied his magic ſtone, Samur, or Schamir, which a raven had brought him, and which had the power of cleaving anything, and lo! the pearl was pierced; then he examined the diamond, which was ſo pierced that no thread could be paſſed through it; ſo he took a worm, and having placed a piece of ſilk in its mouth, it wriggled through, and the diamond was threaded. The next taſk was to fill the goblet, which he gave to a negro ſlave, and bade him mount a wild horſe and gallop it till it ſtreamed with ſweat, and then to fill the goblet with it, thus fulfilling the impoſed conditions. He then gave back theſe preſents to the ambaſſadors, who ſpeedily returned to Queen Balkis. She at once ſaw that it would be uſeleſs to oppoſe the powerful will of Solomon, and immediately ſet out on her journey to that monarch.

It is here that her connection with the holy Croſs comes in, for its wood, which Solomon had cut down in order to incorporate it into his Temple, and which had the inconvenient property of fitting in nowhere, being either too long or too ſhort for any purpoſe, was in conſequence thrown aſide, and ultimately was uſed as a foot-bridge acroſs a brook. Acroſs this plank the Queen had to paſs, but ſhe, recogniſing its holy virtue, refuſed to walk acroſs it, preferring to wade the brook, which, having done, ſhe expounded its value to Solomon, and propheſied that out of it ſhould be made the Croſs on which Jeſus ſhould ſuffer.

She afterwards became one of Solomon’s wives, and bore him a ſon, and then returned to her own land, and from this ſon are deſcended the kings of Abyſſynia.

The legend on the label is, as far as is legible, REGINA SABA FAMA SALOMONIS (adduct) A VENIT (Iero)SOLUMA UBI LIGNUM IN ... ABATICA ... IT ... GENIS ... PERSOLVETUR.

Plate =B= is, virtually, two; one ſhowing the angel appearing to Conſtantine when, early in the fourth century, he was advancing towards Rome againſt Maxentius; but the legend of the miraculous inſcription which appeared in the ſky, “IN HOC SIGNO VINCES,” does not appear. The other, and larger portion, repreſents his victory over Maxentius, and he is repreſented as ſpearing and killing that monarch; but this is not hiſtorically correct, for, after his defeat, as Maxentius fled towards Rome, eſſaying to croſs the Tiber over a rotten bridge, it gave way, and he was drowned. It is noticeable that the Chriſtian flag bears the Tau Croſs.

_The Plates_ =C= _and_ =D= _run into each other, although they portray different ſubjects,_ =C= _being the departure of St. Helena for Jeruſalem on her queſt of the holy Croſs. The label in this freſco is utterly illegible._

Plate =D= ſhows Judas (called Julius in the label) Cyryacus (the Quyryache of the Golden Legend) being releaſed, after having been forced, through impriſonment and ſtarvation, into confeſſing where the holy Croſs lay buried. In the upper part St. Helena is receiving the holy Croſs, whilſt labourers are uncovering the Tau Croſſes of the two thieves.

The legend is mutilated, but enough remains to make its meaning clear: “HERE SEYNTE HELYNE EXAMY(neth) THE I(ews for) Y^E HOLY CROS.... IULIUS CYRYACUS (saith that he knew w)HERE HETE WAS.”

_The legend in Plate_ =E= _is nearly perfect, and accurately deſcribes the painting_, “HYT WAS PROVED EVIDENTLY BY MYRAKEL WHICH WAS Y^E VERY CROS THAT OURE SAVYOUR SUFFYRED.... IN RESYNGE A MADE FROM DETH TO LYFE.”

Here all the Croſſes are of the Tau type, and the ſcene is laid in a foreſt, where an old labourer, and a bill-man, and the deer nibbling the trees, give a rural aſpect, inſtead of in the City of Jeruſalem, as ſaith the Golden Legend.

Plate =F= evidently conſiſts of two ſeparate paintings—one, where St. Helena is reverently carrying the Croſs into Jeruſalem, whilſt the angels in heaven are diſcourſing celeſtial muſic; and the other, its reception either in Jeruſalem or Byzantium, whither St. Helena ſent a portion as a preſent to her ſon. And this latter ſeems the more probable, if we imagine the King, who, with St. Helena, is adoring the Crucifix, to be the emperor Conſtantine, a fact which might have been ſettled had the label been legible.

The legend at the bottom is unfortunately mutilated, but that evidently relates to that portion of the Croſs which remained at Jeruſalem, becauſe it ſpeaks of Choſroes: “HERE THE HOLE CROS WAS BROUGHTE SOLEMLY YN TO THE ... IN Y^E BYSSHOPS HANDS EASILY AND (remaynyd) UN TO THE TYME OF (King Codſd)ROE.

Plates =G= and =H= repreſent the ſtory told in the Golden Legend, of Heraclius bearing the Croſs into Jeruſalem, how the gate miraculouſly cloſed, and an angel appeared in the heavens and reproved Heraclius for riding in ſtate on the very ſpot where Jeſus had gone in all meekneſs, and lowlineſs, to His paſſion. The legend is eraſed in parts, the unmutilated portion reading, “AS THE NOBUL KYNGE ERACLYUS COM RYDYNG TOWARDE Y^E CYTTE OF IERUSALEM BERYNG Y^E CROSSE SO GRETE PRYDE ... WHERE Y^E....”

Naturally, the poſſesſion of a piece of the true Croſs would be eſteemed as a moſt precious property. No matter how ſmall, it would be reverentially encloſed in cryſtal and gold, and was more than a preſent fit for an emperor or king, and we cannot marvel that ſmall pieces were diſtributed all over Chriſtendom. Poſſibly ſome of the relics ſhown as pieces of the very Croſs might not have been what they were ſuppoſed to be, but it is hard to believe what John Calvin[K] wrote about it:—

“And fyrſt of all let us begynne to ſpeake of his croſſe, whereupon he was hanged. I know that it is holden for a certaintie that it was founde of Heline the mother of Conſtantine the Romaine Emperour. I knowe alſo what certaine Doctours have written touching the approbation hereof, for to certifie that the croſſe which ſhe found was without doute the ſelfe ſame on the whiche Ieſus Chriſt was hanged. Touchynge all this I reporte me to the thynge it ſelfe, ſo much is there that it was but a foliſh curioſitie of her, or at the leaſt a foliſhe and unconſidered devotion. But yet put the caſe it had ben a worke worthy of prayſe to her, for to have taken paynes to fynde the trewe croſſe, and that our lord had then declared by myracle that it was his croſſe which ſhe found; Yet let us onely conſider that which is of our time. Every one doeth holde that this croſſe which Helene founde is yet at Ieruſalem, and none doeth doute thereof. Although the Eccleſiaſticall hiſtory againſt ſayeth the ſame notablye. For it is ther recited that Helene toke one part thereof to ſend to the Emperour her ſonne, who put the ſame at Conſtantinople upon a fyne pyller of Marble in the myddeſt of the market. Of the other part, it is ſayde that ſhe did locke the ſame in a copher of ſilver, and gave it to the Biſhop of Ieruſalem to kepe. So then eyther we ſhall augment the hiſtorie of a lie or els that which is holden at this daye of the true Croſſe, is but a vayne and triflyng opinion.

[Sidenote: 51 _Blocks—billets_]

“Let us conſider on the other part howe many peeces there are thereof throug out the worlde. Yf I would onely recite that whiche I coulde ſay there woulde be a regiſter ſufficient to fyl a whole boke. There is not ſo little a town where there is not ſome peece thereof, and that not onelye in cathedrall churches, but alſo in ſome pariſhes. Likewiſe ther is not ſo wicked an abbey where there is not of it to be ſhewed. And in ſome places ther are good great ſhydes:[51] as at the holye chappell of Paris, and at Poitiers & at Rome, where there is a great crucifix made thereof as men ſaye. To be ſhort, yf a man woulde gather together all that hath bene founde of this croſſe, there would be inough to fraighte a great ſhip. The Goſpell teſtifieth that the croſſe myght be caried of one man. What audacitie then was this to fyll the earth with pieces of wod in ſuche quantitie, that thre hundred men can not cary them,” &c.

Calvin was full of zeal, and could not ſtoop to particulariſe. Witneſs his aſſertion that the Croſs would freight a ſhip, and yet that three hundred men could carry it. M. Rohault de Fleury has gone very minutely into this matter. Knowing, from microſcopical examination, that ſeveral of the relics of the Croſs were of pine, he accepts this wood as his baſis, and, from its probable ſize, he deduces a weight of 100 kilogrammes, equal to about 240 Engliſh lbs.; and, taking the average denſity of pine, he eſtimates that this would give 178 millions of cubic millimetres. He then deſcribes all the known pieces in Europe, Jeruſalem, and Mount Athos, with their meaſurements, and he puts the outcome at 3,941,975 cubic millimetres; thus, according to his ſhewing, there is but a very ſmall portion of the Holy Croſs in exiſtence. I ſubjoin his liſt of the places in which pieces of the Croſs are known to exiſt, as it is moſt intereſting, ſhowing the comparative bulk of the pieces, in cubic millimetres:—

Aix la Chapelle 150
Amiens 4,500
Angers 2,640
Angleterre 30,516
Arles 8,000
Arras 10,314
Athos (le Mont) 878,360
Autun 50
Avignon 220
Baugé 104,000
Bernay 375
Beſançon 1,000
Bologne 15,000
Bonifacio 47,960
Bordeaux 3,420
Bourbon l’Archambault 29,275
Bourges 22,275
Bruxelles 516,090
Chalmarques “
Châlons 200
Chamirey 605
Chatillon ”
Cheffes (Anjou) 100
Chelles “
Compiègne 1,896
Conques 108
Cortone 3,000
Courtrai 200
Dijon 33,091
Donawert 12,000
Faghine ”
Florence 37,640
Fumes 5,250
Gand 436,450
Gênes 26,458
Gramont 5,000
Jancourt (Aube) 3,500
Jeruſalem 5,045
Langres 200
Laon “
Libourne 3,000
Lille 15,112
Limbourg 133,768
Longpont 1,136
Lorris ”
Lyon 1,696
Mâcon 2,000
Maeſtricht 10,000
Marſeille 150
Milan 1,920
Montepulciano 500
Naples 10,000
Nevers 176
Nuremberg “
Padoue 64
Paris 237,731
Piſa 8,175
Poitiers 870
Pontigny 12,000
Raguſe 169,324
Riel les Eaux 671
Rome 537,587
Royaumont ”
Saint Dié 99
Saint Florent 400
Saint Quentin 5,000
Saint Sepolcro 200
Sens 69,545
Sienne 1,680
Tournai 2,000
Trèves 18,000
Troyes 201
Turin 6,500
Venice 445,582
Venloo “
Walcourt 2,000
Wambach ”
————
TOTAL 3,941,975

According to this table we are credited in England with 30,516 cubic millimetres of the holy Croſs, and it is intereſting to know where they are ſituated. M. Rohault de Fleury, writing in 1870, ſays there were pieces at Isleworth; St. Gregory, Downſide, near Bath; in the poſſesſion of Lord Petre; at Bergholt Eaſt, in Suffolk; at Plowden; at the convent of St. Mary, York; at Weſt Grinſtead; at St. George’s, Southwark; and Slindon, Suſſex.

Theſe pieces of the holy Croſs are not large, as the following table, in cubic millimetres, ſhows:—

At Isleworth 1,000
“ College of St. Gregory 6,120
Lord Petre (two relics) 8,287
At St. Mary, Bergholt Eaſt 1,008
” Plowden Hall, Salop 262
“ St. Mary, York (two relics) 5,600
” Weſt Grinſtead “ 38
” St. George’s, Southwark (four relics) 63
“ St. Richard, Slindon 8,100
——————
TOTAL 30,516

One relic at St. Mary’s Convent, York, is very fine; it is ornamented with ſcroll-work of the tenth century, and bears three impreſſions of the ſeal of the Vicar Capitular of the dioceſe of Saint Omer, 1657 to 1662. It is a pectoral croſs that is ſuppoſed to have belonged to the patriarch Arnulph, who was with Robert, Duke of Normandy.

The other is ſuppoſed to have been attached to the above, and to have belonged equally to Arnulph, patriarch of Jeruſalem. This is kept in a ſilver reliquary, which alſo contains relics of SS. Ignatius Loyola and François Xavier.

We ſee by the Golden Legend, that St. Helena, after finding the Croſs, feeling certain that the nails were not far off, proſecuted a further ſearch for them, and they were diſcovered “shynyng as gold.” As with the faſhion of the Croſs, whether it was _immiſſa_ or _commiſſa_, there is, and was, a controverſy with regard to the nails, whether three or four.

Boſius in his learned and exhauſtive book, _Crux Triumphans et Glorioſa_,[L] gives ſeveral authorities for three nails only—foremoſt, Gregory Nazianzen; but he does not give the paſſage where it may be found; the quotation, however, is

Γυμνὸν τρισήλῳ κείμενον ξύλῳ λαϐών,

“having taken from the three-nailed wood the dead (or hanging) body.” Thus clearly ſhowing the number of nails he conſidered right.

Boſius then goes on to quote Apollinaris Laodicenus, who, in his tragedy entitled _Chriſtus patiens_, called the holy Croſs by the ſame words, τσισηλον ξυλω, “three-nailed wood”; and he alſo quotes from the _Meditat. vitæ Chriſti_ of Bonaventura, “_Illi tres clavi ſuſtinent totius corporis pondus_.” Nonnus, the Greek poet, writing in the fifth century, alſo ſays that our Lord’s feet overlapped each other, and were faſtened by only one large nail. So that there is a very fair amount of antiquity in favour of three nails.

Againſt this theory may be quoted the authority of St. Cyprian, St. Auguſtine, St. Gregory of Tours, Pope Innocent III., Rufinus, Theodoret, and others, who ſay four nails were uſed in the Crucifixion of our Saviour. The battle waged pictorially; but perhaps the earlieſt known repreſentation of the Crucifixion, that found in the Cemetery of St. Julian, Pope, or of St. Valentine in Via Flaminia at Rome, ought to bear moſt weight. Our Saviour is repreſented as being clothed in a long ſleeveleſs robe, which reaches to His ankles; the feet are ſeparate, and are each nailed. It is ſaid that Cimabue was the firſt to paint the feet overlapping, and one nail. His example, however, was much followed, and hence the controverſy.

Of theſe nails, univerſal tradition ſays that St. Helena ſent two to her ſon Conſtantine, and, as the Golden Legend has it, “the emperour dyd do ſette them in hys brydel and in hys helme when he wente to batayle.” One can underſtand one of theſe ſacred nails being worn in the Emperour’s helmet as a preſage of victory and as a ſafeguard againſt danger, but the utility of incorporating one of ſuch priceleſs relics in a horſe’s bridle is not ſo eaſy to comprehend; but the fathers of the Church, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Ambroſe, Theodoret, and St. Gregory of Tours, recogniſe in it the fulfilment of the prophecy of Zecharius, chap. xiv. 20: “In that day ſhall be upon the bridles of the horſes, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD.”

This bridle, or rather bit, is now ſaid to be in exiſtence in France at Carpentras, department of Vaucluſe. How it got there is not clearly known, but probably it was taken at the time of the Cruſades—as leaden ſeals on which it is engraved exiſt, attached to parchments of the dates 1226 and 1250, and it was mentioned in an inventory of relics in the year 1322.

I have reproduced it, as well as the Iron Crown of Lombardy and the nails, from M. Rohault de Fleury’s work, and, as will be ſeen, it is undoubtedly of great antiquity, cloſely reſembling the bits of the Romans.

According to Boſius, who quotes Gregory Nazianzen, a third nail was thrown by St. Helena into the Adriatic Sea, in order to calm a tempeſt; and the ſame authority ſays that the fourth was depoſited in the head of a ſtatue of Conſtantine, but this militates much againſt the number of holy nails ſaid to be in exiſtence. Calvin notices this, and is down upon it with ſledge-hammer force:—

“Yet there is a greater combat of the nayles. I wyll recite them only that are come to my knowledge. Thereupon there is not ſo lytle a childe but wyll judge that the Devyll hath to much deluded the worlde in takyng from it both underſtandyng and reaſon, that it coulde diſcerne nothynge in this matter. If the auncient writers ſaye trewe, and namely Theodorite Hiſtoriographer of the auncient churche, Helene cauſed one to be nayled on her ſonne’s helmet, the other two ſhe put in his horſe bitte. How be it Sainct Ambroſe ſayeth not fully ſo. For he ſayeth that one was put in Conſtantine’s crowne, of the other his horſebit was made, and the thirde Helene kept. Wee ſe y^t already more than twelve hundred yeres agone this hath bene in controverſie, to wit, what was become of the nayles. What certentie can be had of them then at this preſent time?

“Now at Millan they boſte that thei have y nayle that was put in Conſtantine’s horſe bitte. To the whiche the towne of Carpentras oppoſeth herſelfe, ſayinge that it is ſhe that hath it. Nowe S. Ambroſe doth not ſaye that the nayle was knit to the bitte, but that the bitte was made thereof. Whiche thynge can in no wyſe be made to agre eyther w^t their ſaying of Milan or w^t theirs of Carpentras.

“Moreover there is one in Rome at Sainct Helenes; another alſo at Sene, another at Veniſe. In Germany two: at Collyne one, at the three Maries: another at Triers, one in Fraunce at the holy chappell of Paris, another at y^e Carmes, one alſo at Sainct Denis in France: one at Burges: one at Tenaill, one at Draguine.

“Beholde here fourteene, whereof account is made; in every place they alledge good approbation for themſelves, as they ſuppoſe. And ſo it is that everye one hath as good right as aunother. Wherefor there is no better way then to make them all paſſe under one fidelium. That is to ſaye, to repute all that they ſaye hereof to be but lyes, ſeying that otherwiſe a man ſhoulde never come to an ende.”

What would Calvin have ſaid if he had ſeen the formidable liſt of holy nails enumerated by Guiſto (or Juſtus) Fontanini, Archbiſhop of Ancyra? which is as follows:—

1. Aix la Chapelle.
2. Ancona, in the Cathedral.
3. Bamberg.
4. In Bavaria, Convent of Audechſen.
5. Carpentras. The Holy Bit.
6. Catania, Sicily.
7. Colle, in Tuſcany.
8. Cologne.
9. The Escurial in Spain.
10. Milan.
11. Monza. The Iron Crown.
12. Naples. Monaſtery of S. Patricius.
13. Nuremberg. Church of the Holy Virgin.
14. Paris.
15. Rome. Two Nails. Church of the Holy Croſs of Jeruſalem;
Church of Santa Maria in Campitelli.
16. Sienna. Hoſpital Sainte Marie de de l’Echelle.
17. Spoleto.
18. Torcello, near Venice. Church of S. Anthony.
19. Torno, on the Lake of Como.
20. Toul.
21. Trèves.
22. Venice. Three nails.
23. Vienna.

But this liſt is further ſupplemented by M. Rohault de Fleury, who gives ſix more:—

1. Arras, according to M. le Chev. de Linas.
2. Compiègne. A point.
3. Cracow, in Poland, according to M. Goſſelin.
4. Florence.
5. Lagney.
6. Troyes.

So that no leſs than twenty-nine towns claim the poſſesſion of thirty-two nails, all differing in form, the number of which can only be accounted for by the ſuppoſition that only a portion of the holy nails has been incorporated into each of them.

One of the moſt intereſting relics in connection with the holy nails is the Iron Crown of Lombardy. This, as may be ſeen by reference to the illuſtration (Fig. 1), is a circlet of gold, ornamented with precious ſtones, and it is indebted for its name of “Iron” to a thin band (=A=) of that metal, which is inſide the gold circlet. The Crown itſelf is of very antique form, being even devoid of rays, and is too ſmall to go on the head. Charlemagne was crowned with it in 774, and Napoleon did not think himſelf King of Italy until he had placed this precious diadem on his head, in 1805. It is kept at Monza, nine miles from Milan, in the Cathedral, which is of great antiquity. There it repoſes in a huge croſs placed over the altar.

Of the relics of the Croſs there now remains but two ſpecks of the title or inſcription thereon, and here, again, I am indebted to M. Rohault de Fleury for the illuſtration on page xciv., as it ſeems to me to be the beſt yet publiſhed.

The Evangeliſts, although agreeing in the ſpirit of the inſcription, vary as to the letter.

Says St. Matthew: “This is Jeſus the King of the Jews.”
“ St. Mark: ”The King of the Jews.“
” St. Luke: “This is the King of the Jews.”
“ St. John: ”Jeſus of Nazareth the King of the Jews.“

Neither St. Matthew nor St. Mark note the tri-lingual character, and SS. Luke and John vary as to the order of the different languages; the former ſaying it was in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew—the latter that it was in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. The latter is the generally accepted form, and the reaſon given is, that Hebrew, being the common language, it would naturally come firſt, as we ſhould do in an Engliſh notice, firſt in Engliſh, then, ſay in French and German, for the benefit of foreigners, as were the Greeks and Romans in Jeruſalem.

The tradition is that, along with the Croſs, St. Helena found the inſcription, and that ſhe ſent it, together with a piece of the Holy Croſs and a number of other ſacred relics, to Rome, where it was depoſited in the baſilica of Santa Croce. Here it remained until Valentinian, fearing that it might fall into the hands of the Goths and Huns, hid it in the wall of the building, until it was found in 1492.

Valentinian died A.D. 375, and Antoninus Martyr, in his _De Locis Sanctis_ (sec. 20), written about A.D. 570, ſays he ſaw the inſcription which had been placed on the Croſs, and that the words were, “Ieſus Nazarenus Rex Iudæorum.” He ſays that he held it in his hand, and kiſſed it, in the Church of Conſtantine at _Jeruſalem_. Hence it is evident that either tradition is incorrect, or that Antoninus did not tell the truth.

But the claim is that it is, and always has been, in Rome, and Boſius, in his _Crux Triumphans_ (p. 60), gives an account of its re-diſcovery. He ſays that in February, 1492, Monſeigneur Pedro Gonſalvo de Mendoza, Cardinal Sanctæ Crucis, was repairing and cleanſing his church, and on the firſt day of that month, when the workmen reached the top of the arch which was in the middle of the baſilica, and near the roof, they ſaw two ſmall columns; and finding a ſpace, they diſcovered a niche in which they found a leaden box, well cloſed, and on its lid was a tablet of marble, on which were engraved theſe words: HIC EST TITVLVS VERÆ CRUCIS. In this box was found a little board, about a hand’s breadth and a half, much corroded on one ſide by time, and bearing, in grooved, engraved characters, which were coloured red, the following inſcription: IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM. But the word IVDÆORVM was not entire, the laſt two letters VM having crumbled to pieces by reaſon of old age. The firſt line was written in Latin characters, the ſecond in Greek, and the third in Hebrew.

All the city went to ſee it; and three days afterwards, Pope Innocent went alſo, and ordered the relic to be preſerved in its box, and covered with a ſheet of glaſs. Every one was convinced that they had before their eyes the inſcription which Pilate placed upon the Croſs over our Saviour’s head, and which Saint Helena had depoſited in the church at the time of its building.

The relic, as now ſeen, is very worm-eaten, but the letters are ſtill viſible, and have been cut with a ſmall gouge. They read from right to left, as Hebrew does, thus lending great plauſibility to the idea that it was done by ſome Jewiſh artificers; and it ſeems to be of ſome cloſe-grained wood. Taking the piece now at Santa Croce, the whole inſcription, if reſtored, would be thus:

_Notes on the Woodcuts._

THE Hiſtory of the Legend of the Holy Croſs which is here reproduced, is ſomewhat fuller than the Golden Legend of Caxton, there being particulars about Moſes, David, and Solomon not to be found therein; but they may be found in other verſions of the Legend, ſome in the Latin of Jacobus de Voragine, others in two MSS. in the Britiſh Muſeum.[M]

The engravings are taken from a very rare book, of which, as far as is known, there are but three copies in exiſtence: one is in the Royal Library at Bruſſels, another at the Hague, in the collection of Mr. Schinkel, and the third is in the poſſesſion of Lord Spencer at Althorp. It is from this book that theſe fac-similes (made by M. J. Ph. Berjeau) were taken. The book itſelf has one woodcut on each page, with a verſe in Dutch, at the bottom, explanatory of each engraving. It is called indifferently _Hiſtoria Sanctæ Crucis_ or _Boec van den houte_ (Book of the wood or tree).

It was printed at Kuilenburg on March 6th, 1483, by John Veldener,[N] who had juſt removed from Louvain. Theſe ſixty-four engravings were originally on thirty-two blocks,[O] and evidently belonged to ſome much older block book, now loſt. Theſe, Veldener cut in half, as he had already treated a _Speculum_, and brought them out as a freſh book.

The Legend as told by theſe engravings is as follows:—

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 1._]

[Sidenote: _No. 2._]

[Sidenote: _No. 3._]

[Sidenote: _No. 4._]

[Sidenote: _No. 5._]

[Sidenote: _No. 6._]

[Sidenote: _Nos. 7, 8._]

Adam, feeling himſelf about to die, ſent Seth to Paradiſe to beg for ſome of the oil of mercy,[1] which, however, the Archangel Michael refuſed to give him, but, inſtead, preſented him with three ſeeds of the tree of life.[2] On his return, he found Adam dead, and, being unable to adminiſter theſe ſeeds to his father in any other manner, he put them under his tongue, and then buried him.[3] Preſently theſe ſeeds germinated and ſhot through the ground, and are traditionally ſaid to have been a cedar, a cypreſs, and a pine.[4] They grew until Moſes had led the Israelites out of Egypt, when he found them in the Valley of Hebron, and he recognized them as typifying the Trinity. He removed them, and they were his conſtant companions.[5] With them he ſmote the rock, and the waters guſhed out,[6] and the bitter waters of Marah became ſweet.[7, 8]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 9._]

[Sidenote: _No. 10._]

[Sidenote: _No. 11._]

[Sidenote: _No. 12._]

[Sidenote: _No. 13._]

He then planted them in the land of Moab,[9] and there they remained, until an angelic viſion appeared unto David, and commanded him to go, and take them up, and bring them to Jeruſalem.[10] On his return the three rods worked miracles, healing the ſick,[11] and the leprous, with a touch;[12] nay, more, on being applied to three black men, they inſtantly became white.[13]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 14._]

[Sidenote: _No. 15._]

[Sidenote: _No. 16._]

[Sidenote: _No. 17._]

Arrived at Jeruſalem, they wiſhed to plant them, but for the night they left them in a ciſtern, by the Tower of David,[14] and lo! during the night, they ſtruck root, and, entwining themſelves, became but one ſtem,[15] which, when David ſaw, he had a wall built round it.[16] And the tree grew for thirty years, David ornamenting it with rings of ſapphire and other precious ſtones, adding one for every year, and under this tree he compoſed the Psalms, and praiſed God exceedingly.[17]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 18._]

[Sidenote: _No. 19._]

[Sidenote: _No. 20._]

[Sidenote: _No. 21._]

[Sidenote: _No. 22._]

[Sidenote: _No. 23._]

But Solomon, who muſt needs have all that was rare and coſtly to adorn his temple, caſt his eyes upon this precious tree, and ordered it to be cut down.[18] It was duly felled, and ſquared, and trimmed, and it meaſured thirty cubits in length.[19] But when the carpenters came to put it into a place of that length, it was a cubit too ſhort, and when it was fitted into a place of twenty-nine cubits, lo! it meaſured thirty, and the carpenters marvelled much, and were greatly aſtoniſhed, and ſo, being uſeleſs, it was laid aſide.[20] Yet the people came to ſee this wonderful tree, and amongſt them was a maid named Maximilla, who ſat down upon it, and inſtantly her clothes were in a blaze.[21] Then ſhe began to lift up her voice, and propheſy, crying, “My God, and my Lord Jeſu Chriſt.”[22] Then the Jews took her, and ſcourged her to death.[23]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 24._]

[Sidenote: _No. 25._]

[Sidenote: _No. 26._]

[Sidenote: _No. 27._]

[Sidenote: _No. 28._]

[Sidenote: _No. 29._]

[Sidenote: _No. 30._]

The Jews, not knowing what to do with this miraculous tree, laid it acroſs a brook,[24] and, when the Queen of Sheba came to viſit Solomon, ſhe recognized the virtue of the wood; and, refuſing to defile it with her feet, ſhe diſmounted, and adored it, and waded through the brook.[25] Then, when ſhe met Solomon, ſhe reproved him, and told him that on that tree would the Saviour of the world ſuffer death.[26] And Solomon commanded the holy wood to be taken up,[27] and cauſed it to be carried into the Temple, there to be placed over the door, ſo that all men might bleſs, and adore it, and he coated it over with gold and ſilver.[28] There it remained until Abias ſtripped it of its coſtly coverings,[29] and the Jews buried it deep in the earth.[30]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 31._]

[Sidenote: _No. 32._]

There it remained for many years, until the Jews wiſhed to make a pool, where the prieſts might waſh the beaſts, to purify them, previous to ſacrificing them, and, unknowingly, they dug over the burial-place of the Holy Croſs.[31] This imparted ſuch a virtue to the water of that pool, which was called Betheſda, that the ſick were healed thereat, and an angel at times deſcended from heaven, and ſtirred the waters, and then whoever could get firſt into the waters was ſtraightway healed of any infirmity he might have.[32]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 33._]

[Sidenote: _No. 34._]

[Sidenote: _No. 35._]

[Sidenote: _No. 36._]

We now come to the Crucifixion, and there was a lack of wood to make Chriſt’s croſs—when, ſuddenly, from the depths of Betheſda, leaped up the tree of the Croſs, and floated gently to land. One ran to the High Prieſt,[33] and told him of the timely find of ſuitable wood, and he at once gave orders for it to be faſhioned into a Croſs.[34] Then comes the mournful proceſſion to Calvary, with our Saviour fainting under the weight of the Croſs, and Simon the Cyrenean is preſſed into the ſervice to help Jeſus.[35] And then the Crucifixion.[36]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 37._]

[Sidenote: _No. 38._]

[Sidenote: _No. 39._]

[Sidenote: _No. 40._]

[Sidenote: _No. 41._]

[Sidenote: _No. 42._]

[Sidenote: _No. 43._]

[Sidenote: _No. 44._]

And whilſt the croſſes were ſtill ſtanding, the diſciples came to them and prayed, and many were healed of their infirmities, and many devils were caſt out.[37] This ſo angered the Jews that they took the croſſes down, and buried them,[38] and there they remained until their invention by St. Helena, A.D. 326. On her arrival at Jeruſalem,[39] ſhe convened a meeting of the principal Jews, and they denied all knowledge of it, but, on threat of being burnt, they ſaid that one of their number, named Judas, knew where the croſſes were buried.[40] Judas, however, refuſed to tell, and, to compel him to impart his knowledge, St. Helena had him lowered into a dry well, “and there tormented hym by hongre and evyl reſte.”[41] Seven days of this treatment made him ſubmiſſive, and at the end of that time he capitulated. He was then drawn up,[42] and prayed to God to direct him to the right ſpot.[43] His prayer was heard, and after ſome digging, the croſſes were diſcovered.[44]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 45._]

[Sidenote: _No. 46._]

[Sidenote: _No. 47._]

[Sidenote: _No. 48._]

[Sidenote: _No. 49._]

[Sidenote: _No. 50._]

The news was brought to St. Helena, who viſited the ſpot,[45] but although there were certainly three croſſes, no one knew which was the one upon which Jeſus ſuffered. A teſt, however, was applied, which proved to be ſatiſfactory. The body of a maid was being borne on a bier for burial, but the funeral proceſſion was ſtopped, and the body was touched by the different croſſes. The two firſt produced no effect,[46] but when the third touched the dead maiden, ſhe was at once reſtored to life.[47] Here, then, was proof poſitive; this was the very Croſs; and St. Helena, mindful of her ſon Conſtantine, divided the ſacred wood; part ſhe encloſed in a caſe of precious metal, and kept at Jeruſalem;[48] and part ſhe ſent to her ſon, at Byzantium, who received it with due reverence,[49] and depoſited it in the church, with great ceremony.[50]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 51._]

Here it remained, until it was taken away, with other ſpoil, by Choſroes, the King of Perſia, who, aware of the ſanctity of the relic, had it placed on the right hand of his throne. He was ſo puffed up with pride, that he ordered himſelf to be adored. His people, hitherto, had worſhipped the ſun, but now he ordained that henceforth he was to be conſidered the principal Perſon in the Trinity (the Father), and that the relic of the Croſs was to be looked upon as the Son, whilſt a golden cock which he had made was to repreſent the Holy Ghoſt.[51]

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 52._]

[Sidenote: _No. 53._]

[Sidenote: _No. 54._]

Then Heraclius made war againſt Choſroes, and meeting with a Perſian army under one of the ſons of that monarch, it was agreed that, in order to prevent a uſeleſs effuſion of blood, the two commanders ſhould fight it out between them, and whoever was vanquiſhed ſhould ſubmit.[52] The duel was fought on a bridge over the Danube, and Heraclius vanquiſhed and killed the ſon of Choſroes.[53] The Perſian army then made their ſubmiſſion,[54] and the penance impoſed upon them by the conqueror was that they ſhould all be baptized, which was duly done.

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 55._]

[Sidenote: _No. 56._]

[Sidenote: _No. 57._]

[Sidenote: _No. 58._]

[Sidenote: _No. 59._]

[Sidenote: _No. 60._]

[Sidenote: _No. 61._]

[Sidenote: _No. 62._]

Heraclius then went to Choſroes, and told him what he had done, offering him his life if he too would embrace Chriſtianity,[55] but the Perſian monarch refuſed, and Heraclius ſmote off his head.[56] He then crowned a ſon of Choſroes, and cauſed him to be baptized,[57] himſelf ſtanding ſponſor, and buried the ſlain king with befitting honours.[58] Then, taking poſſesſion of the holy relic,[59] he ſet out with it for Jeruſalem. But, as he was bearing it in great ſtate, he came to that gate of the City through which Jeſus went to His paſſion, worn, buffeted, ſcorned, and weary, carrying the heavy burden of His croſs. And ſuddenly the gateway became ſolid maſonry, ſo that he could not paſs through, and an angel appeared in the heavens, and reproved him for his oſtentatious diſplay in a place which his Saviour had previouſly trodden in ſuch deep humility.[60] Heraclius diſmounted from his horſe, and, ſtripping himſelf of all the trappings of royalty, barefoot, and in his ſhirt,[61] he meekly bore the Croſs to its appointed place,[62] the maſonry diſappearing as ſoon as he had humbled himſelf.

[Sidenote: _Woodcut No. 63._]

[Sidenote: _No. 64._]

A piece of the Croſs was afterwards ſent to Rome, where it duly arrived after a very ſtormy voyage,[63] and it was there preſerved for the adoration of the faithful.[64]

JOHN ASHTON.

FOOTNOTES:

[A] “And for as moche as this ſayd worke was grete & over chargeable to me taccompliſſhe, I feryd me in the begynnynge of the tranſlacion to have contynued it / bycauſe of the longe tyme of the tranſlacion / & alſo in thenpryntyng of y^e ſame and in maner halfe deſperate to have accompliſſd it / was in purpoſe to have lefte it / after that I had begonne to tranſlate it / & to have layed it aparte ne had it be(en) at thynſtance & requeſte of the puyſſant noble & vertuous erle my lord wyllyam erle of arondel / whych deſyred me to procede & contynue the ſaid werke / & promyſed me to take a reſonable quantyte of them when they were acheyeued & accompliſſhed / and ſente to me a worſhypful gentylman a ſervaunt of his named John Stanney which ſolycyted me in my Lordes name that I ſhold in no wyſe leve it but accompliſſhe it promyſyng that my ſayd lord ſhold duringe my lyf geve & graunt to me a yerely fee / that is to wete a bucke in ſommer / & a doo in Wynter / with whiche fee I holde me wel contente,” &c.

[B]

[Sidenote: _Length of Adam’s life._]

This apparently long life of Adam is admitted on all hands, even in the Reviſed Verſion of the Bible. The Talmud ſays that God promiſed him one thouſand years of life, and it is recorded that he begat Seth when he was a hundred and thirty years old. On this the Talmud (_Eruvin_, fol. 18, col. 2) has the following comment: “Rav Yirmyah ben Elazer ſaid: All thoſe years, which Adam ſpent in alienation from God, he begat evil ſpirits, demons, and fairies; for it is ſaid, ‘And Adam was an hundred and thirty years, and begat a ſon in his own likeneſs, after his image’; conſequently, before that time, he begat after another image.”

This term of one hundred and thirty years ſeems to have been a period in Adam’s exiſtence, for we again find (_Eruvin_, fol. 18 b.): “Adam was a Chaſid, or great ſaint, when he obſerved that the decree of death was occaſioned by him; he _faſted_ a hundred and thirty years, and all this time he abſtained from intercourſe with his wife.”

[Sidenote: _Talmud legends reſpecting Adam’s length of life._]

There is a Talmudical tradition that God ſhowed the future to Adam (Avoth d’Rab. Nathan, chap. 31): “The Holy One—bleſſed be He!—shewed unto Adam each generation, and its preachers, its guardians, its leaders, its prophets, its heroes, its ſinners, and its ſaints, ſaying, ‘In ſuch and ſuch a generation ſuch and ſuch a _King_ ſhall reign, in ſuch and ſuch a generation ſuch and ſuch a wife man ſhall teach.’” This is amplified in Midraſh Yalkut (fol. 12), where it is ſaid that God ſhowed Adam all future generations of men, with their leaders, learned and literary men, and there he obſerved that David was credited with only three hours of life, and he ſaid, “Lord and Creator of the world, is this unalterable?” “Such was my firſt intention,” was the reply. “How many years have I to live?” aſked Adam. “One thouſand.” Then Adam ſaid, “I will lend him ſome of my years.” And a document was drawn up whereby Adam tranſferred ſeventy years of his life to David.

S. Baring-Gould, in his legends of _Old Teſtament Characters_, vol i. p. 77, referring to a Muſſulman legend, ſays: “Finally, when Adam reached his nine hundred and thirtieth year, the Angel of Death appeared under the form of a goat, and ran between his legs.

“Adam recoiled with horror, and exclaimed, ‘God has given me one thouſand years; wherefore comeſt thou now?’

“‘What!’ exclaimed the Angel of Death, ‘haſt thou not given ſeventy years of thy life to the prophet David?’

“Adam ſtoutly denied that he had done ſo. Then the Angel of Death drew the document of tranſfer from out of his beard, and preſented it to Adam, who could no longer refuſe to go.”

[C] The Feſtival of the Invention, or finding of the Croſs, is kept in the Roman and Engliſh Churches on May 3.

[D] Piſcina, a fiſh-pond: _Lat_. In this inſtance it is ſuppoſed to be the Pool of Betheſda.

[E] Nicodemus, chap. 14:—

[Sidenote: _v._ 1.]

But when the firſt man our father Adam heard theſe things, that Jeſus was baptized in Jordan, he called out to his ſon Seth, and ſaid,

[Sidenote: _v._ 2.]

Declare to your ſons, the patriarchs and prophets, all thoſe things which thou didſt hear from Michael the Archangel, when I ſent thee to the gates of Paradiſe to entreat God that he would anoint my head when I was ſick.

[Sidenote: _v._ 3]

Then Seth, coming near to the patriarchs and prophets, ſaid: I, Seth, when I was praying to God at the gates of Paradiſe, beheld the angel of the Lord, Michael, appear unto me, ſaying, I am ſent unto thee from the Lord; I am appointed to preſide over human bodies.

[Sidenote: _v._ 4.]

I tell thee, Seth, do not pray to God in tears, and entreat him for the oil of the tree of mercy, wherewith to anoint thy father Adam for his headach;

[Sidenote: _v._ 5.]

Becauſe thou canſt not by any means obtain it till the laſt day and times, namely, till five thouſand and five hundred years be paſt.

[Sidenote: _v._ 6.]

Then will Chriſt, the moſt merciful Son of God, come on earth to raiſe again the human body of Adam, and at the ſame time to raiſe the bodies of the dead, and when he cometh he will be baptized in Jordan;

[Sidenote: _v._ 7.]

Then with the oil of his mercy he will anoint all thoſe that believe on him; and the oil of his mercy will continue to future generations, for thoſe who ſhall be born of the water and the Holy Ghoſt unto eternal life.

[Sidenote: _v._ 8.]

And when at that time the moſt merciful Son of God, Chriſt Jeſus, ſhall come down on earth, he will introduce our father Adam into Paradiſe, to the tree of mercy.

[Sidenote: _v._ 9.]

When all the patriarchs and prophets heard all theſe things from Seth, they rejoiced more.

[F] Alban Butler, in _The Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs, and other Principal Saints_, denies that St. Helena was an Innholder (_Stabularia_) in Bithynia, when Conſtantius married her, and ſays: “We are aſſured by the unanimous tradition of our Engliſh hiſtorians that this holy empreſs was a native of our iſland. William of Malmeſbury, the principal hiſtorian of the ancient ſtate of our country after Bede, and before him, the Saxon author of the life of St. Helen, in 970, quoted by Usher, expreſſly ſay that Conſtantine was a Briton by birth.” Leland, in his _Commentarii de Scriptoribus Britannicis_, ſays that St. Helena was the only daughter of King Coilus, the King Cöol who firſt built walls round Colcheſter, and the Engliſh Church has generally recogniſed her Britiſh origin. Her feſtival is kept on Auguſt 18.

When her huſband, Conſtantine Chlorus, entered into an arrangement with Diocletian, by which he had the countries this ſide the Alps, namely, Gaul and Britain, he was obliged, as part of the bargain, to divorce St. Helena, and marry Theodora, the daughter-in-law of Maximinianus. According to Euſebius, ſhe was not converted to Chriſtianity at the ſame time as her ſon Conſtantine, who, when he came to the throne, paid her the greateſt deference, and gave her the title of Auguſta, or empreſs. After the Council of Nice, in 325, he wrote to Macarius, Biſhop of Jeruſalem, concerning the building of a ſplendid church upon Mount Calvary, and St. Helena, although ſhe was then 79 years of age, undertook to ſee it carried out.

It was then that the reputed Invention of the Croſs, together with the nails, took place, and ſhe ſoon afterwards died, but the exact year is uncertain, ſome authorities giving A.D. 326, others 328.