206 Journal of Philology. tyrs of neighbouring sees and cities their days also, and then it was that he of Portus received his due honour. The 21st or 23rd of August, the day when he had been always commemo- rated on the scene of his martyrdom and sepulture, was enrolled in the calendar of the city of Rome in about the 6th century, as the calendars evince; the very century when, in all likelihood (though there may have been some earlier monument) this statue was set up at Rome. On the other hand, if the addition of a graphic touch to a picture of the Bp. of Portus be so desirable that we must at any price believe him to have been buried in the Ager Veranus, on the Ides of August, and there, and on that day, venerated in the early centuries by such crowds of Christian people ; then we must suppose that at some undiscoverable period, for no perceptible purpose, and without all warrant, the entry of his name in the calendars became connected with the story of St Laurence, and his church and festival made over to a namesake of far less renown, while the rejected Bishop and Father was provided with another feast an eight days afterwards, and an obscurer shrine in Portus. This is indeed to the last degree improbable. At any rate we have seen, that Baronius was certainly not the author of such a change ; that the commemorations stood as they now stand a thousand years before his time. We have been unable to find any record of such a change, or any proof "that the church of Rome has made three Hippolytuses out of one 43 ." 48 Bunsen (Vol. iv. p. 121) would which Bunaen makes for Aug. it, begins prove this by a simple juxtaposition of " In Porttf Romand S. Hippolyti Epi- Prudentius' Hymn with the modern scopi," which, followed by "apudeundem Roman Martyrology : which would of locum sepultus," looks very like the Ti- course only shew that either the latter burtine way. The quotation professes had made three of one, or the former to be taken from the Martyrology one of three. Neither of these hypothe- "edited by Gregory XIII. and revised by ses are tenable, for the mistake about order of Urban VIII." But in the ori- tli Antiochian Hippolytus is at least as ginal edition of 1589 the words are "In old as the ninth century. And for the Portw Romano" ; so they are in that of rest I hope to have shewn some reason 1701, the revision of Clement X., and to believe that Prudentius did make in that of 161 3 (Antwerp), the revision one poetical saint by a combination of of Sixtus V. the poetical points that belonged to The one referred to I have not seen, two. but if the words are quoted correctly The quotation from the Martyrology, they are a notable misprint.
