Four Crowned Martyrs - Confusion and Conclusions

Confusion and Conclusions

Problems arise with determining the historicity of these martyrs because one group contains five names instead of four. Alban Butler believed that the four names of Group One, which the Roman Martyrology and the Breviary say were revealed as those of the Four Crowned Martyrs, were borrowed from the martyrology of the diocese of Albano Laziale, which kept their feast on August 8, not November 8. These "borrowed" four martyrs were not buried in Rome, but in the catacomb of Albano; their feast was celebrated on August 7 or August 8, the date under which it is cited in the Roman Calendar of Feasts of 354. The Catholic Encyclopedia wrote that "these martyrs of Albano have no connection with the Roman martyrs".

The double tradition may have arisen because a second passio had to be written. It was written to account for the fact that there were five saints in Group 2 rather than four. Thus, the story concerning Group 1 was simply invented, and the story describes the death of four martyrs, who were soldiers from Rome rather than Pannonian stonemasons. The Bollandist Hippolyte Delehaye calls this invented tradition "l'opprobre de l'hagiographie" (the disgrace of hagiography).

Delehaye, after extensive research, determined that there was actually only one group of martyrs – the stonemasons of Group 2 - whose relics were taken to Rome. One scholar has written that “the latest research tends to agree” with Delehaye's conclusion.

The Roman Martyrology gives the stonemasons Simpronianus, Claudius, Nicostratus, Castorius and Simplicius as the martyrs celebrated on November 8, and the Albano martyrs Secundus, Carpophorus, Victorinus and Severianus as celebrated on 8 August.