THE IDENTITY OF FRA MARINO:
NOTES TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION
TO THE RIDDLES OF THE MEDIEVAL GOSPEL OF BARNABAS
NOTES TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION
TO THE RIDDLES OF THE MEDIEVAL GOSPEL OF BARNABAS
©Copyright R. Blackhirst 2015
The Gospel of Barnabas is a 400 year old mystery. The
following points attempt to provide a comprehensive solution to the
mystery. The first step is to identify the people named in the Preface
to the Spanish version of the work recovered in Sydney in the 1970s and
then to identify who was responsible for naming them. The Preface is not
a blind alley as many have supposed but contains the keys to the
mystery. In the following proposal I regard the solution to the identity
of "Fra Marino" as watertight, and the identification of the person
trying to incriminate "Fra Marino" as equally certain. The motives,
means, methods and materials involved are open to more speculation and
debate but after a study of the background of these two identifications I
think the points I raise are the issues relevant to the case. I accept
that I have not found an exact focus upon the historical circumstance
but I believe I am very close and possibly as close as we can be.
* * *
"And Barnabas had received documents from Matthew, a book of the word of God, and a narrative of miracles and doctrines..."
- The Acts of Barnabas
1. The GB as we have it (in two vernacular manuscripts
united by a Preface) was prepared by Cardinal Giulio Santorio, bishop
of Sanseverina, a canon lawyer and Inquisitor. It is, however, clear
that he did not compose the work but is using a pre-existing heretical
text, adapting it to his purposes.
2. The purposes to which Santorio was putting it was
the incrimination of Cardinals Marcantonio and Ascanio Colonna following
the events of the papal conclave of 1592. In the conclave Santorio was
denied the papacy by the vote of Ascanio acting in league with
Marcantonio. This was the provocation and cause of the literary plot
that has survived as the medieval Gospel of Barnabas.
3. The main target is Marcantonio. Marcantonio was the
protege of Pope Sixtus V and head of the Vulgate Commission and later
head of the Vatican library. The Preface purports to be by Marcantonio
under a nickname, "Fra Marino". This is a key. It points to the comune
di Marino, the ancestral Colonna stronghold, about 15km south of Rome in
the Castilli Romani region. St Barnabas the Apostle is the patron saint
of this location. It is also here that the Colonna commemorate the
Battle of Lepanto (1571) in which Don Marcantonio I Colonna led the
papal fleets against the Turks. The point of the allusion in the Preface
to this "Muslim gospel" is to portray Cardinal Marcantonio as a
Turk-lover and so antithetical to his great Turk-slaying namesake.
4. The half-Spanish Ascanio appears in the Preface as
"Mustafa de Aranda" who supposedly translates the GB into Spanish. De
Aranda refers to his mother's heritage and is also an allusion to a play
by Ascanio's close friend Cervantes (who fought at Lepanto) while
"Mustafa" refers to the leader of the Turkish naval forces, Lala
Mustafa. The allusions to the comune di Marino are remarkably concrete.
If we were to sit near the Fountain of the Moors (commemorating the
Battle of Lepanto) in St Barnabas Piazza in the comune di Marino we
would appreciate that the GB is pointing to exactly that place.
5. The full dramatis personae of the Preface is:
Fra Marino = Marcantonio Colonna, namesake of Don Marcantonio I, hero of Lepanto.
The gentleman of the Ursini Family = Fulvio Orsini, antiquarian and librarian of the Farnese collection.
The lady Colonna = Marchessa Constanza Colonna di Carrivagio
Her deceased husband = Francesco I Sforza Marquis di Caravaggio, from the Sforza of Milan
Her sons = Muzio and Fabrizio Sforza
Pope Sixtus V (otherwise Montalto) = Felice Peretti, mentor of Marcantonio
Mustafa de Aranda = Ascanio Colonna, sponsor of Cervantes and Spanish literati.
This is a single circle of individuals related by family and position. The identifications are mutually reinforcing.
6. The intended readership of the Preface and the
extant vernacular versions was King Philip II of Spain and the Spanish
Inquisition. Santorio had been the Spanish candidate for the papacy. The
Colonna were in the employ of Philip but voted against his candidate.
Santorio was painting the Colonna's actions as high treason. To Philip
the GB says that the Colonna are in league with his most bitter enemies,
the Turks. To the Inquisition it says that the Roman nobility and
higher clergy are infected with the most vile species of heresy. (The
dressed work should be seen as a type of Inquisition literature and it
is important to appreciate that forgery and fake documentation were a
standard adjunct to torture especially in the pursuit of errant
intellectuals).
7. The specific scenario suggested in the Preface is
that Marcantonio has stolen an explosively heretical text and is
preparing for its publication, probably (Philip is to understand) by
Spanish Jewish publishers exiled in Istanbul. The "faithful" mentioned
in the Preface are probably the Spanish Moriscos whom Philip suspected
of collusion with the Turks. Marcantonio is responsible for the Italian
text and Ascanio (Mustafa de Aranda) for the Spanish text. The purpose
of the notice of a Spanish translation is to suggest to Philip that the
Colonna were preparing to publish a Spanish version to be smuggled into
Spain for the Moriscos. The extant mss. are dressed up as being in
preparation for a publisher. (Santorio would report that his office had
intercepted Colonna's correspondence and caught him red-handed).
8. Marcantonio was head of the revision of Jerome's
Vulgate under Sixtus V, and also appointed to help expurgate the Talmud
of anti-Christian references to allow its limited publication. Santorio
was opposed to the direction of both of these projects. In the case of
the Talmud he wanted it banned altogether while Sixtus V had
(alarmingly) ordered Colonna to translate it into Italian. In the case
of the Jerome revision Santorio was fearful that evangelical readings
would be allowed into the text. The GB puts into Marcantonio's hands
material exactly contrary to his professional position and status. The
text of the GB reflects material that both Jerome and the Talmudists
fought against, as the Preface intimates. This, in short, is why the GB
has the appearance of being under "Ebionite" influence. Santorio wanted
to place in Colonna's hands material utterly inappropriate for a Jerome
and Talmud scholar to have.
9. The Preface suggests that the GB contains
traditions of Hebrew commentary excised from Judaism by the Talmudists
and gospel narrative excised from the Christian tradition by Jerome.
Jerome was contemporary with the finalizing of the Palestinian Talmud
and while the Talmudists excised "Christianizing" influences, Jerome
fought against "Judaizing" sects and influences. Thus does the GB have
the appearance of containing elements of Samaritanism, Origenism,
Ebionism, Dositheanism, etc.- traditions anathemized by Jerome and the
Talmudists both. Again, Santorio has not composed this material. He has
it at hand and is using it against Colonna. The implication in the
Preface - and assuming that Santorio was not going to attack Cardinal
Colonna armed only with fairy-floss - is that Santorio himself believes
the GB to contain remnants of ancient heresy. Colonna could easily
defend himself against such a work as the GB if it were merely an empty
hoax. (We must appreciate that what Santorio is proposing is akin to
saying today that Cardinal Ratzinger is a secret member of Hamas! We can
assume that he will bring to this claim the most potent evidence he can
muster. Santorio must believe in the potency of the GB as a weapon and
be very confident of the incriminating nature of its contents.)
10. While the conclave was the acute provocation,
Santorio's motives are extensive. He had a lifelong hatred of the
Colonna which presents several sub-motives in his conspiracy against
Marcantonio and Ascanio. In part the GB is prepared in self-defense.
Marcantonio's brother, Pompeo, had once brought accusations of treachery
against Santorio himself, implicating him in a plot to assassinate Pope
Pius IV. Santorio had been arrested and interogated but pardoned by
Pope Pius V. When he unexpectedly lost the papacy in the conclave of
1592, and his enemies were unexpectedly in power, he was again exposed
to the possibility of renewed accusations and had to take measures to
cover himself.
11. Further, in the second half of the 16th C Santorio
had made his career pursuing Catholic evangelicals from the flush of
radical reform prior to the Council of Trent. He was involved in the
torture and execution of some. In the case of the famous Vittoria
Colonna, a member of the "Neopolitan Group" and sponsor of radical
reform groups, he sought to have her remains dug up and burnt. (The
Preface has a sinister allusion to this).
12. By extension, Santorio was opposed to the Milanese
reforms in which the Milanese reasserted their independence against
their Spanish overlords. Again, the Colonna were receiving benefices
from Philip but had, since Vittoria, been active supporters of the
Milanese revival which was clearly against Spanish interests.
Marcantonio's hero and exemplar was Carlo Borromeo, archbishop of Milan.
Anna Borromeo was the mother of Don Marcantonio I. The Borromeos were
actively involved in the Battle of Lepanto as well. Moreover, Milan,
like the comune di Marino, had St Barnabas the Apostle as its patron.
The Milanese had revived the veneration of the relics of Barnabas in the
1520s. Carlo Borromeo reaffirmed them in the 1570s. This was by way of
reactivating the position of archbishop of Milan which had lain dormant
for several generations. Borromeo sponsored the Barnabites and a
Barnabas revival in Milan. The Colonna were involved in this. Santorio
regarded it as a case of Spain's enemies fostering and permitting heresy
in order to undermine Spanish interests in northern Italy. A "Gospel of
Barnabas" draws in the wider context of the Milanese Barnabas revival
and the Colonna's connections with the Borromeos and Sforza of Milan.
13. The Preface actually portrays a tradition of
heresy. It reports a body of heretical literature in various hands and
suggests that it is the inspiration behind the anti-Spanish reforms in
northern Italy. Santorio wants to expose a tradition of heresy that is
supposed to have existed among the Colonna, thrives in Milan, and is
associated with the name Barnabas. The Preface reveals one heretical
text but reports others. It seems that Santorio was in pursuit of a
particular body of literature of which he had one part but knew the
other parts were in private (Colonna) hands. Another sub-motive emerges.
Santorio had long campaigned for greater enforcement of the Index of
Prohibited Books and greater Inquisitorial access to private libraries.
The Preface of the GB is also intended to underline that rare manuscript
collectors and owners of private collections, such as Marcantonio
Colonna (also Fulvio Orsini, mentioned in the Preface) are a nest of
heretics and require urgent Inquisitorial investigation. The Colonna's
GB was intended to demonstrate the dangers of leaving private
collections unregulated. Santorio achieved some success in this. He was
granted increased access to private libraries in 1596. It seems that the
outcome of his plot against the Colonna did not win Santorio an
investigation into the treachery of the conclave, nor a conviction of
the Colonna, but it might have had a hand in eventually raising concerns
about heretical texts in private libraries and so in that sense was
succesful.
14. As well as listing a dramatis personae, the
Preface also provides a bibliography. There is a strong likelihood that
the other texts mentioned in the Preface and in the GB itself were real
texts and were associated with the GB and that in part Santorio is
exposing an actual heretical literature travelling with the name
Barnabas. This can only be speculation because it is also likely that
these same texts were destroyed in the book burnings that followed the
purge of private libraries in 1596+.
15. The "glosses on prophets written by prophets"
mentioned in the Preface are clearly related to the prophetic content of
the GB, especially the three installments of material supposedly
written by Daniel. The Preface wants us to understand that these glosses
are an example of the Hebrew commentary traditions excised from Judaism
by the Talmudists in the time of Jerome.
16. The Preface also describes a body of Ignatian
literature from the library of the Sforza of Milan (via the "lady
Colonna"). It is in this literature, we are told, that "Fra Marino"
first encounters a notice of a "Gospel of Barnabas". This literature
appears to be spurious Ignatian literature legitimizing the independent
Barnabas tradition (but too anti-Pauline to be useful). This is
especially important because it signals the nature of the literature to
which the GB belongs and allows us to understand the background of the
material that Santorio is deploying against Colonna.
17. The origins of the material must be in Cyprus. The
Cypriot Church claimed independence from the Church of Antioch in the
5th C appealing to the apostolic authority of Barnabas (over Paul). The
Third Eucemenical Council supported the Cypriot's claims but the Church
of Antioch persisted in their designs. At this point the Cypriot's
uncovered the relics of Barnabas, along with the books of Matthew he is
supposed to have carried with him, and appealed directly to the Emporer
Zeno. He approved the relics and upheld the right of the Cypriot's to
elect their own archbishops. In the 11th C. the city of Milan followed
this lead and imported the Cypriot Barnabas mythology, adding an extra
leg to the travels of the apostle to strengthen the claims of Milan to
an independent, ancient tradition (the Ambrosian rite). From the 11th C.
onwards Milan had on-going links to the Barnabas traditions of Cyprus
and there were several influxes of relics (and accompanying material).
18. An essential feature of the Barnabas tradition and
the basis for its underpinning of the Ambrosian tradition of Milan is
the persistence of the ancient catechumenate. Milan contributed
Ambrosian congregationalism to catholic reform but Milanese traditions
had also fed such movements as the Anabaptists. Ambrose was unbaptised
when elected archbishop of Milan. The GB contains material supposedly
relating to an ancient catechumenate. Textually, it draws upon the
lectionary traditions of the period from Easter Vigil to Pentecost
during which the neophytes were among the congregation. This is an
important key to understanding the text of the GB itself and especially
its diatesseronic features - the text is drawing upon lectionary
traditions pertinent to the catechumenate. The developments of the
Lazarus story and the raising of the widow's son at Nain in the GB are
initiatory and related to the catechumenate, noting that for this reason
Cypriot traditions appropriate Lazarus as well since he supposedly
moved to Cyprus after his resurrection from the dead. All of this speaks
of the traditions (Cypriot via Milan) reflected in the GB. (It will be
noted that the Preface cites prophets, gospel, fathers, as if "Fra
Marino" is collecting materials for the preparation of a lectionary. I
suggest that rather than in the Syrian diatesseron tradition, the roots
of the textual sequences in the GB will be found in Cypriot and
Antiochian lectionary traditions and especially in readings from John's
gospel during the period leading up to Pentecost.)
19. The pivotal event is again the Battle of Lepanto.
Here the Christian league defeated the Turks, but it was at the expense
of Cyprus. Cyprus fell to Lala Mustafa's fleets in 1571. The Latin
Church of Cyprus fled, many to Milan. (The Barnabas revival in Milan
under Borromeo corresponds with the fall of the Cyprus Church). Part of
the background to the GB is bitterness over the fact that Christendom
had abandoned Cyprus and left the eastern Meditteranean to the Turks. It
was effectively the end of the Crusades. The Muslims had won. This was
the strategic decision of Don Marcantonio I and the whole strategic
premise of Lepanto. The defense of European Christendom would require
abandoning all claims to the Near East. Santorio is portraying this as
treachery. The Colonna/Borromeo/Cervantes circle commemorate Lepanto as a
great Christian victory (the Fountain of the Moors in the Barnabas
Piazza in the comune di Marino) when in fact it was a great Turkish
victory (from a Cypriot point of view). By extension, Santorio is
implying that this circle have undermined the orthodox tradition of
Cyprus while importing the Cypriot heresies.
20. Ignatius was first Bishop of Antioch. The Ignatian
books described in the Preface to the GB are spurious Ignatian books
probably travelling with the relics of Barnabas or associated with the
relics or in any case associated with the claims of an independent
Barnabas tradition. They purport to be written by Ignatius and his
followers (including Irenaeus) confirming the apostolic authority of
Barnabas and so his independence from Antioch.
21. The notice that Fra Marino saw the GB cited in a
work by Irenaeus is an informative report. A spurious work by Irenaeus,
disciple of Ignatius, was part of the literature with which the GB was
associated. The GB itself corresponds to the "narrative of miracles and
doctrines" that supposedly travelled with Barnabas the Apostle as
reported in the Acts of Barnabas, itself a contra-Antioch legitimation
text of the Cyprus tradition. This is what the GB is supposed to be. It
is supposed to be the long-lost narrative of miracles and doctrines
given to Barnabas by Matthew which is why Barnabas appears in the GB
"with Matthew" (chpt. 12) and why the text of the GB uses Matthew to
contend with Luke.
22. The "Old Book of Moses and Joshua" mentioned in
the GB (and to which the Preface points) corresponds to the companion
volume to the "narrative of miracles and doctrines", namely a "book of
the word of God". We must conclude that someone, at some point, has
composed a body of heretical literature in Barnabas' name, which
literature attempts to establish legitimacy from Ignatius, bishop of
Antioch, and conforms to the literature supposedly travelling with
Barnabas the Apostle. Santorio has the central part of this literature,
the Gospel or narrative of miracles and doctrines, but the other parts
of it are in the hands of Colonna, as the Preface reports. This is what
makes such a bold-faced accusation as the one Santorio is making viable.
The GB is incriminating because its supporting literature will be found
in Colonna's possession (if only Philip would allow the Inquisition to
investigate such book collectors and antiquarians).supposedly travelled
with Barnabas the Apostle as reported in the Acts of Barnabas, itself a
contra-Antioch legitimation text of the Cyprus tradition. This is what
the GB is supposed to be. It is supposed to be the long-lost narrative
of miracles and doctrines given to Barnabas by Matthew which is why
Barnabas appears in the GB "with Matthew" (chpt. 12) and why the text of
the GB uses Matthew to contend with Luke.
* * *
The GB was prepared
by Cardinal Giulio Santorio to incriminate Cardinals Marcantonio and
Ascanio Colonna. His motives were a combination of revenge,
self-defense, ideological zeal and political leverage. The work itself -
called a Gospel of Barnabas - is supposed to be the "narrative and
miracles and doctrines" described as travelling with the apostle
Barnabas in the 5th C apocryphal work Acts of Barnabas. The origins of
the work are probably Cyprus and it enters Europe along with supporting
literature through Milan probably shortly after 1571, its broader
context being the fall of Cyprus to the Turks and the strategic shifts
of Christendom in the counter-reformation following the Battle of
Lepanto. As it survives, Santorio is using the work to incriminate the
Colonna and expose a tradition of heresy and treachery among the
nobility and high clergy. broader context being the fall of Cyprus to
the Turks and the strategic shifts of Christendom in the
counter-reformation following the Battle of Lepanto. As it survives,
Santorio is using the work to incriminate the Colonna and expose a
tradition of heresy and treachery among the nobility and high clergy.
©Copyright R. Blackhirst 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment