(Πατρίκιος), the second son of the patrician Aspar, so powerfull in the reign or the emperor Leo I. [LEO I.], who owed his elevation
136
to Aspar's influence. Leo and Aspar had been estranged from each other; but a reconciliation having been effected between them, it was agreed that Patricius should receive the hand of one of Leo's daughters. Nicephorus Callisti says he was to marry Ariadne, the elder of the two; buat it was more probably Leontia, the younger, as Ariadne appears to have been already married to Zeno, afterwards emperor [ZENO]. It was also stipulated that Patricius should be raised to the rank of Caesar. As this would have been equivalent to pointing him out as Leo's successor onl the throne, and as Patricius held the Arian principles of his father and family, the arrangement was vehemently opposed by the orthodox clergy, monks, and populace of Constantinople, who relqutired that the arrangement should be set aside, or, at least, that Patricius should make profession of orthodoxy as the price of his elevation. Leo appeased the malcontents by promising that their request should be complied with. Whether Patricius renounced Arianism is not stated; but he received the title of Caesar, and was either married, or, as Tillemont thinks, onlv affianced to the emperor's daughter. IHe soon after set out in great state for Alexandria; but he must soon have returned, as he was at Constantinople when Leo determined oil the removal of Aspar and his sons by assassination. Aspar, and Ardaburius, his eldest son, fell, and most writers state that Patricius was murdered also; but according to the more ancient, circumstantial, and, on the whole, more trustworthy narrative of Candidus, Patricius escaped, though not without many wounds. According to Nicephorus Callisti he was banished, and deprived of his affianced bride, whlo was given to Zeno; the statement that he was banished, and that his wife was taken from hinm, or that the marriage was not completed, is not improbable; but that she was given to Zeno is probably an error, arising from Nicephonis's confounding Leontia and Ariadne. Valesius says that Patricius was father of Vitalian, who played so conspicuous a part under the emperors Anastasius and Justin I. he does not cite his authority, but he probably followed the statement of Theophanses, that Vitalian was the son of Patriciolus, by which name Marcellinus calls our Patricius; but Theophanes never gives the name Patriciolus to the son of Aspar, nor does there seem sufficient reason for identitfying these. It is difficult to ascertain the dates of these transactions; the elevation of Patricius is fixed by Cedrenus in the twelfth year of Leo, i. e. A. D. 469; the assassination of Aspar is placed by the Alexandrian Chronicle in the consulship of Pusaeus and Joannes, A.D. 467; by Theophanes in A. M. 5964; Alex. era, A. D. 472; and by the Latini chroniclers, Marcellinus, Cassiodorus, and Victor of Tunes, whose date is adopted by Tillemont, in A. D. 471; we do not attempt to reconcile these discrepancies. This Patricius, the son of Aspar, is to be distinguished from Patricius, magister officiorum, whom the intriguing empress Verina [VERINA], Leo's widow, after driving her son-in-law Zeno [ZENO] from his throne and capital, hoped to mairr, but who was put to death by Basiliscits, Verilat's brother [BASILISCUS]; from Pelagiius Patricius, the supposed author of the Homero-Centra [PATRICIUS, Literary, No. 5] ; and from Patricias, a distinguished general in the war carried on by Anastasius, Zeno's successor, against the Persian king Caiades. (Chron. Paschal. vol. i. p. 323, ed. Paris, p. 596, ed. Bonn; Theophanes, Chronog. p. 101, ed. Paris, pp. 181, 182, ed. Bonn; Marcellin. Cassiodor. Victor Tunet. Chronic; Zonaras, Annul. 14.1; Cedrenus Compend. p. 350, ed. Paris, vol. i. p. 613, ed. Bonn; Candidus, apud Phot. Bibl. Cod. 79 Niceph. Callist. Hist. Eccles. 15.27; Valesils, Rersm. Francic. lib. v. vol. i. p. 213, ed. Paris, 1646. &c.; Tillenmont, Hist. des Enmp. vol. vi. p. 413, &c.) [J.C.M]