[_Sermo Pseud.-Augustin._ cxxix _de Kal. Ian._ in _P. L._ xxxix. 2001. Parts of this sermon are reproduced ‘mutatis mutandis’ in the eighth-century Frankish _Homilia de Sacrilegiis_ (§§ 23-26), edited by Caspari (cf. No. xxxix, below), and also in a MS. homily, _De Kalendis Ianuariis_, in _Cod. Lat. Monac._ 6108 (tenth century), f. 48ᵛ. The rest of that homily is mainly from Maximus Taurinensis, _Hom._ 16 (No. xiv, above). And nearly the whole of the present _Sermo_ is included in the _Homiliarium_ of Burchardus of Würzburg and printed from his MS. by Eckart, _Francia Orientalis_, i. 837. On the date and authorship of the _Sermo_, cf. Caspari, 67. It is ascribed to Augustine by a _Codex Colbertinus_. His editors, Blancpain and Coutant, treat it as not his (_a_) on account of the difference of style, (_b_) on account of the reference to the _ieiunium_ prescribed by the _sancti antiqui patres_ (i.e. amongst others, Augustine himself: cf. No. x). A _Codex Aceiensis_ ascribes it to Faustinus (i.e. Faustus of Raji), and this is accepted by the Bollandists (_Acta SS. Ian._ i. 2), and by Eckart, _op. cit._ i. 433. Finally a _codex Navarricus_ assigns it to Maxentius. This can hardly be the Scythian monk of that name (†520). Caspari suggests that there has been a scribal error. The _sermo_ is headed ‘De natali Domini. In calendis ianuariis.’ There is nothing about the Nativity in it, and possibly a Nativity sermon and the author’s name of the Kalends sermon which followed it have dropped out. He also thinks Maximus Taurinensis may be meant. However Caspari finally agrees with Blancpain and Coutant, that the style and the allusion to the _triduum ieiunii_ so closely resembling that of the Council of Tours (No. xxii) point to a writer of the first half of the sixth century, and that he may very likely be Caesarius of Arles, who, as his _Vita_ (cf. No. xx) states, did preach against the Kalends.]