ABSTRACT
In this chapter, we examine the connection of the components of Irenaeus’s cult – his several cult places in the ancient and medieval Sirmium, his hagiographies in various languages, and his feast days in calendars – in the light of Delehaye’s definition of the three components of sainthood. Their nonsynchronicity led Irenaeus to be neglected and forgotten in the sole place of his cult, Sirmium, since his memory did not migrate. Being linked exclusively to this locus at the crossroads and without the possibility to develop uninterruptedly, the cult and his memory faded. Their primary hindrance was the repeated succession of new people. With every new arrival, different people who came to Sirmium were building up the memory of Irenaeus from their resources. New people used new languages, making memory appropriation more challenging. The migrations could not help but give rise to discontinuity and forgetting rather than a solid, continual memory.
