Ecclesiastical History (Continuation)

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY VOLUME XV

CHAPTER I. Concerning the reign of Marcian. What signs preceded it, portending his imperial rule, and what his character was.

^A Marcian, having firmly established the foundations of his empire, proved himself to be even more excellent than the hopes that had been entertained of him. But if you wish, let us recount who he was, whence he came, and how he attained the imperial throne; and then, in due course, let us go through the events that occurred during his reign. This celebrated Marcian, as Priscus the rhetorician also says, was Thracian by birth, born of a soldier father. When his father died, and he had determined to follow in his father’s footsteps and engage in military service, he set out for the city of Philippopolis, where he judged he would properly enlist. ^B While on his journey there, he happened upon the fresh corpse of a man who had been slain, which lay thrown carelessly upon the ground. He halted for a short time at this sight, for in addition to the other excellent qualities with which he abounded, he was also outstandingly humane and merciful; and, taking pity on the man’s fate, he performed the customary burial rites for the deceased. But when some passers-by saw him occupied with burying the corpse, they reported the matter to the officials in Philippopolis. They subsequently apprehended Marcian as he arrived, and set themselves up as judges of his murder. ^C Since the circumstances made the case seem probable, and the conjectures formed at the outset, along with the truth itself, carried more weight than the speech of Marcian denying the crime laid against him, he would have paid the penalty for homicide, had not a certain person, by divine providence, been brought into the court as the perpetrator of the slaughter, who, by paying the penalty for the crime with his own head, preserved the head of Marcian. Thus, unexpectedly absolved by that judgment, he went to the rank of the soldiers, there to take the military oath. And he...

^A, since those who knew him had judged him well, was received kindly and enrolled—in no mean position, as the law provides—but in a certain perfect rank of a man of that name who had already departed this life, whose name was Augustus. Thus, his name was written with the appointment: Marcian, who is also Augustus. From this it was sufficiently clear that, along with the appellation, the purple of Augustus had also reached him; and it was as if this surname would not remain in him without the dignity itself, and that the dignity, in turn, required no other name for its magnificence. Thus, the same word, being both proper and appellative, became one, clearly indicating by a single title both the dignity and the name. This, then, was the first omen and sign in Marcian that portended he was to ascend to the imperial dignity.

But another event also occurred from which it was possible to conjecture that he would be emperor. Marcian was serving under Aspar against the Vandals; and after they had gained the victory, he, too, was led away as a captive with others from the battlefield across the plain. Gaiseric, the leader of the Vandals, wished to see the captives along with the other slaves. And when they were gathered in a certain place ^B, Gaiseric, sitting on a high hill, feasted his eyes on the multitude of the captives. As time was passing, he permitted them to do whatever each wished; for by Gaiseric’s order they had been freed from their bonds. While others were doing various things, Marcian, overcome by the intense heat of the sun on the plain, fell asleep. An eagle, flying thence from somewhere, lowering its wings against the sun and hovering directly above him, created an aerial cloud and a sort of shadow, by which, by divine will, it refreshed him not insignificantly. Seeing this, the barbarian immediately conjectured openly what would become of him; and summoning Marcian to him, he granted him his liberty and bound him by the sanctity of an oath that, should he be raised to imperial power, he would be faithful to him and the Vandals and never wage war against them. This Marcian did by means of an oath, as he [Gaiseric] wished, and kept his faith in deed, as Procopius writes.

Before this, while marching against the Persians, he came into Lycia to a city named Sidema. Having fallen ill ^C, he formed a deep friendship with two brothers, men of distinction there, Julian and Tatian, who received him into the hospitality of their home, cared for him as was fitting, and later went out hunting with him. At midday, all were overcome by sleep. When Tatian first awoke from his sleep, he saw a wondrous sight: an eagle of vast size spreading its wings over Marcian and casting a shadow, as it were, upon him. Having awakened his brother, he made him see the same thing. Marveling at the bird’s benevolence, they predicted to Marcian what would come to be, and asked that, if what they divined should come to pass, who would be [his ministers] by his side. ^D

Having then treated him with gold, they sent him on to Constantinople. After he had attained to his work, he sent for those mentioned from Lycia and declared them to be fathers to him. And to Tatianus ^A he attached the dignity of the city, while to Julianus he entrusted the administration of the Lycians. Such portents did they consider to be a betrothal of the sovereignty to Marcian. But let us return to the subject at hand. Marcian was, if any man was, pious toward God, living in justice, holding wealth to be not the gathering of others' goods for all purposes, but [the ability] to be sufficient to assist those in need. He was also exceedingly formidable, not in the execution of punishments, but in the expectation of being punished; and, I think, it was for this reason that they gave him the sovereignty not as an inheritance of merit, ^B or as a reward for virtue, with all the votes of the senate and all others filling out the judgment of Pulcheria the Empress; she indeed lived with him in the imperial court and administered the empire with him, yet remained a virgin until old age, as Marcian kept the faith given to her by the religion of an oath. Subsequently, Valentinian, who ruled the Roman city, when he became more certain of his virtue, confirmed the sovereignty to him with his own vote. But above all, Marcian busied himself with one thing: that a common reverence toward God be held by all, that heresies be removed from the midst, that the Church be established unified through concord, and that the religion be honored under one doxology.

Chapter 2. For what reasons the fourth holy universal synod was convened at Chalcedon in Bithynia.

^A in his stead. But it was translated to Chalcedon in Bithynia, because the emperor himself wished to be present at the synod, imitating the great Constantine, with whom he competed in glory to the highest degree, and so he doubled that holy assembly, having exerted himself to gather six hundred and thirty-six Fathers instead of the three hundred and eighteen. But Zacharias the rhetor, led by personal bias, records that Nestorius also was summoned to this synod; yet that the matter is not so is most clearly shown by the fact that he was, almost everywhere, struck with anathema by the synod. And Eustathius, bishop of Berytus, makes this even clearer still, writing to Bishop John and another, John the priest, about the things done in the synod, in which letter these words also occur: "Those who seek the remains of Nestorius came forward again and cried out against the synod, 'Why are the holy men anathematized?' So that the emperor was indignant and ordered his guards to drive them away to a distance." How, then, the synod could have summoned him, whose remains the dead-seeking men looked for, I cannot fathom. ^B

CAPUT III. Description of the temple of the holy and celebrated martyr Euphemia, which was constructed at Chalcedon from its very foundations.

After the synod arrived at Chalcedon, it was gathered in the sacred fane of the glorious martyr Euphemia, which was constructed at Chalcedon, and is distant about two stadia from the Bosphorus, situated in a very pleasant and gently sloping place, so that he who wishes to ascend to the martyr’s temple does not feel the labor of walking, and easily and at once reaches the basilica. And as he turns his eyes around from that elevated spot, he beholds the whole field below, green with tender grass and waving with a deep harvest of crops, and ^C containing trees of every kind planted there; moreover, hills beautifully rising to the heights, and some gradually curving themselves and showing a dense foliage. Various waves of the sea also meet him: some indeed are resonating with purple serenity and stillness, and are playing placidly and sweetly against the shore; others are noisy with waves and swelling, but in the heat itself are rolling sea-shells, seaweeds, and whatever other light things there are, and colliding with the greatest ease. The temple itself, constructed opposite the city, so lies that it is easy to infer from the very site that it is conspicuous and pleasant to look upon from so great a city. This temple is divided into three vast structures: one of which is an open-air hall, extended to a great length and adorned with frequent columns; the second has an equality with that one in width and length, ^D though it has fewer columns, and it differs from it in this one thing: that it is covered by a roof of baked brick; it is not built toward the north, the part where it happens that the sun rises, but has been erected in a circular fashion.

^A It is elaborated with great skill, and is itself adorned within by columns of the same material, size, and color, which stand in a circle like a choir, embellishing the inner part of the temple. Above these, a high portico is constructed under the same roof, so that anyone who wishes may be present at the rites performed, and at the same time offer prayer to the martyr herself, facing toward the east. Inside the dome itself is another very beautiful sanctuary; where it happened that the martyr was laid in a long coffin, which some even call the Long [Coffin], enclosed on all sides by silver skillfully cast and fashioned with exceptional beauty. ^B But the miracles which the martyr used to perform in former times were evident to all Christians. For she would very often appear in a dream to the bishop presiding over the region, or to some other person living an illustrious life who happened to enter her temple, and would exhort them to gather the fruit of such miracles. When this became known to those throughout Constantinople, the whole crowd of people flocked there; both he who held the scepter, and those who held the sacred reins, and those who stood at the head of other offices, desiring to see the things being performed. And indeed, with everyone watching, the bishop of Constantinople, along with the priests about him, would enter the aforementioned vault where that martyr’s body lies. ^C There was attached to the coffin on the left side a small, venerable opening, secured with small doors most precisely; through which they would let down a rather long iron implement, to the end of which a sponge had been tied. They would turn this sponge around the all-holy relics of the martyr with the iron, and draw it out again full of blood and thick with clots, mingled with the martyr’s moisture. When the multitude caught sight of this, they would immediately bow to the ground, honoring God with a great shout, raising their hands and being struck with amazement at the miracle. So great and abundant was the fluid that flowed forth from there, that not only did the emperors and bishops, and the people who were accustomed to gather there, benefit richly from the liquids flowing forth from it, but ^D they also carried them to whomever they wished to any place. And neither did the clots fail in time, nor was the divine blood altered in any way, but it always preserved its highly red appearance. These things were not done according to any fixed period, but as the sanctity of the life and character of the presiding bishop allowed. For the account says that whenever he who governed the Church lived illustriously and adorned his life with virtue, this miracle occurred more frequently; but when the high priest of the sacred things was not such a man, the miracle appeared more rarely, and the wondrous thing did not proceed so easily from the martyr. This is how I know it to have happened. But that which neither day nor any time interrupts, but flows perpetually and is available to all the faithful and those who are otherwise, I shall now declare. If anyone comes into the sanctuary where the coffin and the saint’s holy relics are now stored like a treasure, an immense scent, beyond the grasp of nature, and [surpassing] all the scents that human art—

even when a perfumer works at it, blending fragrant things according to weight—could produce. For it is something exceedingly great and in much greater measure that is sent forth from thence, providing evidence of the power of Him by whom it is sent forth.

Chapter IV. The acts of the synod; and how the episcopate was abrogated for Dioscorus and his followers.

In this holy sanctuary of the martyr, which we have said was moved from Nicaea, the synod was gathered, thirty years after the third synod, in the five thousand nine hundred and sixty-sixth year from the creation of the world. ^B On the right side of the temple sat the Romans, the Byzantines, and the Antiochenes; on the left, the Alexandrians and the Hierosolymitans; and in the space between them sat the princes and the senators. And when those things which Eutyches in Constantinople and Dioscorus in Ephesus had schemed in their eagerness for innovation were brought into the midst, Dioscorus took refuge in ignorance of the acts, an excuse by which he tried to defend himself. And because he could not escape the crimes objected to him, he was of doubtful mind: but when, the truth being brought into the open, he could not evade the plain necessity of pleading his case (for those who had sat with him in that predatory synod refuted him, and demonstrated his deceit and the force and constraint which had been brought upon them by the threats of the magistrates), ^C he was cast into great shame and disgrace. And indeed those who had been the instruments of his violence, having asked for pardon, were received into favor, and crossed from the left side to the right; one of whom was Juvenal of Jerusalem. But Dioscorus, as one crime after another was charged against him, since he could not obtain pardon from those just judges, refrained from coming to the synod. But after the synod, following the canon, had cited him three times, and he did not obey, by the common vote of all, with the God-beloved Emperor himself present, they both deposed him and Eutyches, and struck them with anathema. Then they confirmed the decrees of the holy universal synods issued for the establishment of the faith, namely those which were gathered ^D at Nicaea, at Constantinople, and previously at Ephesus. Furthermore, in the third session, they included in their acts the letters of the admirable Cyril written to Nestorius; to which they also joined the letter of Pope Leo to the divine Flavian, and moreover the tome which the same Leo sent to the synod and to the Emperor Marcian, which was also called a pillar of orthodoxy. For this Leo—

having judged Eutyches and Dioscorus—convened a local synod in Rome, ^A in which he cast out both Eutyches and Dioscorus, and as many as chose to follow them; and he sent the record of his action to the synod and to the Emperor, so that those aforesaid who brought in the confusion and jumbling of the two natures of Christ might, on that very ground, be deposed without any pretext. He exhorted them, teaching that the Church of Christ should be built up and established by these doctrines: that one should know Christ as one God, perfect in subsistence, consubstantial with the Father, without mingling, without change, without alteration, and without confusion, the two natures of divinity and humanity being seen in Him, from which He is composed, and in which He is contemplated, and which He truly is. ^B

CAPUT V. Concerning the miracle which occurred at the shrine of Saint Euphemia, regarding the decision between the double decree of faith, of the orthodox, I mean, and of the heretics.

When a great dispute had arisen over this matter (for wickedness is unassailable and most studious of contention), it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to the eminent men ^C who had gathered that the definition of the faith should be written down, and that the judgment and the resolution of the matters in dispute should be entrusted to the all-praised martyr and virgin Euphemia. For she was, in ancient times, a local citizen and alumna of the city of Chalcedon. Under the impious Diocletian, standing before a certain detestable governor, and proclaiming with a clear voice that Christ is God and the Son of God, she was first tested with infinite tortures, and then, cast to the beasts and killed by the bite of a bear, she received the crown, having completed her struggle for Christ; and her divine body, preserved whole and incorrupt, was deposited in the church of Chalcedon in a marble tomb, producing such prodigies as I have mentioned a little earlier. ^D Therefore, to her all-pure and holy body—as to an impartial judge of the faith concerning them—both the orthodox and those who thought otherwise, having separately committed the definition of the faith as it seemed best to each of them onto two papers, placed them at the feet of the martyr, having secured them with locks and seals. And having spent the whole night in prayer, they came on the following day, and opening the lid of the casket, they saw an extraordinary sight, and one worthy of the right judgment. For the tome of the orthodox was held fast in the hands of the victorious martyr; but the other, as it happened, lay cast aside at the feet of the martyr as something vain and of no value. But since, even after such a heavenly verdict, shamelessness still waged war against the truer faith, the condemnation was yet more firmly confirmed as being thoroughly legitimate; and to those who chose not to agree with the decrees of the synod, dishonor and disgrace were allotted by God and men.

^A Many other things having also been done, the decree of the synod was proclaimed, setting forth these things word for word:

CAPUT VI. The Decree of Faith of the Holy and Universal Fourth Synod

^B “Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, confirming the knowledge of the faith to his disciples, said: ‘My peace I give to you; my peace I leave with you,’ so that no one might dissent from the dogmas of piety, but that all might equally proclaim the preaching of the truth. And after the divine Creed had been read, and furthermore that of the one hundred and fifty holy Fathers, they added: ‘This wise and saving Creed of divine grace was indeed sufficient for the perfect knowledge and confirmation ^C of true piety; for it teaches the perfect doctrine concerning the Father and the Holy Spirit, and sets forth the incarnation of the Lord to those who receive it with faith. But because the enemies of the truth, who strive to abolish the preaching through their own heresies, have brought forth empty talk, and some have dared to adulterate the much-graced dispensation of our Lord and have dared to deny this word Theotokos, [Mother of God]; while others, introducing confusion and commixture, foolishly imagine that the nature of the flesh and the divinity is one, and monstrously assert that the divine nature of the Only-Begotten is subject to suffering through confusion: ^D for this reason, this present holy and great ecumenical synod, wishing to close every trick and machination against the truth on their part, and vindicating the integrity and inviolability of the ancient doctrine, first of all decrees that the faith of the three hundred holy Fathers remains unshaken. And it also confirms by its own authority the doctrine concerning the essence of the Spirit delivered in later times by the one hundred and fifty Fathers who gathered in the imperial city against the enemies of the Holy Spirit, which those Fathers made known to all, not as introducing anything lacking to those who preceded them, but declaring more clearly, by testimonies recorded in writing, the nature of the Holy Spirit, wishing to confirm certain things concerning His power.

But because of those who dare to deprave the mystery of the oikonomia [economy/dispensation], and who shamelessly and abusively say that He who was born of the holy Virgin Mary is a mere man, it [the synod] received the synodal epistles of the blessed Cyril, who was pastor of the Church of the Alexandrians, written to Nestorius and to the bishops of the East, since they are rightly written both for the refutation of the insane madness of Nestorius and for the declaration of the meaning of the saving Creed to those who seek it with pious fervor; to which it also [received] the epistle of the prelate of the greatest and elder Rome, the most blessed and most holy archbishop…

^A Leo, written to the bishop Flavian, who is among the saints, for the sake of refuting the malevolence of Eutyches; which, agreeing as it does with the confession of the great Peter, and existing as a kind of common and public pillar against those who hold wrong opinions, he deservedly joined [to the acts] for the confirmation of right dogmas. For it contends against those who attempt to rend the mystery of the Economy into a duality of sons, and it thrusts from the sacred assemblies those who dare to say that the divinity of the Only-Begotten is subject to suffering; and it withstands those who devise a mingling or confusion of the two natures of Christ; and it drives away those who rave that the form of a servant, which He took from us, is of a heavenly or some other essence. And it anathematizes those who fable that there are two natures of the Lord before the union, but who fabricate one after the union. ^B Following, therefore, the holy Fathers, we all with one voice teach and confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, truly God and truly man, the same [consisting] of a rational soul and body, consubstantial with the Father according to the divinity, and consubstantial with us according to the humanity, in all things like unto us without sin; begotten of the Father before the ages according to the divinity, but in the last days the same, for us and for our salvation, [born] of Mary the Virgin and Theotokos according to the humanity; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-Begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the difference of the natures being in no way taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one hypostasis: not as though He were partitioned or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-Begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; just as the prophets taught concerning Him from of old, and Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the Creed of the Fathers has handed down to us. »

CHAPTER VII. On the remaining matters which the synod decreed.

Therefore, these things having been formulated by us with all accuracy and diligence, the holy and universal synod decreed that it is not permitted for anyone to produce, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or ^C to teach others any other faith. But those who shall dare either to compose another faith, or to bring it forth, or to teach, or to hand down another creed to those who wish to return to the knowledge of the truth from Greek superstition and Judaism, or from any other heresy whatsoever, these, if they are bishops or clergymen, shall be alien from the episcopate and from the clergy, but if they are monks or laymen, they shall be anathematized. After ^D these things, the Emperor Marcian, who was present at the synod, when those things which were fitting,

^A had been spoken before the assembly, returned to the imperial palace. The synod also rightly and in order resolved the controversy that had arisen between Maximus, who was established as successor to Domnus in the church of Antioch, and Juvenal, bishop of Jerusalem, regarding the boundaries of the provinces. In addition to this, both Theodoret and Ibas recovered their own sees. It was also decided there that the see of New Rome should hold the primary rank among the other sees, following after the precedence of Old Rome. Many other things also were set in motion at this council, all of which I shall, beginning from the start, recount as best I can in the discourse at the end of this present volume, so that anyone who wishes may more clearly understand the matters transacted there. For I deemed it somehow inopportune to set them forth at present, lest I should interrupt the continuity of the history. And for this reason, I judged that it was not necessary to treat them at length at this time. Therefore, he who desires to know exactly the matters of this synod, let him read that summary narration which has been appended to the end of the fifteenth book. Now I shall proceed to continue the history. ^B

Chapter VIII. Concerning the sedition which arose in Alexandria on account of the ordination of Proterius, the successor of Dioscorus.

There were, then, fulfilling the synod from Old Rome, Paschasinus, Lucentius, and Bonifacius, holding the place of Leo, the prelate of Rome. There were present also Anatolius, bishop of New Rome, Maximus of Antioch on the Orontes, Juvenal of Jerusalem, and Dioscorus himself, presiding over Alexandria; who, as we have said, being deposed and condemned to exile, was ordered to dwell in the region of Gangra in Paphlagonia. Furthermore, the divine Proterius was allotted the bishopric of Alexandria by the common consent of the synod. And when he received his throne, a great struggle ^C broke out among the multitude; the crowd and the tumult divided the common people into various opinions. For, as is wont to happen in such times, some—who were the greatest part—courageously defended the new pastor, while to others Dioscorus seemed more suitable for administering the ecclesiastical province. And the matter progressed to a great danger. For Priscus the orator, in writing his histories, says that at that time he had come to Alexandria from the province of the Thebans and saw a huge crowd, causing a sedition against the magistrates; and when the soldiers strove to restrain it, [the mob] used as weapons the very stones which were lying scattered about on account of the occasion, and compelled them to flee to the temple which formerly had the name of Serapis. ^D Now Serapis is Zeus, or the Nile, or Apis, a certain man in the city of Memphis who, during a time of famine, supplied grain to the Alexandrians from his own stores. Upon his death, they consecrated a temple and a statue to him, in which also an ox, having certain signs and marks, was reared—as a symbol, one might conjecture, of agriculture—which they also called Apis, after its master. And the temple was built by Alexander.

^A For it is permitted to know by this sign and proof, whom they also called Apis, by the same name as his master. But when the coffin of that man—which in Greek is called a temple—was translated, they named his statue Sorapis, or even Serapis, through a transposition of the letters. Whose temple was most beautiful, and the image was by far the largest and most dreadful, being constructed of various materials so that with both hands it touched either wall. In the middle of the image, however, there was another deceptive temple, in which another bronze figure, not large, was suspended, to whose head they had fixed iron. And when they had placed a magnet in the moldings of the roof right above the perpendicular, they suspended it high in the air in such a way that it touched neither the ground nor the roof itself. ^B Into this very temple the people compelled the magistrates, and then burned the captives alive with fire. When this matter was reported to the emperor, he sent two thousand soldiers, who, favored by a following wind, arrived at the great city of Alexandria on the sixth day. They, using wanton insolence towards the wives and daughters of the Alexandrians, afflicted them with sufferings more severe than those they had experienced before. The populace, however, taking this indignity ill, at last petitioned Florus, who administered the military affairs and at that time was also managing urban affairs there, when he had gathered to watch the Circensian games, that they might have restored to them the usual distribution of grain which had been taken away from them, and that he might return the baths and theaters and other things which, in such a dissolute and disturbed state of the city, they were compelled to abstain from. He, as the common people had wished, promising under certain conditions that he would do so, received their request. And in that manner he gradually sedated the sedition. Such were the affairs in Alexandria. ^C

CHAPTER IX. How a sedition also arose in Palestine, stirred up by a certain monk named Theodosius: who also invaded the see of Jerusalem, having expelled Juvenalis: and what things happened under him. Also concerning Athanasius the deacon, the confessor.

Nor indeed was there any tranquility in Palestine. For certain monks who had been present at the synod, and who thought differently from its decrees, when they had come to Jerusalem, shouted that the faith had been betrayed, lamenting and striving to incite and urge on the monastic order to rescind the things that had been rightly done in the synod. But when Juvenalis recovered his see, and they wished to compel him to abolish the acts of the synod and subject them to anathema, he ^D departed for the city of the emperor. The leader of the whole crowd was a certain monk named Theodosius. This man, having drawn Eudocia Augusta (for she was still alive at that time) to his side and having reconciled all the fellowship of the monks to himself, after the manner of a robber and a bloodthirsty man, since Juvenalis (as we have said) had departed for Constantinople, [took to himself the see of Jerusalem].

He used as his helpers in this those who opposed the constitutions of the synod and wished to gratify Eudocia. And when the bishops had not yet returned from the synod, he himself sent others whom he had ordained into every city. Severianus, the bishop of Scythopolis, because he would not yield to his malice, he drove out of the city and slew. He also stirred up a great persecution in the holy city against those who refused to be in communion with him; for he tormented some with tortures, plundered the property of others, and set fire to the houses of still others, so that the city appeared to have been captured by barbarians. Concerning him, the monastic order later wrote in a letter sent to Alcison: that since he had been caught as a malefactor and one unfaithful to his own bishop, he had been expelled from his monastery; and because he had also been a rebel against Dioscorus at Alexandria, he had been beaten with many stripes, and as a seditious man, had been led through the city riding on a mangy camel. The same man, going around the cities of Palestine, compelled them to choose bishops for themselves. One of the latter was even Peter, of Iberian origin, who had been entrusted with the reins of the episcopate of the city of the Gazaeans, which is named Majuma.

To such a degree did this happen that a certain Athanasius, who had been enrolled in the order of deacons, having gathered the courage to speak in the midst of the church at Jerusalem, while the abomination of iniquity sat upon the most holy throne, uttered this noble cry: "Cease, Theodosius, from committing such carnage; cease to wage war against Christ, and from casting out his flock like a robber from the divine sheepfold; and at last, finally, recognize our goodwill toward our true and genuine shepherd; for we have not learned to follow a stranger, nor to listen to a foreign voice." When he had said these things, he was seized by the satellites of Theodosius and dragged out of the church. ^C And having endured every kind of insolent petulance and torture for Christ's sake, and having been cut by many lashes, he finally lost his life by the sword. His corpse was dragged by the feet through the whole city, and finally was thrown out as food for dogs.

Furthermore, Dorotheus, who was administering the province of Palestine, having received it from the emperor, and who was at that time occupied in the region of Moab in a war against barbarians, when he learned what was being done in the city in this manner, hurried with the utmost celerity with a strong army to deal with the present state of affairs. ^D Yet the satellites of Theodosius and Eudocia, having shut the gates, did not admit him before he had promised them that he too would defect to their side, just as the entire order of monks and the whole multitude of the city had done. Thus for twenty months the baneful Theodosius exercised tyranny over the see of Jerusalem. When Marcian learned of this matter, he was ejected by Dorotheus; though he did indeed attempt to capture him (for such was the emperor's command), he was unable to do so, because that plague had fled to Mount Sinai. For which reason very many who had favored his cause were subjected to torments, not only common men, but also those who, on account of

^A their having been listed in the monastic order, had been held in high regard. After the flight of Theodosius, Juvenal, having been restored to his throne, immediately stripped of their dignity all whom he [Theodosius] had ordained. Many other sad things, moreover, coming from here and there, befell the multitude, which the mind—at the prompting of the envious and God-hated demon—suggested to him through the changing of a single letter: so that, by the pronunciation of one letter, it was permitted to introduce something entirely different. So much so, that it was thought that by many a change was effected, and that the sense was carried into a meaning contrary, diametrically opposed, and that one was being destroyed by the other. For he who confesses Christ *in* two natures says that he is *from* two, inasmuch as, while confessing Christ in divinity and humanity, he says that he is composed of divinity and humanity; and he who says *from* two necessarily brings in the confession *in* two, for if he says Christ is from divinity and humanity, he confesses that he exists in divinity and humanity, with neither the flesh being changed into divinity nor the divinity passing over into flesh: from which that ineffable union exists, so that through the expression "from two," the expression "in two" is appropriately understood here, and through "in two," "from two," and neither is left behind by the other; seeing that, according to the customary way of thinking, not only is the whole perceived from the parts, but the whole is also perceived in the parts. And yet, men, by a certain habit regarding the glory of God, have thought these things to be thus separated from one another, or [have been] preoccupied with such a desire, and [have become] deranged in every concept, or [have refused] to come to the assent of that which is. Because of which the confusions I have mentioned arose. And these things, in this way, occurred both in Alexandria and in Palestine. ^B

CHAPTER X

Concerning the famine and plague simultaneously that attacked the cities of the East; and how the earth of its own accord brought forth fruits in the following year.

At the same times, there was an immense drought, and a famine and plague simultaneously in Phrygia, Galatia, and Cappadocia; and the calamity progressed clearly even as far as Cilicia itself, so that the inhabitants of the regions we have mentioned, in the greatest penury, reached such straits—as needs were lacking—that they used forbidden, unusual, and deadly foodstuffs. And as the famine prevailed to such an extent, men, their diet having been changed, fell into maladies. For their bodies, on account of the greatest inflammations and the tumor that was conceived, first lost their sight; then, with a cough supervening, they died on the third day. ^C Against that plague there was nowhere any help. But as for those who survived it, of whom there were very few, the all-preserving Providence brought them aid and relieved their hunger. For in that year when the fruits did not grow, it nourished them with aerial food, just as it is recorded to have done formerly for the ancient Israelites, showering down upon them what is called manna. In the following year, however, it brought it about that the fruits grew of their own accord. These evils spread also through the land of Palestine ^D and many other regions; and the calamity

^A traveled, as it were, step by step, throughout the whole land of the East.

CAPUT XI.

Concerning the end of Valentinian, who ruled in the West; and concerning his wife Eudoxia and her children; and how Genserich took the city of Rome; and concerning those who ruled in Rome by succession after Valentinian.

Such were the evils that encompassed the East; but in the West, other evils occurred no less serious than those mentioned. For Aetius, who governed the city of Rome, ended his life in a wretched manner; and the emperor of the Western realm, Valentinian, held fast to the correct dogmas of the Church, as we have already said above, though in the daily habits of his life he sinned ^B greatly. For, dwelling with a wife who was beautiful of face and adorned in other respects, Eudoxia, the daughter of the younger Theodosius, he foully profaned foreign marriages. Frequently, too, by holding open converse with those who practiced curious arts, he brought his life to a most foul end. For the son of that Maximus who, having slain the emperor Gratian, seized the tyranny and was afterward killed by the great Theodosius—this man, namesake of his grandfather, holding the primary dignity among the patricians, laid a snare for the emperor Valentinian because he had defiled his wife. Fearing Aetius, who governed the imperial hall (for he stood against his designs), he first slandered him to the emperor on the charge of high treason. ^C When, for this reason, the latter had been wretchedly put to death, Maximus, entering the palace with no effort, killed Valentinian, and took his wife as his own, and by offering much violence, defiled her; for by the very things through which one sins, by those same things is one chastened. Afterward, he even usurped the empire for himself. But Eudoxia, affected by such a great insult, because she bore such an unexpected infamy with difficulty, decided to cast every die, as the saying goes, so that she might avenge herself upon the author of the injury, who had dared to commit such a crime against her own husband, and furthermore, to pollute her nobility and freedom. For a woman is accustomed to be fierce, and she is in no way ^D bent or persuaded to immediately lay aside her grief, if the chastity which she strives to keep is taken from her by force, and that, too, by him who had simultaneously destroyed the former guardian of her chastity, dignity, and honor. Eudoxia, therefore, harboring these things in her mind, since she thought there was no hope of aid from Byzantium, because her father Theodosius had long since departed this life, and because for a very long time the divine Pulcheria had held the empire there—who had not yet laid aside the anger she had conceived against her mother Eudocia—sent a vast amount of gifts to Libya to Genserich, and asked him to come to her aid in such a great extremity and to free her from the wickedness of Maximus; and she offered him hope, if only he would move,

^A that he would attain the Roman empire, which it promised would readily surrender to him.

Thus, after Maximus had not even possessed the tyranny for a year, he was killed. Genserich, however, arrived with great forces and captured Rome. Being a barbarian in mind and unstable and fickle, he did not keep his pledge to Eudoxia, but after plundering the city and setting its public buildings on fire, he departed and returned to Libya, taking with him Eudoxia and her two daughters, Eudocia and Placidia, as captives. He also carried off many ecclesiastical and precious vessels, among which were not a few Hebrew vessels, which Vespasian and Titus had taken to Rome after they had ravaged Jerusalem. Genserich then united the elder of the daughters, Eudocia, in marriage to his son Huneric; but having learned that Placidia had been betrothed to the patrician Olybrius, a leader of the Roman senate—who was at that time a refugee in Byzantium when the city was taken—he sent her, together with her mother Eudoxia, with great ceremony and a royal retinue to Byzantium, intending to appease Marcian, who had been greatly enraged against him, both because he had burned Rome and because he had so insulted the empresses. Olybrius, by the command of Marcian, took Placidia as his wife.

After Maximus, Avitus held power in Rome ^B for eight months. When he ended his life by famine, Majorian held the empire for two years. After he was treacherousy killed by Recimer, the commander of the Roman military, Severus reigned there for three years. After him came Anthemius, to whom Marcian had betrothed his own daughter, at the request of the Western Romans through an embassy. When he, too—being a most Christian man—was killed by treachery, Olybrius was proclaimed emperor by Recimer. After him succeeded Glycerius; and after he had held that dignity for five years, Nepos was entrusted with the rule, having made Glycerius bishop in the city of Salona in Dalmatia. But Orestes also deprived this man of the throne of power, ^C to whom his son Romulus, who was also called Augustulus, succeeded; he became the last emperor of the Romans, one thousand three hundred and three years having passed since Romulus, the first king. After him, Odoacer seized the Roman government, having stripped himself of the imperial and royal title and being the first to call himself king; it was at this time that Leo the Great departed from this life. ^D

CHAPTER XII.

The Empress Eudocia, while still residing in Palestine, having been informed of the affairs of her daughter Eudoxia, and of her husband and their children, was cast into the depths of anxiety. Accordingly, having moved every stone, as the proverb has it, she was reconciled to Pulcheria through the agency of the patricians Valerius and Olybrius; and she also requested of her that she might bring aid to those who were in captivity. And when peace had been made between Gaiseric and Marcian, Gaiseric sent Eudoxia and Placidia to Byzantium, at the request of Pulcheria, as I have said. But Eudocia the younger remained with her husband Huneric in Africa, with whom she lived for sixteen years, and bore him a son, Hilderic. Furthermore, as the association with her husband, who professed the Arian religion, was little pleasing to her, she escaped from his hands by a ruse, and, imitating her grandmother Eudocia, she departed to the holy places, and long afterwards she kissed her tomb. There she herself lived for a short time, but being laid to rest in the blessed sleep, she was also placed in a magnificent monument beside the tomb of her grandmother. Whatever property she had, she consecrated it to the poor and to the holy Resurrection of Christ.

CHAPTER XIII.

Pulcheria Augusta, as soon as she was reconciled to Eudocia, exhorted her brothers and daughters to send frequent letters to her, so that she might depart from the opinion of Eutyches and Dioscorus, and might choose to communicate with the holy and catholic Church. Eudocia, having received letters of this kind, and as the blessed Bassa was also always troubling her to think the same as she did in matters of religion, fearing that she might not be acting according to the will of God, thought that she ought to refer this matter to the God-bearing Fathers, that they might instruct her with certainty concerning the true worship of piety. Accordingly, having summoned the chorepiscopus Anastasius, she wrote through him to Saint Symeon the Stylite, who at that time was illuminating the world with his virtues. To him she also revealed her conscience in a letter written with her own hand, promising that she would embrace whatever he decided. That holy man wrote back to her in these words: "Know, my child, that the devil, seeing the wealth of your virtues, sought you out to sift you like wheat. And that destructive Theodosius, having become a vessel and instrument of that evil one, darkened your God-loving soul and troubled it. But take courage; for your faith shall not fail. But I indeed have wondered greatly at this, that while you had the fountain within yourself, you were ignorant of it, and sought to draw water from afar. You have, therefore, the God-bearing Euthymius; follow, therefore, his instructions."

doctrines and exhortations and you will be saved.” ^A Having learned these things, Eudocia did not behave with negligence; but having sent for the holy Euthymius, she summoned him to the tower which she had recently constructed. And when he arrived, she was filled with unspeakable joy, and throwing herself at his feet, she cried out with a loud voice, “Now I know that the Lord has visited my unworthy self with the grace of your presence.” The holy man bestowed a blessing upon her and ordered her to be more attentive henceforth. “For you must know,” he said, “that the grievous and harsh things that have happened to you have come about for no other reason than that you have sustained communion with the impious Theodosius. Therefore, abandon entirely this irrational contentiousness, and concerning the three holy and universal councils—the one first gathered at Nicaea against the impious Arius, the one at Constantinople against Macedonius, ^B and the first one at Ephesus against Nestorius—you must accept as well the definition recently proclaimed by the council gathered at Chalcedon. And having rejected the communion of Dioscorus, join yourself to Juvenal of Jerusalem, and do what is customary for you to do in the Church.” Having said these things, and having sent up a prayer to God for her, he returned to his own monastery. Eudocia, for her part, sought the holy city and performed in the Catholic Church what was fitting. A great multitude, both of the common people and of the monastic order, who had followed the error of Theodosius, partook of the holy communion along with her. Those who chose not to follow her were still receiving the customary gifts of Eudocia, but only for the sake of the affection she felt, not for the sake of an agreement and union of sentiment and opinion. But after Eudocia had ^C submitted herself to the universal Church, she stripped off and cast away the inclination toward their wicked and erroneous opinions. And not long afterward, having left this dust behind on earth, she migrated to God, as I have said, with a happy and blessed passing.

CAPUT XIV. Concerning the pious works of Augusta Pulcheria; and concerning the three greatest temples which she built for the Theotokos—that of the holy casket in the Chalcopratia, that of the Hodegetria, and that of the Blachernae; and what Juvenal related concerning the holy dormition of the most holy Theotokos, and her funeral wrappings.

Pulcheria, the most celebrated Augusta, performed many illustrious deeds throughout her life; she established many public hostels and shelters for the poor, as well as cemeteries for strangers and other evidences of her pious mind, among which is the temple of the martyr Laurence. ^D She also erected from their very foundations three immense houses for the Mother of God. One of these is in the Chalcopratia, bearing the name of the holy casket, in which she treasured the girdle of the Mother of God, of which we made mention in the second chapter of the book immediately preceding this one. In this temple, she ordained that a vigil and supplication with lanterns and lamps should take place every fourth day of the week, and she herself would go there on foot, accompanied by light, which the lamp provides.

^A Another is that of the Hodegetria, in which is deposited the image of the Mother of the Word sent from Antioch, which the divine Apostle Luke painted with his own hands, while she was still living, and—as she looked upon the design—infused her grace into the likeness. This image was first in the place called the Tribunal, where the miracles that occur even to this day were performed. In that church he also arranged for a vigil and intercession to be performed every third day of the week, a custom that is observed even until now.

A third church, decorated with incredible beauty and materials of every kind, was consecrated to the Mother of the Word, known as the Blachernae. Pulcheria, having adorned it with lavish beauty throughout the time when Marcian held the scepter of the Roman Empire, exerted great effort to find the most venerable, immaculate, and God-bearing body of that same [Mother of God], so that it might be deposited in that church. She therefore summoned Juvenal, Archbishop of Jerusalem, and the bishops from Palestine who had come for the sake of the Council of Chalcedon, and asked them whether the divine temple of the Theotokos in Palestine, which is truly extraordinary, and her divine body, were still resting in the tomb where they had been placed at the beginning. She wished to have it transferred from there and brought into this temple, so that it might be the protection and fortress of the imperial city. For, since both the city itself and the temple were dedicated to her, she said it was right that her sacred body should not be absent from them.

In response to these words, Juvenal replied that the passing of the holy and ever-virgin Theotokos Mary is in no way recorded in the holy and divinely inspired Scriptures, but that it is accepted by a most ancient and entirely truthful tradition: that as her end approached, the Apostles, who had been scattered to the ends of the earth for the sake of preaching, were suddenly brought to Jerusalem, raised upon clouds. By a more divine vision, a hymn of divine powers was heard resonating. ^B And again, in an ineffable way, without noise, the Word and her Son descended to receive her divine spirit into His hands. Her most godlike body, having been carried out by angelic and apostolic hymnody, was placed in a tomb in the region of Gethsemane, and for three days the hymn of the angels remained in that place, honoring the Theotokos with unceasing hymns. When that ceased, one of the choir of the Apostles, who had been absent, arrived after the third day, and, having urged that holy choir to open the tomb so that he might also pay the final honor due to the Mother of the Word, he prayed with great earnestness. When the seal was removed and the sepulcher opened, her sacred body was found to be entirely missing; however, her burial wrappings remained in their place, untouched and inviolate, just as if they had only just been vacated by that body, gleaming with an ineffable fragrance. ^C More struck by this, and having sealed the tomb again, they departed, astonished at the paradox of the event, concluding only that which it was proper to conclude, namely, that the One who was born of her had, by His own power... ^D

^A willed—ineffably and incomprehensibly—to take on flesh and be born, He who is the Lord of glory, and then, after the ineffable birth, to preserve her virginity inviolate; and that He Himself, after her departure from this life, deigned to honor her supernaturally immaculate, untainted, and most holy body, even before the general and common resurrection of all, with incorruption, and by angelic translation removed it to certain places above the heavens and to the incorruptible regions of the celestial mansions, bestowing upon her, as a singular prize, what He did not grant to the rest of mankind—even to those who had highly distinguished themselves—namely, to be raised up thus. There were present at that time with the apostles the most holy Timothy, Dionysius the Areopagite, and the great and wise Hierotheus in divine matters, just as Dionysius himself says in those things written by him to Timothy concerning the blessed Hierotheus, speaking as follows: "For we also, along with our God-inspired hierarchs, both I myself, as you know, and many of our holy brethren, had gathered for the sight of the life-originating and Theotokos-bearing ^B body." There was present also James, the brother of the Lord, and Peter, the supreme and most venerable pinnacle of the theologians. Then it seemed good, after the viewing, that all the hierarchs should, each as he was able, sing a hymn to the infinitely powerful goodness of the divine strength, and after the divine words, all surpassed the other sacred mystagogues, as you know, being wholly transported, wholly going out of himself, and experiencing the communion with the things being hymned. And he was heard and known and seen by all as a God-inspired hymn, and was judged a divine cantor of hymns. And what should I tell you concerning the things theologized there? And if I have not altogether forgotten myself, I know that I have often heard from you parts of those divinely-inspired hymns as you sang them." When Juvenalis had said these things, the princes themselves asked him to send that holy tomb to them, properly sealed, along with the sacred garments; and it, having been sent thus by Juvenalis, they consecrated ^C and deposited with pious hands in the great temple of the Blachernae which had been built by them, very close to the holy and divine table, while Marcian was still alive. For the venerable garment was brought not long after, under Leo, and was placed in the round temple which Leo the Great built, as we shall say when we come to recount his history.

Chapter V. On the death of Pulcheria and Marcian; and how, after him, Leo the Great was proclaimed Emperor of the Romans.

^A The blessed Pulcheria, in the sixth year of the reign of Marcian, having left behind her great praise and glory, and having preserved her virginity intact even to the very end, departed this life after having done many and very great good works, and having dedicated all her substance to the temples of God and to the poor. Marcian accepted this donation with favor and distributed her properties, which were very great. She was buried in the temple of the Holy Apostles. Not two years having passed in their entirety, Marcian also ceased to be among men—a man who exercised much piety and holiness. For he went on foot in the public processions that were held, and distributed vast sums of money to those in need. He was as Christian as any man who ever lived, and he left his reign to all men as a monument of a life lived piously. While he reigned, there was a tranquil peace in the Roman domain, such that those days were considered to be a golden age. However, when he had passed to a better life, by a common calculation of the senate, Leo, who was from the tribunes and a Thracian by race, was proclaimed Emperor of the Romans and crowned with the diadem by the patriarch Anatolius. He was also called "Macelles," because he immediately put to death Aspar, the greatest of the military commanders, who had raised him to the empire, and his son Ardaburius, on account of their plotting against the empire.

Chapter VI. How, a sedition having arisen again in Alexandria among those who did not accept the decrees of the holy fourth synod, Proterius, Bishop of Alexandria, was killed and dragged by the feet through the city, at the instigation and by the treachery of Timothy Aelurus, who occupied the episcopal see; and how, after he had been expelled by Leo, the Alexandrians elected another Timothy, surnamed Salophaciolus; and how, on the death of Anatolius, Gennadius obtained the see of Constantinople.

^C The plebs of Alexandria, and even the leading men who were addicted to Dioscorus, did not accept the decree of the Council of Chalcedon; and, having learned of the death of Marcian, they were once again incited with great fury against Proterius, showing the greatest fervor in driving him out. The populace everywhere is, in truth, easily driven to anger, and it seizes upon any matter that chance offers as a spark and kindling for tumult. The Alexandrian plebs is no less prone and ready for ^D things of this kind, having been collected from the countless multitude that has flowed in from everywhere. Therefore, it acts beyond all reason and is carried away by a demonic impulse. For they say that it is free for anyone there, having seized upon whatever cause and occasion at random, to quickly excite the people to sedition with certain intemperances, and to lead them wherever he wishes. And the people are in great part given to jokes and playful things, as Herodotus says in writing about Amasis. This is the nature of the Alexandrian people in this regard; but as for its other qualities, they are not...

^A altogether to be despised. Since, therefore, the people were carried away by such an impetus of anger, and having seized the opportunity of the time—the fact that Dionysius, the commander of the Eastern military legions, was in the interior of Egypt—they decreed the elevation of someone named Timothy, surnamed Aelurus (the Cat), to the episcopal throne. He had led a monastic life and had subsequently become a presbyter of the Church of Alexandria. And because he inveighed fiercely against the synod at Chalcedon and was adept at stirring up trouble, and because he pursued the episcopacy with extraordinary desire, he smeared himself with soot and black coloring and, by night, walked about the cells of the monks, calling out each of them by name through a hollow, pithy reed. ^B When they heard the calls, he would pretend that he himself was one of the ministering spirits, and he would say that he had been sent from heaven to tell everyone to withdraw from the communion of Proterius and to raise Timothy Aelurus to the throne of the high priesthood. And indeed, while Proterius was still holding the bishopric and performing the priestly office, those who were part of his faction were gathered in the Great Church—which is called by the name of Caesar—and they appointed Aelurus himself as patriarch of Alexandria. Eusebius, the bishop of Pelusium, ordained him, along with Peter, who was from Iberia and held the oversight of Majuma, a town in the prefecture of Gaza; both of them had had their priestly dignity taken away from them by Proterius long before. When the general Dionysius learned what had happened, he drove with all speed and came to Alexandria, striving to extinguish the fire of sedition that was still fresh and had just been fanned. ^C Timothy, fearing that he might be stripped of the throne, incited certain of the seditious Alexandrian populace against Proterius. Being full of wrath and spirit, they attacked, and when he had fled to the most holy baptistery, they—(oh, divine judgment!)—assaulted so great a high priest, driving their swords into his vitals in order to fulfill the command of Timothy. Then, having attached a rope to him, they dragged him everywhere along the public highway, insulting the corpse like madmen, mocking it with contumely, and shouting that Proterius had been killed. And after they had dragged him throughout the whole city, they finally handed him over to the fire and scattered the remaining ashes into the air, and did not even refrain from tasting his raw viscera—for they were not even repulsed by this act. Together with Proterius, six others underwent the same struggle. When this matter was reported to the most pious emperor Leo, he did not consider it necessary to assemble a synod again, but sent circular letters to the churches throughout the world; inserting his own opinion into the letters, he ordered every bishop to write back to him his own judgment, both as to whether they wished to follow the decrees of the synod held at Chalcedon, and also as to what they thought concerning the ordination of Aelurus, which had taken place as has been described; whether they condemned it as having proceeded less than legitimately, or would permit him to hold that bishopric. Leo wrote these things thus to all the bishops everywhere. But they...

^A all together, although separated by the distance of their locations, yet since they were over a thousand, confirmed the Synod of Chalcedon with a universal vote, and very bravely cast their ballots in favor of what had been determined there. And all, with a common vote, stripped Timotheus of his priesthood, as one who had leaped upon the throne unworthily, explicitly rejecting him. Upon being thus condemned by vote, he was cast out of Alexandria and exiled to Gangra, whither also his teacher Dioscorus had been deported. It is said, indeed, that this Aelurus corrupted many of the writings of the divine Cyril that had not yet been published, by sprinkling them with his own adulterated doctrines. Upon his removal, the Alexandrians chose another Timotheus as bishop of their own church, a man who embraced the same opinion as Proterius; some called him Basilicum, others Salophaciolus. Because the populace had raised a tumult on his account, he resided in Canopus. At the same time, Anatolius having departed both from life and his bishopric in the queen of cities, Gennadius was substituted in his place; and to him later succeeded Acacius, who had presided over the orphanage in the city of Constantine. ^B

CHAPTER XVII.

A suppliant petition of the Egyptian bishops and clergy concerning the affairs of their churches, and concerning Proterius and Timotheus.

^C Indeed, it will not be troublesome or difficult for me to append here the petition sent to Leo by the bishops of Egypt and the clergy of Alexandria, which comprises almost the entire history of Proterius, and also the circular letters of Leo. The petition of these men was conceived in these words: ^D "To the most pious, most Christian, and by God declared victor, triumpher, and Augustus Leo, the petition of all the bishops of your Egyptian diocese, and of the clergy of the church of the great city of Alexandria. Not undeservedly, O most holy of all emperors, do you, who were given to this world as a certain gift by heavenly grace, proceed daily to take thought for the republic according to God." And after other things: "When peaceful calm among the orthodox and rightly thinking people was among us and the Alexandrians, Timotheus again separated and cut himself off from the universal Church and the faith immediately after the holy Synod of Chalcedon, while yet holding the dignity of a presbyter, with only four or five bishops and a few monks, infected with the small opinion and heresy of Apollinaris and his followers. For which cause they were canonically and legitimately deposed by Proterius of divine memory and the entire Egyptian council, so that they deservedly experienced the emperor's indignation and condemnation to exile for the sake of the land." And after a few things: "Upon learning of the migration to God through the holy passing of the emperor Marcian, as one who lived by his own will, released from the laws, he impudently railed against him with blasphemous and reviling words, and the holy oecumenical"

^A synod at Chalcedon, he condemned with a forehead altogether brazen, and drawing to himself a multitude of venal and disorderly people, he began a war against the sacred canons, the ecclesiastical constitutions, the commonwealth, and the laws themselves; and he cast himself into the holy Church of God, which at that time had as its pastor and teacher our most holy father and archbishop, Proterius, who was performing the customary assemblies and sending up prayers in supplications to our common Savior Christ for your pious empire and your Christ-loving palace. And after a few things: And when one day had passed, and the most God-loving Proterius, as is the custom, was in his episcopal residence, Timothy, having taken with him two bishops and clerics who had been lawfully deposed and condemned to exile, as we have said, and having received his consecration from these two—while not one of the orthodox bishops of the Egyptian administration was present, as is the custom for such ordinations of the bishop of Alexandria—seized ^B, as he thought, the pontifical chair, daring manifestly to commit adultery against the Church, which had its own spouse who was performing the divine service therein and was canonically and lawfully fulfilling his office. And after other things: The blessed man could do nothing else but give place to wrath, according to what is written, and take refuge in the most holy baptistery, fleeing the assault of those who were pressing upon him to commit murder. In which place even to barbarians and all wild men, who are ignorant of the veneration and worship of that place, and the grace springing forth from it, a fear comes. But those men who were striving to bring the counsel and undertaking of Timothy to its end, suffering him not to be safe even in that uncontaminated temple, neither reverenced the religion of the place nor the time. For ^C the assembly of the saving feast of Pascha was being celebrated. But neither did they shudder at the priestly function, which acts as a mediator between God and men. They killed, therefore, the innocent man, and cruelly slaughtered him together with six others; and they dragged his remains, wounded on every side, through almost all parts of the city in a beast-like manner, and treating him shamefully, they tortured without mercy the body that was no longer feeling the wounds, tearing it limb from limb; and not even sparing him from the tasting of his insides like wild beasts—him whom they had but recently deemed to have as a mediator between God and men—and burning to fire the body that remained of him, they sent the dust from it to the winds, surpassing all savagery of beasts. Of all which evils the author ^D, if it pleases God, was the wise Timothy. Moreover, it pleased Zacharias the rhetor, when writing about these things in his history, to relate them otherwise: namely, that the tumults in Alexandria were stirred up rather by Proterius, and that these things were not done by the populace, but by some from the military ranks. And these things are verified by a certain letter of Timothy sent to Leo, for which a certain person sent by Leo was dispatched to inflict punishment. And

Leo sent forth circular letters to the bishops everywhere, and to Anatolius, the bishop of Constantinople, and to those excelling in the monastic life, inquiring about the Synod of Chalcedon, as has been said, and also concerning the ordination of Timothy; dispatching along with these the petitions of the Egyptian bishops, both from the party ^A of Proterius and from the faction sent by Timothy. These circular letters of Leo were written to this effect:

CHAPTER XVIII.

Leo’s circular letter sent to Anatolius the bishop and the rest, concerning the Synod of Chalcedon and against Timothy Aelurus.

^B “Imperator Caesar Leo, pious, victor, triumphator, maximus, ever-venerable Augustus, to Anatolius the bishop. It was indeed in the prayers of our piety that all the orthodox and most holy churches, and also all the cities under the Roman Empire, should enjoy the profoundest peace, and that nothing might occur that could disturb their state and tranquility. ^C But we believe that your holiness already knows what has recently occurred among the Alexandrians. But in order that you may be more fully informed concerning all matters, and what cause has existed for such great tumult and confusion, we have sent to your piety [copies of] the prayers which the most religious bishops and clergy from the city of Alexandria and the Egyptian diocese have offered to our piety against Timothy in the city of Constantinople; and likewise [copies of] the supplicant libelli which those who arrived at our serenity from Alexandria as messengers of Timothy delivered to us, that your holiness may more clearly understand what has been done by the aforementioned Timothy—whom the people of Alexandria, and the magistrates who govern there, and the citizens and the shipmasters, or captains of ships, ^D seek as their bishop—and concerning other matters which the context of the petitions comprises; and further, concerning the Synod of Chalcedon, to which some by no means assent, as the appended libelli show. Therefore, let your piety summon immediately to itself all the orthodox and holy bishops who now happen to be staying in this imperial city, and also the most religious clergy; and having treated and deliberated on all things with care and faith, since the Alexandrian city is at this time disturbed, and its state and tranquility are of the greatest concern to us, signify to us your judgment concerning Timothy himself and the Council of Chalcedon, with all human fear, and favor, and hatred set aside, placing only the fear of the omnipotent God before your eyes. For you know that we shall all have to render an account to the immaculate Divinity concerning such a great matter. And that in this, regarding every matter...

having been perfectly instructed by your letters, we might be able to render the fitting decision. ^A

CAPUT XIX. Regarding Leo’s writing to the monks everywhere, and to Symeon the Stylite, on behalf of the fourth holy synod; and the letter of the holy Symeon on behalf of the holy synod.

Leo wrote to Anatolius and to the bishops everywhere in this manner. He also sent letters of a similar nature to the illustrious monks and to others ^B who were renowned for the sanctity of their lives, directing their characters toward the spiritual life. Among them, the most famous of all was that Symeon who was the first to conceive of standing upon a pillar, whom I have also mentioned before; and likewise Varadatus, and Jacob of Nisibis, of whom Theodoret also makes mention in his *Religious History*. Leo, the bishop of Rome, therefore, was the first to accept the synod held at Chalcedon and rejected the ordination of Timotheus as one not rightly performed. Emperor Leo sent this letter of Leo ^C to Timotheus Aelurus, with the Silentiarius serving as the intermediary. But Timotheus wrote back to the Emperor, rejecting the letter of Leo and condemning the Chalcedonian synod as much as possible. The remaining bishops acted in the same way as the Pope. Only Amphilochius of Side, writing to the emperors, condemned the ordination of Timotheus but did not at all accept the decree of the synod at Chalcedon. All these things were recorded in history by Zacharias the Rhetor, who also inserted the letter of Amphilochius into it. ^D Not only the bishops, but also Symeon of blessed memory sent two letters regarding these matters: one to the Emperor Leo, and another to Basil, the bishop of Antioch. Since the latter is shorter, I insert it into my work, containing these exact words:

«To my lord, the most pious and most holy, God-loving Basil, the archbishop, Symeon, a sinner and humble man, sends greetings in the Lord. Now it is fitting to say, Lord: *Blessed be God, who has not pushed away my prayer, nor His mercy from us sinners* (Ps. LXV, 20). For upon receiving the letters of your holiness, I marveled at the zeal and true piety of our God-loving Emperor toward the holy Fathers, and at the firm and stable faith of the same, which he has shown and continues to show. And this gift is not from us, as the holy Apostle also says (Eph. II, 8), but from God, who bestowed this readiness upon him through your prayers.» And after a few words: «Wherefore I too, a humble and base man, the abortive one among monks, have made known to his majesty my intention concerning the faith of the holy Fathers, who gathered to the number of six hundred and thirty at Chalcedon—in which I persist and by which I am confirmed, inasmuch as it was manifested by the Holy Spirit. For if, where two or three are gathered...

in his name, the Savior is in their midst, how could he have stood aside from such a great number of such holy Fathers, unless the Holy Spirit had been with them from the beginning?" And after other things: "Therefore, be strong and act with manly courage in true piety, just as did Jesus the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, among the Israelitic people. I pray you to greet in my words all the religious clergy who are under your holiness, and the blessed and most faithful people. For all these reasons, as has been said, Aelurus is indeed cast out of Alexandria, and another Timotheus, who was also called Salophaciolus, and who was from the party of Proterius, is brought into the church in his place." And so much for these things.

CAPUT XX.

Concerning the horrible earthquake which occurred under Leo, and the flood, and other calamities of the world: and of the dust which fell from the sky.

When Leo had now been reigning for ^B two years, a huge earthquake and shaking occurred to such an extent that although many ruins followed in all places, the entire city of Antioch was almost completely shaken. This slaughter was as a prelude to the evils that were to follow it, because the citizens themselves, being alien to divine laws, were like wild beasts in their spirits, and were driven by all manner of mindless intemperance. For the most grievous earthquake that ever visited the city of all those that occurred, struck in the five hundred and sixth year from its founding, on the fourteenth day of the month of September, at the fourth ^C hour of the night: six hundred and nineteen years after the earthquake which occurred there under Trajan, three hundred and forty-seven years having elapsed. For that one afflicted it in the one hundred and twenty-ninth year after the city was made free and autonomous. This one, however, oppressed it under Leo in the five hundred and sixth year, as has been discovered by the studious. And it demolished almost all of its houses, although it was very populous: so that there was no solitude in it, nor was any place uninhabitable or neglected. It had been most magnificently adorned, on account of the ambitious ^D liberality of many princes, who competed among themselves in constructing works there, and strove to surpass one another in glory. The imperial palaces, therefore, fell on top of one another: others escaped the danger, together with the nearby bath, which indeed freed the city from its former inconvenience, because the remaining baths had been hindered by a violent inundation. Also demolished were the porticoes that were before the imperial palaces, and the tetrapylon that was placed upon them. Furthermore, the tower before the gates of the Hippodrome, and some of the porticoes resting upon it. In the old city, however, it did not touch any house or portico at all. It shook, moreover, the baths of Trajan and Severus and Hadrian. Likewise, it threw down very many buildings and porticoes in the neighborhood that is called Ostracina, and also that which is called the Nympheum: all of which John the rhetor recounts most copiously in his histories. On account of this earthquake,

^A they say that the emperor remitted to the city the payments of the annual taxes, on account of the buildings that had been destroyed, and also contributed much from his own treasury to restore the public buildings. At the same time, Thrace and the Hellespont, and all of Ionia, and the islands that are called the Cyclades, were shaken; and many buildings in Cnidus and Cos collapsed. At Constantinople and in the province of Bithynia, immense rains continued into the third and fourth day, with waters falling from heaven in the manner of rivers; mountains fell into the plains, and the largest villages disappeared in the deluge. From the great quantity of debris, islands emerged in certain lakes, just as happened at Boana, which is nearest to Nicomedia. ^B And many other signs occurred, for signs were observed in the heavens: a cloud in the form of a trumpet was seen for forty days. At that time, ash also rained down from above on Constantinople, lying upon the roof tiles to the height of almost a palm's breadth, as the clouds were changed into fire; this was the most evident omen of the conflagration that was soon to come—so that all, going out with trembling, prayed to God, saying that it was God’s will to rain down fire and consume everything. But as He was moved to mercy, it was extinguished, and the ash descended to earth. Procopius of Caesarea, I believe, mentions this elsewhere, writing that it had its origin from Mount Vesuvius; and when it had been produced in great quantity, and raised aloft by a violent wind, it fell wherever the wind chanced to cease; perhaps also God, where there was need of punishment, cast it down by carrying it aloft. ^C Because of the aforementioned earthquakes that were pressing upon him, the emperor Leo, fearing for himself, pitched his tent around Saint Mamas, departing from the city for six months, thinking that in this way he would escape the divine wrath.

CHAPTER XXI.

On the Constantinopolitan fire.

Then also a great fire occurred at Constantinople, which inflicted upon it a greater calamity than the earthquake. The beginning of the evil happened in the maritime part of the city, which the locals call the Bosporus, or "crossing of the ox." An evil demon, having assumed the likeness of a working woman at the hours of night work, brought a lamp to the market of all kinds of goods to purchase some salted fish, or perhaps a woman truly agitated by a destructive demon—for I cannot say which, as both are reported—had brought it. The lamp was put down ^D and the woman herself departed. Fire, having caught from I know not what tow, immediately sent forth a great flame; it at once consumed the building, and from there, creeping to the neighboring structures, it spread in all directions, devouring the nearest houses with the greatest ease. And it did not spare only those things which are easily flammable, but even those homes which were built of hewn stone of great width and height. And into the fourth day it pitilessly kept consuming the

^A things it encountered, manifesting itself as a power ^B both unassailable and in every way superior; so that the very middle of the whole city, from the northern region even unto the southern, was entirely consumed, extending five stades in length and fourteen in breadth, so that nothing remained in between, neither of the public or private porticoes, nor of the buildings; but it consumed even columns and the very nature of the stone, hardened though it was, and the material, just like brushwood or things easily lit. ^B And the evil spread from the northern part, where the naval arsenals of the city are, from the strait called the Bosporus, up to the old shrine which bore the name of Apollo; and from the southern region, from the harbor of Julian even unto the famous edifice of its temple, which is called the Concordia. The place between these ^C was from the Forum of Constantine even unto what is called the Forum of Taurus. Thus, those buildings which were in between what we have described became a deformed and miserable spectacle. For whatever had been constructed to a sublime height and form, and adorned with incomparable magnificence, and had been for the greatest public and private utility, all suddenly resolved into heaps and vast, impassable chasms, with materials of every kind piled into one mass, and the appearance of things so utterly changed, that not even the inhabitants of the houses themselves could discern what had been there, or in what place each of the former works had stood.

CHAPTER XXII.

The fire also seized the temple of the Holy Resurrection, which the celebrated Marcian had erected at his own expense, and likewise the temple of Holy Peace, which is situated by the sea. For at that time this illustrious man flourished, excelling in new works, and being most distinguished for his humanity and mercy, and having progressed in virtue to such a degree that he even raised the dead. But he also constructed other famous and magnificent temples for God. Now, when the fire had begun to seize the temple of the Holy Resurrection, ^D he became an obstacle to it. For as the creeping flame was already drawing near to the church, he took the holy Gospel into his hands, climbed upon the tiles to the roof of the temple, and besought God with prayers and tears. The fire, however, approaching him, as if it respected the holy man, rose aloft and, curving itself like an arch to a great extent, leapt over the church, leaving it entirely untouched. At this same time there also flourished Daniel, who for a very long time endured his station upon a column at the Anaplus. He came forth from the Mandra of Symeon, helped by whose prayers and exhortations, he undertook extraordinary struggles and an exercise of piety beyond the capacity of nature,

^A and being proclaimed by the Author of the contest with abundant glory, he received strength against the soul-destroying demons and against all manner of diseases. By reason of this, the emperor, often coming to him in humble attire, was struck with awe, and would ask for his blessing and share in his prayers. The emperor also, in his zeal, constructed magnificent buildings near the column, and founded a church and a dwelling for the holy monks around it; he elevated the column itself, and became in all things a benefactor to the holy man. During the fire which happened at that time, Daniel finally descended from his column, came into the city, and in his presence the fire was immediately extinguished and ceased. ^B And under Basiliscus, when he was subverting the religion and rejecting the synod at Chalcedon, Daniel, moved by zeal, again descended, held ecclesiastical assemblies with Acacius, the bishop of Constantinople, and taking all the monastic order along with a crowd of the common people, he approached Basiliscus and spoke to the emperor with great boldness. The same was done also by Olympius, the most ascetic. At that time flourished also Auxentius, formerly of the Scholarians, living the life of a naked monk on the mountain that is opposite Byzantium, as I have previously mentioned. He descended from there, was present at the synod, and contributed much weight to the orthodox dogma. Among the renowned ascetics were Varadatus and the one called Jacobus of Nisibis. How he occupied himself with a virtuous way of life, he showed by what he did concerning the Greek girls washing in the fountain; for those who disobeyed his word were turned gray. And the fountain immediately became dry, which, after he had prayed, he caused to flow again, though he left the maidens gray for the rest of their lives. It is necessary to know, however, that this is not that Jacobus who wrote against the encyclical letters; for that one was in the times of Constantius. But this one flourished in the present time, being great in wonders and extraordinary miracles, as Theodoret says in his *Philotheos Historia*, for whom also Theodoret had prepared a sarcophagus for burial. It happened that Theodoret died first, but nonetheless the great Jacobus was buried in it. ^C Gennadius, the steward of the church of Constantinople, ordained Marcian, whom we mentioned, as economus of the church, for he had formerly been of the heresy of the Cathari, or Purists, but had returned to the Church. As soon as he became economus, he arranged that the offerings made in each of the churches of the various places were to be carried off to the local clergy, whereas up to that time all such gifts were brought to the universal Church. At that time also, Leo the first issued a law that the Lord’s Day should be kept as a day of rest by all, and be considered a day of leisure and veneration, as also it seemed good to the holy apostles; and that those enrolled in the clergy should be judged only by the prefect of the praetorium. ^D

Chapter XXIII.

While this Gennadius was exercising the episcopate, a certain painter, having dared to portray the Savior in the habit and form of Jove, received the reward of his crime. For his hands withered; but when he publicly confessed this sin, Gennadius restored them. ^B It is worth noting, however, that it is truer, as we have gathered from the historians, that our Savior had hair that was softly flowing and slightly curled, and less dense. This same Gennadius wrote a letter to the martyr Eleutherius concerning a certain cleric of his, whom he accused of living dissolutely, composed in these words: "O holy martyr of God Eleutherius, your soldier leads a disordered life: wherefore either he must be corrected by you, or you must be rejected by the Church." That cleric died immediately. The same Gennadius ordained no one who had not first carefully held the Psalter in his mouth. In his episcopate, a certain Studius, an illustrious man, arrived at Constantinople from Rome, and erected a temple to the divine Forerunner, into which he brought monks from the domicile of those who are called sleepless (akkoimetoi). The most divine Marcellus had built their domicile, in which hymns were sung to God continuously by night and day, their monastic fellowship being divided for this reason into three groups. In this monastery, John the Calybite also lived as a monk. ^C At that time, Timocles and Anthimus, poets of Troparia, also flourished, each possessing his own fellowships. And those who approved the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon frequented the assembly of Anthimus, who also instituted vigils among them. But those who were hostile in spirit toward him followed Timocles. I shall also recount another marvelous thing that happened to Gennadius. For as he was standing by night before the altar of the most holy sacrifice and pouring out prayers to God for the world, a certain demonic phantom appeared: being repelled by him with the sign of the cross, it replied to him in a human voice: that while he lived, it would depart and remain quiet, but afterward it would disturb the Church in every way. Gennadius, fearing this, after he had prayed most earnestly to God, migrated from this life. ^D Acacius the orphanotrophus, or curator of orphans, received the throne. Then it also happened that two bishops, of whom one was infected with the madness of Arius and was most instructed in the art of speaking and disputing, while the other was most adorned with virtue, religion, and the true faith, contended concerning the doctrine of religion. Furthermore, it seemed best to the orthodox one, who thought rightly, that, leaving behind the contention of words, they should descend to the matter itself and explore the truth; namely, that a great pyre being kindled, they should cast themselves into the fire. When the Arian refused this, the orthodox one committed himself to the fire and, having remained unharmed by it, from within it conferred with the impious man and held a dispute. And a certain Jewish archisynagogos having been caught with two boys—a disturbance having occurred, of which he was the cause—was cruelly tormented by the prefect, with many present at what was being done. Being examined with many tortures, he cried out nothing else but, "O God!"

of Saint Sergius, help me. Saint Sergius, you know." The judges, however, thinking the Hebrew was pretending these things, condemned him to the fire, saying what had been predicted. And in the midst of the fire, two horsemen clothed in bright robes appeared, and for many hours kept him unharmed by the fire. The multitude ran in and snatched him away. From that point on, upon being baptized, he was named Sergius. Being enlightened also in his mind, he sold his property, which he had in great abundance, and erected a very large temple to the martyr Sergius on the site of the pyre; and having shorn his head, he finished the remainder of his life there, having greatly pleased God. His young attendants did the same thing for him, changing their names to Sergius and Bacchus. And so much for these matters.

CHAPTER XXIV. On the venerable robe of the all-holy Theotokos, how it was brought from Jerusalem and deposited in the round temple at Blachernae.

^B During the same reign of Leo, the venerable robe of the all-holy Mother was brought to Constantinople in the following manner. This, as we have said, the Mother of God, as she was departing to her Son, left to a Hebrew woman who was a virgin; it had remained incorrupt among her successors up to that very time, and performed many miracles. Now, Candidus and Galbius, German brothers adorned with the rank of patricians, having set out for Jerusalem, after they had traversed all the places there and venerated them, and had arrived in the parts of Galilee, found this treasure being kept by a certain Hebrew woman, and they formed a plan to steal it. And having traveled around Jerusalem and venerated every holy place, they fashioned a chest ^C equal in length and width to that in which the divine robe of the Mother of God was stored. On their return, they placed this empty one, covered with the customary veil, in its place; but they took the other one, with the sacred and divine garment, and at the feet they held it and hurried to Constantinople; and in their suburb, which had the name Blachernae, they began to try to hide the divine treasure. But when they seemed to be attempting what could not be done, and were even unwilling, they reported it to the Emperor. He, being lifted up with incredible pleasure, having built a round temple in the place where it was being stored, placed the sacred chest there with great veneration; where even now that venerable robe is preserved ^D intact, remaining as an invincible and perpetual rampart for the city, a dispeller of all diseases, overcoming the nature of time by the novelty of the miracles which are performed by it. Pulcheria, the celebrated empress, indeed founded a great temple to the Mother of God under Marcian, where she deposited her burial shrouds; but Leo the Great built another, in which he magnificently consecrated her robe.

CHAPTER XXV.

This same Leo also erected another temple to the Virgin Mother in the place which bears the name of the Spring, where there was once a thick and vast grove of cypresses, a meadow teeming with tender flowers—as it were a pleasant and beautiful paradise—and, moreover, a spring quietly bubbling with clear and potable water; and, to speak briefly, it possessed everything that might befit a sacred temple. Both these shrines were built outside the city walls: one at the Blachernae by the seashore, the other near the so-called Golden Gates, which are situated ^B at the end of the fortification, so that both might be, as it were, impregnable bulwarks for the city. This area is about a stade away from the city, and it possesses all the excellences that land can have, having been consecrated to the Mother of God from ancient times. The climate there is optimal, and the place itself was most pleasant, planted with various trees, and beautified by the abundant growth of plane trees and the height of cypresses. It abounded in soft and lush grass, bearing flowers of every kind, suitable for resting, and no less useful for pasture. The spring, flowing abundantly and clearly, not only provided the place with great grace and beauty, but rendered it fair and conspicuous. Furthermore, divine grace, being infused into the very water, made it effective for the producing of miracles. A long time passed, and the accumulation of mud gradually ^C buried the spring and blocked the outlet through which the water flowed. The density of the trees, too, once the access to the spring was obstructed, and the length of time having elapsed, caused the place to be forgotten, so that it became a muddy swamp, distinguishable only by a slight moisture.

When this Leo, not yet adorned with imperial dignity by the divine will, was living as a private citizen and walking somewhere near that place, he happened upon a blind man wandering along the road. Pitying his plight (for he was a good man, merciful, and in all things thoughtful and provident), he took him by the hand, acting as eyes for him, directing his steps through level ground, and removing whatever thorns or rough obstacles there might be in the path that could injure the traveler. And he indeed was leading, while the other followed. ^D And when they had finished a considerable part of their journey and had come near this miry place, the blind man was exhausted from thirst and was nearly collapsing, as all the moisture there had dried up in that most intense heat. Therefore, he insisted strongly upon Leo, and frequently urged him to relieve his thirst and to let him rest for a while from the toil of the journey under some shade. This was the work of the ineffable knowledge and wisdom of God, who wondrously provides for all things. Leo, therefore, moved by compassion for the poor man, searched through the entire dense wood, looking to see if any moisture of water might be gushing forth there. But when, after much toil, he returned to him unsuccessfully, and in great anxiety...

...so that nothing of consolation could be brought to that miserable man in such a state, he heard a voice beyond all expectation sent down from on high, which said, "It is not right, Leo, that you should be consumed by anxiety, for behold, the water is near." ^B Struck with amazement at that strange voice, he sought again to find the water. Yet he was himself utterly blind, wandering around it, but seeing almost nothing. For the thickness of the woods obstructed him, and the mire, having settled to a great depth, drove the man far away. Wherefore he seemed to be in distress, asking if he were allowed to suffer these things while being led by the hand. Therefore, pondering in his mind the things said by the voice, and again searching where the water might be, he once more became a participant in the same voice, sounding sweetly and pleasantly from above, declaring his name to him and the dignity of the empire which would be his, as it were, at no distant time: "Leo, Emperor," it said, "enter this thick and shaded grove, and draw of this turbid water, and refresh therewith the thirst of the sick man; and take the muddy mire in your hands, with which you shall anoint the eyes of the blind man. As for who I am, having long held this place and delighting in it, you shall soon know. See to it that you build a sacred temple for me here, in which I may continually dwell and walk about with pleasure; in which, moreover, to all who pray and come to this place with fervor and certain faith, I will grant all things desired. And there is absolutely nothing that will oppose me, and that will not immediately yield to my power, even if it be a demon, or a disease that surpasses all medical care, or any other thing which I may not perform, provided it be asked for rightly and piously." ^C Leo, obeying these words, brought the mire and the water to the blind man, who now cared little for it, as his spirit was nearly extinguished; and he anointed his eyes with the mire, just as the Savior did to the man blind from birth; then he also offered the water to him as he rubbed his eyes. (Oh, the magnitude of your wonders, Mother of God!) To that man, the turbid water and the mire become Siloam. For immediately he is given sight, and he casts off his long-continued darkness, gazing with wondrous eyes upon the sun—or rather, upon the mud and the mire. For just as the sun, first giving light to the sense of sight, is also first to be seen by it, so now the mire, having become a provider of light, is first seen by the one who has recovered his sight. ^D And this, too, was a marvel: that which is most hostile to healthy eyes, that same thing, having laid aside its nature and power, becomes a means of salvation.

CHAPTER XXVI.

Description of the sacred temple, which was given the name of the Fountain, founded by Leo.

Leo, afterward, having been raised to the imperial throne according to the prediction of the Mother of God, immediately repaid her for so great a benefit shown to him. And indeed, having cleansed that place of the mire and having sought out the vein of the spring at a very great depth and restored it, he took care to cast out whatever earth and rubble there was; and the fountain itself, having been well fortified round about with a solid structure, he repaired the temple...

^A and raised it up for the Mother of God, having placed the roof around the fountain. Now this building is no less deep beneath the earth than it is visible above the earth. For it rises, I believe, from the very foundations of the earth, joined together in a square, yet making the structure of the building oblong, in such a way that the width is about one-third of the length. The planning of the walls is varied until they rise above the ground; but once they have emerged a little from the earth, they are immediately variegated, for they outline four porticoes. Two of these are suspended in the empty air, one facing the sunrise and the other the sunset; the other two are joined to and lean upon the adjacent walls, and rest upon them when finished. A structure of arches runs in a circle above the building, rising up little by little, and rests on porticoes that are equally spaced. The space between these is reserved for the admission of light, through which an immense light flows into the fountain; and an abundance of brilliance illuminates the whole area with much light. Above these, a dome rises high, a vault in a spherical, elevated shape, curving gently into its depth, and rising upward in ^B its entirety. The beauty of this is so great that one might liken it to the heavens, shining and flowering with fire. Furthermore, another building crowns the upper part of the inner sanctuary, above the fountain itself, adorned with a solid portico so as to fulfill the beauty of the form, with the length exceeding the width by half as much again. The architect has also very fittingly constructed some steps—twenty-five on each side, I believe—to provide an easy descent to the fountain itself, adding marble railings which both provide a certain beauty to the work and guide those descending so they do not slip on the moisture. Some of the steps are straight inclines, while others are slightly curved. The top of the vault, or rather the very vertex of the temple, is lavishly adorned with pure gold; and this, by means of the light admitted through the many glazed windows and the vibrating brilliance of the marble with which the walls are incrusted, causes the whole temple to shine as if with lightning. ^C The fountain is almost in the middle of the space, for it is only a little distance from the center; it occupies about two fathoms in width, offering forth its ever-flowing, cold, and transparent streams. It is surrounded by a square marble structure, whose rim is most convenient for those drawing water. Within this structure, there are the equal steps we mentioned, some featuring a semicircular shape and others a square one—six on each side, leading those who wish to do so up to the fountain. Also, a medium-sized basin stands before the mouth of the fountain, slightly hollowed out so as to receive a water-jar immediately; it has certain openings so that there is a place for the flowing liquid. Another hollow in the floor receives this before the flow of the fountain, providing a channel and exit for the water straining to flow out on every side. A conduit extends through the middle ^D of the building, dividing the sanctuary, completely enclosed. But beyond the two...

^A, there are cavities above: one built of round stone in the middle of the temple, the other approaching the sanctuary, having a vessel longer than it is wide. From this, those to whom the ministry is entrusted draw the sacred and purifying mud with a vessel made in the shape of a spoon. Moreover, the water is mixed in a marvelous unity. For it lacks being altogether cold, and it stands apart from being tepid, so that it happens to be of every kind and whatever one wishes it to be, not unlike that celebrated Manna. It is, moreover, extremely clear and light, attenuated as if by a certain sacred breath of the Spirit. And what surpasses all other things is that this water happens to be a cure for contrary ailments. For those diseases for which the art of medicine has despaired of cold treatment, you may find instant healing here. Thus, Leo erected such a shrine to the Mother of God, calling the place the Fountain; it is a work extraordinary to behold, and better than words can express. And in this way the grace in the water shone forth. Later, others honored the site with additional buildings, bestowing upon it a more elaborate beauty and bringing more graceful elegance to the location—just as Justinian also later erected a great and beautiful house ^B, repaying her for the benefit received, referring it to the Virgin Mother. Regarding the very many miracles that have been wrought at the fountain, we have composed a book, stirred to do so by certain pious men. Whence we have transferred to this work the things we said about the fountain. But now let us proceed to the rest of the history.

CHAPTER XXVII

Genserich, the king of the Vandals, having taken control of Africa, as I have previously mentioned, and having advanced to great power after the death of Marcian, afflicted the Roman territory greatly with his incursions; he demolished the walls of all the cities except Carthage. And whatever money and lands the Western Libyans possessed, he took from them and bestowed upon his own countrymen. And he pressed his subjects extremely hard, piling tax upon tax. The local residents, oppressed by such great hardship, fled; Leo, being grieved by this, gathered eleven hundred ships from all under his authority and, having filled them with weapons and a sufficient army, sent them against Genserich and the Vandals. It is said that he spent twelve hundred centenaria of gold on this fleet, and that he assigned over seven thousand rowers to the ships ^D.

^A He appointed Basiliscus, the brother of his wife Verina, as commander of this fleet. Basiliscus, having always kept his eyes on the imperial throne, had entered into a pact with Aspar and Ardaburius, for he thought that through them he could most easily accomplish his desire. For it was impossible for them to come to the throne, as they espoused the doctrine of Arius, a religion which the Byzantines detested intensely. Yet it was an easy matter for them to grant the empire to others, just as they had done for Leo, whom, while he was their steward, they had elevated to the empire without bloodshed. Once he possessed the empire, however, he took it heavily that he was ruled by them. And they, having determined to disturb the Church, opposed him in many necessary matters, and claimed that he did everything poorly; they even asserted that he would be defeated by Genserich, because he did not hold to a "sound" religion. They falsely opined that the belief of Genserich, who professed the dogma of Arius, was far more pleasing to God than that of ^B Leo, who steadfastly defended the faith of Nicaea and Chalcedon. In order to appear to speak the truth, they met in secret with Basiliscus and promised to hand him the imperial scepter if he would grant the victory to Genserich. When this had been agreed upon with them, Basiliscus sailed with the entire fleet to the African territory and, having entered into talks with Genserich, immediately betrayed the fleet just as he had contracted with Aspar. The latter set fire to it while the soldiers were sleeping, and as a violent wind lifted the flame on high, ship caught fire from ship; and the Vandals, standing over them with poles, killed those who managed to escape the fire. Of so great a fleet, not even one vessel remained. Basiliscus, having barely escaped with a very few followers, came to Byzantium and took refuge in the Great Church. His sister, the Augusta Verina, snatched him from this danger and allowed him to pass his time at Perinthus in Thrace. ^C Emperor Leo summoned Aspar and Ardaburius to himself, in order to lead them away from their absurd opinion and to divert them from plotting against the empire. For this reason, he gave his daughter Ariadna, whom he had born of Verina, in marriage to the son of Aspar, who was a consul and patrician. But they, being even more given over to their utter wickedness, did not cease to weave treacheries against Leo. When the people of Constantinople learned of this, they were incensed against them and reviled them bitterly in the Hippodrome. Fearing the mob, they crossed over to Chalcedon, with their entire military force following them, and took refuge in the temple of the martyr Euphemia. The emperor sent the patriarch and promised that he would keep faith with them if they would depart from that church. They, however, refused to leave that place unless the emperor himself came to them. Leo gave way to this and accepted the men without further questioning; he shared a table with them and, on the face of it, did everything else, promising amnesty for their evils. On the other hand ^D

^A he ordered Zeno the Isaurian, who seemed to be most faithful to him, to take those men unawares as they were passing through the baths into the imperial palace and suddenly strike off their heads. When they were about to enter, Zeno first took the head of Ardaburius; seeing this, Aspar grieved and, crying out in a loud voice, said: "The gray-haired old man, who boasted in vain and was never willing to listen to my advice, meets a fitting end. For I very often said to him: 'Let us eat Leo, before he sets us before him at dinner.'" When he had said these things, he too was struck by the sword and lost his life. As for his other son, the patrician, he separated him from his daughter Ariadne by divorce and sent him into exile; and he gave Ariadne to Zeno, as one who had removed the conspirators, as his wife. This Zeno had been called Aricmesius from his swaddling clothes, but at the same time he was married to the emperor's daughter he changed that name and was called Zeno, taking the name from a certain person who attained great glory among the Isaurians. From this man and the aforementioned daughter of Leo, a son was born called Leo the Less. ^B

Chapter XXVIII

Zeno, as soon as he became the emperor’s son-in-law, was sent into the East; Peter, surnamed the Fuller, followed him on that journey, being a presbyter of the temple of the holy martyr Bassa in Chalcedon of Bithynia. When ^C he arrived with him in Antioch and became pleased with the episcopal see there, he persuaded Zeno to assist him in taking possession of that bishopric. At that time Martyrius, the successor of Maximus—who had been deemed worthy of the presidency by the votes of the fourth synod—was holding the reins of the office. While Martyrius was delaying in the imperial city, as necessity required, Peter stirred up no small disturbances in Antioch, throwing the crowd into confusion, disseminating certain innovations against the faith, and, most importantly, striking with the thunderbolt of anathema all those who do not believe that God was ^D crucified and suffered. And by more firmly establishing this opinion, he added to that thrice-holy hymn the clause: "Who was crucified for us," which even to this day holds sway among the Theopaschites. Having also gained the support of some from the sect of Apollinaris, he plotted much against bishop Martyrius and divided the people into multiple parties through various dissensions. When Martyrius returned to Antioch and found the multitude in sedition against both himself and the true opinion concerning God, and Zeno favoring the Fuller to the utmost, after much exhortation—since he could not persuade them to change this opinion—he gathered the people in public and resigned the bishopric, saying with all openness toward all: "To a disobedient clergy, a rebellious people, and a polluted Church, I bid farewell, keeping for myself the priestly dignity"

^A Once he had said this and departed, the Fuller [Cnapheus] leapt upon the throne of Antioch, flowing forth in great stream against the Council of Chalcedon, and compelling everyone to say the addition to the Trisagion. When the most pious Leo learned of these things, he immediately condemned the Fuller to exile. The latter, having learned of this, saw to his own safety by flight, hiding himself secretly in the dwelling of the Sleepless [Akoimetai] monks. Stephen was substituted for the Fuller; him the youths of Antioch, still being attached to the Fuller, slaughtered with sharp reeds as if with spears and threw into the river that flows past the city, just as John the Rhetorician has recorded. After Stephen, Calandion, who was then in Constantinople for a certain matter, was entrusted with the rudders of the episcopate. He, breathing with zeal for the fourth council, would admit no one to communion unless they had first subjected Peter the Fuller and the circular letters which were later issued by the tyrant Basiliscus to anathema. Calandion, resisting the actions of the Fuller, added to his [the Fuller's] additions to the Trisagion the words, "Christ is King." They say, indeed, that Peter the Fuller devised these four things, most beneficial to the catholic Church: that the sacred ointment should be consecrated in the presence of all the people; that on the evening of the holy Theophany, the water should be poured into the sacred font; that the holy Creed should be sung in every synod with great freedom, whereas previously it was sung only once, on the holy and great Friday; and that in every prayer the Theotokos should be named, and her divine invocation be called upon. A little while later, Juvenal having reached a very deep old age, ^B Anastasius obtained the throne of Jerusalem, to whom Martyrius succeeded.

CHAPTER XXIX. How Leo the Great died, leaving Leo the Less as his successor. And how, soon after he also passed from this life, his father Zeno received the empire, having accepted the diadem from his son.

Emperor Leo the Great (2) proclaimed the son of Zeno and Ariadne the daughter, the younger Leo, first Caesar and then also Emperor of the Romans, and he himself conferred upon him the imperial insignia with his own hands. For he did not deign to choose Zeno as emperor, because he differed in religion. Then Leo, oppressed by disease, laid down the empire along with his life at Byzantium, having administered it for seventeen years. After him Zeno assumed the purple, as he was Leo's son-in-law: ^C because Verina, Leo's wife, took him up while Leo was still a boy, she who also placed the imperial insignia upon the father Zeno, as the child had passed the power to his father.

After the little Leo had departed this life a year later, Zeno reigned alone, but ruled the Roman empire with little success. What was done under him and what else occurred at that time, God willing, the following shall ^A show. This fifteenth book of history spans twenty-five years, dating from five thousand nine hundred and ninety years after the creation of the world, and the four hundred and eighty-fifth year from the divine birth of the Lord.

CAPUT XXX. Brief and succinct exposition of the acts of the holy and universal fourth synod, placed at the end of this volume so that the order of the history may be preserved without confusion.

It was the year five thousand nine hundred and sixty-six from the creation of the world ^B when the divine and holy, universal, and fourth synod was gathered in the province of Bithynia, in the city of Chalcedon, in the temple of Euphemia the martyr. Pascasinus and Lucentius, bishops, and Boniface, a presbyter, held the place there of Leo, bishop of elder Rome. Anatolius at that time administered the bishopric of Constantinople, Dioscorus that of Alexandria, Maximus that of Antioch, and Juvenal that of Jerusalem, who were present at that synod along with the bishops around them. Added to these were the magistrates and those who held the highest ^C dignities in the senate. When all were seated, the legates of Leo immediately said that Dioscorus ought not to sit with them. For this had been so ordained by Leo; otherwise, if they were forced to do so, they themselves would withdraw from the assembly. The senate asked for what reason this should be done. And they replied that Dioscorus was a defendant, and therefore, with the Roman pontiff not permitting it, he could not sustain the role of a judge. When these things were said, and Dioscorus took a middle place by the opinion of the senate, Eusebius, bishop of Dorylaeum, was present and requested that the petitions which he had presented to the imperial majesty be read publicly, using these words: “I have been wronged by Dioscorus; the faith has been wronged. Bishop Flavian was murdered; and I, along with him, was unjustly deposed by him. Command, I beg, my petition ^D to be read.” When this was granted, the petition was read, written in these words: “The petition of Eusebius, bishop of Dorylaeum, who pleads his own cause, the cause of the orthodox faith, and that of Flavian, the former bishop of Constantinople, who has been numbered among the saints. It is the counsel and institution of your imperial power to extend your right hand to all subjects, and especially to those who, having been recruited into the order of priests, have been affected by injury, caring for them. In this matter you obey the divine power with pious worship, from whom the empire and power over the world has been handed to you. Since, therefore, contrary to all equity and reason, those things which are the faith in Christ, and we, have suffered grave ac-

- ^A curacy from the most devout Bishop of the great city of Alexandria, Dioscorus, we flee to your piety, petitioning to obtain our rights. The matter is entirely as follows. In the synod which was recently held in the metropolis of the Ephesians (would that it had never been held, nor filled the world with turmoil and many evils), the good Dioscorus, having no regard for justice or the fear of God, being of one mind and intent with Eutyches the vain-minded and heretical—though concealing this from the many, even if afterwards he revealed and betrayed himself when he found an opportunity through the accusation I brought against Eutyches, his fellow-believer, and the sentence pronounced against him by Bishop Flavian of holy memory—having gathered a multitude of disorderly men and having secured power for himself through money, attacked, as far as lay in his power, the pious religion of the orthodox, and confirmed the perverse opinion of Eutyches the monk, which from of old and from the beginning has been condemned by the holy Fathers. Since, therefore, the things daringly committed by him against the faith in Christ and against us are not small, we supplicate and fall before your power, to command the same most devout Dioscorus to answer for the charges brought against him by us; namely, that the records of his proceedings against us be read by the holy synod, through which we can prove that he is far removed from the orthodox and right faith, and that ^B he confirmed a heresy full of impiety, and unjustly deposed us, and inflicted grievous injury upon us: that by your divine and venerable mandates sent to the holy and universal synod of most pious bishops, the cause between us and the aforementioned Dioscorus may be inquired into by them, and all the acts be referred to the knowledge of your piety and the judgment of your immortal highness. And having obtained this, we will not cease to pour forth perpetual prayers to God for your eternal empire, O most pious emperors.

^D Accordingly, with such a petition having been made by both Dioscorus and Eusebius, the acts at Ephesus were brought forth and read. From these it was evident that the epistle of Leo had not been publicly read, although many had requested its reading time and again. Dioscorus, being called upon to state the cause of this, said that he had ordered it to be done once and again, and he cited as witnesses Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, and Thalassius, Bishop of Caesarea, the primary city of the Cappadocians, who had presided over the synod with him. Juvenal testified that he had ordered the sacred document that was to preside over the synod to be read, but that afterwards no one had made mention of it. Thalassius, however, declared that he had not obstructed its reading, but neither had he arrogated to himself so much authority as to order it read by himself alone. As the reading of the acts continued, certain bishops voiced...

^A objections, as though some of the statements were fabricated. And indeed, Stephen, the prelate of Ephesus, was asked who exactly among those who had subscribed were also included; and he stated that Julian, who had acted as bishop of Lebedus, had signed last, as had Crispinus; and that Dioscorus had not permitted the others who were signing to do so, but held back the fingers of those who were subscribing, with the result that they were in danger of suffering the most wretched treatment of everyone. The same Stephen added that the subscription was made on the one and same day on which the dignity of Flavian was abrogated. To these things, Acacius, the bishop of Ariarathia, added that they had all subscribed to a blank sheet of paper, having been forced by great violence and necessity, as they were surrounded by soldiers with murderous weapons.

Another act having been read, Theodore, bishop of Claudiopolis, said that no one had uttered such words. As the reading of the sections proceeded, since a certain ^B passage contained a report on Eutyches, and mentioned those who said that the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ had descended from heaven, it showed that Eusebius had spoken against this, saying that he had indeed said the words "from heaven," but had not added the words "from whence." And that when Diogenes, bishop of Cyzicus, insisted that he say "from whence," they were not permitted to inquire further.

In addition to these things, the acts showed what Basil, bishop of Seleucia in Isauria, had said as follows: "I worship one Lord of ours, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only God the Word, who after the incarnation and union is acknowledged in two natures." To these words the Egyptians cried out with a loud and clear voice: "Let no one divide him who is indivisible; it is not fitting to speak of two, but one Son." The Orientals, for their part, shouted in response: ^C "Anathema to him who divides; anathema to him who separates."

The acts further record that Eutyches was asked if he maintained that there were two natures in Christ. And he is said to have replied that he recognized that Christ was from two natures before the union, but after the union, one. Basil then rejoined, saying: "Unless he confesses that the two natures, which can neither be separated nor confounded, exist after the union, he absolutely asserts confusion and commixtion. If, however, he adds 'incarnate' and 'made human' and understands the incarnation and the being made human in the same way as Cyril, he says the same things as we do; for the divinity from the Father is one thing, and the humanity from the mother is another." When asked for what reason they had subscribed to the deposition of Flavian, the acts show that the Orientals cried out: "We have all sinned; we all petition for pardon."

The reading continuing, it shows that the bishops were asked for what reason ^D they did not allow Eusebius, who wished to enter the assembly, to do so. To which Dioscorus replied that Elpidius had produced a memorandum and asserted that Emperor Theodosius had commanded not

to allow Eusebius to speak freely. The records show that Juvenal of Jerusalem said the same thing. Thalassius of Caesarea reported that what had been condemned by the princes had no authority. But [Dioscorus argued] that this was not the defense of the faith which had been proposed for consideration. Furthermore, they assert that Dioscorus criticized what was happening, saying: “How are the canons observed now, ^A when Theodoret has also come into the assembly?” The senate replied that he had entered because he was holding the place of an accuser. Dioscorus further brought forward: “And yet he sits on a bishop’s bench.” And the imperial senate replied again: “Both Eusebius and Theodoret perform the duties of accusers, just as Dioscorus has been assigned the place of the accused.” And indeed, when all the proceedings of the second council held at Ephesus, along with the sentence passed against Flavian and Eusebius, were read, and that concluding point was reached where Bishop Hilary said: “The Eastern bishops and those with them shouted, ‘Anathema to Dioscorus! At this very hour Christ has deposed Dioscorus; Flavian has been deposed by Dioscorus. Holy Lord, vindicate him! Orthodox emperor, vindicate him! Long live Leo for many years! Long live the patriarch for a very long time!’” Following these, when the rest had also been read, which declared that others of the bishops had also ^B consented to the deposition of Flavian and Eusebius, the most glorious princes spoke in this manner: “On the next day, with the council meeting concerning the orthodox, right, and catholic faith, we perceive that a more certain investigation must take place. But since Flavian of pious memory, and Eusebius, the most religious bishop of Dorylaeum, have been proven by the testimony of the readers of the commentaries, and by the very voices of those who then presided over that synod as princes, to have fallen—confessing that they themselves had wrongfully annulled the dignity of those who had not erred in the faith—and have proven that the condemnation was made unjustly: it seems to us right, in accordance with what is pleasing to God, if it should please our most divine and pious lord, that by the same penalty Dioscorus, the most religious bishop of Alexandria, and Juvenal, the most religious bishop of Jerusalem, and Thalassius, the most reverend bishop of Caesarea, and Eusebius, the most religious bishop of Ancyra, and Eustathius, the most religious bishop of Berytus, and Basil, the most religious bishop of Seleucia of Isauria, who with authority usurped by them presided over the synod, should be punished; namely, that through this holy synod, according to the canons, they should fall from their episcopal dignity, and all things that were consequently done should be reported to the sacred majesty.” To these words the Easterners exclaimed: “This is a just judgment.” The Illyrians, however, shouted: “We have all erred, we all ask for pardon.” And the Easterners cried out: “This is a just judgment! Christ has deposed Dioscorus; Christ has vindicated the martyrs, so that each of the bishops [may maintain] his own ^C [place].

^A Hic, the senate ^B ordered every bishop to submit his profession of faith in writing; and the same person further informed them, so that they might know, that the most God-beloved Emperor believes in accordance with the formula set forth by the three hundred and eighteen and again by the hundred and fifty Fathers, and in accordance with the letters of the holy Fathers Gregory, Basil, Hilary, Athanasius, Ambrose, and those two of Cyril which had been published at the first Council of Ephesus, and that Leo, the most holy bishop of the Roman Church, had deposed Eutyches.

When this assembly had reached its conclusion, another was held again, in which only the most holy bishops sat, to whom Eusebius of Dorylaeum presented other petitions on behalf of himself and Flavian. In these he brought a charge against Dioscorus, as one who held the same religious views as Eutyches; on account of which both Flavian and he himself had been deposed by him. He added, moreover, that some things which had not been said at the time had been interspersed in the records of the proceedings, and that signatures had been affixed to a blank sheet of paper. He requested that, by the common vote of those who were assembled, the things that had been transacted at the second Council of Ephesus be considered invalid and as if they had never happened; that their priestly dignity be restored to them, and that that impious dogma be destroyed by anathema. After the reading of the petition, he requested that his adversary be present. ^C When, following an exchange of views, it had been ordered that he appear, Aetius, the chief of the notaries, came forward and said that he had gone to Dioscorus, just as indeed to the others, and they had said they could not come due to those guarding them; and it was discussed that Dioscorus should be sought before the council. When he was not found, Anatolius, the bishop of New Rome, said that equity and justice demanded that he be present. When this did not happen, those who had been sent returned and said that he had replied, "I am guarded. But if they will permit it, I am ready to come to the holy synod." Himerius added that when they had departed from Dioscorus, Boethus had met them along with the Master of the Divine Offices. With him, the bishops returned to Dioscorus and said that they had matters to conduct with him in writing. When this had been read, the book of the acts relates that Dioscorus said these words: "Since I have deliberated about myself, and considered what is useful and proper, I answer thus: Since in the previous session the magnificient princes who sit in the council decreed many things after many discussions, and now I am summoned to another session to reconsider and abolish what was said, I request that the magnificent princes who were present at the previous synod, and the holy senate, also be present now, so that these same matters may be inquired into again." ^D To these words

they testify that Acacius ^A responded: "The holy and great synod has not bidden your holiness to be present so that those things which were done in the presence of the magnificent princes and the holy senate might be introduced; rather, it sent us to you so that you might come into its assembly, and that your holiness might not be absent from it." Dioscorus responded: "Just now, you told me that Eusebius had presented a libel against me. If that is done, I repeat my request that the inquiry regarding my affairs be held in the presence of the princes and the senate." And after certain other words of this sort had been interposed, others were sent again to summon Dioscorus to be present for the proceedings. When this had been done, they returned and reported that he had used these words: "I have already indicated to your piety that I have been seized by an adverse illness, and I ask ^B that the magnificent princes and the holy senate be present now as well for the inquiry and judgment of the matter. When my health has improved, I shall request a day for that reason to be set." Further, the commentaries of the acts indicate that Cecropius said to Dioscorus: "You alleged nothing previously regarding your health. Therefore, you ought to satisfy the canons as you are bound to do." To which Dioscorus responded again: "I have said once that the princes ought to be present." Upon this, Rufinus, bishop of Samosata, replied that the synod and the assembly had been constituted canonically, and that if he were to come, he would be free to say whatever he wished. When Dioscorus asked whether Juvenal, Thalassius, and Eustathius were present at the proceedings, he ^C replied that they had nothing to do with the matter. To these words, they report that Dioscorus added to the acts: "I have entreated the most Christ-loving emperor that the noble princes, and those who contend in judgment along with him, be present." Then those who had been sent to him said that Eusebius was the only one accusing him, and that all were bound to be present. And there Dioscorus said that those who had acted as judges with him ought also to be at hand. "For," he said, "I have no private business or criminal case with Eusebius that is not common with the others who brought a sentence of condemnation with me." And when the messengers had stayed with him for a long time for this reason, Dioscorus finally responded to them with these words: "I have said to you once what needed to be said, and I have nothing more to say." When these things had been reported to the bishops, Eusebius said that he had a case with Dioscorus alone, and with no other; and he requested that Dioscorus be cited for a third time. ^D Thereupon Aetius indicated that shortly before, certain men who claimed to be clerics, and other lay and common men from Alexandria, had presented libels against Dioscorus, and that they were standing and shouting before the doors of the meeting hall. The first to hand over a libel was Theodore, a deacon of the Church of Alexandria, then another deacon named Ischyrion, and Athanasius, a presbyter and nephew of Cyril; in addition to these, Sophronius also presented one. Through these they demonstrated that he was a blasphemer, and that he had seized money by force; and they went into details concerning certain bodily matters. And upon these, a third summons was issued to Dioscorus to be present. When those who had carried the message returned, they said that Dioscorus had replied that he had spoken sufficiently before, and that now he had nothing more to say. When those who had been sent insisted, and he said the same things, Paschasinus the bishop said: "Dioscorus has already been cited for the third time and has not appeared at all, perhaps being pricked by his conscience." And he inquired of the bishops what he was worthy of. When they replied that he should be subject to the canons, Proterius the bishop of Smyrna said: "When Flavian was murdered, nothing consistent was done regarding him." Those holding the place of Leo, the bishop of elder Rome, expressed these things verbatim: "The things dared by Dioscorus against the bishop of the great city of the Alexandrians, contrary to the order of the canons and..."

the ecclesiastical constitution, have been ^A clearly demonstrated from those things already examined in the first session, and from the events of today. For this man, to pass over many things, dared unlawfully to receive into communion Eutyches, his fellow-heretic—who had been canonically deposed by his own bishop, our Father among the saints and archbishop Flavian—before he had sat with the God-beloved bishops in the council of Ephesus. But the Apostolic See granted pardon to those who had acted there against their own judgment; and they have remained until this present time following the most holy archbishop Leo and all the holy and universal council. For which reason, he also received them into his communion as being of the same faith. ^B But this man, even until today, has continued to boast of those things over which he ought to have groaned and bowed his head to the earth. Moreover, he did not even permit the letter of the most blessed Pope Leo, which had been written by him to the most blessed Flavian, to be read, although he had been frequently importuned to have it read by those who had brought it, and had promised with oaths to carry out the reading; the non-reading of which caused the most holy Churches throughout the world to be filled with scandal and harm. But since, regarding such things being dared by him, we might have deigned to show him some philanthropy concerning his former impious act, just as we did for the rest of the God-beloved bishops, even though they had not possessed the authority of the judgment in a like manner. ^C But because in the second things he surpassed his former lawlessness, and dared also to dictate an excommunication against the most holy and most sacred archbishop of great Rome, Leo; and in addition to these things, although libels full of lawlessness were brought against him to the holy and great council, and being called once, and twice, and thrice via God-beloved bishops according to the canons, he did not obey, being stung, clearly, by his own conscience, and—having himself unlawfully received those who had been lawfully deposed by different synods—he has passed sentence against himself in many ways, having trampled upon the ecclesiastical laws. Wherefore the most holy and most blessed archbishop of great and elder Rome, Leo, through us and the present council, together with the thrice-blessed and most praised Peter, the apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic ^D Church, and happens to be the foundation of the orthodox faith, has stripped him of both the episcopal dignity and alienated him from every priestly activity. Therefore, let this holy and great council decree what is pleasing to the canons concerning the aforementioned Dioscorus."

^A When Anatolius, Maximus, and the other bishops—except for those who had been deposed along with Dioscorus—had confirmed all these things with their authority, the acts state that a synodal report concerning all these matters was sent to the Emperor Marcian. Appended to it was the sentence by which the dignity was revoked from Dioscorus, containing word for word what follows, just as it was also communicated to Dioscorus himself: "Know that, on account of your contempt for the holy canons and the disobedience you have shown toward this holy and universal council, and because, beyond the other crimes of which you have been clearly convicted, you were ^B summoned a third time by this holy and great council according to the holy canons to appear to plead your cause and did not appear, on the thirteenth day of the current month of October, by the holy and universal council you have been deposed from the episcopacy and [are] alienated from every ecclesiastical constitution."

After this, when letters concerning these matters had been written to the bishops in Alexandria and edicts had been drawn up against Dioscorus, that meeting also reached its conclusion. But when they gathered again, the subject was the true faith, and it was decreed that no other formula should be conceived; and after the matters of Eutyches had reached their end and had been confirmed ^C by the Roman bishop through a constitution—which all also approved—all exclaimed that they themselves said the same things and repeated them often. When the princes also requested that each patriarch designate one or two bishops from his own diocese and administration, so that the opinion of each one might be clearly brought forth before all, after the bishops had permitted Florentius, bishop of Sardis, to do this once the matter had been deliberated, Cecropius, bishop of Sebastopolis, spoke thereafter in these words:

"The faith was rightly formulated by the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers, and it was confirmed again by the holy Fathers Athanasius, Cyril, Celestine, Hilary, Basil, Gregory, and now again by the ^D most holy Leo. We request that both the writings of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers and those of the most holy Leo be read." When this was done, the entire council exclaimed: "This is the faith of the orthodox and of those who think rightly; we all believe thus; Pope Leo believes thus; Cyril believed thus; the Pope has expounded the faith thus."

Furthermore, upon other dialogue and deliberation being held so that the things put forth by the hundred and fifty Fathers might also be read, these too were read; to which the council again cried out: "This is the faith of all; this is the faith of the orthodox; we all believe thus." When these things had been said, Aetius, the archdeacon, stepped forward and said that he had in hand the letter of the divinely inspired Cyril to Nestorius, which those gathered at Ephesus confirmed with their own hands, and that he also brought another letter of Cyril

to John of Antioch, confirmed in the same way as the other; and he requested that they be read publicly. Interlocution therefore having been made, both writings were read publicly. ^A The former letter was composed in these words: "To the most religious and devout fellow-minister Nestorius, Cyril. There are those, I hear, who are speaking against my reputation to your piety; and they do this quite frequently, ^B being very solicitous to meet with the magistrates for this purpose, watching for an opportunity, and perhaps thinking to do something pleasing to your ears." And after a few words: "The holy and great synod therefore professes, he says, that He who was begotten by nature from God the Father, the Only-begotten Son, true God from true God, light from light, through whom the Father created all things, descended, was incarnate, was made man, suffered, rose on the third day, and ascended into heaven. We also must follow these things, both in doctrine and by example, considering with ourselves what these words mean, that the Word of God was incarnate and made man. ^C For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and became flesh, nor that it was transformed into the whole man, consisting of soul and body; but rather that the Word, having united to himself according to subsistence [substantia] a soul endowed with a rational mind, unfathomably and inconceivably became man and has been called 'Son of Man,' not by will or good pleasure alone, nor as if by the assumption of a person only; and that while the natures that have been brought together into a true union are different, still one Christ and Son is from both; not that the difference of the natures was removed by the union, but that they rather brought about for us one Lord and Christ ^D and Son from the Godhead and the manhood by an ineffable and unspeakable concurrence of unification." And after other things: "Since, however, for us and for our salvation, having united to himself according to subsistence the humanity, he came forth from a woman, for this reason he is said to be born carnally. For a man was not first born commonly from the holy Virgin, and then the Word moved into him; but, united from the very womb, he is said to have undergone carnal birth, as taking to himself the birth of his own flesh. In this way we say he suffered and rose again, not as if the Word of God suffered in his own nature, or received blows, or the piercing of nails, or other wounds; for the divine is impassible, because it is also incorporeal. But since it was his own body that suffered these things, he himself is said to have suffered for us. For he was impassible in his suffering body." The greater part of the other letter has already been included in the preceding history; but there is in it also a statement such as this, which John of Antioch wrote, and which Cyril accepted with all votes, saying: "We confess the holy Virgin to be Theotokos, because the Word of God was made flesh from her and became man, and from the very conception united to himself the temple taken from her. The evangelical and apostolic sayings concerning the Lord, we know that the divinely-inspired men, some make common as

if from one person, while those who divide [them] as if into two natures, they censure, and they deliver the divine-befitting [sayings] according to the divinity of Christ, but the humble ones according to his humanity. To which he added: "Having encountered these your holy utterances, we find that we ourselves also hold the same opinion; for there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism. We have therefore glorified God, the Savior of all, congratulating one another, because both the Churches with us and those with you have a faith that accords with the divinely-inspired Scriptures and the tradition of our holy Fathers." When these things were read, the members of the synod exclaimed with such words: "We all believe thus; Pope Leo believes thus. Anathema to him who divides and to him who confuses. This is the faith of Leo the archbishop; Leo believes thus; Leo and Anatolius believe thus. We all ^B believe thus, and Cyril believes thus. Eternal be the memory of Cyril; and the epistles of Cyril are [what] we hold, [what] we believed, [what] we believe. Leo the archbishop thinks thus, believes thus, wrote thus." And when a discussion took place so that the epistle of Leo might be read, it was read having been translated into the Greek language, which is reported verbatim in the acts, after the reading of which the bishops shouted: "This is the faith of the Fathers; this is the faith of the apostles. We all believe thus; we the orthodox believe thus. Anathema to him who does not believe thus. Peter has spoken thus through Leo; the apostles taught ^C thus. Piously and truly Leo has taught; Cyril has taught thus; Leo and Cyril have taught in like manner. Anathema to him who does not believe thus. This is the true faith; the orthodox believe thus. This is the faith of the Fathers. Why were these things not read at Ephesus? Dioscorus suppressed these things." That also is found in the commentaries of the acts: "After a certain part of the epistle of Leo was read, containing this: 'And to pay the debt of our nature, the divine nature was united to that which is subject to suffering, so that, as was appropriate for our healing, one and the same mediator ^D of God and men, Christ Jesus, might be able to die by the one, and by the other might not be able to die.'" Regarding this statement of Leo, the Illyrian and likewise the Palestinian bishops having raised objections, the aforementioned Aetius, the archdeacon of the most holy Church of Constantinople, brought forward another statement of holy Cyril, setting it forth in these words: "Since again his own body, by the grace of God, as the apostle Paul says, tasted death for everyone, he is said to have suffered that death for our sake; not as if attaining to the experience of death, so far as his own nature is concerned—for it is an insanity to say or to think this—but because, as I said just now, his flesh tasted death." And again regarding the statement of Leo's epistle which says: "For each form performs with the communion of the other what is proper to it; the Word performing that which is of the Word, and the body performing..."

[The text begins, continuing from the end of the previous page:]

...as the apostle Paul says, he tasted death for everyone, that he underwent death for us, it is said of him (the Word, that is): not that he faced the danger of death, so far as his own nature is concerned (for to say or to think this is the height of folly), but because, as I just said, his flesh tasted death. ^A Again, regarding the statement in the letter of Leo, which runs thus: "For each form performs, in communion with the other, what is proper to it; the Word performing that which belongs to the Word, and the body accomplishing that which belongs to the body; and that [the former] shines forth in miracles, while this [the latter] is subject to injuries and insults," to this statement, I say, the Illyrians and Palestinians being once more in doubt, Aetius read another chapter of Cyril, which runs thus: "Some utterances indeed befit God to the greatest degree, while others again are suited to man, and others still occupy a middle position, indicating that the Son of God is at once God and man." After this, the aforementioned bishops were in doubt concerning another part of Leo’s letter, the words of which are these: "For even if in the Lord Jesus Christ the person of God and man is one, yet that from which in both cases there is a common injury and insult is one thing, and that from which a common glory consists is another. For from us there is in him a humanity lesser than the Father, but from the Father there is in him a divinity equal to the Father." ^B Thereupon Theodoret, weighing these words with a fair balance, reported that the blessed Cyril also had said these things word for word: "And having become man and not having changed what was his own, he remained what he was; and the one dwells in the other, namely the divine nature with men."

Upon this, the most noble princes asked if there was any controversy still remaining, and all declared that they had no doubts at all. Then Atticus, bishop of Nicopolis, requested that he be allowed a few days, so that with a calm and quiet mind he might be able to put into a final statement the decree of God and the divine Fathers. He also asked to be given the letter of Cyril to Nestorius, in which Cyril admonishes him to give his assent to his twelve chapters, just as all the others had done. And the princes having consulted, they granted an interval of five days so that he might meet with Anatolius, the prelate of Constantinople. ^C All the bishops praised these things with favorable acclamations, crying out: "We believe thus; all of us believe thus; we believe just as Leo does. None of us has doubts. We have all signed." Then these words were spoken: "It is not necessary for all of you to assemble. But since it is equitable that the faith of those who are in doubt should be confirmed, let the most devout bishop Anatolius select from among the signatories those whom he deems suitable to instruct those who are in doubt." ^D Thereupon those who had gathered in the synod shouted: "We ask the Fathers to restore the Fathers to the synod, so that they may bring the voices and prayers of the orthodox to the emperor: we have all sinned, [we ask] pardon for all."

Other such things having occurred, the proceedings of that assembly came to an end.

In the ^B following session, once the senate had decreed by interlocution that the decisions of the council, reduced to the form of a constitution, should be read, Constantine the secretary came forward and read from a document the following verbatim: "With regard to the right and catholic faith, we decree that on the following day, when the council has assembled, a more diligent inquiry must be made. And because Flavian, high priest of divine memory, and the most religious bishop Eusebius, by the inquiry into the acts and records which were read, and by the very words of certain persons who presided over the council celebrated at that time, and who confessed that they had been deceived and had wrongly deposed those who had in no way strayed from the faith, have been proven to have been unjustly deposed: it seems to us, in accordance with what is pleasing to God—insofar as our most godlike and most religious Lord shall also judge this to be fitting—that the same penalty should be imposed upon the most religious Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, and the most religious Juvenalis, ^C bishop of Jerusalem, and the most religious Thalassius, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and the most religious Eusebius, bishop of Ancyra, and the most religious Eustathius, bishop of Berytus, and the most religious Basilius, bishop of Seleucia in Isauria, who presided over that council at that time: namely, that according to the sacred canons they should be removed from episcopal dignity, and that everything that followed thereafter should be referred to the sacred majesty." And after the reading of certain opinions, the bishops who were gathered there were asked whether the letter of Pope Leo was in agreement with the faith of the three hundred and eighteen Fathers and, again, of the hundred and fifty Fathers. Then Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople, and the rest, replied that the letter of Leo agreed most fully with the aforesaid divine Fathers; and immediately all subscribed to it.

With these things thus proceeding, all those of the synod cried out: "We all assent, we all approve, we all believe the same, we all think the same; we all believe thus. Let the Fathers be restored to the synod, let the subscribers be restored to the synod. Long live the Emperor Augustus for many years. Long live the Empress Augusta for many years. Let the Fathers be restored to the synod. Those who believe the same as we do, let them be restored to the synod. Long live the Emperor for many years. Those who agree with us in opinion, let them be restored to the synod. May the Emperor live for many years. We all have signed the faith. As Leo [believes], so do we also believe." Following this, an interlocution was pronounced in these words: "We have referred to our most godlike and most pious lord concerning these matters, and we await the response of his piety. But ^D your reverence, even regarding Dioscorus who was deposed at your hands, is ignorant both of the most godlike majesty and of us..."

as well as of all things transacted in the synod, and shall render an account to God. ^A They shouted, saying: "God has deposed Dioscorus; Dioscorus was justly deposed; Christ has deposed Dioscorus." When the response from Marcian was brought in, and he permitted them to decide concerning the deposed bishops, as had been made known through the magistrates, the synod said in these exact words: "We ask that they enter; let those who are of the same mind as the synod, those who are of the same opinion as the synod, those who have subscribed to the letter of Leo, be restored to the synod." Following this, petitions from the bishops of the Egyptian diocese were presented to the Emperor Marcian and read, which, among other things, contained these words: "We hold exactly as the three hundred and eighteen [Fathers] set forth in the city of Nicaea, ^B and the blessed Athanasius, and Cyril among the saints, anathematizing all heresy, that of Arius and Eunomius, and of Manes and Nestorius, and of those who say that the flesh of our Lord is from heaven, and not from the holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, according to the likeness of us all, without sin." To which the synod shouted, saying: "The dogma of Eutyches, why do they not also subject it to anathema? They ought to subscribe to the letter of Leo; anathematizing Eutyches and his dogmas, let them agree with the letter of Leo. They wish to mock us and depart." To this the Egyptian bishops said: "There are many bishops in Egypt, and it is not permitted for us to take on the person of those who are absent." And they brought a petition to the synod to wait for their own archbishop, that they might be moved by his judgment according to the synodical custom. ^C For if they were to proceed to do anything before the decision of their leader, the bishops of the province would set [the blame] upon them. After a great dispute had arisen between them and the synod, with difficulty was it granted to them to wait until a bishop should be appointed for them. Then the petitions of certain monks were brought forward, the gist of which was that no necessity be imposed upon them to subscribe to any papers until the whole synod, which the emperor himself had ordered to be gathered, was assembled, and the things that were well-decreed might be discerned. When these were read, Diogenes, Bishop of Cyzicus, spoke up, [saying] that Barsumas was one of those who had come there, for he was the one who shouted, "Slay [him]," he who slew Flavian; ^D and that he had not, as was fitting, obtained entry, not being included in the petitions. To which all the bishops shouted: "Barsumas has laid waste all of Syria; he has brought a thousand monks against us." And when the matter arose that those who had come together should await the synodical definition, the monks requested that the memorials [libelli] they had brought with them be read, a part of which was that Dioscorus and the bishops with him should be brought before the assembly. To this, all the bishops shouted: "Anathema to Dioscorus! Christ has deposed Dioscorus. Cast these men out! Remove the insult from the synod! Remove the violence from the synod! Remove the shame from the synod!" To which the monks, resisting, shouted: "Remove the insult to the monasteries! Slay [him],"

^A or eject those who do not hold to the orthodox faith!" They also demanded that the petitions of Faustus and the other monks be read aloud, in which they besought the emperor not to deign to receive those monks who opposed the correct dogmas; among whom was Dorotheus, who had named Eutyches orthodox, against whom, in the presence of the princes, various opinions regarding Eutyches were brought forth.

^B Afterward, in the fifth session, the princes said that what had been formulated regarding the faith was clear to all. And Asclepiades, a deacon of the Church of Constantinople, came forward and read the definition, which it was not deemed proper to insert into the minutes. To this, some objected, but the majority assented. And after various outcries had been made, the princes said that Dioscorus claimed he had deposed Flavian because he had said there were two natures, whereas the definition held that it was "from two natures." To this, Anatolius replied that it was not for the sake of the faith that Dioscorus had been condemned, but because he had excommunicated Leo and had not appeared when summoned three times. And from that time on ^C the princes ordered that the things in the letter of Leo be placed into the definition. The bishops, however, refused, saying that no other definition should be formed, for the previous one was complete; the matter concerning these things was reported to the emperor. He ordered six of the Eastern bishops to be chosen, three from the Pontic diocese, likewise three from the Asian, three from Thrace, and an equal number from Illyricum; and he commanded that the legates of Rome and Anatolius be present: that they should meet ^D at the most celebrated martyrium of Euphemia and correctly establish the profession of the faith; and that each should declare his own faith, or know that the synod would be transferred to the Western part of the world. And when they were required to say whether they followed Dioscorus, who spoke of Christ as being *from* two natures, or Leo, who taught that two natures come together in Christ, they shouted that they believed with Leo, and that those who said otherwise were to be called Eutychians. And as the princes had said that there should be added "two natures united, unchangeable, indivisible, and unconfused in Christ according to Leo," and therefore

after the princes had arrived at the martyrium of Saint Euphemia ^A together with Anatolius and the legates of Leo, at which place also Maximus of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, and Thalassius of Caesarea in Cappadocia were present along with others, and when they had gone out of the temple, the definition of the synod ^B was read, having the following form: "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..." and the rest which I have inserted into the context of this history. After this, when all exclaimed: "This is the very faith of the Fathers; let the metropolitans subscribe to it immediately. This is the faith of the apostles; we all agree to this; we all so think." The princes, speaking in the interval, answered that they would report to the sacred majesty those things which had been established by the Fathers and approved by all.

In the sixth assembly ^C Marcian himself was present, and first, before the gathering, he spoke to the bishops concerning the concord of the orthodox and right faith. Then, by his command, the definition of the faith was read by the archdeacon Aetius, and all subscribed to it. The emperor asked further if the definition had been written with the consent of all; and all confirmed it with auspicious acclamations. And the emperor again made a speech, and all praised it. After this, at the urging of the emperor, canons were established, and metropolitan rights were granted to the city of Chalcedon. The emperor also commanded the bishops to wait three or four days, and that each of them should bring forward what he wished, so that in the presence of the princes what was equitable might be decided. And thus that assembly was dissolved.

Another meeting also took place, and other canons were established. And when another assembly was held, Maximus of Antioch and Juvenal of Jerusalem sat together. And it was decided that the see of Antioch should have the two Phoenicias and Arabia itself, but that the three Palestinian provinces should obey the one of Jerusalem. And these things were confirmed by the bishops and the princes. In the ninth session, the case concerning Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, was dealt with; and rising up, he anathematized Nestorius, saying: "Anathema to Nestorius, and to him who does not call the holy virgin Mary Mother of God, and who divides the one only-begotten Son into two Sons. I also have subscribed to the definition ^D and to the letter of Leo." And so, with the consent of all, he recovered his see. In another meeting, it was brought about that the case of Ibas, bishop of Edessa, should be examined. His letter was read, which Photius, bishop of Tyre, and Eustathius, bishop of Beirut, opposed in the judgment. The decision on this matter was deferred to the next session, which, after it was convened as the eleventh, with more bishops present, some decreed that he should be a priest only; but other bishops spoke in opposition, saying that his adversaries were outside and asking that it be permitted for them to enter. And the acts concerning him were read. And when the princes said that the things done at Ephesus regarding [that matter] should be read, the bishops answered: "The things done at Ephesus the second time were judged to be invalid."

except for the ordination of Maximus of Antioch. And they brought a petition to the emperor concerning this, that he should decree that nothing of the things performed in the second synod at Ephesus should hold force, unless it were the first synod held there, which the most holy Cyril, shepherd of Alexandria, presided over. And these things being said, Ibas was vindicated in holding the bishopric. ^B And at the twelfth session the matters concerning Bassianus, the bishop of Ephesus, were discussed; and it was decided that he should depart from the bishopric, and that Stephanus should succeed him. And through another synod these things were confirmed. The thirteenth session having taken place, the matters concerning Eunomius of Nicomedia and Anastasius of Nicaea were examined, who were contending with one another concerning the boundaries of their own provinces to be administered. The fourteenth session was also convened, in which the affairs of Bassianus were treated. And last of all, the synod granted that right to the throne of Constantinople, confirming that it should hold the position and order immediately after Rome. And so the synod reached its conclusion.

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

VOLUME XVI

CHAPTER I

Concerning the reign of Zeno; and that being intemperate and living a completely dissolute life, he destroyed many regions of the Roman Empire.

The things that happened in the churches under the administration of the pious emperors Marcian and Leo were as follows; but Zeno, after he took up the empire, did not think that he could rightly govern the sum of affairs unless he should enjoy with supreme power all the pleasures that might happen to come his way: to which he so abandoned himself from the very first starting-gate, as they say, that he gave no

^A thought to curbing his inclination toward the worse; but he behaved so wantonly in his shameful deeds that he considered it base and ignoble to do such things in secret and in a corner. He judged it rather to be worthy of a prince and emperor, if performed openly and, as one might say, from a vantage point and without any shame, which is a servile and highly dangerous way of thinking. I, however, would say that a true emperor is not to be recognized by the fact that he rules over others, but by his ability to rule and master himself, and by not allowing any of the low things to enter into him. From this, he becomes unassailable by base deeds, and as he has distanced himself as far as possible from intemperance, he might become, as it were, a living statue of virtue, drawing all under his hand toward imitation. But he who abandons himself to pleasures seems to me to be a most shameful, triple slave, or rather a captive taken in war, yielding little by little to the inclinations toward the worse, just like some useless slave who is constantly changing masters. By this, the mistresses of his pleasures, which baffle counting, become his masters, for by the successive and continuous nature of this wickedness, they never allow him to come to an end, since the pleasure at hand does not stop, but is, as it were, a spark and a prelude to that which follows, always wooing ^B even worse things. And this must proceed until someone becomes a true emperor, and chases away this mob-rule of varied pleasures to such an extent that he may henceforth reign, and not be tyrannized by them—or by those subtle suggestions, charmed by the smoothness of pleasure. Like a triple-slave, he serves a wicked mistress until the final moment, until he meets with the punishments in Hades. Such was Zeno from the very beginning and entrance of his reign, a man uncomposed, dissolute, intemperate, and corrupt. Hence, he did not render to him who handed over the scepter the honor due from pious works, and he administered the empire badly. For the entire subject population, both in the East and in the West, was afflicted. For the peoples who derive their origin from ^C Agar ravaged Mesopotamia. But an infinite multitude of Huns, who were formerly called Massagetae, crossed the Ister and ran through Thrace without fear, in the great desolation caused by the lack of anyone to stop them. And whatever was left by these was forcibly taken away by Zeno, who invaded it just as hostelly as the barbarians themselves. Nor did he merely afflict distant places with damage, but he also laid waste his own house through absurd and filthy pleasures. ^D

CAPUT II. Concerning the tyranny of Basiliscus; and how Zeno was driven from power. Timotheus Aelurus and Peter Gnapheus, having recovered their own sees, armed themselves against the Fourth Synod.

Indeed, after a short time had elapsed, Basiliscus, brother of the Augusta Verina, rose up against him.

^A He, ^B however, thinking nothing at all that became a man and an emperor, but rather something ungenerous and abject (for a matter is altogether desperate when impiety is given over to passions, and an effeminate spirit is indicated by the fact that it yields to pleasures), and suspecting ^A the guile of Verina, ^B fled headlong during a great storm into the region of the Isaurians, taking with him Ariadne, his wife, who had at last fled from her mother, and any others who were kindly disposed toward him. ^C Basiliscus, for his part, having seized the empire like some booty without bloodshed, first placed the diadem upon himself, and then created his own son, Marcus, Caesar. Having prepared an adequate army, he sent it to besiege Zeno at Seleucia in Isauria, in which city he [Zeno], as he had previously been brought into the light there, so now lay hidden as a fugitive, committing the war against Zeno ^D to Illus and Trocundus. When he thought his affairs were well established, just as it seemed to him, he decided that he should be less bound by the laws. He even thought that he ought not to rule at all, unless he administered the commonwealth in a manner contrary to what Leo and those who had ruled before him had done. His wife, Zenonis, whom he also proclaimed Augusta, chiefly instigated him to this course. Joined with her, he set himself in battle array against the confession of faith. First, at the petition of certain Alexandrian envoys, he recalled Timothy Aelurus from the exile in which he had lived for eighteen years, at a time when Acacius, the orphanotrophos and curator of orphans, was presiding over the Church of Constantinople after the great Gennadius. Aelurus came to the imperial city and, leading a cohort of dissolute men with him, processed magnificently; and, riding upon an ass, he went from the imperial palace to the church for the sake of supplication. But as the beast happened to fall down, he himself fractured his foot and departed from there in disgrace. Basiliscus also summoned Peter the Fuller from the Monastery of the Acoemetae, where he lay hidden in some place; and he distributed to Aelurus the throne of Alexander, and to the Fuller that of Antioch, having driven out Timothy, who had succeeded Proterius, and the holy Calandion. These, as soon as they had received those sees, having manfully taken up arms, subjected the Fourth Synod to anathema. Basiliscus permitted much license to many others as well, whom he knew to be sufficiently capable of opposing ecclesiastical opinions. But before Aelurus and the Fuller received their own thrones—while they were still remaining in Constantinople—they persuaded Basiliscus to send circular letters to all the bishops, by which he would condemn the Council of Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo by anathema. He, easily complying with them, wrote as follows:

Chapter III. Circular letters of Basiliscus against the holy fourth synod, written by the agency of Timothy and Peter.

^A Imperator Caesar Basiliscus, pious, victor, triumphator, greatest, ever-august Augustus, and Marcus, most noble Caesar, to Timothy, most holy and most God-beloved archbishop of the great city of the Alexandrians, and to all priests of God throughout the East and West. None of the laws which the most pious emperors before us, who worshipped ^B the blessed, immortal, and life-giving Trinity rightly, have decreed on behalf of the orthodox and apostolic faith—laws which have always served as a salvation to the whole world—do we wish to be neglected or abolished at any time; rather, we proclaim them as our own laws. Since we prefer piety and the zeal for our God and Savior Jesus Christ, who made and glorified us, to all concern for human affairs, and furthermore believe that the union of Christ's flock is his salvation and the firm, unshaken wall of our empire, we are therefore moved by a divine zeal of mind. Offering to God and our Savior Jesus Christ the union of the holy Church as the first-fruits ^C of our empire, we decree that the foundation and confirmation of human well-being—that is, the Symbol of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers, who were long ago gathered in Nicaea with the Holy Spirit together in ecclesiastical assembly, into which we and all who were before us have been baptized in the true faith—is alone to prevail and be maintained in all the most holy churches of God by the orthodox people, as the only true definition of the unswerving faith. It is sufficient both for the complete eradication of every heresy and for the supreme union of the holy churches of God, ^D while they have their own power, as do the things that were enacted in this reigning city against those who blasphemed against the Holy Spirit by the hundred and fifty holy Fathers, and also all the things that were accomplished in the metropolis of the Ephesians against the impious Nestorius and those who held his views thereafter. But those things which divide the union and good order of the holy churches of God and the peace of the whole world—namely, the so-called Tome of Leo, and all that was said and done at Chalcedon by way of a formula or decree of faith, or edition of a symbol, or exposition, or teaching, or disputation, by way of novelty against the aforementioned holy symbol of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers—we decree, both here and everywhere in every church, that they be anathematized by the most holy bishops everywhere, and delivered to the fire wherever they may be found, because of the way all heretics have been ordered...

^A by the doctrines, and the emperors who preceded us in piety and blessed rest, Constantine and Theodosius the Younger; and that things thus becoming chaff should be utterly cast out from the one and only catholic and apostolic orthodox Church; as they remove the eternal and saving boundaries of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers, and those of the blessed Fathers who defined these things by the Holy Spirit, and those who met at Ephesus.

It is absolutely forbidden for any priest or layman ever to make any transgression of that most divine legislation of the holy Symbol. Furthermore, along with all the things innovated at Chalcedon against the sacred Symbol, we deem the heresy of those who do not confess the only-begotten Son of God—having been truly incarnate and made man of the Holy Spirit and of the holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary—to be butchered by anathema, but who babble monstrosities that he either came from heaven or was imagined to be man through phantasy and appearance. ^B And absolutely every other heresy, and if anything else at any time, in any manner, or in any place throughout the whole world, has been innovated in word or in sentiment against the sacred Symbol.

Since it belongs to imperial providence to provide for the safety of its subjects not only for the present time, but also for those to come, through forward-looking consideration, we command the most holy bishops everywhere to subscribe to this divine circular letter of ours, clearly declaring that they adhere solely to the divine Symbol of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers, which the one hundred and fifty holy Fathers sealed; as was also decreed ^C by the most holy Fathers who later assembled at the metropolis of Ephesus: that it is necessary to adhere solely to the holy Symbol of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers as the rule of faith; anathematizing all that was done at Chalcedon that causes offense to the orthodox nations, and utterly casting them out of the churches, as being a hindrance to the ecumenical and our own well-being.

As for those who, after this divine writing of ours—which we are persuaded has been promulgated by the counsel of God to bring about the union of the holy Church of God desired by all—dare ever, in disputation, or in teaching, or in writings, at any time, or in any manner, or in any place, to propose, or even to mention, the innovations against the faith made at Chalcedon, we command that such persons, as ^D authors of disturbance and instability in the holy churches of God and for all our subjects, and as enemies of God and of our own salvation, be—according to the laws previously established before us against such malice by the emperor Theodosius who is in blessed and divine rest, and which are attached to this divine circular letter of ours—if they are bishops or clergy, to be deposed; and if they are monastics or laymen, to suffer exile and confiscation of all goods, and to be subject to the ultimate penalties. For thus the holy, consubstantial, creative, and life-giving Trinity, which is always worshipped by our piety, will be honored and now...

^A by our abolition of the aforesaid tares and our confirmation of the straight and apostolic traditions of the holy symbol, it will be placable and propitious both to our souls and to all our subjects, and will dwell with us forever and bring peace to human affairs.

CAPUT IV. Concerning those who subscribed to the circular letters of Basiliscus; and the letter of the bishops of Asia, attacking the holy fourth synod.

To these circulars, not only Timotheus and Peter, those whom we mentioned, gave their consent, but also Anastasius, who held the see of Jerusalem after Juvenal, subscribed very readily, as did very many other prelates of the churches, ^B not fewer than five hundred; all of whom repudiated both the Tome of Leo and the synod at Chalcedon. This is proven to be true by the petition written to Basiliscus by the bishops in Asia who had assembled at the metropolis of Ephesus, which sets forth these things word for word: "To our masters in all things most pious and Christ-loving, Basiliscus and Marcus, eternal victors, Augusti." And after a few words: "In all things, most pious and Christ-loving princes, you have shown that you are engaging in a distinguished war against the hated and hostile faith." And after other things: ^C"A terrible expectation of judgment, and the ardor of divine fire, and the just indignation of your serenity will cast at your feet those adversaries who dare to attack the mighty God and your empire, which is confirmed by faith, with the arrows of proud vengeance, and who, sparing our weakness in no way, continually afflict us with calumnies and sycophantic falsehoods, as if we had subscribed to your divine and apostolic circular letters by force and some necessity, whereas we did so with all joy and alacrity." And afterwards: ^D"Do not, therefore, desire to issue or propose any other letters than your own sacred circulars. And know that which we have said: that the whole world will be overturned again, and those evils which happened in the synod of Chalcedon will appear small—the evils which have indeed caused those countless slaughters and have shed the blood of the orthodox iniquitously and unlawfully." And after a few other things: "We attest before our Savior Jesus Christ that your piety is free and innocent. We beseech that the judgment and sentence of deposition, being just and canonical and ecclesiastical, be brought against them—and especially against him who has been discovered in many ways to hold the bishopric of the imperial city unholily."

CAPUT V.

Once those circular letters had been published, as Zacharias says, those who dreamed of Eutyches’ opinion, and who pursued the monastic life, happening upon them as if upon some windfall, hurried to him on account of the circular scriptures and the unexpected honor of Timotheus. And when they came to speech with Timotheus, and heard that the Word of God is consubstantial with us according to the flesh, and again consubstantial with the Father according to his divinity, they returned to their own places. The same writer records that Timotheus, when departing from the city as if to sail back to Alexandria, put in at Ephesus and installed Paul on the episcopal throne; ^B who had previously received his ordination from the bishops of the province, as was the ancient custom for that see, but had been driven from his throne. He also restored to the city of the Ephesians the ancient patriarchal rights which the Synod of Chalcedon had taken from it. And having accomplished these things there, he came to Alexandria, where he immediately persuaded everyone to condemn the Synod of Chalcedon by anathema, just as I have said before. Many also resisted him, and many others, including that Theodotus—one of those who had been ordained by Theodosius at Joppa, and who had piratically seized the church of Jerusalem when Juvenal had gone to Byzantium—fell away from his faction.

CAPUT VI.

When Basiliscus had acted in this manner, he insisted with force that Acacius also receive his circular letters and subject the Synod of Chalcedon to anathema, since the three great thrones had already done this. It is said that he was greatly grieved, and that he shrouded himself, his throne, and the altar of the sacrifice in black vestments; then, having gathered the populace and the order of monks of the imperial city, he struggled ^C strenuously against the tyrant. At which time, even the great Daniel descended from his pillar and held ecclesiastical assemblies with Acacius. Basiliscus, fearing the movement of the urban populace, returned from the church to the imperial palace, and instructed the senate not to offer any molestation to Acacius, because the multitude was prepared to set fire to the city. Daniel, having taken up the multitude of the people and the monks, approached the tyrant and spoke freely and openly to him concerning the right dogmas. Being thus compelled by Acacius and Daniel, he renounced his former circular letters, and ordered that the constitution which had been obtained surreptitiously ^D by means of those circulars should be utterly abolished, and that anti-circular letters should be written and sent throughout the world, contrary to those...

circulars which had been written in a far different manner, and which defended the Synod of Chalcedon. Now Zacharias, who wrote his whole account under the influence of his own partisan feelings, omitted in his history the letters written in opposition to the former circulars; but I, having found them somewhere, shall append them here. Their words are as follows:

Chapter VII. The opposing circular letters of Basiliscus.

^A "The Emperors Caesars, Basiliscus and Marcus. The apostolic and orthodox faith, which has held sway in the Catholic churches from the beginning and down to the times of our reign, and which obtains under our reign, and which ought in perpetuity so to obtain, into which also we have been baptized and which we believe, we decree that this alone, being inviolate and ^B unshaken, shall obtain and be celebrated forever in all the orthodox, Catholic, and apostolic churches, and that nothing else ought to be required. For this reason, we command that whatever has been enacted and issued under our reign, whether it be circular letters or other writings, whatsoever they may be, promulgated for the sake of the profession of faith or of ecclesiastical order, shall be null and void and abrogated. We condemn with anathema Nestorius and Eutyches, and all other heresies, and all who think the same things as they do. We decree also that no synod be convened ^C regarding the cause of the faith, nor any other inquiry be introduced, but that these things which we approve shall remain firm and unshaken. And that the provinces should be restored to the most holy and most pious patriarch and archbishop Acacius, the ordination of whose prelates the throne of this imperial and glorious city has held—that is to say, with the most God-beloved bishops who now are remaining in their own sees—without any prejudice being created after their death regarding the rights of ordination of the holy throne of this imperial ^D and glorious city. This our divine decree, having the force of a sacred constitution, ought not to be called into question or controversy by anyone." Thus these things were enacted.

Chapter VIII. How Zeno returned again to his own empire; and Basiliscus perished.

Now Basiliscus, since he waged war against the faith, incurred the hatred of all. When those to whom the siege of Zeno had been entrusted learned of this, they were reconciled to Zeno, having sworn an oath that they would be faithful to him; and having received him, they hastened towards the imperial city, having indeed already received gifts from him, and having stipulated to receive others. Some say, furthermore, that the protomartyr Thecla, who struggled much and strenuously, appeared to him in mystical visions and confirmed to him the restoration of his empire. When this had come to pass, Zeno, to show gratitude to the martyr for such a notification, dedicated in the metropolis of Seleucia a temple that was very vast and preeminent in beauty, which he adorned with much gold and imperial offerings. But Basiliscus, the agitation...

of Zeno having become known to him, sent his cousin Harmatius, the commander of the forces in Thrace, against him to hinder his progress, and bound him with a truly horrible oath that he would never join himself to Zeno. But Harmatius, having engaged with him at Nicaea, cast such fear into him that he thought it useless to attempt the matter, unless he could overcome him with gifts and promises—namely, that he would adorn his son, Basiliscus, with the Caesarian diadem. And so, having induced him also to disregard the sanctity of his oath, Zeno had him on his side against Basiliscus. But Basiliscus, having learned of these matters, immediately changed his mind; and having placed the imperial crown upon the holy table, he took refuge as a suppliant with his wife, Zenonis, at the baptistery. Zeno, having been immediately received at Constantinople, went first to the great church, and then, with great pomp and retinue, entered the imperial palace. Basiliscus, however, having played the tyrant in the Roman empire for twenty months, was sent to Cappadocia to die; and in a certain mansion or military lodging house, which goes by the name of Acusus, he was executed along with his wife and children. ^B Zeno immediately held the Circensian games. Then, departing from what he had sworn a little before that he would do, he indeed raised the son of Harmatius, Basiliscus, to the dignity of Caesar; but later, thinking that he would not be more faithful to him than he had been to Basiliscus, he ordered him to be slaughtered; and he made his son, the Caesar, a priest, who long afterward administered the church of Cyzicus in the best manner.

CAPUT IX. That the Asian bishops sent a book of repentance to Acacius, appeasing him concerning the synod.

Zeno, as soon as he was restored to the empire, immediately abrogated by a written constitution whatever had been innovated by the tyrant Basiliscus through circular letters against the faith. When the Asian bishops understood this, having sent books of repentance to Acacius, the bishop of Constantinople, they sought to be granted pardon, employing this plea: that they had not subscribed to the circulars of their own accord, but having been driven by greatest force. And they confirmed with an oath that the matter was so and not otherwise, and that they assented to the Chalcedonian synod, and had believed in accordance with its decree both before and now. ^C This was the writing of the bishops: "To Acacius, the most holy and most pious patriarch of the most holy Church that is in the imperial Constantinople, the new Rome." And after a few words: "It rightly came to us, who also..."

"We signify by humble petitions that we have subscribed not out of the disposition of our mind, but compelled by necessity, assenting to those circulars in letters and words only, not by the intent of our mind. For in our acceptable prayers, God consenting, we believe those things which we have received from the luminaries of the whole world, the three hundred and eighteen, and again from the one hundred and fifty holy Fathers, and in addition to these, those things which have been piously and rightly established by the divine Fathers gathered at Chalcedon." ^A These things the bishops wrote. Now, whether Zacharias, who composed these things driven by his passions, sycophantically imputed this to them, or whether the bishops themselves lied—stating that they had signed the circular constitution against their own judgment, as they wrote to Acacius, as we narrated a little while ago—I cannot discern or pronounce with certainty. Such, indeed, were these events. ^B

CAPUT X. How Zeno expelled Peter the Fuller and others from Antioch; and he restored the throne to Calandion. And concerning the bringing back of the relics of Saint Eustathius of Antioch.

Zeno expelled Peter the Fuller from Antioch, as one who had been recalled by Basiliscus, and restored the episcopate to Calandion, who succeeded Stephen. He also drove Paul from Ephesus, and Nestorius from Tarsus, and Cyrus from Hierapolis, and Romanus from Chalcedon, and Eusebius from Samosata, and Julian from Mopsuestia, and Paul from Constantia, and ^C Andrew from Theodosiopolis. Calandion, moreover, would admit no one to communion who did not first anathematize Peter and the circulars of Basiliscus. And with the will and consent of Zeno, the relics of the divine Eustathius, who had ended his life in exile at Philippi in Macedonia, were brought back to Antioch with great reverence; and the city, having poured out—the entire population—to the eighteenth milestone outside the city, received them with the greatest joy. And those who, up to that time, had separated themselves from the Church, after one hundred years had passed, were at last completely united with the Church. ^D

CAPUT XI. How, after Timothy Aelurus, Peter the Moggus became bishop in Alexandria; then again Timothy Salophaciolus; then John the Tubennesiote; and after him again Peter the Moggus, having received those who had followed Proterius, and having subscribed to the Henoticon of Zeno.

Zeno had determined to expel Timothy Aelurus also from Alexandria. But when he learned that he had reached a deep old age and was now not far from the tomb, he abandoned his plan. And he departed not long after to the judgment of the underworld. The Alexandrians, however, having usurped power and authority for themselves, chose for themselves a shepherd far worse in impiety than Aelurus, another Peter by surname Moggus; whose ordination, as they say, one or two bishops performed, and...

whose priesthood was legitimately ^A stripped of him. When Zeno learned of this, he punished with death those who had chosen him as bishop. But he restored to his see Timotheus Salophaciolus, the successor of Proterius, whom (as we have said) he had been living in Canopus, and whom Moggus had supplanted for thirty-six days. Timotheus thus recovered his own throne by imperial letters. Not long after, some began to take counsel to send a legate to the emperor, namely John, a presbyter of Tabenna, who had been appointed steward of the church of the venerable Forerunner and Baptist; so that if it should happen that their bishop should depart from among men, the Alexandrians would have the authority to elect as president whomever they might wish. But when the legate was caught seeking ^B the episcopate for himself, as Zacharias says, having given oaths to the emperor that he would never take the throne of Alexandria, he returned home; and the emperor decreed by a constitution that, after the death of Timotheus—John alone excepted—Alexandria should receive as bishop whomsoever the clergy and the people might choose. Not long after, when Timotheus had departed this life, John, counting the pacts and the oath of little value, and having corrupted certain persons with money, as the same Zacharias says, ascended to the episcopal throne. When this was done, Zeno ordered that he be cast out, but at the suggestion of Acacius he gave to the Alexandrians a document, which he ^C called the "Henotikon," or "Instrument of Union," in which he commanded that the throne be given back to Peter Moggus, if indeed he were willing to subscribe to the document, and to receive the followers of Proterius, and not to reject the fourth synod. This arrangement of the matter, decided upon by the opinion of Acacius (as I have said), was carried to Alexandria by Pergamius, who had recently been appointed prefect of the Egyptian province. After he arrived there and learned that John had fled to Rome, he conferred with Peter Moggus and persuaded him to receive the Henotikon, the document of Zeno, and also those who had seceded from the Church. He immediately ^D subscribed to the volume; and when a public assembly of the people was being held in Alexandria, because Zeno’s Henotikon was pleasing to everyone, he admitted also those who had seceded on account of the party of Proterius. And when he had delivered an address to the people, which was not very long, which he had composed for the ecclesiastical assembly of the populace, he afterwards also read Zeno’s constitution to the multitude, composed in these words:

CHAPTER XII. Concerning the edict of Zeno, which is called the pacificatory [Henotikon], neither rejecting nor confirming the holy synod of Chalcedon.

"Emperor Caesar Zeno, pious, victor, triumpher, greatest, ever-revered, Augustus, to the most religious bishops and clerics and monks and laity throughout Alexandria and Egypt and Libya and Pentapolis. Knowing the beginning and constitution and power and unconquerable armor of our empire to be the only orthodox and true..."

faith, which the 318 holy Fathers assembled at Nicaea set forth, and which the 150 holy Fathers ^A assembled at Constantinople likewise confirmed, we strive night and day with all our prayers, our zeal, and our laws, so that through it the holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of God, the incorruptible and unending mother of our scepters, may everywhere increase, and that our pious people, remaining in the peace of divine religion and concord, may offer prayers acceptable on behalf of our empire, together with the God-beloved bishops, and the most pious clergy, archimandrites, and monastics. For when our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who was ^B incarnate and born of the holy Virgin and Theotokos Mary, praises and readily accepts our concordant glorification and worship, then the hostile nations shall be crushed and extinguished, and all shall bow their necks to our empire, which is ordained by God. Peace also, and the good things that come from it—the wholesomeness of the air, the abundance of crops, and other things that are beneficial to men—shall be liberally supplied. Thus, therefore, as the blameless faith preserves both us and the Roman state, petitions were brought to us by pious archimandrites and hermits and other venerable men, who ^C entreated us with tears that we might see to it that union be effected in the most holy churches, and that the members be joined to members, which the hater of good has for many years striven to separate, knowing that if he should wage war against the whole body of the Church, he will be defeated. For it results from this that countless nations and generations, which the times have carried off from this life over so many years, have departed, some without the laver of regeneration, others without the reception of divine communion, before their inevitable transition from this life; ^D and that countless slaughters have been committed, so that the wave of blood has contaminated and infected not only the earth, but the air itself. Who is there who would not pray that these things be changed for the better? Therefore, we wish you to know that neither we nor the churches everywhere possess, nor have we possessed, nor will we possess, nor do we know of any others possessing, any other symbol, or doctrine, or formula of faith, or faith at all, beyond that holy Symbol which (as has been said) was published by the 318 holy Fathers, and approved by the 150 holy Fathers whom we have also mentioned; and if anyone possesses such, we consider him a stranger. For we are confident that this alone, as we have said, preserves our empire. And all the people who are privileged to receive saving illumination are baptized having received this alone. The holy Fathers who assembled at Ephesus also followed this, who condemned the impious Nestorius and those who held his views thereafter. That same Nestorius, together with Eutyches, who held opinions contrary to those stated, we also anathematize, accepting also the twelve chapters

promulgated by Cyril of holy memory, the archbishop of the holy catholic Church of the Alexandrians. We profess that the only-begotten Son of God, who is God, who in truth became man, our Lord Jesus Christ—who is consubstantial with the Father according to his divinity, and the same one consubstantial with us according to his humanity, having come down and become incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of Mary the Virgin and Mother of God—is one and not two. For we declare that the miracles and the passions which he voluntarily endured in the flesh belong to the one. Those who divide him, or confuse him, or introduce a phantasm or apparition, we do not receive at all; for the sinless incarnation in truth from the Mother of God did not make an addition to the Son; for the Trinity remained the Trinity, even with the one of the Trinity, God the Word, having been incarnate. Knowing therefore that neither the holy orthodox churches of God everywhere, nor the most God-beloved priests who preside over them, nor our own imperial majesty, have accepted or accept any other symbol or definition of faith beyond the aforementioned holy teaching and formula, we have united ourselves, doubting nothing. These things we have written, not introducing anything new regarding the faith, but confirming you through the certain and perfect doctrine. Whoever has thought or thinks otherwise, either now or at any time past, or at Chalcedon, or in any synod whatsoever, we anathematize; and especially the aforementioned Nestorius and Eutyches, and those who hold their views. Unite yourselves, therefore, to your spiritual mother the Church, enjoying the same divine communion in her as we do, in accordance with the aforementioned one and only definition of the faith of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers. For your all-holy mother the Church awaits to embrace you as her dear, true sons, and desires to hear your pleasant voice at last. Therefore, bestir yourselves and make haste; for by doing these things, you will both secure for yourselves the favor of our Lord and Savior and God Jesus Christ, and be praised by our imperial majesty. When these letters had been read, all the people of Alexandria were joined and united to the holy catholic and apostolic Church, removing whatever stumbling blocks and impediments lay between them. ^A The things stated above by the person of blessed memory were such that they differed from those held by them, and we visit them with anathema; we also receive those twelve chapters ^B published by Cyril of holy memory, archbishop of the holy catholic Church of the Alexandrians. We profess that the only-begotten Son of God and God (who in truth was made man, our Lord Jesus Christ, who is consubstantial with the Father according to his divinity, and likewise consubstantial with us according to his humanity: and who descended and became incarnate from the Holy Spirit, and the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God) is one, and not two. For we say that the miracles and the sufferings which he endured of his own will in the flesh belong to the one. But those who divide him or confuse him, or introduce a phantom or spectrum, we by no means approve. And the incarnation, pure and devoid of every stain of sin, truly from the Mother of God, did not bring an addition to the Son: and the Trinity, by one of the Trinity, God the Word, having been incarnate, remained the Trinity. Since, therefore, we know that neither the holy orthodox churches of God that are everywhere, nor the most God-beloved priests who preside over them, nor our own imperial sublimitatem, have either brought forward or do now bring forward any other symbol or definition of faith beyond the holy doctrine and formula which we have mentioned, we have joined ourselves through union among ourselves, doubting nothing and hesitating nothing. ^C And we have written these things, not that we might bring forth anything new regarding the faith, but that we might confirm you through a certain and perfect doctrine. But whoever has held or holds any other view, either now or in any other synod, we subject to anathema: especially, however, those whom we have mentioned, Nestorius and Eutyches, and those who think the same as them. Join yourselves, therefore, through union to your spiritual mother Church, and enjoy her divine communion in her, through that one and only definition of the profession of faith of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers which we have mentioned. For your most holy mother the Church herself desires to embrace you as her own natural and true sons, with outstretched arms, and desires to hear your pleasant voice at last. Therefore, urge and incite yourselves. For if you do this, you will both reconcile to yourselves the kindness of our Lord and Savior and God Jesus Christ, and you will carry off exceptional praise from our imperial majesty. When these letters were read, all the Alexandrians were joined and united to the holy catholic and apostolic Church: and they took away whatever offenses and impediments had been in the middle. ^D Unum solummodo Christum Dei Patris Ver- bum cum propria carne cognoscimus. (Cyrill.) ... (The following is an alternative theological apparatus, omitted)

the inconstant and treacherous character of Peter Mongus.

^A Calandion, the bishop of Antioch, wrote to Acacius and Zeno, calling Peter an adulterer because of what had occurred, and because, while he was at Alexandria, he had subjected the holy fourth Synod to anathema. Calandion, having seized upon this occasion to support the cause of Illus, Leontius, and Pamprepius, who had revolted from Zeno and were aspiring to tyranny, was condemned to exile in the Oasis. Being thus expelled from Antioch, Peter the Fuller, having accomplished his design through intrigue, was again installed in the see of Antioch, which he had long coveted, after having subscribed to the Henoticon of Zeno. He sent synodical letters to Peter Mongus, the bishop of Alexandria, and in turn received the same from him. Martyrius, who had succeeded Anastasius at Jerusalem, likewise sent him similar letters in the customary manner. Acacius, who then governed the Church of Constantinople, was also in communion with him.

^B Not long after, however, some who had belonged to the party of Peter Mongus, seeing that he had changed his mind, broke off communion with him, alleging that he had been forced to anathematize the Council of Chalcedon in the church and to exhume the remains of Timothy. When Acacius of Constantinople learned of this, he took it very seriously and was greatly perturbed, to such an extent that he decided to send certain persons to Alexandria to discover the truth of the matter. When Peter learned that they had arrived after a diligent search, he assured them that he had done nothing of the kind. Gathering the multitude together, he drew up testimonials, the substance of which was written down, to the effect that Peter had done none of the things he was accused of. ^C But he was in truth like a buskin, or a Proteus of Pharos, or the Euripus—a man truly treacherous, who never remained of one mind, but always adapted himself to whatever the times and circumstances suggested. At one moment he accepted the Council of Chalcedon, and at another, as if singing a palinode, he rejected its every decree and condemned it to anathema. It will be clear, from the letters which he wrote to Acacius, the bishop of Constantinople, who had scrutinized his guile through this investigation, what kind of man he was. He wrote in the following words:

CHAPTER XIV. The Letter of Peter of Alexandria sent to Acacius, the bishop of the Queen of Cities.

^D The Most High God shall reward your holiness for such great labors and toils, which for the course of so many years you have undergone to preserve the profession of the faith of the holy Fathers, which you have tirelessly preached and confirmed. In which also the Creed of the 318 holy Fathers, rightly set forth and found therein, we have believed and do believe, as we were baptized according to it.

This also the one hundred and fifty holy Fathers who gathered at Constantinople confirmed. ^A Since therefore You lead all men unceasingly upon the right path, You have united the holy Church of God, having persuaded us through the greatest of proofs that nothing has been done contrary to these things in the holiest and ecumenical synod which took place at Chalcedon, which is in agreement with and confirms the things [set forth] by the holy Fathers at Nicaea. For having found nothing new in it, we have autonomously established and believed it. But we have learned that certain monks, envying our brotherhood, have brought certain slanders to your holy ears, not easily moving your holiness to grief. And first, indeed, that we have transferred the relics of our father among the saints, the blessed archbishop Timothy, to another place; a matter which is pleasing neither to God nor in accordance with the laws. And beyond these, they have leaped to another [charge], which is groundless and worse than the former. For how could we have been able to cast an anathema upon the holy synod at Chalcedon, to which we have pledged our faith and which we have confirmed? ^B But your piety is not unaware, nor has the zeal and fickleness of our people escaped your notice, nor the stirrings of those monks who look to novelties; who, having plotted with certain evil-minded men to break away from the Church, attempt to draw the people along with them. And through your prayers we have considered a way of healing that does not harm the holy synod at Chalcedon, knowing that nothing new was done in it, and we have brought those who gathered with us to say this, for the persuasion of the simple and for the sake of an apology. ^C And this matter, having become widespread, I quickly restrained. But I make it known to your holiness that even until now those monks who always sow tares do not cease, having installed themselves as instruments by moving into the monasteries of certain who never lived there. And they go about circulating various rumors against us, and against the ecclesiastical peace of Christ, and do not permit us in any way to act canonically and fittingly in the holy, catholic Church of God, preparing the people among us to command us rather than to obey us; and they desire to do all that is not pleasing to God. ^D We believe that your holiness will explain all these things to the most divine master of the inhabited world, and will ensure that a decree be issued by his serenity, in which there is provided guidance concerning ecclesiastical peace, such as is fitting to both God and the Emperor, and in which all may acquiesce. And such things did that buskin-wearer Peter, a man inconstant and fickle, write fraudulently to Acacius.

CAPUT XV.

John, the Bishop of Alexandria of the Tabennesian order, whom I have mentioned before, having fled from there, reached Rome and stirred up a disturbance, claiming that he had been expelled from his own throne because he defended the doctrine of Leo and the Synod of Chalcedon, and that another had been substituted in his place who held sentiments altogether contrary to these. Simplicius, the bishop of Rome who succeeded Leo, moved by this complaint, wrote to Zeno, blaming the irrationality of John’s expulsion. But Zeno wrote back, affirming that he had been cast out for no other reason than that he had been caught in the crime of perjury. When Felix succeeded Simplicius, John did not cease to plague him, reporting regarding Peter, whom Acacius of Constantinople had previously rejected as a heretic but now embraced very tightly. And as he pressed him frequently, at last he persuaded Felix to issue a letter forthwith in which he stripped Acacius of his dignity because he had communion with Peter Mongus. Which letter, composed against ecclesiastical tradition, as Zacharias writes, certain monks from the sodality of the Sleepless ^B [Acoemetae] offered to Acacius. But Acacius did not receive it. It seems that Zacharias knew nothing of what actually happened, and reported only a mutilated rumor. But I, knowing exactly, will relate the matter itself as it occurred, and I shall recount the rumor that is surely known to me.

CHAPTER XVI.

John gave petitions to Felix against Acacius, because he communicated with Peter contrary to reason, and because he did many other things not according to the prescription of ecclesiastical canons. And Felix sent the bishops Vitalis and Misenus to Zeno, with an order and decree of this sort: that the Synod of Chalcedon should prevail with all votes; that Peter, as one who did not hold sound religion, should be cast out of Alexandria; and that Acacius should be sent to Rome, ^D to stand trial against John regarding the charges brought, or to defend himself, or to undergo the appropriate penalties. But before Vitalis and Misenus, who had come from Rome, could reach the imperial city, Cyril, the prelate of the monastery of the Sleepless, arrived by sending [a letter] to Felix, accusing the Pope of such great delay, by which so many innovations were being introduced into the ecclesiastical constitutions. When his letters were received, Felix wrote to his legates not to do anything before they had met with Cyril and learned from him what was to be done. He also gave them other letters to Zeno.

was sending letters, both instructing him concerning the Synod of Chalcedon and admonishing him about the persecution which Huneric was inciting in Africa. Moreover, he also wrote to Acacius, calling him the greatest cause of the innovations occurring in the Church. ^A To this, Zeno sent back an answer equal to those before: that John was troubling him in vain, for he had by no means sworn that he would not ascend the throne of the Church of Alexandria, but rather that he would not violate the religion of an oath, seize the throne through sacrilege, or commit other dire crimes. Nor had Peter Mongus arrived at the see without any prior investigation; rather, before he received it, he had subscribed with his own hands to the faith of the Fathers who gathered at Nicaea, on whose faith the Synod of Chalcedon also leans. Zeno wrote this, too, in these words: "You ought to be certain, both that our piety and the most holy Peter, of whom mention was made before, and all the most holy churches receive and honor the holy Synod of Chalcedon, which accords with the profession of faith of the Synod of Nicaea." In the acts of those affairs, letters to Felix from the aforementioned Cyril, and other archimandrites in the Imperial City, and even from the bishops and clergy of the Egyptian diocese, are found against Peter and those who were in communion with him as heretics. ^B And some who had arrived at Rome from the monastery of the Sleepless Ones complained to Felix about Misenus and Vitalis, claiming that right up to the time of their arrival in Byzantium, the name of Peter had been carried secretly and in hiding in the sacred diptychs, and had remained so from that time to this present day, and that it was commonly rumored that, contravening the canons, Misenus and Vitalis were having commerce and communion with Peter and Acacius. The letters of the Egyptians signified the same things. Furthermore, they stated that John was orthodox and held the right views, and had received the see according to the canons; but that Peter had been ordained by only two men who had followed the same depraved opinion, and that after the departure of John, he had not ceased to do all sorts of grievous things against the orthodox. Having learned all these things from those who had come to Byzantium from Rome, Acacius was so far from interceding with his authority in matters of this kind, though he easily could have, that he even made himself an agent of Peter’s actions and forced almost everyone to be in communion with him. ^C All these things were augmented and confirmed as true by that Symeones who had been sent to Felix from the Sleepless Ones, who openly accused Misenus and Vitalis of having been in communion with heretics. He argued that, in their presence, Peter’s name had been publicly proclaimed in the sacred books, and they had not even indicated, by so much as a pretense of gravity, that they disapproved. For this reason, many of the simpler folk were led astray by the heretics, claiming that Peter had even been received by the Roman see. Symeones also added that, although various inquiries were made, those around Misenus would not encounter any of the orthodox, nor provide any answer to ^D a letter, or anything [else].

The statements of the monks were also confirmed by a certain presbyter, Sylvanus, who had been in the imperial city with Vitalis and Misenus. Then, too, the letter of Acacius to Simplicius was produced, which showed that Peter had long since been deposed as a child of darkness. For these reasons, the priestly dignity was abrogated for Misenus and Vitalis, and they were repelled entirely from the holy communion. And by common suffrage, the Roman synod decreed this word for word: “The Roman Church does not receive Peter the heretic, who was long ago, by sentence, stripped of his episcopal chair, condemned, proscribed, and pierced by the anathema. Even if nothing else were objected against him, this would ^B suffice, that since he was ordained by heretics, he cannot preside over the orthodox.” In that same opinion, there was also this: “That Acacius of Constantinople is liable to the greatest crimes, the matter itself has shown, because when writing to Simplicius, he called Peter a heretic and did not indicate it to the emperor; whereas, certainly, if he loved Zeno, he ought to have done so. Therefore, as it appears, he embraces the emperor out of a desire for his own advantage, but he does not embrace the faith.”

CHAPTER XVII

Concerning the sedition that arose in Alexandria on account of the Mongus, because he subjected the fourth synod to anathema. And concerning Felix of Rome and Acacius of Constantinople.

Acacius, wishing to remove the dissension that had intervened and to introduce union, wrote to the bishops and clerics in Egypt and also to Peter himself. But forasmuch as ^C this evil was growing more and more in Alexandria, Peter persuaded some of the bishops and archimandrites to communicate with him, and he cast anathemas upon the acts of Chalcedon and the tome of Leo, and upon those who did not receive the writings of Dioscorus and Timotheus; and those who did not obey him he drove from their monasteries. After Zeno learned all these things from a certain Nephalius who had come to Constantinople from Alexandria, he was greatly troubled and sent a certain Cosmas, one of his bodyguards, to Alexandria. He ordered him, with many admonitions, to move every stone, as the proverb goes, to reconcile the people and Peter to one another, and ^D to denounce great threats against those who acted otherwise. But he, by his own harshness, was so far from joining that which had been broken by dissipation that he actually increased the sedition, and returned to the emperor with nothing accomplished, having only restored those who had been driven from their monasteries. After him, Arsenius was sent by Zeno, leader of the military ranks in Egypt, together with him who was called Nephalius, to Alexandria, to treat concerning reconciliation and union. But when he accomplished nothing, he sent many of the Alexandrians to Byzantium, who, having conversed with Zeno, discoursed much concerning the synod of Chalcedon.

^A However, Basil the Cilician records that Felix sent the sentence of condemnation to Acacius, whereby his dignity would be abrogated, and that it was delivered to him by the monks of the monastery of the Hodia within the sanctuary. Because of this, those around Acacius slew many of the aforesaid monks; others they wounded and drove away, and others they imprisoned. Acacius cared so little for this deposition that, being completely insensible, he was the first to remove the Pope’s name from the sacred diptychs. And he, being thus bound in both soul and body, shortly thereafter entered upon the road common to all.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Regarding Flavitas, the successor of Acacius, and how he seized the episcopal see by evil craft.

After him, Flavitas ^C succeeded to the bishopric of Constantinople: a man who, though he appeared to be a presbyter, had reached such a pinnacle of audacity and wickedness that the crime I am about to relate is sufficient to indicate what sort of person he was. For Zeno placed a blank parchment upon the holy altar, and in another writing he supplicated God that, by the hand of an angel—which should not come into the sight of men—He might inscribe the name of him whom the heavenly reckoning should choose to be appointed hierarch of the Church of Constantinople. On account of this, he ordained a forty-day fast for the churches, and commanded all to pray to God to reveal him who was pleasing to Him. When Flavitas learned of this, he corrupted with much gold the guardian of the temple, who was also the chief of the imperial chamberlains, so that he might write his name upon the blank parchment and seal the book again with the emperor’s seal. When this was done, and the appointed time of the fast had passed, the seal was removed from the parchment, and suddenly Flavitas, wrapped in immense glory—as if he had been designated by God—was brought forward, and he ascended the patriarchal throne with arrogant pomp. But Almighty Providence did not allow this sin to remain hidden for long; rather, it quickly brought that illusion and theatrical performance into the open. For that wretch, having not even spent four full months in that see, was suddenly removed from among men by a swift death, not having been able to scrape together even half of the money with which he had bought the episcopal dignity. The moneylenders pressed his heirs, demanding the repayment of the loan. And since they had not the means to pay,

they approached Zeno, pleading to be delivered from those bitter creditors; and they revealed the deed in secret, while he himself investigated the matter. Zeno, upon hearing this, was astonished; and after he learned that it was not Christ, but Chrysus—that is to say, gold—that Flavian had inscribed in that book, he exercised true judgment and justice (according to the Psalm), and commanded that the eunuch, who had arrogated to himself divine reputation and glory, be driven away, and that the borrowed money be paid to the moneylenders from his property. But he committed the Church to the bishops, that they might, by their suffrages, choose whomsoever they judged suitable for its care. And so, without any delay, Euphemius, a presbyter of the Church, a man most eloquent and full of orthodox faith and every virtue, was raised to the helm of the Church. ^B

Chapter 19. On the synodal letters of Flavita, Petrus, and Felix: and on Euphemius, who held the bishopric after Flavita.

While Flavian was still holding the throne, he used synodical letters to Peter of Alexandria, and received letters of the same kind from him, in which he wrote the same things concerning the acts at Chalcedon, subjecting them to anathema. But when, in the meantime, Flavian had departed from human affairs, having held the episcopate for only four months, and Euphemius had undertaken the administration of the Church, it happened that the synodical letters of Peter to Flavian were delivered to him. When he discovered in them that the acts of Chalcedon were condemned by an anathema, he was greatly disturbed, and withdrew himself from the communion of Peter. I would have included both the letters of Peter and Flavian here, had not their prolixity deterred me; although Flavian had written to Felix, signifying that he was in communion with him, but abhorred the association of Peter. He had done the same in giving letters to Peter, insinuating that he accepted his communion, but rejected Felix. When the Pope received these letters, which had been carried to him by certain pious persons, he expelled the legates of Flavian from Rome with contumely. But Euphemius, as soon as he entered his episcopate, without delaying, with his own hands erased the name of Mongus from the sacred tablets and inserted the appellation of Felix; and sitting in the sacred chair, he sent synodical letters to Rome to Felix according to custom. The Pope indeed received his writings and favored Euphemius as if he were orthodox, but he did not admit him into episcopal communion, because he had not also erased the names of Acacius and Flavian from the sacred book. ^{C D}

Chapter 20. How Athanasius succeeded Petrus Mongus, and Palladius succeeded Cnapheus: and on their successors.

And as Euphemius and Peter were about to disagree with one another, and hold synods against each other in their provinces,

^A Peter departed this life in Alexandria. Athanasius, surnamed Coelites [the Hermit], succeeded him on the episcopal throne. Although he made many efforts to reunite the divided members [of the Church], he achieved nothing, for they had slipped into many and varied opinions. Not long after, Peter Cnapheus also died in Antioch, and had Palladium as his successor. Among his supporters was Anastasius Dicorus, who, after Zeno, poorly administered the Roman empire. Moreover, Athanasius, having sent synodal letters to Palladium, likewise held the same views regarding the Council of Chalcedon as Moggus had; and John, who presided over the throne of Alexander after him, said the same things. But when Palladium of Antioch died, and Flavian received the administration in his place, a certain Solomon, a presbyter of Antioch, was sent to Alexandria to John, carrying synodal letters and demanding the customary reciprocal epistles from John to Flavian: these documents also, in the same manner, spoke against the Council. This John was succeeded by another John in Alexandria, of whom we shall speak a little later. For up until some years of the reign of Anastasius, the affairs of the churches proceeded in this manner; for he [Anastasius] expelled Euphemius. ^B We were compelled to set forth these things in order, so that they might be more easily understood. The affairs of the churches, then, were in such a state at that time; but let us now turn our discourse to other matters.

CHAPTER XXI.

Regarding the incursion of Theuderic the Scythian, and how he perished.

Theuderic the Scythian, having amassed great wealth, took up arms against Zeno. Having gathered his forces in Thrace, he invaded Roman territory and plundered everything in his path, reaching as far as the mouth of the Euxine [Sea]. Indeed, he would have nearly captured the imperial city, had not some of his own companions plotted against his life. Fearing them, he retreated. ^C Not much time passed before he ended his life, due to the following cause. According to a local custom, a spear was customarily held aloft before his tent. Wishing to exercise his body, he ordered a horse to be brought to him; and though he was not accustomed to riding, he leaped upon it from the ground. Since the horse had only recently come from the pastures and the herd, and was breathing with ferocity, and since Theuderic had not yet sat firmly upon him, the horse reared its front hooves into the air, balanced only on its hind legs. Seeking to control him, Theuderic could neither restrain him with the bridle—for fear that the beast might fall backward upon him—nor sit upon him with sufficient certainty or firmness. ^D And as he was being tossed hither and thither upon the horse, I know not how, he shook that spear, and it was driven obliquely against him, wounding his side. From this he became bedridden, and shortly after...

when his entrails had withered away from convulsion and inflammation, he lost his life in a short time.

CAPUT XXII. Of the tyranny of Marcianus, son of Anthemius, who had held the empire in Rome; and how, being captured, he was honored with the priesthood.

After him, Marcianus rose up in rebellion against Zeno. He was the son of Anthemius, who had reigned in Rome not long before, and he held a marriage tie with the daughter of Leo, the father-in-law of Zeno, the emperor who had reigned. For he supposed that the empire belonged more to himself than to Zeno, because he had married the younger of the daughters of Leo, whom Verina had borne to him while he was on the throne; for Leo had raised Ariadne as a private citizen, born of his wife. For this reason, Marcianus attempted to seize power. A powerful battle having broken out around the palace, a great slaughter flowed from both sides, but the victory was leaning toward Marcianus; and he would have been in possession of both the scepter and the palaces, had he not made use of a delay until the next day. ^B For Occasion is a most swift bird, and one may somehow catch it if it is at one’s feet; but if it should escape, it goes aloft into the air, rising high, mocking those who pursue it, and having no intention at all of returning to them. ^C Indeed, as many as are those who mold and paint images, they let hair fall upon its forehead, fashioning a human head, while they shave the back of the head down to the skin, indicating very cleverly and wisely that if it should happen to be coming from behind, it might perhaps be caught by being held by the lock of hair that is let down; but if it should arrive in front, moving away, it is not at all easy to be held, nor does it provide anything by which the pursuer may grasp it. This is what happened right then to Marcianus, as he delayed the opportune moment and was unable to regain it afterward. For on the following day, having been betrayed by his own followers, and having become alone, he fled as a suppliant to the temple of the Holy Apostles; from where, being dragged out by force, he was cast into Cappadocia. ^D A short while thereafter he was caught among some monks, while contemplating flight for himself; and from there he was brought to Tarsus of Cilicia, where, having shaved his head, he was honored with the priesthood. This is what Eustathius the rhetor, who wrote these things, related very elegantly.

CAPUT XXIII. Of the tyranny of Illus and Leontius, and of the buildings of Ammianus.

The same Eustathius also reports that Zeno had plotted various schemes against his own mother-in-law, Verina, and at last had even sent her as an exile into the territory of the Cilicians; and later, that she had been sent to the fortress of Papyrius, where she finished her life at the time when Illus and Leontius, upon whom she had herself bestowed the imperial insignia, exercised their tyranny. The same Eustathius pursues the history of Illus with a polished style, describing how obviously he escaped the plots of Zeno, and how Zeno had ordered that the assassin who had been sent to kill Illus be put to death himself: the penalty for the failure being the head—

^A of him who had offered to remove him; but he escaped by hiding in a convenient place. Zeno, wishing to suppress the matter deliberately, appointed Illus to command the Eastern forces. But Illus, having joined Leontius and Pamprepius to his cause, seized the tyranny at Tarsus in Cilicia. Furthermore, Eustathius adds that the tyranny was of no use to them, because Theoderich the Goth, having been sent against them by Zeno with a huge army, had destroyed them in a pitiable manner along with both native and foreign forces—a fitting gratitude ^B for the fact that they had restored him to the empire. The same rhetor also adds that Theoderich, whom Zeno had proclaimed consul and Duke of Thrace, when he sensed that traps were being laid for him by Zeno, led an army against ancient Rome, defeated Odoacer in war, donned the royal robes, and declared himself king; and furthermore, he conquered many of the Western nations without a battle, as well as the Vandals, the great city of Rome, and (to speak once for all) the entire Western region, and subjected them to his rule. There are those who say that Theoderich did this at the suggestion of Zeno. At the same time, Mammianus, a man distinguished by curule honors and a member of the senatorial order, built an edifice in Daphne, which was a suburban village of Antioch, and it was called by them the Antiforum. Within the city, moreover, he built two imperial porticoes in a very magnificent style, adorned with stones of great value and various colors; between them he set up a Tetrapylon, conspicuous for its huge columns and bronze, with the floor and other parts paved with Proconnesian stone. So much for these matters.

CHAPTER XXIV

Regarding the death of Zeno and the election of Anastasius Dicorus.

As Zeno saw the end of his life approaching, he consulted one of those who were thought to be able to predict the future, a man named Maurianus, asking who would rule after him (for he had no children begotten from his own loins). He is said to have replied that someone from the Silentiarii would take not only the empire, but also his wife. Zeno, however, thinking that Pelagius—a man renowned and advanced in wisdom—was the one being singled out, ordered him to be put to the sword, and furthermore caused others who had committed no crime to be killed. Then, seized by the comitial ^D disease, and unable to bear its force, he gave up his soul, whilst having the name of Pelagius on his lips. It is also said that because his wife Ariadna hated him, when he was convulsed by the pains of epilepsy and appeared as if dead, he was shut up in the tomb by her while still alive. Others, however, hand down that when he had lost all sense from drunkenness, he was cast into the tomb; and that, after he had returned to himself through sobriety, he cried out from within the very monument that he sought only his life, and not the empire. But no one was there to pity him as he spoke such things, with Ariadna, his wife, preventing it. And the conflagration was most severe, in which, besides the greatest part of the city, one hundred and twenty thousand books perished. And among these was Homer’s poem of the intestine of a dragon one hundred and twenty feet long, written in golden letters.

^A He died in this manner, having tyrannized over the Roman empire for seventeen years; to which years the months of Basiliscus are also counted. When these things had thus come to pass, Longinus, the brother of Zeno, who had attained to very great power, hoped to secure the sovereignty for himself; but he was altogether disappointed. For Ariadna, with the order of the senate, placed the imperial crown upon Anastasius, known as Dicorus, who had not yet been enrolled in the senate and was still serving in the school of the Silentiarii. Eustathius, whom we mentioned a little earlier, records that from the beginning of the reign of the tyrant Diocletian down to the end of Zeno and the proclamation of Anastasius, there elapsed two hundred and seven years; from the time when Augustus became monarch, five hundred and thirty-two years and seven months; from the beginning of the reign of Alexander of Macedon, eight hundred and thirty-two years and seven months; from the empire of the Romans and Romulus, one thousand and fifty-two years and seven months; from the fall of Troy, one thousand six hundred and eighty-six years and seven months; from the divine incarnation of the Lord, four hundred and ninety-two years; and from Adam, five thousand nine hundred and eighty-four years. ^B

CHAPTER XXV. Of the state of the churches at that time, and what opinion each held concerning the Council of Chalcedon; and of the exile of Euphemius of Constantinople.

^A to move or change a single letter, or even a tittle, in its decrees, and by this great liberty they shrank back from the commerce and communion of others: so much so that they would not even admit into their own houses those who did not accept what had been rightly decreed there. But there were others who not only did not approve of it, but even publicly struck it down with anathema along with the Tome of Leo. Others did the same regarding the Henoticon constitution of Zeno, and were divided among themselves even ^B in their own ranks: so that some said there were two natures in Christ, while others said there was one; and while some were deceived by letters cunningly composed, others thought that peace should be sought. This evil progressed to such a point that every Church was divided into its own factions, and bishops recoiled from mutual intercourse. Consequently, those in the East and West and even in the Libyan parts were split into many sects. For neither would the East agree with the West, nor did Libya wish to be reconciled with them. And what is most shameful of all, not even the leaders of the Eastern Churches ^C met together for communion among themselves, nor did the bishops of Europe or Libya hold assemblies among themselves; much less would they congregate with those who were outside the borders of their own regions. Such a confusion and darkness of mind overtook the whole world. Furthermore, although Anastasius had proposed to maintain tranquility for himself, and had wished to change nothing in the Churches, yet, being moved by the unconsidered temerity of those who were intent upon innovations, he would drive from their thrones and inhumanly expel whichever of them he learned were acting in a manner contrary to custom, and were either impudently condemning the holy council and cruelly binding it with anathema, or, on the other hand, were openly and clearly preaching it in the holy temples. And indeed, many ^D bishops were punished in this way, and first of all, as we have already said, he proscribed Euphemius of Constantinople; then after him, Macedonius; and afterward, the one who had been after him, Timothy.

CAPUT XXVI. De Macedonio Constantinopolis episcopo, ut et is sede sua sit expulsus, et quem vitæ finem habuerit. Item de episcopis Alexandrinis.

But in truth, just as the pretext of Patroclus [(1)] was here set forth by Anastasius against them, that they were introducing innovations into the Churches, the things that were secretly troubling Anastasius were far different: namely, the distinguished piety of Euphemius, and the fact that he had earlier excluded Anastasius from the Church because he had given the impression that he was infected with the contagion of Dioscorus; and because, wishing to stir up a crowd, he had threatened Euphemius that, having received power from Zeno, he would shave his head and overturn his cathedra. Furthermore, when Ariadna was about to clothe Anastasius in the purple, Euphemius, the prelate of sacred things, stood against him with noble spirit, refusing to perform the customary rites for him in any other way

until he had confirmed with written oaths and most dread obligations that he would keep the faith inviolate, and would not attempt to introduce any innovation into the Church during his reign; and, furthermore, that he would join the Council of Chalcedon with his whole heart to the other three. ^A Anastasius having agreed to these terms in writing, the priest then performed the customary rites for him. Not long after, Anastasius pressed him and demanded the written document. When Euphemius refused to return it, he ordered him to go into exile for that reason alone. He even laid snares against his life, so that a certain Paul, one of Euphemius’s household—a tall man, towering head and shoulders above others—intercepted the sword which had been prepared against him. On this account and for this reason, he drove him into exile, although the populace bore this with great irritation. Anastasius raised to the sacred see Macedonius, to whom Euphemius had entrusted the handwritten document of his profession of faith, for he had been given the custody of the sacred treasures. ^B Euphemius had acted in this way both for the reasons I have mentioned, and because Anastasius was commonly thought to foster the Manichaean heresy, as his mother pursued it with great ardor, and his uncle on his mother’s side, Clearchus, had been found to follow the teachings of Arius. For this reason, the purple of Anastasius brought joy to both Manichaeans and Arians, who expected some change to occur in their favor.

When Macedonius ascended the throne, Anastasius again sought to obtain his own profession of faith from him, considering it an insult and an injury to himself if the document that served as a rebuke to his life were left behind after he was gone. But since he, like Euphemius, stood against him resolutely and believed that it would be an utter betrayal of the faith if he returned the document, and fought against him most valiantly, Anastasius devised various schemes to cast him from the throne, and attempted everything to achieve his desire. ^C Having no idea what else to do, he gathered an assembly of heretics and attempted by force to compel Macedonius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon. When the crowds realized this, they flocked to that place and shouted openly, "The time for martyrdom is at hand; let no one stand far from the shepherd." They hurled insults at the ruler, calling him a Manichaean, unworthy of the empire.

Anastasius, struck with fear, was prepared to flee; he sought out Macedonius, whom he had previously sworn he would never even look upon again. Macedonius, speaking with great boldness, rebuked Anastasius as an enemy of the Church. At that time, he yielded and bowed, showing himself more placable, and submitted. Yet later, because of the wickedness of his heart, he hired accusers against him; and young boys, slanderers of themselves and of Macedonius, were brought forward, accusing him of shameful deeds. ^D When Macedonius refuted these charges almost entirely, showing himself to be a man of courage by his very bearing, Anastasius turned to other schemes full of deceit. For through Celeras, who had been appointed leader of the ranks at the palace, he drew up a paper listing the two earlier councils, and agreed to accept them, while omitting the third and the fourth.

^A This action of Macedonius was approved, and furthermore, the fact that he had subscribed to the Henoticon of Zeno did not escape censure. However, later, when he was in a Dalmatian monastery, in a certain discourse addressed to all who were pursuing piety, he cleared away that stumbling block and the accusation, explicitly approving the holy fourth council in clear terms and calling those who did not accept it heretics. Anastasius, having summoned Celer the magister to him, through him secretly removed Macedonius from the throne and sent him into exile at Euchaita. Deep grief seized the senate and the populace of Constantinople ^B for this reason, for they admired both the holiness of Macedonius’ life and the sincerity of his doctrine; and he shone forth greatly in his profession of the monastic life and in his priestly dignity, as one who had been brought up and taught by Gennadius, and was even the nephew of his brother. A severe persecution arose against his followers. For some were afflicted by exile, others by relegation, others by iniquitous accusations, and others by the confiscation of their property. Many, also, having consulted for their own safety by flight, arrived at Rome. The emperor immediately took the book of the Acts of Chalcedon, which Macedonius, upon departing, had deposited on the most holy altar, and which a certain Calopodius had furtively removed; he cut it to pieces and committed it to the fire. And to Macedonius, who was being led away in this manner, he sent a sentence of deposition. But he inquired whether those who had deposed him accepted the council at Chalcedon. And when those who had brought the sentence to him denied it, he said, "But if Arians or Macedonians, he said, had sent the sentence of deposition to me, ^C was I to accept it?" He was thus led to Euchaita. When the Huns, who were called Saberi, having made an eruption through the Caspian Gates, were devastating the East, Macedonius, out of fear, moved from there to Gangra. When Anastasius learned of this, he sent assassins and murdered the holy man. His body was deposited in the temple of the martyr Callinicus, where it radiates countless miracles. They say that when he lay already dead, he signed himself with his own hand with the holy sign of the cross. ^D And that he appeared in a dream to a certain Theodore who was living piously, and with a certain vehemence ordered that these words be reported to Anastasius the emperor: “I indeed am departing to my fathers, whose faith I have preserved pure. But know that I shall not cease praying to God until thou, too, at the first opportunity, shalt come to stand trial with me before that tribunal which does not accept bribes.” Anastasius, after Macedonius, entrusted the Church to Timothy, a presbyter of the same and a steward—a man who was called Cylon and Litrobunes by name—who, on account of certain of his actions, was suited to his names, and did everything that was proposed, if he did not tear down the icons of Macedonius, where they happened to be present. That most impious emperor, on account of these things, also sent the namesake of Antioch, Flavian, and Elias of Jerusalem, who had succeeded Sallust, and also John of Alexandria into exile; and indeed also John the Tabennesiote—who, having learned in Rome that Anastasius had ascended the throne, had come to receive his own see. For he was a friend ^A to him at the time he was living in Alexandria, and when Anastasius had suffered shipwreck, he had saved him—being naked—and, as was fitting, had treated him with care. But the ungrateful man, having changed his disposition, instead of rewarding him, condemned him to exile. Thus, when he entered the churches, he did not first...

perform the divine service before he had removed the images of Macedonius which were there at that time. But the emperor, for such most impious reasons, exiled Flavian of Antioch, and Elias of Jerusalem, who had succeeded Sallustius, and also John of Alexandria. He did the same to John the Tabennesiote. The latter, when he learned at Rome that Anastasius had become emperor, came to the East to resume his see. For he had been a friend to Anastasius when he was staying in Alexandria, and had received him naked after a shipwreck, and had shown him all the care and kindness that was fitting for the man. But he, through the vice of an ungrateful mind, repaid him for the liberality shown to him with the gift of exile. This John, however, fleeing, betook himself back again to Rome.

CAPUT XXVII. Narrative concerning Xenaias of Hierapolis and Flavian of Antioch.

^A Regarding Flavian of Antioch, the following has been handed down in historical records. There was a certain man named Xenaias (whom one might rightly call Philoxenus in the Greek tongue), by birth a Persian and by status a slave, a most fitting minister of Satan. Under the episcopate of Calandio, having fled from his master, he approached the Church of God, claiming to be a cleric, even though he had not yet been initiated with the divine laver of regeneration. Calandio, having recognized the man and the hidden wickedness within him from certain signs and conjectures, cast him out of the Church. But when Peter Cnapheus ^B succeeded Calandio, he not only received Xenaias, but even, while he was still uninitiated, made him bishop of nearby Hierapolis and called him Philoxenus, changing his name. And Peter, when at last he understood that he had entrusted a bishopric to a man not yet baptized, is said to have declared that for him, ordination sufficed in place of baptism. This Xenaias was the first (O the bold soul and impudent mouth!) to vomit forth that voice: that there should be no veneration of the images of Christ and of those who have pleased Him. Therefore, this slave of impiety, with great tumult, having gathered to himself many ^C from the nobility of the Syrians and having taken a not insignificant multitude from the Cynegicon (or Venatic) monastery, with his innate depravity, arrived in the city and brought maximum force to bear upon Flavian, so that he might anathematize the Council of Chalcedon and the Tome of the holy Leo. When Flavian confirmed that he would not do this, and the monks were pressing upon him, the populace, learning that their priest was in danger, immediately rose up, each as he was able; and such a slaughter of the monks occurred, that on account of their great number, the Orontes river was their appointed grave, their bodies being committed to the waves. In addition to this, another evil ^D occurred, no less than the former. For the monks in Coelesyria, being very devoted to Flavian because he had led a monastic life in a nearby place called Tilmognus, upon learning of the crowd, betook themselves to Antioch, determined to defend Flavian in every way. And there, at that time, not less

^A than the calamities they had received, this and that misfortune was brought about by the trickery of Flavian, who was led into exile and ordered to spend his life dwelling on a certain sheer and lofty rock in the borders of Palestine. These, then, are the reasons why such men as Macedonius and Flavian were driven from their own sees. Concerning them, the monks in Palestine, writing to Alcison, report these things in these very words:

Chapter XXVII.

What the monks of Palestine wrote to Alcison concerning Macedonius and Flavian of Antioch: and concerning the confusion of the churches at that time.

^B When Peter was dead, Alexandria, Egypt, and Libya began to dissent once more amongst themselves, and each faction held its own separate assemblies. The rest of the East also became segregated from the other churches, because the Westerners would not communicate with it on any other terms than that it should subject Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus to anathema, and in addition to them, Peter Mongus and Acacius. While the affairs of the churches of the whole world were in this state, those who were genuine followers of Dioscorus and Eutyches were reduced to a very small number indeed. And when their fortunes had reached the point where they were shortly to vanish from the earth and exist no longer, Xenaias—truly a stranger to God as his name implies—being moved against Flavian, we know not by what counsel, nor what enmities he was avenging, but under the pretext of the faith, as most people relate, began to slander him as a Nestorian. ^C Although Flavian had, together with his own opinion, pierced Nestorius with anathema, Xenaias still passed from him to Dioscorus, Theodore, Theodoret, Ibas, Cyrus, Eleutherius, and John; and we know not who others besides these he gathered, nor from whence. Some of these truly professed the dogma of Nestorius; others, however, were suspected of being of his heresy, though they had cast anathema against Nestorius and had died in the communion of the Church. "All these," he said, "are infected with the contagion of Nestorius; if you do not anathematize them, you are a Nestorian, even if you were to pierce him and his dogma with anathema ten thousand times over." By his letters, he also stirred up the supporters of Dioscorus and Eutyches, persuading them to be his patrons against ^D Flavian, intending to demand that he should not cast his anathema upon the synod, but upon the men we have mentioned. To this, Bishop Flavian resisted for a long time and with great effort. But when others also joined with Xenaias against him—namely, a certain Eleusinus of the second Cappadocia, Nicias of Laodicea in Syria, and other bishops from elsewhere, whose pusillanimity towards Flavian it is not for us to explain, but rather for others—he eventually thought that by these means he would bring them to peace, and he yielded to his contentiousness; having anathematized those persons in writing, he sent it to the emperor. For they had even stirred the emperor against him, as one professing the doctrines of Nestorius. But not even satisfied with these things, Xenaias again demanded the anathema of the synod itself, and of the two natures spoken of in the Lord, and of the

^A flesh and of the divinity. And when he [Flavian] did not comply with him, he again accused him of being a Nestorian. And when many things had been agitated regarding these matters, and the patriarch had composed a formula of faith in which he professed that the synod was to be received for the sake of the deposition of Nestorius and Eutyches, but not as having the force of a decree and doctrine of faith, his adversaries—since he was in secret a Nestorian—again began to accuse him, unless he also submitted the synod itself, and those who profess two natures of flesh and divinity in the Lord, to the anathema. They also led the Isaurians into their own opinion by much deception of words, and they issued a written document regarding the faith, in which they condemned with anathema the synod ^B along with those who say that there are two natures or properties in the Lord. Therefore, they withdrew from Flavian and Macedonius, and joined themselves with others who subscribed to that written document. Meanwhile, they also demanded a written document regarding the faith from the bishop of Jerusalem, who, having composed it, sent it to the emperor by the very hands of the Dioscorians; and they brought forward that which contained the anathema against those who speak of two natures. The bishop of Jerusalem himself, however, asserted that it had been corrupted by them, and produced another document without such an anathema. Nor is this a wonder, since they have even adulterated the writings of the Fathers, and have attributed many of the books of Apollinaris to Athanasius and to Gregory the Wonderworker and to Julius by means of the inscriptions themselves, through which they mostly draw the multitude to their own impiety. They also agitated against the written formula of faith which Macedonius himself had issued; for he confirmed that he knew only the faith of the three hundred and eighteen and, again, of the one hundred and fifty Fathers, striking with an anathema Nestorius and Eutyches, and those who imagine either two Sons or two Christs, or who divide the natures, while making no mention ^C of the synod at Ephesus, by which Nestorius was condemned, nor of that at Chalcedon, which abrogated the dignity of Eutyches. This matter the monasteries at Constantinople took amiss, and they withdrew from Bishop Macedonius. Meanwhile, Xenaias and Dioscorus, having taken many bishops to themselves, became proud and intolerable; and they stirred up grave movements against those who would not consent to the anathema, among whom, if there were any who would not yield to them at all, they strove to drive them into exile by all manner of means. Thus, therefore, they also exiled Macedonius, and John, the bishop of Paltus, and Flavian. These things, then, went thus far.

CHAPTER XXIX

Flavian having been driven out in this manner, the impious Severus, that is, a man with no head, another Eutyches ^D or Dioscorus in complete depravity, ascends the throne of Antioch,

who, having sprung from Sozopolis, which is in the region of the Pisidians, ^A applied himself to the study of law and to forensic practice at the city of Berytus. And when he had learned the Christian doctrine, having immediately changed his mind, he was initiated into the laver of baptism in the temple of the illustrious martyr Leontius, which is situated in the maritime region of Tripolis in Phoenicia. And then he practiced the monastic life in a certain monastery between Gaza and the town of Maiuma: where even that Peter from Iberia, who was declared bishop of Gaza and was proscribed along with Timotheus Ælurus, having cultivated the same manner of life, left behind for posterity a famous reputation for himself. Furthermore, Severus first engaged in a verbal disputation with Nephalius, who was of the same opinion with him before, professing one nature in Christ: but afterwards he himself defended the Chalcedonian synod and those who maintained two natures. And since Severus carried himself more confidently and arrogantly in the disputes, he was cast out from his monastic ^B home by Nephalius, together with those of his own party and many others who followed the same opinion. And he departed thence to the queen of cities, intending to supplicate the emperor so that the monasteries might be restored to him and to his own party who had been expelled with him. It so happened that he came to the notice of the emperor Anastasius and the senators: just as the one who wrote the life of Severus reports. Moreover, John, who contended against him in judgment, left behind a writing: that Severus, when he was about to be ordained, offered a written oath to the emperor Anastasius, stating that from the day he gained the throne of Antioch, he would by no means subject the Chalcedonian synod to anathema; and that on the very day he was ordained, instigated by his followers, he went up to the ambo and cast anathema upon it in the presence of the people: and that he did the same in plain words when he wrote his synodical letters. Regarding which matter those letters which we mentioned, written to Alcison, report these things:

CHAPTER XXX

Excerpts from the letters sent to Alcison regarding the impious Severus.

The synodical letters of Timotheus, bishop of Constantinople, were received here in Palestine; but the deposition of Macedonius and Flavian was not received, nor even the synodical writings of Severus. Nay, those who brought these things here, having been treated with insults and outrages ^D as they deserved, fled from the city because the people and the monks had been stirred up against them. And affairs in Palestine indeed stood thus. At Antioch, however, some were led away into their opinion, among whom is also Marinus, bishop of Berytus: but others were compelled by necessity and force to agree to these same synodical letters of Severus, having anathematized together both the synod and the rest who spoke of two natures or properties in the flesh of the Lord and in his divinity. And those who, after the forced [agreement]...

had changed their view, have revoked it; among whom are the bishops who are reckoned under Apamea. But others did not endure to agree at all, among whom are Julian of Bostra and Epiphanius of Tyre, and some other bishops, as they say. But the Isaurians, now having come to their senses, condemn their former error and anathematize Severus and those with him. Others of the bishops and clergy around Severus, having left their churches, fled; one of whom is also Julian of Bostra, and Peter of Damascus, who are here. But also Mamas—and this man is one of the two who appeared to be the leaders of the ^B Dioscorians, by whom also Severus was led astray, though he had previously condemned their headstrong rashness. And after other things: "But the monasteries here, and Jerusalem itself, agree with God on the right faith, and many other cities also with their bishops; for all of whom, and also for us, pray, most holy and most reverend Master and Father, that we may not enter into temptation."

CHAPTER XXXI. What Evagrius of Epiphaneia himself wrote concerning Severus, from whom the episcopate was taken away.

Whatever Evagrius of Epiphaneia has recorded about Severus, I shall set forth in his very words. ^C He writes thus: "Since, therefore, these letters indicate that the priests under Apamea had leapt away from Severus, come, let us add what has been passed down to us from our fathers, even if it has not been recorded in history until now. Cosmas, the bishop of our fatherland, Epiphaneia—which the Orontes washes—and Severianus, the prelate of the neighboring Arethusa, being disturbed by the synodical letters of Severus, having severed themselves from his communion, sent to him, while he was yet bishop of Antioch, a document deposing him of his dignity. They entrusted this document to Aurelian, the first of the deacons of Epiphaneia, to deliver to him. And he, because he feared Severus and the weight of such an episcopate ^D when he held Antioch, putting on a woman's garment, approached Severus, mincing and posturing, and in every gesture simulating being a woman; and having lowered to his chest the cowl that was upon his head, lamenting after the manner of a suppliant, and in the secret depths of his soul imploring him with groans, he gave him the deposition under the guise of an entreaty; and having deceived all the surrounding crowd, he escaped to safety by flight before Severus had read what was written in the document. Nevertheless, Severus, having received the book, and having understood what was in it, insisted on his throne until the death of Anastasius. But when Anastasius learned of the things that had happened regarding Severus (for the action must be narrated as having been humanely arranged by Anastasius), he orders Asiaticus, who had been entrusted with the government of the authority in Phoenicia Libanensis, to Cosmas and Se-

Anastasius commanded the one presiding over the Phoenician prefecture ^A to expel Cosmas and Severianus from their churches on account of the book of condemnation sent to Severus. When he arrived in the regions of the East, and found that many mortals were defending the dogma of Severianus and Cosmas, and that their cities were courageously defending them, he reported to Anastasius that these men could not be expelled from their thrones without bloodshed. And Anastasius wrote back to the Asiatic that he wished to undertake and achieve nothing, even if it were something great and excellent, if a drop of blood were to be shed. And these things were done not long after in this way.

CHAPTER XXXII.

The emperor also pressed Elias, the bishop presiding over the throne of Palestine—the son of Passarion, who had succeeded Salustius, the successor of Martyrius—to hold communion with the detractors of the Council of Chalcedon. But Elias, because there was a grave sedition among the prelates of the churches (for the Romans were at variance with the Byzantines because they had inscribed Acacius in the sacred diptychs; and the Byzantines, on the other hand, were hostile to the Alexandrians because they had admitted the communion of Dioscorus and had pursued the Council of Chalcedon with anathema; and Palladius of Antioch was doing what was pleasing to the emperor, eschewing that Council and embracing the acts of the Alexandrians, which were agreeable to the ideas of Anastasius),—Elias, I say, while such a confusion of affairs prevailed, determined that he should hold communion with Euphemius alone. ^C And when he, as has been said, was proscribed on account of the orthodox faith, and Macedonius had received his episcopate, Elias by no means wished to assent to the proscription of Euphemius, as it had been done against the canons. But with Macedonius, as one who preached the sound doctrine, he entered into communion. ^D Since, however, the successor of Palladius at Antioch, Flavianus—being addicted to sound doctrine—thought the same as Elias and Macedonius, that most powerful tyrant in impiety could not contain his wrath nor bear the concord of such great men; but, burning with fury and becoming most savage, he cast Macedonius, the shepherd of the imperial city, out of the Church with ignominy through the calumnious accusations of which we have spoken, and handed over the episcopal throne to Timothy. He also planned how to send Flavianus and Elias into exile. Yet for the time being, he exerted himself to unite them with Timothy. And they decided that they should indeed hold communion with Timothy, who seemed to assent to the orthodox doctrine; but they could by no means bear the exile of Macedonius, as it had been decreed through a violent domination rather than by the sanction of the Church, just as had happened to Euphemius before him. For which reason the emperor blazed with fury against them, and that matter created great commotions in the churches. Anastasius [ordered] at Sidon, against...

conventicle of the bishops of the East and of Palestine; over which presided Soterichus of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and Xenaias of Hierapolis—a man indeed alienated from God—bishops who inveighed vehemently against the Council of Chalcedon; as also did others who, like them, studied to ensure that the affairs of Eutyches and Dioscorus might prevail in the East. Being informed of this matter, Elias, the hierarch of Jerusalem, in order to be reconciled to the emperor, took counsel, making use as an intercessor of that Sabas who stood great in the exercise of piety and divine philosophy. When he had come to Anastasius with letters of this kind from Elias, he said: "We, the inhabitants of the desert, and together with them Sabas, the head of the desert, send these to your majesty as advocates for the churches. Do you, O emperor, standing in awe of their labors and the toils they have endured for God, put an end to the war waged against the churches, and do not permit this disaster to proceed any further. For I am persuaded that it is your care to do what is pleasing to God, who has granted you the diadem." ^B He, as best he could, having met with the emperor with a constant mind, allayed the swelling rage which the emperor had conceived against the prelate of the Palestinians. And the synod gathered in Sidon by Soterichus and Philoxenus against Elias and Flavian accomplished nothing. These men, however, afterwards burning with envy, slandered those men to the emperor, as if they had been reviling and mocking his actions; and indeed, having taken upon themselves the power to detest the patriarchs, what is it worth saying as to what evils they perpetrated, which ought to be pursued with tears and lamentations? ^C For at that time they did to Flavian such things as we have already briefly described above. And furthermore, they cast him out of his see, substituting for him the impious Severus. And he, after he had entered the church of Antioch, brought upon those who held back from his communion countless evils which it would be impossible to express in words.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

All the monks in Palestine did indeed experience this ordeal, and most especially their leaders, who were the disciples of Euthymius the Great; for they were an immense multitude, almost beyond numbering. For at that time, monasteries flourished exceedingly in that region, which were governed by illustrious prelates, the luminaries of luminaries: I speak of Euthymius the great, and Theoctistus the great, and Theodosius the prince of the coenobia, ^D and Sabas, who turned the desert into a city. I would have recounted their struggles and toils for God had I not known that I would be wandering from the intended argument, since those things specifically require their own separate work because of the abundance and magnitude of the events, which, however, are sufficiently manifest and are celebrated by all tongues and churches. Therefore, we are owed some indulgence if we do not recount them at greater length. And at that time, they forcefully set upon Sabas and Theodosius, if they might have them in their own camp.

^A And when they had tested their resolution, that man, illustrious in virtue, Theodosius, ascended the dais, and like some general and commander, having surrounded himself with the monastic phalanx and signaled silence to the multitude with his hand, he raised his voice to a great volume and thundered forth in this manner: “If anyone does not hold the four synods in equal honor with the four Gospels, anathema!” Having said these words, and having stunned the multitude like an angel, he walked through the midst of the crowd as all silently watched, and all were astonished at the generalship of the man; from which, indeed, they prescribed by law that the aforementioned holy synods should be inscribed in the sacred diptychs. And sending letters to the Emperor, they revealed that they would fight for these to the point of bloodshed, and that even if anything should happen, they would in no way depart from the traditions of the Fathers, as they declared and confirmed. ^B Thereafter, traversing the surrounding cities, as if they were peerless military leaders, they became all things to all men, strengthening them, emboldening them, rousing the sluggish, anticipating the heretical madness, and finally preaching that the Word of God is one and the same, both God and man; and that He has one subsistence or person, by nature possessing both of these, namely divinity and humanity: which is what the Synod of Chalcedon also taught, which avoided the errors of the heretics on both sides. For in that it professes one person, it cast off the madness of Nestorius; but in that it proclaims two natures, it suppresses the contraction of Eutyches and Dioscorus. For it does not, according to the opinion of Nestorius, divide the one Christ into two Sons and as many subsistences; ^C nor, likewise, does Eutyches and Dioscorus, and also Severus, confuse divinity and humanity into one nature in the one Christ. For since each of these proceeded further than they ought—the one toward division, and Dioscorus toward contraction—and the one speaking of two Sons, while the other would not even properly profess one, they fell into a miserable state. For Nestorius, fearing confusion, said that the union of the divinity with the humanity was only by relation, or rather by an acquired authority, so that even with the natures he declared two Sons and two subsistences, and one Son specifically begotten of the Father, and another who was born of the Virgin, having obtained the honor of divine adoption by grace alone. ^D Unhappy Eutyches and Dioscorus, and also Severus, who later joined them, wishing to refute the absurd opinion of Nestorius, cured evil with evil, and foolishly veered into a more absurd heresy, daring to name one nature—I mean of divinity and humanity—thereby, as far as it depended on them, bringing the impassibility of the divinity into passibility. For if, according to their foolishness, we should concede that the natures which concur in Christ have become one, then the God and man, the divinity also, in every way participates in death. But may Peter, the chief of Christ's disciples, stop the mouth of these men, (1) "Relation" is said of things toward something, and they have a relation between themselves: just as a son to a father, and conversely. (Suid.)

^A who declare that Christ suffered for us in the flesh, without adding "and in his divinity." For although the divinity of Christ was united to the flesh according to subsistence, it was nevertheless in no way a participant with him in his suffering; for how could it be, since the divine is altogether incapable of any suffering? And the council, rightly confirming this, decrees that Christ is two natures, united without confusion, without change, and without alteration; and that he is to be worshiped in one subsistence of the Word of God, the same who was begotten of the Father before the ages according to the principle of his divinity, and again in the last days was born from the holy Virgin in a manner new to human nature; the same, in accordance with both substances, being like to the Father and to the mother—only-begotten according to the Father, and first-born according to the mother—by whom the Father has adopted many into the rights of sonship through baptism. ^B These things they taught, traveling everywhere. But the impious emperor, inflamed with anger, condemned them to exile, until divine vengeance decreed that inevitable exile—that is, the departure from this life—for him, through which the great waves of the Church were calmed, and those men, having been recalled from exile, returned from their hardships to the longed-for peace.

CHAPTER XXXIV

But we must not yet speak of these things; for before this happened, Severus sat upon the throne and attempted to tyrannize over true piety, practicing most terrible deeds. He sent, according to custom, the synodical letters to the patriarch Elias; when these were not accepted by him on account of his enormous impiety, the emperor was again stirred to anger. And he sent a large band of armed men to Jerusalem against those who did not choose to agree with Severus and to subscribe to his synodical letters, commanding that they be driven from their seats and that force be applied if necessary. ^D When, therefore, such a disaster hung over Elias, with piety being thus tyrannized, those admirable men, having again gathered the monastic body, drove out—disorderly—the emissaries of Severus from the church, and from the king...

^A missioners were sent to them, they cast them out with tumult. And when later another great multitude of them flowed together, in their sight, with great confidence, they subjected those who were in communion with Severus to anathema. The emperor, however, wishing to remove from himself so great a disgrace, sent against them a certain Olympius, to whom he assigned the military forces in Palestine, so that having the imperial authority, he might accomplish what was ordered, ignoring ecclesiastical sanctions. As soon as he arrived in Jerusalem, he cast the divine Elias from the episcopal throne and replaced him with a certain John, the son of Marcian, who indeed communicated with Severus, but rejected the Council of Chalcedon. Having learned of this, Sabbas and the holy cohort that was with him ran into the stadium again. And although Olympius, finally considering the matter in his mind, had retreated, Sabbas spoke with the new patriarch, John, and persuaded him that he should abstain from the communion of Severus and protect the Council of Chalcedon, even at the risk of shedding blood. This he did, having reverently accepted the persuasions of the Fathers and having neglected the covenants entered into with Olympius. The emperor, offended by this, deprived Olympius of his magistracy and sent Anastasius, a duke appointed in his place, into Palestine. Upon his arrival, having in mind to carry out the emperor’s wishes unreasonably, he immediately cast John—without even a word having been exchanged with him—into prison; and he began to compel him by force to despise the Council of Chalcedon and to embrace the communion ^B of Severus. But John, having secretly spoken with Zacharias, the bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, had heard that, as the times demanded, affairs should be managed with opportune craft, and he promised the duke that he was ready to do what he wanted, if only, after the passage of two days, he were released from custody: ^C “Lest,” he said, “we seem, by force and not by persuasion, to do that which is pleasing to the emperor.” And this was done, and the patriarch was freed from custody. He then called together the multitude of monks to the church of the first deacon Stephen, so that he might curb the unyielding temerity of the heretics; and he brought forward another plan from his own home, by which the spectacle of the events might be made more conspicuous. For the duke himself arrived, so that, with him as a witness present, the synod might be abolished and condemned. John ascended the dais, supported on either side by the hands of Sabbas and Theodosius, the champions of the faith. And when he had kept silence for a little while, and heard the multitude whispering that the unsound faith ought to be condemned with anathema, full of confidence he brought forth these words: “If anyone holds the views of Eutyches and Nestorius, and of Severus and Soterichus, bishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, let him be anathema. If anyone does not follow the dogmas of the four universal synods, let him be anathema.” The duke, when he understood the drama, fearing the impulse ^D of the multitude, was content to escape with his life. The Fathers, however, knowing that the emperor would be enraged when he heard these things, sent an open letter, refuting him and setting forth the accuracy of the dogma, asserting that it was absurd that they, being Jerusalemites, from whom the dogma had flowed as from a fountain, should now be late-learners of the better...

things. They declared that they knew the faith promulgated at Nicaea by the three hundred and eighteen Fathers, and that they would most tenaciously hold to the other three councils as well, inasmuch as these relied upon the footsteps of the former one; nor would they yield any of these first traditions, even if something harsh were to befall them, but would rather defend them, if need be, even unto blood. Patriarch John, having lived for no short time with those holy men, had as his successor in his church and in piety Peter, a man of distinction. ^A They say, moreover, that Elias, while he was with the blessed Sabas, and being far from Constantinople, foretold the very hour of Anastasius’s passing when he was about to die. Such was the manner in which events in Palestine took place.

CHAPTER XXXV.

Concerning Timothy of Constantinople, and Symmachus and Laurentius, bishops of Rome; and concerning the feast of the holy apostles Peter and Paul. And also concerning Theodoric the Scythian, and Deuterius, and Alamundarus, phylarch of the Saracens.

Timothy, the bishop of Constantinople, differed greatly from Macedonius, who had held the priesthood before him; he was himself like a cothurnus, most easily turning his mind toward whatever was pleasing to men, at one time embracing the synod of Chalcedon, and at another time, conversely, fixing it with an ^B anathema. For I shall relate what he did in the monastery of the Studios. For the curator of that monastery was dying, and Timothy was present to appoint another to the office. But he who was to receive the transfer of authority asserted that he was bound by the obligation of an oath not to accept the vote or election to such a prefecture from one who did not sincerely assent to the synod of Chalcedon. Timothy, however, cast an anathema by way of condemnation upon anyone who would not accept the said synod; and thus, he who had been designated accepted the ordination. Then the chief of his deacons, who was present, assailed Timothy with reproaches, as one who did not stand on one foundation, but was now turning to this side and now to that, like Euripus. He went to the emperor and reported the ^C undertaking. The emperor, having summoned him, dealt harshly with the priest. And he, in order to wipe away this disgrace, publicly proclaimed a completely contrary opinion, and cast an anathema upon every man who accepted the synod of Chalcedon. Some say that it was he, and not Peter the Fuller, who, because of the slander of Macedonius—as though he did not accept the symbol of the three hundred and eighteen—was the one to prepare this to be said at every assembly, whereas previously it was said only once a year on the Friday of the holy Passion in the church, where, for me, ^D Studios built a magnificent house, And quickly received the honor of the consul’s rod as reward for his labor.

^A Such are the things regarding Timotheus.

At this same time, a great confusion and disturbance arose in Old Rome, for the following reason. A certain man named Festus, of high rank and a Roman senator, had set out for the New Rome on account of certain public interests of the Roman state. Having conferred with Emperor Anastasius and having successfully completed his business to his satisfaction, he then petitioned [the Emperor] that the memory of the apostles Peter and Paul might be celebrated there with greater reverence and devotion, as is the custom in Rome. For until then, it had been observed without much care, and, if one might say so, as chance had dictated. Anastasius, wishing to gratify him, was compliant, and formally decreed that the festival of those apostles should be celebrated by all the people in a public and magnificent manner. From that time forth, the festival grew greatly and took on much splendor, having increased in magnificence.

Furthermore, while Macedonius was still excelling in the throne of Byzantium, he determined, through the aforementioned Festus, to send a synodal letter to the Roman bishop Anastasius, so that he might ever more firmly uphold the Council of Chalcedon. But when Emperor Anastasius learned of this, he prevented it. Festus, however, approaching the Emperor in a secret conference, suggested that he could easily induce Anastasius, the primate of Rome, to assent to the Henoticon of Zeno and to subscribe to it with his own hand. ^B But when he returned to Rome, he found that Bishop Anastasius had passed away; therefore, he made an effort to ensure that, through pretense and simulation, the subscription he had promised might be fulfilled. Accordingly, having corrupted some people with money, he managed, against established custom, to have a certain Roman named Laurentius chosen as bishop. The common people, however, decided to appoint another. Thus, a sedition arose, and at the same time two bishops were appointed: for the majority, Symmachus, who had been a deacon, was determined [to be the bishop]; but by the other party, Laurentius was ordained.

Because of this, the sedition lasted for three years, not without bloodshed, plunder, and other evils that are wont to happen in such times, until it was quelled. For Theoderich, who at that time held dominion over Rome, although he was an Arian, nevertheless gathered a synod of bishops and confirmed the episcopacy for Symmachus; having driven out Laurentius, he enthroned him in a city named Nuceria. But Laurentius by no means wished to remain quiet; desiring the episcopate, he incited the populace to sedition. ^C Symmachus, therefore, having deprived him of his priesthood, exiled him from the region, and thus the sedition in Rome was quieted. ^D Regarding Theoderich, the following is also recorded: A certain deacon, adhering to the sound faith, was passionately loved by the Goth [Theoderich], and enjoyed everything he desired from him. And indeed, the deacon, wishing to do things that were pleasing and welcome to him, withdrew himself from the homoousion faith and preached the doctrines of Arius. This, having learned of the man he so exceedingly loved, Theoderich removed from his head.

^A For he said: "If you have not kept your faith toward God sincere, how will you furnish a sound conscience toward me who am but a man?"

At the same time, a certain Arian bishop named Deuterius, while baptizing a man named Barbas in the city of Constantinople, as if setting aside the Lord's ordinance, daringly spoke contrary to custom: "Barbas is baptized in the name of the Father through the Son, in the Holy Spirit." ^B Behold, the water which was in the holy font instantly disappeared, and Barbas, fleeing from there, proclaimed this miracle to all.

At this same time, the Scenite barbarians made an incursion into Mesopotamia, and they ravaged Armenia and both Phoenicias. The chieftain of the Saracen people, Alamundarus, together with Zarethas—a leader of the Persians—made an attack even upon the borders of Palestine. Having been received harshly on every side by the Roman generals, they later made peace with the Romans and remained quiet. Alamundarus also embraced the holy rites of the Christians. ^C Severus was at that time administering the episcopacy of Antioch, and he sent two of his bishops to Alamundarus, that he might infect him with his contagion. But God, forestalling them, caused him to be instructed in the better religion through those who held the right opinions and approved the Council of Chalcedon.

For those who had been sent by Severus were striving to lead the chieftain astray and to persuade him to profess doctrines contrary to the truth. And he, to refute what they had said, contrived a marvelous story; he said he had received letters stating that the Archangel Michael had just recently died. ^D When they claimed that this was a matter that could not possibly be, the chieftain replied: "And how did God, who is incorporeal, accept the cross after our manner, if Christ our God was not of two natures, since not even an angel is by nature capable of suffering or dying?" Those holding to the views of Severus, filled with shame, departed from there in disorder.

Such was the state of the churches everywhere as long as Anastasius held the imperial scepter; whom, because some judged that he opposed the Council of Chalcedon, they removed from the sacred books. Indeed, in Jerusalem, while he was still alive, he was condemned with anathema. But it will not be foreign to my purpose if I append to this present work such things as I have learned to have been performed under his reign and worthy of mention.

Chapter 36. Nicephorus Callistus. On the rebellion of Longinus the Isaurian and another Longinus. On the administration of the Persian kingdom by Perozes, Blases, and Cabades, and how they made peace with the Romans.

^A Longinus was the brother of Zeno, as we have said above. Having been banished to his own country by Anastasius, he collected an army of fifteen thousand Isaurians and moved toward him, waging war to engage him in open conflict. In his camp were many others, and among them was that Conon who had received the bishopric of Apamea in the province of Syria. He, having exchanged his episcopal office for military service, stood at the head of the Isaurians in the war. Finally, when battle was joined and the Isaurians were slaughtered with great destruction, the heads of Longinus and Theodorus were brought to Constantinople; these the emperor ordered to be fixed upon long poles and set up on high in the place which bears the name of the Fig Trees, opposite Byzantium, to be a pleasing spectacle for the inhabitants of Constantine's city, who had suffered very many evils at the hands of the Isaurians.

^B Longinus also, another, surnamed the Selinuntian, and some Indes with him, who for a long time had exercised tyranny, were captured by John, a military commander who was nicknamed Curtus—that is, the hunched or stooped—and were sent to Anastasius. These men offered a very agreeable spectacle to the emperor and the Byzantines, when the tyrants, bound in heavy chains, were dragged in a grand triumph through the midst of a great crowd, in the great hippodrome and along the public streets. From that time, the Isaurica, as it was previously called, was brought into the imperial treasury. This was the gold which was paid annually to those barbarians, amounting to five ^C thousand minae.

Indeed, the king of the Persians at that time, Perozes, having declared war upon the Nephthalite Huns, returned to his kingdom ingloriously. For while he was pursuing them in certain narrow passes, he was suddenly encircled by their dense ranks, and, with all outlets of the defiles closed by guards, he was captured by them. Thus reduced to necessity, he sought peace from them. The leader of the Nephthalites would not accept the conditions of peace until Perozes performed the honor of adoration to him by bowing his body, and confirmed by a pledge combined with an oath that he would never wage war against the Nephthalites. And he, though unwilling, was driven by the necessity of the time to do a thing that was beyond reason, and he returned home with ^D the greatest disgrace. But later, not bearing that ignominy, he set out against them with an army, against the sanctity of his oath. And when they had again laid an ambush for him, he was slain for violating his oath.

The Persians handed over the kingdom to his younger son, Cabades. When he administered it, he established by law that wives should be held in common. For this reason, the Persians stripped Cabades of the kingdom and furthermore cast him into custody, and they proclaimed Blasus, the other son of Perozes, their king. As for Cabades, his wife did what she could for him in his confinement. And she was of beautiful countenance and, [alt-version omitted]

^A because the guard of the prison was overcome by her beauty and captivated by love, he was induced to do what she wished. Knowing this, the woman, who was chaste and devoted to her husband, reported the guard’s infatuation to her husband, who exhorted her to yield to the desire of her lover. When this shameful deed had been carried out, the woman could go more freely to her husband, providing him with fitting care. There was a certain friend of Cabades, extremely dear to him, who sent word through his wife that he had horses and men ready in a certain place, with whom, if he wished to escape, he could easily recover his kingdom. ^B When night fell, Cabades persuaded his wife to put on his clothes and sit in the dungeon, while he, putting on her attire and cleverly feigning to be her, made his escape. And this was completely successful, and Cabades, through the guidance of Se-es—for this was the name of his friend—made his way as quickly as possible to the Nephthalites. Their prince gave him his daughter in marriage and assigned him an army to lead against the Persians to recover his own kingdom. Having invaded the land of the Persians, he suddenly and without any difficulty recovered his kingdom; he seized his brother Blasus, blinded him, and shut him in prison; and because Cabades was a wise and industrious man, he afterwards held the kingdom most securely. In the eleventh year of his reign, he first made peace with the Romans. ^C But afterwards, when he wished to receive a loan of money from Anastasius and Anastasius replied that if he wished to borrow money he must provide a written bond, and that without it he would not receive a single obol, for this reason Cabades broke the peace treaty and took up arms against the Romans. There was a town between Persia and India called Tzundadaer, in which Cabades learned that a vast quantity of money and precious, translucent stones were secretly stored. He left nothing untried in order to gain possession of them along with the town; but he could not achieve what he wanted because demons, whose lot it was to guard these things, stood in his way. After he had tried all his own sorceries and accomplished nothing, as the demons were gripping the place fast, he attempted to act through the Jews; but having failed in his purpose there too, he decided to turn to the Christians, having heard that they had received power against demons. He sent for the bishop of the Christians in Persia, who, having for this purpose gathered an assembly of his own people and partaken of the divine mysteries, and having distributed them to the Christians who had gathered there, drove out the demons who occupied the place with the sign of the cross, ^D and immediately delivered the town to Cabades without any difficulty. The Persian, struck with wonder at this, honored the bishop of the Christians with the first seat, whereas until that time the Jews and Manichaeans had held the primary seats. From that time on, he granted liberty to all who wished to live as Christians, whereas previously he had punished them, even to the point of removing the tongues of many, who, even in that state, spoke as purely as they had before.

^A

Chapter XXXVII. Concerning the war with the Persians, and the towns of Theodosiopolis and Dara; and concerning the holy relics of the apostles Bartholomew and Barnabas.

But indeed, as we have said, the Persians violated the peace, crossed their own frontiers, and first made war against Armenia. Having captured a small town called Theodosiopolis, they moved from thence to the city of Amida, which lies somewhere in the middle of the rivers, and having besieged it, they took it; ^B yet Anastasius later recovered it at great expense. If anyone desires to know more fully and accurately how the details of that siege proceeded, we urge him to read Eustathius the Syrian, who has written of these matters quite elegantly; having brought his history down to that time, namely the twelfth year of the reign of Anastasius, he proceeded to common topics and dealt with them in greater detail. Afterwards, the emperor fortified a certain place named Dara, which also lies between the rivers, near the borders of the Roman Empire—a boundary marker between us and the Persian state—and enclosing it with a strong wall, he turned it into a city. He erected various buildings, temples, magnificent houses, imperial porticos, public baths, and other things in which famous cities glory. ^C It is said that this place received the name Dara from Darius, because Alexander the son of Philip defeated him there in the final battle. When he had finished building it and had departed, the apostle Bartholomew appeared to him in a dream and announced through an oracle that the protection of those walls had been entrusted to him by God. Anastasius, confirming this dream, discovered his relics and deposited them there. In his reign, the body of the apostle Barnabas was also discovered in Cyprus under a tree which is called a carob tree; upon his chest was found the sacred and divine Gospel of the evangelist Matthew, written by the hands of Barnabas himself. ^D For this reason, the Cypriots for the first time began to have their own metropolis as an autocephalous church, and were henceforth no longer considered to be subject to Antioch, to which they had previously been subordinate. Justinian later confirmed this right even more strongly for the sake of his wife Theodora, for whom Cyprus was a fatherland; just as he also honored his own fatherland, Achrida, which he called Justiniana Prima. At that time also the Himyari, a warlike people living under the rule of the Persians at the extreme ends of the south, embraced Christianity; having sent envoys to the emperor, they received a bishop and whatever else was fitting for them to have. It was said, indeed, that they came at the same time as the Queen of the South to see Solomon. Though they had been Jews from the beginning, long after they had become heathens and gentiles; but then, mingled with both Jews and gentiles, they embraced the Christian religion with ardent spirits.

CHAPTER XXXVIII

Another tyrant, a Thracian by birth named Vitalianus, made war upon Anastasius. Having ravaged Thrace, starting from Odyssopolis and Anchialus, he pressed on to capture the royal city, bringing with him a countless multitude of Huns. Hypatius the general was sent to stop his advance; he was captured by the tyrant, having been betrayed by his own men, but the emperor ransomed him for a large sum. After this, Cyrillus was placed in charge of the military forces. When the battle had been fought with equal success, and each side had often fled and then pursued the other in turn, Cyrillus, through the negligence of his men—though the general himself was superior to the enemy—nonetheless fell into their power in this way. The tyrant thus advanced as far as the Sice, devastating and consigning everything to destruction, ^B being possessed of great hopes that he would capture the queen of cities and seize the empire. When he was encamped there, the emperor sent Marinus the Syrian against him with a naval force. As both armies drew near, they paused, engaging in skirmishes between the two. And when a fierce naval battle eventually took place at the so-called Bytharia, Vitalianus, having been pushed back, took to flight with all the speed he could muster, his forces having been largely destroyed. His men followed him with such swiftness that on the next day there was absolutely no enemy to be seen, either near the city or at the crossing. Vitalianus lingered for a short time at Anchialus and then, ceasing from his tyranny, ^C chose to live in peace. Another tribe of Huns, having passed through the Caspian Gates, ravaged the Roman dominions in the East; and at the same time, the island of Rhodes suffered an enormous earthquake in the middle of the night, the third one at that.

CHAPTER XXXIX

Anastasius also accomplished a work most great and glorious, worthy of remembrance ^D and befitting an emperor, which he called the Long Wall, constructed for the adornment of Thrace. It lies two hundred and eighty stadia from Constantinople and reaches to both seas, stretching out for four hundred and twenty stadia like a strait, making the city a peninsula, almost in the shape of an island. It also provides an easy passage for those wishing to cross from what is called the Mouth of the Pontus to the Propontis and the Thracian Sea. It was a work intended to prevent the barbarians who desire to rush forth and overrun [the land] from the regions above the Euxine Pontus, and from Colchis, and from the Maeotic Lake...

^A and from those who have spread out into Europe.

CAPUT XL. On the shameful and impious tax of the *chrysargyron*, that is, the gold-silver tax, which Anastasius removed from the Roman Empire by his imperial virtue.

Another of his works, far more excellent and divine, is the fact that he completely removed from the Roman Empire the tribute which was termed of old the *chrysargyron*, or "gold-silver tax." To recount this matter with the dignity it deserves would be a task for the language and eloquence of a Thucydides. I, however, will set it forth, trusting not in the power of words, but in the excellence of the deed itself. The Roman Empire, which is adorned with such amplitude and magnificence, had long ago instituted a tax, most absurd, miserable, and hateful to God: one that was unworthy not only of the Romans and their noble empire, but even of the vilest barbarians. This tax, which I know not by what means had been tolerated through connivance down to his own time, he himself, with truly imperial spirit, attacked and utterly abolished.

^B This tribute, which was demanded without exception from many others, such as those who eked out a living by begging for alms, was imposed as well upon those wretched women who, wherever they could be found in the lonely and hidden quarters of the city’s brothels, sold the flower of their youth to petulant men for the sake of profit—so much so that a reproach was brought not only against nature itself, but even upon the administration of the Republic. For since that payment was established by law, it openly proclaimed that power was granted to anyone to do whatever they wished, and even what was forbidden. And this detestable and impure tax, which indeed formed no small part of the revenues, was brought every four years to the magistrate whom the prince appointed, and he who held this position was reckoned among the illustrious men.

^C When Anastasius learned of this indignity, which had crept into the administration of the Roman Empire as some sort of execrable stain brought on by new circumstances, he suppressed the wickedness by casting the account books of its exaction into the fire, as if offering the whole matter as a kind of holocaust to God; and he took care, through a decree, that it should not be permitted for any emperor after him to renew this ancient disgrace in the administration of public affairs. After he did this, he feigned annoyance at his own action and accused himself of folly, as if it were out of a mere pursuit of vain glory that he had wrongly abrogated a tax instituted of old, without mentally weighing the dangers that threatened or the many, great stipends that needed to be paid out to the soldiers. Therefore, concealing his counsel, he promised that he would restore the tribute ^D of which we have spoken, and among those familiar with him he pretended to be on the point of renewing the aforementioned revenue; he feigned regret to those present, as if he had no way to correct his own mistake, since the books of this exaction had been carelessly consumed by fire. Yet, while those men were deceived—or rather, not making a pretense of it, but in truth being vexed on account of the revenue because of their profit from that impurity, and putting forward the difficulty of the situation—he urged on those circulating everywhere...

to make a collection of whatever was found; and wherever any such document might be discovered, he ordered it to be brought to him, so that with much consideration and accuracy the revision might be composed. Now when after a considerable time those who had been sent about such tasks arrived, bringing with them all that they had found, Anastasius continued to be very joyful, having attained his desired purpose; and he inquired again, with craft, as to how and where and among whom they had found them; and whether any other such thing remained anywhere else. They asserted that they had brought them together with great diligence; and they confirmed with an oath that no other document remained throughout the whole jurisdiction of the empire that could give an account of this ^A tax. And so Anastasius again cast those collected documents into the flame, and having drenched their ash with water, scattered it to the air; determined to obliterate the act completely, so that not even dust or any other remnant of the transaction should be left, nor, after the burning, should even a shadowy letter be visible. But so that we might not appear—by inflating the matter to such a degree—to have been ignorant of what the ancients also wrote about this transaction, led by their own feelings, I shall produce these things as well; demonstrating from those things which I have gone through, that those things which they have recorded ^B about this illicit transaction are false.

CHAPTER XLI

A digression to the historian Zosimus: what he bitterly and spitefully twisted by blasphemy against Constantine, the most celebrated among kings.

For Zosimus, being very much addicted to the Greek religion, and angry at Constantine, the champion of piety and proclaimer of the faith as emperor, because he changed from the worship of idols to the faith of the Christians, having abandoned their detestable ways, records with blasphemy that Constantine himself, having first devised the exaction of the Chrysargyron, legislated that such a most shameful tax should be introduced every four years. ^C But he did not only blaspheme the pious and great-gifted emperor with this, but also with other things unbearable, [claiming] him to have acted against every art and science; and that he inhumanly killed his son Crispus; and that he destroyed his own wife, Fausta, having secured her in a bath heated to the extreme; and that when he sought an expiation for such a great crime from the Greek priests and did not find it, he chanced upon an Egyptian man who had come from Iberia; and having heard from him that the faith of the Christians provides for the remission of every sin...

^A he immediately changed his mind, rejected his ancestral customs and the worship of idols (as the man says), and embraced the sacred rites of the Christians. ^B But that he recorded these things falsely in an attempt to slander the great emperor, I shall demonstrate as evident by refutation. But first I shall discuss the *Chrysargyron* tax with you.

CHAPTER XLII.

A refutation of those things which Zosimus said concerning the apostolic Constantine.

In your history, you ruinous man, you record that he, wishing to found another city equal to Rome, first selected the location between Troas and Ilium as being suitable for the work he had planned, and laid foundations, and raised a wall above the ground. But after he discovered that Byzantium was more suitable, changing his plan, he quickly surrounded that city with strong walls, and having extended it far and wide with great towers, he so adorned it with such beautiful porticoes and other buildings that it yielded to Rome in nothing, having received its increments of such great ornaments and delights gradually over many years. You also record that he granted public grain rations to the city and gave much gold to those who had gathered there for the construction of private homes. And you also append these things verbatim: "When Constantine died, the sum of affairs reached his son Constantius, after the death of his brothers; and when Magnentius and Vetranio had seized power, Constantius, by means of persuasion, brought Vetranio into his power. For since armies had been gathered on both sides, Constantius, speaking before the assembly, reminded the soldiers of his father's liberality towards them—his father with whom they had waged many wars and by whom they were honored with the greatest gifts. And when the soldiers heard these things, they stripped Vetranio of his purple robe, and in the garb of a private man brought him to Constantius. And he, having suffered nothing unworthy, was saved by Constantius, although he had hurled many insults at him and his father." ^C Therefore, I ask you, how do you expect one who, as you write, rejoiced in such great liberality and munificence, to be at the same time such a miser and so stingy as to introduce to the Roman administration such a detestable and God-hated tax in an unusual and new way? I certainly cannot reconcile this. I will also demonstrate most clearly that he did not execute his son Crispus nor his wife Fausta so cruelly, nor did he consort with any Egyptian, from whom he supposedly received our religion after he had embraced it. Listen instead to Eusebius Pamphili, who flourished in their times and was with them a great deal, having enjoyed their company and friendship to the full. For you record only a mutilated rumor in your writings, not the truth itself, living as you did a long time afterwards, under Honorius and Arcadius, to whom you dedicated your history, and perhaps even living much later still. ^D Now consider what Eusebius, who flourished and lived with Constantine and Crispus, says in the eighth book of his written work...

Ecclesiastical History concerning them: ^A “A very long time having passed, the emperor Constantine, having spent his entire life with the utmost gentleness and benevolence toward his subjects, and with a most devout disposition toward the divine Word, left behind his legitimate son Constantius as emperor Augustus in his own stead, and departed this life according to the common law of nature.” And after other things: “His son Constantius, immediately upon beginning his reign, being a most perfect emperor and Augustus by the armies, and long before that proclaimed by the very King of all, God, established himself as an emulator of his father’s piety toward our faith.” And at the end of the same ^B history he also adds this: “But the greatest victor, Constantine, shining with every virtue of piety, together with his son, the most God-beloved King Crispus, who was in all things like his father, recovered his own East.” Now, how would Eusebius have praised Crispus in this way if he had been put to death by his father? And how would the son have been pursuing Constantine, when even Theodoret, who wrote of ecclesiastical matters after Eusebius, narrates at the end of his life that Constantine, putting off the reception of regeneration in Nicomedia, longed to attain it in the river Jordan, saying in these very words: “The thirtieth year of his reign had passed; and a year and a few months having elapsed, while staying in Nicomedia of Bithynia, he began to be ill. But knowing well how uncertain human life is, he received the gift of holy baptism: which he had previously put off until that time, because he had longed to receive it in the river Jordan.” These are the words of Theodoret. ^C In addition to this, O most accursed, most execrable, most filthy, most abominable, and most defiled man, you say that even the Roman state, from the time that the Christian religion flourished, has utterly perished and been destroyed. And so, to me you seem either to have read nothing at all of what has been recorded in history, or of your own accord to be blinding yourself to the truth; for anyone can easily find that, on the contrary, the affairs of the Roman empire increased in manifold ways through the faith of the Christians.

CHAPTER XLIII

The same Zosimus is refuted and proven wrong, in that with the arrival of Christ upon the earth, the Roman state received the greatest growth.

You ought, therefore, to consider that, along with the coming of our Savior Jesus Christ, the kingdom of the Macedonians was completely taken away by the Romans. ^D Moreover, Albania, and Iberia, and Colchis and the Arabs, chose to submit to the Romans. Furthermore, Gaius Caesar, after the one hundred and eighty-third Olympiad, subjected the Gauls, the Germans, and the Britons to great battles, bringing upon them the yoke of slavery; and he annexed

he subdued ^A the Britons with great struggles, laying upon them the yoke of servitude; and he added to the Roman dominion, in addition to the cities it already possessed, five hundred populous cities, as have those who recorded these matters for the memory of posterity. This Caesar was the first, after the consuls, to be declared monarch and sole prince; by this act, as if going before and paving the way, he brought the citizens and subjects of the Roman Empire, from the worship of many gods and a turbulent state of public affairs, toward the one religion that alone would prevail, through the approaching monarchy of Christ. For the sake of this, all Judaea, and the surrounding regions everywhere, were so subjected to the Roman Empire that then, for the first time, a census and enrollment took place, in which Christ himself was registered, so that the prophecy concerning the city of Bethlehem might openly have its fulfillment, which the mournful Jeremiah predicted concerning it in these words: And thou, Bethlehem, land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda; for out of thee shall come forth a leader, who shall feed my people Israel.

After the ineffable birth of Christ our God, Egypt ^B also fell under the power of the Romans, the kingdom of the Ptolemies—which had ended in Cleopatra—having been utterly conquered by Augustus Caesar; under whom our Lord Jesus Christ was born. After Antonius, Cornelius Gallus was sent by Augustus into the regions of Egypt and succeeded him, being the first to govern the province of Egypt after the Ptolemies, as those who have chronicled these events record. Moreover, you yourself in your histories set forth what great disasters the Persians suffered from Ventidius, Corbulo, and the generals of Nero, and likewise from Severus, Trajan, Carus, Cassius, Odenathus the Palmyrene, Apollonius, and others; and how often Seleucia and Ctesiphon, as well as Nisibis—which has shifted back and forth—were captured, and how Armenia ^C and other neighboring provinces came under the Roman dominion, together with others. But how should I speak of the other things which you write that the most sacred Constantine performed illustriously, when he, having professed our piety, administered the Roman Republic? And furthermore, what great and many disasters did Julian, your closest companion in leading dances and participant in the same orgies as you, bring about? He who truly inflicted countless and intolerable wounds upon the Roman Empire, and left them behind uncured.

But whether any of those things that have been predicted concerning the end of this universe have either begun or will have their end, this is surely too great for you to judge. But come, if it seems good to you, let us consider, while you speak of these things, how the emperors—both those who professed the Greek superstition and those who practiced the mysteries of the Christians—each lost their life or their empire. Was not the first monarch, Gaius Julius Caesar, who first usurped the empire for himself, slain by treacherous murder and deprived of life? Did not certain soldiers ^D deal with the second one, Gaius, the grandson of Tiberius, with the sword? And what of Nero? Was he not removed by one of his own household? Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, who reigned for the three months alongside one, suffered likewise; and as for Titus, did not Domitian his own brother—his most genuine brother—slay him? And what of that one again? Was it not a pitiable [end] that he sustained...?

^A And will you deny that Commodus was slain by Narcissus? And did the same not befall Pertinax and Julian? Did not Antoninus, the son of Severus, slay his brother Geta? And did he not suffer the same fate at the hands of Martialis? Was not Macrinus taken to Byzantium like a slave and slain by his own army? And did not Aurelius Antoninus of Emesa perish together with his mother? The same fortune attended his successor, Alexander, who was likewise slain with his mother, Mammaea. What shall I say of Maximin, whom his own army destroyed? Or of Gordian, who was removed by the treachery of Philip and departed to the common home [of all]? You, yourself, may recount the fates of Philip and Decius, how they were slain by enemies; and further, the fate of Gallus and Volusianus, to whom their own soldiers put an end. Did Aemilianus not meet the same result? ^B Was not Valerian, when he had fallen into the power of the Persians, led away as a captive? And was not Gallienus slain by guile, and after him Carinus, who left the empire to Diocletian, whom he had chosen as his co-ruler? From among them, Maximian Herculius, and then his son Maxentius, and last of all Licinius, died the most shameful deaths.

From the time, however, when the most renowned Constantine took up the empire—he who presided over the flock of Christ and most magnificently built the city that bears his name and dedicated it to Christ and His mother—examine for yourself whether any prince who attained to imperial dignity for a long time was ever slain, either by his own kinsmen and retainers or by foreigners, or whether at any time tyranny became more powerful than legitimate rule, except for Julian—your seer, priest, canephorus, and emperor—and your Valens. For I believe you, who have excellently detailed in your discourse the evils that they inflicted upon the Christians. ^C Wherefore both of them also bore the fitting penalties for their impiety. But of any other, you yourself would not be able to say anything similar. I, however, will add Basiliscus, who stirred up a movement against Zeno, from whom he lost not only his tyranny but his life as well. Although these things might perhaps seem to some to be of little relevance to an ecclesiastical history, I think them quite useful and helpful to the work I have undertaken, and most appropriate to this place; this is because the historians who are devotees of Greek superstition, deliberately and maliciously opposing the truth, write erroneously and falsely out of hatred for the Christian religion. But let us proceed to the remaining history of Anastasius.

CHAPTER XLIV.

Anastasius abolished the gold-and-silver tax ^D according to the method we have described; and this is—he instituted an administration of the nobility, and sold magistrateships and offices; he [sold them] to unjust men...

^A in a manner unworthy of his station. On the other hand, he introduced things unworthy of himself: namely, the sale of offices; and he burdened his own peoples with war taxes through the trafficking of these sold positions beyond measure, and by abrogating the collection of curial tributes, he appointed in every city those who are called *vindices*—at the suggestion, as they say, of Marinus the Syrian, who held the primary dignity under him, which the ancients called the prefecture of the praetorium. Wherefore, it came to pass that the revenues vanished in large part, and the cities were less prosperous. For in antiquity, those who were well-born and noble were enrolled in their registers, and every city regarded them as occupying the place of the senate in its curial affairs and determined them as such.

CHAPTER XLV.

The last and ultimate of all the evils of which he himself was the author was this: because of that addition, "Who for us wast crucified," which he himself wished to be added to the Trisagion, a huge sedition arose, as though men wished to overthrow the Christian religion. Peter the Fuller was the author of this dogma, as has been said. Severus, however, writes to Soterichus, attributing it to Macedonius, who had been the hierarch in Constantinople a little before, and to his clergy; [he writes] that although he was not yet enrolled in the order of bishops, but was living at that time in the imperial court, he was expelled from his monastery with those whom we mentioned previously. It is a conjecture, however, that for the sake of such calumnies and others, Macedonius was cast down from his throne. But that he lies without cause in attacking this man will be shown by what is said next. For after Macedonius began to dissent from the emperor, the emperor plotted against him greatly. ^C Hence, he ordered those who had defected from Macedonius to gather in a disorderly fashion in the temple of the Archangel, and to chant the Trisagion hymn with that very addition. The same thing was done by them on the following Lord’s Day in the Great Church, when they even brought clubs in with them. But the people, moved with burning zeal, shamefully drove them from the church. ^D Afterward, the ruler openly commanded that the deserting and apostate monks and even men of high rank should shamelessly heap unworthy insults upon the bishop; one of whom was Julian, the bishop of Halicarnassus in Caria, and Severus, who was even then a monk: both of them enemies of the faith, of Macedonius, and of those who were with him. How, therefore, could we accept that the man whom they, in their tyrannical manner, wished to insult and abuse by means of that addition, was the author of this confusion in the Church? Turning to an insatiable greed for money, he plundered the provinces. Good men were dismayed at the insolent and new custom which he introduced. For he was accustomed to repel the barbarians looming over the empire not with arms, but to purchase peace with gold. He curiously inquired into the property of the deceased, and everywhere brought public poverty upon all. (Suidas.)

^A When the emperor wished to publicly introduce this addition, the populace was uncontrollable, raging in the extreme. Many of those in power were in extreme danger, and many of the distinguished buildings were consumed by fire. Gathering at the houses of Marinus the Syrian, and finding some man there leading a monastic life, they cut off his head, saying that it was by his prompting that such an addition had been made. And having hoisted this head upon a pike, they proclaimed it publicly amidst great mockery, asserting that this man was indeed the enemy of the Trinity. ^B The sedition progressed to such a magnitude, with every counsel and remedy discarded, that the emperor himself, moved by so grave a danger, came out into the Hippodrome without a crown or his customary imperial habit, and proclaimed to the people through criers that he was ready to cede the empire. Truly, he said, he knew well that it was impossible for all men together to ascend to such a dignity, as it could by no means tolerate many; but that there must absolutely be one person who, succeeding him and holding the reins of administration, would govern the empire. When the people of Constantinople heard this, they suddenly, as if by some divine impulse, changed their attitude, and immediately implored the emperor to put on his crown, promising that they would dissolve the sedition and thereafter remain quiet. Anastasius lived for but a very short time thereafter; having died a little later, after having wretchedly and to the destruction of his own soul governed the Roman empire for twenty-seven years, three months, and as many days. ^C This sixteenth book of my histories contains a period of forty-four years and three months, at the time when the year of the world was six thousand thirty-four, and from the divine birth of the Lord the five hundred and twenty-ninth year was passing.

BOOK SEVENTEEN OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS. CHAPTER I.

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY VOLUME XVII

CAPUT I. Regarding the reign of Justin the First; and how he put to death Amantius the eunuch, Theocritus, and Vitalianus.

^A Such was the state of things in the churches under Zeno and Anastasius. When, however, Anastasius had departed to the lower courts of judgment, on the ninth day of the month of Panemus (this month is called July among the Romans), Justin, who claimed Thrace as his fatherland, assumed the purple. He was commander of the court ranks, and by the guards of the Emperor, whom he had led, he was declared prince, against all hope. For there were at that time many who, by their wealth, their power, and their kinship with Anastasius, had advanced to great glory, and who could have assumed the empire, and who, according to the license of all things, were pulling it toward themselves. Among others was Amantius, the prefect of the imperial chamberlains, who had amassed huge riches for himself. Since it was not permitted for him, as he lacked male faculties, to aspire to such an empire, he attempted to place the imperial crown upon a certain Theocritus, whom he used as his closest friend. He summoned this Justin and ordered him to use a large sum of money to tempt whoever was inclined to be able to bestow the purple upon Theocritus. But Justin, seeking the empire for himself, immediately bribed the people with the money, and purchased with gold the goodwill of those who are called the Excubitors. Having assumed the purple, he first removed Amantius and Theocritus from the land of the living; then he killed others also, whom he deemed capable of securing the imperial status for themselves. As for Vitalianus, who under Anastasius had aspired to tyranny, he summoned him from Thrace, where he was staying, to the imperial city with great honor, and his wealth...

^A and the industry of his military skills, and his outstanding reputation among all men he held suspect; and at the same time he pondered deeply in his mind, out of fear, that he knew the man to be possessed by a love of power. However, since he knew well that he could not otherwise be removed unless he pretended to be his friend and assumed a mask not to be despised, he immediately chose him as leader of the greatest orders: the Latin tongue calls these *Praesentes* ^B. Making use daily, furthermore, of greater enticement and fraud, he eventually raised him even to the dignity of consul. When he had reached such a height of power, since he was required to move about in the imperial court, he was killed by a ruse at a certain door in the middle of the hall; paying, I suppose, worthy penalties for the crimes with which he had previously ill-served the Roman Empire through his reckless audacity. These things were done a little later.

CAPUT II.

Who were the bishops of the supreme sees who administered sacred affairs at that age; and concerning Severus, Paul, and Euphrasius, the bishops of Antioch.

At that time the following presided over the churches: at Rome, Hormisdas after Laurentius and Symmachus; after Hormisdas, Agapetus; and to him succeeded the bishop Agathon. At Byzantium, after Macedonius, [was] Timotheus; after Timotheus, Joannes Cappadox obtained the throne. At Alexandria, after Joannes, Dioscorus governed the Church. At Jerusalem, after Joannes, who had succeeded Elias, Petrus ^C still held the see. At Antioch, however, Severus, the successor of Flavianus, held the throne through tyranny, railing vehemently against the synod at Chalcedon. Because he was so minded, he subjected that synod to anathema almost daily, but most especially in those letters which are called Enthronistic or synodal, which he sent to the patriarchs of every place. Only Joannes, who had succeeded the former Joannes at Alexandria, received these, as did Dioscorus and Timotheus; through whom many trifles were introduced against the Church, and the people were divided into countless opinions. But the most faithful emperor, in the first year of his reign, commanded that Severus pay the penalties due for the insolence of [his] ^D wanton speech, and that his tongue be cut out by the root. Irenaeus was in charge of this act, just as report has made it famous; he was the leader of the military orders at Antioch. Severus himself confirms by his own letters that this is indeed true, namely that Irenaeus had inflicted that punishment upon him for the sake of the tumult stirred up. For writing to certain friends at Antioch, he commemorates his exile and flight, and heaps very many taunts and revilings upon Irenaeus, because he had guarded the man with carefulness by disposing guards, so that he might not flee and depart from the city of Antioch. And I have learned...

^A of some who write that Vitalianus inflicted this punishment upon Severus, having requested his tongue from the emperor, because while still holding the primacy under Justin, he had often assailed him in his writings with scoffs. But he fled the throne in the month of Gorpieus, which the Romans would call September. Upon his departure, Paul ascended the see of Antioch, who, like the other, ranted in secret with madness against the Fourth Synod. Then, indeed, he publicly proclaimed it; but a little later, he withdrew himself from the churches of his own accord, and finished his life by departing to the common lot. And after him Euphrasius, coming ^B from Jerusalem, received the priesthood of Antioch.

CHAPTER III.

At that time, many frequent fires in Antioch were, as it were, precursors of future tremors, and laid as the beginnings of the evils that were to seize it. For not much time passed until—it being the seventh year of the reign of Justin, in the tenth month, during the month of Artemisios, which the Romans are accustomed to call May, on its twenty-ninth day, at high noon—a tremendous earthquake, intense and ^C shaking, fell upon the city, and, shattering it utterly, rendered it unsightly and deformed, casting to the ground everything in it that was excellent. A thunderbolt followed these, distributing the calamity as it were. For those [shocks] had thrown down the city; but if anything had been overlooked by them, the fire coming on consumed it, reducing it to ash and dust in an astonishing way. But as to how and how many evils that city suffered, how many houses and public porticoes and other illustrious works of it were rendered a secondary task for both the fire and the earthquake at once; and further, all the things that were strange and beyond words that occurred by God’s will in such casualties, John the rhetor sets forth in ^D this [work] with singular affection and graceful speech, putting an end to his history with such a calamity. Among these many disasters, Euphrasius the bishop also perished, having been overwhelmed in the ruins, so that no one might be left who would provide for the things necessary for that city. But the divine Providence, which looks upon all things and softens the swords of vengeance with the oil of mercy, and fashions remedies even before the blows, and immediately opens up bounty from the very point of despair, as one might say, roused up Euphræmius, who had been entrusted by command of the Emperor with the leadership of the Eastern troops; and he showed such care for the whole city that nothing of what was necessary was left undone. Whom the children of the Antiochians, admiring such guardianship, vote to be their priest. And he received the throne,

as if it were a certain reward and prize for such providence received from God. But after thirty months, it again suffers the most grievous things from earthquakes, at which time it chanced upon the providence belonging to ^A Justinian, and was named Theopolis (City of God). For every one of the inhabitants, writing the invocation of Christ before their doors, thus averted the shaking of the earth; God having charged one of the pious men to write thus before the doors: "Christ is with us: stand."

Still while Justin’s rule was flourishing, Epidamnus also (now called Dyrrhachium) suffered the most from fierce earthquakes, as did Corinth, which is founded in the land of Greece. Anazarbus, which leads the second nation of the Cilicians, suffered the same things, which Justin restored with great expenditure of money. In the time of the same reign, the prosperous city of the Edessenes, in the province of Osrhoene, a place both very great and populous, was flooded in an extraordinary manner by the river Scirtus ^B flowing past it; and to such an extent that it pulled away many of the buildings, and dragged away and engulfed an infinite multitude of people; whom the water snatched up and quickly departed, passing through the middle of the city like a torrent. When the calamity ceased, a slab of marble appeared, showing these words in hieroglyphic characters: "The Scirtus shall leap a bitter leap for the citizens." And at that time a woman of giant kind was seen, exceeding the stature of every tall man; her breadth also corresponded in proportion to her height.

The emperor, having become very sorrowful for the calamities in Antioch and the others, took the diadem from his head, put on a purple chlamys [in sign of mourning], and was in grief. And the whole city was in mourning, clad in black for the evils that had happened. The ^C emperor not only restored Antioch, but also the city of the Edessenes and Anazarbus, in a royal manner. And Anazarbus and Edessa were rebuilt from their very foundations and with such magnificence that both were adorned with the emperor’s own name. Since we have made mention of such a calamity against the city of Antioch, come let us also insert into the present history other things worthy of note that happened at that time, which we have excerpted from the writers of history.

CAPUT IV.

There was at that time a certain man named Zosimas, by birth from the so-called maritime Phoenicia, having Sidon as his fatherland, situated no less than twenty stadia from the city of the Tyrians, who practiced the life according to God with great contests. This man, therefore, by long fasting and other [exercises] in which it is fitting for God to take pleasure, having embraced Him with his whole heart, [not only] was he [adorned] with freedom from passion;

^A but he also received from God the gift of seeing future things as if they were present. There was, moreover, in Caesarea—which is the capital of the Palestinian nation—a man of high renown, eminent in prudence and eloquence, distinguished also by his dignity and other qualities that adorn a man's life, and very illustrious for the nobility of his race, by the name of Arcesilaus. When, therefore, Antioch was about to suffer from earthquakes, Zosimas, shedding abundant tears and groaning from the depths of his soul, took a vessel of fire in his hands from somewhere, and walking about, filled the whole place with incense. Then, casting himself upon the ground, he implored God's aid with prayers. When Arcesilaus happened to be present and asked what such a tumultuous action of his meant, he told him openly that he felt the ruin of Antioch occurring at that fatal moment, and that the crash thereof was resounding in his ears. Arcesilaus, together with those who were present there, hearing such words beyond all expectation, was struck with astonishment and noted the hour; and afterwards he discovered that at that very hour, which Zosimas had predicted by divine inspiration, the city of Antioch had fallen into the greatest calamities. Many other things also, which surpass all belief, they say this man did; but to relate them one by one, since they exceed measure, is not the task of the present time. I shall, however, endeavor to set forth one or two of them. At that same time, there flourished with this great man a certain person named John, not far behind him in virtue, in a monastic house that was named Choziba, ^B which is situated by the torrent on the northern part of the public road that leads those who have left Jerusalem toward the city of Jericho. This man, having formerly held the bishopric of the aforementioned city of Caesarea in Palestine, was at that time leading a solitary and ascetic life. At that time, therefore, the Chozebite, learning that the wife of the aforementioned Arcesilaus had knocked out one of her eyes with a weaver’s shuttle, went with all possible speed to visit the woman. When, therefore, he saw that the pupil had extruded and the eye was flowing out like fluid, he ordered one of those following him to bring a sponge as quickly as possible; and having gathered up the matter that was flowing out, to return it to its place, and to bind the sponge itself as best he might with a bandage. Arcesilaus was absent from the house; for he was conversing with Zosimas in a phrontisterion, or monastic cell, which lay by the village called Sida, and was about five hundred stadia distant from Caesarea. ^C While he was conversing with Zosimas, the servants, running home quickly, reported to him the accident to his wife. Hearing this suddenly, he fell into excessive mourning, and plucking his hair, he tossed it into the air, and could not restrain his grief. As Arcesilaus recounted the cause of his distress, interrupting his speech with frequent groans, Zosimas learned that Arcesilaus was in such a miserable state. ^D When, having gone out from there for a little while, he was returning, joyful and, as it were, exulting with a smiling and gracious countenance, he said, "Go, Arcesilaus, go; the grace is given to the Chozebite, and your wife is in perfect health; you must by no means be distressed."

And this was by no means false, for both of them in the same matter wrought miracles in equal measure. ^A They also say that this John spent his life in such a way that he dug out a certain winding subterranean passage, and there, avoiding the great crowd, he pursued quietude. Concerning Zosimas, this also has been handed down to memory: The holy man was once going to Caesarea, leading an ass with him, which was carrying some necessities, when suddenly a lion stood in the way, snatched the ass, and ran off. The old man followed him through the woods with a slow pace. The lion, as soon as Zosimas reached him, having satiated himself in the meantime on the feast of the donkey, was already prepared to depart. But Zosimas, looking upon the lion with a smiling countenance, said, "But, my friend, I do not have the strength to carry the pack-saddle on my shoulders, for I have reached such an age and have wasted away through poverty. ^B It is your duty, therefore, to take up the burden, and laying aside your natural prerogative, to do that which is contrary to the established laws, if you wish to be released by me and to be a wild beast once again." Then the lion, just as if he had once and for all cast off his ferocity, approached Zosimas gently, wagged his tail at the man, and showed that he would in all matters be obedient to him. Father Zosimas, having placed the burden upon the shoulders of the lion, led him all the way to Caesarea, clearly demonstrating that all things become obedient to the man who has chosen to live according to God, and who faithfully maintains the image and likeness given to him from above, just as it was in the beginning to the progenitor Adam.

Chapter V. De altero sancto Zosima. De Maria Aegyptiaca et Theodora Alexandrina.

Another Zosimas was also distinguished at that time, who did not indeed lead a solitary life, but who pursued the common struggle among the monks in a certain monastery in Palestine. ^C They say that this man, while serving in the priesthood, performed the divine service of the secret mysteries for the Egyptian woman—I speak of that Egyptian who, they say, had at first flowed forth so much into the pleasure of the flesh that she left nothing of carnal insolence untried, and reached such a degree of excessive evil that no one can even express it in words. Yet, subsequently, she ascended to such a height of virtue that one is illustrated by the other. For as she, born in Egypt, and having used that way of life, had brought many into her power like slaves through the magnitude of her lust; and as she, moved by the divine will to worship the all-holy Wood, had set out on the way, ^D and departing from there had crossed the river Jordan and hidden herself in the inner desert, and spoke with no human being except for this one Zosimas, without food and stripped of clothing, until she spoke with this Zosimas, having become elevated in prayer; and as she ended her life, and of the

divine communion she was deemed worthy, and by the roar of the lion the grave was fashioned for her. Having left behind a life most opportune for those desiring to repent, for Sophronius, who of old adorned the throne of Jerusalem, who had fittingly chronicled the life of her herself and Zosimas. For it is not permitted to me, hastening to set forth other matters, to linger on these. But furthermore, a little before this time, Theodora, that illustrious woman to be admired among women, was known; of whom the story goes that in the ninth region of the city of Alexandria she had borne the struggle of the monastic life with great magnanimity. For having been stolen away by a certain deceit into fornication, when she perceived that she had offended the divine Being, setting aside all wealth and the splendor of her lineage by the mandate of God, and concealing her feminine qualities under a masculine habit, she lived a life beyond nature; and she so veiled the drama, that she even underwent judgment as if she had been the father of a child that had been born, and the slander so prevailed, that she was even expelled from her cell, taking the child as if it were her own to raise, and she raised the infant by force, and brought him forward into a perfect man, it being in her power to reveal a few small things and be released; but she remained until the end, eager to stay hidden. Deemed worthy of the greatest gifts of grace, so as to command even wild beasts, and to ask of God whatever she needed, she departed to Him to receive the rewards of her labors. This departure, indeed, the author and reconciler of good things revealed to the prefect of the monastery, showing a kind of wondrous ascent, and a house most splendid, through which Theodora herself was brought forth by a bright retinue and body of attendants. ^A

CHAPTER VI. What things happened in the city of Negra, and concerning the holy martyr Arethas.

At that same time, and Arethas the martyr endured the struggle for Christ in the city which has the name Negra. He presided over it, being entirely consecrated to God by his ancestors themselves. But it is situated somewhere near the borders of happy Arabia. Since it flourished in most respects, and did those things which were pleasing to God, the enemy of the human race, bearing it least of all, stirred up a wild storm against it. For, having entered into a certain Jew—one who boasted of having Moses as a father and lawgiver, but in reality [was] far from the laws and entirely alien to the norms of nature, and who was exercising tyranny in the neighboring region of the Homerites—he incited him against the city I mentioned. And since, having brought to bear every trial upon it, he was unsuccessful, and was rebuffed by the mass of the walls and by the strategic expertise of those inside, he turned to the ancient armor of his father, that is to say, to deception itself; and, having assumed the mask of friendship, he struck a peace pact with them, and requested that it be permitted for him, with a few men, to enter it for the sake of seeing the city, by invoking the name of his ancestral god under oath, [promising] to think of or perpetrate no evil. And they were persuaded; and when he had gotten inside the walls, he...

did not tarry long; for once the mask was donned and the stage set, the wolf engaged with Christ's sheep. And after he had made the danger of turning the citizens away from Christ, and had strayed from the goal of his [previous] counsel, he finally offered up the entire city as a holocaust to God, some by the sword, others by fire and various tortures. Among whom ^B Arethas, most noble, received the crown of martyrdom. A remarkable specimen of manly spirit was also displayed there by another individual, the son of one of the women who were being dragged to the kindled pyre. For the tyrant, holding this child who was still tender in age, attempted to snatch him away, flattering him and promising him everything that would charm the soul of a small child. But the boy, looking at his mother, ran toward her, biting the thigh of the tyrant, and thus, together with his mother, was transmitted to God as a sweet-smelling sacrifice. And indeed, the whole city was in this manner offered by ^C sword and fire to God, and joined to the immortal Spouse as if it were a beautiful and blameless bride. But truly, God, Who is Lord of all, though He would willingly receive their blood, yet did not endure that the dues for such impious and shameful cruelty should go unpunished. Moreover, Dunaan himself (for this was the name of the tyrant)—having thus captured the city—did not perceive that he was also transmitting her, against his will, to eternal life, while for himself he was taking away this temporal life in disgrace, and casting himself miserably into eternal punishments. For when Justin heard these things, as much as Homerita ^D had contrived against the city, and all that he had dared to do against the saints, he was greatly angered by these deeds and was filled with rage. And he wrote to Elesbaan, the leader of the Ethiopians, a man who most strictly honored the faith of the Christians, inciting him to a righteous zeal for the taking of legitimate vengeance upon that perjured and impious man, so that with all the preparation of war and the military expedition becoming a king, he might crush him and exact the penalty worthy of the sheep of Christ. He, however, having also of his own accord a drive born of his love for Christ, and having received no trifling alliance from the emperor (from the military forces that were in the East and Egypt), and having girded himself with the armor of the cross, goes against the Hebrew—and indeed, having attacked him with a land and naval force (for the greater part of his dominion happened to be coastal), he engages him most bravely. And having prevailed with a superior power, he took him alive along with many of those akin to him by blood. And after he had put them all to the sword, and had further left the cities and the entire territory desolate, and had besieged it to the end, the illustrious man gained a fame that shall never be forgotten. And so, the blessed Elesbaan, perceiving that he had had as his ally the God of all, so as to lead to utter destruction the Jew who had set himself against the cross, said: "O all-sovereign King, I would not be able to return to you an equal reward for such an alliance; but this kingship which is mine, considered desirable by all, I lay aside this day for your sake." And at the same time as his speech, having laid aside the purple robe and the diadem, he approached the sanctuary; and having shaved his hair, and having put on the rough habit of the monks, he caused himself to be shut up in a certain narrow cell, inaccessible for life, using only bread and some vegetables for his sustenance. And having there lived his life holily, he departed to the ageless and blessed life. But in order that such...

a long account may not expand my work to an excessive length while I recount many such things, I return to expound the rest of the history.

CAPUT VII.

How the great Justinian, having assumed the empire, defended the profession and faith of Chalcedon; but Theodora his wife was inclined rather to the party of those who attribute one nature to Christ.

^B Justin was in the eighth year of his reign, and in addition the ninth month and the third day, when, already established in extreme old age and being in no way fit for the administration of public affairs—beyond the fact that he was also afflicted by a certain grave disease—he chose Justinian, the son of his sister, a patrician and supreme general, to be his colleague in the empire. And indeed, having obtained his proclamation according to custom on the first day of the month of Xanthicus, which is called April, he then lost his uncle, upon the first day of the month of Loüs or August (for it was then that he reached his final day), with whom he had reigned for four months. The entire time of Justin’s reign was nine years and three months.

Moreover, when Justinian had obtained the whole empire for himself alone, the Synod of Chalcedon, by the sanctions of Justin, was prevailing in all the churches everywhere, just as has been said by me above. Nevertheless, in certain provinces, ecclesiastical matters were not in their proper state because of disturbances. But this evil was observed most especially in the imperial city and in Alexandria itself; where, however, it was not being set forth so freely at all. In the sovereign city, after Epiphanius, who had presided over the Church for sixteen years, and to whom John, one of the scholastici (who held the bishopric for one year), had succeeded, Anthimus, having been transferred from Trapezus, ^C governed the bishopric with no glory; but at Alexandria, following the aforementioned Dioscorus, Theodosius took care of sacred matters. But both of them, both Anthimus and Theodosius, maintained that there was one nature in Christ after the union.

Truly, Justinian with a great spirit defended the Synod of Chalcedon and was very much devoted to its sanctions. But his wife, Theodora, protected those who professed one nature, having judged that this was more consistent with the truth. For if at any time a controversy arises concerning the faith, not only do parents dissent from their children and vice-versa, but even a wife from her husband, and a husband from his wife because of sedition. Justinian and Theodora, I know not how (perhaps, however, by design), had divided their opinions, so that he defended those who confess two natures in Christ after the union, while she supported those who profess one nature. Nevertheless, they appeared towards each other

^A not yielding in the least; for he indeed remained very steadfastly attached to those who were decreed at Chalcedon and identified with them, while she was especially inclined towards the opposite party and took great care of those who held to the one nature, not entirely neglecting our own people in the meantime; yet she especially gladdened the others by cooperating with them ^B and helping them as much as possible.

CHAPTER VIII. How Severus was recalled; of his letters; how he communicated his own ruin to Anthimus; and how the Fourth Synod was proclaimed in all the churches.

The Empress, holding such an opinion and using much persistent testing with Justinian, at length persuaded him with difficulty to summon Severus to Constantinople. There still circulate even today letters of Severus to the Empress Theodora and to Justinian himself, from which it is understood that while he had initially delayed his journey to them—from the time he left the see of Antioch—he later came and wrote that when he had reached the imperial city, he found that Anthimus held the same opinion, and that he held the same view as himself regarding the Divine; and that he even persuaded him to leave his throne. He also writes these things to Theodosius, the bishop of Alexandria, in which letters he seems to boast that he had brought the said Anthimus to the opinion of preferring such detestable dogmas to both this temporal glory and the supreme see. But the letters of Anthimus on these matters, and likewise those of Theodosius to Severus and Anthimus, are also extant; which for this reason I have omitted, so as not to accumulate a huge quantity of such writings in this work. ^C But since they did not agree with the Emperor, but went against his commands and did not accept the Chalcedonian Synod, both Anthimus and Theodosius were driven from their own sees. Zoilus therefore succeeded to the see of Alexandria, and Menas to that of the imperial city. It came to pass then that the Synod of Chalcedon was clearly preached in all the churches, and that no one dared to envelop it in anathema or disparage it; but those who did not hold to it were driven in every way so that they might come to agreement and be forced to embrace its teachings. Justinian also promulgated a constitutional law in which he anathematized Severus along with others, and those who were attached to him and professed an alien belief, and he subjected them to severe punishments; so that from that point on, everyone was driven by fear, and the churches everywhere came to hold the one same opinion; and no schism was thereafter left in the churches, but the patriarchs of each diocese came to agreement with one another, and ^D the bishops of each locality followed their own leaders, and publicly throughout the whole Church of the inhabited world, four councils

were proclaimed: the first, the one at Nicaea of the three hundred and eighteen Fathers; the second, the one at Constantinople; the third, the former ^A one at Ephesus; and the fourth, the one at Chalcedon. There came to be also a fifth, by the decree of the Emperor Justinian, concerning which I shall discourse in its proper time.

CAPUT IX. Concerning the synods that were convened against Anthimus, Peter, Severus, and Zoora; how the holy fourth council was approved everywhere; and concerning the bishops of Rome, Agapetus, Agathon, and John, how they came to Byzantium.

It is fitting to note that the one we mentioned, Anthimus, who succeeded Epiphanius, did indeed in word receive the holy fourth council, but in intent ^B truly abominated and rejected it. And when he was pressured to approve it, and to punish with anathema those whom it had rejected, he kept putting it off, contriving one reason after another for the delay. Meanwhile, it happened that Agapetus, the hierarch of elder Rome, came to Constantinople. When he investigated the affairs of Anthimus, and accepted many petitions presented to him by the archimandrites of that city and others, he deposed him without even admitting him to his presence. His judgment was approved by the monasteries of Palestine, by Peter of Jerusalem, and by the rest of the leaders of the ^C churches. After the passing of Agapetus, the synod convened at Constantinople, and indeed Agathon himself—who was, while still alive, the successor to Agapetus in the Roman Church—all exhorted this Anthimus to submit a petition of repentance, to prove that the things said against him were false, and thus to return to his former bishopric of Trapezus. But as he hid himself, the synod commanded him a second and a third time to appear and plead his cause, and to refute the charges brought against him, and publicly to resume his former see of Trapezus. However, since he kept himself hidden out of fear and would not grant them an audience, ^D the synod published a sentence against him and stripped him of all priestly dignity. After Anthimus, Menas ascended the episcopal throne, as has been said; Pope Agathon laid his hands upon him, which had never been done before. While Agathon was still among the living, another provincial synod was assembled at Constantinople, presided over by Agathon and Menas. In this, the cases of Severus, bishop of Antioch in Syria, and Peter of Apamea, and of the Syrian monk Zoora, were brought into question. Against them, the monasteries of Palestine, of the city of Constantinople, and of the second province of Syria had presented petitions. When they were caught being entangled in illicit affairs, and—which is the greatest thing—anathematizing the council of Chalcedon, and, moreover, having performed re-baptisms and other deeds full of unspeakable obscenities.

^A And both they and whoever were of the same opinion as them were cast out and rejected. A law was also passed that the writings of Severus ought not to be preserved, and that wherever they were found, they should be committed to the flames; or if not, that a capital penalty should be inflicted upon anyone who had decided to keep such writings. This same thing was also decreed by Hormisdas, who held the bishopric before Agapetus and Agatho, in a council celebrated at Rome; and his letters are also circulated, having been entered into the acts. In addition to this, the council ordained that the four holy ecumenical councils, and the divine Leo, and his Tome, should be proclaimed throughout the entire world; and furthermore, that Euphemius and Macedonius, bishops of Constantinople, and Flavian of Antioch, should be restored in full and enrolled in the album of sacred records, inasmuch as they had fought well for the truth, and all those things that had been commenced and transacted against them were to be abolished. ^B And the presiding bishops of other provinces and churches approved and confirmed these things. Now, those things which were done in the royal city against Anthimus, Severus, Peter, and Zoora before the holy and great fifth ecumenical council happened in this way. While Epiphanius was previously governing the priesthood, Pope John also came to Constantinople, when Theoderic, who had gained possession of the city of Rome, had sent an embassy to Justin. For he, defending the Arian religion, sent an embassy on behalf of the Arians, so that they might not be forced to depart from their own belief; and he added threats to the embassy, that if Justin were unwilling to do this, he himself would likewise persecute the worshippers of the Nicene council throughout Italy. ^C And when John was invited to an equal seat, to sit with the prelate of Constantinople, he did not endure to abandon the prerogative of the Apostolic See until he was placed on a throne above Euphemius. And John admitted all others to communion, except only for Timothy of Alexandria. These things, then, occurred in such a way.

CAPUT X.

Concerning the histories of Procopius of Caesarea. What he writes regarding the Persian war. Concerning the sedition and popular tumult which occurred at Constantinople, which sedition is called Nika.

It would not be untimely, furthermore, to relate in this history the other deeds of the Emperor Justinian which are worthy of mention and by no means averse to ecclesiastical affairs, and to weave them together as far as it is possible to do so; which were written ^D quite elegantly and learnedly by Procopius of Caesarea in the history of his own times. He composed four volumes, approaching the style of antiquity, of which he named one "Persian"—the work being divided into four parts—and the second, with a like division, "Gothic"; which war-related writings, undertaken by the Emperor Justinian himself and his legates, Theoderic killed by starvation in prison after their return to Ravenna. Then, on a certain day, Theoderic himself met his end due to a flux of the bowels.

Chapter X

the propitiation of God for the slaughter heaped up by them, and erected the temple from its very foundations, bringing it to the magnitude which is seen today.

CHAPTER XI. The Affairs of the Vandals; Concerning Honorichus and the Martyrs of that Time; Concerning Cabaon the Moor and What He Did for the Christians.

The same Procopius narrates most auspiciously the events that happened to the Vandals at the hands of Belisarius, events worthy of being preserved in memory. For in the time of Arcadius and Honorius, as has been said, the Vandals and Alans, having occupied the land of Spain with their king Gongidisclus, passed from there into Western Libya and took possession of it. When Gongidisclus had paid the debt of life, his sons Gontharis and Gizerichus succeeded to the kingdom. But upon the death of one of these, namely Gontharis, the entire kingdom of the Vandals passed to Gizerichus alone. He made Carthage, the preeminent city of the Africans, his royal seat, and afterwards captured Rome as well, having reigned for thirty-nine years. He left behind his son Honorichus, who, being a champion of the Arian heresy, punished the Christians in Libya inhumanely—those who bravely defended the decrees of Nicaea—compelling them to profess the opinion of Arius. Upon those who were unwilling to obey, he inflicted myriad punishments, consuming them with fire and water and other most bitter forms of death. There were some whose tongues he cut out with a sword; Procopius says he saw these men when they came to the imperial city and conversed with them, orating no differently than those who had suffered nothing of the kind. Their tongues had been excised from the very throat, yet their voice was issued so clearly and articulately that it provided a new miracle to those witnessing and hearing it. Justinus makes mention of them in one of his constitutions. Of these, Procopius says that two, having fallen into base conduct some time later and having had relations with women, lost their voice entirely, the grace of martyrdom no longer wishing to remain with them but departing from them on account of their degeneration. Furthermore, he recounts another thing worthy of admiration, which God brought about at that very time in men who were by no means initiated into our sacred rites, but who nonetheless had chosen to perform what was holy at that time. For he writes of a certain Cabaon, a leader of the Moors who are around Tripolis; this Cabaon (I shall use the words of him who recounts these things most clearly), when he heard that the Vandals were moving to wage war against him, did as follows. First, he enjoined his subjects and subordinates to abstain from all iniquity, from food that induces luxury, and most of all from the congress of women. Having set up two camps, he stationed himself with the men in arms in one, while in the other he confined the women, threatening death as the penalty for transgressing.

^A Having sent spies to Carthage, he issued the following instructions: whenever the Vandals, while proceeding on their expedition, should commit any act of outrage in a church where Christians worship, they themselves were to watch what was happening; but as soon as the Vandals departed from that place, they were to do everything contrary in the shrine to that which those who had departed had done. It is said that he also expressed the following: that he was ignorant of the God whom the Christians worship, but that it stood to reason—if indeed He is such a powerful being as is said—that He would both punish those who insult [Him] and defend those who worship [Him]. The spies, therefore, arrived in Carthage and remained at their leisure, observing the preparations of the Vandals. When their army headed toward Tripoli, they assumed humble appearances and followed them. Now the Vandals on the first day stayed in the churches of the Christians, and having brought in horses and other beasts of burden, they left no form of injury or insult uncommitted, and they themselves indulged in their own wantonness and lust. They seized whichever priests they could find, striking them with blows and scourging their backs, forcing them to wait upon them. But as soon as they quickly departed thence, the spies of Cabaon did what had been commanded of them. For they immediately cleansed the temples, and having carefully and diligently removed the dung and whatever else had been improperly deposited there, they arranged everything in an orderly manner, lit all the lamps, honored the priests with great reverence, and greeted them with all other forms of kindness; and they gave silver to the beggars who were sitting around those sacred buildings. In this way they followed the Vandal forces; and from that time, throughout the entire journey, the Vandals sinned in this manner, and the spies amended it. ^B When they were on the point of being nearby, the spies, having outstripped them, reported to Cabaon all that the Vandals had done in the Christian churches, and all that they themselves had done, and that the enemy were nearby. Upon learning these things, he entered into battle with them. In that engagement, many of the Vandals, as he himself says, were killed, many were captured by the enemy, and only a few from that army returned home. These things befell the Vandal Trasamund at the hands of the Maurusians; he finished his life not long after, having ruled the Vandal nation for twenty-seven years. Before him, Gundamund, the son of Honorich and grandson of Gizerich, reigned for twelve years, and Honorich for eight years. This Trasamund was a man of excellent appearance and great spirit; he sent to Theuderich, the king of the Goths, to take his sister, Amalasuntha, in marriage. ^C He gives also a thousand Goth shield-bearers, and another five thousand serving in the rank of attendants. Upon his death, Hilderich, the son of the Honorich who was the son of Gizerich, reigned; he was a gentle man and ^D a fierce persecutor of the Catholics, some call him Childerich; he bound him with the sacrament of an oath not to favor the Catholics at any time, for he had perceived him to be inclined toward embracing them. But once he had gained the kingdom, he recalled the orthodox bishops from exile and entrusted them with the restoration of the churches. This matter proved to be a snare for the Arian Vandals.

^A legation, requesting his sister Amalasuntha for his bride, he sent. He indeed gave him a thousand armed men, and in addition five thousand other men, who might fill the order of bodyguards. But after he had died, Hilderich, the son of Honorich, who was born of Genzerich, reigned, a man mild and to the Christians not at all burdensome, and one who was by no means easily excited toward waging war. Gelimer, however, some man related to him by birth, intent on tyranny, stripped Hilderich of his kingdom after he had reigned for seven years. He, because he was industrious in managing affairs, wore down the tribe of the Goths.

Chapter XII.

How Belisarius, having conquered the Vandals, led a great triumph in Constantinople; and concerning the holy martyr Cyprian; and concerning the race of the Moors and its origin.

^B Verily, Justinian, pitying the Christians who were being so afflicted there, gathered an army. But by the suggestion of John, who was established as prefect of the praetorium, he changed his mind about undertaking the expedition. ^C Furthermore, he received a command in his sleep not to desist from the undertaking, for it was said to him that the victory would bring vengeance for the Christians against the Vandals. Therefore, having taken it to heart with a great spirit, around the summer solstice he sent Belisarius to complete the war against Carthage. And when the praetorian ship came to the shore that is by the imperial palace, the bishop of the city, Epiphanius, performing the fitting and customary solemn prayers, also baptized some of the soldiers, and brought Belisarius aboard the praetorian ship. ^D News was reported to the emperor regarding the martyr Cyprian, worthy not only of mention but also of being remembered; concerning which Procopius relates these things word for word: The Carthaginians venerate Cyprian as a holy man above all others, and they established for him a temple of great worth before the walls of the city by the seashore. And besides other forms of worship which they offer him, they also celebrate an annual feast day, which they call the Cypriana. And by the same name that they call the feast, the sailors are accustomed to name a certain stormy tempest, since it is wont to fall during that time when the Libyans have by law established that this feast day should be celebrated. This temple the Vandals, under King Honorich, took from the Christians by force; and from there, having cast out the priests with much ignominy, they subsequently restored it, inasmuch as it was convenient for the Arians. Libyans, however, grieving and lamenting this turn of events, say that Cyprian very often appeared to them in dreams, saying that the Christians ought not to be anxious about him, for he himself would be their avenger and punisher in his own time. The emperor received this matter as a propitious omen. And this oracular prediction fell rightly upon the times of Belisarius, under whose leadership Carthage was subjected to the Roman empire, in the ninety-fifth year after that temple had been taken from the Christians. In that war the Vandals were altogether subdued, and the opinion of the Arians was expelled from Libya. Christians

-fifth year after that temple had been taken from the Christians. In that war the Vandals were altogether subdued, and the opinion of the Arians was expelled from Libya. Christians ^A then recovered their temples, according to the prediction of Cyprian the martyr. In addition to these things, Procopius also committed those events to the memory of posterity. Belisarius, having set up his trophies regarding the conquered Vandals, returned to Byzantium with the spoils and a huge multitude of people captured in war: among whom was Gelimer, their leader. Belisarius held a triumph in the hippodrome, in which, along with many other things worthy of admiration, there were especially brought forward votive offerings estimated at a vast sum of money—the votive offerings which, as we have said before, Gizerich had plundered at Rome, when he had been received there into the palace and had invaded the temples. At which time, of course, Eudoxia, the wife of Valentinian—who ruled the Western Empire—having lost her husband by murder under the tyrant Maximus, and having been violated in her chastity, summoned Gizerich, promising him entry and safe passage into the Roman city. ^B There he truly ravaged Rome with fire, and took Eudoxia away with her two daughters to the Vandals. At that very time, together with other exquisite ornaments of the city, Gizerich also seized the votive offerings which, after the capture of Jerusalem, Titus, the son of Vespasian, had brought to Rome and which Solomon had formerly dedicated to God, whom he worshipped above all. All these things Justinian, wonderfully honoring Christ our God, sent back again to Jerusalem, where they had also been consecrated before. The same Procopius states furthermore that Gelimer, ^C when he was lying on the ground in the hippodrome—where the emperor, presiding, was watching the procession of the triumph—uttered in his native tongue that sentence of Solomon: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." Procopius also recounts another thing, which no one else among the ancient historians has consigned to memory, exceeding all wonder and astonishment. He says that the Maurusians, a tribe of the Libyans in the west, having formerly been driven out of Palestine, settled in those western regions of Libya; and that they are those whom the Sacred Scriptures call the Gergeseans and the Jebusites, and other tribes besides, whom Jesus, son of Nave, having conquered in war, cast out of their homes. He confirms that this matter is most true by a certain ancient inscription, which he testifies that he himself read, composed in Phoenician letters near a certain spring, where also two columns of white stone had been erected. The sculpture of the letters proclaimed these things to those arriving there: "We are they who fled from the face of Jesus the bandit, the son of Nave." ^D And concerning these matters he writes in this fashion. Libya, having been brought under the power of the Romans, paid annual tributes into the treasury, just as it had done before. In the same Libya, Justinian is said to have restored one hundred and fifty towns, which had been either entirely destroyed or had collapsed from antiquity. He restored them most magnificently and embellished them to the highest degree, with both private and public structures, walls, and various other buildings, through which the cities are illuminated and the Divine Power is most greatly appeased, as well as with aqueducts, which serve both the need and the beauty of the city.

^A Some of these were constructed for the first time, having not existed before, while others, which had existed at one time but had subsequently fallen into ruin, were at that time restored to their original condition.

CHAPTER XIII

Concerning the events in Italy involving Belisarius and Narses; the various captures of the city of Rome; the bishops Silverius and Vigilius; the nations that embraced the Christian faith at that time; and the strategic skill and piety toward God of the general Narses.

We shall also recount those things which took place in Italy, as Procopius has recorded them in his history. For after Theoderic, as we have related above, took Rome and destroyed Odoacer who was playing the tyrant there, he departed this life having ruled over the Romans. Amalasuntha, ^B his wife, undertook the guardianship of their common child, Atalarich, and administered the kingdom with a masculine spirit. ^C But because she provided for the state with such foresight, she was the first to incite Justinian to embark upon the war against the Goths; for, after a plot had been formed against her, she sent ambassadors to the Emperor. And besides, when the child Atalarich died at a tender age, Theodatus, who was related to Theoderic by blood, seized the empire of the West. But after the Emperor sent Belisarius into the West, Theodatus, seemingly ceding his authority, occupied himself more with literary studies than with the administration of affairs, being wholly unfit for the conduct of war; meanwhile, Vittigis commanded the forces in the West.

When Belisarius entered Italy, Vittigis abandoned Rome and departed. Belisarius, however, approaching the city, was admitted by those within, the Romans opening to him not only all the gates but their very hearts as well; this was accomplished chiefly by the counsel and management of Silverius, who presided over its throne, and who dispatched Fidelis—who had been an assessor and counselor to Atalarich—to Belisarius. Thus, without a battle, Rome returned to the dominion of the Romans, sixty years later, on the ninth day of the month of Apellaeus, which the Romans call December, in the eleventh year of the reign of Justinian.

Procopius recorded also that when the Goths later besieged Rome, Belisarius grew suspicious of Silverius, the priest of the city, and for this reason removed him to Greece, ^D placing Vigilius as high priest upon the throne. The same Procopius relates that, at that time, when Anastasius held the empire, the Heruli crossed the Ister, and that later, because Justinian treated them liberally and won them over with great sums of money, they suddenly changed their customs to those of the Christians and adopted a more humane way of life. In addition to this, he records the return of Belisarius from the city of Rome to Byzantium, and how he led away Vittigis, like a slave, among the spoils of Rome. As for how Totilas seized the empire of Rome, and the city fell again into the power of the Vandal.

^A Atillas invested himself with the rule of Rome; and how Belisarius, having twice come into Italy, again captured Rome. Moreover, how upon the outbreak of the Persian War in the East, Belisarius was recalled from there by the Emperor. He also recounts that the Abasgi at that time embraced the Christian faith and adapted themselves to a more humane manner of life; and that the Emperor Justinian sent to them a eunuch of their own nation, Ephratas by name, to forbid anyone henceforth from depriving himself of that part of the body by which we are men, by inflicting injury upon nature with iron. For indeed, most of the servants who attended in the royal bedchambers, whom we are accustomed to call eunuchs or chamberlains, were from that nation. At that time, too, Justinian built a temple to the Theotokos in the region of the Abasgi, ^B outstanding in beauty and size, and he duly appointed priests and provided other things pertaining to divine worship. From this it came about that they also exercised themselves most accurately in the dogmas of the Christians. He also writes how those who dwell along the river Tanais (the local inhabitants call the tract extending from the great Maeotic Lake as far as the Euxine Sea "the Tanais") sent envoys to Justinian, supplicating him to give them a bishop; to whose prayers he indeed acceded, and gladly sent them a bishop. He also recounts very tersely how the Goths, the inhabitants around the Maeotis, during the reign of Justinian, made many incursions into Thrace. Furthermore, he tells how savage earthquakes occurred in Greece, and how Boeotia and Achaia, and the coasts along the Crissaean Gulf, were shaken; ^C that very many places, beyond counting, and cities likewise, fell headlong and were leveled to the ground, and that in many places the earth was submerged; and in some places the chasms closed up again, while in others they have remained as bottomless voids to this very day. Such a thing also happened to the city of Pompeiopolis in Cilicia. For when the earth split and swallowed up that city together with all its inhabitants, a voice was heard from the deepest abyss, of men supplicating those who had been left behind in the surrounding areas to deliver them from that affliction. He also relates how Narses the eunuch was chosen by Justinian as general of the military forces and undertook an expedition into Italy, and how he defeated Totila, and subsequently Teias as well; ^D and how Rome was captured for the fifth time. They who lived with Narses relate this concerning him: that he depended so much upon the divine will and practiced piety of every kind, and that he so venerated the Virgin and Theotokos, that she would appear to him manifest, instructing him when the battle should be joined; and that he would not easily descend into the battle line before he discerned the opportune time from her. Many other very great things were also accomplished by Narses, who warred against Buselinus and Sildouandus; and the lands as far as the Ocean became subject to the Romans.

Chapter XIV

Which things Agathias the rhetorician, who lived after Procopius, related in his writings. ^A

CHAPTER XIV. How Chosroes, broken by envy, violated the peace and invaded the Roman Empire; and concerning the capture of Antioch and other cities.

In the history of Procopius, it is also related that when Chosroes heard of the successes achieved in the wars in Libya and Italy by the Roman commanders, he was moved by an extraordinary envy. ^B Fabricating pretexts against the Romans, he claimed that the treaties had been violated and the perpetual peace broken. At first, Justinian sent ambassadors to Chosroes to declare that he had provided no cause for the peace that had been established to be broken, and that he had brought no injury to the agreements, and therefore he sought that an inquiry take place regarding the disputed matters, and that the causes brought forward be settled amicably through peaceful councils. But Chosroes, because he could not contain the heavy envy that burned within his heart, did not respond with anything reasonable; but having gathered the army under his command, which was very great, he invaded the Roman territory in the thirteenth year of Justinian’s reign over the Roman Empire.

He writes, therefore, how Chosroes besieged and took the city of Sura, situated on the Euphrates, having agreed to one thing but done another; acting unholily, as he disregarded the treaties and captured it by craft rather than by the law of war. And how he set fire to Beroea, and how he came from there to Antioch, where Euphremius was then adorning the throne. Euphremius, having left the church, as nothing was proceeding according to his wishes, is said to have saved the church and all that surrounded it by having adorned it with the sacred offerings, so that these might be a ransom for it.

He also records the capture of Antioch by Chosroes very pitifully, and how he destroyed everything there by killing and burning. ^C Then he describes how he came to the neighboring Seleucia and the suburb of Daphne. And how he reached Apamea, where Thomas was at that time bishop, a man both eminent in life and doctrine. It is said that he, together with Chosroes, at whose court he was an ambassador, watched the horse races in the Hippodrome in a manner wisely contrary to established custom, in order to render him mild and appeased by such a service. When Chosroes asked him quite wittily if he thought that he would watch it in this manner in his own city, he, valuing the truth of everything, is said to have replied that he would not gladly see him there. And because he placed the truth above Chosroes, the king is said to have admired the priest exceedingly. ^D and because he preferred the truth to all else, he was greatly admired by him.

CHAPTER XV. De miraculo, quod Apameæ ad vivificum crucis lignum accidit.

^A Having reached this point in our narrative, I wish to recount something else that is most appropriate to the present history. For when the inhabitants of Apamea learned that their city was already being set on fire, they implored the aforementioned Thomas, the bishop whom I mentioned before, ^B to bring out the life-giving wood of the cross beyond his usual custom, and to set it in the midst; so that they might see and kiss it one last time—that sole salvation of mankind—and take its adoration as a sort of viaticum as they were preparing to depart for the better life. Thomas yielded to their entreaties and brought out the life-giving wood, having announced specific days for its display so that those in the neighboring areas might also gather and partake of that saving remedy. When everyone had assembled, Thomas, holding the wood—that banisher of the curse—aloft in his hands, walked around the holy church, a thing that was customarily done only on the prescribed days of supplication. As Thomas moved, a great quantity of resplendent fire was seen following him; it did not burn, however, in such a way that it seemed to set the place where it passed on fire. This happened not once or twice, but many times as the priest kept circling the entire area; and the crowd that had gathered kept beseeching the priest to do this repeatedly, so that they might enjoy the divine radiance more often. This occurrence portended the future salvation of Apamea. And an image and monument of this miracle was set up on the roof of the Basilica, to testify to all of the novelty of the event. This indeed remained intact up until the time of Ardaamanes and the Persian war; at which time the entire city and the church itself were devastated, and the image perished in the flames along with it. Thus these things took place. Chosroes, having recently forgotten the pacts of peace he had entered into, performed the same hostile acts once again, which was consistent with his fickle and inconstant character, but entirely unbecoming to a man possessed of reason, much less a king.

CHAPTER XVI. On the wondrous event at Edessa, beyond the opinion and belief of all, performed by the image of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ not made by hands.

^C Furthermore, Procopius mentions those things which have also been recorded by the ancients concerning the image of Christ, which was sent to Abgar, the ruler of Edessa. He relates how Chosroes wished to prove that the rumors circulating about it were false—namely, the claim that Edessa would never fall into the power of foreigners—a claim which is not found in the letters sent to Abgar, as is clear from the history of Eusebius Pamphili, who read that letter and inserted it word for word into his work, as we also have recounted in our second volume. Among the faithful, however,

^A it is thus both sung and believed. The work itself also demonstrated the truth of this prediction, how it was most true and consistent. For Chosroes, having attacked the city with the greatest impetus, and having almost tried everything with myriad assaults, and having piled up so much earth that he even surpassed the city wall, and having devised myriad other schemes, departed with shame, his effort unsuccessful. I shall recount what he attempted against the city as best I can. He ordered his soldiers, setting aside all other things, to gather a great quantity of wood and other material, whatever easily catches fire, to the city. And when, more quickly than words, the work was finished, and he had placed the material in a circle, he then piled up earth and advanced against the city, and having little by little built up the wood and earth, he approached it; and he raised it to such a height that he could cast missiles even from a superior position against those defending the city. ^B When, therefore, those besieged within saw the rampart like a mountain looming over the city, and the enemies likewise seemed ready suddenly to rush into the city on foot from those higher positions, they engineered a great trench to be made opposite the rampart, which is named by the Romans an "agesta" [a conduit]; then they intended to apply fire, so that the wood might melt in the flame and the earth foundation would be drained. And the work was indeed completed; however, having thrown in the fire, they missed their goal, as the fire did not have a passage; wherefore, it was necessary for it to catch hold of air and of the material, as is to be expected. When, therefore, it brought them to utter helplessness and they were in extreme ^C despair, they turned to the final anchor, to the heaven-wrought image which no human hand had made, but which Christ God himself had sent to Abgar, who greatly longed to see him; and he had sent it having wiped his face with a linen cloth. This same image they brought to the conduit [the trench], and having sprinkled it with water, they cast it toward the pyre; and immediately, by divine power invisibly assisting the faith of those who were doing this, what had been thought impossible for them was accomplished with great ease. For immediately the wood caught the fire, and as quickly as it was burned to charcoal, it immediately passed the fire to what was lying above it, all of it being consumed and devoured. When those besieged saw smoke rising up over the embankments, they devised the following: having collected some earthen vessels, and having filled them with sulfur and pitch and other things, as much of the material as is easily flammable, they hurled them down at the conduit; these, emitting smoke, being ignited by the force of the cast, caused the smoke that was flowing from the embankments to escape notice, as if it were being prepared from there; for all supposed the smoke was rising from the pots. After the third day, the fire having consumed what was in the middle, it surrendered its tongues [of flame] to the earth; and it occurred to the Persians standing upon the embankments to understand ^D the danger in which they had been placed. Chosroes, however, as if thinking he must act in opposition to the divine power, loosed the water flowing past the city against the pyre,

^A attempting to extinguish it; but it burned even more, receiving the torrent of water as if it were some divine element or oil, or any other thing suited to set material ablaze; and it rose to such a height that the entire pile, having consumed the material, was reduced to ash. Chosroes, therefore, despairing from these very events and realizing the power that was protecting the city, returned to his own lands full of shame, repenting of the vanity of the labors by which he had resolved to raise his hands against God in such a manner. This, then, happened exactly so. I shall now relate also what occurred to Chosroes elsewhere, at Sergiopolis: for the work is truly worthy of mention, and deserves to be preserved for the memory of posterity.

CHAPTER XVII.

Concerning the precious cross which Justinian dedicated at Sergiopolis, and concerning the miraculous event that happened there.

He persisted in trying to impose the yoke of servitude upon this city as well. When, therefore, he assaulted the walls and attempted to lay siege, the terms for the salvation of the city—how it might be preserved—were discussed between both the besiegers and the besieged. Finally, it was agreed between them that the city should be ransomed by the sacred votive offerings of the temples, ^B among which was counted the cross sent by Justinian and Theodora. When all things had been carried to Chosroes by the priest of the city and those who had been sent with him, he inquired whether anything else remained in the city. A certain person who was accustomed to speaking the truth was present there and announced to Chosroes that a few other things were being secretly kept by the citizens in the city, and that although nothing of gold or silver remained, there was another matter of higher value and dedicated to God, in which the bones of the martyr Sergius were being guarded: a long silver casket, skillfully fashioned. When Chosroes heard this, he immediately led his entire army out from the fortifications of the camp to destroy the city. ^C Suddenly, however, an immense host appeared above the city, arrayed to fight on its behalf, darting everywhere along the circuit of the walls. As soon as those who had been sent to attack saw this, they returned at once to Chosroes, struck with wonder at both the multitude of the defenders of the city and their own fear, which had rendered them helpless. But Chosroes, having investigated everything narrowly, learned that only a very few remained in the city, those of immature or advanced age, with all the robust ones having perished, and he suspected that the matter was from some higher power, and principally that of the martyr. Seized with fear and greatly admiring the Christian religion, he immediately lifted the siege and returned to his own borders. ^D Report has it that this Chosroes, shortly before his death, was initiated into our sacred rites and admitted to the divine washing. But indeed, I shall also narrate, as far as it is possible, concerning the plague that then attacked, which extended, one might say, over the whole inhabited world, of which word had once reached me, fifty-two years after it had begun to ravage the earth.

^A

Chapter 18. On the most savage pestilence and contagion of that time, which afflicted the world for fifty-two years.

For two years after Antioch had been captured by the Persians, a pestilential disease broke out, in some respects quite similar to that described by Thucydides, but in many ways and in some details differing from it. It had its origin in Ethiopia, but it ran through almost the entire inhabited world, proceeding as if it were moving slowly, so that it left almost no one of those then living untouched. Some cities were gripped by this disease to such an extent that they became completely empty of inhabitants. There were others that it touched lightly and then passed by quickly. ^B Indeed, it did not spread according to any fixed period; nor, when it began to attack, did it maintain the same course: but in some places it began to rage at the beginning of winter, in others in the spring, and in some, as summer set in; in others, as autumn advanced. In some cities it touched part of the town but left the rest alone, and it was possible to see in a plague-ridden city some houses completely destroyed, while in others, one or two having been ruined, the remainder stayed untouched. There were men who observed with accuracy that those houses which had remained free from the plague at that time were the only ones that suffered from the scourge in the following year. ^C But what seemed strange regarding this was to see that, if any citizens of the cities that the plague had invaded had migrated elsewhere, they alone would be seized by the disease—those who, from the infected cities, were mixing with the uninfected. The plague attacked most especially during the periods of the cycles, which we call "epinemeses." Total destruction generally occurred to men in the second year of the fifteen-year cycle. This plague was composed of various illnesses. In some, it began from the head, making the eyes bloodshot and the face swollen; then, attacking the throat, it took life away. A flux of the belly invaded others. ^D In others, buboes also appeared, and fierce fevers followed. They died in two or three days, remaining in full possession of their reason and health, as if they were suffering from nothing at all. Others, however, died while out of their minds. Carbuncles also broke out, which burned men up and extinguished them quickly. There were those who were seized and freed from this evil once or twice, only to be overtaken afterward, as if by a relapse, and perish. The contagion was also varied, exceeding all understanding. For some contracted the disease merely from the conversation and daily company of the sick, while others brought death upon themselves by simple contact with them. There were those who were infected even by merely looking into a house, and for others it happened in the marketplace. There were some who had escaped the danger by departing from the plague-stricken cities, transferring the contagion of the disease to those who were not sick. Others were not seized by the plague at all, even though they had associated with many who were sick; and not only with those who were not sick, but also

^A with those who had already perished from the plague. For there were many who were eager to die because of the total destruction of their children or their households, and for this reason they mingled with the sick, as if vying with the affliction, yet they were not able to achieve their desire in the way they wished. And the affliction raged for fifty-two years, as I have said, leaving all previous plagues far behind. Philostratus admires the plague of his own time, which lasted fifteen years. But I shall return to the continuity of history, to supply what is missing regarding the times of Justinian.

Chapter XIX.

What the historian Evagrius wrote concerning the insatiable greed of Justinian.

But I will append what Evagrius narrates about him, so that I myself may not appear to be attacking such a great emperor. For he speaks of him word for word in this manner: “Justinian was insatiable in his desire for money, and so strangely covetous of the property of others that he held all citizens and subjects for sale for gold. He sold them to the magistrates themselves, and to the tax collectors, and to all those who were accustomed to craft schemes against people for no reason at all. Moreover, from very many who possessed great wealth and estates, he plundered all their property, under any pretext or none, having devised a cloak for his greed by means of some excuse. And if any woman who acted as a prostitute ^B or cast a lustful eye upon someone feigned an association or intercourse, immediately everything was turned against the laws. And when she had associated Justinian in this shameful profit, he would transfer the whole wealth of the one who had been slandered into his own house. Yet, being prodigal of money, he also built many sacred houses and temples everywhere, and furthermore built houses for the sake of piety for the care of men and women who were of advanced or imperfect age and those struggling with various diseases, having assigned to them large revenues from which they might be supported. He also performed other innumerable works of piety pleasing to God; if indeed the authors of these things were to perform them from their own resources, and reap the fruits of their own pure deeds.” ^C And these are the words of Evagrius.

CHAPTER XX. Description of the august temple of the Word of God, Wisdom, which Justinian, holding God in highest honor, restored.

Justinian, moreover, raised up most beautiful shrines everywhere in the world, but most especially he constructed in Constantinople most illustrious temples of surpassing form and magnitude. Among these is that huge and incomparable basilica, such as had never been seen before, that august temple of the Wisdom of the Word of God, truly the greatest and most decent, and one which exceeds all power of description. It seemed fitting to insert here its construction from Procopius, whose words are as follows:

Description of the structure of the temple of Sophia, the Word of God, restored at Constantinople by Justinian.

Common men and the fickle mob at one time dared to burn the church of the Christians. They call this temple the Sophia of Byzantium, most aptly attributing this surname to God. God permitted those wicked men to commit such impiety because He foresaw to what beauty that shrine would one day be restored. So the church lay entirely burned. But Justinian so adorned it, some time later, that had anyone known it before, and had he shown him the description of the building as it now stands, he would have wished it to be completely destroyed, so that he might behold it in the form to which it has now been reduced. For the emperor summoned all the craftsmen from all the provinces, and first of all Anthemius of Tralles, who was ^A a master of architecture and the mechanical art which is achieved by talent and hand, not only among those who were his contemporaries, but also those who had been distinguished in preceding times for constructing buildings accurately and conveniently; furthermore, he was most skilled in prescribing the forms and figures of structures for those who were to come after. And he summoned Isidore of Miletus, an excellent master builder. ^B The church thus became a spectacle most beautiful, indeed wondrous to those who see it, and utterly incredible to those who hear of it. For it nearly touches the heavens in its height, and as if withdrawn from other buildings, it overhangs and looms over the rest of the city, indeed adorning it, because it belongs to it; but showing itself to be seen because, since it belongs to it, it surpasses it; it stands out so much that from it, as from a watchtower, the whole city can be surveyed. It is adorned most precisely in both width and length, such that it is not undeservedly called both long and wide. It is also distinguished by incredible beauty. The very mass is an ornament to it, and the ratio and proportion are suitable and fit for its magnitude, neither exceeding toward an excessive vastness nor demeaning itself to a humbler lowliness. For it is larger than usual buildings, ^C and more beautiful and decent than those that are merely grand. It abounds marvelously with light and the splendor of the sun. You would say that the place is not illuminated by the sun from the outside, but that light rises from within. Such a power of light is diffused into this temple. Its face, that is the part looking toward the rising sun, where the mysteries and secrets sacred to God are performed, is constructed in this manner. A certain building, half-round and domed, which those skilled in this art call a hemicylinder, rises to an immense height. The altitude of this work becomes the fourth part of a circular figure. Above it, another structure of a crescent shape, placed upon it by the builders of the edifice, stands out; it is indeed admirable for its decent beauty, but one which, because of the dangerous joining of its composition, might seem to be something altogether terrifying. For to those arriving at the present scene, it seems not to be placed on a sufficiently firm foundation, and ^D to be raised on high not without danger. Yet it stands most securely and stably. On either side in this part of the temple, there are columns on the ground, and their capitals are constructed from huge stones, duly joined together. These columns, responding to one another by their very position, reach to a great height; you would compare them to precipitous cliffs if you saw them. Four arches in the form of a square stand upon them. Of these arches, two, which pertain to the rising and setting sun, reach into the empty air. The other two, however, from a lower part, hold a certain edifice and certain columns. From the upper part of the same, a round structure verging to a domed shape looms over, from which the day always appears first as it dawns. And since the building is divided in this way, it has the advantage that it provides light to the temple in abundance. But this very thing (in my opinion) cannot be explained by a stammering and ill-vocal tongue. For because of the seamless structure, it does not seem to stand on the earth, but to be suspended by a golden chain from heaven. And those who contemplate these things, what might they prioritize...

or what could they properly call the beauty and appropriate appearance of the columns and the stones with which the sacred house is adorned? One might think they had stepped into a meadow blooming with flowers. For one may justly admire the purple color, another the green, and in some parts the crimson that blooms; in others, one can see the white shining forth. Furthermore, one may marvel at those in which nature herself has, in the manner of a painter, variously adorned the colors that stand in opposition to one another. Furthermore, it is entirely impossible to recount accurately all the gifts of this temple, whether prepared for the use of the sacred rites or wrought from silver and precious stones, which this emperor alone dedicated. From one thing alone, those who read this may surmise how great the ecclesiastical wealth was. For the sanctuary of this temple, which only the priests enter, contains forty thousand pounds of silver. ^A Of the arches which the mechanics call *lori*, one, facing the rising sun and not yet perfect, crushed the bases of its columns with its own magnitude. These, barely able to bear the weight, suddenly cracked in a certain way, and it seemed they would collapse shortly thereafter. Anthemius and Isidore, terrified by this, reported it to the emperor, and they had no hope left in their expertise. But the emperor, divinely inspired, immediately promised them that the arch would be finished. For it will raise itself, he said, and will not need the lower bases of the columns. Thus, the arch suspended on high with certain firmness confirmed by experience itself the truth of Justinian's invention. And this piece of work was thus finished in this part. ^B In the other arches, however, which look to the south and north winds, a certain thing happened. The *lori*, as they are called, were being raised on high through the new construction with a great mass. The buildings beneath them were laboring under the pressure, and the columns that were in that place were casting off small stones just as if they were being polished. Therefore, the mechanics, again despondent, reported such a danger to the emperor because of that event. Then he devised that remedy for this evil. He ordered them to remove the top parts of the laboring buildings and the arches themselves, and to set them aside for the present, but afterward to replace them when the moisture of the structure had dried out. They did as they were commanded. The building itself then stood firm and stable. Justinian also restored the Temple of the Holy Apostles, to which he wishes to grant the first place to no one. In it, emperors and bishops are buried according to established custom.

^C And these indeed are the preeminent, and by far the most preeminent of the preeminent, works of the Emperor Justinian. But in that which exceeds all beastly ferocity, whether by error or by the timidity of his disposition (for I cannot say which), there was a starting point taken from the sedition that was called *Nika*, that is, "Conquer." For he seemed to be wondrously devoted to one of the folk factions, the Blues, I say; to such a degree, indeed, that not only did he not restrain them when they committed murders of their adversaries in the middle of the city by day, when legitimate punishment of the crime should have been exacted, but he even pursued them with rewards. Consequently, many more became murderers, and the impunity of the slaughters increased. They even dared to enter the houses of the opposing party and to plunder the citizens' precious and stored-up possessions, so that the latter were forced to redeem their own safety with gold. But if any of the magistrates—I will not say restrained—but even wished to hinder such crimes, he would be in danger of his life. Wherefore, a certain prefect of the East, since he was keeping in check some who were attempting revolutionary acts with such wickedness...

CHAPTER XXI. Of the same emperor's madness, rather than love, for the blue or cerulean color.

These things, indeed, have been done most beautifully and as the finest of fine works by Emperor Justinian. But there was one thing adherent to him that went beyond every beastly mindset: whether by fault or indeed by a natural cowardice (I cannot say), which took its beginning from the faction called *Nika*. For it seemed that he was supernaturally attached to one of the two parts of the people—I mean the Blue—and to such an extent that when they were seen committing murders of those of the opposing side in the middle of the city, during the day, he not only refrained from preventing it and exacting the penalty for their iniquity, but even deemed them worthy of honors; so that from this, it even proceeded to the deed of homicide. They even dared to attack those in their homes and quietly to plunder the valuables that belonged to them, and then to force those same people to buy back their own safety with gold. And if any of those in authority judged it right not to punish, but only to hinder them, he put his own life at risk. Hence, even one of those entrusted with the administration of the East, when he had apprehended certain persons attempting revolutionary acts concerning the things mentioned, was correcting the profligate manner with lashes, and was...

^A castigated, and having been dragged in contumelious procession through the middle of the city, he was scourged across his sinews. And another man, Callinicus by name, overseer of the province of Cilicia, because he had punished two of these assassins, Paul and Faustinus by name, who had attempted to kill him, was fastened to the cross, paying this as a penalty for good sense and the law—justly and prudently done, and exacting the penalty for the laws preserved.

Therefore, those who were of the opposing faction, because they were compelled to leave their own possessions and were received by no one at all, but were cast out of the city like certain detestable or cursed things, occupied themselves with brigandage; and they lay in ambush along the roads, committing murder, omitting nothing of the evil deeds that could be committed, and from that time forth they made a show of committing murders, robberies, and the rest of their wicked deeds daily. And often shifting to the other side as well, he brought them also to the penalty of death, releasing them to the laws, which he had previously permitted to be broken asunder everywhere by the commission of unholy acts, and to perform the most dire deeds as if they were barbarians. But I think it better, both for the sake of the discourse and for the sake of time, not to speak of these things in precise detail. Yet these things are sufficient to provide proof for the remaining matters of the beginning.

CHAPTER XXII. De Barsanuphio monacho et Joanne: item de Symeone propter Christum fatuo.

^C Under Justinian, many men, religious and illustrious in life and the miracles performed by them, flourished in many parts of the world, among whom was one Barsanuphius, Egyptian by birth, who in the flesh lived a life free from the flesh, in a certain monastery which was situated in the prefecture of Gaza. This man, as it is said, not only performed many miracles, but also shut himself up alive in a small cell, and is believed to have lived there for over fifty years in such a way that he was neither seen by anyone, nor used any earthly thing. When reports of this were spread abroad concerning him, and Salustius, bishop of Jerusalem, did not believe them, having ordered them to dig through the little house where the man of God dwelt, fire sprang forth from somewhere and would have consumed them all, had they not sought safety in flight.

Another man, Symeon by name, lived at Emesa, leading a certain new and unusual life. For being full of all wisdom and grace, he feigned madness, and cast off empty glory, as that which is in truth a dishonor. This holy man therefore lived for a long time as a recluse, remaining entirely hidden; nor did he permit anyone access so that they might know when or how he poured out prayers to God, or at what time, and with what foods he sustained or abstained from himself. But very often, even while walking in the squares, he appeared to have lost his mind, and to have no steady heart, skill, or sagacity. Sometimes he would leap indiscriminately into taverns, and famished, would fill himself with whatever food he had snatched.

^A If, however, anyone, upon understanding his counsel, were to show him respect or honor, he would be indignant and depart from that place as quickly as possible, fearing lest that which he wished to be hidden should be discovered and his virtue made manifest. And thus he conducted himself openly and in the midst of the market-place. He also had certain acquaintances with whom he would sometimes associate, masking his true self behind a stage play and simulation. Among them was a maidservant who had been ravished by someone for lust; when the time for labor arrived, she was compelled by her masters to reveal the father of the child and the perpetrator of her shameful act. Through calumny, she declared that Symeon had been secretly intimate with her, and that she was pregnant by him, and confirmed by an oath that the matter was so; and she promised that, if need be, she would say this to his face. When this reached the ears of Symeon, he did not himself deny the deed, saying—as if he were still carrying flesh and an inherent, slippery proclivity to sin—that he were subject to the same. Once reports concerning this grew among everyone about him, and he himself, as it appeared, was struck with shame, he withdrew himself on the pretext of modesty, as if through a ruse. And now the fatal and appointed day of delivery was at hand, and the poor woman was sitting on her usual stool, and vehement pains were arising, bringing upon her an intolerable agony. The poor wretch was nearing her final crisis, and the fetus would not emerge, when at that very moment she and other women begged the arriving Symeon to pour out prayers to God. He declared openly that the fetus would not behold the sun until the mother revealed the secret father. ^B When the woman confessed this and named the true father, the infant immediately leaped from the womb, with truth itself, as it were, acting as the midwife.

At another time, this same Symeon entered a private room of an unchaste woman and, closing the doors, remained alone with her for quite some time; then, opening the door, he fled, avoiding the sight of everyone, hastening with a rapid gait so that no one might see him. By this act, he provided a cause for not having a good reputation for himself. Therefore, those who had seen this approached the woman and asked her diligently what his entry to her and such a long delay meant. She swore that for three days she had tasted nothing except water, due to a lack of necessities; but that he, upon learning this, had brought food and a little wine to her, then, after closing the doors, had set a table, commanded her to eat, filled her with the feast, and, having taken the leftovers, departed. ^C And when a great earthquake was about to shake that region—at which time, more than other cities, the cities of Berytus, Byblus, and Tripolis suffered a huge calamity—he went about the market-place holding a strap in his hand, striking as many of the columns in the market-place as he could, and saying to the others, "Stand, for you are about to dance shortly." Since it was judged that no act of the man was idle or in vain, those who were present to witness this took care in their minds to note which columns he had passed by without striking. It was these ones that, when the earthquake fell upon them violently, had collapsed, having become a secondary matter to his action. Many other things worthy of memory were done by him, which I have recounted elsewhere in my own writing, which even those who had passed by the columns without striking them did not neglect to consider.

Chapter XXIII. De Thoma, qui et ipse vitam tacitam extra hominum strepitum est complexus.

^A In Coelesyria there was another man who struggled in the same kind of life, Thomas by name; who, having come to Antioch, would go to his dwelling after receiving his annual allowance (for he was registered to the church there). Anastasius, who administered the church’s affairs, because Thomas was frequently troublesome to him, struck him on the face with his hand. When those who were with him took this matter ill, ^B he said that Thomas would not henceforth receive anything from the church, nor would Anastasius give anything; and both things came to pass according to his prediction. For Anastasius departed this life on the following day. Thomas, returning and having reached the suburban village of Daphne, in the hospice for the sick, migrated to that better life. The inhabitants of that place laid his body in the common monument for strangers, one body after another being laid upon it. But after God, honoring His servant, caused his body—each time the attempt was made—to always hold the topmost place, while the other corpses were removed by a certain divine power far from his own body, the spectators of the miracle reported what was happening to Bishop Ephraemius. He, having learned what was true, proclaimed a public and honorable funeral procession, ^C and brought the body magnificently to Antioch, and buried it with great glory in the cemetery; and by that transfer of the body he also dispelled the pestilential disease that was then raging. The people of Antioch celebrated the anniversary memory of this Thomas most magnificently, keeping it as a festival day.

CHAPTER XXIV. How the Great Sabbas and Theodosius the Cenobiarch ended their lives under Justinian.

While Justinian was still administering the imperial power, that great Sabbas and the illustrious Theodosius, the leaders of the desert, were still surviving in life. But the former, Theodosius, passed to God. Sabbas, however, being then in his ninetieth year, departed once more as an envoy from the bishop of Aelia to Justinian, ^D wavering in a feeble and very weak old age. For the Samaritans, having proclaimed a certain Julian as king for themselves, had inflicted many arrogant injuries upon the Christians. They had plundered churches and laid them waste with fire; and those who had chosen to live piously according to God they had slaughtered after many and inexpressible tortures; and they were running about the villages and violating the tombs of the saints, and casting them into the fire; and these things had happened especially around Neapolis, whose bishop they killed with the sword, and, having captured some of the presbyters, they then divided them into pieces and limbs, and together with some of the relics of the martyrs they burned them.

^A abstaining from no recklessness or outrage against the Christians. When Justinian understood this, he engaged them with a great force and slew many others, including Julian himself. A certain Silvanus was also captured in Scythopolis and was committed to the fire; and he suffered a bitter end to his life—a man who had railed most insolently against the Christians, and who had been preserved until that time by divine vengeance so that he might pay the penalty due to him, just as the divine Sabbas had foretold to him.

There was also a certain Arsenius, illustrious by name and rank, who was a companion of the aforementioned Julian, and who was in Constantinople, falsely fabricating certain slanders against the Palestinians, as if they had been assistants to the tyrant in many things. For their sake Sabbas, as has been said, came again to Constantinople as an envoy. ^B Him, however, as if he were an angel and a citizen of the Jerusalem above, coming from heaven, the emperor received with most celebrated pomp, sending out all that was illustrious of the men in the city, and even Epiphanius the patriarch himself, to meet him. And when the emperor perceived him approaching from afar, he saw a certain crown shining upon his head; which Anastasius also had once beheld, when he approached him. He went to meet him, therefore, and having been deemed worthy of his blessing, he was very glad to be with him and most easily did whatever he wished. Having returned from there, he himself passed to the eternal and immortal life, having received the rewards worthy of his labors.

CHAPTER XXV.

Concerning a notable miracle which occurred to a Hebrew boy by the most holy Mother of God.

When Anthimus, as I have said, had been cast down from the episcopal throne in the imperial city, and Menas had been elected and ordained in his stead by Pope Agatho, a certain miracle occurred in Constantinople, worthy to be remembered, which I shall recount as well as I am able. ^C It has long been a custom in the Queen of Cities that, when some portion of the immaculate and divine body of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ remained, the priests should summon undefiled boys from those who were attending school and that they, fasting, should consume these relics. This, indeed, often happened to me also when I was very young, and I had a great desire from my earliest age to spend time in the holy churches. Such a thing was happening then also under Patriarch Menas. When the boys selected for this purpose had been gathered, a child also of a man of the Hebrew religion, who earned his living by glass-blowing, was joined to them. When this boy, having been delayed beyond the usual hour, came home, and his parents were inquiring more diligently into the cause of his late return, he reported that he had eaten the divine portions in the holy church with the other boys. ^D The father, having heard this strange thing, was inflamed with rage, and [thrust] the furnace

where he was shaping the glass, and having taken the child, threw him into the furnace amidst the burning coals, being angry at what had happened, even though the boy had done nothing knowing it. But when the mother, searching for the boy and finding him nowhere, wandered all over the city, wailing terribly and shrieking for her child; and having arrived on the third day at the husband's workshop, rending herself with excessive laments and sighing profoundly, she called for her child. And he, having heard his mother's voice, gave an answer from the furnace. Then the mother, having broken the door of the furnace, with the greatest miracle saw the child standing in the midst of the coals, so completely unharmed that the flame could not even injure a hair. And when she asked the reason how he had remained unharmed, he said that a certain woman of distinguished appearance, clothed in a purple stole, had come to him frequently, had poured water for him, and when the flame approached, had extinguished it, and had even provided him with food when he was hungry. When Justinian learned these things, he brought the boy with his mother to the divine bath of regeneration, and dedicated him to God. But the father, who could not bear to adopt the sacred rites of the Christians, he impaled upon a fig tree ^B as if he were a murderer. But these things happened in this way. Let us, however, return to the proposed course of our narrative.

CHAPTER XXVI

Concerning the bishops of the great cities at that time; and concerning the discord between Menas and Vigilius of Rome.

At this time, Vigilius presided over the Church of Rome, having succeeded Sylverius, who had succeeded Agapetus. And at Constantinople, Eutychius had succeeded Menas during the time of the synod, and Anthimus had preceded him, while Epiphanius had preceded that one. Upon the throne of Alexandria, after Theodosius was cast out, as has been said, Zoilus was still living. And when, after a little while, he was gathered to his predecessors, Apollinaris took the cathedra. ^C Among the Antiochians, Domninus was substituted in the place of Ephraim. But in Jerusalem, after Martyrius, and Salustius, and the renowned Elias, John administered the bishopric. After him again was the admirable Peter, and after him Macarius, although the emperor had not yet approved the chairmanship; for which reason he also was driven from the ecclesiastical cathedra, for it was said that he promulgated the dogmas of Origen more than anyone else. After he was driven out, Eustochius was raised to the holy cathedra. One must know, however, that Pope Vigilius of Rome, when Rome was again taken by the Goths, fled and reached Constantinople. Having been received magnificently by the emperor, he promised to unite the Church, so that he would also place under anathema the three chapters ^D resisting the faith; and he was carried to such a pitch of spirit as even to

emperor, he promised to unite the Church, so that he would also place under anathema the three chapters resisting the faith; and he was carried to such a pitch of spirit as even to ^A exclude Menas from communion for four months. Menas, in turn, certainly did the same thing against him. But Justinian, moved to anger by matters of this kind, sent men to arrest him. Vigilius, however, fearing for himself, fled to the altar of the martyr Sergius; and, having entangled himself in the sacred railings, he would not yield to be dragged from there until he had pulled them down, for he was a large man and of a stout physical stature. But afterwards, when Justinian felt regret for this business, with Empress Theodora interceding for her side, he received Vigilius; and he once again admitted Menas to communion. At that time, the dedication of the temple of the holy Apostles took place on the twenty-ninth day of June, and the sacred relics of the apostles were carried around in a golden chariot by Menas. In this same year Menas died, and Eutychius, as we have said, received his throne, being a monk and priest, and having also served as minister for giving responses to the bishop of Amasea.

CHAPTER XXVII. Concerning the holy and great fifth ecumenical synod.

And so, while Vigilius was administering the bishopric of elder Rome, and Menas, and afterwards Eutychius, that of the new; while Apollinarius governed that of Alexandria, Domninus that of Antioch, and Eustochius that of Jerusalem—with there also being present ^B Gregory of Agrigento, a man almost superior to all in sanctity of life, eloquence, and the doctrine of truth ^C—the emperor Justinian gathered the holy fifth ecumenical synod, having summoned the bishops of all the churches, for the following reason. Eustochius, the bishop of Jerusalem, since many in Palestine who professed the dogmas of Origen were flourishing, and especially because that sect held power there in what was called the new Laura, strove with great zeal to drive them out from there; and indeed, having occupied the aforementioned new monastery, he drove them out from the church as if they were common and profane pollutions. But they, having been dispersed everywhere, and having drawn many to their side, begged them to bring them aid, and they had not a few auxiliary associates. ^D Theodore, surnamed Ascidas, defended them most strongly—he who was established as bishop of Caesarea, the leading city in Cappadocia, and who was also an assessor to the emperor Justinian, a counselor pleasing to him and seen as most faithful, in that he excelled at handling matters adeptly according to the prince's will. When he had stirred up the imperial court as much as he could, and had called the affair of Eustochius, which had occurred in Palestine, an impiety that surpassed all unspeakable crimes, there were summoned to the imperial city, chief among them Eustochius, Rufus, the abbot of the monastery of the great Theodosius, and Conon, the prefect of that of the great Sabbas—both leaders of the desert, on account of the monasteries over which they presided, and especially on account of their own virtue. Others also came with them, not much inferior to them in glory. After the Fathers had gathered together there in one place, they brought into the middle the business, first of all, of Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius;

they moved, in the first place, that inasmuch as they had wrongly mingled the opinions of the Greeks with the correct doctrines of the Church, these opinions ought to be removed from the midst. ^A But Ascidas, drawing them to other things, brought forward the opinions of Theodore of Mopsuestia, and of Theodoret, and of Ibas, the bishop of Edessa; God, in His all-wise providence, so disposing it, that from both sides the new and profane dogmas might be cast out further afield. And when the first discussion had taken place, the question was raised: was it permitted at last to strike with anathema those who had long ago deceased? At that time Eutychius, while Mennas was still alive, a man ^B of the highest learning in the holy Scriptures, though less renowned because, as has been said, he served as the responder to the bishop of Amasea, seeing that those who were gathered in the assembly were holding not correct, but rather ridiculous and contemptible opinions, declared in distinct terms that there was no need for any counsel or deliberation regarding the matter: for this reason, that King Josiah long ago not only slaughtered the living priests of the demons, but also dug up the tombs of those who had died a long time before. This saying seemed to all to have been well spoken; so much so that Justinian, admiring the man ^C for this, elevated him to the throne of the imperial city when Mennas died in those days. Now Vigilius, even though he had given his consent in writing, did not choose to sit in assembly with Eutychius, but, when the synod was finished, as will be told by me, he set out for Rome and, in the course of his journey, yielded to his fate. The synod having been convened, as I have said, Justinian inquired what they had to say about the matters of Theodore of Mopsuestia, and of Theodoret, and of those writings which he composed against the twelve chapters of the holy Cyril; and, furthermore, about the letter which is called the letter to Ibas ^D the Persian. And when many statements of Theodore and Theodoret had been read, and it had been clearly enough demonstrated that not only now, but long ago, Theodore had been proscribed by the Church and cast out from the register of the sacred tablets, and that heretics ought to be condemned even after their death: without any delay, they subjected Theodore himself, and moreover whatever Theodoret had written against the twelve chapters of the divine Cyril and the correct faith, and in addition the letter of Ibas, to anathema, with a decree composed in these words: "Since our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, according to the evangelical parable..." and thereafter: "We condemn, and we pierce with anathema, besides all the other heretics who have been condemned and slaughtered with anathema by the aforementioned four holy synods and by the holy catholic and apostolic Church, Theodore also, who is called bishop of Mopsuestia, and his impious writings; and those things which were impiously written by Theodoret against the correct faith and against the twelve chapters of him who is among the saints, Cyril, and against the former holy synod of Ephesus; and, finally, whatever else he wrote in support of Theodore and Nestorius. To these we add the anathema against the impious letter—

^Alization, and the impious letter which is said to have been written by Ibas to Maris the Persian. And after a few words, they set forth fourteen chapters concerning the correct and blameless faith. These things proceeded thus. ^B In the second session, after the libelli against the impious dogmas of Origen, who is also called Adamantius, and against those who followed his impiety and delusion had been presented and read by Eulogius, Conon, Cyriacus, and Pancratius, the monks of Jerusalem, Justinian again ordered the synod to give judgment concerning them, and the letters which had been written to Pope Vigilius concerning these matters were also brought forward. In these it was shown how it had been the goal of Adamantius to fill the purity of the apostolic dogmas with Greek nonsense and Manichaean tares. The synod, therefore, after the outcries against Origen and those who were equally deluded by him, referred the matter to Justinian. Some of these things were drafted in these very words, from which we have excerpted them from the acts of this synod: ^C “You who possess a soul that is a participant in heavenly generosity, most Christian emperor…” and then: “We have fled, therefore; we have fled this alien voice which we do not acknowledge. And as a thief and a robber, we have bound such a man tightly with the snares of anathema and cast him outside the sacred walls of the Church.” And after a few words: “From the reading of our acts, you will know their force.” To these they joined the chapters, as many as those who favored Origen were taught to believe, which show their agreements, but also their disagreements and their multifaceted delusion. The fifth among these is the chapter of the blasphemies of certain persons of the so-called New Laura, written in these words: “Theodorus Ascidas the Cappadocian said: If now the apostles and the martyrs perform miracles and are in such great honor, if in the restoration and re-establishment ^D of all things they are not to be equal to Christ, what kind of restoration is it for them?” The same monks also very diligently brought to the synod many other blasphemies of Didymus, Evagrius, and Theodorus, gathered from their poorly written books; all of which they crushed with anathema, and set them all forth in order. To these they added the chapters which those who were studious of Origen professed to be excerpted from his writings, in which that frantic man teaches these things: That the soul exists before the body and that it committed sins in the heavens. In addition to these: that the heaven, the sun, the moon, the stars, and the waters which are above the heavens are living and rational virtues. Furthermore, that in the resurrection the bodies of men will be raised in a round and spherical shape. And that the torments of all impious men and even of the demons themselves will have an end, and that the impious and the demons will be restored to their former order and state. Moreover, that for the sake of the demons also Christ must be crucified, and that he will have to suffer this same thing again often in future ages at the hands of the spirits of malice.

^A But it would be a long task to set forth all of his blasphemies in detail. It is, however, necessary to know that this is the very man who, for the mad Manes, for Sabellius, for Arius and Eunomius, and for the rest of the choir of those who think wrongly, was the first to act as author in sowing and scattering tares in their writings, by saying that God has a power bounded by certain limits, that the Son is less than the Father, and again the Spirit less than the Son; that the Son is a creature and an offspring of the Father, and in all things less than the Father, and that he was merely a man; and that created things are co-eternal with God; and by uttering other absurd and strange blasphemies of this kind, impiously mingling the simplicity of apostolic dogmas with Platonic opinions. But the kind of man he was will be made manifest from the very anathematisms which the synod hurled against him; which, word for word, are as follows:

CHAPTER XXVIII

Concerning the blasphemies of Origen, and the anathematisms by which he was struck by the synod; and concerning certain other ecclesiastical matters.

^B If anyone says or thinks that the souls of men exist beforehand, as if they were previously intellectual minds or holy spirits, but that, having become sated with divine contemplation and having turned toward what is worse, and because of this having grown cold in the love of God, they were from that time called "souls" ^C and were sent down into bodies for the sake of punishment, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the soul of the Lord existed beforehand and was united to the Word of God before the incarnation and birth from the Virgin, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the body of our Lord Jesus Christ was formed first in the womb of the holy Virgin, and that afterwards the Word of God and the soul, as if it had pre-existed, were united to it, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the Word of God was assimilated to all the heavenly orders, having become a Cherub to the Cherubim, and a Seraph to the Seraphim, and strictly speaking having been assimilated to all the celestial powers, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that in the resurrection the bodies of men are raised up in a spherical and orbicular shape, and does not confess that we shall be raised upright, let him be anathema. If anyone says that the heaven, the sun, the moon, the stars, and the waters that are above the heavens are certain animate and material powers, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the Lord Christ will be crucified in the world to come for the demons, just as he was for men, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the power of God is limited, and that he created only as much as he could grasp, let him be anathema. If anyone says or thinks that the torment of the demons and of impious men is temporary, and that it will have an end at some time, or that there will be a restoration ^D of demons or impious men, let him be anathema.

Anathema be to Origen, who is also called Adamantius, who promulgated these things, together with his detestable and execrable dogmas, and to every man who thinks or asserts these things, or who dares in any part at any time whatsoever to defend them: in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom is glory for ages of ages. Amen. ^A After the synod, the emperor composed the troparion, or hymn, the beginning of which is, "Only-begotten Son and Word of God," and delivered it to the Church to be sung during the chanting of the psalms. And to this day, it is observed by her as an indissoluble law. He also first commanded the Meeting of the Savior (Hypapante) to be celebrated everywhere on earth, just as Justin had done for the holy birth of Christ; and not long after, Maurice commanded the Dormition of the all-holy Mother of God to be celebrated on the fifteenth day of the month of August. Bestowing also a special honor upon his native land of Achrida, Justinian adorned it with the dignity of an archbishopric and established it as an autocephalous church, naming it Prima Justiniana; just as later he made the church of the island of Cyprus a second Justiniana and an archbishopric, granting it equal honors with Achrida, in honor of his spouse, the Augusta Theodora, for she had originated from thence. ^B Now the city of Achrida is built upon a high hill, near a very large lake which is called Lychnidus, but which was anciently called Dassaritis. In it, a very great quantity of fish is caught. The river Drinus also flows from thence, running toward the north. For taking its rise from the more cultivated parts toward Deabolis, and cutting through the aforementioned lake, like a certain Alpheus cleaving the sea and swimming quietly toward the fountain of Arethusa, it flows out from thence on the northern side. And toward the end of the lake, having met those things which are called by the inhabitants Strudae, and being united with them, it becomes a very great river; then, turning toward the west, it empties itself near the Orinus, around a fortress named Hillissus, which anciently was the metropolis of all Bulgaria. In it also, formerly, the royal seat of the Bulgarians had been established. But of these things, enough.

CHAPTER XXIX

A period of time having passed meanwhile, and Eutychius, seeing that he resisted the emperor, introduced certain new— ^{C D}

[Note: The text of the troparion provided in the text block (in Greek and Latin) reads: "Only-begotten Son and Word of God, being immortal, and having deigned for our salvation to be incarnate of the holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, without mutation having become man, and having been crucified, O Christ God, having trampled down death by death, who art one of the holy Trinity, being glorified together with the Father and the holy Spirit, save us."]

"] ^A to one willing to resist, is cast out from the throne; but John, who originated from Sirimis, is introduced in his place. ^B And this village, situated in the Cynegica region, not far from Antioch, is committed to him. But what these new things were which the emperor was determined to introduce, on account of which even Eutychius was expelled from the throne, I shall proceed to tell. Not much time, as has been said, had passed since the fifth synod, and the old sower of tares, who could by no means bear to see the state of the Church tranquil, in order to disturb it, applied his efforts again with depraved dogmas, as if with certain machines. For when the doctrines of Severus had been driven from the Church, and those of his followers, and furthermore the alien and absurd dogmas of Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius, and of the others, as well as before these the opinions of Anthimus, Peter, and Zoora, the impious men, had been condemned with anathema, the aforementioned Severians, who proceeded from Julian of Halicarnassus and Gaianus, having strongly engaged with certain people under the pretext of piety, persuaded them that the flesh which the Savior Christ took from the Virgin was incorruptible even before the Passion ^C (1). These, they said, were their words: "We indeed, through the necessity of nature, bear about its affections, I mean hunger, and thirst, and the rest; but Christ, inasmuch as he suffered of his own will, did not serve the laws of nature in the same way as we do." The pious, on the other hand, replied to these words, saying, "Even if Christ's passion was voluntary, it was nevertheless equal to ours. For how could it be said that what was suffering in whatever way it did, was incorruptible in its own nature, and not corruptible, even as we speak of ourselves?" To which they again replied: "In the same way that you say the body of Christ is incorruptible after the resurrection and consubstantial with us, in the same way we also, saying it was incorruptible before the resurrection, profess it to be consubstantial with us." But the others replied to them again: "If we confess the Lord's body to be incorruptible after the life-giving resurrection, we do not say it is incorruptible by nature, but by grace." And when they argued back that it was incorruptible by divine grace even before the resurrection, the others again said: "But the things reported concerning Christ do not allow this. For before the resurrection, he is said to have hungered and thirsted and suffered other things. And how could that which had suffered such things be incorruptible? But after the resurrection, it is recorded that he did not suffer any such thing; hence it is clear from this, that before the resurrection the body of the Lord ^D was corruptible, but after the resurrection it remained incorruptible. As for the eating after the resurrection, he did not do it as one hungry, but for the sake of the dispensation of rising from the dead

he did this, that he might prove himself to be the same one who had risen from the dead. In which manner he also showed the ^A prints of the nails, that he might prove that he had truly risen and was not a phantom. For this reason the Scripture also does not say after the rising from the dead that through hunger he ate, or through thirst he drank; but that he ate and drank simply, because he had become incorruptible after the resurrection. If, however, some perchance brought forward the opinions of certain saints as if the body of the Lord were totally incapable of corruption, our [theologians] said that they were speaking of a different corruption than the one now proposed. For the name "corruption" signifies two things. By this name come these natural and blameless affections or passions of the flesh: namely, thirst, hunger, fatigue, agony, and the rest; in which manner we say the body of the Lord is corruptible, as being ^B consubstantial with us. These passions, indeed, the God-Word assumed voluntarily, because he was properly and truly made man. And to say that the Lord's body was incorruptible in this manner—according to Julian of Halicarnassus and Gaianus—is the height of impiety. And this is one type of corruption; but there is another corruption: the dissolution of the body into the elements from which it was composed, and the defilement of the flesh itself; according to which meaning we also declare the body of the Lord to be incorruptible, because no defilement could invade or approach it. Yet after the divine resurrection, we believe that the assumption of the flesh of the Lord is incorruptible according to the first meaning of the word "corruption" as well; just as our bodies will be after the resurrection in accordance with the gift of God, though before the ^C resurrection it was otherwise. And this is the heresy of the Aphthartodocetae, by which many mortals were ensnared, not only those who held honors and magistracies, but also leading hierarchs and those illustrious in the monastic life, and others of the priestly order, and even the Emperor Justinian himself. And he clung most firmly to this opinion—not that he investigated such a doctrine deeply, but that he was vehemently insistent upon the signification of the word itself, namely, because he had decided not to hear any such thing about Christ on account of his supreme love and desire for Him. For this prince is said by those who consigned his deeds to the memory of posterity to have burned with such ardor of piety toward Christ—a piety shown to none of the emperors before him, at least after the thrice-greatest Constantine—that he even performed many ^D violent acts out of this intense longing for His sake. For he did not allow the Jews to celebrate the Passover before the Christians; and he afflicted the Samaritans if they did not depart from their own error. By erecting magnificent temples, he moreover honored the Divine throughout all the earth, as he was desirous of glorifying God in a transcendent manner. And he carried out other such things of a similar nature, attempting to demonstrate clearly to all the abundance of his sincere and deeply-seated affection for God. At that time, however, this emperor also, having strayed from the straight and right path, and having chosen to walk a road unaccustomed and untrodden by the divine Apostles and Fathers, was entangled in thorns and briars. And desiring also to lead the Church toward

his own opinion, he failed: for the Lord had fortified the straight and royal road with such strong fences, that it might not be easily encroached upon with impunity by anyone who wished. ^A At that time, Vigilius also, not consenting to the ideas which seemed right to Justinian, while departing for Italy, died on the way. And John, who was also called Catelinus, received the bishopric of the first of the Apostles. Thus, while John Catelinus governed the elder Rome, and John, whose homeland was Sirmium, governed the new, and Apollinarius administered the bishopric of Alexandria, and, among the Theopolitans, Anastasius—who had set out from Mount Sinai—was chosen bishop after Domninus, and Macarius was restored again to the throne of Jerusalem after the deposition of Eustochius (for he had deposed him as one who did not choose to yield to his dogmas; after which, Justinian anathematized Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius), the emperor wrote an edict (for that is what it is called in Latin), in which he called the body of the Lord incorruptible, and such that even blameless passions did not fall upon it: saying that the Lord ate before the Passion, just as he also ate after the Resurrection, because his most holy body was not subject to any change or alteration, either from the very forming of it in the womb of the Mother of God, nor in voluntary and natural passions, nor even after the Resurrection; and that it did not acquire incorruptibility after the Passion—as the Catholic Church professes—but that it possessed it even before the Passion, from the very seedless and divine conception. ^B And by applying force, he began to compel the priests throughout the East and West to agree with his empty opinion. But all, fixing their eyes upon Anastasius of Antioch, were eagerly waiting, so that they might learn from him what needed to be done. By which cause they wisely repelled his first assault.

CHAPTER XXX.

Regarding Anastasius of Theopolis, the Sinaite.

^C This Anastasius was highly learned in divine matters, upright in his way of life, and most exact in his daily conduct; so as to apply a rule even to the smallest things, and in no way to deviate from what was perfectly secure, especially regarding those things which were essential and pertained to the Divine. He also possessed a beautifully tempered character; for he was not very easily approachable, lest he should be easily accessible to those things which were not right; nor, on the other hand, was he ^D austere, unsparing, and—as it were—not easily approached.

But when it was the time for serious matters to be transacted, he held his ears in readiness, and his tongue gushed forth like a river, and he would swiftly resolve the things proposed to him. But in idle affairs and those less pertinent to the matter, he would entirely plug his ears and bridle his tongue, so that when he measured out his speech of reason in a timely manner, silence was at times more excellent than his discourse. ^B Against him, as if against some bulwark, Justinian struck, having applied every artifice to him; thinking well, as it seemed to him, that if he were to shake him, it would be no difficult task to bring the whole city into his power, to overturn the true and genuine dogmas, and to lead the flock of Christ into captivity. But Anastasius, firmly fixed upon the rock of faith and so entirely lifted up in divine mind against the emperor's assault, stood his ground, so that he openly and in express words—employing demonstrations also composed with the greatest skill—said to him that the body of the Lord was corruptible before the Passion, and subject to natural and irreproachable sufferings, and that thus the holy Apostles had handed it down, and the divine Fathers had thought and preached it. All these things indeed he clearly and freely wrote back also to the order of monks of the first and second Syria, who had consulted him about them, confirming that all should think in this way, and as a kind of trainer, rousing them to undertake the struggle for piety, and putting before them that quote which the vessel of election brought forth, submitting it to all: "If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." ^C And they all continued in the same emulation of sentiment. For this reason, Justinian formed a plan to send into exile him who resisted him in such a manner. Anastasius, having heard of this, drew up a treatise and proposed it to the Antiochenes to use for their defense, if there should be need. And it was composed with such elegance of words and density of enthymemes, and with such an abundance of sayings drawn from the sacred Scriptures, adjusted to the matter itself, that the author of his book gained the greatest admiration. But that writing was not published, as God in some better way had provided for His Church.

CHAPTER XXXI. How Justinian died, and concerning his opinion and faith.

^D For Justinian, while he was dictating the decree of exile for him and the priests who burned with the same zeal as he, struck by an invisible blow, departed from this life, when thirty-eight years and eight months had been spent in his reign: not having abolished the opinion of the Aphthartodocetae, inasmuch as he considered that such a sentiment made more for the honor of the Lord's body. And indeed some grant him pardon, saying that one who has held such a view ought not, like other heresies, to be cast

^A out of the Church. This is made clearer from the preface of the sixth synod, which deems Justinian worthy of "blessed rest" in terms such as these: "Since the two holy and ecumenical synods, which were assembled in this imperial and God-guarded city—the one in the times of Justinian of divine memory, and the other under the pious record of our emperor Constantine, the parent of your clemency, etc." Furthermore, the acts of that same council, whenever mention of him is necessary, always call him Justinian, "who is among the saints." In these, I also found a scholion or brief notation that John, called of Chalcedon, when he presided over the Church of Constantinople during the age of Alexius Comnenus, ^B celebrated his memory annually in the very temple of the Wisdom of God the Word, with a gathering of the whole populace for the divine service. His memory was also kept at Ephesus, in the shrine of the disciple who reclined upon the breast of the Savior, a shrine which Justinian himself had constructed. In whatever estimation he is finally held before God and men, it is said that for this cause also he drove the holy Eutychius and many others from the throne. However, when he was about to die, just as the divine Constantine [had commanded] the return of Athanasius, so also this man in his testament ordered the restoration of Eutychius to Justin, his successor. I think, though I do not dogmatically assert, that because of his other ^C excellent and right deeds, his outstanding zeal for the divine Power, and his piety in all things—and with the wondrous work of the temple of the Wisdom of God the Word intervening—if there was any defect in him at the time, this will have been repaired and covered over by the infinite loving-kindness of God.

CHAPTER XXXII

Concerning the Auxumites, how they embraced the Christian religion; and concerning other matters.

While he was still presiding over the empire, the king of the Auxumite Indians, a follower of the Greek religion, joined battle with the Homerite Indians who were ^D choosing to embrace the Jewish faith, giving the Romans a pretext for the dispute. For through the land of the Homerites, which approaches Egypt, goods given and received in both directions were carried to the Auxumites. And indeed, since the Romans were being waylaid by Damnus, the ruler of the Homerites, it resulted that the passage to the Auxumites was obstructed. Being vexed at this, he set himself to battle against the Homerites, praying to the God of the Christians that if he should overcome the Homerites, he would choose the way of the Christians. And having engaged in battle, he emerges a brilliant victor, and captures that very Damnus alive; and the Auxumite, fulfilling his vow to the God of David, sent envoys to Justinian, asking that he provide for them the rites that are customary for Christians. Justinian, being greatly delighted by this, chose a holy man and sent him as bishop to them; and by many good works he brought the entire nation over and baptized them. By reason of this occasion, the interior nations of the Indians also embraced Christianity.

^A And then, for the first time, silk ^B was brought to Constantinople. Also, very many portents occurred while Justinian was holding the reins of power; for there were extraordinary earthquakes, and tremors of the earth, and chasms, and strange appearances of stars; and the sea turned back, advancing about four miles into Thrace. And a small dog, devoid of light, was performing some novel deeds, apportioning to each his due, and signaling other things of a more secret nature. Moreover, upon the high priests, whom he discovered to be raving over the Sodomite heresy, he took action strictly, or rather, most foully. And when a famine had increased in Byzantium, and necessities were failing, the emperor, in the second week of the fasts, gave orders for meat to be offered for sale in the marketplace. And this, indeed, was done by force. But the people, having chosen to pursue piety for themselves, neither bought nor ate it, deeming it preferable to face death rather than to alter anything of their ancestral customs and traditions. Let these things be said concerning Justinian. But I have determined that it is necessary for me to interweave the reign of Justin also into this book, so that it might be easy for the reader to learn with ease the ecclesiastical actions of these three sovereigns: Justin, Justinian, and Justin the Younger.

CHAPTER XXXIII. Concerning the reign of Justin the Younger, and his character.

Truly, ^C Justinian, being addicted to such an opinion, and because of this, leaving everything full of turmoil and commotion, passed over to that other state of things; and in the magnificent monument built by him near the Church of the Apostles, fashioned from Sardian stone, he was buried on the right-hand side of one entering the building. But the son of his sister, Justin the Younger, who had been entrusted with the administration of the imperial palace (whom the Roman tongue calls *curator* of the palace), took up the purple robe and the remaining symbols of empire, ^D while as yet no one, except those in his household, knew of either the death of Justinian or his own succession; until he suddenly appeared in the Hippodrome to perform and receive what was customary for emperors. And when things succeeded as he imagined, and no one resisted him through the staging of any novelty, he returned to the palace. And the first written command of his was issued, releasing to the priests everywhere the exiles which they had suffered for the sake of the right religion, having faced danger for it; and [ordering] them to recover their own sees, and to worship according to custom, and to innovate nothing further regarding the faith. This, indeed, as was worthy and as was fitting, was carried out by the emperor, but the other things were not in accordance with a monarch: for his life was... [alt-version omitted]

^A excessively self-indulgent, and he occupied himself with base pleasures. And he, too, no less than his divine predecessor, was subject to shameful gains, and he craved the possessions of others beyond all measure. Nor was it merely public matters that he sold for illicit profit, but he felt no shame in doing the same regarding the priesthoods; for he set even these up for sale, selling them cheaply to whoever chanced along.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

How he slew his kinsman Justin, and also Aetherius and Addaeus, those impious men.

Being by nature timid, he was rather possessed by boldness, and was a slave to both of the vilest passions. And so he summoned his kinsman Justin, who was renowned among the multitude for his reputation, and distinguished for his experience in war and his other advancements in honor, who was passing his time near the Ister and preventing the incursions of the Avars there—for the Avars are Scythians, that is, they live in wagons, and they inhabit the plains which are beyond the Caucasus. But they were suddenly driven from their homes by the Hyperborean Persians, for suffering evil at their hands, they had recourse to flight and came to the region of the Bosporus, abandoning the shores of the Euxine Sea. ^B There, where many barbarian tribes had settled, and where some had been expelled by the Romans, and where cities and military camps had been constructed—and some of these were trading ports, while others had been founded as stations either by veteran soldiers who had secured their discharge from service, or by colonies sent out by the emperors—they made their journey, contending with the barbarians who stood in their way, until they arrived at the banks of the Ister and sent an embassy to the Emperor Justinian. From those places, then, the aforementioned Justin was summoned, as if he were to share with the new emperor in the established arrangements and to enjoy the authority. For being nearly equal in lineage and in such worldly vanity, they both had the empire balanced between them. And with difficulty, after many disputes had occurred, they reached an agreement, so that whoever attained to the administration of the empire should concede to the other the next honor, so that he, from the second place in the empire, might take the first place after the others. ^C When he arrived, therefore, the emperor showed towards him much friendliness from the outside, and as he was a renowned commander and akin to him by blood, he treated him with various marks of esteem. Afterwards, however, contriving certain pretexts, he quietly removed all those who were his attendants, guards, and bodyguards; and he prevented his appearances in public; and finally, having shut him up within the famous city of Alexandria, while he lay in bed at night, he took him off by a miserable death. ^D This was the reward that noble man received for his kindly disposition towards his own kin, and for the infinite victories he had brought about against the enemy. Nor was it before the...

^A empress Sophia and Justin himself released the anger they had conceived against him, and were liberated from the expectation of grave evils, that they saw his head brought before them; upon which they trampled with their feet, mocking and laughing at it. Not much time passed before he interrogated both Etherius and Addaeus, the leaders of the senate, who had administered great affairs under Justinian, on charges of lèse-majesté. Etherius, indeed, being severely tortured during the questioning, confessed that he had desired to remove the emperor with poison, and that Addaeus had been privy to his counsel and his partner in all these matters. The latter, however, confirmed with grave oaths that he knew nothing of these things. Nevertheless, both were beheaded. Addaeus, at the moment of being put to death, said that the crime of which he was accused was a mere calumny brought against him; yet, by the judgment of the inspector of trials, he suffered justly, because he had carried off ^B Theodotus, the prefect of the palace, through certain incantations. But how these things were done by divine justice, it is not easy for me to say. Both, however, were most wicked and pernicious men; Addaeus, indeed, was a corrupter of young boys, while Etherius was a great sycophant, who, by the calumny of both the living and the dead, was accustomed to greedily and cruelly devour and seize their goods under the pretext of that imperial house which he had headed under Justinian, having been very useful to him in that regard. And these things happened in this manner.

Chapter XXXV. On the edict published regarding the faith, which Justin sent to all churches everywhere, so that no innovation might be made in the profession of faith.

Justinus sent a decree, drawn up on the spur of the moment, to all the Christians of his realm, that they should innovate nothing in the churches, but, insisting upon the ancient decrees of the Fathers, should correctly worship and adore the divine Being. The document ^C regarding the faith was worded in these terms:

"In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, our God, the emperor Caesar Flavius Justinus, faithful in Christ, clement, greatest, beneficent, Alamanicus, Gothicus, Germanicus, Anticus, Francicus, Herculicus, Gepidicus, pious, fortunate, glorious, victor, triumphator, ever-worshipful Augustus. 'My peace I give unto you,' says the Lord Christ, our true God; 'my peace I leave with you,' the same proclaims to all men. And this means nothing else than that those who believe in him should come together into one and the same Church, agreeing in spirit upon the correct doctrine of the Christians, ^D while turning away from those who speak the contrary. For the primary salvation established for all men is the confession of the correct faith."

^A Therefore, we too, following the evangelical precepts and the holy Symbol—that is, the teaching of the holy Fathers—exhort all to come to one and the same Church and opinion, believing in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, a consubstantial Trinity, one Deity—that is, one nature and essence in word and in deed, and one power and authority and energy in three subsistences, that is, persons, whom we glorify; into whom we have been baptized, in whom we have believed, and to whom we have been gathered. For we worship Unity in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, possessing in a paradoxical way both distinction and union. Unity, indeed, according to essence—that is, Deity; Trinity, however, according to the properties—that is, subsistences or persons. For it is divided indivisibly, if we may say so, and is joined distinctively. For one is the Deity in three, and the three are one, those in whom the Deity exists, or, to speak more accurately, those which the Deity is: God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. ^B When each person is considered by itself, the mind separates what is inseparable; yet it understands the three as God, together with one another, by the sameness of movement and of nature. Since it is necessary both to confess the one God and to proclaim the three subsistences, that is, properties. We confess the same only-begotten Son of God, the God Word, begotten before the ages and timelessly from the Father, not made; but in the last days for us and for our salvation, having descended from the heavens and become incarnate, from the Holy Spirit and our Lady, the holy, glorious Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, and having been born of her; who is equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit. For the holy Trinity did not receive the addition of a fourth person through the incarnation of one of the holy Trinity, the God Word; but it is one and the same our Lord Jesus Christ, consubstantial with the Father and God according to the divinity, and the same consubstantial with us according to the humanity, subject to suffering in the flesh, and the same impassible in divinity. For we do not understand as one the God Word who performed miracles, and as another who suffered; but we confess one and the same our Lord Jesus Christ, the God Word ^C incarnate and perfectly made human; and we attribute both the miracles and the passions which he voluntarily endured in the flesh for our salvation to one and the same. For no man gave himself up for us, but the God Word himself, having, without change, become man; he accepted both the voluntary passion and death for us in the flesh. And so, while confessing him to be God, we do not deny that he is also man; and while confessing him to be man, we do not deny that he is also God. Hence, we recognize one and the same from each nature, of the divinity ^D and of humanity, confessing him to be composite, our Lord Jesus Christ, [in] confusion...

^A to the union we do not introduce. For not because he became man as we are, does he lose the being God; nor yet, because he is God by nature and does not accept the likeness to us, will he refuse to be man. He has remained, just as he was God in humanity, so also in the excellence of divinity, being man nonetheless; and both exists in the same, and the one Emmanuel is at once God and man. Confessing the same to be perfect in divinity, and perfect in humanity—from which he was also composed—we do not apply a division or a cutting into parts to his one composite subsistence; rather, we signify the difference of the natures, which is not destroyed by the union. For neither was the divine nature changed into the human, nor was the human nature turned into the divine. To the eye of the intellect that contemplates both, and rather [contemplates] each as existing within the boundary and definition of its own nature, we say that the union has been brought about according to subsistence. And the union according to subsistence shows that God the Word, that is, the one subsistence of the three subsistences of the Godhead, was not united to a pre-existing man, but in the womb of our Lady, the holy, glorious Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, he fashioned for himself from her in his own subsistence a flesh consubstantial with us and subject to the same sufferings in all things, sin excepted, animated by a rational and intellectual soul. For in this [flesh] he had his subsistence and became man; and he is one and the same our Lord Jesus Christ, glorified together with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Considering his ineffable union, we rightly confess one incarnate nature of God the Word, [fleshed] with flesh animated by a rational and intellectual soul. And again, taking into view the difference of the natures, we say that there are two, while introducing no division; for each nature is in him, ^B whence we confess one and the same Christ, one Son, one person, one subsistence, God at once and man. All those, however, who have thought or think otherwise than this, we anathematize, judging them to be aliens to the holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of God. ^C Since, therefore, the upright dogmas handed down by the holy Fathers are thus proclaimed, we exhort you all to come together into one and the same catholic and apostolic Church. Indeed, we exhort you more strongly; for we would not hesitate, even if we were in the excellence of kingship, to use such words, [prompted] by the concord and union of all Christians, that there may be sent up from all one single doxology to the ^D great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. As for the rest, that no one may make an excuse...

regarding persons or syllables to contend, since the syllables bring about one and the same right faith and understanding of the custom and state that up to now has prevailed in the holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of God, being fixed and without innovation through all things, and remaining so for all time to come. Accordingly, all the bishops and priests everywhere gave their assent to this edict, saying that it was rightly promulgated. But those who had separated themselves from the Church, persisting in schism and dissension, would in no way be united with it, for no other reason than that which was explicitly stated at the end of the writing, namely that for future times as well, such a confession of faith would be preserved stable and without anything new.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

Justinus, after John, whose home was Sirimis, had cast off both life and the throne of the imperial city by death, recalled Eutychius from exile, just as Justinian had commanded in his will, and restored him to his church. He, after two years had passed, had John the Faster as his successor. But when John (also called Catelinus) in Old Rome left the see vacant and departed for that other life, the helm of the episcopate was entrusted to Bonus; John succeeded him, and Pelagius succeeded him in turn. After Apollinaris, John ascended the pastoral throne of Alexandria, and Eulogius was subsequently substituted for him. In Jerusalem ^B Macarius governed the episcopate again after Eustochius. Then John obtained the hierarchical throne, who had lived a pure and indigent life excellently in the monastery of the Acoemetae.

At Theopolis, however, Justinus, having expelled Anastasius, the successor of Domninus, installed Gregory, no new thing having at that time been set in motion in the Church. But the emperor brought against Anastasius the accusation that he was conferring the sacred money upon others than was right for a bishop, and that he had attacked the emperor himself with insults and curses. For it is said that when Anastasius was asked by someone why he was throwing away the sacred money so lavishly, and not rather distributing it for necessary uses as was fitting, he answered expressly with sarcasm, saying that he did so "so that it might not be taken away by the common scourge of Justinus." It was also commonly reported ^C that Justinus had been hostile to him for this reason, that he was unwilling to give money to him when he sought it. Furthermore, other things were imputed to the man by some who wished to cover or excuse the emperor's attempt. After Anastasius had withdrawn, Gregory, as has been said, took the throne, whose glory is widely celebrated in poetry; for from his earliest hair, to the monastic ^D

his episcopate, Gregory, as has been said, ^A received that see: whose glory is wide, to use the words of the poet. For from his earliest youth, practiced in monastic studies, he strove vigorously toward the highest degrees, when only recently the first down of manhood had appeared upon him. Indeed, first he presided over the monastery of Byzantium, where from the beginning he began to lead a life devoid of all worldly concerns. Afterwards, at the command of Justin, he undertook the pastoral office on Mount Sinai, in which, being besieged by the Scenite barbarians, he was not surrounded by minor dangers. To them also, so that they might enter into a peace treaty, he was the persuader and author. Having accomplished great things among them, he was then promoted to the sacred cathedra. In spirit and counsel he was of the best in all matters; and to whatever business he turned himself, he accomplished it most easily. He was in no way disturbed by fear. Yet he did not show himself at all inclined to yield to those in power, as if terrified by them. He was also liberal and quite munificent, lavishly distributing money; so much so that whithersoever he went, as the need arose, very many men would attend and follow him, even those who had no association of custom with him, and who were in no way related to him. Others, moreover, who had heard or seen that he had gone forth, would flock to him, and they held the honor due to worldly dignities in the second place, out of reverence for the man, eagerly desiring of their own accord both to see and to hear him, even when he 796 was speaking of things of no great importance. For he was indeed most capable of instilling a secret desire into the spirits of those who met him in any way; he was most admirable of aspect, very pleasant in conversation, and if anyone else was, he himself was most acute in discerning what was fitting, and most quick in doing it. He was most ready to give counsel to others, and to judge both domestic and external matters. Wherefore he managed many affairs most excellently, not being accustomed to put off business until the morrow. He was a terror not only to the Roman emperors, when he handled public affairs as far as necessity demanded and time required, but also to the Persian leaders, as will be told by me in its proper place. ^B He was also versatile. For sometimes he used great vehemence; at other times he showed himself to be angry. But especially, when there was need, gentleness and mildness shone forth in him to a great degree, so that the prudent saying of Gregory the Theologian could be applied to him most fittingly: that severity was so tempered by reverence that one was not harmed by the other, but both were illuminated by one another.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

But in truth, in the first year of Gregory’s episcopate, the Persarmenians, who had formerly been called inhabitants of Greater Armenia and had obeyed the Romans, but had been betrayed by Philip, who held the empire among the Romans after Gordian, to Sapor the king of the Persians, in such a way that Armenia, which is called the Lesser, remained under Roman rule.

^A And Major Armenia, which observed the sacred rites of the Christians, was given over to the Persians. These Persarmenians, therefore, being treated harshly by the Persians and being compelled by force to transgress their own laws, sent envoys secretly to Justin, praying that they might be received under the dominion of the Romans, so that they might be able to perform their sacred rites to God freely and without molestation, according to the custom of their religion. Justin approved their petitions, and having established certain covenants with them, he confirmed these also by oath. Accordingly, the Persarmenians, having put their own magistrates to death, committed themselves entirely—as the saying goes—to the Roman empire, and having entered into society with the peoples of that same race who were neighbors and foreigners, they brought in Ardaamanes to lead and command them, a man who excelled in lineage, dignity, and also in the practical strategy of warfare.

For this reason, Chosroes complained to the emperor, but was sent away, the emperor saying that he had kept the terms of peace and, moreover, that it was in no way possible for him not to receive Christians who were fleeing to their own kin at a time when the peace had been concluded. The emperor answered these and other similar things; yet, although he spoke in this way, he did not prepare himself for battle, but was given over to his accustomed luxury and pleasure, putting everything else behind his own calculations and delights. He appointed a man who was related to him, Marianus by name, as commander of the Eastern forces and sent him away, without having entrusted him with either a proper army or any significant equipment. ^B He, heading toward manifest danger and—as the saying goes—to the ruin of the East, first went to Mesopotamia, taking with him very few soldiers, and those unarmed, and in addition to them, he brought along diggers, cobblers, and ox-herds, whom he had gathered from wherever possible. And having joined battle with the Persians near Nisibis, when his situation was superior because the Persians were not yet prepared, he chose to besiege the city rather than pursue the enemy. The townspeople, moreover, on account of this contemptible display of such a splendid war effort, did not even close the gates, but even hurled the most shameful insults at the Roman army. Very many prodigies were seen at that time portending the future disasters for the Romans; and a newborn calf was seen at the beginning of the war, from whose neck two heads protruded. ^{C D}

CHAPTER XXXVIII. How Chosroes, having made an incursion into the Eastern empire, captured fortresses and took much booty.

After Chosroes had well equipped himself for war, he drove Ardaamanes off for a certain distance and, having crossed the Euphrates through his own kingdom, ordered him to run into the Roman land through what is called Circesium. Now this Circesium is a very convenient little town, situated at the boundary of the Roman empire; it is in fact most strongly fortified, being surrounded by very solid walls and rising to a great height. Moreover, the rivers Euphrates and Aboras flow around it, and in the form of an island...

^A they render it impregnable. He himself, having crossed the river Tigris with his forces, arrived by forced marches with all speed at Nisibis, which, as it has been said, was being besieged by Marcian. The Romans were ignorant that these things were being done by the Persians; to such a degree that Justin, deceived by the talk of many who reported that Chosroes was already dead or near death, was very angry with Marcian because he was prolonging the siege of Nisibis. He even sent certain men to him to urge him to bring the keys of the gates as quickly as possible. But as the affair did not turn out according to his wishes, and he incurred great shame—as if seeking the impossible regarding such a great city, and that too with an army completely despised and encamped before it—the situation was first reported to Gregory of Theopolis by the bishop of Nisibis. For he was a very great friend to Gregory, from whom he had received ^B a huge sum of money; and besides, he was endeavoring to have his own city return to the power of the Romans, in view of the sufferings it was enduring at the hands of the Persians. Therefore, he signaled to Gregory what was happening in Persia, reporting each thing at its proper time. Gregory, in turn, wrote these things to Justin, informing him also of the sudden expedition of Chosroes. But he, addicted to his accustomed delights and luxury, refrained from giving credence to the bishop’s writings, thinking that to be the case which he himself desired. For in men who live softly and dissolutely, glorious audacity is wont to give way to sloth and neglect; nor do they give credence to the outcomes of events if they obtain a result other than what they themselves wish. Justin, therefore, writing back to Gregory, rejected what he had reported as being entirely false. And even if they were true, he said, the Persians would not prevent the capture of the city; or if they did prevent it, they would nevertheless be repulsed from there shamefully and disgracefully. And ^C having selected a certain Acacius, a man insolent and, you might say, a manifest confusion, he sent him to Marcian with a mandate of such a kind that, even if Marcian had taken the city and had placed one foot inside it, he should immediately lay down his command, and Acacius himself should take it up. This, indeed, he did, executing the emperor’s orders without regard for what was advantageous. For when he arrived, he immediately stripped Marcian of his command in hostile territory, without that fact having been announced to the soldiers. But those who held ranks in the army, when they learned that their general had been deposed from his magistracy, were by no means willing to persevere any longer in the camp; but gradually, wandering off this way and that, they fled, having broken off that laughable siege. Vadaarmanes, meanwhile, leading an army snorting war, ^D and drawing not only from the Persians, but also from the barbarians who are called Scenitae, passed by Circesium and brought the greatest detriment to the affairs of the Romans. For by devastating many places with fire and sword, and by considering or doing nothing moderate—on account of the solitude of the defenders—he captured not a few fortresses. And because no one with authority was there, and moreover because

the greater part of the wall was ruined, the bishop also fled, having carried off the sacred vessels and offerings. The people, attempting rebellion as is customary at such times, also rose up. Among other things, they too, having contemplated flight, left the city deserted, with no one remaining to offer any resistance or attempt any defense. ^A When Vadaarmanes was repelled after an initial assault, he set fire first to Heraclea, and subsequently to the city called Gagalica, and advanced toward Seleucia, which Nicanor Seleucus had founded, a city once prosperous and populous, but which had declined over time, and had become quite small. And since it was unable to resist him, he entered it by means of a certain agreement, contrary to the terms arranged, and having utterly sacked the whole city, he departed, after having plundered the surrounding areas. Among his prisoners he held the bishop of the city and the one appointed to the magistracy. ^B He also committed terrible atrocities in his withdrawal, as no one opposed him, except for a few soldiers sent by the Emperor, whom Magnus led; he had previously been in charge of the silver exchange in the imperial city, and later taken on the administration of one of the imperial houses. They fled headlong, having nearly been taken as prisoners of war. ^C Having accomplished these things, Vadaarmanes found that Chosroes had not yet taken the city he was besieging. His arrival, however, brought him great momentum, which both encouraged his own men and greatly terrified the enemy. He found the city denuded of its wall, and a massive embankment made near it. The Helepoles (siege towers) stood ready, and the catapults—which the common people are accustomed to call stone-throwing machines—from an elevated position, by means of which Chosroes brought the city under his power during the winter season. ^D John, the son of Timostratus, was in charge of it; he did not care in the least about the siege, but rather even betrayed it, for this was what was rumored at that time. Chosroes besieged it for five months and a few days more, and captured it, with almost no one defending it. And having led the citizens out of the city in a great multitude, he partly cut them down with the sword, and partly kept them alive in captivity. He kept the city itself, as it was well-situated and convenient, having placed a garrison in it; he himself, proud of this trophy, returned home.

CHAPTER XXXIX

How Justin rendered by immense grief, fell into a phrenetic disease; and Tiberius administered the state; and how Tiberius, attacking Chosroes with a certain craft, made peace with him.

Having learned this, Justin, thinking nothing sound or sensible, nor even humanly regarding what had happened

fell into phrenitis and madness, ^A so that he understood absolutely nothing of what was occurring. The administration of the empire, however, began to be handled by Tiberius, who held the chief honor under Justin, and was of Thracian origin. Justin had previously sent this man with many myriads of soldiers against the Avars: and he would have been captured immediately in the first engagement by them, his soldiers being utterly unable to sustain the sight of the barbarians, had not divine providence snatched him from thence and clearly preserved him for the Roman empire, which was at that final extremity, in danger of collapsing through the irrational actions of Justin, together with the commonwealth, and of falling under the power of the barbarians. ^B Therefore, with Justin thus wretchedly afflicted and perceiving nothing of what was being done, Tiberius devised a plan highly appropriate to the circumstances, by which he corrected every misfortune and error. For he sent to Chosroes a certain Trajan, an illustrious man of the senate, who in gray hairs and wisdom excelled many, and he instituted the embassy not in the name of the empire or the commonwealth, but solely in the name of Sophia Augusta, the wife of Justin: whose letters were also carried to King Chosroes, in which she deplored the misfortune and fall of her husband and the commonwealth deprived of its prince; adding that it was ^C by no means honorable for him to insult a widowed woman, one prone before a prince, and a perturbed commonwealth. "For even you," she wrote, "when you were ill, not only fell into a similar misfortune, but even the most renowned of physicians from Roman dominion were sent to you, who by their art and due care dispelled your sickness." Hearing such an embassy, Chosroes was swayed; and though he had intended at the first opportunity to undertake an expedition into Roman territory, he nevertheless granted a three-year truce to the eastern parts: so that he might, however, attack Armenia, which had prepared war against him, without the eastern affairs being disturbed. Moreover, with the affairs of the East brought into this state, Sirmium was captured by the barbarians, which the Gepidae had formerly held and had granted to Justin, departing from it of their own accord.

CAPUT XL.

In this meantime, Tiberius, at the prompting of Sophia, was declared Caesar by Justin, who was recovering slightly from his illness. But when he was about to impose upon him the imperial crown, he spoke to him in clear words that ^D far excel all history, ancient and new. For when Justin was conveniently in his right mind during a lucid interval—and that by divine providence, so that he might at once both bring forth his own sins and faults and introduce a better order into the commonwealth—and when everyone, and even John, the head of sacred things, whom we mentioned earlier, along with his priests, were gathered in the open air, or the uncovered palace of the imperial hall, where it is customary for such things to be performed, taking up the imperial crown, and

the purple robe; and preparing to place these upon Tiberius, who had previously been count of the ^A Excubitors, he spoke with such boldness: "Let not this phantom of imagination, my best of men, or this display and vestment deceive you; by which I myself, being led astray further than was fitting, failed to notice that I was rendering myself liable to the ultimate penalties. But it shall be your care to redress my sins as well. You will redress them if you govern the republic both well and benignly; and do not by any means choose to be persuaded by these (pointing to the princes), for they themselves cast me into the wretchedness ^B you now behold." He brought forward other things of this same kind, which moved his hearers to alarm and copious tears. Finally, above all he added: "Honor God and His Church, which was once your mistress and lady, but is now your mother. Let those who have wealth keep it; to those who lack it, distribute it. Direct your mind toward all men in the same way as toward yourself. Know who you were, and who you are this day. If you do not wish to sin, do not be arrogant and proud. For you see yourself who I was but a short while ago, and what I am today. Love the poor above all; and let alms not fail from your hand." When prayer had ^C been offered by the bishop, Tiberius threw himself at the emperor's feet. But he, taking him up, said: "If you wish, I am; if you do not wish, I am not. May God, who made heaven and earth, Himself implant in your heart all things I have forgotten to tell you, strengthening and instructing you in His most holy fear, through which all good things may be rightly and happily brought to fruition for you."

Having spent four years in the empire together with Tiberius, Justin the Younger departed this life. He alone governed the empire for twelve years and ten and a half months; with Tiberius for four years, less one month, so that all the years of his imperial reign are sixteen, and nine and a half months. This Justin, whatever temples Justinian had built with great liberality, he adorned with additions, offerings, and many sacred vessels; and the dome of the Great Church, which had fallen in, he raised by fifteen cubits and restored it most gracefully, as it is seen today. And though he was most pious, he was nevertheless extremely dissolute in his daily life. This seventeenth book of my histories embraces a period of sixty-four years, ^D when the six thousand ninety-eighth year since the creation of the world, and the five hundred ninety-third since the divine birth of our Lord, was being completed.

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY VOLUME XVIII

CHAPTER I Concerning the reign of the Emperor Tiberius; and how kingly and magnificent he was.

^A Having taken up the imperial sovereignty, Tiberius turned himself to all parts of the state, working to restore the civil discipline as correctly as possible, and that by excellent leadership he might strengthen and recover the entire dominion of the Roman Empire. Tiberius was of a stature of body that was tall, and in countenance most becoming, not only among those who were in high positions, but among almost all men, so that his appearance was worthy of the throne, while his soul was gentle, and he rejoiced in human kindness and mercy ^B if anyone did—welcoming all, one might say, by his mere gaze. He considered it a greater wealth and a brilliant abundance for himself to dispense riches not only for necessity, but also for over-abundance to others. For he did not reflect upon what it might be fitting for the petitioner to receive, but what it was fitting for a Roman emperor to give. And if any gold ever came to him that had been collected through tears and violence, he considered it bastard currency, polluted by rust. For this reason, he remitted the annual tax to all his subjects. And all the lands that Vadaarmanes had ravaged in his expedition, he gifted with complete immunity and liberty, far beyond the measure of the damage they had suffered. He also forgave the illegal subsidies to those holding magistracies and honors, by which the former emperors had been accustomed to sell their own subjects; on account of which things he also issued written decrees, so that nothing of the sort might be committed in the future.

CHAPTER II

And so, having put to good use the moneys that had not been collected rightly, he armed himself magnificently for the war to be brought against the enemies. And indeed, having collected a heroic army from the peoples around the Alps and those who dwelt about the Rhine, and furthermore from the Massagetae, the Paeonians, and the Mysians, together with the Illyrians and Isaurians, and having selected from the Scythian race those who were best of all—so that he had one hundred and fifty thousand of the finest cavalry—he set out against Chosroes. The latter, immediately after the capture of the fortress of Dara, had come into Armenia, and intended around the time of harvest to march toward Caesarea, which, having been allotted the principal place among the Cappadocian nation, held the first rank among the other cities. Indeed, he despised the Roman state to such a degree that even when ambassadors arrived to see him, he did not deign to look upon them, but ordered them to follow him as far as Caesarea, there to hear their requests and, having deliberated upon the embassy, to give an answer. Yet when he arrived there, and saw the Roman army which had arrived before him (commanded by Justinian, who was the brother of that Justin who had been wretchedly put to death by Justin the Emperor; he too was highly skilled in warfare), and the army was drawn up for battle; and the trumpets were sounding the ^B martial note, and all the signs of battle were visible; and the general himself, breathing forth courage along with the utmost discipline, was calling out in front, and such a body of cavalry was present as no king had ever before imagined—Chosroes, struck with amazement at what had been done, and at the suddenness and the result beyond his expectations, groaned from the depths of his being, and gave a hollow cry, and would not begin the battle. While he was wasting time and scheming to delay, Curs the Scythian, who had been entrusted with the command of the right wing, made an attack. And as the Persians were unable to withstand his dense charge, and abandoned their order, a great slaughter of the enemy took place. Afterward, he fell upon those at the rear, where the baggage train of Chosroes and of the rest of the army with him was located. And indeed, he seized all his treasures and the remainder of his stores, while Chosroes watched, yet found his own retreat more bearable ^C than the leading of Curs. But the latter, having suddenly become master of great wealth, led away the beasts of burden along with their loads; among which was also the fire venerated by them, which they worship as God. Singing a paean, he rode around the Persian camp and reached his own battle line about the first lighting of the lamps, without having left their own formation, nor being attacked by Chosroes, nor even having joined battle—save for a few skirmishes that had occurred, or one or two of the leaders from both armies having grappled with each other, as is wont to happen. ^D

Chosroes, having lit many fires during that night, attempted to engage in night-fighting. And when the Roman army had been divided into two parts, in the depth of the night he fell upon those who were keeping night-watch near the northern part; upon their being scattered by the unexpected nature of the incursion, he fell suddenly upon Melitene, which was nearby. Being destitute of inhabitants and unguarded, it was burned by the Persians, who were also preparing for the crossing of the Euphrates. But as the Roman army, having rallied, followed behind, Chosroes, fearing for his own safety, mounted an elephant and crossed the river. A great number of the army around him used the river as a tomb; and, having received many who were suffocated by the waters, he departed. And having paid such a final penalty for the injuries he had inflicted upon the Roman Empire, he ^B proceeded further into the eastern regions, where he had such a truce as prevented anyone from attacking him. Justinian, however, with his whole army, invaded Persia; and having spent the winter there, he found no one to resist him: and without having lost any of his army, he left that place around the summer solstice. With much straightforwardness and glorious renown, he continued harvesting [victory] around the borders. From that point, Chosroes, being in despair after his affairs, and consumed by intense grief, and disheartened by the reversal of fortune, departed this life with disgrace: leaving behind him—as a kind of eternal pillar and monument to his flight—that law: that no future king of the Persians should lead an army against the Romans. After him, the rule passed to his son Hormisdas, of whom I shall speak in what follows.

CAPUT III. Concerning the earthquake that occurred in Antioch and in the village called Daphne.

The third year of the reign of Tiberius was already underway: and a tremendous earthquake occurred again in Antioch and at Antioch—this having happened around midday—and it shook public and private buildings, shattering them even to their very foundations, though it did not cast them down to the ground. But ^C all of Daphne, as if having become a subsequent work of it, fell to ruin. And other things also occurred then, not only in Theopolis but even in the imperial city itself—things worthy of mention and of narration—which agitated and terrified those cities with the greatest disturbances. And since these had taken their beginning from divine zeal and emulation, they also met with a befitting conclusion.

CAPUT IV. Concerning Anatolius the sorcerer, and the fraudulent intrigues against Gregory, bishop of Theopolis.

For there was a certain Anatolius in Theopolis, one of the common people, indeed, and of the obscure class, but who later thrust himself into many and various affairs, and particularly managed the matters of the people of Theopolis: and for this reason he had entered into the friendship of Gregory, the prelate of the sacred affairs of that city ^D

^A This Anatolius, having been convicted of paying attention to the sacrifices of idols, was found to be a most execrable person, captured along with others in grievous and absurd transgressions. However, having overcome the prefect of the East with gifts, it lacked little but that he should have escaped together with his accomplices (for many had been seized as partakers in his sin). But the multitude, in a state of agitated motion, opposed this plan. They murmured also against the prelate, as if he himself were a companion of those detestable men. A certain seditious and pestilent demon had persuaded some that Gregory had also sacrificed with Anatolius. And for this he was nearly killed by the plebs, who were vehemently hostile and enraged. And the rumor of this matter ^B spread to such a degree that the Emperor Tiberius himself wished to investigate the truth of the accusation by no other means than through the voice of Anatolius himself. Therefore, he ordered Anatolius and those who had been captured with him to come to Constantinople. When Anatolius learned of this, he ran to the image of the Theotokos, which was hanging by a cord somewhere in the prison, with his hands turned behind his back, after the manner of one suppliant and begging. But she, at once detesting that impure and execrable man, and at the same time reproaching him for so great a crime, turned herself away from him in every direction: a marvel filled with horror and worthy to be remembered forever; which all the prisoners who were being kept in custody, and those to whom the care of the prison had been entrusted, saw with their own eyes and reported to all. The image itself also appeared to certain of the faithful, inciting them to avenge the insult to herself, ^C saying that injury had been contumeliously done by Anatolius to her Son. When, however, Anatolius had reached Byzantium and had been tortured with the extremities of scourges, he said nothing against the bishop. But even there, he and his accomplices were the cause of great evils and sedition for the people. For when, through the passing of sentences, it had been judged that some were not to be put to death but were to be punished by ostracism, the people, inflamed with divine zeal, filled the whole city with a turbulent movement: and raging, and bearing that matter heavily, they seized those who had been condemned to exile, and placing them on fishing boats, they burned them alive. And when the people had passed such a sentence, then they also cast insults at the emperor, and cried out against their bishop Eutychius, as if they had cast aside the faith. Indeed, the multitude would have tracked down and killed Eutychius also, ^D and those to whom the inquiry had been entrusted, in all places, had not divine Providence, which governs all things, snatched those men from the midst of them, and gradually extinguished the heat of the raging multitude so that no further absurdity was committed. Moreover, Anatolius was first thrown to the beasts in the amphitheater, and having been abundantly torn apart by them, he was afterwards fixed to a cross. But not even thus was he finished with the punishment for his impious crimes. For indeed...

^A one who was in charge of the imperial households, although he was well-disposed toward Anatolius, declared that he had seen the Mother of God reproaching him more sternly, and as if she were saying: "How long, then, will you champion Anatolius, who has so impudently and excessively mocked both me and my Son?" But these things happened in this way.

CHAPTER V.

How Tiberius appointed Maurice general of the East, and, being at the point of death, named him emperor.

Tiberius, moreover, when he learned that Justinian was not conducting affairs against the barbarians with the same success as before, relieved him of the dignity of the Oriental prefecture after the death of Justin ^B and, having long since assumed the imperial crown, appointed Maurice as general of the forces in the East—who, a little later, also became the successor of Tiberius. Concerning him we shall speak shortly in his proper place. For what kind of man he was and how great, is to be gathered from his reign, which ^C revealed him to men more clearly and manifest, since it gave him the sovereign power to do whatever he wished. From this cause it also happened that his domestic and private affairs were brought into the public view. This Maurice, therefore, having received the military forces, advanced beyond the borders of the Roman empire, and attacked and captured whatever fortresses of the Persians were situated in convenient and advantageous places; and he took away such plunder that he was able to settle colonists in cities, islands, and fields which had previously been deserted, and to prepare lands which had lain empty for a long time for the abundant bearing of fruit through cultivation. From these colonists he also enrolled strenuous and brave troops, who showed exceptional martial strength against other nations as well. He also brought it about that all houses were filled with servants, and that, in the ^D abundant supply of all things, everything could be acquired easily and at a low price. He also fought against the bravest of the Persians, those most celebrated for their generalship: namely, that Tamichosroes and Adaarmanes, who met him in battle with very powerful armies. But how he acted and what he accomplished in the battle joined with them, it is not easy for me to say at present, as I am hastening to other things that are part of my design; yet it is certain that Tamichosroes fell in the encounter—not through the valor of the Roman army, but by the pure faith in God and the piety of the general alone. Adaarmanes, however, departing from the battle, fled with all the reins loosened to the full, having lost no small number of his own men; for Alamundarus, who led the Scenite barbarians, had betrayed the victory, seeing that he had refused to cross the Euphrates and be present in battle with Maurice, who was fighting against the Scenite Arabs. For that tribe of Arabs is most invincible, mounted on swiftest horses and, as it were, outstripping the winds, neither being captured if it should happen to be hemmed in, and above all, also outstripping its opponents in retreats. But neither did Theodoric, who [led] the Scythian...

orders, take part in the battle; but, standing as far as possible beyond the reach of missiles, he committed himself and his men to a headlong flight. Returning from there with magnificent trophies, he celebrated a triumph and was celebrated by the mouths of all men. Advancing by the way of highest honor, he even ascended to the imperial summit, when the end of life was already at hand for Tiberius, who gave his daughter, Augusta, to him, and with her, in place of a dowry, the empire itself. He did not indeed spend a very long time in the empire, but nevertheless left behind a memorial for all eternity through the deeds which he performed well during his life. To cover these with words does not seem so easy. But the greatest of his deeds, and a kind of inheritance which he left to the empire after himself, is that he proclaimed Maurice, an admirable man, emperor. He even bestowed his own names upon his son-in-law and daughter, imposing the name of Tiberius upon Maurice, and that of Constantina upon Augusta. ^B Therefore, when Tiberius saw that he was henceforth to depart from this life and yield to the laws of nature—a black bile afflicting him—Maurice was proclaimed emperor, and, young in the purple, partook of imperial honor and dignity. For Tiberius, having been carried on a litter, summoned to the open courtyard of the imperial palace him who held the hierarchical see (John was at that time still guiding the helm of the Church), and furthermore gathered the assembly of sacred dignities, as well as his own bodyguard and those who were counted in the imperial honor. Then he also summoned whoever were prominent among the people, where John, a man of oratory and learned in Roman laws—who, boasting of a fluent tongue, was wont to proclaim the commands of the emperor in grandiloquent style, whom the Romans in their local tongue call quaestor—spoke in his name. The emperor was therefore present at the election of the new emperor, together with his daughter Constantina, whom he had given to Maurice as a partner in life and fortune. But before the proclamation of the new emperor was promulgated, he addressed the assembly as follows:

CAPUT VI.

Oration of Emperor Tiberius at the election and designation of Maurice, delivered to the people.

^D “Roman men, a name most renowned among all nations, and on account of the amplitude of [its] glory most celebrated on the tongues of all: great cares and anxieties now encompass me. For one of these—that I should rightly order those things which I must leave behind—presses upon me; the other, [the fact] that I am to be separated from you by my departure, terrifies me. For it compels me to render an account of this life spent here to the Creator of the universe. And now the liberty and security I once enjoyed have been turned into great trepidation. For those to whom a more extensive power of doing what they wish is present, are accustomed to be followed by more sins.

^A I have taken up this burden not as it happened to fall, but as one who might govern it well. For it is not even pledged to me for the sake of luxury and the pampering of the body. Indeed, not only does fortune consume me, but nature itself does as well. For the empire, a wife, and children all crowd in upon me at once: the empire seeking a wise leader, the wife a most equitable protector for her widowhood, and the children—their immature age exposed—seeking a guide, especially given the extreme weakness of the female nature. But I often despise the bond of nature when the illness bears down; I even despise the children, and I count the wife as nothing, seeming to myself to be already dying, and thus I attain freedom from such solicitude. Yet I barely lay aside such thoughts when the care of the empire invades me. ^B For it is not only the greatest of all contests to preserve the entrusted scepter as is fitting, but also to pass on the lot to those who ought to hold it. To me, it has been reckoned as a great justice that successors should be superior to the preceding rulers, so that they might correct the errors of those others. If this does not happen, the whole dominion of the empire, because it rests on weak foundations, must inevitably slip and collapse. While my mind was being consumed by such cares, Providence, which looks upon all things, came to the aid of our labors, and having auspiciously directed our counsel, confirmed it with its own authority, and declared him who is to rule magnificently after me: this Maurice here, a man most useful and capable for Roman affairs, who has endured many great struggles, and who has deposited, so to speak, a certain earnest-money as a pledge of his future care and providence for the citizens and subjects in the republic. Him, this day, you shall behold as emperor. With such persuasion and confidence do I admit him to the greatest of all administrations—not in the least faltering or erring in my mind—that I entrust to him not only the empire, but also my little daughter, thereby heartening you with such a guarantee of his nature. ^C This, I believe, I am also to carry with me as a provision of consolation for that long and irrevocable migration from which there is no returning. You yourselves are for me worthy and faithful witnesses of this most beautiful arrangement, from the fact of your having tested those who long ago administered our empire, and especially this man, who has followed us most prudently. But you, Maurice, proceed to make your empire a most beautiful epitaph for me, and adorn my tomb with your virtues, neither disappointing the hope of those who have been entrusted to you through any disgrace, nor yourself forgetting your own virtues, nor fleeing, as it were, from the original nobility of your soul. ^D Whence, also, as if with a bridle, curb the arrogance of power, and steer the ship of state with philosophy. For the empire is a high and lofty thing, lifting the one who sits above it to a great height, while prying apart his reason. But you should believe that you do not surpass all in wisdom, even if you surpass them in the circumstances of fortune, and have been set up on high above everyone. As for the goodwill or the fear of your subjects,

^A love the former rather than the latter, and embrace reproof—as you would a teacher—rather than flattery. For authority is by nature somewhat incorrigible and least of all tolerates instruction. Let Justice stand before your eyes, keeping vigil and presiding over the recompense of deeds lived. Consider also the purple a cheap rag cast upon you for the sake of philosophy; and as for the crown that encircles you, think that it in no way differs from the pebbles washed by the waves upon the seashore. The somber bloom of the purple garment seems to me to exhort kings to practice moderation in times of success, and not to be puffed up or to act arrogantly in this mournful robe of monarchy; for the scepter of royalty does not profess an unrestrained authority, but rather a glorious servitude. Let humanity and mercy lead [you] in anger, and let fear lead [you] in pride. For even among bees, nature has appointed leaders, and has armed their king with a sting, as if inducing a kind of spontaneous power into him, so that he might even have the ability to strike one who does not obey as he ought. But that sting is least of all tyrannical, but is rather for public benefit and is just. Therefore, we shall be imitators of that [bee], if reason itself is not able to suggest better counsel. These things I, as a proclaimer, [set forth]; but you shall have Authority as the judge of your mind, incorruptible by all affection and gifts, both rewarding virtues and chastising vices.

CAPUT VII. On the vision and death of the Emperor Tiberius.

^C Since, therefore, the emperor had brought his discourse to an end, the citizens and subjects, because of the sorrow by which they were afflicted, poured forth a great flood of tears. Then the emperor, having taken up the crown and the purple chlamys, placed them upon Caesar. And a great shout of acclamation from the subjects resounded. For some admired the author of such sound counsel, and others the one who had been proclaimed; to whom [the emperor] had entrusted himself as worthy of such great rule. Both parties praised the author of all these things, as one who had managed everything advantageously. And when the matters of the proclamation had been carried out according to the imperial customs, the emperor retired to his own bed and saw a vision in a dream. For there seemed to be a man of exceedingly beautiful appearance, unutterable in speech and inimitable in writing; ^D a white garment adorned the place around him.

^A This man, with hand outstretched, addressed these words to him: "To you, Tiberius, the Thrice-Holy One declares: The tyrants of impiety shall not haunt your imperial times." Awakening, he recounted the dream, and then submitted to the laws of nature, even though he was an emperor; he laid aside his earthly tunic, his soul abandoning it like a sort of tent and flying off to the supernal abodes, having ruled for four years. When he was laid in the imperial sepulcher, all men turned to Maurice, just as satellites [turn]; and the tears which had followed the funeral of Tiberius were quenched on that very day. For men are not as accustomed to remember things past as they are to care for and honor the things present. ^B

CHAPTER VIII.

When Maurice had assumed the empire, and had sufficiently mourned the emperor, he first made preparations for his marriage; and, as is the custom for emperors, he took to himself Augusta, who was also called Constantina, in a solemn imperial union. The nuptials were celebrated with truly imperial magnificence, and splendid banquets were provided for the people throughout the city. Real piety toward God and imperial Majesty were present at such a spectacle, most becomingly attending Maurice and his spouse, and offering gifts to them in the most honorable manner. For indeed, reverence toward God fulfilled the role of father and mother—a thing hitherto unknown in history—sanctifying the marriage with venerable gray hair and the dignity of wrinkles, and with handsome brothers adorning the nuptial procession. She provided a robe woven of gold, adorned with purple and Indian pearls, and crowns resplendent with much gold and translucent stones; and she stirred up all those who held magistracies and offices so that, crowned in such a way that they might be distinguished, they carried nuptial torches and celebrated the wedding assembly with hymns and songs. ^C So that one might guess that nothing more splendid than this display had ever appeared among men. Demophilus, indeed, in his account of Roman affairs, says that Plutarch of Chaeronea explicitly stated that it was for the sake of the city of Rome alone that Virtue and Fortune had made a pact with each other. But I would say that true piety toward God and happiness also converged, initialized in a union, in Maurice alone; for piety brought happiness under its own power and did not allow it to wander or fail at all. Furthermore, Maurice made it his aim to wear the purple and the crown not only on his body but also in his soul. For he alone among his predecessors ruled over himself; and being truly an emperor, he drove the tyranny of the passions from his own soul, and having established an aristocracy of his own reason, he provided himself as a living image of virtue, training his subjects in imitation. ^D This one [was such that]...

(1) Paul Deacon writes that Tiberius ruled for... four years: Evagrius [writes] four years, [L: lib. v, cap. 23], so that the remaining three he ruled with Justin.

^A A prince of this kind cast out of his own mind the ochlocracy, or turbulent state, and established in his thoughts and counsels an aristocracy, or government of the best men, offering himself as a living statue of virtue to instruct citizens and subjects in his own imitation. He drew his name and older lineage from ancient Rome, but he claimed his closer kinship from Arabissus, his fatherland, which belongs to the Cappadocian nation. He was a man most prudent and skillful, and in his daily life and diet he was extremely temperate. He did not indulge his belly, using only necessary and frugal foods, and he showed himself constant and unmovable in all matters. He did not easily allow himself to be approached or met by many, nor in listening to men was he lax or remiss. For the one brings about contempt, while the other provides an entrance for flattery. Therefore, he did not provide access to himself frequently, and he only admitted to himself those who were to transact weighty business, shutting and sealing his ears against useless and foolish talk: not, however, with wax, as in the poets, but rather by reason, most conveniently, as if with a key; thus he applied to them a timeliness combined with measure, which in conversations would rightly and opportunely open and close a discourse. ^B Indeed, he so cast off ignorance, the parent of recklessness and ferocity, and timidity, its companion and associate, that the undertaking of things to be done was a sign of well-begun counsel, while intermission and delay were signs of certain security, as in the meantime fortitude and prudence adapted themselves to the time, and turned the rudders toward conducting affairs as was useful, seeing to it that the relaxation and intensity of his undertakings were instituted with a certain moderation and order.

CAPUT IX. What omens preceded and betokened the empire to Maurice.

^C Prodigies also happened by divine ordinance which betokened the empire to Maurice. For when, deep in the night, he was inside the palace, and was offering the holy incense in the basilica of the temple of the Mother of God—which received the name of "the Justinian" from the people of Antioch—the veil that covers the sacrosanct table caught fire and burned, so that Maurice, cast into stupor and consternation, was terrified by the event. ^D Gregory, however, the hierarch of that city, who was present there, said that this was something divine, and warned that it betokened new and sublime things. Again, when Maurice was once in the East, Christ appeared to him while he was awake and manifest, and sought from him that he should avenge the insults offered to Him. This, indeed, was a certain divination of his empire. For from whom else would Christ seek vengeance, if not from the emperor, and one so pious toward Him? Other things, too, worthy of record, were reported by those who brought him into the light. For his father related that when he was about to beget him, he saw in a dream a very great vine that sprouted from his own bedchamber, and brought forth, all at once, very many ripe clusters of grapes, which hung round about. His mother, for her part, at the time of the birth, said that a certain new and varied fragrance of sweetness arose from the earth. And as for this old tale, it indeed seemed to me, for a time, incredible, many times...

adding that often she who is called Empusa—or as another might say, Gilo—had carried the infant out of the bedroom as if to devour him, but had been unable to inflict any harm upon him. But even that Symeon who lived near Antioch, having taken up his station on a pillar, being as practical as any man could be and most distinguished in successive virtues, announced to him not only many things through divination, but also performed many acts, betrothing him to the imperial throne. Such, indeed, was Maurice; and, having been both nurtured and educated by such people and in such a manner, he approached the enviable throne as a bridegroom and emperor at the same time, having brought into his home as his wife the Augusta, who was also called Constantina. What things were actually accomplished by him, the subsequent history will declare, with the divine providence guiding the course of events.

CAPUT X. OF THE CLEMENCY AND MERCY OF MAURICE, AND THE MILITARY ADMINISTRATION OF PHILIPPICUS

^B That, therefore, was his primary zeal: not to shed the blood of anyone who was accused of rebellion and lese-majesty. Thus, he did not put to death Alamundarus, the leader of the Scenite barbarians, who had betrayed the republic, but commanded that he be deported, along with his wife and certain of his children, to an island in Sicily. He did the same for his son, Naamanes, who had been an utter stain and disgrace to the civil administration, and who had committed so many heinous crimes in both Phoenicis and both Palestinas that his barbarian cohorts had plundered and ravaged those provinces, and all men had voted that he be sentenced to capital punishment. When Alamundarus had been captured by the Romans, and all were sentencing Naamanes to capital punishment, Maurice himself kept the man in free custody and ordained nothing more severe regarding him, just as he had done in the cases of many ^C others. As general of the Eastern forces, he first appointed John, Thracian by race, who, having acted wrongly in some matters and rightly in others, achieved nothing particularly worthy of memory. After him, this prefecture was entrusted to Philippicus, a close associate of Maurice; for he had married his sister, Gordia, in lawful wedlock. Having progressed beyond the border, he laid everything waste and seized enormous booty; many of the nobility of Nisibis, as if doing something else, he made the secondary work of iron and swords. Furthermore, he waged war at the river Tigris as well. A great conflict having taken place with the Persians, many of the enemy, who were superior to others, fell in battle, and not a few were taken alive. Moreover, he could have captured a certain cohort of the Persians which had taken up a position in an opportune place on a hill, but he allowed them to go free, having suffered no harm, since they had promised that they would persuade their king at the first available opportunity to send ambassadors to him regarding peace. Furthermore, he performed many other things admirably during his prefecture, when by the army...

^A he had rejected whatever was soft and useless, and had brought all things under control, as if by certain bridles, for honest discipline and good order. Regarding these things, I have deemed it fair to leave it to other writers to recount; for their discourse, stumbling through the slipperiness of ignorance, and partially indulging itself through affection, or even serving hatred, for the most part wanders far from the truth.

CAPUT XI.

Concerning the facility and simple equipment of Priscus the general. And how the army rejected him, and chose Germanus to lead the army.

To him, once the prefecture of the military forces had been accepted, succeeded Priscus: who himself did not easily allow himself to be seen, and was approached only by those necessary to him and his friends, thinking that he would achieve many things specifically by not appearing in public, and not making himself common to all: just as if, for that reason, the soldiers who were subject to his power, induced by fear, would be obedient to his commands. But after he had proceeded to the army with his brow lifted, and ^B superbly arrayed in splendor, and had spoken to the soldiers certain words about fortitude in war, and more accurate armor, and then about the rewards which they were to receive from the public treasury—things which they already knew beforehand—the anger of the soldiers burst forth into the open. And so, an attack having been made on his tent, after the manner of brigands or barbarians, they plundered whatever they found there; and whatever items he had that were splendidly prepared and of great value, they carried off. He himself would have been slaughtered during this tumult of the army, had he not mounted a horse and fled to Edessa. A portion of the forces having been sent there, demanding the fugitive leader for themselves, they began to besiege the city. But when the Edessenes did not do this, they indeed left Priscus alone, but Germanus, ^C the commander of the military ranks in Libanesia of Phoenicia, having been greatly pressured by them, they chose as their leader; and it wanted little, as far as it depended on them, that they even designated him emperor. For after they had laid hands on the man by force, and he resisted them vehemently, a contention arose between them both: he indeed struggling not to be overcome by force, while they labored so that they might carry out what they had begun, to such an extent that they threatened him with death as well, if he did not willingly accept. But when he showed that he preferred this, they turned to certain outrages and shameful tortures, thinking that he would not be able to endure them; for they thought he would not so disregard his own nature and age. And they began to inflict these terrible things, ^D proceeding with the test with a certain reverence and holding back. But as he remained even then eager against these things, at last they compelled him to swear by an oath, that he would indeed keep faith with them, and would rule those who were ruled, and hold command over those who were held, and be a master to those who desired to serve him. As for all the captains, or centurions, and chiliarchs, or those who were in charge of centuries or decades, these they drove out from among themselves, and chose in their stead those whom they wished, entrusting them with the commands; and they openly insulted the imperial authority; and they were becoming milder towards the tributaries of the barbarians than they were to their own fellow-soldiers.

^A For as to whether they acted the part of citizens or allies, or how else I might describe it, they were utterly alienated; they did not obtain their rations for themselves by any measures or weight, nor were they content with what had been allotted from of old; but whatever counsel and will suggested to each man, that was his law, and his accepted measure. When the emperor learned of these things, he sent Philippicus, his brother-in-law, to set these things straight once more; but the army did not receive him; and they knew what and how much was fitting for him either by birth or by disposition, and he would have incurred the ultimate danger had he not persisted in silence. While matters were thus unsettled, Gregory, the prelate of Theopolis, departed from the imperial city, having won that celebrated struggle, which it would not be out of place for me to recount here.

CHAPTER XII: On the dispute between Asterius and Gregory, bishop of Theopolis; and how Gregory won his case.

At that time a certain Asterius was governing the East. When a dispute arose between him and Gregory, the leading men of the city, favoring Asterius, followed his hostile side. ^B The same was done by a large part of the population and by the craftsmen. For everyone contended as if he himself had suffered the most grievous injury. The common people were permitted to attack the pontiff with insults; and taking common counsel, all of them went about in the public streets and theaters, and they rejoiced, laughing at the insults that were cast at the bishop. From these things, even the stage-performers themselves did not abstain. For this reason, the magistracy is taken away from Asterius; and a certain John, at the emperor’s command, enters, having been ordered to hold an inquiry about the matters raised and to investigate the primary cause of the contention that had been stirred up: a man not very great, nor very prudent, ^C and who was unable not only to judge such a great case, but not even to resolve or accurately understand a small, trifling dispute. Furthermore, when he had filled the city of Antioch ^D with great tumults against the prelate, and had posted edicts that, if anyone wished to proceed in law against him, he was prepared to receive it, he accepted no small number of petitions against the prelate from certain overseers of money-changing tables; in these, Gregory was accused of having lived in incest with his own sister, who was married to another man; furthermore, that he had frequently disturbed the happy and peaceful state of the city. But the charge regarding the disturbed city he refuted as best he could. Concerning the remaining charges, however, he appealed to the judgment and cognizance of the emperor and the synod. And so he came to Constantinople to plead his case. Present there to judge were the patriarchs from every region; some of them

^A came of their own accord, others were summoned. Not a few, moreover, were those who presided over metropolitan sees; and further, the greater part of the sacred senate was present. The matter having been examined with precision by all of them, after much struggle and contention, the bishop emerged victorious in the case, in such a way that the accuser himself was scourged with ox-hide thongs, led around the marketplace, and then punished with ostracism. Having been acquitted, therefore, Gregory went up again to his own see. At that time, the military forces were in rebellion, for the most part acting insubordinately and spurning the imperial bridle. Philippicus, meanwhile, was staying near the cities of Berrhoea and Chalcis, observing whither the outcome of the matter would tend.

CAPUT XIII. Concerning the greatest and most severe earthquakes: and how in Antioch alone sixty thousand men were overwhelmed by the ruins.

Four months after the arrival of Gregory had passed, and after one and sixty years had elapsed since the former, more severe earthquakes, around the third hour of the night, ^B a sudden and immense tremor accompanied by a loud roar broke forth, which shook the entire city of Antioch from its very foundations. It brought down buildings that had been raised on high, and whatever was established on bases and supports it lifted up, casting them from the lower parts into the air; so that it came to pass that all the structures around the most holy church were borne headlong to the ground, with the exception of the hemisphere, which remained in its place—which Ephraemius the bishop had constructed from the timber of the grove of Daphne, when the earthquake occurred under Justin. For because of the other earthquakes it had been inclined toward the northern side; therefore, it had the timbers that supported it, which at that time had been brought to that position by the great and violent force of the shaking, and the hemisphere had subsided, and as if by some rule it returned to its own place. ^C Furthermore, many of the structures of the area called Ostracina were shaken and collapsed, as well as the famous Psephium by it; and also the buildings called in the vernacular tongue Brysia, and those around the sanctuary of the Theotokos near the gate, which alone was miraculously preserved. But even all the towers of the plain suffered greatly, with the other fortifications remaining untouched, except for the battlements alone; and of these, some stones were turned in the opposite direction without falling. Many other sacred shrines also shared in the disaster, and both of the public baths, which were situated at opposite quarters, collapsed into that ^D unsightly state from their former beauty. A great multitude of the common people was buried in the ruins, so that some, making a conjecture based on the grain supply, estimate that around sixty thousand people perished in that calamity. Gregory himself, the bishop of the city, was saved beyond all hope. For the roof and the dwelling where he was sitting collapsed shortly thereafter upon him; and no one else escaped that danger except for him and those who were standing around him. They, having lifted the bishop from the debris along with his couch, lowered him, suspended by a rope, having cleared out another place from the earthquake's site through which they brought out those who were standing...

^A in danger. And another thing also happened which was beneficial to the city: the benevolent God, by His kindness and gentleness, restrained His threats, and intended to chasten the vices of men with the rod of pity and mercy. For no conflagration had occurred, even though there was much fire everywhere in the city—in the hearths themselves, of course, and in public and private lamps, in furnaces, baths, kitchens, and other workshops where craftsmen exercise their trades. Many of the famous and notable men also perished in those earthquakes; of whom one was Asterius, mentioned by us a little before, who was destroyed by such a collapse and ruin.

CAPTER XIV

The emperor comforted the public calamity of the city itself with the gift of money. In the army, however, there was the same defection and rebellion, to such an extent that the neighboring barbarians dared to make sudden incursions into the Roman dominion. For they were persuaded that no one would go to meet them, and that they would do whatever they pleased. But as they thought this, Germanus met them with the forces he had with him, and with such fortitude he slaughtered them as victor that not even a messenger of their disaster was left for the Persians. When the emperor learned of this, he donated a huge sum of money to the army, and summoned the commander himself with some who were with him to judgment. There, the judges all sentenced them to capital punishment. But the emperor not only did not take action against them, but also honored them with distinctions and rewards, and treated them liberally with other acts of kindness. And while the state of affairs in the East was this, the Avars made an expedition twice to what is called the Long Wall, and Singidunum and Anchialus, and all of Greece, and other cities and fortresses they stormed and plundered in a hostile manner; some they consumed with fire, and others they cut down in a cruel manner, because no one resisted them, and the greatest part of the military forces remained in the East. Wherefore the emperor sent Andrew, who had first been the prefect of the imperial guards, to persuade the army to receive the former commanders of the ranks and prefects back again. But when the soldiers could not even endure to hear those orders, Gregory settled the matter. He was indeed a man fit for accomplishing the greatest of things; and the whole army, so to speak, showed him much honor, at once with observance and reverence. For some had been reconciled by money given by him; others had received clothing. Some had been abundantly provided by him with drink and food and other things besides, which are useful and necessary for men living in a foreign land. Then, however, all those who, after a selection had been made by him whom we mentioned a little before, Asterius, ^D were enlisted in the rolls, passed through him. And indeed, having first sent messengers to those who performed the first duties in the army, he gathered them at the site of Litarb, which is distant from...

Theopolis ^A about three hundred stadia. And when he himself arrived at that place, although he was bedridden, he spoke these words:

Chapter XV. Oration of Gregory, Bishop of Theopolis, to the defecting army.

^B Men, Romans in deeds and in words alike, I long ago supposed you would come to me to communicate your sentiments to me regarding the events that have occurred, and to seek counsel. This was promised by that old benevolence which has existed between us, which was certainly confirmed by my prior services to you, when I assisted your naval move and the tumult that followed it by providing the necessary supplies. But that has not been done until now, perhaps because in the days just passed no opportunity was offered for such a matter; specifically, so that the Persians might truly perceive the fortitude of the Romans, defeated and routed by men who were without a leader; and so that your sincere benevolence toward the state might be examined by the opportunity of the time, and verified by the testimony of the events themselves, and be recognized in every respect. For you declared, when you were moved by grief against your leaders and ill-disposed, that nothing was more ancient or more excellent to you than the republic. But come now, if it seems good to you, let us consider together what must be done. ^C Our kind emperor calls you to himself, promising amnesty, that is, oblivion and impunity for past offenses; receiving your disposition toward your own people and your bravery in the war in place of the olive branches of suppliants; giving you these as safe pledges of forgiveness; proclaiming that if He who holds all things in His hand has released the greater part through benevolence, and has removed the responsibility for the faults through your own bravery, the proof of the forgiveness shown is altogether clear: how shall I not also follow the divine judgment, which imposes upon me the necessity of remitting the offense? Therefore, if you will obey me, yield most quickly, do not throw away the opportunity, lest it slip away and become unreachable. For it is difficult to master that which has slipped past; it is indignant, as one might say, that it was neglected and despised; and it does not allow itself to be caught a second time. ^D And indeed, inherit the obedience of your fathers, just as you have indeed inherited their bravery, so that in all things you may show yourselves all the more to be Romans, and lest any reproach befall you which might argue that you are an illegitimate and adulterous offspring. For those who begat you worthily of the race, being placed under consuls and emperors, by obeying well and by their innate bravery brought the whole of the presently inhabited world under Roman rule. For Manlius Torquatus put a crown upon his own son and slew him because, although he excelled most in bravery, he was least willing to obey. For the sound judgment of those who lead, and the obedience of those who are led, have been naturally productive of the most and greatest goods. But if one of these two is lacking, it would limp in that part, and, being overturned, it trips, being severed from the best-constituted pair.

ctive of the most and greatest goods. But if one of these two is lacking, it would limp in that part, and, being overturned, it trips, being severed from the best-constituted pair. ^B Therefore, delay no longer; hearken to me, for I am a priest of God, acting as a mediator between the emperor and the army. Heed me, and show that what you did against your commanders—those who were ruling less than legitimately—was not a tyrannical habit, but a just indignation for a short while. For unless you make haste and rush to your emperor, I shall have sacredly fulfilled, in accordance with my office, both my outstanding loyalty to the commonwealth and my singular love for you. But you must consider again and again, you who exercise tyranny in this way, what rewards are proposed for you. For into what will your present affairs turn? It is by no means easy for them to remain in this very state. And whence will come your sustenance, or the importation of ripe fruits from the fields, or of those things which the sea, by aiding the continent as is fitting, provides? Therefore, by waging war against your own kinsmen, the Christians, and by receiving war in turn from them, you will both perform and suffer the most shameful things of all. And where, at long last, will you live your lives, scattered hither and yon? Divine vengeance will pursue you from behind—a vengeance which, because of your stubbornness, will be able neither to hold back nor to grant you pardon henceforth. Wherefore, let us join our right hands to one another and to the commonwealth, and let us consider the matter itself as is just—and this now, most especially, as we are celebrating the feast days of the saving passion and most holy resurrection of our Savior Jesus Christ, which bring us help and assistance toward better things.

CAPUT XVI. How the army, obeying Gregory, chose Philippicus as commander again.

Gregorius, having spoken these things and much more with tears, by a certain divine providence, in a moment of time, turned the minds of all to a different opinion. And so, they asked to be allowed to withdraw from the assembly, so that they might deliberate separately upon what was just; and having returned a little later, they surrendered themselves to the authority of the bishop. But when he called upon them by name to take Philippicus again as their commander, they said that both they and the entire army were bound by the sanctity of an oath, and that Philippicus would by no means be accepted by them as commander hereafter. To this, Gregorius, without delay, said that he, as a priest through divine grace, possessed the power to loose and to bind in heaven and on earth; and he brought forth the divine command concerning this matter. Then, indeed, the soldiers complying with him, he appeased the divine Power with prayers; and the celebration of the divine and mysterious rites having been completed, he imparted the immaculate body to all, for the day was that which precedes the holy passion of Christ. Afterward, having feasted them—they being about two thousand in number—on mattresses of grass prepared for the occasion, he turned back on the following day; and there seemed to be a gathering of those who wished it. He summoned Philippicus, who was at Tarsus in Cilicia, even though he was hastening toward the city of the king. Having led him there,

^A he informed the Emperor of these matters and assured the army through his prayers regarding Philippicus. When Philippicus arrived at Theopolis, the army went out to meet him; and just as if they had been admitted to divine regeneration, they approached him like suppliants and fell at his feet. Having received his right hand and the assurance of oblivion for past grievances, they followed him on his military expeditions. This is how affairs were conducted between the commander of the army and Gregory, the prelate of the city of Antioch.

CAPUT XVII. How Sittas betrayed Martyropolis, and of the siege by Philippicus.

^B At that time, a certain man named Sittas, who held the rank of decurion among the military forces, having been insulted by one of his commanding officers and noticing that Martyropolis was being guarded negligently, betrayed that city. For he brought in a Persian force by night, as if they were Romans, and took the city, which was most strategically important to the Romans. He kept the women who were in the prime of life within the city, but drove out all the other inhabitants, except for a few servants. Philippicus, therefore, immediately directed his expedition thither and, sitting down before it with all his forces, began to lay siege to the wall. ^C Although he did not possess the equipment necessary for conducting a siege, he nevertheless fought as best he could; and having dug mines, he managed to cause one tower to fall. Yet he was unable to take the whole city and bring it to submission, for the Persians had shielded the fallen section by night and sufficiently fortified it. When the Romans, attempting an assault upon the wall with intensity, were pushed back even more vigorously—for darts were frequently cast at them from higher ground, so that they suffered more harm than they inflicted upon the townspeople—they broke off the siege. Retiring a little, they pitched camp, intent only on this: that no other Persian reinforcements should be added to the defenders.

At the command of Maurice, Gregory came once again to the army and persuaded them to attempt the siege again. However, because they lacked the necessary instruments for demolishing walls at that moment, they were unable to achieve anything further. ^D Accordingly, abandoning the siege, the army withdrew to winter quarters, having placed numerous garrisons in the neighboring forts so that the Persians might not secretly send relief to the city. The following summer, the troops were assembled. And because the Persians had also arrived, a great battle was joined at Martyropolis, from which Philippicus emerged the victor. However, with many Persians having been slaughtered, and one hero having been struck down, a great multitude (which had been their main object) reached Martyropolis. The Romans from that point on refrained from besieging the city, for they had learned well that it could not be forced into surrender.

titude great (that which had been their chief concern) reached Martyropolis. The Romans thereupon ceased attacking the city, knowing well that it could not be forced into surrender by violence. ^A At a distance of seven stadia, they built another city in safe and mountainous regions, so that from there they might resist enemy machinations and excursions with military skill and inflict damage. This they did during the summer; but with the approach of winter, they would withdraw from there into their winter quarters.

CHAPTER XVIII

Concerning Varames the Persian, and the conspiracy formed against Hormisdas, King of the Persians.

Commentiolus, a Thracian by birth, was given as successor to Philippicus; he engaged the Persians with great valor. In that battle, the Persian leader would have perished, having been thrown to the ground with his horse, had not one of his attendants lifted him onto a horse which he was leading with him and withdrawn him from the battle. The remaining Persians, ^B having abandoned their own leaders, fled as quickly as possible and retreated to Nisibis, fearing to return to their own king. For he had threatened them with capital punishment unless they brought back all their commanders safe and sound. Having gathered there, they plotted tyranny against Hormisdas. Varames, the commander of the Persian ranks, who had returned with his men from the battle fought against the Turks, led this counsel, as shall be told by me in its proper place. Meanwhile, Commentiolus was besieging Martyropolis. He left the greater part of his forces there, but he himself, along with some of the best and most select men, marched out towards Ocbas, a fortress that was by far the most heavily fortified, situated on the opposite bank across from Martyropolis, built upon a sheer cliff so that the whole city could be seen from it. He attacked this fortress, ^C and leaving nothing untried, he brought down certain parts of the fortifications with stone-throwing engines; and finally, having overcome them, he captured it with great force. Wherefore, the Persians reached the point of despair regarding Martyropolis. While these things were occurring, these same Persians killed their own king, Hormisdas, the son of Chosroes (whom Cabades had fathered); he was the most unjust of all kings, not only because he unjustly fined his subjects money, but also because he put them to death in a cruel manner by various kinds of punishments for no cause. They substituted his son, Chosroes, in the kingdom for him. But I think it is proper to set forth how these things happened, repeating the account from an earlier point.

CHAPTER XIX

Concerning the tyranny of Varames, and how Hormisdas, King of the Persians, was killed by his son Chosroes.

Hormisdas had dispatched Varames, properly equipped with a regular army, against the Romans. And ^D Maurice, the Roman, sent out against him the one who was to meet him, namely Commentiolus, the praetor of the Orient. Moreover, Heraclius, having prospered in the war, killed the Persian praetor; upon Asarthatus being killed, the Persians fled and the Romans pursued. They now capture King Hormisdas. The Turkish name was then heard regarding the first of Asia. He writes that he had grown so much in glory and wealth that thereafter he received an annual tribute of forty thousand gold pieces from the Turks, which sum he himself had previously paid to them annually.

filio suo sit occisus. Hormisdas Varamum exercitu justo probe instructum adversus Romanos expediverat. Et contra hunc Mauricius Romanum, qui illi occurreret, primum Asiae auditum.

^A Romanus, having taken only ten thousand of the most select men, met him. And after many slaughters had occurred on both sides in the region of Albania, the victory, despite the barbarity, remained with the Romans. When Hormisdas, the king of the Persians, learned of this defeat of his men, he deprived Varamus of his command and sent him a woman’s garment. He, turning his mind to rebellion, began to aspire to tyranny, attempting to repay with insults him who had first insulted him, and writing these words in a letter: “Varamus to Hormisdas, daughter of Chosroes.” He also stirred up the army serving under his standards to desert, showing them letters purportedly written by Hormisdas against them all, and recalling to their minds his cruelty and his insatiable greed for money; namely, that he had either put all the leading men to the sword or had prepared for them the Tigris as a grave, deigning to grant them such burial and funeral rites. Having seduced the army with speeches of this kind, he incited them to the greatest tyranny and rebellion. Therefore, having sworn an oath to Varamus so that he might be safer, they formed a plan to remove Hormisdas. Hormisdas sent Pherochanes against him with a great multitude. But Varamus also approached him, saying that it was not right for Persians to fight against one another, but that they ought to know the harsh and violent rule, and furthermore the bloodthirsty nature and insatiable avarice, of Hormisdas, and that they ought to show goodwill to one another. When the army of Pherochanes perceived that these things were true, they killed their leader and joined the side of Varamus. From there, having gathered en masse and in a popular spirit, they attacked Hormisdas, took the diadem from his head, and cast him down from the royal throne. Then, in his presence, they killed his wife and son. They gouged out his eyes and threw him into custody, and they proclaimed his other son king of the Persians. For a time, he acted kindly towards his father, pleading that he had accepted the throne against his will, and he supplied him with food in abundance. But the father did not cease to treat the son with insults and to cast away everything he sent. Agitated by this, Chosroes the son ordered his father to be killed with rustic clubs. This indignity struck grief into the Persians and stirred up no small hatred against him.

CAPUT XX.

That Chosroes the younger fled to the Romans, and with their help recovered his kingdom.

^D Furthermore, Chosroes, since he knew that Varamus was leading an army against him, went out with a not insignificant force to meet him on a certain plain at the river Zab. But seeing that his own men were acting maliciously and were inclined toward Varamus and were plotting against him, he executed many of them; and, when a tumult arose in the army, he quickly fled to Circesium, together with his wife, his two newborn children, and certain other Persians of noble birth who followed him voluntarily.

^A He arrived at that place, as he himself related, having invoked the God of the Christians as Savior and Guide; and he pledged that he would allow his horse to proceed straight ahead, wherever he might be led by Him. Thence he sent an embassy to Maurice, with Probus informing him by letter of how matters had transpired. Baram also sent envoys to the Emperor, and the embassy requested that he should not choose to ally himself with Chosroes. But Maurice, knowing the unstable and precarious nature of human affairs, and being well aware of the reversals and sudden shifts of this human and wretched life—having pondered these things well in his own mind—received the suppliant with great kindness and pleasure; ^B and in place of an exile and a fugitive, he made him his own true friend and son by adoption, receiving him with royal gifts and lavishing upon him all other kindness and generosity. And he did not merely send what was appropriate with imperial munificence himself, but the Augusta likewise showed the same affection toward his wives, and their children toward his children. Not content with these services, he also wrote to the entire army at Hierapolis and to its general, Commentiolus, that they should escort Chosroes with a royal bodyguard and retinue, and follow him wherever he might wish to go. To bestow even greater honor upon him, he also sent to him the bishop of Melitene, Domitianus, a kinsman of Maurice—a man far superior to the many in intelligence and keenness of mind, highly capable in both word and deed, ^C and most effective at bringing the greatest affairs to a successful conclusion. He joined to him Gregory, who occupied the throne of the Antiochene see. Both of these men overwhelmed Chosroes with words, gifts, and timely conversations and advice. When Chosroes reached Hierapolis, which occupies the chief place in Euphratesia, he returned to his kingdom; for Maurice had judged this to be to his advantage, and had given in to the suppliant to the extent that it seemed it would redound to his own greater glory and praise. Having presented Chosroes with an immense sum of money—a fact which has never been recorded by anyone else in writing—and having hired certain Persians into his service at his own expense, he sent the Persian back most magnificently into Persia, escorted by both the Persian and the Roman armies. Narses was in command of the Roman forces: ^D he joined battle with the Persians, took sixty thousand Persians captive by hand, and after bringing them to Chosroes, pierced them through with spears. As for those of them who were Turks, Chosroes sent them to the Emperor at Byzantium. Furthermore, the Roman army, having defeated Baram—who had fled the battle disgracefully, alone—handed over his own kingdom to Chosroes, conducting him even to the royal palace itself. When he was seated upon his throne, he spoke these words in the hearing of the Romans: "King Chosroes, may you always keep in mind this day, and hold it in your heart, that the Romans have bestowed upon you the kingdom of the Persians as a free gift." Fearing the plots of the Persians, Chosroes asked Maurice for a thousand Romans. Maurice, thinking kindly, granted his request. Sittas was also impaled before the Persians; and the city of the Martyrs [did] the Romans a favor.

^A Persians whom Chosroes sent to Byzantium, the Emperor, seeing that they had crosses of molten black ink impressed upon their foreheads, asked for what reason they wore these marks while not being worshipers [of the Cross]. They said that many years ago a severe plague had afflicted Persia and their own land, and, as many mortals were dying from the infection, certain Christians who were there had persuaded the people that if they did this, it would be for the salvation of their lives, and that the region would be left untouched and immune to such a pestilence. And this was done. And the affairs concerning Hormisdas and Chosroes, the Persians, reached this end. ^B

Chapter XXI. On the crosses sent by Chosroes to Gregory of Theopolis, and what he wrote to him concerning them.

Chosroes, restored to the possession of his kingdom, sent to Gregory of Theopolis [Antioch] that cross which Theodora, the wife of Justinian, having adorned with much gold and resplendent jewels, had dedicated to God in honor of the victorious martyr Sergius, and which Chosroes, the father of Hormisdas, had taken away with him from Sergiopolis along with other gifts and precious vessels, just as I have already rightly mentioned. ^C Along with it, he also sent another cross, which Chosroes himself had caused to be made from a great weight of gold, with an inscription in Greek letters of the following nature: “I, Chosroes, king of kings, son of Hormisdas, [declare] that this cross, at the time when, because of the diabolical instinct and evil machinations of the most wretched Varames and the Caballarii [Cavalry] who were with him, we had retreated into Romania; and because the wretched Zadepram was coming with an army to Nisibis, for the sake of leading away the Caballarii of the Nisibene region, so that they might resist us and rebel by attacking, we also sent our own Caballarii with their leader to Charchas; and through the fortune of the holy Sergius, that venerable and famous man, since we had heard that he was a granter of vows and petitions—in the first year of our reign, on the seventh day of the month of January, we made a vow that if our Caballarii should slay or capture Zadepram, we would send a golden, jewel-studded cross to his temple, for the sake of his ^D venerable name. Furthermore, when on the ninth day of the month of February the head of Zadepram was brought to us, having become masters of our wish and having obtained our desire, so that it might be manifest and certain to anyone, in his venerable name [we sent] this cross, made by us, together with the cross sent by Justinian, the emperor of the Romans, to his temple, and which, during the time of the war that was waged between these two kingdoms, had been brought hither by Chosroes, king of kings, son of Cabades, our grandfather, and [was kept] among our treasures.

^A Having written these things, Chosroes sent the crosses; which Gregory, having taken them by the advice of Maurice, together with much pomp and a guard, consecrated and deposited in the temple of the martyr in a manner both solemn and pious, thinking that the Church would suffer no detriment whatsoever from the heathen offerings.

CHAPTER XXII.

Regarding the gifts which the same Chosroes sent to the great martyr Sergius.

Not long after, Chosroes also skillfully fashioned other gifts and sent them into the sacred shrine of the holy martyr, ^B and he also donated a golden dish of no small weight in minae, upon which he inscribed in Greek the following letters: "I, Chosroes, king of kings, son of Hormisdas, have inscribed these things upon this dish, not that they may be beheld by men, nor that the greatness of your venerable name may be known through my words, but for the sake of the truth of the things written, and for the sake of the many thanks and benefits which I have received from you. For it is a matter of happiness to me that my name should be carried about on your sacred vessels. When I was in Beramis, I besought you, O holy one, that you would come to my assistance, and that Sira might conceive in her womb. And since Sira is a Christian, but I am a follower of the Greek religion, ^C and our laws would not permit us the freedom to have her as a wife, for the sake of my benevolence toward you, I disregarded these very laws on her behalf, and I have held and hold her day by day with true and sincere love among [my] wives. And so it seemed good to me to implore your goodness, O holy one, that she might conceive in her womb. I asked this of you, and I made a vow: if Sira carried in her womb, I would bring the cross which she wears to your venerable temple. But for the sake of this matter, I and Sira took counsel, that the monument of your name, O holy one, might be with us, and that we might retain that cross: and we decreed for it, and for its price and valuation, not exceeding three thousand four hundred silver staters, to send five thousand staters. And from the time that I conceived such a vow within myself, and revolved these things ^D in my mind, until we arrived at Rosochosrum, not more than ten days had passed, and you, O holy one—not because I was worthy, but because such is your kindness—appeared to me in a dream by night, and told me a third time that Sira would carry in her womb. And I in that very vision replied to you a third time, saying: 'It is well.' And because you are a giver of requests, from that day Sira did not see that which is accustomed to women. I, however, hesitating in this matter, if I did not have faith in your words, and because you are holy and a giver of requests, after that the female courses did not follow, from this I knew the power of the vision, and the truth of the things spoken by you.

Therefore, for this cause, I have sent both such a cross and its price to your most holy house. And I ordered that from this price one paten and a chalice be made for the account of the divine mysteries; and also a cross that should be fixed upon the holy Table, and a censer, all of gold; and a Hunnish chancel-screen adorned with gold. And whatever remained of the price in miliaresia, I have dedicated to your holy house, so that through your good fortune, O holy man, in all things, and especially in this petition, you may bring aid to me and to Sira; and that what has come to us through your intercession, by the mercy of your goodness and by my will and that of Sira, may reach a perfect conclusion; so that I, and Sira, and all men in the world may hope in your power and henceforth believe in you. These were the gifts which Chosroes sent, not inconsistent with the prophecy of Balaam, of God the all-bountiful, who in ineffable ways orchestrated these things, that the tongues of the Greeks might believe and utter such saving words. ^B

CHAPTER XXIII. Regarding Naaman, the Prince of the Saracens, and how he embraced the Christian faith.

When Chosroes was writing and sending such things, Naaman also, a leader of the Scenite barbarians—a wicked, lascivious, and impure man, or rather the most impure of all, and a man addicted to ethnic superstition, even to the point of slaying men with his own hand and sacrificing them upon altars to his gods—contrary to all expectation, being smitten by divine love through an unexpected vision, passed over to the sacred rites of the Christians. ^C Having received the sacred laver, he underwent the regeneration of temporal birth and a heavenly renewal. And with him, he brought all his people, in a vast and unnumberable multitude, to the divine baptism, having instructed them in all things that pertain to our religion. But after Chosroes had donated the aforementioned crosses, Gregory, by the divine will, traversed the wilderness which had the name of the Limetarians, and going around all the places there, he exterminated the dogmas of Severus which had spread in those parts, and, having set forth the sound doctrine of the Church, he brought many fortresses and villages and populous tribes, along with the clergy and monasteries, to the true discipline of the orthodox and right-believing Church. ^D

CHAPTER XXIV. Regarding Saint Symeon the Thaumastorite, that is, he who dwells on the Wondrous Mountain.

In the meantime, it was reported to him that that Symeon who dwells on the Wondrous Mountain was lying ill with a fatal disease and was drawing his final breath; and that he was altogether...

disappointed in his desire. ^A This Symeon far surpassed the men of his own time in virtue, seeing that from a very tender age he had chosen to spend his whole life in the station of a pillar. It is said, indeed, that he shed his first teeth while in his station on the pillar, and that he ascended it for the following reason. While he was still quite young, and while he was playing and leaping on a high mountain, having been entrusted to a guide whom he followed, he encountered a savage beast known as a leopard. Having loosened his belt, he cast it about the creature's neck; and as if it had forgotten its ferocity, he led it as if pulled by a tether and brought it to his dwelling place. When his teacher—who himself led a life upon a pillar—saw this, he asked what it was that he had brought. He replied that it was a weasel, which by custom they call a cat. From this conjecture, the teacher, gathering how great his virtue was to be, received him upon the pillar. Living most rigorously on this and another mountain, he persisted in such a manner of life for sixty-eight years. ^B Infinite were the gifts that came to him from God; for he put demons to flight, and by prayer and the touch of his hand he straightway cured every disease and malady. Future things, likewise, he both saw and foretold as if they were present; just as he signified to Gregory that he would not see his own death, and would be ignorant of the events that followed it. And when Evagrius of Epiphania was grieving over the loss of his children, and was pondering within himself why it was that the Greeks and Gentiles—who produced many children—did not suffer the same, yet did not reveal these absurd thoughts to anyone: Symeones wrote to him to desist from such matters, for such thoughts were by no means pleasing to God. ^C The wife of a certain notary of the same Evagrius was destitute of the milk that had ceased to flow. Wherefore the infant she had was brought to the brink of death. Symeones, having placed the husband’s right hand upon the woman’s breasts, commanded him to apply it; and when this was done, milk immediately burst forth as if from a certain wellspring, so much so that the woman’s garment was abundantly drenched with it. But also a certain child, who in the deep of night had been left behind in the woods by his companions through forgetfulness, was, as he wandered, lifted upon the back of a lion and carried entirely unharmed to the monastery of Symeones. ^D Then, at the command of Symeones, those who were serving him went out by night and brought him into the monastery, as he was being guarded and kept by the lion without any danger whatever. Many other things, too, exceeding number, did Symeones accomplish, which truly require a longer time, a more polished language, and a special work. These are celebrated to this day on the tongues of all, having been written by Symeon Magister the Eunuch, even if not as learnedly as the magnitude of the deeds demands; yet it has fallen to our lot to encounter them, being struck with wonder at the sheer multitude and power of the works performed by this holy man. For from the entire Roman territory—or rather, to say it in a word, from everywhere—the Symeon who shares his name, the Metaphrast.

^A Men of barbarian nations flocked to him, and they received the satisfaction of their needs more quickly. For the branches of the shrubs growing on that mountain were always for him a sustenance, superior to all food and drink.

CHAPTER XXV.

Concerning Saint Golinduch the martyr, who remained alive while undergoing the contest of martyrdom in Persia.

At that time, Golinduch the martyr also shone forth while alive. She was born to Persian Magi, her father being Asmodoch and her mother Myzuch, who, according to the religion of those people, worshiped fire and the other abominations of the Persians. She herself was also devoted to the cursed ^B and God-detested mania of idols and to magic. Being given in marriage to a man of the first rank of the senatorial council, she bore two sons. After three years had passed, she was caught up in an ecstasy, and through an angel, she was initiated into the divine mystery of our salvation. Being subsequently delivered to the Magi, and having been tested by many tortures and bonds—all of which she overcame—she became the author of infinite wonders and surprising miracles; for the angel who guided her came to her and took care that she should bear everything lightly and easily. She also revealed many secret things, ^C as she had received from God the grace of foreknowledge. But after she had been tested by tortures for many years and desired to obtain the crown of martyrdom, the angel who had frequently appeared to her stood by, and bringing forward a certain youth with a sword, he granted her request. For upon his command, the youth cut off her head with the sword; and the blood flowing from her neck streamed onto the linen garment she was wearing next to her body, staining it as far as her thighs. And this garment was seen to work countless miracles; for she herself lived on even after the severance of her head. And when she had come to the Roman borders, she stayed at Circesium and at Dara, and she even reached the regions ^D of Jerusalem, being seen as a strange spectacle to all the faithful, for she carried about in her still-living body the stigmata of Christ. Severely afflicted by the torments of her martyrdom, she went about the cities, proceeding with the angel as her guide, and she did not apply any medicine to her pains, using only natural baths. Having led her own household and relatives and others besides to Christ, at length, having arrived at Hierapolis and abandoned this life, she passed on to the ageless life. While she was still alive, she had been summoned by the emperor to his city, but she was in no way persuaded to comply. Stephen, the bishop of Hierapolis, wrote her life, having been with her and having learned the details from her own lips, and he honored her by burying her body splendidly and magnificently.

CHAPTER XXVI.

How Anastasius Sinaites recovered his own see after Gregory, and concerning other patriarchs.

^A Then Gregory also, afflicted by the gout which suffered him, ended his life after drinking a potion given by a certain physician, known as hermodactylus. He died while Gregory presided over the throne of Old Rome, who had succeeded Pelagius, while in New Rome John the Faster governed the church, of whom we shall speak a little later. At that time Eulogius held the bishopric of Alexandria; in Theopolis, however, Anastasius was restored to his see after Gregory in the twenty-third year. At Jerusalem, John held the hierarchical dignity, and after he died shortly thereafter, Neamus succeeded him in the bishopric; at which time the twelfth year of the reign of Tiberius Maurice was coming to an end. But these things have ended here.

Chapter XXVII.

What Chosroes predicted concerning the Roman Empire; and also what he said to Probus, the bishop of Chalcedon, concerning the Mother of God.

^B What I had nearly omitted concerning the affairs of Chosroes, I shall commit to history as best I can. That great war which the Romans had with the Persians ceased, with both Romans and Persians observing the agreed-upon pacts on equal terms. I will not fail, however, to set forth what Chosroes, long and greatly practiced in the laborious vanity of Chaldean astronomy, predicted by divination. It is said that he spoke these things at the height of the war to John, the commander of the Armenian forces. For when John rebuked Chosroes, harshly taunting him as being perverse in his ways and strange in the impulses of his mind, and saying that a king ought not to be such a person, the barbarian is said to have replied something of this sort to the commander: "Had we not been constrained by the tyranny of the times themselves, O commander, you would not have dared to prick the great king among men with taunts. ^C But since you are puffed up with pride in present circumstances, you shall hear what has been ordained by the gods regarding future times. Know well that calamities will overflow upon you Romans, and the Babylonish race will rule over the Roman commonwealth for three circular weeks of years. But after this, in the fifth week of years, you Romans will reduce the Persians to servitude. When these things have been accomplished, that day which knows no evening will arrive for men, and the expected end of the empire will be at hand. At that time, corruption will be abolished, and the way of life according to the ordinance of God will prevail." ^D I shall also tell what he unexpectedly replied to Probus himself, who had recently been raised to the bishopric of Chalcedon, when he was sent by Maurice to Ctesiphon. For Chosroes had summoned him at midday, while it was burning hot, to his own palace. And as he was dripping with much sweat, he asked the bishop to show him the image of the Mother of God to look at, and he—bearing the sacred likeness of her in a small case—came into the sight of the King of the Persians. And the Per-

Persian, having venerated the tablet with adoration, reported that the archetype or primary exemplar had stood by him during the night and said that it had yielded to him the victories of Alexander of Macedon. There Probus the bishop answered the king in these words: "That happened to him long ago, when he was restored to his kingdom and had overcome the destructive tyrants by the virtue and strength of the Emperor." And he added that he would, by oath, attain the same if any remnants of those ancient bricks, fired by the kiln, as is written of them by the holy Moses, still survived. But since we have lingered long enough on the affairs of the East, and the legitimate Persian war has, with God helping, reached its end, let the pen turn its course to the deeds accomplished by the Emperor in Europe; so that we too may reach the harbor of our design and institution, and set down the burden of these sacred acts. ^A

Chapter XXVIII. On events in Europe between the Romans and the Avars, whose leader was the Chagan.

And so, at the beginning of spring, ^B having transported his forces from the East, Maurice set sail from Byzantium and, amid many intervening obstacles, hastened to Anchialus. For he had heard that the Abares wished to run out there, after that golden bed and the spectacle of the elephant and the gift of many talents of gold, which the Emperor—thinking that he was securing peace for himself—granted to them at their request. And first he came to Perinthus, which they now call Heraclea, having indeed encountered many terrors and a most violent tempest. In which city, he paid the customary religious devotion to the martyr Glyceria, who is honored there in a magnificently constructed sacred shrine. And after having suffered something severe from the incursions of the barbarians, having created Priscus as the leader of the army in Europe, he returned thence to the imperial city. ^C But the tribes of the Abares and the Slavinians, having crossed the Ister, serving under the Hun Chagan, running through Thrace and plundering everything in their path, arrived as far as Heraclea. Indeed, while Priscus the general kept himself at Turulus, they even captured Didymoteichum by a stratagem. The Emperor checked their onset by a certain admirable art and counsel, for he pretended that he would make an expedition against their homelands with an equipped fleet. This thing struck great fear into them, and compelled them, even against their will, to return to their own lands. After their departure, the Emperor placed firm garrisons of soldiers at the crossing of the Ister, so that the Barbarians might not again easily run out into Thrace. But Priscus, having returned to Byzantium, was accused regarding the spoils; and the dignity of the prefecture of the military forces was taken away from him and given to Peter, the brother of Maurice. ^D But since he too achieved nothing brilliant according to the opinion of the Emperor, that magistracy having been taken away from him and restored to the same Priscus, at home

^B he sat; but when Priscus had resumed the command, and had arrived in Europe, he dissolved the agreements made with the Chagan. For the latter was the first to begin the war, and with an unnumbered host, falling suddenly upon the Roman territory, took many fortresses and set fire to the temple of the martyr Alexander. And the most detestable man, having taken his venerable relics out of the casket, perpetrated many unspeakable atrocities upon them, and offered them the greatest insult. For this reason, he saw the loss of seven children in one day, paying penalties worthy of such outrages. Then the Chagan crossed the Ister where it flows into the sea, and did all kinds of terrible things, making the plunder of the Mysians—as it is called—his entire object. Although Maurice, out of a certain despair, had sent the general Commentiolus with many thousands of men to lead an army against his forces, he, having achieved nothing, kept himself in a certain western fortress, avoiding the danger. Much later, Maurice sent an embassy and persuaded the Chagan to consider more peaceful plans.

CAPUT XXIX. How the envoy of Priscus, by adducing an ancient example, persuaded the Chagan to embrace peace again.

^C When the Chagan was obstructing Priscus from crossing the river, at the time when Priscus was securing the greatest amount of booty, Priscus sent to him Theodore the physician, a sagacious man, and one who excelled many in insight and prudence. Who, having seen the barbarian raging greatly, and being arrogant, and exulting in the haughtiness of his words (for he was boasting threateningly that he was the lord of all nations), the envoy assuaged the barbarian's pride with an ancient story. For he said: "Hear, O Chagan, an ancient and useful story. Sesostris, the king of the Egyptians, having become illustrious and most prosperous, made very many and great nations subject to himself. And having been lifted up to brazen arrogance by that success, he caused a golden chariot to be made for himself, adorned with transparent and precious stones. In this he sat, and having laid a yoke upon four of the conquered kings, he harnessed them to the chariot to draw him. And when this was done often, and on one notable feast day, one of the four kings kept continually turning his eyes towards the back, and was watching the turning of the wheel; and when Sesostris asked him for the reason why he so frequently turned his eyes to the wheel, he is said to have replied: 'I am struck with wonder seeing the wheel carried in an unstable manner, and at one time rolling one way and at another time another, now bringing down the things that are high, and again raising up those that are low.' Sesostris, moreover, when he understood the saying, decided that they should not draw the chariot for him thereafter." ^D The barbarian, however, smiling, indicated that he readily embraced peace; and Priscus, in return for the passage, gave him a good part of the spoils, while conceding the greatest things, and signified that he was departing from the Roman territory—for indeed he claimed the ground was Roman. But the barbarian, [remarked] that also with weapons and the laws of war the Romans [had acquired them]. While they struggled…

in this rather familiar manner with each other, Priscus reproached him, using as an insult the fact that he had fled from the East. ^A

CHAPTER XXX.

Since I have made mention of the Scythians near the Caucasus and those facing the North, come now, let us set forth what followed these things as a sort of supplementary narrative, even if it is not strictly relevant to the history. Before these years, the Chagan, who is lauded by the Turks in the East, having courageously defeated the prince of the Abdele (though another might call them Ephthalites), took the empire of that people for himself. Greatly elated by that victory, and having taken Stemeischagan as an ally in war, he also brought the nation of the Avars under his dominion: not the Avars who happened to dwell in Europe and Pannonia—for those people falsely usurped that name for themselves, having arrived there before the times of Maurice. ^C But where they truly derive their lineage, I shall say a little later. Thus, the Avars having been defeated by the Chagan, they fled to those who held Taugast. Now Taugast is a very famous city of the Turks, bordering on the Indians, whose people are the most valiant of all, having no nation in the entire world that can be compared to it. Thence they went to the neighboring nation of the Mucritae, a nation which itself possesses great strength and constant zeal for dangers, which they sustain with very courageous spirits. The Chagan, furthermore, having set upon the nation of the Sogor, subdued it as well, a people most robust and most populous. This tribe dwells near the river Til, ^D which the Turks call the Black, and which the most ancient princes called Uder and Cunni; from these names, certain nations have also acquired their appellation. Therefore, when Justinian was governing the scepter, a portion of the ancient chieftains, fleeing, came into Europe; and they named themselves Avars and adorned their leader with the title of Chagan. But the Hunnic peoples—the Barselt, the Uniguri, and the Sabiri—when they saw a portion of the Var and Guni tribes approaching them, fell into the greatest terror, thinking that those dreaded Avars had arrived in the region; and for that reason, having greeted them with gifts, they obtained Albania through them. And those fugitives themselves, perceiving that the appellation was advantageous to them, thereupon named themselves Avars. For among the Scythian nations, that race is said to be by far the most warlike and most apt for conducting raids. Even to this present day, these Pseudavars…

are divided according to their tribal origins; for some are called after the Var, others after the Chuni. But since the affairs of the Pseudavars have been told by us, let us return to the thread of the history. ^A Ogorilia having been defeated, and Tucoch, the prince of the nation, having been put to the sword by the Chagan, together with him, thirty myriads of his people were slaughtered, so that the continuous bodies of the slain obstructed the path for several days. But when so brilliant a victory had been gained by the Chagan, civil war arose among the Turks. For a certain Turun, a kinsman of the Chagan, attempting a revolution, gathered great forces, with which he engaged the Chagan and prevailed. But the latter, having allied himself with three other Chagans, marched against the tyrant; and having joined battle at the fortress of Icar, he killed the tyrant after much bloodshed, and again became master of his own land. Congratulations for his victory were signaled to others and to Maurice himself, with this preface to his congratulatory message: ^B "To the Emperor of the Romans, the great despot, lord of seven nations and of the seven climates of the habitable world." Now the Persians call Mount Icar the "Golden," situated towards the east, for the reason that it is most fertile in crops and most abundant in cattle and pack animals. It is a law among the Persians to yield this golden mountain to the most powerful Chagan. The same people boast exceedingly of these two things: that they have never seen an epidemic of plague, and that earthquakes are rare in their region. They say, however, that the land of Caath and Sogdoane experience both earthquakes and plagues. The Turks most extravagantly honor fire. ^C They reverence the air and water, they celebrate the earth with hymns, and they worship it alone, and they name as God Him who created the earth and heaven; to whom they also sacrifice horses, bulls, and sheep. They also have priests who are deemed capable of divining regarding future events. Among the Medes, seven orders of people manage the principal affairs. And the ancient law does not permit business to be divided otherwise. For the order called that of the Arsacids retains the kingship for itself and places the diadem upon the king. Another order oversees military affairs; to another, the concern of statecraft is entrusted. Another settles controversies that have arisen between disputants regarding anything that requires an arbitrator as judge. ^D The fifth order of the people governs the cavalry. The one which follows this exacts tribute from the citizens and subjects and presides over the royal treasury. The seventh oversees the king’s horses and maintains his military attire. They say that Darius, the son of Hystaspes, consecrated these laws in the royal court. But at that time, those Turks who were fleeing from the Var and Chuni came into Europe, and joined themselves to the Avars, who were under the Chagan, numbering themselves ten thousand. The Chagan of the eastern Turks, having brought the civil war to an end, administered his affairs prosperously; and having sent envoys to the inhabitants of Taugast, he initiated a legitimate treaty with them and brought peace to his kingdom. The prince in Taugast,

^A Taisan by name (which in the Greek tongue signifies "Son of God"), obtained his position. The prince of that region possesses a peaceful realm, free from sedition, for the entire nation is accustomed to deferring administration to him. They worship statues; their laws are just, and they pass their lives with sobriety. They have a sacrosanct constitution, that no man should adorn himself with gold, even though they abound in gold and silver for the sake of the convenience of trade. A river separates that territory, flowing between two great peoples who are at variance with one another, of whom the one wears black clothing, the other scarlet. Those who prefer black attire, having crossed the river, brought war against those who wear the red garment, and they bravely obtained the whole empire at the time when Maurice was administering the Roman Empire. The wives of the kings there have golden carriages, which are drawn by single oxen; these oxen are magnificently adorned with gold and precious stones of great value. The bridles, too, are golden for the oxen. And he who had received the rule in Taugast would spend the entire night with seven hundred women. Moreover, the wives of illustrious men there use silver chariots. Furthermore, the Barbarians say that Alexander the Macedonian founded the city of Taugast, when he was subduing the Bactrians and the Sogdians, having burned twelve myriads of Barbarians in it. They also say that the same Alexander founded another city not many miles from there, which they call Chubdam; the law there requires that when its governor dies, his wives must mourn him perpetually, and never depart from his tomb, wearing black garments, and shaving their heads with a razor. ^B Two very large rivers divide Chubdam, on whose banks cypresses hang over, so to speak. Elephants roam the region. The citizens conduct trade with the Indians, who are for the most part white in body; among them are also very many worms that spin the threads of the Seres, of manifold and varied color. The Barbarians tend them with great eagerness. Let this suffice concerning these matters: which indeed I have not set forth in vain. For since I had spoken of the Avar nation and their leader, the Chagan, as to how he paid the penalty on account of the ill-treated relics of the martyr Alexander, and since I was about to commemorate here the greatest deed miraculously performed by the Mother of the Word, for that reason I digressed a little from my purpose and related these things. But now let us recall our history to the matters at hand. ^C

CHAPTER XXXI

What Maurice did at the tomb of the holy and renowned martyr Euphemia.

I shall therefore relate to the account what happened to Maurice concerning the all-renowned martyr Euphemia. For a certain sluggishness of soul had come upon the emperor, causing him to inquire too anxiously into her extraordinary miracles, and ^D

concerning the all-renowned martyr Euphemia. For a certain sluggishness of soul had come upon the emperor, causing him to inquire too anxiously into her extraordinary miracles, and ^A to think that the wonders wrought by her were produced by human artifice. For exactly opposite to Byzantium is built the renowned city of the Chalcedonians, where a magnificent temple has been constructed. We have already mentioned not long ago that her most holy relics were placed long ago in this very temple in a marble sarcophagus. And in memory of her, a singular miracle is wont to occur, almost unbelievable to those who have not seen it. For from the time that she completed the stadium of her martyrdom and her body was interred in the tomb, on the day of her passing, in the sight of all, the bishop who holds the priestly office there draws forth from her dead body a stream of blood by means of certain sponges. And one might see the blood flowing as if from a freshly slaughtered body, mixed with the gore of wounds and tempered with certain natural ointments; and the priest, having collected and divided this into small glass vessels, distributes it to the crowds who have arrived. Maurice, then, as I have said, doubting this famous report through a certain sluggishness of mind, as the time approached, removed the silver ornament from the tomb and sealed the martyr’s monument with imperial seals; for such was the audacity of his unbelief. But when the proper time arrived, he examined the mystery with curiosity, and scrutinized the miracle with careful and solicitous testing. Behold, the blood, mixed with ointment as before, flowed from the monument like a stream, and the sponges were again saturated with blood of sweet fragrance. And the martyr herself then caused the fountain of blood to flow even more prolifically, and in this way she rebuked and chastised the emperor's incredulity. He, however, applying his fingers to the blood and anointing himself with that liquid, sanctified himself; and being persuaded by the reality of the event, he henceforth rendered to the martyr his praises with a clear voice, being struck with wonder.

CHAPTER XXXII.

It will not be out of place if I join the miracle of this most celebrated martyr, the admirable Glyceria, to that of the previous martyr. For a certain man named Paulinus, born in an obscure place and educated in good disciplines, was discovered to have fallen openly into the abyss of impostors and sorcerers. This sorcerer and magician possessed a silver basin in which, collecting detestable blood, the accursed man would hold converse with apostate powers through it. This vessel, as necessity demanded, he sold to silver-smiths. They, having paid the price, received the basin, and they in turn placed it for sale before their doors, giving anyone passing by the free opportunity to buy it. It happened, however, that the bishop of Perinthus was at Byzantium, and he purchased the basin as it was being sold. And so, having taken the purchased vessel, he returned to his see, and out of reverence for the ointment of the martyr Glyceria, having removed the former bronze vessel, he placed that silver one in its stead,

ta ut venumdabatur, compararet. Itaque cum vasculo empto se in sedem suam recepit, et ob reverentiam unguenti martyris Glyceriæ, sublato priore vase æneo, argenteum illud reposuit, thinking it most suitable for the worship of the divinely flowing unguent. And he acted accordingly; but the stream of the unguent stopped. For the martyr herself, abhorring the defilement, withdrew that grace and gift; for she said—even in silence—that it was by no means right for the pure to come into contact with the impure. When the bishop discovered that this had been happening for many days, he took it very grievously and revolved various cares in his mind, that because of his own fault the Church should be deprived of so great a blessing. Hence, turning to tears and prayers, he besought God to take away this great burden and to reveal the mystery of the matter. God, indeed, rightfully putting away the abomination and mercifully visiting his ignorance, manifested the defilement of the vessel to the prelate in his dreams. He forthwith removed that silver phial and restored to the holy service the former brazen one, as being pure and, as it were, a virgin and unstained vessel. And behold, on a sudden, the unguent flowed again, and the deluge of miracles gushed forth once more. The abomination was publicly denounced, and the city recovered its former glory. When this matter reached the ears of the Emperor, through him who held the first see—this was John the Faster—and the sovereign was stirred up by the same bishop to pursue the criminals with capital punishment (for he wished to correct the crime with repentance and penance), a great tribunal was assembled, and a vast multitude of sorcerers was brought forward. They, being wrapped in a terrible and inescapable fate, were delivered up to punishment to pay the penalties due. But Paulinus, having been impaled upon a stake sharpened at the top, ended his life shamefully, having first been the spectator of the slaughter of his own son; for he had also filled him sufficiently with the abominations of his unholy magic. Thus far concerning this affair; but another wondrous event which took place at that time, concerning the Mother of the Word, I shall now relate.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

Certain Greeks or pagans, feasting in the house of one of them and inviting one another to wine, after the midday meal, as soon as they were sufficiently soaked with drink, began to blaspheme and to denigrate the Mother of the Word with insults; finally, they made this the main business of their drinking, that whatever absurdity or indignity any one of them could devise, they might use it to mock the mystery of the Economy and the Dispensation of our salvation. After this impiety became known, they indeed paid the fitting penalties for their petulant tongue. But the master of the house in which they had sat and indulged in their grave blasphemy, although he was not a stranger to our sacred rites, at that time escaped the danger, as the circumstances of the case allowed. But not long after, as he was sleeping by night, the Mother of God appeared to him in a dream; and as she asked him in detail who...

^A he was, and if he knew who she was: after he confessed that he did know her, she recalled to his memory the indignity of his insults. Then the miserable man became a suppliant to her, and begged for pardon for his sin: and implored that he not be punished with death so quickly, but that time for repentance be left to him. She promised that she would grant him this, and that he would not at that present time pay the penalty with his life: however, with a twig which she seemed to carry in her hand, she described a circle around his knees, as if carving them out. When this was done, she flew away and appeared to him no more. He, having shaken off sleep, immediately found those limbs which had been marked by the twig severed from the rest of his body, with fresh blood flowing from them. And being brought out into public, he proclaimed to all the just judgment. Those who heard it sang praises to God for such an unexpected miracle; and in the same way they glorified the Mother of God, who thus always protects the race of Christians, and who shows her affection toward us in a different way—even if it is against her nature to punish anyone, being forced by a certain power to do so, so that, of course, our religion might remain stable and firm. ^B

CHAPTER XXXIV. Of Saint John the Faster, adorned with the archiepiscopal dignity of Constantinople.

Then, indeed, the hierarch of the city of Constantinople, John, departed from this life after thirteen years of his episcopate. Because he had conquered the pleasures, and had curbed the disturbances of his soul, and had exercised mastery over his belly, he was named "the Faster" by the Byzantines: a man who had advanced from the order of commoners and of no dishonest craft, but who, on account of his surpassing virtue, was raised to the heights of the episcopate. Concerning whom, while many other things worthy of remembrance are told, this is celebrated most of all: that on account of his affection and mercy toward the poor, ^C he borrowed many talents from the emperor and gave him a bond, in which he pledged and mortgaged his own substance as security for the borrowed money. But after he departed from this life, Maurice, inquiring into the prelate's resources, found that he had followed poverty to a great degree: and, marveling at a man of such virtue, he immediately tore up the bond; and he ordered only the wooden bed, which was found among his goods, and a very thin woolen cloak, and a certain misshapen mantle (for John had been poorly dressed, being conspicuous for the frugality of his life) to be brought into the imperial palace, and he preferred these over all other things. And henceforth, in the solemn time of the fasts, having bid farewell to beds fashioned of gold ^D and precious stones, and to silk garments, and other imperial delicacies, he made use of the priest's wooden bed whilst keeping watch all night, thinking that he would receive from thence some divine grace. At that time also the nation of the Moors moved into Libya.

having been driven from their places by the German leaders. ^A

CHAPTER XXXV.

What signs preceded the murder of the Emperor Maurice; and concerning certain portents that appeared.

At the same time, very many signs also appeared that portended the death of the Emperor. For, first, a very large comet was seen, shining brightly for many days. And another thing that happened showed it even more clearly. For a certain man who had lived in the greatest poverty, and had exercised himself in solitary life in the contemplation of hidden things, and had renounced this worldly life, carrying a drawn sword in the Forum (this is a famous place in the city) as far as the vestibule of the imperial palace, came forth and ^B cried out with a loud voice, predicting that in a short time the emperor would be slain by the sword together with his children and his wife. In the summer time, a certain Herodian also openly announced that which was to happen to the emperor; and he asserted that this prediction had been manifested to him not without divine lot. Moreover, other prodigies happened at that time, which no one had ever seen or heard of before. For, in Thrace, a woman gave birth to a child that was entirely monstrous, and a violation of nature itself. For it lacked eyes, and eyelids, and eyebrows, nor did the rest of the constitution of its body have a proper form and shape; ^C seeing that it had neither hands nor arms, and to its buttocks there was grown a fish's tail hanging down. When the emperor saw this portent, he ordered it to be killed, and he immediately kissed the sword. But the mother who had produced the monster itself, since she had contributed nothing by her own fault to the unexpected miracle, was absolved of the crime. Then also, the most excellent of the imperial horses, and the most spectacular in its golden trappings, suddenly fell down and burst. In the suburban districts of the ruling city, other monsters were also born: namely, a boy having four feet, and another with two heads, ^D and both were put to the sword.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

Concerning animals of human form that appeared in the waters of the Nile.

In the nineteenth year of the reign of Maurice, while Menas was governing Egypt, certain portents also appeared in the waters of the Nile. For after the commander came to the Delta (this place is famous among the Egyptians, having received its name from the shape of the letter) and at first dawn made his way to the bank of the river, suddenly from the river's bed a certain man came forth, bringing horror with him, similar in face to a giant, with a grave look, his hair yellowish and sprinkled with gray, with a huge chest, bearing something heroic in his back and arms, and as he leaped up from the waters as far as his pubic region, showing himself to be seen, while the rest of his body remained hidden under the water: just as if he were blushing

with the result that he even revealed the secrets of nature. ^A The leader, having beheld this, cast binding oaths, that if it were a demon, it should dissolve the spectacle and embrace tranquility; but if it were some creative power that had brought forth this [sign], it should not withdraw from the view until all had been satisfied by the unexpected sight. ^B Accordingly, that creature—for I would not dare call it a man—remained standing for a long time, constrained by the adjuration, and presented itself to be seen by everyone. Then, on the third day, at dawn, another living being, of feminine form (for nature indicated this quite clearly), emerged from the waves. For the smoothness of its face, the length of its hair, and indeed the entire conformation of its body, and its hair, partly braided and partly loose, and the splendor of its form, proclaimed it a woman: however, its hair was rather dark, its face fair, its nose moderate, and the fingers on its hands were comely. Soft lips blossomed in its mouth, its breasts were gently swelling, and its nipples were seen to protrude slightly from recent puberty. The river hid the rest of the woman’s parts, concealing the mysteries of the marriage bed from the spectators, just as if they were those not initiated into more sacred rites. ^C Therefore, the leader himself and his cohort fed their eyes upon that spectacle until the setting of the sun, at which time those creatures went into the innermost recesses of the river, having exhibited themselves to be seen in silence. For they offered the sight of themselves to their admirers in mute taciturnity. From all these portents of evil, the Emperor, by conjecturing, gathered the grave outcome of affairs. And even then he was perturbed by the fear of future events: because those who have diligently written histories have recorded that such manifestations of prodigies are by no means advantageous to republics.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

How Commentiolus and Priscus, the generals of the European regions, having engaged the Avars, slew over thirty thousand of the enemy. And again, certain things concerning Chosroes.

Not much time passed when Priscus and Commentiolus, the prefects of the European regions, having dissolved the peace which they had entered into by some artifice with the Chagan of the Avars, secretly, as the Emperor commanded, crossed the Ister on rafts. And as soon as they were brought to Viminacium (that is an island situated in the river Ister), and then suddenly engaged with the Barbarians and certain others, in the space of one month, in very many battles, they slew over thirty thousand Avars, Gepids, and Slavonians. And they captured over fifteen thousand of them; and, having obtained such a victory as scarcely anyone is known ^D ever to have reported against enemies, they turned back. But the captives, when the Chagan asked for them by an embassy, Maurice restored. In the wintertime, however, when the Roman forces, by the force of Commentiolus’s command, were crossing the stone-paved way of Trajan, with Gerontius, a man of ancient nobility, who was one hundred and twelve years old, as their leader,

^A many perished from the occurrence of an intense frost. Commentiolus therefore returned to Byzantium, while Priscus remained in Thrace to confront any incursions of the enemy that might occur. But in the early spring, when he had arrived at Constantinople, he was again declared commander. In the nineteenth year of the emperor Maurice, nothing of great consequence was accomplished between the Romans and the barbarians. At that time, however, Maurice sent forth his son Theodosius to be betrothed, having arranged for his lawful marriage to the daughter of Germanus, a man most distinguished and of great eminence among those who sat in the council of the Senate. But even Chosroes, then residing in Babylon, being incited by our allies—these being the Syrians and the peoples of the regions bordering on them—contemplated breaking the treaties made with the Romans. However, when the emperor sent an embassy to him, the treaties were indeed confirmed once again. But the envoy himself, after the embassy was concluded, was ill received, for the reason that he had told the emperor that the King of Persia had spoken these words in the midst of his listening satraps: "On account of the virtue of the envoy, I grant a release to the war." The emperor, having heard these things, was indignant; and for George—for that was the name of the envoy—the outcome of his embassy was perilous. For so it is that affairs often eventuate, that if a speech is not dispensed with the due measure that is required, it brings about great calamities for those who abuse it. And regarding these matters, so it is.

CHAPTER XXXVIII

^B Maurice was already in his twentieth year as emperor when he entrusted the command of Europe to his brother Peter. And a pestilence suddenly falling upon the city, afflicted it severely. But when the time of Christ’s nativity arrived (for the emperor was accustomed to celebrate the feast day with the people, as Maurice was wont to show the honor due to the multitude), some of the populace, stirred up by revolutionary ideas, instigated a sedition against him, and casting stones, they threw insults at him. He, having barely escaped the danger, fled for safety to the temple of the Theotokos, which it is the custom to call the Blachernae; this the Byzantines venerate with the utmost religious devotion. ^C For it is said and believed that the garments of the Virgin Mary are stored there in a golden, elaborate casket, and a certain portion of her own most desirable girdle, and the covering for her head, just as I have recorded in the preceding narratives. The emperor, however, having meted out only a light punishment to the seditious—such as would bring even the more notable of the revolutionaries to their senses, while for the rest he pretended that he would punish them—dissolved his wrath and again ordered them to return to the city. Peter, meanwhile, having taken up the Roman forces, arrived at Palastolus; and having harvested there, as autumn began, he moved toward the region of Dardania. For he had heard that the multitude of the Avars had gathered there, ^D camping by the river Ancus.

^A Mauricius exhorted Peter to do whatever he could against the Chagan, and not to allow the army to leave that place, but to betray it—if one might use that term—through some artifice and cunning administration; for he was indignant, mindful of past injuries, against soldiers who rejoiced in sedition and rebellion. Now the Chagan, proceeding secretly, ran through Macedonia, and, gathering to himself an infinite multitude of men, came near to Byzantium, offering to redeem each man for two gold coins. But since this condition seemed burdensome to Mauricius, and, overcome by avarice, he rejected such a cheap redemption, the tyrant, stirred to fury, cut down all the captives, many thousands in number. ^B It is believed that for this reason God became hostile to him; for it is said that Christ appeared to him in a dream and told him that he had been delivered over to Phocas, the commander of the soldiers. Having awakened, he ordered his brother-in-law Philippicus to be summoned from chains—for he held the first letters of his name in great suspicion regarding the succession, and for this reason he kept him in bonds, thinking that the empire would devolve upon him. Mauricius therefore asked him if he knew a soldier named Phocas. And when he replied that he was the man who had but a short time ago impudently resisted his power, the emperor, inquiring as to what kind of character he had, asked: and when he learned that he was a coward, he answered, "If he is truly a coward, then in truth he is also a killer." For the rest, Mauricius, because of the slaughter of such a multitude, incurred the hatred of all and was attacked by the reproaches of everyone.

CAPUT XXXIX. How the army in Europe, having committed sedition, declared the centurion Phocas emperor of the Romans.

Since the army had been in Mysia for a rather long time, and the soldiers were requesting from Peter, for the sake of rest, an end to the war and their discharge, and a return to their own homes; but Peter, resembling a mute, thought that one ought to obey the emperor’s command rather than their desires, and that he should continue to hold the army beyond the Ister—it is a wonder how the multitude, rejecting the order, took this badly. Peter withdrew twenty miles from the army. To him the soldiers sent eight chosen men, among whom was also Phocas, the most pernicious of tyrants. ^C After he persisted in his opinion, and asserted that it was the command of the emperor that the army should remain beyond the Ister, the multitude itself, burning with anger, set the centurion Phocas over themselves, having rejected Peter. Afterward, having also raised Phocas on a shield, they proclaimed his election with the greatest acclamation. ^D When Peter learned of this, he fled and, having arrived, reported the whole matter to the emperor. Mauricius, having summoned the tribunes of the people, investigated the number of the people, not at all anxious about the fact that the deserter Phocas had been proclaimed commander.

^A He strengthened the approaches to the city with guards, and then sent an embassy to the rebellious multitude. But the tyrant paid no attention at all to his commands, rejecting both his reasoning and his pleas. The Roman army, having stirred up sedition, sent a letter to Theodosius, the son of Maurice, who was diverting himself with hunting at Callicratia, proposing that he either assume the imperial power himself, or yield it to his father-in-law Germanus; for they declared that they would no longer endure to see the Roman forces governed by Maurice. When these things became known to the Emperor, Germanus, as if he had given cause for suspicion that the army had conspired to stage a coup and had chosen him to administer the commonwealth, took refuge as a suppliant in the temple of the Mother of God, which report says was built by Cyrus, who was consul under Theodosius and was a very good man, and extremely devoted to eloquence and all learning, which he pursued with singular love and what one might call a sound madness. ^B Later, however, Germanus also moved to the great church, which Justinian, with great ambition and magnificence, built at great expense to God, the Lord of all. For this very reason, the Emperor ordered his son Theodosius to be beaten with clubs, suspecting that he had secretly advised his father-in-law Germanus to take refuge in divine protection. He also sent certain men to try to drag Germanus out from there. But the city populace, when they learned of this, raised a tumult, defending the right of sanctuary of the temple, and persuaded the fugitive to remain inside. Led by their fury as if by a guide, many hurled numerous insults at the Emperor and mockingly charged him with holding the views of Marcion, a heresy that is foolish, fatuous, and contemptible, along with a certain foolish piety. As the riot gathered strength, the guards who were protecting the city walls, hearing of these events, joined the rest of the seditious mob. The people, surging from every side like waves in the storm of this evil, rushed upon the house of Constantine, who bore the cognomen Lardys, ^C a man whom Maurice held especially dear among the other patricians; for he was an illustrious man, one of the leading senators who had been raised to the height of the patrician dignity, and he had been appointed prefect of the eastern regions, whom it is the custom of the Romans to call the Praetorian Prefect. After they had consigned his house to all-consuming fire, and had committed this act with an audacity devoid of all reason, they departed.

CAPUT XL.

The flight of Maurice; the arrival of the tyrant in the imperial city; and the slaughter of Maurice and his children.

Therefore, Maurice, despairing of the situation, and seeing the multitude, through hatred of slaughter, falling away to the tyrant, and seeing even Cyriacus (who had assumed the hierarchal dignity after John, having previously been a presbyter and bursar of the Great Church) reviling him, ^D at midnight laid aside the imperial purple, put on a private garment,

^A and embarking with his wife and children upon a dromon, he attempted to flee towards the East, taking with him no small amount of money. And after he arrived in the Gulf of Nicomedia, at the temple of the Martyr Autonomus (it is called Soraeum in the vernacular, and it is distant from Constantinople by about one hundred and fifty stades), he was beset by a fierce storm, and was suddenly hindered by being shackled by his habitual gout—a disease whose unfortunate and abundant visitation is accustomed to afflict those who perpetually inhabit the imperial city. From that place he sent his son Theodosius to Chosroes, both to ask him for aid and to remind him that when he was in danger of losing his kingdom, Maurice had preserved it for him. He pointed out that it was fair and pious that he should render him a like favor, since his entire house was now brought into the greatest peril. But Germanus, father-in-law of Theodosius, son of Maurice, having encountered the Roman Empire as if it were a rudderless ship, attempted to take the helm. However, the Greens (this is an order and faction of the Roman populace) dashed his hopes. Wherefore, he too, in desperation regarding the state of affairs, betook himself to the benevolence of the tyrant; and he bowed down to him toward whom fortune, so to speak, had inclined. For the faction of the Greens immediately went to the palace, and with imperial acclamations applauded the tyrant. Phocas, having sent a certain prominent man named Theodore, summoned the city’s prelate (the people are accustomed to call him Patriarch) and the notables of the people. They met in the temple of John the Baptist, in that suburban part of the city which is called the Seventh, and placed the imperial crown upon that pestilent beast. ^B And he immediately entered Byzantium with splendid equipment, scattering gold everywhere like rain, and gladdening the citizens of Byzantium with that munificence at his entrance. Afterwards, he also proclaimed his wife Leontia as Augusta, and led her into the imperial palace in a splendid triumph. Furthermore, as the factions of the people were fiercely contending with one another in strife, it is said that one of them [1] vulgarly remarked: "Go, learn the present state of affairs; for Maurice is not yet dead." Hearing these words, the tyrant for the moment restrained the brawling multitude, but on the following day he was driven, as if by some Furies, to the slaughter of Maurice. ^C Therefore, having brought him together with his wife and children from that gulf I mentioned—with Theodosius also having been recalled from his mission—and while Maurice was suffering from the pains of gout and chilblain, he transported them from the region opposite Constantinople, where the city of Chalcedon is, to the Port of Eutropius. There, he first slaughtered the children in the sight of their father, at each of whose deaths the father uttered these words: "Just art thou, O Lord, and just is thy judgment." ^D Afterwards, he himself also became a sacrifice to the sword, enduring the severance of his head, having again displayed his virtue in the magnitude of his calamity. For when the nurse of the children had secretly stolen one of the royal youths and offered her own nursing child for the slaughter in his stead, Maurice, who was standing by, caused the secret of the concealment to be made known to the executioners, not deeming it just that anyone else should be punished, he himself being punished by God. Wherefore also...

with the infant put to the sword, the slaughter poured forth a milky fluid instead of blood. In this manner the emperor, who had appeared superior to the laws of nature, ended his life, having passed sixty-three years of age, and having ruled in the empire for twenty of them.

Chapter XLI. On the stripping of imperial corpses, and other murders by the tyrant. And on the demonic prediction of the imperial slaughter made at Alexandria.

^B The imperial bodies were tossed about on the shores of the sea there, an object of tearful mockery, so that they stained those waters with the purple gore of blood, at one time being gently driven towards the land by the surge, and at another time retreated by the returning force of the sea. Removed thereafter from that place, they brought forth a harvest of tears from those who beheld those imperial bodies exposed naked for a spectacle. And in such a manner, being viewed by the tyrannical soldiers, they were cast heedlessly into the so-called field of the Tribunal, which is at the Seventh. For it was fitting that the inhuman army should also participate in the defilement through the sight, so that the God who hates evil and whose judgment is impartial might snare them all in the nets of retribution. For that army, a source of ruin, having fallen into certain dire and most great evils, departed this life through diverse sufferings. For when the Persian war had resumed its freedom, and Chosroes—seemingly feigning anger because of his hatred for Maurice—stirred up the war, the army was brought under divine scourges and penalties from battle in various ways: sometimes being fiercely struck by celestial fire at the very hour of battle, at other times being afflicted by famine and every kind of looting; the greater part was given to the edge of the sword, and became the casual business of steel. Nor did victory forsake the Persians, until that tyrant-loving and impious army had completely perished; a fact which is sufficient as proof of what shall be said: for a short time later, when fourteen years had passed, and Heraclius was waging war against Razates, as he held a levy of soldiers, he found only two remaining from that multitude which had sided with the tyrant among the rest. But when time subsequently brought new forces to the Romans, and that entire vicious army had perished, the state of success shifted to the Persians. And that Babylonian dragon, Chosroes, the son of Hormisdas, is put to death without mercy, and the Persian war found its end. The tyrant himself, however, being intoxicated with his impieties, was arming himself for the slaughters of others. Indeed, he consigned Peter, the brother of Maurice, to the sword; and the frequently mentioned general Comentiolus is also put to death; and in addition, the Georg[ius], son of Philippicus...

and Prosentinus, to whom Peter had entrusted his cares and councils, were slain. Finally, ^B Theodosius, the successor of Maurice, was overtaken while on his journey, as has been said, and brought back. A rumor, however, prevails that the executioner, sparing Theodosius, slew another man very similar to him with the sword, and that Theodosius himself, having fled and experienced many hardships in many places, later died of a disease. And that rumor was spread throughout all the dominions of the Roman empire. But some barbarian error—daring to assert this on very flimsy conjecture—gave rise to this story, for the reason that his head alone, among the others who were killed, was not displayed. But the investigation itself, wearied by the utmost care, learned that Theodosius was also dead. The tyrant then reduced the empress Constantina herself, along with her three daughters, to the rank of commoners, and at first shut them up in a lowly and humble little dwelling, but in the end he ordered them to be put to death by the sword. The remains of them and of the other imperial bodies (there were ten in all) were, long after, deposited in the church of the martyr Mamas, near the wall which is named Xylocercus. This church was built by the eunuch Pharasmanes, who was prefect of the imperial bedchamber under Justinian. Furthermore, this epigram is inscribed on the monument of their common sepulcher:

O I, thrice-wretched, of two kings the consort, Daughter of Tiberius, and wife of Maurice: As a queen and most fruitful mother, I have taught What a boon for many is the scepter of rulers. I lie low by the fury of treacherous soldiers and populace, And with me my husband and my offspring lie. I am no living corpse of Niobe in my misery: Have the Cissean or Jocasta borne more? So be it, O Father, for justice: but why are small pledges killed, A throng utterly ignorant of human guile? No longer, O Rome, shalt thou pluck shade from my branches, For the stock has been uprooted by the Thracian North Wind.

^C This also I shall by no means pass over in silence, a thing worthy in the highest degree of being committed to the memory and records of historical events. For at the very hour when Maurice was put to death, the whole affair, just as it had happened, was reported at Alexandria by the statues which stood in the Tychaeum, a famous region of that city, and which then slipped from their pedestals, in a louder voice than usual, telling a certain man of distinguished life who was walking there by night what was befalling the emperor Maurice. ^D This fact the Augustalis of Alexandria and Peter, who was entrusted with the reins of the Egyptian diocese, having carefully marked by certain signs, found to be true on the ninth day after that bitter news arrived in Egypt. We have learned that many things of this kind have happened which portended a future event. But if we were to attempt to relate them one by one in writing, time would utterly fail us.

CAPUT XLII. How Maurice prayed to God that he might be allowed to pay the penalty for his sins in this life; what he attained; and concerning the buildings constructed by him.

^A It is said, however, that the Emperor Maurice, some time before his execution, fearing for himself because of the conscience he had regarding his neglect of the captives—for, overcome by greed for money, he had not ransomed those whom the Chagan, roused to fury, had slaughtered—sent letters to the most venerable temples of the world, requesting that prayer be offered for him to the one Christ our God, from the super-substantial Trinity, and that men preeminent in virtue should ask of God that he might receive punishment for the deeds he had committed during his life in this mortal and transitory world, and be allowed to make payment in this life. And they say that a voice came to him from one of the images of Christ while he was awake, foretelling that his desire would be fulfilled, and that he would pay the penalty in this life. Some declare that this image is the one established in the Chalkē; ^B but others, most notably, claim that it is the one in the Beautiful Gate of the church of the holy forty martyrs, which depicts the appearance of Christ with great precision.

It is said that the Emperor Maurice also held eloquence in high regard, and honored lavishly those who had labored in the most beautiful and excellent studies; and he constructed many renowned works throughout the subject lands, one of which was the church of the forty saints, which Tiberius had formerly undertaken to build. They say that he also founded the temple of the apostle Paul in Tarsus of Cilicia. It is also mentioned that he remitted the third part of the taxes to his subjects, and gifted thirty talents to the Byzantines so that they might restore the water conduit. Moreover, as to that renowned crown and ornament which the Augusta Sophia, his mother-in-law, and Constantine, his wife, had labored over with great ambition and magnificence, he—without having worn it even once—offered it to the greatest temple of God, consecrating it to the holy table and suspending it by a small golden chain, which remained until the sacking of the city. ^C During his reign, Philippicus and his brother Peter also built monasteries: the former in Chrysopolis, and Peter in Constantinople, in the district called that of Areobindus. Both temples were dedicated to the Theotokos. Furthermore, the Patriarch Cyriacus raised up a magnificent monastery for the deaconess. Thus, the affairs concerning the Emperor Maurice reached this kind of end. ^D

CHAPTER XLIII

When Phocas took up the empire, evils of many kinds immediately beset the Roman state. For in the fifth month after he began his reign, he sent letters to Chosroes—as the custom had for a long time existed between the Romans and Persians—through his intimate, Leontius, who had also perpetrated the murder of Maurice, in which letters he signified that he had ascended to the imperial dignity. He, however, moved by the intemperance of his anger, desiring to exact a righteous vengeance for Maurice, broke the agreed-upon treaties with the Romans and sounded that trumpet so destructive to the world; for this broke the happy and tranquil state of both the Persians and the Romans. And from this the Persian war took its beginning. The Persians quickly subdued Syria, Palestine, and also Phoenicia. They added to their dominion Armenia, and soon Cappadocia, Galatia, and Paphlagonia. Carried by an uncontainable momentum, they even arrived at Chalcedon itself, which is situated opposite Byzantium, and established their camp there. On the other side, the Avars ran through all of Europe, devastating everything; and the slaughter of men was most abundant, such as no one had ever seen before, with not only the citizens being killed everywhere, but the military forces themselves as well. Living creatures also suffered a great plague, and there was no yield of any kind of grain. Famine and pestilence were added, as well as immense winters, surpassing their own nature, so that the sea was frozen by the cold and later cast up dead fish. Every age of the human race was slaughtered, and temples and other buildings, constructed with beauty and splendor, were ruined by the frequent incursions of the Persians, because Chosroes, as has been said, had broken the peace ostensibly on account of Maurice. And while he, on the outside, was destroying everything with fire and was afflicting the commonwealth, Phocas was treating the city worse from within. Consequently, in a certain equestrian contest, because some had stung him with a jest, calling him a drunkard, he flared up in a rage, and having seized not a few of the more prominent citizens, he cut off the limbs of some, cast others into the deep sea, and shut others in prison. ^{B C}

CHAPTER XLIV

At Antioch, indeed, there was a grave tumult, because the Hebrews again rose up against the Christians on account of recent events. In that sedition, the Jews were superior. For they slew a huge multitude of Christians, either by the sword or by the fire which they had cast into their dwellings. Those [Jews], Phocas, the impious ^D

^A ruler, having exacted the penalties for their wicked deeds and actions, subjected to punishment and drove from the city. But they, having cast down from his throne Anastasius, the prelate of the city ^B and successor to Gregory, and having tied a rope to his feet, dragged him through the city and delivered him to a shameful death. For they cut off his private parts with a sword while he was being dragged, and cast them into his mouth. Afterward, as if he were some burnt offering, they handed him over to the fire; a man preeminent in wisdom and virtue, and a primary teacher of the dogmas of the Church, since he left many lucubrations to it. His book is that which is named *Odeegos*, that is, *Guide*, and the definitions of the dogmas of the Church, and many other things besides. Also, the book on the sixth Psalm, published at the beginning of the fasts. I myself have also read a certain oration of his, written to the Antiochenes upon his entry, and another, pacificatory, which he composed in the twenty-third year upon returning in postliminy to his throne, when Maurice held the empire: whom he also praises in that writing, because he was recalled from exile. To this Anastasius, because he philosophized on Mount Sinai and there subdued the sense of the flesh, the cognomen Sinaite was given. And he indeed, having been slain in the tumult of the people, ended his life. But after him, when he had shone in the episcopate for six years since his return, another Anastasius received the pastoral office of Antioch. And before him also Cyriacus, the bishop of the city of Constantinople, having passed eleven years in the sacred function, left the see to Thomas: who, having performed the office of deacon and sacellarius in the Church, ascended to the pontifical throne. And he, having performed the sacred office for no more than three years and two months, yielded the throne to the impious Sergius. This Thomas built a very large house in the episcopal residences: which house, having received its name from its founder, retains it to this day and is called the Thomaitis. But Sergius was indeed a deacon of the Church: but he drew the lineage of his race from the Syrians and Jacobites.

Chapter XLV.

Concerning the schisms which crept into the Church after the fourth and fifth holy synod.

Who this Jacob was, from whom the Jacobites were named, and other things besides which have been omitted in this history, I think it right to relate here. I shall take the narration from higher up. After the dignity of Eutyches and Dioscorus was abrogated by the fourth holy synod at Chalcedon, those who defended their dogmas, having made a defection from the Catholic Church, called themselves *diacrinomenoi*—that is, the separated or the doubting—and could not by any means be induced to approve those things which had been rightly ordained in the holy council. These were divided into twelve sects; from which many thousands of heresies sprouted. Of those followers, some were called Eutychianists, because they accepted only Dioscorus and Eutyches: who taught that Christ was indeed consubstantial with the Father, but not with us: for the reason that

^A after the transition, and with Zeno and Anastasius having girt themselves with the imperial authority, those who were opposed to the Fourth Synod received the greatest freedom. At that time, also, the party of the Acephali, of whom Severus of Antioch became the leader—wrongly teaching one nature of the Word and the flesh—and the throngs of the Jacobites, Theodosians, Julianists, and many others, assaulted the Church. These were also called Monophysites, inasmuch as they claimed and taught one nature of the Word and the flesh after the ineffable union. But they were named Acephali because they did not accept the *Henotikon* of the Emperor Zeno, to which he had not subjected the holy Fourth Synod by anathema. They were called Acephali [i.e., 'Headless'] because they were not governed under any bishops. Hence, when their bishops and priests had died off, neither was baptism performed according to the established order of the Church, nor was any offering or divine rite performed, nor was the ecclesiastical ministry celebrated as is the custom. ^B Having preserved a supply of Communion from earlier times, they would break it into very small pieces during the Paschal season and distribute them to those who came together; at which time each person would take for himself as much as he wished, claiming the authority to do so. And because each one wished to insert into the faith whatever seemed good to him, a very great multitude of schisms and heresies sprouted up: Tritheites, Agnoetae, and Theopaschites, Jacobites, Armenians, Severites, and Aphthartodocetae, beginning from Julian of Halicarnassus, who thought that the Lord's body was indeed created, but taught that it had been incorruptible from the very moment of conception. ^C Those who opposed this cohort called them Phantasiasts and Manichaeans, just as they in turn named them Phthartolatrae and Scenolatrae. With heresies of this kind, especially those of the Severites, pressing hard upon the Church, even the mention of the Council of Chalcedon remained for a very long time suppressed, and it was violently tossed and turned; and from this, a great deal of sedition and confusion was stirred up in the Church for a long time. For the mobs, standing by the rails of the altars, threatened to beat the priests and shamefully eject them from the sacred precincts if they dared to make any mention of the Council of Chalcedon, or to inscribe it in the sacred diptychs, or to proclaim the names of the divine Fathers who promulgated its decrees. ^D Those same people also brought to bear the greatest zeal to utterly overturn the divine Tome of the holy Leo, who is among the saints, bishop of elder Rome—which the pious have rightly called a pillar of orthodoxy and of the right opinion—because it firmly supported that Synod. This Tome, the most divine Pope Eulogius of Alexandria later expounded, and he clearly declared it to be composed in the best and most proper manner; he also left behind to the Church of Christ many other writings worthy of account and remembrance. And long after him, Anastasius the patriarch of Antioch, who was from Sinai, also fought a great deal on behalf of the holy Fourth Synod, and flowing with great force against the tenets of the Monophysites and Acephali, with all his arguments...

^A he proved that the book most rightly and fully taught orthodoxy in all respects, and that its dogmas were most full of true piety. Truly, however, Dioscorus and Gaius, and Severus of Antioch, and also Jacob, and John the Grammarian, who was called Philoponus (who published many difficult books against the fourth synod, which are not so easy to refute), opposing that very synod, most impiously wrote and taught that there is one nature, but two ^B subsistences, in Christ; and Severus, in particular, composed a whole book on this subject. Yet even they, in their own books, sometimes acknowledge two natures in Christ; which many, not observing accurately, thought to be sound and pious, and were subsequently led into their impiety in another way. And these things prevailed until the inauguration of Justinian. But after he had taken up the scepter of empire with nobility, all the leaders of these heresies, including Severus, betook themselves to their caves and hiding places like wild beasts, when he gathered the holy Fifth Synod of the hundred and sixty-five holy Fathers. Although Justinian himself was afterwards snatched ^C obliquely, by the madness of some beguiler, into the heresy of the [Aphthartodocetae], and strayed from the right path, as has been said by me in the previous book. Furthermore, I will describe in order the mixture and division of most of these heresies.

CHAPTER XLVI Furthermore, concerning the heresy of the Monophysites; that they hold insidious and dangerous opinions regarding the incarnation of the Word of God.

But what, finally, is the opinion held by the Monophysites, from whom, as from a most evil root, the aforementioned heresies sprouted, hanging together like a circle or a chain, I shall now say. For when they distinguish the natures that have come together in Christ, each one by itself, they are forced to confess that they are two. But when they unite both in the incarnation of the Word, they do not posit two natures that have come together in an unconfused manner, but one composite nature. For while we say ^D there is one composite subsistence, they, on the contrary, propose one composite nature. And they exemplify the reasoning of their position by saying that just as man possesses a soul and a body, and the nature of the soul is one thing, and that of the body is another, if one were to contemplate each by itself; yet when they come together, they make a man, possessing one composite nature; for, they say, one ought not to call man two natures, but one composite one. In this same way they think concerning the Savior Christ: namely, that He consisted of two natures, but that after the union, these two natures became one composite nature. Which the Church finds altogether abhorrent. For this reason, the great Gregory in theology also says that the "out of which," and the "in which," and the "what things,"...

as if it were an abominable crime, completely turns away from it. ^A For this reason, the great theologian Gregory, explaining his opinion concerning the two natures, says with the utmost wisdom and subtlety that nature preserves them in what they are: "from which," "in which," and "what they are." He posited "from which" in order to declare the nature from divinity and humanity; "in which," that he might preserve the natures after the union, and not confuse them because of their union with one another; and "what they are," that no one might think that Christ became something else after the union of the natures.

Let us consider from this the greater precision of this dogma. It is acknowledged that our body is constituted of four elements: fire, air, water, and earth, in which it also consists. And in the body, those "from which" and "in which" are preserved, but "what they are" is not likewise preserved. For after the union of the elements, our body is not purely fire, nor unmixed air, ^B nor incorrupt water, nor genuinely earth, but something else beyond those four. And this is sufficiently evident from sense perception itself. For each part of our body is something other than the elements. But in the divine union, nothing else was formed after the concurrence of the two natures, but it is this very thing: Christ, namely, God and man.

This heresy became, as it were, more precise and subtle than the others because it boasted of having wise men as its leaders and defenders, and most especially the aforementioned John Philoponus, who flourished under the present empire—of whose affairs we are now treating—who labored most in the perplexities of Aristotle, and was, moreover, the leader of the heresy of those called Tritheites. Concerning who this man was, one must speak.

CHAPTER XLVII.

Concerning the philosopher John Philoponus the Tritheite.

By birth he was an Alexandrian, and a supreme philosopher. Although his style and diction are not greatly praised, in disputes and in the proofs of his arguments, he was truly admirable, being ^C deeply versed in the doctrine of Plato and Aristotle. For this reason, for their obscure sayings, and most especially for those of Aristotle, he left behind most brilliant commentaries, which exist even to this day. This man, then, having been asked by the impious Sergius, who at that time presided over the church of Constantinople, to establish a heresy of this kind, composed a most acute book which is entitled *The Arbiter*, or *On the Union*, and he wove together all that heresy in ten chapters. To prove his abominable dogma, he moved with the utmost precision the whole of philosophy. ^D Furthermore, that same Philoponus published many other writings against the Greeks, against the remaining heresies, and against certain others, in which he also sets forth this impious dogma, stating: "All these bodies subject to sense and the eyes were brought forth by God from non-being into being, according to matter and form; and these are corruptible, and they perish according to matter and form."

≫ ^A To these, however, God provides other bodies far more excellent than these visible ones, incorruptible and everlasting. He also asserts that at this consummation, or destruction, of this visible world, there will be another creation of a new world. He also establishes that the resurrection of the dead is the indissoluble union of rational souls with the corruptible body. Conon, resisting these opinions, rejected both him and his writings, as will be told by me, even though he had formerly accepted them. Conon himself said that bodies do not perish according to matter, but only according to form, and are remodeled, with the matter itself receiving a more excellent species. He says that the creation of the world is according to matter and form, but the destruction ^B of the same is according to form only, and not according to matter. He defines the resurrection of the dead as the indissoluble union of this body with the rational soul.

Philoponus, in addition to what we have said, also philosophizes—or rather, to speak more truly, trifles—the following: "Therefore, every nature is not spoken of simply, as to what it is, but in two ways. There is one way, when we contemplate the common account of any nature in and of itself, such as the nature of man or of a horse, existing in none of the individuals. But there is another way, when we consider that same common nature as existing in individuals, and receiving a subsistence that is most particular in each one of them, and henceforth fitting no one else except that one alone." For the rational, mortal animal that is in me is not common to any other men, nor could the nature of the animal that is in this one exist in any other. ^C That the teaching of the Church holds these concepts concerning natures and subsistences is clear from the fact that we confess the nature of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, but we dogmatize that there are three subsistences or persons of these, by which each is distinguished from the others by a certain property. For what could be the one nature of the divinity or the common account of the divine nature, considered in and of itself and separated by mere speculation from the property of each? And that we know the name of "nature" again in a more specific way, seeing the common account of the nature become the specific property of each on each of the individuals, or subsistences, and thus unable to be applied to any other that falls under the common species—this is clearly that from which we preach the union of two natures in Christ, I mean of the divinity and of the humanity. ^D For we do not say that the common divinity, as understood in the Holy Trinity, was incarnate; for thus we would also be predicating the incarnation of the Holy Spirit. But neither do we think that the common account of human nature was united to the Word of God. For in that way it would justly be said that the Word of God was united to all men who existed before the advent of the Word, and to all who were to exist after it. But it is clear that we speak here of the nature of the divinity as the nature of the common divinity in the subsistence of the Word. Whence we also confess one nature of God the Word incarnate, clearly distinguishing it from the

Father and the Holy Spirit; ^A so that here, too, having understood the common account of the nature to be proper to God the Word, we say the nature of the Word has been made flesh. And again, by saying that the nature of humanity has been united to the Word, we designate that most particular subsistence which the Word alone has assumed out of all.

CHAPTER XLVIII.

Furthermore, concerning the heresy of the Monophysites, that it holds insidious and dangerous opinions regarding the incarnation of God the Word.

But Philoponus, with his followers, divides the common human nature, and even the divine itself—which we say is indivisible—into very many persons, distinguishing it and distributing it individually to particulars, and parceling it out among the three subsistences of the supersubstantial nature. ^B This, however, is entirely alien to those who think rightly, as the great theologian Gregory clearly demonstrates in his book written to Evagrius the monk concerning the divinity. Nor did some of the learned men who came after him leave those things erroneously uttered by Philoponus unrefuted. For many others also opposed these, but above all the monk Leontius most nobly opposed them in a book of thirty chapters, by which he both utterly overthrew that same heresy and strongly confirmed our pious opinion. After this man, the admirable deacon and referendary George Pisides, a contemporary of his, although ^C somewhat younger in age, engaging against said heresy with the most beautiful iambics which he was accustomed to write, tempering the serious matter with playfulness, relates it in this way, refuting its absurdity:

He reckons one and then another with a pebble; For if you call one and another—one, The statement becomes a source of laughter even for children.

What he expressed here in verses is as follows: You say, O Philoponus, most laborious and wisest of all philosophers, that two natures are united in the Word: one of the divinity and one of the humanity. If, therefore, you say that two natures have come together in Him, how do you again compress two into one? For one and one are two, not one. ^D Therefore, if anyone regarding the same subject matter predicates two things, and again reduces those same things into one, he justly renders himself a laughing stock. Such was the heresy of the Monophysites, a heresy entirely contrary to the heresy of the impious Nestorius. For Nestorius, because of the two natures, enumerates also two subsistences; but these men, because of the one subsistence, posit also one substance and nature. But the heresy of Nestorius—that we may speak of this again—does not say that God became man, nor that He descended from heaven, and was united in nature and substantially to the human nature;

^A but rather by a specific relative disposition. For he claims that the Word of God was united to the man from Mary as if someone were to effect a union between friend and friend through a relationship. And while he escapes the notice of many by speaking of a union of God and man, he very clearly dogmatizes a separation and not a union in reality; for to say that the Word of God was not substantially united to the man, but according to some friendly relationship, is not an accurate union, but a true disjunction. Whence Nestorius used to call the same person both a mere man and a sublime one: a "mere" man, as being deprived of the substantial union of God, but a "sublime" one, as having been perfected in virtues from his first birth. Hence, too, the wretched man did not call the one who is truly Theotokos the Mother of God, but called her Christotokos, as having given birth to a divine man, supposedly, and a friend of God, and one who had received some unction from God, a prophetic or royal or high-priestly dignity; not, however, one who had truly been united substantially to God through the incarnation. Such, then, was Nestorius. But the most unfortunate Eutyches, though he held to better things in his confession—for he acknowledged that God was born of the immaculate Virgin and Mother of God, and in this one point he set forth something piously—yet he imagined his flesh to have been fictitious, and taught other things wrongly besides. For he claimed that the Word of God Himself was changed in an immutable way and became flesh, and that He fashioned the economy of our salvation in appearance and by pretense. Thus he asserted that all the bodily things of God were ^B phantastical, and he defined that even the crucifixion of that divine and uncircumscribed nature happened as a phantasm. And thus far let it be said concerning these two heresies, which are entirely contrary to one another, I mean the Nestorians and the Monophysites, whom John the Alexandrian, also called Philoponus, later led.

CHAPTER XLIX. Of John the philosopher, the Philoponian and Tritheite.

It is said, indeed, that Severus was the first leader of this heresy, and that ^C Philoponus later defended it. But after Severus, it is said that Theodosius, who became their pope at Alexandria, was the first to receive this heresy, and then others after him; from whom also those called Agnoetae and the Contobabditae—having taken their name from a certain place—proceeded: those who were also called Theodosians, because they followed the aforementioned Theodosius especially; but they were later subjected to anathema by him, as having fallen into the heresy of ignorance. ^D The others, however, because they did not accept the writing he composed concerning the Trinity, were called Contobabditae from the place, as we have said; they also, because they accepted only Severus, were called Severians. There is also another cohort of Severians who are also called Theodosians, because they admitted both of these as well as Paul, nicknamed the Black. And there are third ones

who are called Severians, and also Theodosians and Angelites, and Damianites; these likewise have their own bishops, from whom they receive matching names; the Contobabditae alone do not receive bishops. ^A Now these Severians, who are the same as the Theodosians, Angelites, and also Damianites, say that the Father is one, the Son another, and the Paraclete—namely, the Holy Spirit—yet another. They say that each of these is not a nature by itself, but that they have a common God or deity existing in them; and that, by participating in that deity in an indivisible way, each of them is God. They believe, however, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one subsistent entity, but that this common God himself is the substance and nature. The Angelites were so named by their adversaries from a certain place in Alexandria, bearing the name "Angelium," in which those who took the lead among them used to hold their assemblies; their adversaries also labeled them Sabellianists and Tetradites. There are, in turn, other fourth Severians, also called Petrites, having received this name from a certain bishop of theirs, Peter. They accepted Severus and Theodosius, but did not admit Paul and Damian, because they disapproved of the opinion of both of them, and because, by communicating with the Catholic Church, they did not approve the fourth ^B synod. For they profess that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each truly God in essence and nature in themselves, saying this not by number, but by an identical substance. Paul and Damian’s followers called them Tritheists, just as they themselves sometimes also called those others Sabellianists, as I have already said. Beyond this, there is also a fifth sect of Severians and Theodosians, who are called Cononites, who approve of Severus and Theodosius, and also a certain other bishop among them, Conon, from whom they are also named. Truly, these also profess that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each truly God, nature, and substance. Furthermore, they also speak of three persons, the holy Trinity indeed, and three subsistences. Saying that there are three substances and natures in number, similar in all respects according to the deity, and professing the holy and consubstantial Trinity as one substance—that is, nature—and one deity—that is, God—not by number but by an identical deity, they altogether shrink from saying "three gods" or "three deities." These indeed did not receive Damian, nor Paul, nor even the last among them, Peter; those following Damian, Paul, and Peter were the first to call them Tritheists. They ^C differed from them because those others, while refusing to say "three gods"—that is, three deities—regarding the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, also refuse to say "three substances in number," equal and identical. But these refuse to say "three gods" or "three deities," yet they confess three substances in number—that is, certain equal natures. Those who followed Conon, while formerly accepting the writings of John the Grammarian of Alexandria, known as Philoponus, which were composed by him against the Greeks and on other subjects, in the very end rejected both him and his writings and have delivered them over to anathema. ^D

Chapter L. On the monk Leontius and George Pisida.

^A Joannes this Philoponus the Alexandrian, as we have said, was the head of the heresy of the Tritheites, just as the philosopher Themistius once under Valens first led the sect of the Agnoetae. This sect had indeed been extinguished at that time, but then, reviving under those whom we have mentioned, the Severites, it devoured the multitude most severely, Severus the Acephalous having caused it to spring up again in the open. ^B The followers of this are called not only Agnoetae, but also Severites. They say that God the Word knows all things, but that the humanity united to Him according to subsistence is ignorant of very many things. They claim that He does not know the hour and day of the consummation of the whole world, as being lesser than the Father; because in the Gospel according to Matthew and Mark it is said: *But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.* ^C Starting from such words, the heresiarchs Arius, Aetius, and Eunomius first, and others afterward, spoke ignorantly and impiously, that the Father is of one nature, but the Son of another; and that the one is without beginning, but the other is a creature, having received a beginning in time, and that He does not know all things equally like the Father. This, having been received by tradition, the philosopher Themistius confirmed and defended even more. One might say that this heresy is a certain rill of the Arian dogma. The ancient originators of this heresy, when piety shone forth and prevailed, perished together with their invention. But at that very time the Severites greatly propagated that evil. Not long after, however, it vanished again, and that heresy was plunged into the depth of ignorance.

Chapter LI. On the division and schism of the Tritheites, who originated from Severus.

^D In addition to these things, at that same time the heresy of the Theopaschites again little by little began to sprout up, and growing daily, it proceeded to great increase. For Severus greatly fanned this, which had been dormant for a little while, and the many-headed hydra which was born from it. Its first parent was that Peter who was surnamed the Fuller, who dared impiously to add a supplement to the Trisagion hymn, as I have said above. For this Trisagion hymn, as it appears and as it seems to me, had already been handed down to the Church by the apostles, even before the times of Theodosius the Younger and the patriarch Proclus, just as also the *Lux hilaris* [O Gladsome Light], which was added; as in the thirty chapters addressed to Amphilochius.

^A For the great and famous Basil says: "Just as the *Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit* was discovered by Flavian of Antioch, with the help of Chrysostom." Under Theodosius the Younger, when Proclus held the patriarchate, since some at that time were attempting to attribute suffering to the divinity of the Only-Begotten, and because of terrible earthquakes, public supplications were being performed by the whole populace, a boy was suddenly snatched up into the air in the sight of all (as we have clearly explained in the fourteenth volume, chapter forty-six), having heard with his own ears, so simply, the thrice-holy hymn being sung in perfect harmony by the angelic orders without any addition; from which the whole Church has adopted the habit of chanting such a hymn continuously to God. Indeed, he who first composed this song borrowed from the angels: as they sang, *Holy, holy, holy*. But what follows, he took from the lyre of the sweetest harmony, the fortieth Psalm of David, fitting it in very nicely; for he says: *My soul has thirsted for the strong, living God*. And the author of the hymn itself preserved these words, *God and strong*, ^B intact and unchanged in any part, just as he found them in the Psalmist; he only changed the word *living* into a synonymous name, *immortal*. He also added the word *holy* to God, setting that name in opposition to idols, which are full of every abomination and are works of human hands. Just as he set *strong* against their utter weakness and infirmity, for they cannot move at all from their place. And likewise *immortal*: to expose the trunks of statues, which lack life, cannot breathe, and are not directed by sense or mind. But truly the Theopaschites, who took their origin from Peter and Severus, not wishing to apply this most wondrous hymn to the divine Trinity, but rather striving to sing it to the incarnate Word, dared to corrupt it with certain additions; wickedly adding the clause, *who wast crucified for us*, to the *holy, immortal*. ^C This evil was first begun by Peter the Fuller, and after him by the Acephalous Severus, or rather, it should be said, the many-headed hydra. Although his followers, in their calumny, attack Macedonius of Constantinople, saying he was the one who began such an addition. Certainly, as it appears, this heresy is old; as the much-suffering Athanasius clearly declares in his own words. Unless perhaps that holy Father foresaw and overthrew it, just as he also removed many other heresies by his writings, even though they arose only after his death. This very heresy, then, having started with the Fuller, and having been greatly increased in the second place by the followers of Severus, was not long after entirely extinguished, having been abolished by the Church of God; yet it still continues to be strengthened among the Armenians alone, who choose not to obey the catholic traditions, nor indeed to accept the account of the boy's being snatched into the air, who [revealed] the trisagion of this song— ^D *Thou art worthy at all times to be hymned with auspicious voices, O Son of God, giver of life; therefore the world glorifies thee.* O gladsome light of the holy glory, of the immortal, heavenly, holy, blessed Father, O Jesus Christ. Having come to the setting of the sun, and beholding the evening light, we praise the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, God. Thou art worthy at all times to be celebrated with auspicious voices, O Son of God, giver of life: wherefore the world glorifies thee.

^A Severus’s faction, having been greatly increased and frequented, not long after being abolished by the Church of God, vanished entirely. This is still kept to this day among the Armenians alone, who are unwilling to obey catholic traditions, nor do they approve of that boy caught up into the air, who, sent down from on high, openly revealed the divine voice and doctrine of that thrice-holy song. And the holy synod of Chalcedon received that hymn and handed it down to be sung simply in that way. Therefore, it would be truly a laughingstock and a joke if a song produced and chanted by the angels and the Seraphim themselves, and approved and confirmed by so many holy Fathers of the sacred synod, which explicitly proclaims one Godhead in three subsistences, were to be driven away by the opinion first of Gnapheus and then of Severus, and according to their judgment (if it pleases God), as if they surpassed the Cherubim, were to be corrected. But indeed, those who felt this way were called Theopaschites, having as their primary authors Peter Gnapheus and Severus, as has been said, and then Jacob. And they indeed from that point on contend to establish one nature in Christ, saying thus: "If we admit there are two natures in Christ, there will necessarily follow two wills along with them; and if this is granted, two persons and two operative powers, contrary to one another in every way, will also necessarily be introduced." ^{B C}

Chapter LII. On the opinion of the Agnoetae.

Jacobus, then, from whom the heresy of the Jacobites is even now named and celebrated, was Syrian by race, a man altogether obscure and of no renown, who was also named Zanzalus on account of his extreme poverty, as I suppose. Having accepted the dogma of Eutyches and Dioscorus, and furthermore of Peter Gnapheus and Severus, he strove mightily to propagate it among the Syrians. The Catholic Church, however, confesses our Lord Jesus Christ to be one subsistence consisting of two natures, I mean of Godhead and of humanity, in such a way that each of these, after the union, preserves its own properties entire, and the union of these two natures admits of no mixture and confusion, nor change and alteration; and that he is the same one who is God and man, and has two wills and operative powers, namely, divine and human simultaneously. Eutyches, however, said that there were indeed two natures before the union, but then they were united. After the union, he opined that they had passed into one nature, and that they had been confused and had undergone a commingling, so that the divinity even suffered the things that belong to the humanity, and vice versa. ^D Hence our divine Fathers named those who dogmatize these things Monophysites and Theopaschites. And in the same opinion Dioscorus, patriarch of Alexandria, and Peter Gnapheus, and Severus the Acephalus, bishops of Antioch, and others besides, were led astray. Truly, when the aforementioned Jacob was preaching the opinion of the Monophysites among the Syrians, a great schism arose. For those who adhered to the correct opinion were called Melchites, because they followed the holy fourth synod and the emperor himself (for *Melchi* in the Syrian tongue is king;

and those who ^A held contrary opinions were called by many and varied names. They were especially called Jacobites, because they followed Jacob, who, as I have said, was a zealous supporter of the Monophysite heresy. These too have been delivered to anathema, as have the Monophysites and Theopaschites. Later, they also drew to themselves another swarm of heresies; for, while believing in a consubstantial Trinity, they taught that there is one nature in Christ after the union, rejecting the holy fourth synod and casting off all the holy Fathers who followed thereafter. And what is greatest of all, they attributed suffering to the divinity of the Only-Begotten himself, by appending this addition to the *Trisagion* hymn: "who was crucified for us."

CHAPTER LIII.

On the heresy of the Theopaschites.

Derogating also from the faith in the birth of Christ according to the flesh, and saying that it happened only in appearance, like a phantom—not as we do, at intervals and piece by piece, but extending the time of fasting to the fifteenth day of the month of January—they celebrate the Annunciation, the Nativity, and the Baptism of Christ all together. They also strike out and introduce many sayings of the divine Gospel, attempting to establish their own opinion. And as if they had inherited the heresy of the Monophysites, Theopaschites, Aphthartodocetae, and Monothelites, they greatly embrace the addition to the *Trisagion* hymn made by Peter the Fuller, saying that the universal Church from the beginning proclaimed the *Trisagion* hymn in this way, but after the abduction of the child, it legislated it this way. This abduction they also describe as false, saying that it was not at all addressed to the tri-hypostatic Godhead, as the divine Fathers ^D teach, but to the Only-Begotten Word, Christ. And these same people also do not use leavened bread in the sacred

rite, ^A but use unfermented bread, and to this they add wine not tempered with water; by this action they signify one nature in Christ, and do not mix the chalice as we do, by which mixture we declare the union of the two natures. But those impious ones also celebrate the Passover, in the Jewish manner, slaughtering oxen and sheep according to the Jewish rite, and they smear the doorposts of their houses with the blood of the lamb. They do not partake of the body and blood of the Lord, but, sacrificing the lamb in the Jewish fashion and roasting it with fire, they partake of that. And they do not honor the cross until they have baptized it as if it were a man, and have driven a nail into the middle of it, and smeared it with the blood of the sacrifice. This they do in the name of Christ, showing that one of the Trinity was crucified, not understanding that in doing so they also crucify the nature of the Father and of the Deity, which is one and the same. And ^B binding three crosses together, they name them the holy Trinity; perhaps by these actions signifying that the holy Trinity was crucified. They also fashion images of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, which is most absurd; for images are of bodies that can be seen and circumscribed, not of those that are incomprehensible and invisible. Indeed, they nominally "honor" sacred images, but do not kiss them; they touch them only with their finger, and then they kiss that finger. They consider our communion to be nothing, and they knead the offering with oil and anoint it. They are also said to have institutions of various liturgies outside of the Church’s tradition and custom. And as if to sufficiently show themselves to be Monophysites, they sign themselves with the cross with one finger, from left to right; and on Great Friday they hide the divine cross in the ground ^C until the Great Lord’s Day [Easter Sunday]. Then, going around the streets and corners with lights, they search for it here and there, and once found, they bring it forth. As time went on, they adopted other indifferent practices, establishing their own fasts. On the Saturdays and Sundays of the holy Great Lent, they eat milk, cheese, and eggs, and they offer the sacrifice with unleavened bread; and they established the so-called Arziburus fast briefly before the day on which the eating of meat is forbidden.

CHAPTER LIV.

Concerning Jacob the Syrian and the Jacobites.

These things are held most strongly by those among them called Chazinzarians; this is no small faction of their dogma, for they are, so to speak, "cross-worshippers," for *chazus* is what they call the cross; ^D for the cross...

^A alone, as they say, they adore and venerate. Those who agree with them entirely seem to differ from such sects, and especially from the Jacobites. For they do not, like them, imagine one nature in Christ in a confused way, but two, just as we do. Yet they wrongly introduce another strange impiety, inventing by way of fable two persons in the one Christ, after the manner of the man-worshipper Nestorius; so that they say that at the time of the passion, one person suffered on the cross, while the other stood apart, separated from it, and was a spectator of the passion. They babble other nonsense of the same kind, filled with every sort of impiety. And while those of today do these things out of an irrational tradition, their ancient lawgivers and teachers ^B falsely claim that Gregory, that prelate of Great Armenia, handed down to them such rites; and especially the offering of unleavened bread and the cup without water, on the grounds that in the mystical supper the sacrifice was unleavened bread and wine alone. The apostolic Church admits none of these, lawfully preserving its ancient tradition. Furthermore, when questioned about the *Arziburi* fast, they say sometimes that they observe it because of the exile of Adam, and sometimes they say it is for the sake of the Ninevites; and at other times they say it is because of a fast which the Armenians once kept when they were about to be baptized by holy Gregory; and at other times they invent some other cause, evading the true reason, which is this: A certain teacher among them named Sergius kept a dog, which, being demonically possessed, he used as a great herald and indicator of his arrival; he called it *Arziburi*, which ^C in the Armenian language signifies "messenger." Whenever, therefore, his disciples and followers living in the towns and villages saw the dog coming on ahead, they would go out to meet their master, accompanying him as they went. But it happened that a wolf devoured the dog. Sergius set out for those to whom he had sent the dog on the day after he had sent it, and finding no one coming out to meet him, he took the matter grievously. But after he was informed that his dog had been devoured by a wolf, he ordered the Armenians to fast, mourn, and lament every year on fixed days for the death of his dog, because such a great good had been taken from their midst. And they bestowed the name of the dog ^D upon that fast, calling it *Arziburi*. But enough has been said concerning the Monophysites, the Tritheites, the Agnoetae, the Theopaschites, and the Aphthartodocetae, of whom we wrote more fully in the preceding book, and likewise concerning the Jacobites, the Armenians, the Chazinzarians, and others, of whom many were, from of old, leaders and teachers—certain Nestorii, Eutycheses, Dioscori, Gnaphei, and Severi, and Theodosii, and Juliani of Halicarnassus, and Gaini, and another such chorus of unfortunate men—of whose impious dogmas the aforementioned Jacob was the student and inventor. From whom also the Jacobites, by far the largest Syrian nation, have been named down to the present day.

Sed even Sergius, who not long before had taken up the reins of the archbishopric of Constantinople, was greatly infected by the contagion of this disease, through whom the heresy of the Monothelites was considerably propagated. Of these, enough: for I return to continue the history, intending also to bring this eighteenth book of histories to an end.

Chapter 55. On the abominable heresy of the Armenians.

Chapter 56. On the schism of the Chatzitzarii among the same.

^A stripped him of his purple robe and, having cast his friends and ministers away in various directions, he put a dark cloak upon him, and shortly thereafter led him in chains to Heraclius. Heraclius, upon seeing him, was very glad, and after he had heaped many insults upon him, he trampled him under his feet. And immediately he ordered that the tyrant's hands and feet be cut off; then, exposing his wanton lewdness—since he had done violence to many wives—he ordered his shameful parts to be cut away, and finally that his head be severed from his body. The body of this unhappy man was cast into the brazen bull that had been brought from Pergamon, and it was reduced to ashes, as was fitting, and his remaining race was extinguished along with him. Such was the end of the tyranny of Phocas, the most wicked of evils, who had insulted the Roman empire for eight years.

Ecclesiastical matters during the administration of this empire were in no way disturbed by innovations, given that secular affairs in both the East and the West were altogether ^B confounded by the calamities of disasters appearing on every side. At that time, Innocent governed the Roman Church after Gregory the Great. In the imperial city, after Thomas, Sergius held the ecclesiastical helm. In the Alexandrian see, after Eulogius, who had presided over it for twenty-five years, Theodorus Scribo performed the episcopal function for two years, and was succeeded with praise by John the Merciful, a Cypriot. At Antioch, after Anastasius, a second Anastasius held the episcopate. In Jerusalem, the successor of John was Neamus; after him, Isaac. Subsequently, before the city was captured and plundered, Zacharias administered the priestly office there. This present eighteenth book of [my] history contains a period of thirty-two years, reaching the year six thousand one hundred and thirty from the creation of the world, and the year six hundred and twenty-five ^C from the divine birth of the Lord.

EXPLICIT NICEPHORI CALLISTI XANTHOPULI HISTORIA ECCLESIASTICA

ON THE FOLLOWING CATALOGUE OF THE PATRIARCHS OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS: AN ANNOTATION BY ANSELM BANDURI (Imperium Orientale, vol. I, Preface and p. 190)

The catalogue of the Patriarchs of Constantinople, written by Nicephorus Callistus, is now published for the first time, translated by us into Latin and illustrated with chronological and historical notes. It exists in manuscript codex no. 3502 of the Royal Library, with characters so eroded and worn that it can only be read with great difficulty; indeed, on the first page, some words appear completely erased, which we have supplemented from other catalogues and, so that they may be distinguished from the others, enclosed in brackets. This catalogue of the Patriarchs of Constantinople written by Nicephorus Callistus, which seems to me most accurate, ends with John, who is also called Cosmas, of Sozopolis, who was indeed inaugurated as patriarch after Athanasius in the year of Christ 1294, but was driven from the see in 1304. But because it was my intention to weave the history of the emperors of Constantinople from Constantine the Great to the last Christian emperor, it was my pleasure to attach to this catalogue of Nicephorus Callistus the complete series of the Patriarchs of Constantinople in our Commentaries, to wit, of those who sat as patriarch a second time after Athanasius, down to Gregory, who was the last patriarch before Constantinople was captured by the Turks; this we have done from the Catalogue of the Patriarchs of Constantinople published by the most learned Father Labbe from a manuscript codex of the Clermont Library, in his *Apparatus of Byzantine History*; that catalogue, however, ends with that Joseph who died at Florence at the time of the council held there. The remaining patriarchs, down to the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, we have excerpted from the History of George Phrantzes. We have further illustrated this catalogue with chronological and historical notes for the reason that no one, so far as I know, had written specifically on the Patriarchs of Constantinople, and those who have spoken of them incidentally in universal Church history are cited by us here and there, not only Byzantine writers, but others as well, both published and unpublished, and indeed very many entire unpublished minor works, most opportune for the illustration of this subject, are inserted in their places.

NICEPHORI CALLISTI XANTHOPULI NARRATIVE ON THE BISHOPS OF BYZANTIUM AND ON ALL THE CONSTANTINOPOLITAN PATRIARCHS

The most holy apostle Andrew, having arrived in [Byzantium, preached] the saving word; and having established a Church of the faithful, and having erected a house of prayer in the city, which is now called Argyropolis, where in time...

^A of the deposit of the body of the holy martyr Adrian, he ordained as bishop of the same city Stachys, one of the seventy disciples, whom the apostle Paul mentions in the Epistle to the Romans. He indeed held the episcopate for 16 years. [Onesimus] 14 years. Polycarpus 18 years. Plutarchus 16 years. Sedecion 9 years. Diogenes 15 years. Eleutherius 7 years. [Felix] 5 years. Polycarpus 3 years. These men first held their assemblies in the oratory built at Argyropolis during the time of the persecutions. Athenodorus . . . having built an oratory in the city . . . which was later restored by the saintly Emperor Constantine, held gatherings there. Euzoius 6 years. Laurentius . . . Alypius 13 years, 6 months. Pertinax, a man of consular senatorial rank, 19 years. He raised up another church in a coastal place named Sycae, and named that house Irene. Olympianus . . . [Marcus] . . . Cyrillianus . . . [Castinus] . . . He raised up the holy Euphemia in Byzantium at a place called Petrium . . . ^B Titus 35 years, 6 months. Dometius, brother of the Emperor Probus, 24 years, 6 months. Probus, son of Dometius, 12 years. Metrophanes, son of Dometius, brother of the bishop Probus, and son of the brother of the Emperor Probus, 10 years. While he was managing the episcopate, the saintly Emperor Constantine came to Byzantium on account of the war undertaken against Licinius, and by him Constantinople was built. ^C He [Metrophanes] was present at the first synod, and became the first Patriarch of Constantinople. There are, therefore, bishops of Byzantium from the holy apostle Andrew up to Metrophanes himself to the number of 20. Then the patriarchs presided in this order: Metrophanes 10 years. Alexander 23 years, under whom Arius burst asunder. Paul the Confessor, Deacon of Constantinople, 3 years. After he was expelled by the Emperor Constantius, ^D Eusebius the Arian, who first at Berytus, then

^A transmigrated to Nicomedia, and finally went to Constantinople, and he presided for 12 years.

After his death, Paul is again restored, but is immediately cast out and exiled to Cucusus, where he is put to death by the Arians, and in his place is ordained Macedonius, a presbyter of the Church of Constantinople, an adversary of the Holy Spirit, for 5 years.

When he had been anathematized and cast out by Constantius, Eudoxius the Arian, who had previously been bishop of Germanicia and then of Antioch, presided at Constantinople for 7 years.

Demophilus the Arian, bishop of Beroea in Thrace, and having been transferred hither, presided under Valens for 12 years and 5 months.

Evagrius, orthodox, ordained by Eustathius of Antioch, for 6 years, and was sent into exile by Valens.

Gregory of Nazianzus, the Theologian, who held the episcopate for 12 years.

And upon his return to his own country, Nectarius, a man conspicuous in dignity, a catechumen of the Christians, and not yet having received baptism, is at once ordained and baptized by the holy synod of the 150 bishops. He presided for 16 years and 3 months.

John the presbyter of Antioch, Chrysostom, for 5 years and 6 months. Having been exiled to Comana, which is in the second province of Armenia, he died, and was laid to rest with the relics of the holy martyr Basiliscus. ^C

Arsacius, presbyter of the Church of Constantinople, brother of the aforementioned Nectarius, after the expulsion of Chrysostom, held the episcopate for 2 years.

Atticus, presbyter of Constantinople, for 20 years.

Sisinnius, presbyter of Constantinople, for 1 year and 10 months.

Nestorius, presbyter of the Church of Antioch, a heretic, for 3 years and 2 months. He was deposed and sent into exile in the Oasis, while the third synod was being celebrated.

Maximianus, presbyter, in origin a Constantinopolitan, for 2 years and 5 days.

Proclus, the disciple of Chrysostom, having been ordained bishop of Cyzicus by the aforementioned Sisinnius, and not being received by the citizens there, and having remained unoccupied in the interim, after the death of Maximianus, while his body was still lying in the sacred sanctuary at the time ^D, he is enthroned in the same most holy Great Church and presided for 12 years and 3 months.

Flavianus, presbyter of Constantinople, for 1 year and 10 months.

When he had been murdered by the impious Dioscorus, Anatolius, presbyter and apocrisiarius of the Church of Alexandria, is ordained, and he presided for 8 years and 8 months.

Gennadius, presbyter of Constantinople, ^A for ... months, 3. Acacius, presbyter of Constantinople and curator of the orphans, for ... years, ... months. Phraitas, presbyter of the holy Church of Thecla of the Sycae, for 3 months and 17 days. Zeno raised him up. Acacius, a heretical presbyter under Anastasius Dicorus, for 17 years and 9 months. He was also curator of the orphans. Euphemius, presbyter of Constantinople and curator of the poor at Neapolis, for 6 and a half years. After he was cast out by the emperor Anastasius, Macedonius, presbyter of Constantinople and keeper of the vessels, is created, who sat for 16 years and 7 months; he was expelled by Anastasius. Timotheus, presbyter of Constantinople and keeper of the vessels, for 6 and a half years, under Justinian the Great. Joannes the Cappadocian, presbyter and syncellus of Constantinople, under Justinian, for 1 year and 10 months. Epiphanius, presbyter of Constantinople and syncellus, for 16 years and 3 months. Anthimus, first of Trapezus, then presiding over Constantinople, for 10 months. This man was deposed by the ^B synod gathered against Severus and against Anthimus himself. Menas, presbyter of Constantinople and prefect of the hospice of Sampson, ordained by Agapetus, Pope of Rome, for 16 years and 6 months. After he had died, and while his body was still lying on the bier in the sacristy, Eutychius, presbyter and monk of the monastery of Amasea, was ordained, who sat for 12 years and 5 months. He was cast out by the emperor Justinian in the 38th year of his reign, and Joannes Scholasticus, presbyter of Antioch, is created after three days, and he sat for 12 years and 6 months. This man was under Justin, the nephew of Justinian. He died under Tiberius, and in his place Eutychius was again co-opted, who sat for 4 years and 6 months. The total time of his archiepiscopate is 17 years, lacking one month. Joannes, deacon of the Great Church and sacellarius, called the Faster, under Maurice for 13 years and 5 months. He was ordained after... days... in the reign of Tiberius; he died in the 14th year ^C of the reign of Maurice. Cyriacus, presbyter and oeconomus of the Great Church, for 11 years. He was under Maurice and under the tyrant Phocas. Thomas, deacon and sacellarius of the Great Church, for 3 years and 2 months. Sergius, deacon of the Church of Constantinople, from among those who... and at the phiala of the harbors of the hospice under Phocas and Heraclius for 28 years and 7 months, created on Great Saturday. Pyrrhus, presbyter of the Great Church and prince ^D of the monasteries, monk and abbot of the monastery in Chrysopolis, of the pan...

^A of the all-praised Theotokos, established by Philippicus and Gordia, sat for 2 years, 9 months, and 9 days. A sedition having been raised, he abdicated, and there is chosen...

Paulus, presbyter and oikonomos of the Great Church and overseer of the prisons, for 2 years and 26 days; and he died, and Pyrrhus was restored [nearby], for 4 months and 23 days. He died on the holy Pentecost. His entire time of episcopacy is 3 years, 1 month, and 2 days.

Petrus, deacon of the Great Church and oikonomos, referendarius, cancellarius, periodeutes of Thrace, and gerokomos of Saint Clement, for 12 years and 4 months. And the throne was vacant for 6 months and 16 days. ^B He was under Constantine, the grandson of Heraclius.

Thomas, deacon, chartophylax, notarius, and cancellarius, referendarius, skeuophylax, and gerokomos of the Scala, and curator of the poor in Neapolis... He was installed on Holy Saturday, and sat for 2 years and 7 months. He was under the same emperor.

Joannes, presbyter, protekdikos, and chartophylax of the Great Church, for 4 years and months... under the reign of the same.

Constantinus, cancellarius and skeuophylax, for 8 years, 11 months, and 7 days, ^C under Pogonatus.

Theodorus, presbyter [synkellos] and skeuophylax, and cancellarius, for 2 years. And he was cast out under Pogonatus.

Georgios, presbyter, synkellos, and skeuophylax of the church of the Theotokos named Sphorakion, under Constantine Pogonatus for 6 years and 3 months; and upon being cast out, Theodorus, the true patriarch, was restored, and sat for 1 year and 10 months; his total time of episcopacy is 3 years and... months, in the reign of Justinianus, son of Pogonatus.

Paulus, from the laity, protoasekretes, for 6 years and 8 months.

Kallinikos, presbyter and skeuophylax of the Blachernae, for 12 years. Under Justinianus Rhinotmetus, he was blinded ^D and cast out.

Kyros, presbyter and monk from the island of Amastris, for 6 years, under the same, and he was cast out by Philippicus.

Joannes, deacon and chartularios of the oikonomion of the Great Church, under Artemios and Anastasios, for 4 years and... months.

Germanos, that great bishop, first of Cyzicus, then of Constantinople, for 15 years, under Theodosius of Adramyttium and under Leo the Isaurian, called Conon, who also cast him out.

Anastasios, presbyter and synkellos, the first Iconoclast, for 24 years, under Leo and Copronymus.

Constantinus, monk and bishop of Syllaeum...

the former who was beheaded, for 12 years, under the same. ^A Nicetas the eunuch, presbyter of the Holy Apostles and ruler of the monasteries... for 4 months, under the same Copronymus, and Leo, whom he received from the Chazar [princess]. Paulus the Cypriot, deacon, almoner, who practiced the pious faith for some time, for 5 years, under Leo and at the beginning of the reign of Constantine and Irene. Tarasius the most holy, formerly first secretary, for 21 years. He continued even until Nicephorus, [who was] taken from the laity. He presided over the Seventh Synod and governed the patriarchate piously. Nicephorus the most holy, formerly first secretary, having become a monk, for 9 years. He was under Stauracius and Michael Rangabe, and up to Leo the Armenian... who drove him from the throne. ^B Theodotus Melissenus, first secretary, Iconoclast, for 6 years. He was under Leo the Armenian. Antonius, bishop of Syllaeum, [surnamed] Cassymatas, for 13 years, under Michael the Stammerer and Theophilus his son. Joannes, also called Jannes the sorcerer, Iconoclast, for 8 years and 3 months, under Theophilus and up to the beginning of the reign of Michael and Theodora, by whom he was deposed. Methodius the most holy, monk and presbyter, and formerly bishop of Cyzicus, then of Constantinople, for 4 years and 2 months, under Michael and Theodora. ^C Ignatius the most holy, for 11 years. He was cast out by Michael on account of the wickedness of Bardas his uncle, the brother of Theodora. Photius, formerly first secretary, having become a monk, under the same Michael the Drunkard and Basil the Macedonian, by whom he was expelled after having sat for 9 years. Ignatius again, for 11 years. Photius again, under Leo the Wise, for 9 years. Stephanus, the brother of Leo, under the same, for 3 years. Antonius Cauleas, under the same, for 2 years. Nicolaus Mysticus, for 11 years. He was cast down by Alexander, the brother of Leo. Euthymius, formerly syncellus, under Alexander, for 5 and a half years. ^D Nicolaus Mysticus again, under Constantine and Romanus Lacapenus, for 13 years. His total time of episcopacy was 24 years. Stephanus, metropolitan of Amasea, under Romanus, for 2 years and 11 months. Tryphon the monk, after he had held the episcopacy for a designated time, being an old man, until Theophylactus the son of Romanus had reached a suitable age, sat for 3 years, and was expelled by means of a stratagem. Theophylactus, the son of the Emperor Romanus, under him and Constantine Porphyrogenitus, for 23 years and 25 days.

^A Polyeuctus, under the same Constantine and Romanus the Younger, and Nicephorus Phocas, and until the proclamation of John Tzimiskes, 14 years. Basilius Scamandrenus, under John Tzimiskes, 4 years. Antonius, abbot of the Stoudion, under Basil the Bulgar-slayer and his brother Constantine, 6 years. Nicolaus Chrysoberges, under the same emperors, ruled the Church for 4 years and a half, the see having previously been vacant for 12 years and 8 months. Sisinnius, magister, under the reign of the same, 7 years. Sergius, abbot of the monastery of Manuel, under the same, 20 years. Eustathius, first of the presbyters of the palace church, 4 years. ^B Alexius, ecclesiarch of the monastery of the Stoudion, under the individual reign of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, and of Romanus Argyropoulos, and of Michael the Paphlagonian, and of Michael the Caesar Calaphates, and up to the beginning of Constantine Monomachus, 18 years. Michael Cerularius, under Monomachus, and Theodora, and Michael the Elder, and under the lord Isaac Comnenus, and Constantine Ducas, 15 years. Joannes Xiphilinus of Trebizond, 13 years and a half. He was under the lady Eudocia, and under Romanus Diogenes, and under Michael the son of Ducas, who was called Parapinakes. ^C Cosmas Hierosolymitanus, under the same Michael Ducas, and under Nicephorus Botaniates, and for a short time under Alexius Comnenus, and he resigned, having sat for 5 years and a half. Eustratius, the eunuch, surnamed Garidas, under Alexius Comnenus, 3 years. Nicolaus Grammaticus, who was at Lophadius, the divinely-chosen, for 27 years and... 10 days, under the same emperor. Joannes Hieromnemon of Chalcedon, under the same emperor, 23 years; he reached as far as John Comnenus. Leo Stypes, under the same John Comnenus, 8 years and a half. ^D Michael, a monk most dedicated to asceticism, of the Oxeia, and surnamed Curcuas, under the sovereign lord Michael Comnenus Porphyrogenitus, 2 years and 8 months, and he resigned. Cosmas Atticus, under the same emperor, 10 months, and he was expelled. Nicolaus Muzalon, a monk, who had been Archbishop of Cyprus, having resigned—as some said, his archiepiscopate, but as others said, only the administration of affairs—and having remained in retirement for 37 years, finally, under the Emperor Manuel, held the Constantinopolitan see for 3 years and 4 months; and when he had resigned ambiguously, having been pressured by the violence of the bishops

from whose number some had even been ordained by him, he was cast out.

Theodotus, monk and abbot of the holy monastery of the Holy Resurrection of Christ, ^A served under the Emperor Manuel for 2 years.

Constantine Chliarenus, deacon and sacellarius of the Great Church, served for 2 years under the same emperor.

Lucas, monk and Chrysoberges, served under the same Manuel for 15 years and 3 months.

Michael, deacon and sacellarius of the Great Church, the Anchialinus and supreme master of the philosophers, served under the same reign for 8 years and 2 months.

Chariton, monk and most noble abbot of the Mangana, held it for 11 months.

Theodosius Borrhadiotes served under the same and under Andronicus Comnenus for 6 years, and resigned on account of the emperor's wrath.

Basilius, deacon and chartophylax of the Great Church, by surname Camaterus and Phylacopulus, ^B was patriarch under Andronicus, and was expelled by Isaac Angelus, lest he crown another than the one who had crowned himself. The occasion for his deposition was that he had made a blessing having cast [rags] over a woman's head. He held the patriarchate for 2 years and a half.

Nicetas Muntanes, deacon and great sacellarius of the Great Church, served under the same reign of Isaac for 3 years and 10 days. But he was expelled, being accused of having urinated inside the sanctuary while officiating.

Dositheus, patriarch from Jerusalem, served for 9 days, and was immediately expelled by the agency of the bishops and clergy under the same Isaac, and is brought in:

Leontius, called Theotocites, abbot of the holy Apostles on the mountain of Saint Auxentius, concerning whom the emperor used to say ^C that the Theotokos had shown him to the emperor by night—held it for 7 months, and was cast out having given his resignation, the Emperor Isaac saying again: "The Theotokos so commands." And he ascends the throne.

Dositheus, for the first time patriarch of Jerusalem, who held the bishopric for a year and a half. But the schism ^D of his cause prevailing more and more, he is again deposed and withdraws to Jerusalem, and again resigned from both thrones.

Georgius Xiphilinus, deacon and great custos of the vessels, served under the same for 6 years, 9 months, and 27 days, and was tonsured in the monastery of the Phryganoi, which he had built under the reign of Alexius Angelus, brother of Isaac.

Joannes, deacon and chartophylax, Camaterus, served under the same Alexius up to the capture of Constantinople for 5 years, 8 months, and 7 days. He lived also after the capture of the city for 2 years, 4 months, and 14 days, and died in Adrianople from a shortage of water while the Latins were besieging it, having previously resigned at the request of those who were in Nicaea and of the Emperor Theodore Lascaris.

^A The capture of Constantinople by the Latins took place in the year 6712 (that is, 1204 of Christ), in the month of April, on the seventh day of the week, in the seventh indiction, during the sixth week of the fasts.

After the capture of the city, the first to be appointed in Nicaea by the Emperor Theodore Lascaris, on the 20th of the month of March of the ninth indiction, was Michael Autorianus, the Great Sacellarius of the Church, who died after having presided for 6 years, 5 months, and 6 days.

The throne remained vacant for 10 and a half months, because the emperor was away in the Thracesian theme; and on the 28th of September of the second indiction, on the first day of the week, the Master of the Philosophers and Chartophylax of the Great Church, Theodore Irenicus, called Copas, was elected. And he died after having held the episcopate for one year, [....] and 3 days.

^B When the Emperor Lascaris was in the Thracesian theme, the heads of the Church and the bishops decided to send their opinion and votes in writing to the emperor, by whose order Maximus, the Abbot of the monastery of the Acœmetai, was promoted. But when the emperor had returned, he was appointed by him according to custom on the third day of the month of June. He was, however, unlettered, and someone who had spent his time only in the women’s quarters, having previously fled from the city and later been named the spiritual father, or confessor, of the emperor. He presided for 6 months and died. This man incited the emperor against the Nicaeans.

Manuel the Deacon Sarantenus, surnamed the Philosopher, [presided] under the same emperor for 5 years and 7 months. ^C

Germanus, that most wise and holy man, hailing from the Anaplus, the son, as it was said, of a fisherman, having first been a deacon of the Great Church, was after the capture of the city tonsured as a monk in the monastery of Saint George of the Paneumorphos at Achyrane. John Ducas Batatzes raised him up. He governed the Church rightly and holily, writing against the Latins and composing other books. At his death, having changed his name, he was called George the monk. He ruled the Church for 18 years, and was buried at Nicaea in the monastery of the Cyriotissa, having worked many miracles.

Methodius, Abbot of the monastery of the Hyacinth, [presided] under the same Emperor John Ducas for 3 months, and having died in the same monastery of the Hyacinth, he was buried there. ^D Thinking that he knew many things, he in reality knew little.

Upon his death, the throne remained without a shepherd for many years.

Another Manuel, the proto-priest of the same Emperor John, a man continuously devoted to secular learning from his youth, [presided] for 11 years, and he died.

Arsenius, a monk of the Autoriani, who had practiced the ascetic life in the lake of Apollonia, later, under Theodore Lascaris, well-instructed in encyclical learning, was created reader, deacon, and priest; then he...

^A is ordained patriarch, receiving his orders day by day, because the emperor was hurrying his departure, and he crowned him immediately. He occupied the see for 5 years, and was expelled by the emperor Michael Palaiologos, because he had disregarded the young emperor John, and had not made him emperor as the promise of his oaths required.

Then Nicephorus, formerly bishop of Ephesus, receives the throne, and after having held it for one year, he dies.

When Constantinople was taken, Arsenios the holy ^B once again presided for 2 years. But when the boy John had died, he is harassed again; Michael becomes emperor, and he was exiled to Proikónnesos, where he died. This man crowned the emperor Michael twice, first at Nicaea, then at Constantinople. The city was taken by the Romans in the year 6765 (Christi 1257), on the 25th of July, on a Monday, in the second year of the reign of Michael Palaiologos.

Joseph, abbot of Galesios, formerly a cleric of the emperor John, who had been married, sat for 8 years, and because he had been joined with the Latins, he is cast out by the emperor Michael.

Joannes Beccus, deacon and chartophylax of the Great Church, for 8 years. He formed ^C the union with the Latins during the reign of the emperor Michael Palaiologos, and having been deposed by the most pious emperor Andronikos Palaiologos, he is sent into exile; and then there is brought back the confessor Joseph, who sat for 4 months. Upon his death,

Gregorios Kyprios, reader and protoapostolarios, is co-opted, and he presided for 16 years. But because of some offense concerning a certain book which he had written against Beccus, he is removed by dispensation.

Then Athanasios from Macedonia is created [patriarch], who, since he involved himself too vehemently in affairs, was cast out by the people, after he had presided for 4 years under the emperor [Andronikos].

Joannes, monk and presbyter, abbot of the Pammakaristos and confessor of the emperor, from Sozopolis, who was formerly called Kosmas, a most peaceful and ^D most meek man and truly a man of God, presided for 9 years; and when he had resigned under the same emperor, he was deposed, and Athanasios is brought back again.

It should be known that from the holy apostle Andrew, the bishops... of Byzantium up to Constantine the Great are twenty in number. From Constantine the Great, or from the holy Metrophanes up to the most peaceful and meek John, one hundred and eleven. In total, from the apostle Andrew up to the aforementioned John, there are 130 patriarchs, in the year 6800 [Christi 1292].

ANSELM BANDURI ON THE CATALOGUE OF NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS OBSERVATIONS AND NOTES

^A *Andreas the most holy.* I consider those among the Byzantine bishops, who are numbered by the Greeks up to Metrophanes, to be fictitious. I do not think it necessary to prove a matter so manifest by the authority of writers; nor does time permit, given my various duties. It may suffice here to note that three bishops of Constantinople before Metrophanes are referred to with other names by Cedrenus, who writes on page 256 that the first bishop of Byzantium was Philadelphus, in the reign of Antoninus Caracalla: *“Under him, Philadelphus was established as the first bishop of Byzantium, for three years; for before him, a certain presbyter had presided over the Church for eight years.”* At that time, Philadelphus was constituted as the first bishop of Byzantium and presided for three years; for before him, a certain presbyter had presided over the Church for eight years. Symeon Magister and Logothete has the same in his *Chronicle*, who further relates that in the third year of Gordian, Eugenius was created the second bishop of Byzantium, who administered that see for twenty-five years: *“In the third year of Gordian, Eugenius became the second bishop of Byzantium for 25 years.”* Where Cedrenus, on page 257, has only this: *“And Eugenius became bishop of Byzantium for 25 years.”* Then the aforementioned Logothete reports thus concerning Rufinus, the third bishop of Byzantium: *“Then Numerian reigns, who was a captain of Mysia. Under him, Saint George and Saint Babylas suffer martyrdom in Antioch. And Rufinus presides over the Church in Byzantium for 9 years.”* Then the emperor Numerian, duke of Mysia, reigns. Under him, Saint George and Saint Babylas suffered martyrdom at Antioch. Rufinus, however, presided over the Byzantine Church for nine years. Cedrenus has the same on page 264, except that he makes no mention of Rufinus. But what they write concerning the martyrdom of Saint Babylas is false, since Saint Babylas had died a martyr before the time of Decius.

^C *Cyrillarius.* It is written above in red letters *Cyriacus*.

*Metrophanes.* What Nicephorus Callistus writes here concerning Metrophanes—namely, that he lived in the episcopate for ten years, was present at the Council of Nicaea, and was the first patriarch of Constantinople—are matters of much controversy. The most reverend Petrus de Marca in book V of *De Concordia*, chapter 3, and the very learned Baluze in the same place, in the *Observation* which he subjoins, attempt to show that Metrophanes was still alive at the time of the Nicene Council; and they attempt to do so by the authority of Eusebius, who in book III of *De vita Constantini*, chapter 7, reviewing the provinces from which bishops came to that council, says: *“From Spain itself, the man much celebrated by the talk of all, together with other remainder of men, took his seat. Truly the bishop of the Royal City was absent on account of old age; but there were presbyters present who fulfilled his place.”*

^B The very place of Eusebius is cited by Socrates, book 1, chapter 5. The words of Eusebius are: *“From the Royal City, however, the one presiding was absent due to old age.”* They assert that the bishop of the Royal City, who was absent on account of senile age, is not to be understood as the Roman pontiff, who at that time was Saint Silvester; and they attempt to demonstrate this from the acts of the Nicene Council collected by Gelasius of Cyzicus, which are held to be published in Vol. II of the *Concilia*. That writer himself confesses that he transcribed these word-for-word from the third book of Eusebius’ *De vita Constantini*: *“Thus, Hosius, much celebrated by the Spaniards, holding the place of the bishop of great Rome, Silvester, sat with the Roman presbyters Vitus and Vincentius and with many others. But the bishop of that city which now reigns, named Metrophanes, was not present on account of his old age; but the presbyters of his who were present supplied his place; one of whom was Alexander, who obtained the bishopric of the city after Metrophanes.”* Photius in his *Bibliotheca*, codex 88, testifies that he read these same Acts of the Nicene Council, interpolated by Gelasius of Cyzicus, where some excerpts from them are held; which indeed assert the same: *“The order, he says, which held the dignity of the presbyter, to be present in the person of the very Metrophanes of Constantinople. For he was hindered by deep old age, for the time of his life had extended beyond the hundredth year.”* The excerpts of the *Lives* of the patriarchs of Constantinople, Metrophanes and Alexander, which are held in Photius’ *Bibliotheca*, codex 236, affirm the same thing. But not only do the aforementioned writers refer the cited words of Eusebius to the bishop of Constantinople, since Nicetas Choniates in his *Panoplia* and Epiphanius Scholasticus hold the same sentiment. Hence it came about that the most reverend Petrus de Marca, Baluze, and Pagi believed those words of Eusebius to refer to the Byzantine bishop; although Valesius, in his Eusebian notes, refutes the quoted writers, saying that it could in no way be understood of the bishop of Byzantium, since at the time of the Nicene Council, Constantinople had not yet been dedicated and adorned with the title of the Royal City. But Baluze immediately occurs to this argument, saying that Eusebius did not write those books of *De vita Constantini* until after the death of this emperor, and therefore long after the dedication of Constantinople, which therefore could be adorned with the title of the Royal City after the death of Constantine, taking into account the time, not of the thing itself, but the time when Eusebius was writing those things. For, says Baluze, Eusebius does not speak simply of the Royal City, but of the city which was then reigning, *βασιλευούση*, as a distinction from Rome, which later in book V of *De vita Constantini*, chapter 69, he constantly calls *βασιλίδα* in two places, never *βασιλευούσαν*. Wherefore, in order that the true and genuine sense of Eusebius be retained, this passage should be translated into Latin this way: *“The bishop of that city, in whose power the empire is.”* Thus Baluze responds to Valesius’ Eusebian notes. But Eusebius in *De vita Constantini* everywhere calls ancient Rome...

^A *the city that rules over the Roman empire*. Chapter 53, where he speaks of the tyranny which Maxentius exercised at Rome: *“For he had long been despoiling this city that rules over the empire.”* Chapter 59, speaking of the arrival of Constantine in the city of Rome: *“...journeying towards the city that rules over the empire.”* And chapter 4, where he relates that Constantine the Great erected a trophy of the cross in the middle of the city of Rome: *“...in the city that rules over the empire.”* But those who assume those words ^A of Eusebius refer to the Roman pontiff do not bring forward these arguments alone; for the most learned and our most dear abbot de Longuerue, in the very scholarly letters which he wrote to Pagius, seems first to call into doubt those Acts of the Council of Nicaea collected by Gelasius of Cyzicus, as well as the *Excerpts from the Lives of Metrophanes and Alexander, Patriarchs of Constantinople*, which are found in Photius, codex 256, which indeed construct the same thing; then truly, to prove that those words of Eusebius ^B refer to the Roman pontiff, this same most learned man praises Sozomen, who understood the same words regarding the Roman pontiff, except that he mistakenly substituted Julius in the place of St. Silvester. Likewise, Theodoret, who in book I, chapter 8, understands the words of Eusebius as referring to the Roman pontiff: *“He of Rome, on account of his advanced age, was left behind,”* and a little later says that Silvester was then sitting at Rome; and in chapter 4 of the same book, Theodoret relates a letter which Alexander of Alexandria wrote to Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople, about the rising Arian heresy, and about Arius whom he had recently deprived of communion, with this title: *“To the most honored brother and fellow-minister ^B Alexander, Alexander sends greetings in the Lord.”* And so that no one may doubt that this Letter of Alexander of Alexandria was written to Alexander of Constantinople, or rather Bishop of Byzantium, as Theodoret also, in chapter 5 of the same book, relates that before the Council of Nicaea, nay, even when Arius began to divulge his first heresy, Silvester was sitting at Rome, Vitalis and Philogonius at Antioch, Macarius at Jerusalem, Alexander at Constantinople, and Alexander at Alexandria: *“At that same time, Alexander of Constantinople was deemed worthy of the priestly office, resplendent with apostolic gifts. Therefore, the Alexander of the Alexandrians, etc.”* But the things which Pagius has on this matter are of entirely little moment; for to confirm his own opinion he praises only one passage of Theodoret, namely the letter of Bishop Alexander of Alexandria to Bishop Alexander. And this Bishop Alexander, to whom the letter was written, he labors in vain to assert is not ^C the prelate of Constantinople, as it is easy for anyone to know from those things which we said a little above. See what Cardinal Baronius writes about Metrophanes, who confines the times of his see within a three-year period.

Col. 452 D. *Alexander.* Socrates, Sozomen, Theophanes, both Nicephori, and Zonaras record that Alexander sat in the see of Constantinople for 23 years; but Cardinal Baronius affirms that he died in the year of Christ 340. But if the things we have spoken of above from Theodoret are true, Alexander administered the see of Constantinople for more than 25 years, or at least the year of his death is not well established by Baronius. *Ibid. Paulus.* Paul succeeded Alexander in the see of Constantinople, in the time of Constantius Augustus, not in that of Constantine the Great, as Valesius labors in vain to show in his *Ecclesiastical Observations* on Socrates and Sozomen. Before he accepted the episcopal dignity, Paul was sent into exile by Constantius. See Pagius on the year of Christ 340, XI ^D et seq. But the year in which Paul succeeded Alexander in the see of Constantinople is wrongly [assigned].

*Ibid. “And you were killed there by the Arians.”* Concerning the death of Paul, see Sulpicius, chap. 2; Socrates, lib. II, cap. 21; Theodoret, lib. II, cap. 5; Sozomen, lib. IV, cap. 2. Moreover, the death of St. Paul, whose feast the Greeks celebrate on September 6, and the Latins on June 7, is assigned by Baronius to the year of Christ 351.

*Ibid. Macedonius, etc., 5 years.* I do not know from where the five years that Nicephorus writes Macedonius sat in the see of Constantinople are to be counted, namely whether from the first time he occupied that see after the death of Eusebius, or from the death of Paul; since the writer of the *Alexandrian Chronicle* says that Macedonius was deposed because of many crimes, under the consuls Constantius Augustus X and Julian Caesar III, in the year of Christ 360: *“In that year, on the 15th day of the month of Peritius, the Great Church of Constantinople was dedicated. Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, was deposed for many crimes of his own, and Eudoxius was established in his place as bishop of the same Church, etc.”* From this place in the *Alexandrian Chronicle* it appears that Macedonius occupied the see of Constantinople for more than 5 years.

*Ibid. Eudoxius, etc., ... 7 years.* It is written here above in red letters [that he sat] for 7 years. But Eudoxius perhaps ruled the see of Constantinople for more than seven years; however, not nineteen years, as is read in Socrates; and that this is a mistake of the copyist, Valesius shows in his notes on him. Otherwise Socrates would be contradicting himself; since the same writer in book II, chapter 42, writes that Eudoxius was substituted in the place of the deposed Macedonius at the Council of Constantinople which began in 359 and continued into the following year, but the same Socrates, lib. IV, cap. 14, and also Philostorgius lib. IX, cap. 8, relate that he died under the consuls Valentinian Augustus I and Valens Augustus III. But Sozomen, lib. VI, cap. 13, says that Eudoxius died when Valens was heading for Antioch, and paused for a while in Nicomedia. Furthermore, Theophanes writes that Eudoxius held the see of Constantinople for ten years. *Ibid. Demophilus, etc., 13 years, 5 months.*

It is read in the version above, where by the carelessness of the bookmen it is read under Valens; which indeed is only found in the margin of our texts, and in the manuscript is read above in red letters, *Eudoxius*, and below, *Valens*. Concerning Demophilus, who was substituted by the Arians in the place of Eudoxius, one must read Philostorgius, book ix, chapters 10 and 14.

*Col. 453 B. Evagrius the Orthodox, etc., 6 years.* Theophanes writes that in the 5th year of Valentinian Augustus, Evagrius was immediately elected by a small band of the Orthodox after the death of Eudoxius; at which time the Arians set Demophilus over themselves: yet Evagrius was immediately expelled from the see by Valens, but Demophilus was confirmed in it, as the aforementioned author narrates in the same place.

*Ibid. Gregory of Nazianzus, etc., 12 years.* Thus have the catalogue of St. Nicephorus, the Menaia on the 30th of January in the commemoration of the three holy doctors of the Church; Amphilochius in the *Life of St. Basil* speaking about Gregory Nazianzen; and Gregory the presbyter in the *Encomium* in which he wove the *Life of Gregory*. But Theophanes writes that holy Gregory Nazianzen administered the see of Constantinople for only two years. Cedrenus hands down that Gregory tarried in Constantinople for a decade and a little more. Yet it is certain that Gregory stayed in Constantinople for no more than three years, and administered the Constantinopolitan episcopate for only a few weeks; for he was both proclaimed bishop and deposed in the same synod; and in the year of Christ 381, on the Kalends of August, when Theodosius gave law 5 of the Theodosian Code *De fide catholica*, Nectarius was already bishop of Constantinople, and the Council of Constantinople was already finished, as is evident from the same law.

*Ibid. John the presbyter of Antioch, etc., [years...]* St. John Chrysostom was driven from the throne twice; first at the synod at the Oak, in the year of Christ 403, then at the Constantinopolitan synod in the year 404, which indeed happened as the feast of Easter was approaching, and after a few months Chrysostom was driven into exile. See Socrates, book vi, chapter 18. Many things that deserved to be said about St. John Chrysostom and his episcopate would have been said, had not Pagius diligently examined everything; whence I intend to refer the reader to him. ^B *Ibid. Sisinnius, etc., 1 year, 3 months.* In the *Compendious Chronography* of the holy patriarch of Constantinople, Nicephorus, and in the *Tables of Theophanes*, two years are attributed to Sisinnius. But Socrates, book vi, chapter 26, asserts that Sisinnius was ordained on the day before the Kalends of March, in the next following consulship, which was the first of Theodosius XII and Valentinian Junior Augustus. On which year the last day of February indeed fell on a Sunday, on which day the ordinations of bishops were accustomed to be held. Sisinnius died, however, as the same Socrates narrates in the place cited just above, in the consulship of Hierius and Ardaburius, in the year of Christ 427, on the 9th day before the Kalends of January.

*Ibid. Nestorius, etc., 3 years, 2 months.* Nestorius is ordained bishop of Constantinople in the consulship of Felix and Taurus in the year of Christ 428, on the 4th day before the Ides of April, as Socrates writes, book vii, chapter 29. But the deacon Liberatus, in chapter 4 of his *Breviary*, says that the ordination of Nestorius took place on the Kalends of April. Which indeed is more likely, for the Sunday of that year, on which the ordinations of the bishops of Constantinople were accustomed to be held, fell on the Kalends of April, or the first day of the same month, as Pagius very well teaches against Baronius and Garnerius, who agree with the error of Socrates. Nestorius is deposed in the year of Christ 431, and Maximianus is consecrated in his place, as is to be seen below.

*Ibid. Maximianus, etc., 2 years, 5 days.* Saint Nicephorus of Constantinople writes that Maximianus held the see for 2 years, 5 months. Thus have also Socrates, book vii, chapter [35]. Maximianus was elected bishop after a space of four months from the deposition of Nestorius, as the same author says, book vii, chapter 35: *When four months had passed after the deposition of Nestorius, Maximianus was chosen for the episcopate, a man ascetic in his life; and he himself had also been ordered among the presbyters.* After a space of four months from the deposition of Nestorius, therefore, Maximianus is elected bishop, being a man of monastic life: yet he had also been co-opted into the order of presbyters. Which indeed happened on the 2nd of October, in the consulship of Bassus and Antiochus, in the year of Christ 431, as the aforementioned author narrates, chapter 37 of the same book: *Maximianus therefore being chosen for the episcopate in the consulship of Bassus and Antiochus, about the twenty-fifth of the month of October, the affairs of the churches were quiet.* When Maximianus had been elected to the Constantinopolitan episcopate, in the consulship of Bassus and Antiochus, on the eighth day before the Kalends of November, the tumult of the churches quieted. Maximianus died, however, in the consulship of Areobindus and Aspar in the year of Christ 434, on the day before the Ides of April, etc., as the same Socrates reveals in chapter 49 of the same book. Whence it appears that Maximianus had lived in the Constantinopolitan episcopate for two years, five months, and also some days; which fact Valesius did not notice in his *Notes* on the same Socrates, nor did Pagius, who handles the matter ^D *ex professo*, as they say.

*Ibid. Proclus, etc., 12 years, 3 months.* Proclus, before the body of Maximianus was committed to burial, is placed on the episcopal throne by the bishops who were present by the order of Theodosius the Younger, as Socrates narrates, book vii, chapter 40, discoursing on the death of Maximianus, to whom he also explains the cause of this hasty election. This indeed happened, as the same author hands down in the place cited a little earlier, in the consulship of Areobindus and...

and Aspar, in the year of Christ 451, on the day before the Ides of April. But Proclus died on the 24th of October, as is held in the Menologion of the Greeks on the same day, in the year of Christ 446, of which no one doubts. Therefore, Proclus sat in the Constantinopolitan episcopate, not for just 12 years and three months, or eleven years, as the same Nicephorus Callisti writes in his *Hist.*, book xiv, ch. 47, but for thirteen years and some months, as is certain from the aforementioned.

Col. 453 D. *Ἐν τῷ ἱερατείῳ.* In the sacred adyta, I have interpreted. But what part of the church the *hierateion* is, is entirely uncertain, as Ducange says. Dionysius the Areopagite, *De hierarch.*, ch. 3, clearly distinguishes the *thysiasterion* (altar) from the *hierateion*, such that *thysiasterion* is what the Greeks commonly call the *bema*, and the Latins the presbytery; but the *hierateion* is the nave of the church, for the first centuries did not recognize a choir, as it is today; as we have observed, says Ducange, in *Constantinop. Christ.*, book i, no. 77. Therefore, Dionysius, in the cited place, where he establishes two orders of the deceased, speaks thus: "Gathering the sacred choir, if the one who has fallen asleep was of the priestly order, the divine hierarch, having laid him before the divine altar, departs from the prayer and eucharist to God; but if he was assigned to the holy monks or the sacred people, he lays him out beside the venerable *hierateion* before the holy entry." Which last words are to be understood of the doors of the temple. For Pachymeres in his *Paraphrase* did not fully grasp the sense of Dionysius, nor did Allatius in his *Dissert. de Narthece*; for he is such as to say that the corpse of a monk or a faithful one is placed in the lower part of the temple toward the doors, as presbyters are before the doors of the *bema*. By that notion perhaps Theophanes used *hierateion* in the 14th year of Zeno: "The monks of the holy ^B church handed the letter to Acacius in the *hierateion* on Sunday." Although it must be admitted that *hierateion* is sometimes taken for the *bema* itself. Since, therefore, the *hierateion* was properly the very nave, in which the holy people stood, from there the *laos* (people) were called, or the people subject to the bishop, who specifically consists in the *hierateion* of the church, etc.

Ibid. *Φλαβιανός*, etc., "year 1, months 7." So holy Nicephorus has in his *Chronography* and also the *Menaea* on the 16th of February, on which the Greeks celebrate the memory of Saint Flavian, successor of Proclus. The tables of Theophanes, and Zonaras under Theodosius the Younger, show that Flavian sat for two years in the Constantinopolitan episcopate. But since Flavian was sent into exile in the year of Christ 449, in which he also died, as Marcellinus writes, Pagius thinks Flavian obtained the Constantinopolitan see not before the year of Christ 447. See the cited Pagius at the year of Christ 446, no. 8 and following, and at the year of Christ 449, no. 14.

Ibid. *Ἀνατόλιος*, etc., "8 years, 3 months." Concerning Anatolius, see Baronius at the year of Christ 458, no. 31 and following, and also Pagius at the same year, no. 8 and following.

Col. 455 A. *Γεννάδιος*, etc., "years... months 3." St. Nicephorus in his *Chronography* writes that Gennadius sat in the Constantinopolitan episcopate for 13 years and 2 months. From this, the number of years is to be supplied, which in the catalogue of Nicephorus Callisti appears eaten away by moths and bookworms. The tables of Theophanes and Zonaras ascribe to Gennadius the round number of 15 years. Therefore, the death of Gennadius, who had succeeded Anatolius in the Constantinopolitan episcopate in the year of Christ 458, is most correctly assigned by Baronius to the year of Christ 471.

Ibid. *Ἀκάκιος*, etc., "years... months...". Wrongly in this catalogue of Nicephorus Callisti is Acacius repeated twice, namely before and after Phravitas, as appears from the *Chronography* of St. Nicephorus CP. and from the tables of Theophanes; and also from other writers. But I think this happened through the ignorance of a scribe, who for one Acacius ^C creates two; for Acacius succeeded Gennadius to the Constantinopolitan throne, and lived in the episcopate for 17 years and 9 months, as both Nicephorus have it. Acacius dies, as Theophanes writes, in the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 481, which begins on the Kalends of September of the year of Christ 489. With this agrees Victor Tunnensis, who writes that the death of Acacius occurred in the consulship of Eusebius, namely in the year of Christ 485. "Acacius," says the lauded writer, "Constantinopolitan bishop, dies under condemnation, and in his place Flavian is ordained bishop, who, having died in the third month of his promotion, Euphemius, keeper of the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon, succeeds in the episcopate." But whom Tunnensis calls Flavian, Nicephorus calls Phravitas. Furthermore, Acacius was deposited first by the Ephesian synod, which was convened while Basiliscus was emperor; then by Pope Felix. However, he was condemned not as a heretic, but as a supporter of heretics.

Ibid. *Φραΐτας*, etc., "months 3, days 17." This Phravitas is also called so by St. Nicephorus in his *Chronography*, and he says that he sat on the Constantinopolitan throne for three months and 17 days. Theophanes calls him Phravitas, and attributes to him three months of the CP episcopate. Nicephorus Callisti names him Flavitas in book vi, ch. 13. So also has Zonaras, who attributes to him three months and a half. Victor Tunnensis, however, in the place cited a little earlier, calls him Flavianus, and narrates that he died in the third month of his promotion. Which indeed happened, as the same writer has it, in the consulship of Eusebius in the year of Christ 489.

Ibid. *Εὐφήμιος*, etc., "6 years, 6 months." The tables of Theophanes show that Euphemius sat on the Constantinopolitan throne for seven years. Nor did Euphemius, as Pagius says, contradicting himself, take up the CP episcopate in the year of Christ 499, but 489, as is evident from the place of Victor Tunnensis cited a little earlier. Indeed, Euphemius is driven into exile by the Emperor Anastasius in the 6th year of the same Augustus, 496 of Christ, as Theophanes hands down, and not indeed in the 5th year of the reign of Anastasius as Cedrenus has it. The same Theophanes relates the matter at greater length in the cited place.

Ibid. *Μακεδόνιος*, etc., "16 years, 7 months." Macedonius took up the CP see in the 6th year of the reign of Anastasius, 496 of Christ; he is driven into exile by the same Augustus, in the consulship of Secundinus and Felix, in the year of Christ 511, as Marcellinus writes in his *Chronicle*, whence this Nicephorus Callisti is mistaken when he attributes sixteen years and seven months to him; better is Theophanes in his Tables, who ascribes sixteen years to him, incomplete on both sides. But what is said in the *Chronography* of St. Nicephorus, that Macedonius ruled the Constantinopolitan church for only six years, this I think happened through the carelessness of a scribe who omitted the ten.

Ibid. *Τιμόθεος*, etc., "6 years, 6 months, under Justinian the Great." Theophanes attributes only six ^D years to Timotheus, just as St. Nicephorus does in his *Chronography*. For Timotheus, Macedonius having been ejected, invaded the Constantinopolitan episcopate toward the end of the year of Christ 511, as we advised above. But Timotheus dies, as Theophanes writes, in the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 510, which begins on the Kalends of September of the year of Christ 517. Victor Tunnensis hands down that his death occurred on the fifth day of the month of April: "Timotheus," he says, "Constantinopolitan bishop, a detractor of the Council of Chalcedon, died on the 5th day of the month of April, and handed the episcopate to John the Cappadocian in his own cell, and as a presbyter." Thus it must be read, and not indeed John the Cappadocian. Furthermore, this Nicephorus Callisti is mistaken when he says that Timotheus lived to his Justinian the Great; for Timotheus died while Anastasius was still reigning.

Ibid. *Ἰωάννης ὁ Καππαδόκης*, etc., "under Justinian the Emperor, years 2, months...” so also has St. Nicephorus in the *Chronography* from the edition of the Rev. Father

Goar. But in our text, four years and ten months are attributed to John the Cappadocian. The tables of Theophanes show that John the Cappadocian sat in the episcopal see of Constantinople for two years. But John sat for one year, ten months, and some days, which Nicephorus overlooked; for John was ordained bishop of Constantinople in the year of Christ 518, not 517, as Baronius writes from Victor of Tunnuna: and this occurred on the 17th day of the month of April. John died, moreover, in the year of Christ 520, and in his place Epiphanius, presbyter and syncellus of the same Church, was ordained on the 25th day of the month of February. This happened in the third year of Justin the Thracian, not the second, as Theophanes has it, meaning in the year of Christ 520. Nicephorus Callistus, therefore, incorrectly writes that this John lived under Justinian. Baronius is also mistaken, attributing three years to John the Cappadocian. Incidentally, this John the Cappadocian was the first, as they say, who dared to usurp the title of oecumenical patriarch.

^B Col. 456 B. *Ἐπιφάνιος*, etc., "years 16, months 3." Thus also does Saint Nicephorus in the *Chronography*, and Theophanes, attribute sixteen years and three months to Epiphanius, bishop of Constantinople. Theophanes records this in the 10th year of Justinian, year of Christ 536: "In this year, Epiphanius the bishop having died in the month of June, on the 5th, indiction 15, after having been bishop for 16 years and 3 months, Anthimus, the heretical bishop of Trapezus, was translated to [the see]..." In this year, with Epiphanius as primate, on the fifth day of the month of June, the fifteenth indiction, after he had been taken from the living in the sixteenth year of his episcopate and the third month, the heretical Anthimus, bishop of Trapezus, was translated to the see of Constantinople. But Theophanes seems to contradict himself, for he writes that Epiphanius ascended the Constantinopolitan throne in the 2nd year of Justin the Thracian, on the 25th day of February, year of Christ 520, whence it would be said that Epiphanius sat not for 16, but for 17 years and three months. But Pagi ^C refutes Theophanes’ error using other records, and thus says the death of Epiphanius occurred in the year of Christ 535, on the 5th day of the month of June, the 15th indiction, after 15 years and 3 months of his episcopate. See Pagi under the same year, no. 9.

Ibid. *Ἄνθιμος*, etc., "months 10." Saint Nicephorus again in the *Chronography* and Theophanes assign ten months to Anthimus in the 10th year of the reign of Justinian: whom this second writer describes as the heretic Anthimus removed from the see by Pope Agapetus while he was in Constantinople. The aforementioned Theophanes is mistaken, as Pagi notes, while he narrates these things in the 10th year of Justinian; for Anthimus occupies the Constantinopolitan see in the month of June of the year of Christ 535, and is deposed in the month of March of the following year; whence those ten months of Anthimus's tenure were in both respects incomplete.

Ibid. *Μηνᾶς*, etc., "years 16, months 6." Menas was ordained bishop of Constantinople on the 13th day of the month of March of the year of Christ 536. He dies, however, in the month of August of the year of ^D Christ 552, as Pagi shows at greater length (no. 17 at the same place); whence those six months were incomplete in both respects.

Ibid. C. *Ἐν τῷ ἱερατείῳ*. Theophanes has this too, where his interpreter translates "in the holy shrines"; just as we interpreted this term above at no. 553; but we explained at greater length there what *ἱερατεῖον* signifies.

Ibid. *Εὐτύχιος*, etc., "years 13, months 5." The tables of Theophanes assign thirteen years to Eutychius before his deposition; Saint Nicephorus in the *Chronography* attributes twelve years and two months to him; Eustathius in the *Life* of this holy patriarch, chap. 4, ascribes to him only twelve years. But Eutychius was ordained bishop of Constantinople in the month of August of the year of Christ 552, not 533, as Baronius mistakenly believed, as Theophanes clearly shows, who writes that Eutychius was [ordained] on the very day that Menas [was] in the sacred shrines. Eutychius is driven from the see by Justinian, because he refused to subscribe to his impious edict, on the 22nd day of January of the year 565, as the aforementioned Eustathius writes; whence Nicephorus Callistus very correctly writes that Eutychius had sat for 12 years and 5 months before the persecution. Baronius is mistaken, as Pagi observes, while he assigns that edict of Justinian to the year of Christ 563, and gathers Eutychius’ exile into the following year. For Justinian’s edict, as Pagi writes, was issued at the beginning of the year 564, which is confirmed more strongly by Theophanes together with the aforementioned Eustathius. For the latter, in chap. 5, testifies that Eutychius was deported from the palace to a certain monastery by Hetherius: in which place, after he had stayed for one day, they placed him in another monastery near Chalcedon. After the eighth day, a council of bishops was convened, and Eutychius was summoned to plead his case; and when he had refused to appear, he was translated to the island called Principis, which is situated in the Astacenian Gulf of the Propontis, where he spent three weeks under military guard, and thence to Amasea, the metropolis of Helenopontus, in which he had first been a monk and then an archimandrite. See Theophanes on the 58th year of the reign of Justinian.

Ibid. *Ἰωάννης Σχολαστικός*, etc., "after 3 days, years 12, months 6." John Scholasticus is ordained bishop of Constantinople, as Theophanes writes in the 38th year of Justinian, on the 12th day of the month of April, upon which in the year of Christ 565 a Sunday fell; for there the aforementioned Theophanes speaks of the deposition of Eutychius (which, as we said a little above from Eustathius, happened on the 22nd day of January of the same year) on the occasion of the ordination of John. John dies, however, as the same Theophanes writes, on the thirty-first day of the month of August, the tenth indiction, that is, of the year of Christ 577, from which it appears that John had sat for 12 years and five months, incomplete in both respects. Incidentally, in the tables of Theophanes, 12 years are rightly assigned to John, the months being neglected.

Ibid. *Εὐτύχιος*, etc., "years 4, months 6." Eutychius the patriarch is restored to the Constantinopolitan see not long after the death of John Scholasticus, that is, on the third day of the month of October, as Eustathius writes in the *Life* of this holy patriarch, of the year of Christ 577, not 578, as Baronius thinks. This is confirmed by Theophanes, who in the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 570, which begins on the calends of September of the year of Christ 577, says: "In this year, in the month of October, the eleventh indiction, Eutychius received again the throne of Constantinople." In this year in the month of October, the eleventh indiction, Eutychius took the Constantinopolitan throne for the second time. Eutychius dies, however, on the sixth day of the month of April of the year of Christ 582, as the same Theophanes writes in the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 574, on the calends of September of the preceding year: "In this year, in the month of April, on the 6th, the fifteenth indiction, Eutychius the patriarch died, and after six days John, deacon of the Great Church, called the Faster, was ordained." In this year, on the sixth day of April, the fifteenth indiction, Eutychius the patriarch died, and after six days John, deacon of the Great Church, who is called the Faster, was consecrated. Which is clear also from Eustathius in his *Life*, chap. 10. Whence it appears that Eutychius had ruled the Constantinopolitan Church for the second time for four years, six months, and some days.

Ibid. D. *Ἰωάννης διάκονος*, etc., "the Faster, under Maurice, years 13, months 5." John the Faster was consecrated bishop of Constantinople six days after the death of Eutychius, which happened on the sixth day of the month of April of the year of Christ 582, as Theophanes writes in the place cited a little above; therefore the ordination of John happened on the twelfth day of April of the same year, upon which day in that year a Sunday fell...

^A John dies in the year of Christ 595, as is clear both from both Nicephori, who assign to him thirteen years and five months, and also from the Menologium of the Emperor Basil, for the second day of the month of September, a portion of which exists in volume VI of the *Italia Sacra*; where thirteen years and five months are attributed to this same John. But as to why Baronius assigned the death of this patriarch to the following year, Pagius teaches at length, who, it seems to me, resolves the knot excellently. Furthermore, this patriarch is not unjustly criticized by many as being ambitious, because he held a synod at Constantinople so that he might confirm for himself the title of Ecumenical by synodal judgment.

Col. 456 D. *He was ordained after... days... under the reign of Tiberius.* This passage, being mutilated, must be restored from the place in Theophanes cited a little above: *He was ordained after six days*, etc., namely, that John was consecrated six days after the death of Eutychius.

Ibid. *And he dies in the 14th year of the reign of Maurice.* From this it is manifestly clear that John died in the year of Christ 595, since the fourteenth year of the reign of Maurice corresponds to this year of Christ.

Ibid. *Cyriacus, etc., 11 years.* Theophanes and Saint Nicephorus in his *Chronographia* also assign eleven years to patriarch Cyriacus; for he was elected bishop of Constantinople in the year of Christ 595, and not in the year 594, namely under the 12th indiction, as the writer of the *Chronicon Alexandrinum* incorrectly reports: who, however, excellently records the death of Cyriacus in the fourth year after the consulship of Phocas Augustus, in the 9th indiction, that is, in the year of Christ ... Patriarch of Constantinople, in the month Hyperberetaeus, according to the Romans October 29th, the fourth day of the week, and he is interred on the thirtieth of the same month, the first day of the week, and his remains were deposited according to custom in the Church of the Holy Apostles. In this year, Cyriacus, patriarch of Constantinople, dies in the month Hyperberetaeus, according to the Romans on October 29th, the seventh day of the week; and his funeral was conducted on the 30th of the same month, the first day of the week, and his body was deposited according to the accepted custom in the Church of the Holy Apostles. But that the writer of the *Chronicon Alexandrinum* here says that the body of Cyriacus was deposited according to the accepted custom in the Church of the Holy Apostles, Evagrius shows this to be true in lib. IV, cap. 30, where he speaks of the Church of the Holy Apostles built or restored by Justinian: "In which both the emperors and the priests receive fitting burial." Sozomenus, lib. II, at the end of the last chapter, gives the cause for this custom or rather sanction: "From this, as if it had become a kind of custom, also the emperors who died subsequently in Constantinople, Christians, are laid there, and not only they, but also bishops, since the priesthood is of equal honor to the empire, or rather, it even holds the first place in sacred sites." From him, therefore, as the author of this matter, the custom was derived, that Christian emperors are buried after death in Constantinople, and even the bishops themselves: for since the priestly dignity is equal to the dignity of the empire, or indeed holds the first place in sacred places. But that this was done from the time of Constantine the Great, Socrates teaches, lib. I, cap. 26, concerning Constantine: "Being deposited in the church eponymous of the Apostles, which he had built for this very reason, so that the emperors and priests might not be deprived of the apostolic relics." In the Church of the Apostles he is deposited, which he had built for that reason, so that both emperors and pontiffs might not be deprived of apostolic relics. Afterwards, however, we read that the patriarchs of Constantinople were buried throughout in the Church of the Holy Apostles. ^B Ibid. *Thomas the deacon, etc., 3 years, 2 months...* attributes three years and two months to this patriarch. With him agree the Menologium of the Emperor Basil; the ancient Synaxarion in the manuscript of the Parisian College of Louis le Grand, and the printed Menaea, and manuscripts, as can be seen in Bollandus on the 20th of March, on which day the feast of Saint Thomas occurs. But Saint Nicephorus in his *Chronographia* assigns three years and five months to Thomas; but wrongly; for Thomas was ordained bishop of Constantinople on the 23rd of January in the year of Christ 607, as is held in the *Chronicon Alexandrinum*: "In this year, in the month Audynaeus, according to the Romans January 23rd, Thomas became patriarch in Constantinople, from the deacons of the Great Church, and sacellarius of the patriarch, and presiding over the ordinations." In this year, in the month Audynaeus, according to the Romans January 23rd, Thomas was named patriarch of Constantinople, from having been a deacon of the Great Church, and sacellarius of the patriarch, and overseer of ordinations; whence Theophanes is deceived, who in the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrians 598, having begun from the Calends of September of the preceding year of Christ, supposes that Thomas was substituted in the place of Cyriacus on the 11th day of the month of October. Thomas dies in the 11th indiction, namely in the year of Christ 610, on the 20th day of the month of March, which fell on a Friday, and is buried on the 22nd day of the same month, which was a Sunday, as the same writer of the *Chronicon Alexandrinum* narrates: "In this year, in the month Dystrus, according to the Romans, March 20th, the sixth day, dies Thomas, patriarch of Constantinople, and he is interred on the... of the same month, the first day." Moreover, that that Triclinium which was called the Thomaites was built by this Thomas, Nicephorus Callistus is the author, lib. XVII, cap. 44. But see what Ducangius has concerning this Triclinium, lib. II, n. 8.

^C Ibid. *Sergius the deacon, etc., of those in the phiale of the ports of the almshouses, etc., 28 years, 7 months.* This mutilated place can be supplemented in some way from the *Chronicon Alexandrinum*, where it is thus held concerning Sergius: "Sergius, deacon of the Great Church of Constantinople, and overseer of the poor, guardian of the port." Which Ducangius interprets thus: "Sergius, deacon of the Great Church of Constantinople, and prefect of the almshouses, guardian of the port." But the aforementioned Ducangius incorrectly warns in the notes: "Another, if I am not mistaken, than the Sergius whom the writers designate only as a deacon." But this Sergius, although he was a deacon of the Great Church, nevertheless drew his origin from the Syrians and Jacobites, as the same Nicephorus Callistus testifies, lib. XVII, cap. 44. But what *ptocheion* signifies, see the Glossarium Graecum of Ducangius on the same word. But as for what pertains to the time of this see, since the *Tabula* of Theophanes show that he sat in the episcopate of Constantinople for 29 years; but Saint Nicephorus in his *Chronographia* from the edition of the most learned P. Goar assigns to him 21 years and 21 days, from our edition 28 years, 7 months, 21 days. It is certain, however, from the *Chronicon Alexandrinum*, that Sergius succeeded Saint Thomas on the eighth day of April, in the 13th indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 610, which day in that year fell on Holy Saturday. But that for the eighth day of April the eighteenth day should be written in the same Chronicle, Petavius teaches in his Notes on Nicephorus, where it deals with the death of Sergius; whose entire words, which pertain to the years of this patriarch's see, it is pleasing to transcribe here after the words of Saint Nicephorus: "In the twelfth indiction dies Sergius, the president of Byzantium, etc." In the twelfth indiction Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople, dies. Where Petavius makes this observation;

^A this indiction began in the year 638, the 29th of Heraclius. Therefore, his death is noted in the Great Annals as occurring in the year 639, since he had sat for 28 years and 21 days, as it is in the Chronicle of Nicephorus: but falsely. For it is certain that Heraclius was crowned by him. Therefore, his beginning is noted in the Annals at the year of Christ 608, indiction 11, Phocas 6, so that he presided over the Church for 32 years. But Theophanes asserts he sat for only 29. For this reason, he began his episcopate in the year of Christ 610, the last of the emperor Phocas. His final year, indeed, runs into 638, indiction 11, Heraclius 28. The Alexandrian Chronicle, page 875, designates that year, in which Sergius was created patriarch, with a manifold character. For it reports that Thomas, his predecessor, died on March 20, a Friday: who was buried on the 22nd of the same month, a Sunday. But afterwards, on April 8, indiction 13, a Great Sabbath, Sergius was created pontiff. It also subjoins another character for the day: October 3, indiction 14, was a Saturday, concerning which there was discussion above. That year is without doubt 610 of Christ, cycle of the sun 3, Sunday letter D. Therefore, March 20 is a Friday, and the 22nd a Sunday. The lunar cycle is 3, the Paschal term is April 15, the Constantinopolitan solar cycle is 26, the concurrents or epacts of the sun are 3, which together with the regulars of the day give the 2nd weekday. Therefore, Easter is April 19, and the Great Sabbath the 18th of the same. Whence one must rewrite 18 in the Chronicle in place of 8. From this observation, you might correct the series of superior patriarchs in these same Annals. As, for instance, when the first year of Thomas is compared with the year 606, Phocas 4. In which those who provided supporting evidence, as regards the year of Phocas, follow Theophanes and Cedrenus, but both have slipped into error. For when Theophanes attributes three years to Thomas, and counts the 4th of Phocas as his first, he adapts the first of Sergius to the two years 7 and 8. Much better, in the Alexandrian Chronicle, Cyriacus is said to have departed from the living on the 29th day of October, a Saturday, and his funeral was attended to the day after, Sunday. This year was 607, cycle of the sun 27, Sunday letter B, indiction 10, Phocas 4 being almost finished. The following year 607, Phocas 5, indiction 10, after the consulship of Phocas, in year 4, January 23, Thomas was created. Thus he sat for 3 years. Nicephorus in the Chronicle attributes 3 years and 3 months. But he included the space of the interregnum. But indeed, the Chronicle must be corrected again, when it notes for Phocas 5, in which Thomas was created, indiction 10, after the consulship of Phocas 3. For since the first of Phocas begins, from the same Chronicle, on indiction 6, November 25, a Sunday, when he was inaugurated on the 23rd, a Friday, by Cyriacus. The year of Christ is 602, cycle of the sun 25, Sunday letter G. In the year 603, indiction 6, Phocas began his consulship. Therefore in the year 604, Phocas 2, indiction 8, he began to be numbered as being in his 1st year after his consulship; then in the year 605, Phocas 3, indiction 8, it was the year after his consulship. Thus year 606, Phocas 4, indiction 9, is from his consulship. But the year 607, Phocas 5, indiction 10, is in order the year after his consulship. It is therefore wrong in the Greek that indiction 9 and 10 repeat the ^B. ^C This has been examined by us a little more accurately, so that both the history of those times and the most lucid Chronicle might be consulted in some part. Thus Petavius. Whence it appears most excellently that St. Nicephorus attributed to Sergius 28 years, 7 months, and ^D days.

Col. 456 D. ^A Pyrrhus was ejected, but not in the year 642, as is wrongly held in the Annals; since the 15th indiction began in the year 641 in the month of September. See the most learned notes of Petavius on the Historical Breviary of St. Nicephorus; which Pagius has often transcribed word for word, as they say. Furthermore, as to what this Nicephorus Callistus says, that Pyrrhus was appointed by Philippicus and Goria, the account of time does not admit it.

Col. 457 A. Paul the presbyter, etc., and at the prisons, 2 years, 26 days. St. Nicephorus in his Chronographia attributes the same number of years and days to Paul. But Zonaras and Theophanes, both in their Chronicle and in the tables inserted into it, assign twelve years to Paul. Thus the same Theophanes in the Chronicle: 12. Bishop Paul. Paul held the Constantinopolitan episcopate for twelve years. But since this Paul was ordained in the month of October in the 15th indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 641, as we demonstrated above, and he died between the 19th day of the month of December of the year 654, and the 13th day of the month of March of the following year, it is necessary that he sat for thirteen years and some months, as Pagius teaches more fully at the year of Christ 651. Moreover, I have interpreted regarding the *custodiae* (prisons) having followed the old interpreter of the Council of Constantinople under Menas, Act 3: "John, the most beloved of God, presbyter, *ecclesiasticus advocate*, and at the prisons, said." Where the old interpreter writes: "Ecclesiastical advocate, and over the *custodiae*." Whence it appears that an officer of the Church, who was called *at the prisons*, had charge of the prisons.

Col. 457 D. Pyrrhus returned, etc., 4 months, 25 days. St. Nicephorus in his Chronographia, and also Theophanes in the Chronicle, attribute likewise four months and 25 days to Pyrrhus after he was restored to the see of CP, at the year of the Incarnation according to the Alexandrian era 641, which begins on the Kalends of September of the year of Christ 652. Wherefore it anticipates the death of Pyrrhus by two years, just as Baronius by three years. From what has been said, says Pagius, it is clear that the death of Pyrrhus occurred in the year 655.

Ibid. The entire years of his, etc., 3 years, 1 month, 2 days. Nicephorus is mistaken here in calculating the years of the entire time of the episcopate of Pyrrhus, unless a copyist by mistake wrote 3 years, 1 month, 2 days, in place of 2 years, where the number 2 fits very well, omitting the year.

Ibid. Peter the deacon, etc., and visitor of Thrace, and caretaker of Saint Clement, 12 years, 4 months. This Peter, who was also infected with the same heresy, was substituted in the place of Pyrrhus in the same year of Christ 655. Zonaras writes that he died after twelve years of his session; and the same number of years are attributed to him in the tables inserted into Theophanes. In the Chronographia of St. Nicephorus, two years and seven months are wrongly assigned to him. Hence also Baronius, deceived, attributes two years to him. But Pagius writes that Peter could not have extended his life in the Constantinopolitan episcopate beyond twelve years and seven months; and that he died on his final day in the year of Christ 666. For Tarasius, in the second session of the sixth General Synod, speaking of the heresy of the Monothelites: "From Peter," he says, "until the sixth synod, not more than fifteen years had passed; five pontiffs were in the intermediate time: Thomas, and John, and Constantine, had been ordained by the aforesaid heretics; and they were not on that account rejected." Wherefore, since the aforesaid sixth synod was celebrated in the year of Christ 680, and from the years in which Peter's successors sat until the sixth synod, as St. Nicephorus himself writes, it is manifest that Peter had not perished before the year 666. Furthermore, *visitor*, that is, [original-script column: see facsimile]

lustrator*, *circitor*, or, as Ducange says, *circator*, is a dignity today in the major churches, whose office the Allatian Catalogue describes: "The *periodutes* walking about and instructing those who wish to be baptized into the orthodox faith." That dignity is from the order of presbyters, as John, bishop of Citrum, writes in his *Responses to Cabasilas*, p. 328: "There are also other offices that are especially appropriate for priests: the official in charge of catechesis, the orphan-keeper, the four *ekdikoi*, the leader of the lights, the lawgiver, and the *periodutes*." See what Ducange and Meursius have on this dignity in their *Glossarium Graecum* under the same word. ^B Col. 457. "Thomas the deacon, etc., 2 years, 3 months." Since, therefore, the Church of Constantinople had been widowed of its pastor for six months and sixteen days, Thomas was elected in place of the deceased Peter; but since the month in which Peter died is not stated by the writers, it is unknown whether Thomas was elected in the year of Christ 656, in which Peter is said to have died, or in the following. Pagi thinks that Thomas departed from the living only in the year 668, or the following. The Tables inserted into Theophanes assign three years to him. Zonaras in *Constans Augustus*, and St. Nicephorus in his *Chronographia*, attribute the same span of time to him as does Nicephorus Callisti. Moreover, Pagi has attempted to compose an apology for Thomas against Baronius. Ibid. "John the presbyter and *protokdikos*, etc., 4 years, [number of] months." St. Nicephorus in his *Chronographia* assigns five years and nine months to this John. The Tables inserted into Theophanes attribute six years to him. But John, as Pagi thinks, succeeded Thomas in the constantinopolitan episcopate in the year of Christ 668, or the following. He dies, as the same writer says, in the year of Christ 674, or thereabouts. Moreover, *protokdikos* is called the first defender of the Church. See Ducange, *Glossarium Graecum*, v. "Ekdikos." ^C Ibid. "Constantine the chancellor, etc., 8 years, 11 months, 7 days." Nicephorus Callisti wrongly ascribes eight years, eleven months, and seven days to this Constantine; for in the Tables inserted into Theophanes, only two years are assigned to him. St. Nicephorus in the *Chronographia* from the edition of the Rev. Father Goar attributes to him one year, eight months, and seven days: for Constantine received the see of Constantinople in the year of Christ 674, and died in 676, as Pagi shows at greater length. Ibid. "Theodore the presbyter, etc., 2 years." To this Theodore, two years are assigned in the Tables of Theophanes, just as in the *Chronographia* of St. Nicephorus, except that therein three months are added to them. But Baronius, who—having taken away ten years from Peter, one of Theodore's predecessors—contends that instead of "two years," "twelve years" should be read, and asserts that Theodore sat for twelve years; but Pagi shows the most learned cardinal is mistaken in this matter, writing that Theodore obtained the Constantinopolitan throne in the year of Christ 676, and was cast down from the same see in 678. Moreover, why Theodore was stripped of the patriarchate is not sufficiently clear, although Baronius thinks it was done on account of heresy. ^D Ibid. G. "George the presbyter, etc., 6 years, 3 months." Wrongly, three years and the same number of months are attributed to this Theodore in the *Chronographia* of St. Nicephorus from the edition of the Rev. Father Goar, and in ours they are two [years], three months. The greater authority in this matter should be given to Theophanes, who, at the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus, speaking of George, says that the third year of his patriarchate was being counted when the holy ecumenical synod was held, and adds that after the synod another three were completed in the dignity:

Patriarchate of George, and those who held the patriarchate after the synod of the holy ecumenical council

^A when they succeeded, who, indeed, stirred by the ambition of worldly power and assenting to the impiety of Leo, became a false bishop of Constantinople. And indeed, that it should be read as *the twenty-second*, and not as it is in the text of the Royal edition, *the seventh*, is suggested by the Barberini codex, the *Miscella*, and the *Anastasius*—for the twenty-second day of the month of January in that year coincided with a Sunday, on which day ordinations of bishops were customarily held, as we have often noted above. The sacrilegious Anastasius died in the 13th year of the reign of Constantine Copronymus, in the year of Christ 753, as Theophanes relates in the same place. Regarding the death of Anastasius, see the *Breviarium historicum* of the holy patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople, from the Petavius edition, page 203.

^A *Upon John’s death, Germanus was transferred from Cyzicus*, etc. But if the beginning of the first year of the Philippic reign is to be taken from the 15th day of August in the year of Christ 711, as some suppose, four years seem best attributed to this patriarch by Nicephorus Callistus; for Philippicus, as we said above, at the very beginning of his reign, after casting Cyrus from the see, substituted a certain John, as Theophanes writes: "He drove Cyrus the patriarch from the Church, and put forward John, his own fellow-mystic and accomplice in heresy." Germanus was transferred from the Cyzicene metropolis and substituted in the place of John in the 2nd year of Artemius, in the thirteenth indiction, on the eleventh day of the month of August, which is the year of Christ 715, as the aforementioned Theophanes relates regarding that same year of Artemius: "In the same second year of the reign of Artemius, also called Anastasius, in the 13th indiction, on the 11th of August, Germanus was transferred from the metropolis of Cyzicus to Constantinople." Moreover, in that same second year of the reign of Artemius, who is also Anastasius, in the thirteenth indiction, on the eleventh day of the month of August, Germanus was transferred from the Cyzicene metropolis to Constantinople. Baronius, however, is mistaken, as Pagius very well warns, when he claims that this John was deposed, citing Theophanes, whereas Theophanes writes contrary things at the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus—which passage of Theophanes we set forth a little above. Zonaras narrates that John was removed after three years; but since no one else, to my knowledge, makes mention of this deposition, far greater credibility is undoubtedly to be given to Theophanes in this matter.

Col. 457 D. *Germanus the Great*, etc. *15 years*. Theophanes assigns fifteen years to patriarch Germanus at the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus and in the Tables. But the same Theophanes assigns fourteen years, five months, and three days to him at the 13th year of Leo the Isaurian. Regarding the duration of this patriarch's see, Pagius writes thus: "Therefore, since the bishop of Constantinople was consecrated on the 11th day of the month of August in the year of Christ 715, as is clear from the Theophanes chapter in the aforementioned place, it is evident that Baronius wrongly assigned the ordination of Saint Germanus to the year 714; for in that way he would have held the pontificate not for fourteen years, but for fifteen full years with an addition of some months." Secondly, it is clear that for these words, "three days," one should read, with Anastasius, the author of the *Miscella*, and Cedrenus, "seven days." Thus Pagius. But wrongly; for it is better read as "three days," since from the 11th day of the month of August, in the year of Christ 715, when Germanus was consecrated bishop of Constantinople, to the 22nd day of the year of Christ 750, when Anastasius was substituted in his place, there intervene fourteen years, five months, and three days.

Ibid. *Anastasius the presbyter*, etc., *24 years*. Theophanes assigns twenty-four years to this most impious Anastasius, not only in the Tables but also at the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus. Saint Nicephorus in the *Chronographia* (from our edition) attributes the same number of years to him; but from the edition of Rev. Father Goar, 21 years are wrongly ascribed to him; for Anastasius was substituted into the place of the deposed Germanus on the twenty-second day of the month of January in the year of Christ 730, as Theophanes writes at the 13th year of Leo the Isaurian: "On the 22nd of the same month of January, they ordain Anastasius, the pseudonymous disciple and syncellus of the same blessed Germanus, who through a desire for worldly lordship by appointment had consented to the impiety of Leo, as false bishop of Constantinople."

^B Ibid. *Constantine the monk*, etc., *12 years*. To this patriarch, Saint Nicephorus in the *Chronographia* and Theophanes, both in the Tables and at the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus, assign twelve years. But Pagius, who thought that Constantine had been substituted into his place immediately after the death of Anastasius—that is, in the year of Christ 753—and did not advert to the fact that after the death of Anastasius, the Church of Constantinople was for some months deprived of a shepherd, reasons in this manner: "Constantine, a monk and bishop of Silae, had been declared patriarch of Constantinople by the emperor in the year of Christ 753." Indeed, on the thirtieth day of the month of August in the fourth indiction, which is the year 766, the emperor, as Theophanes writes, had suborned accusers against patriarch Constantine, who shared his opinion, later sent him into exile, and in his place on the sixteenth day of November of the fifteenth indiction had Nicetas consecrated; and therefore Constantine sat for 13 years, not 12, as is read in the *Chronicon* of Nicephorus and in the Tables of Theophanes. But if Pagius had read not only the Latin version of Theophanes but the Greek text itself, he would undoubtedly have noticed that the translator erred in the version regarding the indiction number, which is indeed found as seven in the Greek text; furthermore, from the same place in Theophanes, namely, at the 15th year of Constantine Copronymus, Pagius could easily have understood that Anastasius died in that very year, and that a council had been summoned and had begun to be celebrated on the tenth day of the month of February, in the seventh indiction, which is the year of Christ 754, and toward the end of that council, on the eighth day of the month of August of the same year, this Constantine had been declared patriarch by the emperor: thus the aforementioned Theophanes there, after he had spoken of the death of Anastasius, adds: "In the same year, Constantine the wretch gathered an illegal council of bishops against the holy and venerable icons in the Hieria palace, over which presided Theodosius of Ephesus, son of Apsimarus, and Pastillas of Perge; and when they had defined their own dogmas, with no one from the apostolic thrones—I mean Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem—present, starting from the tenth [day] of the month of February, they continued until the 8th of August of the same 7th indiction; during which, when they came to the Blachernae [palace], the enemies of the Theotokos, Constantine ascended the ambo and proclaimed the monk Constantine, who had become bishop ^C of Silae, and praying, he said with a loud voice: 'Many years to the ecumenical patriarch Constantine!' And on the 21st of the same month, the emperor went up into the Forum with Constantine the unholy and the rest of the bishops, and they proclaimed their own heretical doctrine before all the people, anathemaizing Germanus the most holy, and George the Cypriot, and John the Chrysorrhoas Damascene, the Mansour, men who were holy and venerable teachers." In the same year, the impious Constantine also convened an illegal council of three hundred and eighteen bishops against the holy and venerable images in the Hieria palace, the president of which was Theodo- ^D

^Asius, bishop of Ephesus, the son of Apsimar, and Pastillas, prelate of Perge. These men, sanctioning their own private opinions by private authority, with no catholic see—I speak of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem—present there, from the tenth day of the month of February, when they began, until the eighth day of August, persisted in the seventh indiction; during which, as those adversaries of the Mother of God gathered at Blachernae, Constantine, holding the monk Constantine, who had been bishop of Sylae, by the hand, ascended the ambo and, with a clear and loud voice, having formed his wishes, prayed well: “To Constantine,” he said, “the ecumenical patriarch, many years.” And on the twenty-seventh day of August, the emperor, having proceeded to the forum with the sacrilegious Constantine and the remaining bishops, who all published their wicked heresy before the whole people, dared to strike with anathema the most holy Germanus, George the Cyprian, and John Chrysorrhoas Damascene, the son of Mansur, holy men and venerable doctors. Saint Nicephorus narrates almost the same thing in his ^B*Breviary* *of History*, after he had discussed the death of the patriarch Anastasius, on page 203 of the Petavius edition. But the same Nicephorus, in the work of his which is titled: *Anti-rhethical Book*, says in its first part: “Refutation and subversion of the illegitimate and pseudonymous decree, which was promulgated by those who deserted the Catholic and Apostolic Church, and accommodated themselves to a foreign opinion to overturn the incarnation of the divine Word. Second part: Refutation of the testimonies which the Iconoclasts brought forward against images.” In this work, I say, in chapter two of the first part, the aforementioned Nicephorus explicitly records that the Conciliabulum of Copronymus was headless; for it was held while the Constantinopolitan see was vacant, and no new patriarch was created until the end of the council. There, speaking of the bishops who participated in that conventicle, of Constantine Copronymus, and of the Conciliabulum of Copronymus, he says thus: ^C“These, indeed, being far removed from priestly places and from every priestly and Christian word, cast their vote against the holy ones, having taken as leader and teacher of impiety him who was nurtured in impiety with the oversight of God given to him as power. This godless workshop, therefore, headless in truth and useless and traditionless, that we may use their own words, would be justly described. For the see of the reigning city at that time happened to be lacking a high priest. And indeed, at the end of what they contrived, Mamonas [the emperor] proclaims and chooses the namesake Constantine, that truly wretched and thrice-unhappy man, spiritlessly and impiously, for the destruction of the soul and the body, as bishop of the queen of cities; whence he also holds many insults of the priest-mystagogue of the Romans; for he was many times called by him [the Pope] on account of his heresy.” Therefore, those men, being far removed from sacred places and every priestly and Christian state, cast their judgment against the holy ones, choosing as leader and master of their impiety one who was famous for impiety, after he had attained the empire by the permission of God. And so, this impious workshop was deservedly called truly devoid of a head, useless, and destitute of tradition (to use their own words). Since, at that time, the Constantinopolitan see was vacant. For, during the term of those things which they themselves impiously hatched, Mamonas, having given the name Constantine to his like—a man truly unhappy and most wretched—impiously and sacrilegiously declares and creates him Bishop of Constantinople, for the destruction of his own soul ^Dand body. Whence he also received many insults from the Roman prelate: being repeatedly rebuked by him on account of his perverse doctrine. Thus the holy Nicephorus in his aforementioned work, where very many other unknown things are contained pertaining to the Conciliabulum of Copronymus. But because we shall presently publish the aforementioned work of the holy Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, together with all the other works of the same saint, both those already edited and those inedited, in two folio volumes, we did not think it necessary to transcribe more here. Indeed, anyone who understands what has been set forth above will realize that the Constantinopolitan see was vacant for many months at that time, and that Constantine was not announced as patriarch by the emperor Copronymus until the end of the Conciliabulum of Copronymus. This indeed happened, as Theophanes writes, on the eighth day of the month of August, in the seventh indiction, namely in the year of Christ 754, as we demonstrated a little earlier, and not in the year 753, as Pagius erroneously imagined. It now remains to see in what year Constantine was cast out from his see; which indeed Theophanes himself will easily provide when he writes for the 25th year of Constantine Copronymus, on the thirtieth day of the month of August, in the fourth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 766, that the emperor suborned accusers against Constantine, a patriarch who shared the same opinion as him, and decreed that he should first be deported as an exile to Hieria, and then to the island of the Princes. Whence it is clear that Constantine held the Constantinopolitan see for twelve years and eight days. Moreover, regarding the miserable death of this sacrilegious Constantine, one should read Theophanes for the 27th year of the same Augustus.

Col. 460 A. Nicetas the eunuch of Oladia, etc., ^A ... four months. This "Ghadia" [Oladia], being an entirely useless repetition, I think should be read as "Sylatos," or "the one from the Slavs," as is held in Theophanes, or "the one from the Sclavi," as is read in other Catalogues of the Patriarchs of Constantinople; for this eunuch Nicetas drew his origin from the Slavs. But the number of years of the patriarchate of this man, since it is mutilated in the royal codex, is to be supplemented from the *Chronographia* of Saint Nicephorus and from Theophanes. Furthermore, for this patriarch, the celebrated Theophanes assigns fourteen years, both in his Tables and for the 17th year of Constantine Pogonatus. But Saint Nicephorus, in the edition of the Reverend Father Goar, ascribes fifteen years to him; but in our edition, thirteen years and four months. But it is certain from Theophanes that in the year 27 of Constantine Copronymus, the eunuch Nicetas was consecrated Patriarch of Constantinople on the sixteenth day of the month of November, in the fifth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 766. “On the sixteenth of the month of November, of the fifth indiction, by the vote of the emperor, Nicetas, the eunuch from the Slavs, is illicitly ordained Patriarch of Constantinople.” Moreover, on the sixteenth day of November of the same fifth indiction, Nicetas, a eunuch drawing his origin from the Slavs, is consecrated Patriarch of Constantinople against the canons by the suffrage of the emperor. The holy Nicephorus is therefore mistaken when he says, in the *Breviary of History*, page 230 of the Petavius edition, that both the deposition of Constantine and the election of Nicetas happened in the month of August, in the fourth indiction; for Constantine is deposed, as we said above from Theophanes, on the thirtieth day of the month of August, in the fourth indiction; but Nicetas is consecrated, as we have demonstrated here, on the sixteenth day of the month of November, in the fifth indiction. The eunuch Nicetas dies, as Theophanes writes for the 5th year of Leo, on the sixth day, a Sunday, of the month of February, in the third indiction, namely of the year of Christ 780. “On the sixth of the month of February, of the 3rd indiction, Sunday, the day of Tyrophagy, Nicetas the eunuch from the Slavs, Patriarch of Constantinople, died.” But on the sixth day of the month of February, and on that Sunday, in the third indiction, on the Sunday on which before Lent the final permission to eat cheese is granted, Nicetas, a Slav by birth, a eunuch, Patriarch of Constantinople, finished his final day. From this, therefore, it is manifest that this Nicetas ruled this Church of Constantinople for thirteen years and four months, incomplete on both sides, as is held in the *Chronographia* of Saint Nicephorus from our edition, where thirteen years and four months are assigned to him. Erroneously, therefore, in the same *Chronographia* from the edition of the Reverend Father Goar, fifteen are attributed to him.

^A *Theodotus*. In his place, Theodotus is substituted as pseudo-patriarch, as Ignatius the Deacon writes in the *Life of Saint Nicephorus*, no. 73. Leo Grammaticus, in [his history of] Leo the Armenian, p. 446, says he was surnamed Cassiteras. But the Anonymous continuator of Theophanes describes him at greater length, p. 441, who also records that his ordination took place on the feast of Easter; and Easter fell in the year of Christ 815, on the first day of the month of April. The impious Theodotus died in the year of Christ 821, as appears from Symeon the Logothete, who, in [the section on] Michael Balbus, p. 412, before he narrates the inauguration of Theophilus which happened in the year of Christ 821, says, "at that time Antonius held the high priesthood of Sylaion." Therefore Zonaras, who quite rightly assigns six years to Theodotus, wrongly defers his death to a later time.

Ibid. *Antonius, bishop of Sylaion, etc., 13 years.* Zonaras also ascribes thirteen years to this patriarch. In the *Appendix to the Chronographia of Saint Nicephorus*, twelve years are assigned to him. And indeed, this number seems to square very well if the twelve years are said to be incomplete on both sides; for Antonius, as we said in the previous chapter, began his pontificate in the year of Christ 821. He died, however, in the year 832, since Joannes, or Jannes, who succeeded him in the pontificate, was ordained on the twenty-first day of April, [which was] a Sunday, as the continuator of Constantine Porphyrogenitus writes, of the same year. Moreover, Curopalates and Cedrenus are mistaken, as they make no mention of the patriarch Antonius; of whom, however, besides other writers, Theophanes the Presbyter makes mention in the oration *On the Translation of the Relics of Saint Nicephorus*; Nicetas also in the *Life of Saint Ignatius, Patriarch of CP.*, where he records that this Antonius was surnamed Byrsodepsas.

Ibid. *Joannes, also called Jannes, martyr, etc., 8 years, 3 months.* Zonaras, p. 153, wrongly attributes only six years to Joannes. But in the *Appendix to the Chronographia of Saint Nicephorus*, nine years are better assigned to this patriarch. Furthermore, Joannes, as the continuator of Constantine Porphyrogenitus records, was ordained on the twenty-first day of April, [which was] a Sunday, that is, in the year of Christ 832. Baronius is therefore mistaken, as he sets the beginning of the pontificate of Joannes in the year 855, as Pagius quite rightly points out. Joannes was driven from his see, as he was obstinate in heresy, shortly after the death of Theophilus, that is, in the year of Christ 842, as appears from the continuator of Constantine Porphyrogenitus and from what will be said below; from which it is also clear that Joannes sat for ten incomplete years. Moreover, the aforementioned Anonymous writer deals with this patriarch Joannes, or Jannes, at greater length on p. 96.

Ibid. *Methodius, etc., 4 years, 2 months.* In the *Appendix to the Chronographia of Saint Nicephorus*, four years and three months are assigned to Methodius; but Pagius says that Methodius sat for four years and twenty-six days, excluding the day of his death; for from the 12th of February, on which a Sunday fell in the year of Christ 842, and on which it appears from the continuator of Constantine Porphyrogenitus that Methodius was ordained, to the 14th of June, on which Methodius is said to have died in the *Life of Saint Joannicius the Abbot* in Surius, under the date of November 4th, that is, in the year of Christ 846, as the laudable Pagius writes, four years, four months, and twenty-six days intervene, excluding the day of death.

Ibid. ^C *Ignatius, etc., 11 years.* In the *Appendix to the Chronographia of Saint Nicephorus*, eleven years and five months are assigned to Ignatius. The author of the *Libellus Synodicos*, who lived at that time, attributes eleven years, four months, and twenty days to him. Pope Nicholas, however, in his 2nd epistle to the emperor Michael, says that Ignatius performed the priesthood of the royal city innocently for almost twelve years. It is certain, however,

^A as Pagius writes, that Ignatius was ordained on the 4th day of the month of July, in the year of Christ 846, which fell on a Sunday; and that he was subsequently driven from the see on the 23rd day of November in the year 857. From this it is clear that the author of the *Libellus synodicus* quite correctly assigned to Ignatius eleven years, four months, and twenty days; and in the same year Theodora was expelled from the palace and Ignatius from the Constantinopolitan see, as the aforementioned Pagius demonstrates at length.

Col. 460, C. ^B Φώτιος, etc., ětη θ'. Photius, as Nicetas writes in the *Life of the Holy Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople*, having been a layman until then, was ordained by Gregory Asbestas, Archbishop of Syracuse, who some years earlier had been removed from his dignity by Saint Ignatius on account of his wickedness; and indeed Photius is ordained in this manner, as the same writer says: first on one day a monk from being a layman, on the next a lector, on the third a subdeacon, on the fourth a deacon, on the fifth a presbyter, and finally, on the sixth, the 25th day of December, on the holy Nativity of Christ, that is, in the year of Christ 857, he is consecrated bishop. Photius is driven from the see, however, by Basil the Macedonian, and is relegated to the monastery of Scepe on the day after the same Basil had been proclaimed emperor, as the aforementioned Nicetas writes, which is the 25th day of the month of September in the year of Christ 867. Therefore, Photius sat for nine years and nine months.

Ibid. ^C Ἰγνάτιος πάλιν ἔτη ια'. St. Ignatius is restored to the see, as Nicetas the Paphlagonian writes in his *Life*, on the 23rd day of the month of November, in the year of Christ 867, having lived without a bishopric for eleven years, incomplete on both sides. But Ignatius dies, as the same Nicetas writes, on the 23rd day of the month of October, in the year of Christ 877, according to Pagius. Thus, Ignatius presided again over the Constantinopolitan Church for nine years and eleven months.

Ibid. Φώτιος πάλιν ἐπὶ Λέοντος τοῦ Σοφοῦ ἔτη ς'. Photius, upon the death of Ignatius, again occupies the Constantinopolitan see, not even two full days having elapsed since the death of Ignatius, as Nicetas writes in his *Life*, on the 26th day of the month of October in the year of Christ 877. Photius is driven from the see by Leo the Philosopher, as Leo Grammaticus writes, and is relegated to the monastery of the Armeniacs, called Bordi, in the year of Christ 886, as will be clear from the things we are about to say concerning Stephen, who succeeded him in the patriarchate.

Ibid. Στέφανος ὁ ἀδελφὸς Λέοντος ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔτη γ. Stephanus, ^D son of Basil the Macedonian, after his father's death, is proclaimed patriarch by his brother, Leo the Philosopher, who, as Leo Grammaticus writes, was consecrated patriarch by Theophanes, bishop of the see first after the patriarch, when the Nativity of Christ was imminent, in the year of Christ 886. It is handed down that he was ordained patriarch on the Nativity of Christ. Nicephorus Callistus and Cedrenus mistakenly conclude the time of this patriarch's seat within three years; whereas Stephanus held the Constantinopolitan throne for six years and five months, as Leo Grammaticus, the anonymous continuator of Theophanes, Symeon Logothetes, and George the Monk report; who indeed departed to God in the month of May in the year 893, as Pagius shows under the year of Christ 888, the year in which the death of Stephanus is erroneously recorded by Baronius.

Ibid. Ἀντώνιος ὁ Καυλέας ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔτη ιβ'. That Saint Anthony Cauleas was proclaimed patriarch in the month of May in the year of Christ 893, but died in the year 895, Pagius shows at length under the year of Christ 890. Moreover, the memory of this holy patriarch is celebrated both by the Greeks and by the Latins on the 12th day of the month of February; and in the *Acta Bollandiana* for that same day of February is recited: *The Funeral Oration of Nicephorus, a most blessed philosopher and orator*, or

Ibid. Νικόλαος ὁ ἀπὸ Μυστικῶν ἔτη ια'. To this patriarch Zonaras also assigns eleven years; for Nicholas Mysticus is ordained Patriarch of Constantinople in the year of Christ 895, as Symeon Logothetes writes, who links the death of Anthony and the ordination of this man with the tenth year of Leo. Nicholas is sent into exile by Leo because he disapproved of his fourth marriage, and for that reason would exclude him from the thresholds of the Church, in the year of Christ 906, as Pagius teaches under the authority of many writers.

Ibid. Εὐθύμιος, etc. ἔτη ε', ἥμισυ. Euthymius Syncellus, a religious and pious man, at the same time that Nicholas was sent into exile, is proclaimed Patriarch of Constantinople by the Emperor Leo. But Euthymius is subsequently driven into exile by Alexander himself at the beginning of his reign, in the year of Christ 911, as will be clear from what follows.

Ibid. Νικόλαος αὖθις, etc. ἔτη ιβ'. Emperor Alexander, at the very beginning of his reign, having driven Euthymius from the Constantinopolitan see, restored Nicholas Mysticus to it in the year of Christ 911, as the anonymous continuator of Theophanes (p. 233), Symeon Logothetes (p. 471), and George the Monk record. Baronius published it in Latin under the year 912. Nicholas himself testifies that he was restored by Leo himself: "He (Leo) indeed, before he departed from life, tearfully acknowledged his error and sought pardon from God, with me as among the first exhorters and intercessors (for I was then by chance recalled from exile and restored by him to the government of the Church)," etc. But Pagius immediately meets this difficulty, saying: "But those authors can be reconciled with Nicholas, although it must be admitted that they spoke somewhat obscurely. For George the Monk in *Leo*, no. 44, reports that this emperor, suffering from a coliac illness, placed his brother Alexander at the helm of the empire. Wherefore, while Leo was still alive, through the efforts of Alexander, Nicholas was recalled from exile and restored to the government of the Constantinopolitan Church." George the Monk in *Alexander*, no. 4, writes concerning this emperor: "Alexander brought Nicholas from Galacrenae, having deposed Patriarch Euthymius, and restored the same Nicholas to the patriarchal see. And a council having been held in the Manaura, and Euthymius having been brought from Stenos and the monastery of Agathos, Alexander himself, sitting with Patriarch Nicholas, performed his deposition." Having narrated the injuries inflicted upon Euthymius, he adds: "And he was again relegated to Agathos, *καὶ πάλιν εἰς τὰ Ἀγαθοῦ*." From these words it appears that Euthymius was sent into exile twice. First, while Leo was alive, which George clearly assumes, when he says that after Leo's death Euthymius was brought from Stenos and the monastery of Agathos, and having related his solemn deposition, he adds: "and he was again relegated to Agathos." Thus Pagius; who is, without doubt, egregiously mistaken in the way he understands the passage of George the Monk, since he says something altogether different. For the aforementioned writer reports that after the death of Leo, Nicholas was brought from Galacrenae, but not Euthymius from Stenos; since only then, after Nicholas had been restored, was Euthymius relegated to Stenos; whom indeed, after a council had been convoked in Magnaura, he brought from Stenos, deposed before everyone, and, after innumerable injuries had been inflicted upon him, sent back to the monastery of Agathos. Thus George: "Alexander, the son of Basil, reigned for one year and twenty-nine days, together with Constantine, son of Leo. Having sent, he brought Nicholas from Galacrenae, having deposed Patriarch Euthymius, and he enthroned the same Nicholas as patriarch a second time; he made..."

^A a concubine and synod in the Manaura, and having brought Euthymius from Steno, and from the Agathos monastery, sitting himself, Alexander, with Patriarch Nicholas, they performed the deposition of him, tearing out the venerable beard of the holy and beloved man in unworthy ways and inflicting on him certain other insults and punishments, which the venerable and holy man bore quietly and gently. And he was relegated again to the Agathos, where, having died, he is laid in the same monastery in the city at the Psamathia. Alexander, son of Basil, ruled for one year and twenty-nine days, along with Constantine, son of Leo.

Alexander truly brought back Nicholas from Galacrenae, having cast out Patriarch Euthymius; and he restored this same Nicholas to the patriarchal throne once again. Having held a council in the Manaura, and having brought Euthymius from Steno and the Agathos monastery, Alexander himself sitting with Patriarch Nicholas, they carried out his deposition, tearing with unworthy methods the venerable beard of this holy man, who deserved a more worthy reception, and inflicting upon him other injuries and punishments, which the venerable and sacred man bore with calmness, silence, and placidity. And again he was relegated to the Agathos; where, having finished his life, he was buried in his own monastery in the city at the Psamathia house. Thus also the uncertain continuator of Theophanes, page 233, and also Symeon Logothetes, page 471, except that this second one adds that this was done immediately by Alexander: "Alexander therefore having sent immediately," etc.; that is, immediately after the death of Leo, or as soon as he began to rule together with Constantine after the death of Leo. The uncertain continuator of Theophanes and Georgius Monachus also attribute thirteen years to this patriarch. But Symeon Logothetes better assigns 14 years to him; for Nicholas was restored to the throne by Emperor Alexander in the year of Christ 911, as we demonstrated above; but the same patriarch died, as they themselves write, on the fifteenth day of the month of May, in the thirteenth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 925, whence it must necessarily be said that he held the seat for 14, and not 13 years. Moreover, through the carelessness of a scribe, it is read in Symeon Logothetes as the thirteenth indiction, instead of the fourteenth. Baronius also wrongly deferred the death of Patriarch Nicholas to the year of Christ 930, as is clear from what has been said. ^B

Col. 460, D. Stephen, metropolitan, etc., 2 years, 11 months. The uncertain continuator of Theophanes, Symeon Logothetes, and Georgius Monachus assign two years and eleven months to this patriarch. For Stephen, as the praised writers report, was announced as Patriarch of Constantinople in the month of August, in the thirteenth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 925. But he died on the fifteenth day of the month of July, as the uncertain continuator of Theophanes says, or on the eighteenth day of the same month, as Georgius Monachus writes, or, as Symeon Logothetes reports, on the eighteenth day of the month of June, in the sixth indiction; but that for the sixth it should be read as the first, that is, the year of Christ 928, no one fails to see: for from the month of August of the year of Christ 925, in which Stephen was elected, to the month of July of the year 928, two years and eleven months intervene. Moreover, the number of the indictions in the writers of that age is found to be corrupt everywhere; whence it must necessarily be supplied by conjecture.

Ibid. Tryphon the monk, etc., 3 years. Tryphon was ordained Patriarch of Constantinople, as the often-praised writers report, after Theophanes, on the fourteenth day of the month of December, in the first indiction, not indeed the sixth, as is read in them, that is, the year of Christ 928. But Tryphon was deposed by fraud in the fourth indiction, that is, the year of Christ 931, as Symeon Logothetes writes, page 489. After his abdication, the Church of Constantinople was widowed of a pastor for one year and five months, as the uncertain continuator of Theophanes, Symeon Logothetes, and Georgius Monachus report. Therefore, if from the second day of the month of February of the year of Christ 933, ^C on which Theophylactus was ordained Patriarch of Constantinople, you go back one year and five months, during which the Church of Constantinople remained widowed of a pastor, you will arrive without a doubt at the second day of the month of September of the year 931. And thus the years, as is said, were not complete. Moreover, by what fraud Tryphon was forced to abdicate the patriarchate of C.P., and why a trap was set for him, Symeon Logothetes narrates at length on pages 487 and 488, which, since they are rather long, I do not transcribe here.

Ibid. Theophylactus, etc., 23 years, 25 days. Theophylactus is ordained Patriarch of Constantinople on the second day of the month of February, in the sixth indiction, that is, the year of Christ 933, as the uncertain continuator of Theophanes, Symeon Logothetes, and Georgius Monachus write. Patriarch Theophylactus dies, as Cedrenus writes, on the 27th day of the month of February, in the 14th indiction, namely in the year of Christ 956. The praised Cedrenus assigns twenty-three years and twenty-five days to this patriarch; truly the writers after Theophanes, often cited by us, speaking in round numbers, attribute twenty-four years to him. Moreover, the depraved morals of this patriarch are described by the praised writers at length.

Col. 461 A. Polyeuctus, etc., 14 years. Saint Polyeuctus is ordained Patriarch of Constantinople on the third day of the month of April, in the 14th indiction, as Cedrenus writes; in which very year, namely 956, the fifth day of the week on Maundy Thursday coincided with the third day of April. Saint Polyeuctus dies on the thirty-fifth day from that on which John Zimisces was acclaimed emperor, as Cedrenus and Zonaras write; which indeed happened on the eleventh day of the month of December of the year of Christ 969. Therefore, the death of Polyeuctus occurred about the 16th day of the month of January in the year 970, when he had sat, as is clear from the things said, for thirteen years, nine months, and thirteen days.

Ibid. Basil the Scamandrenus, etc., 4 years. Basil is ordained Patriarch of Constantinople on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, as Leo the Deacon writes in his manuscript History. But the Feast of Orthodoxy fell in this year, namely of Christ 970, on the 13th day of February, which was the first Sunday of Lent. But Basil is driven from the seat and sent into exile in the year of Christ 974, as Pagius writes; who cites Leo the Deacon as a witness of this matter, who speaks about the death of Basil when he speaks of those things which were done in the year 974. Therefore, if Basil departed from the living in this year, the four years which are assigned to him, both by Zonaras and here by Nicephorus Callisti, were certainly incomplete on both sides.

Ibid. Antonius the Abbot of Studium, etc., 6 years. Six years are attributed to Antonius Studites by Zonaras: which years were indeed incomplete on both sides, as will be clear from those things which we are about to say about his successor Nicholas from Cedrenus and Zonaras: for Antonius was announced Patriarch of C.P. in the very beginning of the year of Christ 974; but he abdicated the patriarchate at the beginning of the year 979.

Ibid. Nicholas Chrysoberges, etc. Since this chapter was corrupted both by the copyist and by the typesetter, it must be restored thus: "Nicholas Chrysoberges, under the same emperors, when the Church had remained for four years and a half without a pastor, 12 years, 8 months." Wherefore we interpret it thus: Nicholas Chrysoberges under the same emperors, when the Church had been without a pastor for four years and a half, presided for twelve years and eight months. And thus it must also be read in the version above. For Antonius Studites, as we said above, abdicated the patriarchate at the beginning of the year 979; then the Church of C.P., as Cedrenus also writes, when it had been [vacant] for four years and a half…

^A, shortly after the middle of the year 983, Nicholas Chrysoberges was ordained patriarch of Constantinople. Cedrenus, a laudable author, attributes twelve years and eight months to this patriarch; however, the same writer incorrectly relates that the death of Nicholas and the election of Sisinnius occurred in the eighth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 995, as Pagius notes. Pagius demonstrates that this necessarily took place in the following year, based on the number of years assigned to Nicholas by the writers, and he corrects Cedrenus from Cedrenus himself.

Col. 461, A. *Sisinnius [was] magister for 7 years of the same reign.* And this is how it should be read also above in the text, where by the carelessness of the scribes *heautés* is read for *autés*. But Nikephoros Kallistos errs here when he assigns seven years to Sisinnius; for Cedrenus better attributes three years to this patriarch. Moreover, Sisinnius succeeded Nicholas in the year of Christ 996, as we said a little above. The same patriarch died, as will appear from what we shall say below, in the year 999.

Ibid. *Sergius, etc., 20 years.* This Sergius, who, as Cedrenus writes, traced his lineage from the patriarch Photius, was substituted for Sisinnius in the year of Christ 999, as is evident from the same Cedrenus. He assigns twenty years to the same patriarch and relates that his death occurred in the second indiction, in the month of July, in the year of the world 6527 (namely, the Constantinopolitan era), being the year of Christ 1019. Furthermore, Pagius—to whom a letter of Peter, patriarch of Antioch, which he had written to Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople, dated in the year 1054 and cited by Baronius under the year 1019, no. 9, was causing trouble in this matter—asserted, in order to solve the knot, I say, that this patriarch Sergius was binominal; but the most learned P. Lequien showed in the dissertation which we append here that he was mistaken in this regard. He says thus: Baronius, under the year of Christ 1019, no. 9, where he relates from Curopalates ^B that Eustathius, the first of the presbyters who were in the royal temple, had been substituted in the place of Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople; he adds this observation. However, that the same author says that Sergius sat for twenty full years, having been substituted in the place of the deceased Sisinnius, it seems that patriarch John was omitted by him, whom Peter, patriarch of Antioch, in the letter which he wrote to Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople, places as having sat before Sergius, and that he had held that see while John, also called the Roman pontiff, nineteenth of that name, was living. His words must be recited here, by which full faith is established. They are as follows: *And in this matter I am indeed a faithful witness, and many other nobles of the Church with me, that in the time of the patriarch of blessed memory, the lord John, the Roman pontiff, also called John [XIX], was held in the sacred diptychs, and when I arrived in Constantinople forty-five years ago, I found at the time of the lord Sergius ^C of blessed memory the aforementioned John mentioned in the sacred Mass together with other most holy patriarchs.* Thus Peter of Antioch [wrote] about the events of his own time, which he also witnessed. Since, therefore, these things are understood to have been so, the number of Sergius's episcopate was far less, and it is necessary that so many years be subtracted from the see of Sergius, as many as the same John held it. This observation of the most illustrious father of the ecclesiastical annals fixed a cross upon the most famous critic Antonio Pagi, although it was evident not only from Curopalates, but also from other Byzantine writers, and from all the lists and catalogs of the patriarchs of Constantinople, which are very numerous, that a great deal was held by the see of this royal city by a man who was named John. Regarding this matter, in order to resolve it for himself, this very learned man decided thus: One can only conclude from these words of Peter of Antioch that Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople, was binominal, having administered the Church of Constantinople for twenty years; not only Curopalates and Cedrenus, but also Zonaras and the author of the Catalog of Byzantine Bishops related in book IV of *Jus Graeco-Romanum* afford faith [to this]. Thus the most excellent Pagius tried to cut the knot, which he could have solved with little effort from a more accurate Greco-Latin edition of the letter of Peter to Michael Cerularius, which Johannes Cotelerius made available to the public in volume II of *Monumenta Ecclesiae Graecae*. For indeed, from it we have discovered that that patriarch was John of Antioch, not Byzantine. *“In addition to these,” Peter says, no. 5, “and I am an unimpeachable witness, and many others together with me of those eminent in the Church, that while the lord John was patriarch of Antioch of blessed memory, the pope of Rome, John, was also mentioned—being heard himself—in the diptychs. And when I arrived in Constantinople forty-five years ago, I found the aforementioned pope mentioned in the divine liturgy together with other patriarchs under the patriarch of blessed memory, the lord Sergius.”* In addition to these, I am also a witness beyond any exception, and with me many others of those who are famous in the Church, that under the patriarch of Antioch of blessed memory, the lord John, the pope of Rome, himself also called John, was referred to in the sacred diptychs. Furthermore, when I had come to Constantinople forty-five years ago, I found the aforementioned pope mentioned in the sacred Mass together with other patriarchs under the patriarch of blessed memory, the lord Sergius. Wherefore Baronius and then Pagius were deceived by the imperfect and corrupt Latin translation of the letter of Peter of Antioch.

Ibid. *Eustathius, etc., 4 years.* Upon the death of Sergius, Eustathius, the prince of the priests of the Palatine church, is substituted in his place in the year of the world 6527, as Cedrenus writes—that is, in the year of Christ 1019. Eustathius dies a few days before the death of Basil Bulgaroctonus, which occurred, as Cedrenus writes, in the month of December, in the ninth indiction, in the year 6531 (namely, the Constantinopolitan era, which began on the Calends of September of the year of Christ 1025). Therefore, if Eustathius was proclaimed patriarch of Constantinople immediately after the death of Sergius, which occurred, as we said above from Cedrenus, in the month of July of the year of Christ 1019, certainly four years are not to be attributed to Eustathius, but five years, four months, and some days.

Ibid. *Alexius, etc., 18 years.* Alexius, immediately after the death of Eustathius, is proclaimed patriarch of Constantinople by the emperor Basil Bulgaroctonus; and indeed, in the very month of December of the year of Christ 1025, in which the same Basil Augustus died, when, as Cedrenus writes, Alexius was proclaimed while Basil was ailing: *“The king made Alexius, whom he had as a cooperator in the administration of public affairs, a monk and abbot of the monastery of Stoudios, who had come to visit him with the precious head of the Forerunner, and having sent him, he enthroned him through the protonotary John, whom he used as a cooperator for the administration of common affairs. And in the evening he died, etc.”* In whose place the emperor substituted the monk Alexius, abbot of the monastery of Stoudios, who had come for the sake of visiting him, bringing with him the head of John the Baptist. Him, therefore, when he had installed him on the patriarchal throne through the protonotary John, whose services he used in administering public affairs, he expired in the evening. Alexius dies on the twentieth day of the month of February, in the eleventh indiction, as Cedrenus writes, namely in the year of Christ 1045. Therefore, the eighteen years which are assigned to Alexius here by Nikephoros Kallistos and by Zonaras were entirely incomplete, since, as is evident from what we have said, testifying from Cedrenus, Alexius sat for seventeen years and perhaps two months; for on what day of the month of December in the year 1023, Alexius

^A was declared patriarch is not clear from the writings, so far as I know.

Ibid. ^B Michael Cerularius, etc., 11 years. Michael Cerularius, the author of the Greek schism, was substituted for Alexius on the day of the feast of the Annunciation, in the eleventh indiction, as Cedrenus writes, namely on the twenty-fifth day of the month of March in the year of Christ 1043. Other Catalogues of the patriarchs of Constantinople attribute fifteen years to this patriarch, and therefore Baronius placed the deposition of Michael Cerularius in the year of Christ 1058. But Pagius assigns sixteen years and three months to Michael Cerularius, and states that he was driven from the see in the year of Christ 1059, for, says Pagius, the Curopalates asserts that Cerularius was deposed from his dignity on the feast of the Archangels, which Zonaras supports. The Greeks, however, as is to be seen in their Menologion, celebrate the feast of the Archangels and Saint Michael twice a year, namely on the eighth day of June and the sixth day of September.

Ibid. Constantine Leichoudes, under the same lord Isaac Comnenus, and under lord Constantine Ducas, 4 years and a half. We replace here Constantine Leichoudes, whom Nicephorus Callistus, or rather his copyist, had omitted, between Michael Cerularius and John Xiphilinus, from the other Catalogue of the patriarchs of Constantinople edited by us here from the Greco-Roman Law. Zonaras also attributes four years and six months to this patriarch. Constantine was created patriarch of Constantinople in the year of Christ 1059, after the eighth day of the month of June, as Pagius writes from the Curopalates; but he died around the beginning of the month of January in the year 1054, as will appear from what is to be said below.

Ibid. John Xiphilinus, etc., 13 years and a half. Other Catalogues of the patriarchs of Constantinople also assign thirteen years and six months to this patriarch. But Zonaras, in the life of Michael Ducas, better attributes to John eleven years and seven months, as is evident from Anna Comnena, who, on page 75, writes that John Xiphilinus died on the second day of the month of August in the thirteenth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 1075, from which it also appears that John was raised to that dignity in the month of January of the year 1064.

Ibid. ^C Cosmas the Hierosolymite, etc., 5 years, 9 months. Cosmas succeeded to the place of John in the year of Christ 1075, as is evident from the passage of Anna cited a little above. Cosmas, however, abdicated the patriarchate, as the aforementioned Anna writes, page 79, a few days after Irene was crowned, on the very memorial of the confession of Saint John the Theologian, that is, on the eighth day of May; after he had held the patriarchal dignity for five years and nine months: "That noble and holy patriarch Cosmas, whom we have previously mentioned, after a few days, having performed the sacred rites on the memorial of the Hierarch John the Theologian in the church built at the Hebdomon in the name of the aforementioned," ^D "having excelled in the high-priestly throne for five years and nine months, resigned the priesthood and departed to the monastery of Callion, etc." Irene was crowned at the beginning of the month of April of the year of Christ 1081. The memorial of the confession of Saint John the Theologian occurs on the eighth day of the month of May, on which the Greeks celebrate the feast of Saint John the Evangelist. Furthermore, Zonaras also agrees with Anna Comnena, when he writes under the emperor Alexius that Cosmas had administered the Church of Constantinople for five years and nine months.

Ibid. Eustratius the eunuch, etc., 3 years. Zonaras assigns three years to Eustratius Garidas in Alexius Comnenus; who indeed also records that Eustratius was cast out from the see after a three-year patriarchate by Alexius Comnenus for a reason not sufficiently known. And indeed, a span of three years fits Eustratius perfectly; for, as is evident from the passage of Anna cited a little above, Eustratius began his pontificate on the eighth day of the month of May of the year of Christ 1081. But he did not rule that Church beyond the year 1084, as will appear from what we are about to say from the aforementioned Anna concerning Nicolaus Grammaticus, his successor.

Ibid. Nicolaus Grammaticus, etc., 23 years. Twenty-seven years and three months are assigned to Nicolaus Grammaticus in the Catalogue of the patriarchs of Constantinople edited by us here from the Greco-Roman Law: Zonaras, under the emperor Alexius, attributes to him twenty-seven years; and therefore Nicolaus migrated from this life in the year of Christ one thousand one hundred and eleven, as Pagius very well points out: for indeed Nicolaus ascended the patriarchal throne in the year of Christ 1081, before the month of September, as is evident from Anna Comnena, page 273. "And with the patriarch Nicolaus himself present; for he succeeded in ascending the patriarchal throne in the seventh indiction, the year 6592, after the resignation of Eustratius Garidas," etc.

Ibid. John Hieromnemon, etc., 23 years. John Hieromnemon who, as Zonaras writes under the emperor Alexius, at that time presided over the Church of Chalcedon, and, having been versed in both profane and sacred letters from an early age, was substituted in the place of Nicolaus, namely in the year of Christ 1111. This man, however, having ruled the Church of Constantinople for twenty-three years, died in the year of Christ 1154.

Ibid. Leo Stypes, etc., 8 years and a half. Leo succeeded John in the year of Christ 1134, who, having ruled the Church of Constantinople for eight years and six months, as this Nicephorus Callistus writes, died in the year 1143, as Baronius and Onuphrius very well relate in the *Ecclesiastical Chronicles*.

Ibid. ^D Michael the monk, 8 years [sic], 2 months. This Michael, having been previously superior of the monastery on the island which they call Oxia from its position, as Cinnamus writes is a man lightly imbued indeed with the liberal arts and the humanities, but in elegance of morals and knowledge of divine things inferior to none, according to the same writer, was substituted in the place of Leo by Manuel Comnenus, not indeed by Michael, as is errorneously written in the Greek text, namely in the year of Christ 1143. This man, having ruled the Church of Constantinople for two years and eight months, abdicated the patriarchate in the year of Christ 1146, as Baronius writes.

Ibid. Cosmas the Attic, under the same, 10 months, and he was cast out. There is added in the Catalogue of the patriarchs of Constantinople edited by us here from the Greco-Roman Law: "And the Church remained widowed of a pastor for ten months." Namely, after Cosmas the Attic was ejected from the see; who indeed succeeded Michael in the year of Christ 1146, and in the following year was driven from the see because he was infected with the heresy of the Bogomils, as Cinnamus writes, book II, no. 10, speaking of the affairs which were carried out while Manuel was emperor. Allatius, lib. I, *De Consensu Ecclesiae Occidentalis et Orientalis*, cap. 12, page 686, brings forth the sentence passed against Cosmas; which, since it contains many things pertaining to the history of that age, is therefore proposed here by us in its entirety. [A statement regarding the deposition of the patriarch of Constantinople Cosmas the Attic, proven to be of one mind with Niphon Bogomilus.]

^A On the twenty-sixth of February, a Wednesday, in the tenth indiction, while our most mighty and God-crowned holy emperor and autocrat, Lord Manuel Comnenus, was presiding in the palace of Blachernae, and there being present the most fortunate Caesar, Lord John Roger; the most august Lord Stephen Contostephanus; the most august Lord Constantine Angelus—kinsmen of the most mighty and holy emperor—as also the Lord Alexius, son of the Porphyrogenita, and the Caesarissa Lady Anna; the Lord Alexius and the Lord Andronicus, sons of the Porphyrogenita Lady Maria, and her own brother the most august sebastos and grand droungarios, Lord Constantine Comnenus; the most august sebastos, the dikaiodotes and eparch, Lord John Parounitos; the most grand and eminent quaestor and judge of the Velum, Lord Basil; the judge of the Velum, John Alopas; and other not a few of the senate, and the civil judges standing with them, and the ecclesiastical officials.

If, indeed, a man’s own lips are a strong snare, and each person is taken by the words of his own mouth, then the one who sits upon a judgment seat—and that a royal one—with the senate standing by, and the holy and divine synod standing by, and not only these, but also another and most numerous crowd, having himself set forth what he was accused of by others, and having confessed that the truth is such as those who reported his affairs to our most mighty and holy emperor related—how shall he not be, even without further evidence, confirmed by his own lips, and justly be tightened by the words of these men as if by unbreakable chains? ^B Such a thing has today befallen Cosmas, the patriarch of this queen of cities. For even some of the most holy archbishops, having been not a little scandalized at this—that he had, some time ago, synodically bestowed gifts upon a man who had been cast out as a heretic and one who taught and led astray into things alien to the Catholic Church, according to the synodical notes drawn up at that time regarding this—namely, that cursed one and apostate, we speak of Niphon, whom the holy synod gathered at that time had condemned to such an extent that he was even to be avoided and was, simply put, uncommuned by all, even to the point of a mere word or greeting. For it is superfluous to speak of eating with him, or of prayer, or of the other things in which we are accustomed to commune with one another. Because of these things, then, being scandalized, as we said, because he was obstinately showing favor to such a man, and not only in conversations and private meetings, but also in countless other ways communicating with him, they approached our mighty and holy emperor. And feeling no small distress at what was taking place, they reported all these things to his all-fortunate majesty. As, therefore, he is a man truly fervent and a zealot for piety—not enduring such a scandal in the Church—he summoned today both the patriarch himself and those who were in residence, all of us, and began to bring into the midst, to be spoken of and examined, the matters concerning him. God, the God of truth, having seen, as it seems, with what a contrite soul and with what prayer our God-crowned emperor had made the search for the present matter, caused the man himself, having been questioned with his own skillful and masterful wisdom, to reveal the truth concerning himself, and this he did without any accuser. For as he was questioned by the emperor as to what he held regarding Niphon, he shamelessly and with, as they say, "naked head," did not utter that he held him to be a heretic, but rather orthodox. ^C Thus, then, with this second head having been refuted, and the patriarch having been clearly shown to be contrary to those things which had been synodically decreed, we, having judged along with our most mighty and holy emperor—who also himself shared in the judgment with us and with the senate—that he should be examined, and as he holds the synodical notes as nothing, and sticks to and clings to his own will; and as today, in the common hearing of all, he named himself a Lot in Sodom—we all unitedly condemned both him, as being of one mind with the outcast and Bogomil Niphon, and, according to those same notes, declared him to be cast out and unworthy of the high priestly dignity. These things, having been drawn up and confirmed by the signatures of those indicated below, were delivered in the month and indiction written above, in the year 6652.

The signatures. Constantine, unworthy archbishop of the metropolis of Caesarea in Cappadocia, I have signed. John, archbishop of Ephesus and exarch of all Asia, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Cyzicus, Theophilus, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Nicomedia, John, having given judgment, I have signed. The metropolitan of Chalcedon, John, having given judgment, I have signed. The metropolitan of Claudiopolis, Gregory, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Laodicea, Basil, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Myra, Theodore, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Larissa, George, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Rhodes, Nicephorus, having given judgment, I have signed. The metropolitan of Cerasus, Peter, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Aristra, Leo, having given judgment, I have signed. Constantine, the unworthy metropolitan of Christianoupolis, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy archbishop of Bizye, having given judgment, I have signed. Leo, the unworthy archbishop of Parium, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy archbishop of Karavyta, Gregory Gamalas, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy archbishop of Gothia, Constantine, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Heraclea, Peter, having given judgment, I have signed. John, by permission of God metropolitan of Sardis, having given judgment, I have signed. The metropolitan of Nicaea, Leo, having given judgment, I have signed. Basil, the unworthy metropolitan of Tyana in Cappadocia, having given judgment, I have signed. The metropolitan of the New Caesarea, Nicephorus, having given judgment, I have signed this tome. The unworthy metropolitan of Antioch in Pisidia, Michael, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy bishop of the church of the Nicopolitans, Nicholas, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of the most holy metropolis of Trajanopolis, Nicephorus, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Amastris, Constantine, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Apamea, George, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Methymna, George, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy metropolitan of Mesene, John, having given judgment, I have signed. The unworthy archbishop of ... Dioupolis, Nic... having given judgment...

George, humble Archbishop of Kios, having judged, have subscribed. The humble Archbishop of Cherson, Theophanes, having judged, have subscribed.

^A Sententia of the deposition of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Cosmas Atticus, who was found to share the views of the Bogomil Niphon, extracted, and, as is the custom, corroborated, and published in the year 6652, in the month and indiction prefixed to the sentence. On the 26th day of February, in the 10th indiction, while our most powerful and God-crowned, holy king and Emperor, Lord Manuel Comnenus, presided in the palace of Blachernae; there being present the most fortunate Caesar, Lord John Roger; the panypersebastus Stephen Contostephanus; the sebastohypertatus, Lord Constantine Angelus, kinsmen of our most powerful and holy Emperor; Lord Alexius, son of the Porphyrogenita, and the Caesarissa Lady Anna; Lord Alexius and Lord Andronicus, sons of the Porphyrogenita, Lady Maria, and of the sister germane of the same; the pansebastus sebastus, the great drungarius, Lord Constantine Comnenus; the pansebastus sebastus, the dicaeodota and prefect, Lord John Paronita; the great and most illustrious quaestor, and judge of the Beli, Lord Basil Peculius; the judge of the Beli, John Alopa; and not a few other senators, and civil magistrates; together with the present ecclesiastical prelates. If honest lips are a snare to a man, and each is captured by the words of his own mouth, what shall we say of one who stands on the imperial dais, with the senate present, the divine and holy synod present, and another countless multitude present, and who, being called to judgment by others, confesses these things himself, stating the matter to be as those who reported it had narrated to our most powerful and holy Emperor—how, by his own lips, as if by an unavoidable law, shall he not be shackled, and deservedly, by the merits of their testimonies, as if by unbreakable chains, be restrained? ^B Such a thing occurred today also concerning Cosmas, the Patriarch of this Queen of Cities. For when certain most holy prelates were offended, observing that he, a man who had been rejected by a gathered synod a few years ago for thinking differently and suggesting and maintaining things contrary to the Catholic Church, as the sentences passed upon him in full synod relate; this man, I say, this scoundrel and false monk Niphon, whom the holy synod then gathered had so condemned that no access to him was permitted, and he was cut off from the communion of all, even from a word and a greeting—for it would be superfluous to speak of his company, or prayer, and other things in which we are accustomed to associate—were offended, as we have said, seeing the Patriarch clinging to this man and defending him, not only in private conversations and meetings with him, but also in communicating with him in countless other ways, they approached our powerful and holy Emperor and, in a state of highest sorrow and grief on these accounts, reported everything to his most pious Majesty. And so, as he is truly inflamed and kindled with zeal for piety, and not enduring such a scandal in the Church, he compelled the Patriarch himself, and all of us remaining in the city, today, and the case of the Patriarch had already begun to be brought into the light and examined—God being the witness of the truth—with all dejection of spirit, and with prayers humbly offered to God, our Emperor, crowned by God, having held an inquiry concerning this with his own skillful and wise royal perception, interrogated the Patriarch; who declared everything, without anyone refuting him. For, being interrogated by the Emperor himself as to what kind of person he considered Niphon to be, he affirmed with too much impudence and openly, as they say, that he considered Niphon not a heretic, but an orthodox person. ^C For this reason, this second point having been discovered, and it being manifest that the Patriarch was opposing the synodal decrees, it was considered superfluous, as our most powerful and holy Emperor himself, who was passing sentence together with us, and the senate itself have felt, to inquire into it more exactly; and how he makes the synodal edicts of no account, but adheres only to his own arbitrary will, and obeys that, and how today, in the hearing of all, he called himself alone a Lot among the Sodomites; we all together condemn him, as one sharing the views of the ejected Bogomil Niphon, and according to the tenor of the edicts, we depose him, and declare him unworthy of the archieratical dignity. These things were extracted, and corroborated by the subscriptions below, and were published in the month and indiction written above, in the year 6652.

Subscriptions. Constantine, humble Archbishop of the metropolis of Caesarea in Cappadocia, have subscribed. John, Archbishop of Ephesus and exarch of all Asia, judging, have subscribed. Theophilus, humble Metropolitan of Cyzicus, judging, have subscribed. John, humble Metropolitan of Nicomedia, judging, have subscribed. John, Metropolitan of Chalcedon, judging, have subscribed. Gregorius, Metropolitan of Claudiopolis, judging, have subscribed. Basil, humble Metropolitan of Laodicea, judging, have subscribed. Theodorus, humble Metropolitan of Myra, judging, have subscribed. Georgius, humble Metropolitan of Larissa, judging, have subscribed. Nicephorus, humble Metropolitan of Rhodes, judging, have subscribed. Petrus, Metropolitan of Cerasus, judging, have subscribed. Leo, humble Metropolitan of Dristra, judging, have subscribed. Constantine, humble Metropolitan of Christianoupolis, judging, have subscribed. Humilis Archbishop of Buzia, judging, have subscribed. Leo, humble Archbishop of Parium, judging, have subscribed. Gregorius Gamalas, humble Archbishop of Carabiza, judging, have subscribed. Constantine, humble Archbishop of Gothia, judging, have subscribed. Petrus, humble Metropolitan of Heraclea, judging, have subscribed. John, by divine permission Metropolitan of the Sarioroi, judging, have subscribed. Leo, Metropolitan of Nicaea, judging, have subscribed. Basil, humble Metropolitan of Tyana in Cappadocia, judging, have subscribed. Nicephorus, of Caesarea Nova, judging this volume, have subscribed. Michael, humble Metropolitan of Antioch in Pisidia, judging, have subscribed. Nicolaus, humble Bishop of the Church of the Nicopolitans, judging, have subscribed. Constantinus, of the most holy metropolis of Amastris, judging, have subscribed. Georgius, humble Metropolitan of Apamea, judging, have subscribed. Georgius, humble Metropolitan of Methymna, judging, have subscribed. John, humble Metropolitan of Messana, judging, have subscribed. Nicolaus, humble Archbishop of Arcadioupolis, judging, have subscribed. Georgius, humble Archbishop of Cii, judging, have subscribed. Theophanes, humble Archbishop of Cherson, judging, have subscribed.

Truly, above the years of the world according to the Constantinopolitan era, beginning from September, the cor-

- ^A rect reading is to be followed, as Pagius writes, in the year 6655, which in the February of the following year corresponds to the 10th indiction, in which the 4th day of the week fell on the 26th of February. Moreover, Nicetas Choniates, in book 11, where he describes the virtues of Patriarch Cosmas, and especially his piety and kindness toward the poor, writes that the cause of his deposition was something else, not heresy. Cosmas, he says, was slandered by rivals to Manuel as if he were trying to secure the kingdom for his brother Isaac; hence Manuel, wishing to remove Cosmas, invented a story that he held perverse views, along with Niphon, whom he used to frequent both at his table and in his house, and therefore, as a follower and supporter of a man condemned by the synod, he orders him also to be condemned; and this was indeed done; but in vengeance for this unjust deposition, the empress bore no male children, as Cosmas had cursed her, etc.

Ibid. ^B Neophytus the Recluse, formerly of the monastery of Evergetis, [for] ... years. Between the aforementioned Theodotus and Constantine Chliarenus, Neophytus is enumerated, both in the Catalogue edited here by us from the Greco-Roman Law and in other Catalogues; but in what year he died here is not clear, since the number of years of his tenure does not appear in the cited Catalogues, perhaps deleted by the injury of time. Indeed, I myself believe this Patriarch Neophytus, since no other writer to my knowledge mentions him, to be a fabrication, as is easy to see from the things we are about to say below. Whence it will appear of what value this Catalogue of Nicephorus Callistus is, without whose help Baronius, Pagius, and others have often fallen into error, as anyone can see.

Ibid. Constantine, etc., the Chliarenus, [for] 2 years. Theodotus having passed away, as this Nicephorus Callistus writes, Constantine Chliarenus succeeded, in the year of Christ 1153, around the month of April: but the aforementioned Patriarch Constantine died in the year 1165, when he had ruled the Constantinopolitan Church for two years, as the same Nicephorus reports. For this patriarch, the number of years is not assigned in other Catalogues.

Ibid. Luke the monk and Chrysoberges, etc., [for] 15 years, 3 months. Luke Chrysoberges succeeded to the place of Constantine in the year of Christ 1155. Having ruled the Constantinopolitan Church for fifteen years and three months, as this Nicephorus writes, he did not depart from the living before the year 1169. Whence Baronius, Pagius, Leunclavius, and others, who do not assign his death to the aforementioned year, are to be corrected.

Col. 462, ^B. Nicolaus the monk, the Musalon, etc., was bishop in Constantinople for 3 years, 8 months. From those things which we said in the preceding chapter, it is clear that Nicolaus Musalo was installed in the place of Cosmas Atticus on the 26th day of the month of December in the year of Christ 1147, when the Constantinopolitan see had been vacant after the deposition of Cosmas for ten months, namely from the 26th day of the month of February of the same year. He, however, having resigned the archbishopric of Cyprus, betook himself to the monastery of Cosmidion, over which he presided for some years, as is found in the *Jure Graeco-Romano*, lib. iv, cap. 4, where it treats of the translations of bishops. That indeed in this chapter, and in Nicephorus Callistus, it is read that he had previously been Archbishop of Cyprus, is confirmed from Cinnamus, page 47, who relates the whole matter at greater length in these words: "The Emperor elevated a certain Nicolaus, whose surname was Musalo, to the archiepiscopal throne; who previously belonged to the ecclesiastical catalogues, but having secured the throne of the Church of the Cypriots, then of his own free will departs from there. But as soon as it came to pass, and every mouth was moved against him, saying that he had illegally leaped onto the throne, since together with the church he had obtained, he had already also resigned the priesthood. He was at first somewhat stubborn, and would by no means relinquish the throne. But when at length the Emperor’s [officials/judges] arbitrated the matter, he realized he had drawn the shorter lot, and not enduring to be questioned again, he then departed from the throne and, on his own, withdrew." The Emperor elevated a certain Nicolaus, surnamed Musalo, to the patriarchal see, who, having first been engaged in ecclesiastical dignities and having obtained the Church of the Cypriots, later withdrew from it of his own accord. But as he began to administer affairs, the eyes of all were immediately turned against him, crying out that the throne was unjustly occupied by him, as one who, with the Church he had seized, had also resigned the priesthood. But he, being stubborn at first, by no means allowed himself to be pushed from the throne; ^C when, however, the matter was brought to the Emperor's examination, he realized it would turn out badly for himself; having resigned the dignity of his own free will, he returned again to private life. Nicolaus, however, when he had ruled the Constantinopolitan Church for three years and four months, as is found both in this Catalogue of Nicephorus Callistus and in others, was compelled to resign the patriarchate toward the month of April of the year of Christ 1151. See what Theodorus Balsamon has about this Nicolaus Musalo in *Epist. Basil. ad Amphilochium*, cap. 69. Furthermore, the errors of Baronius and others, which occur very frequently in this matter, it would be entirely too long to recount here.

Col. 463, ^A. Theodotus the monk, etc., [for] 2 years. Theodotus succeeded Nicolaus Musalo, a man exceedingly well instructed in monastic disciplines, as Cinnamus writes on page 47. Which indeed happened around the month of April of the year of Christ 1151, as we said above. And Theodotus died around the month of April of the year 1153.

Ibid. Michael the deacon and sacellarius, etc., [for] 8 years, 2 months. Michael, deacon and sacellarius of the Great Church, succeeded Luke Chrysoberges toward the end of the year of Christ 1169. ^B Having sat for eight years and two months, as Nicephorus writes, he died in the year of Christ 1177.

Ibid. Chariton the monk, etc., [for] 1 month, 11 days. Chariton ascended the Constantinopolitan throne at the beginning of the year of Christ 1177, as is evident from the years that Nicephorus assigns to his predecessors, and from those things which we are about to say concerning his successor. The catalogue of Onuphrius in *Chron. Eccles.* wrongly assigns one year, two months, and days... to this patriarch. Moreover, Chariton dies toward the end of this year, as is to be seen below.

Ibid. ^B Theodosius Borrhadiotes, etc., [for] 6 years. Theodosius Borrhadiotes succeeded Chariton in the last days of the year of Christ 1177, or at the very beginning of the following year. Nicetas Choniates treats of Patriarch Theodosius at greater length in *Alexius, son of Manuel Comnenus*; and that writer indeed reports that Theodosius had been cast from the see by the protosebastos, but not long after, by the authority of the empress, the Caesarissa, and other kinsmen of the emperor, had been restored to the same; which indeed happened, as the same Nicetas says, in the 15th indiction, namely in the year of Christ 1182. But in the following year, when Andronicus wished to betroth Irene, born from his cousin Theodora Comnena, against the laws to Alexius, son of Manuel born from the incestuous union with Theodora, Patriarch Theodosius, together with a few among the order of pontiffs and priests, and from the conscript Fathers, resists stoutly, and would in no way allow such marriages, as being incestuous, to proceed. But afterward, when the patriarch perceived that he was accomplishing nothing, and that evils were manifestly encroaching, and that the better part was giving way to the greater, he departs from the sacred palace to the island of Terebinthus, where he had built himself a lodging and a tomb; as the aforementioned Nicetas holds in the place cited a little above; whence also

the mutilated passage of Nicephorus can be supplemented, where he has ^A `and he resigned on account of the Emperor...` Col. 404. ^B *Basil the deacon, etc., 2 years and a half...* Emperor Andronicus appointed Basil Camaterus in the place of Theodosius, a man of his own faction; whom Nicetas Choniates describes in the book on Alexius, son of Manuel Comnenus, page 169, with these words: "And regarding him who was to succeed to the patriarchal throne, and who would fulfill the requirements for the office, he deliberates, and Basil Camaterus is approved by Andronicus for the ecumenical presidency, or conversely, as it was said, he himself had dragged Andronicus toward such a choice, having alone among all men stipulated in writing to Andronicus those things to be transacted while in the high priesthood, whatever was agreeable to Andronicus, even if they were anathema, and again to treat with abhorrence whatever did not please Andronicus." When he was deliberating about giving a successor of his own faction to the patriarchate, he conferred the ecumenical pontificate upon Basil Camaterus: or rather, he sold it, prompted by that man’s signed document, in which he had promised that he would do whatever was dear to Andronicus, however illicit, and would decline those things which were displeasing to him. But Basil was proclaimed patriarch of Constantinople in the year of Christ 1183, as we reminded you in the previous chapter from the same Nicetas. Baronius incorrectly assigns six years and six months to this patriarch; just as Onuphrius also does in *Chron. Eccles.*, assigning three years and six months; whereas in all other Catalogs, two years and six months are attributed to him. Therefore, Basil was cast out from his see by the Emperor Isaac Angelus in the year of Christ 1186. The cause of this deposition is narrated by the aforementioned Nicetas in the same [work on] Isaac; from where those things which this Nicephorus Callisti writes about Basil can be corrected and supplemented.

*Ibid. Nicetas, etc., the Mountanes, in the reign of Isaac himself, 3 years and 10 days.* Having cast Basil Camaterus from the see, the Emperor Isaac appointed Nicetas Mountanes in his place, in the year of Christ 1186. But he did not allow even this man to die in the sacred see, expelling him against his will, accusing him of senility, delirium, and levity, as writes Nicetas Choniates in the same [book on] Augustus, page 259, where, after he had spoken about Basil Camaterus, he continues thus: "Proposing in his stead the patriarch Nicetas Mountanes, who was sacellarius of the Great Church, he did not even allow this man, thrice-aged, to breathe his last on the throne, but condemning [him for] the simplicity and lightness of the man, and casting upon him an unanswerable [charge of] old age, he hurled him against his will from the throne." He designated Nicetas Mountanes as patriarch in his stead, being the sacellarius of the Great Church; but he did not allow even this man, a man of great age, to expire in the sacred see, but expelled him against his will, accusing him of senility, delirium, and levity. But from these words of Nicetas it does not follow that Nicetas Mountanes was immediately driven from the patriarchate, as Baronius wrongly thought; since those words denote only that this patriarch, although advanced in age, was removed from his dignity before his own death. However, six years and six months are assigned to this patriarch in the Catalogs of Philippus Cyprius and Matthaeus Cigala; and it was so read in the Catalog which Onuphrius had used in *Chron. Eccles.*, whence Onuphrius connects the beginning of Nicetas Mountanes with the year 1186, and writes that he was cast from the see no earlier than the year 1192. But I, having followed the Catalog of Nicephorus Callisti, connect the deposition of Nicetas with the year of Christ 1190. Moreover, the monk Methodius assigns one year to Nicetas Mountanes; whose passage we shall cite in the following chapter.

*Ibid. Dositheus, patriarch from Jerusalem, 9 days.* No one else, that I know of, except Nicephorus Callisti, assigns Dositheus as the successor of Nicetas; for in other Catalogs, Leontius is listed after Nicetas; which indeed Niceetas Choniates seems to confirm in [his book on] Isaac, since they are necessary for the history and series of these patriarchs, it is pleasing to describe them here in their entirety: ^C "Having become more solicitous, he sets out to find a great shepherd to govern the Church—a certain monk Leontius, negotiating in assemblies, and swearing before the divine tribunal and gatherings that he did not know the man beforehand; but by night the Theotokos pointed him out to him, describing his appearance and virtue, and also clarifying the place where he lived. But not yet a year had passed when he also strikes down this 'Theotokite' from the patriarchal height, having no regard nor showing respect for all the praises he had spoken about him, and [how he had] glorified him as a divine man. Leontius having been rejected in this way, he resolved to stage a transfer, and to raise Dositheus of Jerusalem to the ecumenical presidency. Knowing that the canons did not permit this, he goes craftily to Theodore Balsamon, who governed the throne of the great city of God, Antioch, a man who was then more versed in law than all others. And indeed, having met with him in private, he feigns distress, [asking] if the Church were so lacking in God-loving and learned men, and if the monastic virtue were so scattered and unmanifested, that there was no one prior to this 'light of the day' [the sun], no one to sit upon the throne of the holy and perfectly to guide the flock of the faithful, and putting forward other such things sorrowfully, he brought in the [matter that] he had long wished to transfer him from the Church of the Antiochenes to the ecumenical eminence, as a light totally shining with the brilliance of the laws, but holding back the transfer because it was long ago forbidden by the canons and discordant with ecclesiastical ordinances. If he himself, as one perfected in laws and canons, could find a place to demonstrate it [to be lawful], just as at that time he had now prepared the transfer, and could change the opinions of many toward this, he will truly deem the deed a 'windfall,' and will not delay the conclusion, making the appointment unrevoked. And the emperor thus approached Theodore of Antioch, and he agreed that all things should be accomplished. Therefore, after that day, there were, among the records of the holy [synods], assemblies of bishops, and synods, and discussions concerning transfers, and a 'casting out' on the spot, and a *tomos* completed on the imperial tribunal; and the one of Antioch [was seen] again in Antioch, and Dositheus was led up from the seat of Jerusalem to that of Constantinople; and the procession was the most brilliant and populous ever, so that it was even rivaled by the triumphs of emperors, and the bishops who had been deceived by this were agape, and having recklessly cast away the canons, indeed, not having been able to bear the laughter for a long time, the learned men of the tribunal and as many of the bishops as had a notable power of tongue for speaking make schisms and disturbances; therefore, Dositheus is heard [called] an intruder into a foreign Church, ^D and he had the second honor dissolved, and is brought down from the throne. But the emperor, not able to bear the defeat, was fighting back, and in all ways hastening to prevail to have the transfer affirmed; and after a short time, having dissolved those things that had supervened, he straightway supported Dositheus; at which time, by means of his axe-bearing guards and the elite of the palace, he sent him forth to the greatest sanctuary, fearing that the crowd might revolt; for Dositheus was regarded by all as a lover of the throne, and the one holding the power [the emperor] was insistent on untimely matters, and not to be praised for his selfishness; but Dositheus was cast out from the throne again, and he suffered truly the [fate] of Aesop’s dog, having fallen from the sacred authority (for another had been ordained for Jerusalem) and having been deposed from the greater throne. And this was, indeed, at that time. And he appoints..."

^A Giorgios Xiphilinos, a great man and keeper of the sacred vessels, as patriarch. But when he pondered more diligently concerning the governor of the Church, he designates a certain monk, Leontios, as a great pastor. In the presence of the throng of the people, before the tribunal, he testified under oath that this man, previously unknown to him, had been revealed to him at night by the Mother of God, with not only his form and virtue described, but even the place shown where he dwelt. But having repudiated him also, through the Mother of God, before a year had elapsed, feeling not at all ashamed that he had extolled him with praises as a divine man before so many, he institutes a change, intending to raise Dositheos of Jerusalem to the ecumenical patriarchate.

Knowing that the canons did not permit this, he tricked Theodore Balsamon, bishop of Great Antioch—a man of that age most learned in the law—and in a private conversation feigned indignation that the Church was being so destitute of pious and learned men, and that monastic virtue had so fallen into decay and vanished, that there was no one who might illuminate the universal see—no differently than the restless circuit of the sun illuminates the globe—and govern the assembly of the faithful as well as possible. Having prefaced these and other things of this kind not without grief, he added that it had long been his intention to transfer him from the Antiochene see to the ecumenical one, as a bright lamp of legal purity. But that he was deterred from such a change by the interdict of the ancient canons and ecclesiastical sanctions. If, however, he himself, as one most skilled in laws and canons, could demonstrate—and persuade the common people—that the translation might have a place now as it did of old, he would consider it entirely a gain, and would—provided it were permitted—designate him without delay.

Treated in this way, Theodore affirmed that all things would be valid. The next day, a council of bishops having been convoked in the sacred edifice and that question having been agitated, the translation was immediately granted and confirmed by imperial letters. And the Antiochene, as he had been before, so remained Antiochene. Dositheos, however, was translated from the Jerusalem see to Constantinople, with a retinue so numerous and splendid that it undoubtedly equaled a royal triumph. But the primary priests, and others distinguished by their eloquence, who saw that they had been deceived by the canons being rashly violated, were stunned. Since they could no longer endure the mockery, they established extraordinary councils and small gatherings of the people; Dositheos was heard of as an invader of another’s Church, and, having had the honor abrogated, he was led out of the see.

The Emperor, however, not bearing that ignominy, opposed them in all ways, and left nothing undone so that that approved translation might remain in force. Not long after, the abrogation having been lifted and Dositheos having been confirmed again, he led him into the sacred edifice by way of the two-edged guards and palace nobles, fearing a motion of the people. For Dositheos was hated by all on account of his ambition, untimely stubbornness, and his little-praised zeal. But again he is cast out of the see, in the same way as the Aesopic dog, and loses the pontificate that he had held (for another had been elected for Jerusalem) and falls from the greater see, with the great guardian of the vessels, George Xiphilinos, being designated patriarch. Nicephorus Callistus himself speaks also of this translation of Dositheos in Book XIV, chapter 29. ^D Since these things are somewhat different from those which the praised Nicetas relates concerning Dositheos, it pleases to describe them here: “And Isaac, who swaying the scepter, transfers Dositheos of Jerusalem to the throne of Constantine, and Mark, the one called Florus, is promoted in that place. Then again Dositheos, leaving the throne of Constantine, returns to the throne of Aelia, the one called Florus having been driven out from there against all justice. After this, Dositheos also resigned both thrones, that of Aelia and that of Constantinople; and, having become by himself, he died.”

Isaac Angelos imperante, Dositheos the Hierosolymitan was translated to Constantinople while there, from Jerusalem, Mark (who was also called Florus) had passed. Then, Dositheos, having left Constantinople again, returned to the Elian throne, since he who was called Florus had been driven out from there against justice and the Constantinopolitan see having been put after, Dositheos lived out his life in private, and died. Methodius the monk, in Allatius, in his dissertation against Creygton (p. 330), speaking of Isaac Angelos, says that the same emperor created five Constantinopolitan patriarchs in the space of nine years during which he held the empire.

Thus he: “For did not Isaac Angelos, not without every reasonable and canonical cause, having removed Kamateros from the throne, set Nikita the sakellarios in his place? And did he not, after a year, having brought this man down as a simpleton, make Leontios the Theotokite patriarch, whom he also called ‘Theotokite,’ asserting that the Theotokos had appeared to him, and had ordered that he remove Nikita and install Leontios in his place upon the throne? And did he not again drive the same Leontios from the throne, asserting that the Theotokos had ordered him to do this again, and did he not reveal Dositheos of Jerusalem as the hierarch of the throne of Constantine? And since much murmuring has taken place concerning this, did not Dositheos fall from the throne because of this, and was not another set forth? For thus Isaac installed five patriarchs of Constantinople in nine years, whom, although he had reigned, he did so not by word and canonical charges at all, but simply by his own will and desire, bringing one down and leading another up. And yet, not one of these, or of those ordained through them, has become inacceptable to the Church. And it is even more ridiculous, or rather more disgraceful, that all lived in the days of Isaac, perhaps on account of the brevity of his reign.”

Does not Isaac Angelos, moreover, without any reasonable cause and canonical decree, after having pushed Cumateros from the throne, substitute Nicetas the sakellarios, and this again, after the year was finished, as being little fit for the burden, having removed him, substitute in his place upon the throne the Theotokite Leontios, whom he named Theotokite, claiming that the Mother of God had appeared to him and commanded that, with Nicetas deposed, he replace him with Leontios? Did he not ^C afterwards cast Leontios from the throne, contending that the Mother of God had also demanded that he perform this, and declared Dositheos of Jerusalem the hierarch of CP? Since, therefore, querulous murmuring grew strong about him, was not another chosen on that account, with Dositheos falling from the throne?

In this way, therefore, Isaac created five Constantinopolitan patriarchs in the space of nine years during which he held the empire, moved by no reason, or of faults against the canons, but simply by his own whim and appetite, depressing one but exalting another. And nonetheless, none from these, or from those who were ordained by them, was rejected by the Church. But what is more festive, or as I might say more truly, unworthy of such dignity, all these led their lives under the empire of the same Isaac: because his rule lasted for a short time. From those, however, which we have brought forth in this matter from Nicetas Choniates, from the History of Nicephorus Callistus, and from Methodius the monk, it appears that not Dositheos the Hierosolymitan but Leontios the Theotokite succeeded Nicetas Muntanos; whence the same Nicephorus borrowed the things he expressed in the Catalog is not known: unless one should believe that no mention is made by the praised writers of Dositheos after Nicetas for the reason that he held that see for the first time for only nine days.

But it seems more likely that that which is said about Dositheos in this Catalog was added by a scribe; and that Dositheos was not raised to the Constantinopolitan throne until after the deposition of Leontios: which indeed must be necessarily concluded from Nicetas, when he narrates that the Emperor Isaac tricked Theodore Balsamon by a ruse; whose authority, indeed, is to be entirely preferred to Nicephorus; since Nicetas flourished at the beginning of the thirteenth century, but Nicephorus at the beginning of the following century. For the rest, see what we advise below concerning the patriarchate of Dositheos after Leontios. Col. 464 C. Leontios the so-called Theotokos...

etc., ^A seven months, etc. It is certainly "seven months," and it should be read thus in the version above, where through the negligence of copyists "nine" is read instead of "seven." Therefore, after Muntanos was expelled from the see, Leontios Theotocites succeeded him in the year of Christ 1190; and when he had sat for seven months, he was expelled by Isaac with the same cunning by which he was installed, as is evident from the things which we have brought forward from Nicetas Choniates and from the monk Methodios in the preceding chapter. Moreover, his deposition occurred in this same year. Col. 464 C. Dositheos the Protopatriarch of Jerusalem, etc., one year, half. We have dealt more extensively concerning Dositheos a little earlier, so it will suffice here only to notify that he was announced as patriarch of Constantinople after Leontios at the end of the year of Christ 1190, or at the beginning of the following year; and when he had sat for one year and a half, he was expelled from the see not before the year 1192. Ibid. D. Georgios the deacon, etc., the Xiphilinos, ^B during the same, 6 years, 9 months, 27 days. After Dositheos was expelled from the see by Isaac Comnenos, Georgios Xiphilinos succeeded him in the year of Christ 1192; and when he had sat for six years, nine months, and twenty-seven days, he abdicated the patriarchate, and was tonsured in the monastery of the Phryganoi, which he had built under the reign of Alexios Angelos, brother of Isaac, as Nicephorus Callisti seems to hint here; which event indeed happened in the year of Christ 1198. Moreover, Nicetas Choniates mentions this patriarch in *Alexios Comnenos*, page 333, and assigns seven years to him. Ibid. Ioannes the deacon and chartophylax the Kamateros, etc. When Georgios Xiphilinos died, as is held in the Catalog edited here by us from the *Jus Græco-Romanum*, since the emperor Alexios was abroad on an Occidental expedition, the throne lacked its patriarch for two months; afterwards Ioannes Kamateros was substituted in his place in the year of Christ 1198; and he ruled the Church of Constantinople until Constantinople was captured for five years, eight months, and seven days. But Constantinople was captured in the year of Christ 1204, as will be evident from things to be said below. Moreover, Nicetas Choniates speaks of the death of Ioannes Kamateros in *Baldwin*, page 407, where, after he subjoins concerning the siege of Didymoteichos: ^C "Then, in a mild death, Ioannes Kamateros, the patriarch, also departed from life, having abandoned the Church and being a dweller in Didymoteichos." Then patriarch Ioannes Kamateros, who after his exile was an inhabitant of Didymoteichos, exchanged life with a gentle death. But Georgios Acropolita speaks more extensively about Kamateros, page 6, where he deals with Theodoros Laskaris: "Two years having passed, and since Laskaris was acclaimed as despot by all, because a gathering of prominent men and notables of the Church had taken place at Nicaea, deliberation was held among them on how the despot Theodoros should be acclaimed emperor. But the patriarch was not present there; for Ioannes Kamateros, who adorned the patriarchal throne when the Latins gained control of Constantinople, had departed to Didymoteichos, and there he made his stay; and having been informed by Laskaris and the rest, he refused to come to them, having put his resignation in a document." Two whole years, therefore, although he was recognized by everyone as despot, Laskaris, and a conventus of most prominent men and primates of the Church meeting at Nicaea, the question was agitated among them: by what rational means should Theodoros be acclaimed emperor up to that time as despot. The patriarch was not present, for Ioannes Kamateros, who indeed was adorning the patriarchal see when the Latins were storming Byzantium, had departed to Didymoteichos and was staying there: and having renounced the patriarchate even in writing to Laskaris and others, he would not approach. From these words of Acropolita, those things which Nicephorus reports here about Kamateros are illustrated. ^D 510 Col. 465 A. "But the capture of Constantinople occurred." This chapter, corrupted by the scribe, should be restored in Greek and Latin thus: "But the capture of Constantinople by the Latins occurred in the year 6712, on the 12th of April, on the 2nd day of the week, 7th indiction, in the sixth week of the fasts." Constantinople was captured by the Latins in the year 6712 (that is, 1204 of Christ) on the 12th day of the month of April, a Monday, in the 7th indiction, in the sixth week of the fasts. Georgios Acropolita writes that Constantinople was captured by the Latins in the current vulgar year of the Greeks 6711: "Forty days then passed, and Constantinople was captured by them, the year being 6711 from the creation of the world, on the 12th of April. For in the 10th year, in the month of May, they approached the city, and in eleven months the plunder happened. And the greatest and most illustrious city was captured, as they say, by one or two leaping onto the wall from a ladder joined to the mast of a very large hollow ship." Therefore, after forty exact days, Constantinople is stormed by these men in the year from the creation of the world 6711, on the twelfth of the month of April. For in the tenth year, in the month of May, they apply to the city, and in the eleventh month they plunder it. And thus the greatest and most celebrated city was captured, by one or another, as rumor grew, leaping onto the walls from the ladder attached to the mast of a very large ship. Ibid. Michael Autorianos, etc., 6 years, 5 months, and 6 days. Michael Autorianos is substituted, as Nicephorus writes, for Ioannes Kamateros on the twentieth day of the month of March in the ninth indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 1206. Georgios Acropolita has things consonant with these at the place cited a little earlier, where he writes that two years after the captured city Theodoros Laskaris was crowned by this patriarch, when a little before Ioannes Kamateros had abdicated the patriarchate; thus he subjoins there concerning Michael Autorianos: "Michael Autorianos is elected patriarch, being a man of letters and experienced in all scripture, both our own and secular, who also crowned the despot Theodoros with the imperial diadem." Therefore Michael Autorianos is substituted in his place, a man articulate and most skilled not only in our literature, but in foreign literature as well. He crowned the despot Theodoros with the imperial diadem. Therefore, when Michael Autorianos, or Saurianos as others call him, had been announced as patriarch of Constantinople on the twentieth day of the month of March of the year of Christ 1206, and had lived in the patriarchate for six years, five months, and six days, his death occurred undoubtedly on the twenty-fifth day of the month of August of the year of Christ 1212. Ibid. Theodoros the so-called Irenikos Kopas, etc., 1 year, . . months, 3 days. The number of months, which is eroded in the Catalog of Nicephorus Callisti, can easily be supplied from another Catalog, which we have edited here from the *Jus Græco-Romanum*, where one year, four months, and three days are assigned to Theodoros Irenikos. And it is so held in the Catalog of Philippus Cyprius; but in the Catalog of Matthaeus Cigala the three days are omitted. Georgios Acropolita attributes six years to this patriarch, both in his *History* page 17, and in his *Compendiary Chronicle*, where he has it thus: "For after the death of the patriarch Michael, Theodoros Irenikos is seated on the patriarchal throne, who was also called Kopas. And after six years he died, and the monk Maximos is raised to the patriarchal throne, etc." For after the passing of patriarch Michael, Theodoros Irenikos, who was also called Copa, is chosen as patriarch. After six years he having died, the monk Maximos ascends the patriarchal throne, etc. But I follow the Chronology of Nicephorus Callisti himself, as one who treats this matter *ex professo*, as they say. Theodoros Irenikos, therefore, as Nicephorus writes here, was announced as patriarch of Constantinople on the twenty-eighth of September, in the second indiction, on the first day of the week, that is...

the Lord's day, on which the consecrations of bishops are accustomed to take place, as we indicated elsewhere. But Theodore, when he had sat for one year, four months, and three days, died on the last day of the month of January in the year of Christ 1215.

Ib. ^B Maximus the monk, etc., 6 months. The catalog of the patriarchs of Constantinople, published here by us from the Greco-Roman Law, assigns eight months to this patriarch; Genebrard, however, assigns seven months. But George Acropolita assigns six months, as Nicephorus Callisti attributes the same to him; indeed, that writer, on page 17, describes his manner thus: "But after six years, he who had left behind the life of that man, the monk Maximus, is raised to the patriarchal throne, pampering the women's quarters, and being pampered in return by them. For there was no other thing that raised him to this prominence. And after lingering for six months, he dies." Six years later, after he had died, Maximus the monk ascended the patriarchal throne, pampering the women's quarters, and being pampered in return by them: for there was no other thing that had raised him to such a lofty peak; but after six months he died. Maximus therefore is established by the emperor in the place of Theodore Irenicus (whose death had occurred, as we noted above, on the last day of the month of January of the year of Christ 1215) on the third day of the month of June, as Nicephorus writes, clearly in the same year. After he had sat for six months, he paid the debt of nature on the third day of the month of December of the same year, 1215.

Ib. ^C Germanus the most wise and most holy, etc., 18 years. Manuel Sarantenus having paid the debt of nature around the end of the month of August 1221, as we said a little above, in his place Germanus is substituted around the end of this year, who when he had sat for eighteen years, as Nicephorus writes, paid the debt of nature around the end of the year 1239. Regarding the patriarch Germanus, George Acropolita speaks thus on page 59: "It happened before the time that the patriarch Germanus departed for the divine tabernacles, having lived well and holily, and having well shepherded his own flock. Before these times, the patriarch Germanus, having laid aside earthly matters, was called to the seats of the blessed, after he had lived uprightly and holily, and had well shepherded his sheep." For the writings of this patriarch Germanus, one should consult Labbe and Casimir Oudin; but the latter is mistaken when he assigns twenty-seven years to the patriarch Germanus.

Ib. ^D Methodius, abbot of the monastery of Hyacinthus, etc., 3 months. Methodius, abbot of the monastery of Hyacinthus, is substituted in the place of Germanus around the beginning of the year of Christ 1240, who died after three months, as Nicephorus writes. George Acropolita has the same on page 59, where, after he had spoken about the patriarch Germanus, he adds: "But after him there was a certain Methodius, called a monk, who was abbot of the monastery in Nicaea, a man who boasted that he knew many things, but was of poor understanding. But this man, having enjoyed the throne for only three months, died. The Church was therefore deprived of an archpriest. For the emperor John, not being prompt in such matters, did not easily have the ability to find at hand one who was worthy, or rather, who was pleasing to him. For rulers especially solicit those who are agreeable to them in these matters, so that they may not have anyone opposing their will. Time therefore slipped by, and there was no one to lead the flock." After him a certain monk named Methodius, head of the monastery of Hyacinthus, which is at Nicaea, a man indeed boastful in his own words, and wise, yet in reality knowing few things, having obtained the throne for three months, died, and the Church, widowed, lacked its pontiff. For when the emperor John was not very prompt in settling these things, it was not so easy to find, from the circumstances, one worthy of such a throne, or rather, one who would be approved by him. For rulers in these offices take on men who will do what is pleasing to them, and will not oppose their desires. Therefore much time had passed, and there was no one present to govern the sheep. From these words of Acropolita it is clear ^D that Methodius sat for only three months, and that the Church of Constantinople remained for a long time without a pastor; and indeed that Methodius was substituted in the place of the patriarch Germanus, not Arsenius, as Gregoras wrongly writes. Moreover, it will not be irrelevant to warn here that the series of patriarchs of Constantinople, especially those who sat at Nicaea, is corrupt and depraved in the three following Catalogs which we have published here; which indeed is apparent not only from this Catalog of Nicephorus Callisti, but also from George Acropolita, whose words we have inserted in their proper places; and this is further confirmed by the Chronology of Ephraem, where the entire series of the patriarchs of Constantinople who sat at Nicaea is found, namely from John Camaterus, under whom Constantinople was captured by the Latins, to Arsenius, the second patriarch, who was the first to sit on that throne after Constantinople was recovered.

^A

It is clear from the words of Acropolita that that passage of Nicephorus, where Arsenius is said to be "sufficiently experienced in liberal arts" (τῶν ἐγκυκλίων γραμμάτων ἱκανῶς ἔμπειρος), must be interpreted differently—that is, adequately instructed in the liberal arts; and it should be read as in the version above, instead of "instructed in all-embracing erudition": by which opinion those words might be accepted, were it not that the historians of that age persuade us otherwise. Then that mutilated passage, "in hastening to go forth, the emperor... immediately crowns [him]." Truly, because the emperor was hurrying his departure, he is crowned by the patriarch immediately, or whatever should be supplied in place of this, as appears from Acropolita. Finally, those words, "and he was... by the emperor Michael Palaiologos," etc., are sufficiently explained by Acropolita and Pachymeres, who relate that Patriarch Arsenius, when he saw John Ducas, the son of Theodore, being held in contempt by Michael Palaiologos and schemes and deceits being plotted against him, bade farewell to the patriarchate; which indeed happened at the beginning of the year of Christ 1260, when he had sat for five years, as Nicephorus writes, neglecting a few days which he ruled that Church above the five years. However, Gregoras is mistaken when he writes that Arsenius succeeded in the place of Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople; since Arsenius succeeded Manuel, Manuel succeeded Methodius, and Methodius succeeded Germanus, as is plain from the aforementioned. See Pachymeres, lib. II, cap. 7, 8, 15, and 16; Acropolita, pp. 77 and 98. ^B

Col. 463 A. "Then Nicephorus, etc., year 1." Arsenius being a fugitive from Nicaea, Nicephorus, Bishop of Ephesus, is substituted in his place at the beginning of the year of Christ 1260. Nicephorus dies at Nymphaeum around the month of November of the same year 1260, when he had presided over the patriarchate for not even an entire year, as George Acropolita writes, pp. 97 and 98, and Pachymeres, lib. II, cap. 22. After the death of Nicephorus, however, the Church of Constantinople remained widowed of a pastor for about nine months, as will easily appear from what is to be said below. ^C

Ibid. "Constantinople having been captured, Arsenius the holy begins again for 2 years." Although it appears from George Acropolita, pp. 97 and 98, that Patriarch Arsenius had been restored to the see before the recovery of Constantinople by Emperor Michael Palaiologos at the prayers of the sebastocrator Tornicius, nevertheless in truth Arsenius was not recalled until after the city was recovered, although it can be believed that the emperor had been disposed toward this by the prayers of the aforementioned sebastocrator even before Constantinople was recovered. Therefore, Nicephorus writes most correctly here that after Constantinople was captured, Arsenius presided again; for the same Acropolita, pp. 102 and 103, and Pachymeres, lib. III, cap. 2, state that the arrival of Arsenius in the city occurred after the entry of the emperor, which occurred on the fifteenth day of the month of August, as the same Acropolita relates, p. 102, and as is held written in the margin of Royal codex 1852, cited by the most learned Boivin in his *Notes on Gregoras*, where the day, month, and year of this entry are noted: "Month of August, 15th, 5th indiction, of the year 6769, we entered, with God, Constantinople." On the fifteenth day of the month of August of the year 6769 (of Christ 1261) we were brought into the city of Constantinople, God helping. That Arsenius was restored to the see around the end of this month is altogether probable; so also thinks Possinus in his *Observations on Pachymeres*, who also believes the coronation of Michael Palaiologos was celebrated at the beginning of September, and John Ducas blinded on the day of the Nativity of Christ of the same year 1261. Such is the opinion of Possinus, from whom it truly seems to me that the beginning of the second patriarchate of Arsenius is correctly designated; the end, however, of the same patriarchate is transferred by Possinus to the year of Christ 1266: and thus four years are assigned ^D to Arsenius as second patriarch. But since Arsenius as second patriarch...

besides two years and a few months, which Nicephorus had neglected to calculate, had presided over the Church of Constantinople, his deposition occurred certainly around the beginning of the year of Christ 1264, as Possinus states; Arsenius departs into exile around the end of the month of May of the same year, as Pachymeres writes. Nor did Germanus immediately succeed Arsenius, on account of the disturbances which were being stirred up by the faction of the Arsenians, as can be gathered from Gregoras and Pachymeres; but I consider that this happened in the year of Christ 1267, as is gathered from Pachymeres, who in book 4, chap. 13, writes that Germanus was inaugurated in the month of June on the day of Pentecost itself. Moreover, the feast of Pentecost does not occur in the month of June except in the year 1264 (in which year the election of Germanus certainly did not occur, as appears both from those things which we have said a little above, and from what must be said below, where we shall deal with the year in which he abdicated the patriarchate); and in the year 1267, for in the year 1265, the day of Easter fell on April 5; and in 1266, on March 28. Thus the election of Germanus must necessarily be linked with the year of Christ 1267. Moreover, the cause of the deposition of Arsenius was, as Pachymeres and Gregoras report at length, that he had interdicted Michael Palaeologus from the sacraments on account of the blinding of John Ducas, and would not listen to him when he sought pardon for the crime; whence, when a council had been indicted by the emperor, and when he would not present himself to it, having been accused there, he is condemned as contumacious.

Col. 468, B. 'Eάλω ἡ πόλις, etc. This passage, corrupted by the scribe, is to be restored in Greek and Latin thus: «Ἐάλω ἡ πόλις παρὰ Ῥωμαίων ἔτει ςυξθ', Ἰουλίου κε', ἡμέρᾳ δευτέρᾳ, τῷ γ' ἔτει τῆς βασιλείας Μιχαὴλ τοῦ Παλαιολόγου.» The city was captured by the Romans in the year 6769 (of Christ 1261) on July 25, on a Monday, in the third year of the reign of Michael Palaeologus. And it is so to be read above in the version.

Ibid. Ὁ Ἀδριανουπόλεως Γερμανός, etc. Here Germanus, formerly bishop of Adrianople, is to be placed between Arsenius and Joseph; he is omitted in the Catalogue of Nicephorus Callistus by the carelessness of the scribe. Mention of him occurs not only in the Catalogues published here by us, but also among the writers who have committed the events of that age to memory, namely in Pachymeres, Gregoras, Georgius Phrantzes, etc. One year is assigned to this patriarch in the Catalogues. But since Germanus was created patriarch of Constantinople on the day of Pentecost, which in the year of Christ 1267 concurred with June 5, as we demonstrated a little above from Pachymeres, and abdicated the patriarchate on September 14 of the same year, as the same Pachymeres writes, book IV, chap. 21, he certainly administered that Church for three months and nine days and no more. But Possinus is mistaken, who says that he sat for four months and a half. That Germanus abdicated the patriarchate in this very year, Gregoras shows sufficiently when he writes that a solar eclipse occurred around that time, namely in this very year on May 23. Moreover, what means the emperor used to persuade Patriarch Germanus to bid farewell to the patriarchate, the aforementioned Pachymeres relates at length, book IV.

Ibid. Ἰωσὴφ ὁ Γαλησίου ἡγούμενος ἔτη η'. ^D Joseph, abbot of Galesius, succeeded Germanus in the patriarchate on December 28, 1267, and was ordained immediately on the Kalends of January, as Pachymeres writes, book IV, chap. 23: «Τοῦ γοῦν τοιούτου καταδεξαμένου τὴν ψῆφον, ὁ βασιλεὺς εἰς πατριάρχην τοῦτον προβάλλεται μηνὸς Σκιροφοριῶνος εἰκοστῇ ὀγδόῃ τῆς δεκάτης ἐπινεμήσεως τοῦ σψος' ἔτους, Ἑκατομβαιῶνος δὲ νουμηνίᾳ χειροτονηθείς, εἰς ἀρχιερέας τετέλεσται.» Him, therefore, approved by the just number of votes, the emperor raised to the patriarchate, on the twenty-eighth day of the month of December, of the tenth indiction, of the year 6773, and soon on the Kalends of January he duly received the episcopal ordination. But concerning the second anathematization by Joseph, as the same Pachymeres writes, chap. 24 of the same book. Afterwards, however, when the Schismatics had persuaded Patriarch Joseph that he should declare in a public instrument, with an oath interposed, that he would never consent to the peace of the churches, as the same writer narrates, book V, chap. 16, then the emperor negotiates with the patriarch that he himself should depart from the patriarchal palace; which indeed happened on the second day of the month of January of the year of Christ 1274, as the aforementioned Pachymeres writes, chap. 17 of the same book, where, having explained the whole matter at length, he concludes thus: «Ταῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους συνθεμένων, ὁ μὲν πατριάρχης κατελθὼν εἰς τὴν τῆς Περιβλέπτου μονὴν προσκαθίζει, ἐνδεκάτῃ μηνὸς Ἑκατομβαιῶνος, δευτέρας ἐπινεμήσεως τοῦ συμπρι' ἔτους, κατέχων καὶ τὰ αὐτοῦ προνόμια ἀναφαίρετα· τὰ δὲ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας ἔτι ἐν γαλήνῃ ἦσαν, πλὴν τῶν τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τεταγμένων ἀρχόντων.» These things having been agreed upon between them, the patriarch went down and sat in the monastery of the Peribleptos, on the eleventh of the month of Hecatombaeon [July], of the second indiction, of the 6782nd year, retaining also his own privileges inviolate; but the affairs of the Church were still in tranquility, except for those set over the offices of the Church. These things having been agreed upon between them, the patriarch removed to the monastery of the Peribleptos on the second day of January, of the second indiction, in the year 6782, enjoying there his annual revenues without diminution; thus the body of the Church was indeed in a certain tranquility; but not so those who presided over it. Joseph, therefore, since he was declared patriarch of CP. towards the end of the year of Christ 1267 and was deposed in the beginning of the year 1274, as we demonstrated a little above from Pachymeres, the eight years which are assigned to him by Nicephorus were undoubtedly incomplete on both sides. Georgius Phrantzes is therefore also mistaken when he attributes thirteen years to Joseph. Moreover, those words of Nicephorus: «Καὶ διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν τῶν Λατίνων ἐκβάλλεται παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως Μιχαήλ» are to be interpreted thus: And on account of the union with the Latins he is ejected by the emperor Michael. And it is so to be read also above in the version.

Ibid. Ἰωάννης, etc., ὁ Βέκκος ἔτη η'. Upon the deposition of Joseph, Joannes Beccus or Veccus is substituted in his place on the twenty-sixth day of the month of May; but on the second of June, the Sunday immediately following, the illustrious day of the Holy Spirit, he was duly inaugurated as patriarch, namely in the year of Christ 1275, as Pachymeres writes, book V, chap. 24: «Καὶ ὁ Βέκκος εἰκοστῇ μὲν καὶ ἕκτῃ Πυανεψιῶνος μηνὸς κατὰ τὴν ἑορτὴν τῶν ἁγίων Πατέρων τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ πατριάρχης προβέβληται. Δευτέρᾳ δὲ Μαιμακτηριῶνος, τῇ ἐπιούσῃ Κυριακῇ, ἐν ἐπισήμῳ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Πνεύματος, τὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος δέχεται, καὶ τελειοῦται ἀρχιερεύς.» Veccus, therefore, was created patriarch on the twenty-sixth day of the month of May, at the feast of the holy Nicene Fathers: but on the second of June, the Sunday immediately following, the illustrious day of the Holy Spirit, having become a participant of the same Spirit through sacred ordination, he was duly inaugurated as patriarch. But Veccus is cast out from the see by Emperor Andronicus on the twenty-sixth day of December of the year of Christ 1282, as Pachymeres writes, lib. 1, chap. 4, who indeed explains at length those things which were done by Patriarch Veccus for the sake of uniting the Greek Church with the Latin. Gregoras says that Joannes Veccus withdrew and shut himself into the monastery of Panachrantos. Seven years are assigned to this patriarch in the ms. codex of the library of the college of Clermont, which Philippus Labaeus used; but he himself had erroneously read there ζ' instead of ς'. Moreover, through the carelessness of the scribe one reads here in the Greek text, «ἐποίησε σε τὴν ἕνωσιν», etc. Read therefore, «ἐποίησε τὴν ἕνωσιν», etc.

Ibid. Ὁ ὁμολογητής Ἰωσὴφ τὸ δεύτερον μῆνας δ'. Upon the expulsion of Veccus from the see, Joseph is again brought in on the last day of the month of December of the year of Christ 1282, as Pachymeres writes, lib. 1, chap. 5. He died at the beginning of the month of March of the year 1283, consumed by disease and age, as the same writer reports, chap. 13 of the same book. But Georgius Phrantzes is mistaken when he says that Athanasius succeeded Joannes Veccus immediately. Moreover, Gregoras writes, book vi, chap. 1, that Joseph, when he had been restored to the patriarchal see, abdicated shortly after, and that this was done by him...

^A in every way, and his character was simple, as also in spiritual matters, he was appointed to the one who had been patriarch, together with Cozyles; they elect the prelate of Heraclea in Thrace, and his own consecrator, and at the same time he is urged by the bishop, as the time required, to ordain him as metropolitan; and the divine temple of the ancient Irene, the holy and mystical table having been previously cleansed by many purifications and sanctified by certain prayers, saw his consecration; but he himself, in turn, also consecrates the patriarch, first as priest, and then, on the bright feast of Palm Sunday, as high priest.

Having therefore taken up the designated patriarch's ordination entrusted to him, in the month of March, he introduces him with a few others into the monastery named after the Forerunner and Petra, where, having found a temple in a vineyard, in which it appeared that divine service had long since ceased to be performed, he instituted Cyprius as a monk from a layman with the customary ceremonies; and shortly after he ordains him deacon from a reader. Moreover, on the same day the emperor declares him patriarch. Hence, now patriarch, who, induced by the persuasions of many, had formed a certain and settled plan not to employ anyone for his consecration other than one who, it was agreed by all, was far removed from any appearance of wrongdoing—of which most of the prelates were accused, being blamed by the mutual accusations of raging factions—the disciple Germanus, son of the pious and very circumspect man Acacius, who had recently deported himself publicly as if he were neutral, maintaining assent to either party, and favoring each only so much as was sufficient for security; ^B this man too, being recommended by a great reputation for religion; furthermore, so simple in his ways that he who had recently held the patriarchate would have numbered him among the confessors; this man, I say, as one against whom no plausible objection could be raised by anyone, he prepared as his own ordinator; choosing him, with the concurrence of Cozyles in this, to be prelate of Heraclea in Thrace. After which he commanded the bishop that he should immediately (for the matter admitted of no delay) ordain him as metropolitan in that see. For this function the ancient divine temple of Irene was chosen, whose sacred and mystical table, previously expiated by many purgations and sanctified by certain prayers, witnessed the inauguration of the new Heraclean, Germanus. Here, in turn, he then initiated his promoter, Cyprius, first into the priesthood, and then on the celebrated feast of Palms, with the bishop Cozyles cooperating, he ordained him patriarch.

But as for the rest that was done while Gregorius Cyprius was being consecrated, the same Pachymeres sets it forth at greater length in chapter 15 of the same book; and since those details are rather long, I do not transcribe them here. But before we speak of the years of the patriarchate of Gregory (since we have made mention of the ancient church of Saint Irene), it is fitting to note here some things which pertain to the same edifice and which were omitted by us in the preceding books, where we spoke of it at greater length. Stephanus, a deacon of the Church of Constantinople, author of the Life of Saint Stephen the Younger, who suffered martyrdom under the impious Copronymus, teaches alone, as far as I know, that the second general council, the first of Constantinople, was held in the temple of Saint Irene; which, indeed, cannot be understood of any other temple of Saint Irene, unless the ancient one, since during the reign of Theodosius the Great, no other so named existed in Constantinople than this ancient church of Saint Irene, which was founded by Constantine the Great. Thus the same writer, page 482, speaking of the six general councils: "The six holy councils were not held in sacred temples; the first in Nicaea, in the temple of Saint Sophia; the second in Constantinople, in the temple of Saint Irene; and the third in Ephesus, in the temple of the Theologian; and the fourth in the metropolis of the Chalcedonians of our time, in the temple of the all-praised [Euphemia]; and the fifth again in Constantinople; and the sixth, the one in the temple of Saint..."

^C Ibid. "Gregory the Cypriot, etc., 6 years." Nimirum, Gregorius Cyprius was received as a protoapostolarius reader and presided for six years. And it should be read thus in the version above, where through a scribe's error it reads "16 years" instead of "6 years." For what "protoapostolarius" means, see Ducange's Glossarium Græcum, s.v. "Apostolos." But after Joseph had finished his life around the beginning of the month of March of the year of Christ 1283, as we have demonstrated above from Pachymeres, Gregorius Cyprius succeeded him, from whom the patriarchate is said to have begun before the middle of the month of April of the same year, as Possinus writes from Pachymeres, which the same writer, book 1, chapter 45, relates, as Gregorius Cyprius was already in full possession of the patriarchal power on the Monday of Holy Week. For in that year Easter fell on the 18th day of April, whence the Monday of Holy Week fell on the 12th day of April: by which it is necessary to admit an earlier inauguration of Gregory. Thus Possinus. But Pachymeres himself states more clearly in book 1, chapter 14, that Georgius Cyprius, who upon assuming the monastic habit was called Gregorius, was consecrated on Palm Sunday, which day in the year of Christ 1285 fell on the 11th day of April; but he was ordained patriarch of Constantinople by Germanus of Heraclea, with Cozyles cooperating; and that was done in the great temple, namely in Saint Sophia, from where all those who had consented to the peace of the Churches were excluded during the consecration, as the aforementioned writer writes in the place cited a little before, and in the following chapter, where he also narrates why Gregory was not consecrated by another bishop than Germanus, and that the same Germanus of Heraclea had been ordained bishop a little before in the temple of the ancient Irene. Thus Pachymeres, chapter 14, whose few words, which pertain to the ordination of Gregory and Germanus, it pleases me to transcribe here: "They entrust the rites to the one who is to be patriarch, who indeed, having taken them from the same month of Cronius there, ^D leads him to the monastery of the Forerunner of Petra, and having found a temple in a vineyard, which appeared to be idle, having performed the customary rites there, he shows him to be a monk from a layman, and ordains him deacon from a reader. And on the same day the emperor proposes him as patriarch. Thence he, having full power through the urgings to do what is necessary for him, makes the disciple of Germanus, a pious man—the son of Acacius, a pious man, and one who had preserved himself in many ways, and who seemed to be blameless in the things done yesterday—a pious man as well."

ON THE CATALOGUE OF NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS

^A of Sophia, and that which is in the sacred palace, where the place called Trullus is, which we call Oatum. Were not the six holy synods gathered in sacred temples? The first at Nicaea, in the temple of Holy Sophia: the second at Constantinople, in the temple of Holy Irene: the third at Ephesus, in the temple of the Theologian: the fourth in our metropolis of Chalcedon, in the temple of the most celebrated Euphemia: the fifth again, and the sixth, at Constantinople, the former in the temple of Holy Sophia, the latter in the sacred palace, in that part which is called the Trullus, which we call Oatum. Now, the order of this synod, and how the prelates were arranged, and in what part Theodosius the Great—who attended that same synod—sat, is represented to us by a painting which exists in a manuscript codex of the Royal Library, written in uncial letters in the ninth century. Regarding this manuscript codex, our most learned Montfaucon speaks thus in his *Palaeographia Graeca*, book iii, page 250: “The Royal Codex,” he says, “number 1869, on parchment, of immense size, in beauty and magnificence yields to none. It shines everywhere with gold in forty-five paintings that I have counted; likewise in the initial letters, especially in the titles of the orations. It contains the Orations of Gregory Nazianzen: and it was transcribed while Basil the Macedonian was emperor, as is evident from the paintings, where Basil himself is depicted with his whole family, and also from the poems placed at the beginning, where Basil is addressed as if he were then holding the scepter: furthermore, from the elegance of the codex, which truly displays imperial magnificence, it clearly seems to have been for the use of Basil himself and the Augustan house. Five very large paintings precede it, which occupy the entire page, far larger than the specimen provided here; for in the leaves described, the margins remain quite wide and empty on every side; ^B in the painted ones, however, the pages are occupied to the very edge. These five very large paintings are contained on three leaves, which it seems did not originally belong with the others: whence a certain learned man, and one most experienced in old library matters, conjectures that the codex is somewhat older than these painted tables, and that these pictures, exhibiting Basil the Macedonian with his family, were added to this copy later, when the codex was transferred for the use of this emperor. Although he himself also admits that the codex is of about the same age, and could easily be traced back to the time of Basil from the shape of the characters. But I would more willingly believe that the entire codex, along with the preceding paintings, was prepared for the use of Basil. Then, however, those first three leaves placed at the beginning were either torn away due to long usage, because being placed at the beginning they were turned more frequently; or perhaps they were removed by some idle man for their elegance, and then later restored. Be that as it may, the codex does not seem to be of the ninth century at all. Regarding this codex, Billius, in his Monitum to Oration 53, speaks thus: 'Yet in the queen’s codex, written in capital letters and almost equaling the antiquity of our Gregory, it is numbered among his genuine works.' This is of such moment to me that, although the style protests, I would hardly dare to number this study among the *pseudepigrapha*, unless Jerome removed every handle of doubt for us and asserted this offspring to its true parent. Vence brings forward the passage of Jerome, who ascribes this work to the holy Gregory of Neocaesarea, or Thaumaturgus. Now let us come to the paintings. On the second page of the first leaf (for the first is indeed blank), on a golden background, Christ is depicted, not inelegantly for that age, sitting and holding an open book of the Gospels at these words:

Εἰρήνην τὴν ἐμὴν δίδωμι ὑμῖν

Εὐδοκία Αὐγούστα

Αλέξανδρος δεσπότης

Λέων δεσπότης

Εὐκληματοῦσαν ἀμπελόν σε τοῦ κράτους Βότρυς φέρουσαν τοὺς γαληνοὺς δεσπότας Βασίλειος πρῆξε Ῥωμαίων ἄναξ Μαθὼν προλαμπεῖς Εὐδοκίας φωσφόρους.

But to return to Patriarch Gregory: first of all, the marvelous negligence of Georgius Phrantzes is to be noted, who in his series of patriarchs places neither this Gregory, nor Joseph restored after Veccus, but writes: 'A certain monk, Athanasius by name, succeeded Veccus the patriarch after he was removed from his see.' In truth, all the writers who have committed the events of that age to memory assert that Joseph was restored after Veccus, as we said above, and that Gregory Cyprius succeeded him; thus Ephraemius of Constantinople reports regarding Joseph, the second patriarch, and Gregory Cyprius. But what Ephraemius says, that Gregory Cyprius was an exile from his home and paternal house from early youth, receives light from Pachymeres, who reports (book vii, ch. 34) that Gregory was born among the Italians and, having grown up, subsequently betook himself among the Greeks: 'What have you endured,' he said (Veccus, that is), 'that you drive away me, born and raised among the Romans, enveloping [me] in frequent insults? Yet you accept with praise a man born and raised among the Italians—and not only this, but one who has even crept into our affairs in his very habit and language!' What have you suffered, he said (Veccus), that you flee me, born and bred among the Greeks and laden with frequent curses, yet receive without reproach a man born and bred among the Italians, and furthermore one who has intruded into the Greeks in his very habit and language? The rest, however, which pertains to Gregory Cyprius and his patriarchate, can be seen in Pachymeres and Nicephorus Gregoras, who wrote about him at length; as well as in other writers who committed the events of this age to memory. It remains for us to say something about the years of this patriarchate and his deposition. Gregory Cyprius, as we demonstrated above from Pachymeres, was proclaimed patriarch in the month of March in the year of Christ 1283, and on Palm Sunday, which in that year fell on the eleventh day of April, he was consecrated patriarch of Constantinople by Germanus, the prelate of Heraclea. After he had sat for six years, he abdicated the patriarchate about the month of June in the year of Christ 1289. But why Gregory was compelled to bid farewell to the patriarchate, Pachymeres explains at length.

^A Everything was recited in detail and at length by George Pachymeres in the first and second book of his *History of Andronicus Palæologus*, the summary of which is this: Because of certain complaints against the Cypriot patriarch, John Beccus, a council of bishops, clerics, and monks, as well as princes of the empire, was convened before the emperor, over which Gregory of Constantinople himself and Athanasius of Alexandria presided. Beccus and his associates, Constantine Melitiniota and George Metochita, were summoned to dispute concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit.

And after they had produced, beyond a certain passage of Gregory of Nyssa, where the Spirit is said to proceed "per illum qui proxime et contigue est" (through him who is next and contiguous) from the Father, another passage from John Damascene, in which the Father is asserted to be "δiὰ Λόγου προβολεὺς ἐκφαντορικοῦ Πνεύματος" (the producer of the manifesting Spirit through the Word); and because this was acknowledged to be genuine and sincere, and was to be understood as referring to no other procession than the eternal one, they were brought into wondrous complexities regarding the schism. The assembly having been dissolved, so that Beccus and his party might not appear to have won, the task was given to Patriarch Gregory to compose a document by which the statement of Damascene would be shown to be alien to the opinion of Beccus and the Latins, and would be reconciled with those other words of the same Doctor: *Ἐκ δὲ Υἱοῦ τὸ Πνεῦμα οὐ λέγομεν* (But we do not say the Spirit is from the Son).

The scroll written by the Cypriot was read in church, which the emperor, and the patriarch himself, and several others supported with their signatures; yet many resisted, who could neither be brought to sign by threats nor by torments. ^B The cause of their resistance was this: that it was stated in the scroll that in the earlier passage of Damascene the Father is signified as the producer of the Spirit through the Word, not so that the Spirit exists *through* the Word, but so that he might shine forth *through* it. The words of this scroll, indeed, were those which Leo Allatius reports in *Vindiciis Syn. Ephes.*, ch. 60, from the 4th oration of Joseph Bryennius on the Trinity: *Εἰ καὶ γὰρ διὰ τοῦ Υἱοῦ παρά τισι τῶν ἁγίων ἐκπορεύεσθαι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον εἴρηται, τὴν εἰς ἀΐδιον ἔκφανσιν ἡ λέξις ἐνταῦθα, οὐ τὴν εἰς τὸ εἶναι καθαρῶς σημαίνειν βούλεται.* (For even if in certain of the saints it is said that the Holy Spirit proceeds through the Son, the expression here wishes to signify the eternal shining-forth, not the existence).

Although it is affirmed among some saints that the Holy Spirit proceeds through the Son, this saying signifies the progress into eternal effusion, pure and proper, not to the effect that he exists through him. Allatius later adds other excerpts from the same scroll fitting the same sense. But more can be read in Beccus, who refuted the Cypriot’s scroll in two booklets, which exist in the second volume of *Græcia orthodoxa*. Those who disapproved of the patriarch’s scroll did not grasp, says Pachymeres, what difference there could possibly be between the production of the Holy Spirit to existence and his procession to eternal shining-forth; especially since the doctors of the Church usually called the emanations or processions of the divine persons of the Son and Holy Spirit from the Father "shining-forths" (ἐκφάνσεις), "effulgences" (ἐκλάμψεις); whence they concluded that the exposition given by Gregory favored the Latin cause more than it hindered it. Therefore, since Beccus first received the scroll published against him, he drew his pen against it, and contrary to the expectation of the Byzantines, who expected nothing but incoherent ravings from a furious mind, he created such great envy for the schismatic patriarch with his most solid refutation that all were thought to have conspired in the opinion of John Beccus himself, of whom he had once been an associate. Nor from ^C that matter, indeed; for since, besides those things which I have brought forth after Allatius, other words of that scroll which are read in Beccus in oration 1 do not yield another sense: *Ἀλλὰ δι' Υἱοῦ καὶ ἐξ Υἱοῦ φυσικῶς ὑπάρχειν, οὐκενοῦν δι' Υἱοῦ καὶ ἐξ Υἱοῦ τὴν ὕπαρξιν ἔχειν οἱ ἁγίοι Πατέρες τὸ Πνεῦμα ἔφασαν.* (But the holy Fathers said that the Spirit naturally exists through the Son and from the Son; not, however, that he has existence through the Son and from the Son). As if, indeed, to exist through the Son and from the Son does not mean the same thing as to have existence through the Son and from the Son, etc., and vice versa. What could be thought of more foolish than this distinction? Let Beccus be read in lib. 1, *Græc. orthod.*, p. 252.

But this vigorous defender and patron of the Catholic cause carps at other points again from the same scroll, of which I have judged this, above all, not to be overlooked. Namely, he said that the Cypriots claimed: *Μηδὲν καινὸν εἶναι μηδὲ τῆς τῶν Γραφῶν συνηθείας ἀλλότριον, ἐάν τε πνευματικὴν χάρισμα ἅγιον ὁμωνύμως Πνεῦμα καλεῖται· καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειαν ἔστιν ὅτε οἰκειοῦσθαι τὴν τοῦ ἐνεργοῦντος κλῆσιν, ὡς ἡ τοῦ ἡλίου λαμπηδὼν καὶ αὐγὴ πολλάκις τὴν τοῦ ἡλίου.* (That it is nothing new, nor foreign to the custom of the Scriptures, if the holy spiritual gift is sometimes called Spirit homonymously; and that the operation sometimes appropriates the name of the one operating, just as the radiance and brightness of the sun often [appropriates] that of the sun). By which words he signified that the eternal action of God, the sempiternal divine light, which are common to the three persons, are sometimes called the Holy Spirit. This he himself explains further in a fragment of another work, if I am not mistaken, *Contra Beccum*, which the Royal Codex 2953 supplied to me, and a great part of which I have quoted elsewhere in my critical-historical dissertation *On the procession of the Holy Spirit*.

Yet these contained the preamble to Gregory Palamas’s impiety, who contended that the divine operation, which he called "Deity" (Θεότης), was distinct in reality from the divine essence, and co-eternal to God and the three persons, and that it is communicated to creatures by participation. Therefore, Beccus argues against the error of his rival by citing the entire chapter of Theodore Abucara which is the twenty-seventh among the published works, and than which nothing more clearly can be opposed to Palamite insanity. ^D Moreover, that this distinction of divine light and operation from the divine essence was then brought in for the first time, when it had not been heard of before, John Beccus testifies, having been introduced by the Cypriot with these words: *Ὁ δὲ τῆς ἀληθείας, ὥς φησι, γενναῖος ἐκδικητὴς συκοφάντας ἡμᾶς καὶ τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων ὑβριστὰς, τοὺς οὕτω τὴν θεολογικὴν μετιόντας ὁδὸν, τί ἂν παρ' ἡμῖν κληθείη αὐτός; ὁ οἴκοθεν καὶ ἀπὸ κοιλίας νέας ἄρτι δογμάτων φωνὰς τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσηγούμενος ἐκκλησίᾳ;* (But that noble defender of the truth, as he says, who calls us calumniators and insulters of the holy apostles, because we follow the theological path in this way, what15 indeed would he be called by us? He who from his own home and from a new belly is just now introducing voices of doctrines into the Church of God?)

I have brought forth this testimony of Beccus out of the way, by which I might prove that he, while he was patriarch of Constantinople, had by no means proscribed Palamas and his errors, although our Combesis was persuaded of this when he was editing the second part of his most recent *Auctuarium*: but rather that the Cypriot preceded Palamas, and had pre-formed his heresy in his writings against Beccus. Wherefore that John the patriarch, by whom Gregory Palamas was first condemned, according to what Cyparissiotes handed down, was either John Glycys, or rather John Calceas Aprenus, the successor of Esaias—which is entirely consistent with the histories of Cantacuzenus and Nicephorus Gregoras—the lucubrations of the tomus against John Beccus stirred up the spirits of Gregory's adversaries, so that they might rise against him with more ardent zeal. The foremost of these were John Chilas, metropolitan of Ephesus, Daniel of Cyzicus, and Theoleptus of Philadelphia, with whom the great logothete

^A added the theta. Leo Allatius, in his book *De Consensu*, ch. 11, col. 513, published in Greek and Latin the document which Chilas presented to the emperor against the *Tomus*. This was the reason why Cyprius wrote an exposition of his own *Tomus*, which is now being published for the first time from the Royal Codex 3442. In this exposition he proceeds to argue that there is one procession of the divine person of the Holy Spirit for the purpose of existing, and another for the purpose of shining forth: the first is indicated by Scripture and the Fathers, when the Spirit is said to proceed from the Father; the second, when [He proceeds] from the Father through the Son. Furthermore, he accuses John Beccus of perjury and recites a document which he [Beccus] had given to Patriarch Joseph to appease the spirits of the rabble, which were infuriated against him, and which he had signed, as if he were renouncing the dogma of the Latins and approving his own abdication. But with what intent Beccus had done this, he himself declared at the beginning of his own dispute, which I have recounted that he had before the emperor in council, and which was the cause of all these disturbances. Moreover, Theoleptus of Cyzicus objected to Patriarch Gregory that in the *Tomus* there were found traces of the impious doctrine of the monk Mark, who had recently published a book in which the name *proboleus*, or "producer," was used in an ambiguous sense, as Pachymeres narrates, "as he himself also uses the word *proboleus*." That this Mark was a foreigner, a Greek, the same historian relates, and as far as can be gathered from the inscription of Gregory’s confession, of which more will be said shortly, he had been made a Christian from being a Hebrew, and subsequently a monk. By this is further refuted the error of that otherwise most learned man who thought this Mark was the same as Mark of Ephesus, who disputed against the Latins 150 years later at the Council of Florence. That he seems to favor his error is because in the index of the Scoriacensian Library it is read: *The Apology of Gregory, Patriarch of Constantinople, the Cyprian, on the Epistle of Mark of Ephesus*. But this happened due to the negligence or ignorance of the librarian, so that the word *Cyprii* (of the Cyprian) was inserted, whereas this work should be attributed to Gregory the Syncellus, who was the last of the Byzantine patriarchs before the city was captured by the Turks: unless, however, for *Mark of Ephesus* one should write *John of Ephesus*, namely Chilas, the adversary of Gregory Cyprius; which I say in passing. And yet, that monk Mark boasted that the small volume he had written was corrected and approved by the patriarch, with whom he was joined in the closest intimacy. Because of this, it happened that as soon as Mark’s book was issued to the public, Gregory Cyprius was considered its author. To repel this accusation, the patriarch composed the *Confession* of faith I mentioned, in which he anathematized Mark’s dogmas. This he also did in another petition to Emperor Andronicus. Meanwhile, those who stood for Gregory compelled Athanasius the Alexandrian, with the emperor’s consent, to subscribe to the *Tomus*: which, however, he refused to do; excusing himself by saying he lacked sufficient time and ability to examine its individual statements, especially since he did not understand the customs and sentiments of the Constantinopolitans. Moved by these things, the emperor began to moderate his own ardent support for the Cyprian, and although he first agreed to grant him a public debate in which he might explain his own mind more clearly, he soon changed his opinion and refused, fearing that the same thing would happen as in the previous debate regarding Beccus, from which the affairs of the Church had ended in no quieter state. Indeed, Andronicus sent [men] to demand his abdication from the see. For the Cyprian had already moved from the patriarchal house to the monastery of the Hodegon, where he spent his time writing books in his defense. But afterwards, lest the patriarch be unjustly condemned, the emperor proclaimed a public assembly, in which his *Confession of faith* was read and judged immune from all suspicion of heretical doctrine. ^B Nevertheless, the metropolitan of Ephesus and the Cyzicenus openly protested, [saying] that they could in no way enter into communion with a man who for certain reasons had been sprinkled with the odium of heresy. Because they pertinaciously adhered to this opinion, and had not yielded to the emperor’s warnings and exhortations, both were sent into separate confinement, from which they were not released until some years later, and then only with great difficulty. But Theoleptus of Philadelphia, pretending that all this offense was taken solely from Mark’s book, said that Gregory would be judged a disciple of the right faith if he would detest Mark’s doctrine (more explicitly, indeed, than in his confession and in his petition to the emperor). That this was done by the Cyprian, Pachymeres does not narrate: but when he heard these things, having given thanks to the emperor, the next day he gave a document of cession. But the emperor, having again collected the synods, exerted effort so that the *Tomus* might at least be emended and explained: which, however, those who had been selected for this work were in no way able to accomplish, since they did not at all agree on a genuine transmission of the meaning of Damascenus. "Then," says the often-cited Pachymeres, "since it was not possible to agree on the correction of the text, they abandoned the explanation, deeming it better not to explain the passage at all than, by explaining it, to throw it into danger." And quite deliberately: for besides Beccus’s exposition, than which no other more sincere one occurred—as all who give effort to reading his books feel, once prejudices are set aside—the Cyprian in the apology which he wrote again for his *Tomus* refutes those adversaries as indeed schismatics, and not different from John of Ephesus, Daniel of Cyzicus, and Theoleptus of Philadelphia, who would interpret John Damascenus’s phrase *proboleus dia Logou ekphantorikou Pneumatos* ("producer of the Spirit through the manifesting Word") as if *dia Logou* (through the Word), *Yiou* (through the Son), meant the same thing among the holy Fathers, and *syn to Logo* (with the Word), *meta to Yiou* (with the Son), *hama to Yiou* (together with the Son): which very interpretation he shows and proves in many ways to be contrary both to the opinions of the Fathers and to the laws and usage of grammar. In the meantime, John Beccus, besides the books I cited against Gregory Cyprius’s *Tomus*, wrote four others to Constantine—namely, the Melitiniote—by which he refuted the exposition of the same *Tomus* adorned by the Cyprian. These also Leo Allatius edited with others... which I found in the Royal codices, and especially in 3442, I have decided to insert here, so that the series of events may be better understood by the studious reader. (Already published in our tome CXLII.)

Col. 408 C. Athanasius of Macedonia, etc. At the abdication of the patriarchate by Gregory Cyprius around the month of June in the year of Christ 1289, as we previously noted, Athanasius the monk, from Mount Ganos, was substituted in his place; whose promotion Andronicus celebrated at the Great Palace in the Justinian Triclinius with brilliance befitting such a function, but with the sinister omen of an earthquake, as Pachymeres writes, lib. II, cap. 15, and on the fourteenth day of the month of October of the same year Athanasius is ordained, as the same writer relates in the cited place. However, when he became too vehemently involved in temporal affairs, he was cast out by the people, as this Nicephorus Callisti writes; which is indeed confirmed by Pachymeres, who describes the things done by him in the patriarchate and his character in more detail. But he was forced to abdicate the patriarchate after he had sat for four years, namely on the sixteenth day of the month of October, as the same writer relates, cap. 24: "And one might observe this alone, that having held the Church for four years, he saw it almost to the day of his expulsion, which he discovered [to be] that of the Annunciation, which is also the sixteenth of Elaphebolion."

^A One might, however, not without reason, add that he exactly completed a four-year period in the patriarchate, so that he numbered almost the same day for the beginning and the end of his departed rule, the sixteenth of October. Thus Pachymeres: from which it is indeed clear that Athanasius abdicated the patriarchate on the sixteenth day of the month of October in the year of Christ 1293, having sat for four years and two days over, since his consecration occurred, as we said a little earlier from Pachymeres, on the fourteenth day of the month of October in the year 1289. Georgius Phranza is therefore mistaken, who assigns eight full years to Athanasius. How ignorant of governing men Athanasius was, and how cruel and inhuman, anyone could easily know, not only from Pachymeres, who says more about him (for Gregoras was very much inclined to favor Athanasius, being a laudator of schismatic men), but also from the letters of Athanasius himself, which he had written to the Emperor Andronicus and to many others. A paper codex of these letters is held in the Royal Library, which the Most Illustrious Lord Charles Maurice Tellier, Archbishop and Duke of Reims, donated to it, as the most learned Boivin writes in his notes to Gregoras, where he speaks of this codex and of the letters and other Works of the Patriarch Athanasius. It pleases us (since six years ago we transcribed all the letters and Works of Athanasius from the aforementioned Royal codex and translated them into Latin) to exhibit here an intact index of the aforementioned works, which we have adorned both from the papers of Boivin and also by our own labor. (Athanasius' Index of Letters followed, which we have already edited in volume CXLI).

Col. 468 C. *John the Monk, 9 years.* With Athanasius having abdicated the patriarchate on the sixteenth day of the month of October, in the year of Christ 1293, as we demonstrated above, John Sozopolitanus, who was previously called Cosmas, is substituted in his place; and his consecration was performed on the Calends of January 1294, as Pachymeres writes in book II, chapter 28, where the nature and customs of this man are described. But this patriarch is driven from the see by Andronicus, so that Athanasius may be restored in his place, on the twenty-third day of the month of August in the year of Christ 1304, when he had sat for nine years, seven months, and twenty-two days over, as ^B Possinus observes in his Chronological book I to Pachymeres.

Ibid. D. *And Athanasius is brought back again.* The Catalog of the CP patriarchs compiled by Nicephorus Callistus ends at Athanasius as patriarch for the second time, namely at the year of Christ 1304, at which time Nicephorus was flourishing, as we warn in the Preface, where it pleased us to say more about him and his writings. But as regards the time of Athanasius as patriarch for the second time, we demonstrated a little earlier from Pachymeres that he was restored to the see on the twenty-third day of the month of August, in the year of Christ 1304; who narrates the whole matter at length. Matthew Cigala and Philippus Cyprius attribute six years and as many months to this second patriarch, but Georgius Phranza assigns eight years to this same second patriarch. Thus Pontanus from Phranza: *And again Athanasius is occupied in this.* After he held the keys of the Church for eight years, scandals emerged again. Thus, for whom peace was always a friend, he commands that the patriarchal see be held again, etc. But Gregoras in book VII, chapter 9, narrates at length the reason why Athanasius abdicated the patriarchate for the second time, where the most learned Boivin notes in the margin that this happened in the year of Christ 1310, whence it appears that Athanasius sat as patriarch for the second time for six years and some months.

Ibid. *And in total from the Apostle Andrew until the same John the patriarch, 1314 [years], in the year 6822.* The number from the creation of the world placed here seems to be corrupted by the scribe; for it either ends the Catalog of Constantinopolitan patriarchs from the patriarchate of Athanasius up to the capture of the Royal city by the Turks.

*Niphon, 3 years, 10 months.* Namely, Niphon, 3 years, 10 months. With Athanasius having abdicated as second patriarch in the year of Christ 1310, as we warned above, the Constantinopolitan Church remained vacant for two years; finally Niphon, the Metropolitan of Cyzicus, occupies that see at the beginning of the year 1312, as Nicephorus Gregoras writes, book VII, chapter 9, where he describes the nature and depraved customs of this man at length. There are also two letters of the Patriarch Athanasius of CP that pertain to this, namely, one to the emperor, concerning the Lord Niphon, Bishop of Cyzicus, and concerning the accusations brought against him; the other to the master of petitions, concerning the election by which the bishop of Cyzicus had been made patriarch. (See volume CXLII.) When he had sat for three years and ten months, in the year of Christ 1315, he is driven from the patriarchal see on account of many and various sacrileges, as Nicephorus Gregoras writes in chapter 11 of the book cited a little earlier. Moreover, there is held in the Royal codex no. 2964, fol. 199 verso, an Oration of Nicephorus Chumnus, praised by Boivin in the notes to Gregoras, which is inscribed thus: *An examination against Niphon, who governed all things well as patriarch, brought by the [metropolitans] of Nicomedia and of Mytilene to the holy synod.*

*John Glycys, 4 years.* Namely, John Glycys for four years. With Niphon driven from the see in the year of Christ 1315, and with one year having intervened, John Glycys, logothete of the public post, is substituted in his place, who had a wife and sons and daughters; but his wife immediately donned the monastic habit; he, however, because he was afflicted at certain intervals of the year by pains in his joints, could not be clothed [as a monk] himself; for by the opinion of doctors he had to eat meat, as Gregoras writes, book VII, chapter 11, where the same writer extols at length the virtues and skill in letters of this patriarch; who also testifies in the same place that he himself was accustomed to the company of John for the polishing of his style. This patriarch also assigns four years to Gregoras in book VIII, chapter 2, where he says that John, because his disease was worsening, having abdicated his dignity in the fourth year of his patriarchate, betook himself to the monastery of Cyriotissa. Which indeed happened in the year of Christ 1320. See in the same place the testament of this patriarch, which Gregoras, having been summoned by him, had written down. Truly, as the most learned Boivin notes very well in the Notes to Gregoras, Gregoras does not produce there the Testament of the patriarch itself, but the proemium of the Testament, of which he considers himself the author.

^A There exist, says the same Boivin, in the Royal Codex 3229, two opuscula, of nearly the same subject and style; the first of which is inscribed, *The resignation of the patriarch by the patriarch Lord John Glykys*, the second, *A memorial of the same patriarch to the holy emperor*.

*Gerasimus 1 year.* Gerasimus, a priest and monk from the monastery of the Mangana, succeeded John in the year of Christ 1320. He, writes Gregoras, lib. VII, cap. 2, was a man of simple intellect, and by reason of his old age, somewhat deaf, and entirely unskilled in Greek literature. For, the same writer reports in the place cited, such men were accustomed to be chosen by the emperors, so that they might be obedient to their commands and not resist them in any matter, like slaves; and Georgius Phranzes says that he was worthless and useless in character, and that he presided over the Church of Constantinople for a scant time, and did not resign it voluntarily. Gregoras writes that the death of Gerasimus occurred the day before Andronikos the Younger deserted the city; which flight of Andronikos indeed happened on the twentieth day of the month of April in the year 6229, of Christ 1321, as the same writer reports. Therefore, the death of Gerasimus occurred on the very day of Easter, which in that year fell on the 19th of April. Cantacuzenus, however, reports that Gerasimus died on that very night in which Andronikos the Younger deserted the city.

*Esaias.* Upon Gerasimus's completion of his destiny on the 19th day of the month of April in the year of Christ 1324, as we noted a little above, the see of Constantinople remained vacant for nearly three years; finally, Esaias, a monk from Mount Athos, over seventy years old, endowed with no priestly dignity, and indeed so unskilled that he could not perfectly join together even the first elements of letters, came into the city; and the emperor, because of the excessive simplicity of his character, placed him in the patriarchal see which was at that time vacant: although many crimes had been freely objected to him and were testified to everywhere, on account of which he had once often been excluded from every rank of the sacred orders, as Gregoras writes, lib. v, cap. 12. Esaias was proclaimed, however, on the day before the Kalends of December, in the seventh indiction, that is, in the year of Christ 1323, as Dorotheus writes in his *Synopsis*. Spondanus therefore incorrectly says this event happened in the year 1322. Esaias dies, as Gregoras writes, and as will be clear from those things which we are about to say shortly, in the year of Christ 1333, having sat for nearly ten years. ^B

*John Aprenos.* Upon the death of Esaias in the year of Christ 1335, as we said a little above, in his place John, born of Aprenos and surnamed Calecas, is substituted in this same year. Fourteen years are assigned to him in the Royal Codex 3058, folio 98, where it is read: *John, illustrious and very wise, 14 years*. Things consonant with this are had by Gregoras who, lib. XVI, cap. 4, says that John was patriarch for about fourteen years: *And first, having cast out the patriarch John from there, he had sent him bound into the archives of Byzantium to be guarded, so that, not associating with the new movements there, he himself might not become the cause of very great and difficult-to-remedy harm to public affairs. Who, also, having lived only a short time, ended his life here, having reached nearly sixty-five years, having been patriarch for about fourteen years, but having lived for six months after his deposition.* From this, however, he above all things ejected the patriarch John, and sent him to Byzantium, that he might be held in custody in the palace; lest he, being a partisan of the new affairs which were being stirred up there, might bring maximum and intolerable detriment to the republic. But he, not having remained in life a long time from that point, died there, aged nearly sixty-five years, having possessed the patriarchal dignity for about fourteen years, and having died in the tenth month after his deposition. John was deposed at the beginning of the year of Christ 1347, as Gregoras and Cantacuzenus report: it is necessary, therefore, as Boivin writes in his *Notes on Gregoras*, that John was created patriarch in the year of Christ 1333, not indeed in the year ^C as Cantacuzenus seems to report; for besides the fact that from the year 1333 to the year 1347 fourteen years are numbered, during which we demonstrated above that he sat, Gregoras and Cantacuzenus expressly confer his deposition to the year 1347. Hence Spondanus is to be corrected, who confers his deposition to the year of Christ 1345.

*Isidore 2 years, 7 months, 15 days.* Upon the expulsion of John Calecas from the see in the year of Christ 1347, Isidore is substituted in his place in this same year: who, as Gregoras writes lib. XV, cap. 10, had previously been elected bishop of Monembasia, and soon, when he had been convicted of the new errors of Palamas, he had been cast down from his dignity and separated from sacred communion. With the same now obtaining the patriarchate, the body of the Church was immediately torn asunder. Thus Gregoras. See the volume of Ignatius, patriarch of Antioch, written against this Isidore, which volume is had in Allatius (*De libris ecclesiasticis Græc. dissert. 2*), promulgated in the month of November, indiction 13, that is, at the end of the year of Christ 1344. See also the *Oration* of Palamas written against John Calecas the patriarch, in which he argues his own and Isidore's cause at greater length. This is had edited in Greek only from the Royal Codex in the notes on Gregoras. The death of Isidore, moreover, is referred to by Gregoras in lib. XVIII, cap. 1, which truly happened at the end of the year of Christ 1349.

*Callistus 12 years.* Callistus, a monk from Mount Athos, one of the friends of Palamas, is elected patriarch in the year of Christ 1350, as Gregoras writes lib. XVII, cap. 4, where the talent and character of this patriarch are described at length. He, having obtained the patriarchate, celebrated a synod in which Palamas was declared orthodox: Combefis edited this in the second part of the *Auctarium novissimum*. This man, while he was performing an embassy at Chalcena for an alliance against the Barbarians in Thrace, dies, as Cantacuzenus writes, lib. IV, cap. 50, whose death truly happened under the end of the year of Christ 1362, which is evident not only from the fact that twelve years are assigned to this patriarch, but also from those things which we are about to say below concerning his successors. Moreover, we have deemed it necessary here to warn that Callistus the patriarch, because he denied that Matthew (the emperor-designate) should be, as Cantacuzenus writes, cast down from the throne, and that Philotheus should have been substituted in his place, of whom we shall speak below. Then the aforementioned writer says that Callistus fled to Galata, and from there to Tenedos to Palaiologos. This, however, happened about the fourth year of his patriarchate, 1354 of Christ. But afterwards, with John Cantacuzenus having put on the monastic habit, and with Palaiologos having returned to Constantinople in the year 1355, at the beginning of the following year the patriarch Callistus returned from Tenedos, as Cantacuzenus writes, and received ecclesiastical power, since no one dared to contradict him: indeed, he did not even seek the vote of the bishops for his restoration. But, having judged himself to have been insulted most unworthily, not only by Cantacuzenus, but also by the bishops, he confirmed his return by his own vote, and demanded the authors of the injury for punishment. Thus the same writer reports concerning him. ^D

*Philotheus 13 years, 6 months.* Philotheus, he too a Palamite, bishop of Heraclea, as we said above, was proclaimed patriarch in the year of Christ 1354 in the place of Callistus who had been cast from the see, but after about two years of this see, Callistus returned to the see from which he believed himself to have been unjustly cast, not by the vote of the bishops, by whom he had been driven out, but by his own authority, as Cantacuzenus writes. And these two years, during which Philotheus had governed the Church of Constantinople for the first time, are not enumerated by the author of this catalogue; perhaps because then, with Callistus the legitimate patriarch living, he deserved the name of an intruded patriarch rather than a legitimate one; but however the matter may be, Philotheus, with Callistus having died under the end of the year

^A of Christ 1362, as we have mentioned above, is substituted in his place, or rather, is restored to the see, as Cantacuzenus writes in book iv, chapter 50, which indeed was done at the beginning of the following year. Philotheus dies in the year of Christ 1376, having sat for thirteen years and six months after Callistus. Of this patriarch, who was of the Palamite faction, many writings remain, especially his *Antirrhetici* for the defense of the Palamite dogma, by which, at the urging of Cantacuzenus, he attempted to refute the deceased Gregoras. These *Antirrhetici* against Nicephorus Gregoras are held in manuscript in the library of the Most Christian King and are cited in many places with praise by the most learned Joannes Boivinius in his notes on Gregoras; they are also preserved in manuscript in the Vatican Library, as well as in the library of the Catholic King. Moreover, in the library of the most serene Duke of Bavaria and in the library of the Catholic King are held manuscript homilies of the same patriarch on the Gospels and the Sundays of the whole year, and others besides, derived mostly from Saint John Chrysostom. Likewise, a refutation or disproof of the anathemas issued by Patriarch Philotheus under Constantine Porphyrogenitus and two other emperors is held in manuscript in the Vatican Library. An encomiastic discourse by this patriarch on the three Hierarchs—namely, Saint Basil, Gregory the Theologian, and Saint John Chrysostom—was published in Latin and Greek by Jacobus Pontanus of the Society of Jesus, together with the *Dioptra* of Philippus the Solitary, at Ingolstadt in the year of Christ 1604. Jacobus Gretserus also published his homily on the Cross in Greek and Latin in volume ii of his work *De Cruce*. See what Possevinus, Udinus, and other writers say concerning other writings of this same Patriarch Philotheus, both published and unpublished. Moreover, concerning Patriarch Philotheus, many things are found written quite honorably in Cantacuzenus; to whom, indeed, no credit is to be given in this matter.

*Macarius* ^B—Macarius for two years, seven months, and fifteen days. Philotheus having fulfilled his fate in the year of Christ 1376, Macarius is substituted in his place in this same year. Having sat for two years, seven months, and fifteen days, he died in the year 1379.

*Nilus*—Nilus for eight years. Nilus succeeded Macarius at the beginning of the year of Christ 1380. Having sat for eight years, he died at the beginning of 1388, as will easily appear from what we are about to say below concerning his successors. Therefore, Spondanus wrongly assigns his death to the year of Christ 1398, and the same writer wrongly attributes twenty years to him; but it would be entirely too long to recount here the individual errors of this writer and the others who have written about the patriarchs of Constantinople, as we warn in the Preface.

*Antonius* ^C—Antonius for eight years. Upon the death of Nilus at the beginning of the year of Christ 1388, as we said a little above, Antonius is substituted in his place in this same year; and since he sat for eight years, as is noted in this catalog, his death necessarily occurred in the year of Christ 1396. This will indeed be more evident from what we are about to say below concerning the years of Patriarchs Euthymius and Joseph, derived from Georgius Phranza. Therefore, the death of this patriarch is wrongly assigned to the year of Christ 1406 by Onuphrius.

*Callistus*—Callistus for three months. Callistus succeeded Antonius in the year of Christ 1396, and having sat for three months, he died toward the end of this year. Onuphrius wrongly assigns thirteen years to this second Callistus; for he himself did not sit for three months, whereas his successor Matthaeus sat for thirteen years, as is recorded in this Greek catalog, which is to be accorded more credit than Onuphrius.

*Matthaeus*—Matthaeus for thirteen years. Callistus having fulfilled his task toward the end of the year of Christ 1396, Matthaeus is substituted in his place in the following year. Having sat for thirteen years, he died in the year of Christ 1410. See what the writers of that age have to say about him.

*Euthymius* ^D—Euthymius for five years and five months. Euthymius succeeded Matthaeus in the year of Christ 1410, and having sat for five years and five months, he died in the year of Christ 1416, in which year his death is also recorded by Georgius Phranza; who expresses it thus: "In the year of the world 6924, and of the Lord 1416, the emperor returned to Constantinople, and with him the entire order of the nobility. In the month after his arrival, Patriarch Euthymius departed from the living." Therefore, Onuphrius wrongly assigns the beginning of Euthymius’s patriarchate to the year of Christ 1419, as will also be evident from what is to be said.

*Joseph*—Joseph, metropolitan of Ephesus, was announced as Patriarch of Constantinople on the twenty-first day of the month of May in the year of Christ 1416, as Phranza writes. So also Syropulus, sect. 2, cap. 4, who writes that Joseph was inaugurated on the very feast day of Constantine the Great, in the ninth indiction; the Greeks celebrate the feast of Constantine the Great and Helena on the twenty-first day of May. Syropulus says: "The high priests having voted according to custom for three persons, with the [prelate] of Medea also present—for he was not present during the prior events—the emperor chooses the lord Joseph of Ephesus, and he is proposed as patriarch; who, having been led into the patriarchate on that very festive day of the great Constantine, celebrated the divine ministry according to the ninth indiction, and was enthroned in the holy seat of the Most Holy Great Church." Which I translate thus: When, for the election of a patriarch, the prelates voted among themselves as was the custom and had proposed three names to the emperor, with the prelate of Medea also present, who did not take part in the previous events in the synod, the emperor elects the lord Joseph, prelate of Ephesus, and announces him as patriarch. He, having been immediately led into the patriarchate, on that very feast day of Constantine the Great, in the ninth indiction, celebrated the office of divine worship and was placed in the Great Church, in the throne designated for the inauguration of patriarchs. Joseph dies in Florence, where he was present with the emperor for the sake of the council, on the evening of June 9 in the year of Christ 1439, having sat for twenty-three years and about eighteen days. He is buried in Florence in the church called Saint Maria Novella, of the Order of Preachers; at his tomb is read the following epitaph, a work, as they say, of Maffei Vegio, a not undistinguished poet of Lodi, of that age. And it stands thus:

*I, who was the great prelate of the Church in the East,* *Here lie, Joseph, great in religion.* *This alone I sought, inflamed by wondrous love,* *That Europe might have one worship, and one faith.* *I sought Italy; we struck one covenant;* *And the Greek faith was joined, with me as leader, to the Roman.* *Without delay I fell; now Florence preserves me,* *Which then flourished with the holy council city;* *Happy man, who, living, was gifted with such a boon;* *Who, dying, was master of my own desire.*

Concerning this Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople, who was present at the Council of Florence along with the emperor, writers say many things; however, it will suffice for us to have said these things. Moreover, with this Patriarch Joseph ends the catalog of the Patriarchs of Constantinople edited by the Reverend Father Labbe from the Claromontanus codex in the *Apparatus Historize Byzantinae*, where Labbe wrongly adds as follows: "That Joseph died in Florence at the general council; to whom the Greeks in Constantinople substituted a certain Gregory surnamed Mamma, unwilling and resisting, who, foreseeing the capture of the city to come a little later, resigned his office: Phranza calls him Melissenus, and assigns his election to July 26, the year 1445." Labbe is mistaken, I say, in writing these things from Phranza; for the same writer hands down things entirely different, as will be easily clear to anyone from those things which we are about to say concerning the successors of Joseph until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks; since our intention is to propose here the series of patriarchs from Phranza up to that time. Thus, therefore.

^A when Patriarch Joseph died on the evening of June 9 of the year of Christ 1439, as we demonstrated a little above, Bessarion, Bishop of Nicaea, was appointed in his place by the synod and the emperor in this same year. But, as Phranza writes, because he did not come to Constantinople afterward on account of disturbances of affairs and I know not what scandals, but remained at Rome, the prince archbishop (the Roman Pope) enrolled him in the number and order of cardinals with most generous pensions.

What those disturbances and scandals were, on account of which Bessarion, having been proclaimed patriarch, did not go to Constantinople—though Phranza is silent about them—we learn sufficiently from the Anonymous Crusius, when he writes on page 4 that upon the emperor’s return to Constantinople, those clerics, monks, and others who had remained there refused to celebrate the sacred rites with those who had returned from Italy, or to make mention of them in their prayers; but rather separated themselves from them as men who had abandoned piety; and that a great division resulted therefrom: "But the clergy, hieromonks, priests, abbots, spiritual fathers, and the rest in the city were unwilling to concelebrate with those who had arrived, or to mention them; but they separated themselves from them, even calling them ungodly. Many even renounced their priesthood; and the union became division." Truly the clerics, hieromonks, priests, abbots, and those appointed to hear confessions (called *pneumatici*) and the rest who lived in the city, were unwilling to celebrate the liturgy and the sacred rites with those who had come; or to make mention of them in their prayers; but departed from them as if they had (so to speak) abandoned piety. Many even renounced the priesthood. In short, division followed upon unity, and discord upon concord.

But the aforementioned anonymous writer is mistaken when he adds that, with the state of the Church cast into this condition and with Patriarch Joseph having died there, there was no one else; nor did anyone, because of the confusion of affairs, allow himself to be promoted to the honor of the patriarchate; for since Bessarion of Nicaea and Isidore, the prelate of Russia, remained at Rome, finally a certain Gregory, surnamed Mammas the Pneumatic, distinguished in the holiness of his life, was seized and made patriarch against his will: but he, when he saw the schism spreading further day by day, abdicated that office, having first foretold the ruin of the empire and the taking of the city. I say that the Anonymous Crusius is wrong; for more credence must be given to George Phranza, who wrote about the matters of his own time: for this writer records that after Joseph died at Florence, Bessarion was appointed in his place by the synod and the emperor, as I said a little above; but since Bessarion, on account of the disturbances of affairs and scandals, did not come to Constantinople, but remained at Rome, Metrophanes was elected patriarch. So it stands with Phranza; but what the same author writes about the election of Bessarion as patriarch after the death of Joseph at Florence seems to conflict entirely with the Acts of the Council of Florence; for when Pope Eugenius had requested of the Greeks that they appoint another patriarch in place of the deceased Joseph before his departure from Florence, they replied that this was by no means possible: neither would the emperor do anything against the ancient custom, by which it was fitting that the patriarch be elected by the bishops of his entire dominion and be consecrated in the great temple of Hagia Sophia; "A patriarch will not be made here, because we have the custom in Constantinople that he be elected by our entire eparchy, and consecrated in our cathedral church. And our emperor will not act otherwise, knowing the custom of our Church."

But Allatius deals with this election of Bessarion at greater length in *De Ecclesiæ Occid. et Oriental. perpetua consensione*, lib. ii, cap. 5, where ^B he has this: "Nevertheless, these things notwithstanding, the emperor and the rest, who were championing the union, intended Bessarion as patriarch," if we are not mistaken about the author who wrote the account of the Florentine [council]; but, since he brings forth George Phranza as a witness to his claim, he destroys his own statement with this very claim. For Phranza, lib. ii, cap. 17, says that Bessarion was created patriarch by the emperor and the synod at Florence after the death of Joseph, but that he did not return to Constantinople with the other Greeks, but remained in Italy. Therefore, by this author's account, it was impossible for Bessarion to be elected patriarch of Byzantium by the Greeks, since he was not in Byzantium; unless we wish to say that he was elected in absentia; which can plainly appear ridiculous to anyone considering what was done at Florence for the election of a new patriarch after Joseph had finished his life. For the Greeks, though the supreme pontiff urged it strenuously, did not want to elect a patriarch, because it was not the custom to elect him outside of Constantinople. And since Phranza says he was elected by the emperor and synod after Joseph’s death, it seems—if my conjectures do not deceive me—to place his election in Italy; which the Acts of the synod would not have left unmentioned at all. And it is false that Bessarion did not return to Greece after the council, since he himself asserts it in his letter to Alexius: "After the holy council had taken place, and our return to Constantinople." That they returned to the city of Constantinople, and that it was for a short time, is certain. And perhaps he was elected while present at that time, and refused to accept it. Yet this does not seem to correspond with the words of Phranza. And although the same Bessarion says in the same letter that he had held the highest honors among the Greeks, one is not to understand this as meaning the patriarchate, but those honors with which he had been adorned in Greece itself before the synod, among which the patriarchate holds no place. Wherefore they do not opine badly who assert that he had been a titular patriarch of Constantinople, just as the Roman pontiffs were naming them after Constantinople was captured by the Latins, as also for other patriarchal sees, and Dorotheus of Monemvasia attempts to insinuate this to us in his *Synopsis of Histories*. See also other things which the same Allatius writes about Bessarion in the aforementioned place.

But to follow Phranza’s series. Metrophanes, formerly the Metropolitan of Cyzicus, was proclaimed Patriarch of Constantinople in the spring of the year of Christ 1440, after the arrival of the emperor at Constantinople; but Phranza does not disclose how long Metrophanes lived in the patriarchate. However, this Metrophanes, as Allatius says in the place cited by us above, had subscribed sixth in order at the synod: who, when he had been settled in the see, as was fitting, attempted to calm the machinations of the dissidents, to hold the turbulent to their duty, and also to take punishments from the contumacious, whom he expelled from their bishoprics and punished with exile, and he restored the upright, pious, and obedient to their places, so that the union might be propagated. While the remaining patriarchs were complaining, and were not calming their arrogance with submissive spirits, he ejected the restless ones even from their dioceses, and substituted others listening to him: which I think a man most reverent to the Roman Church would never have dared to do without the permission of the supreme pontiff. The remaining patriarchs, Philotheus of Alexandria, Dorotheus of Antioch, and Joachim of Jerusalem, taking this ill—although they had subscribed to the synod through their legates—percited by anger and precipitate in their fury, convened a synod, loaded Metrophanes and the bishops created by him with reproaches, subjected them to anathema, and turned the rest of the faithful of Christ away from their obedience. Finally, they write to Emperor John, and urge him to repent; if not, they threaten excommunication. So that you may see the care of Metrophanes, and the emperor’s zeal in propagating the union, and of the other patriarchs in tearing it down, it will not be beside the point to insert here the synodal letters, not those that are commonplace, says Allatius. The synodal letter against Metrophanes is: "Of the patriarchs of Syria. Since there has also come the most holy metropolitan..."

the citizen of the most holy metropolis of ^A Caesarea in Cappadocia, who is also the protothronos and Exarch of all the East, came both to venerate the all-venerable and divine sepulchre of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to visit the holy places in Jerusalem where the paradoxical mysteries of Christ’s dispensation were accomplished, and at the same time to commune with us concerning the great mystery of the faith and piety of Christians, and to make known all the scandals in Constantinople due to the detestable council assembled in Florence in Italy, and the things which those of the Latins, together with Pope Eugenius, have glorified—things which are not permitted—namely, their having subscribed to an addition to the divine and blameless Symbol of our faith, and having been persuaded that the divine Spirit proceeds from the Son, and their having allowed unleavened bread to be sacrificed among us, and for this reason to commemorate the Pope; and furthermore, all the other lawless things contrary to the canons that they have agreed to and embraced; and how the metropolitan of Cyzicus, a matricide, ^B has seized the throne of Constantinople like a brigand, having consented to the heretics, and to the aforementioned Pope, and to the Roman Emperor Palaeologus, who is Latin-minded, threatening, persecuting, tyrannizing, and rebuking the faithful and the orthodox, while inviting, honoring, and promoting the faithless and the heterodox as being of one mind with his own heresy, and in excess showing them favor in opposition to orthodoxy and piety, so that by this manner he has prompted profane metropolitanates and little bishoprics everywhere among the divine parts of the holy great Church of Constantinople, as if they were subject to his own parish. He has shown how the aforementioned most holy metropolitan, lord Arsenius, of the most holy metropolis of the great Caesarea in Cappadocia, protothronos and Exarch of all the East, has acting not only to influence the other Churches, for the pro-Latin metropolitan-patriarch has encouraged ^C unlawful ordinations, but even within the eparchies of all the East he has ordained four unordained metropolitans and little bishoprics—namely, to Amasia, Neocaesarea, Tyana, and Mocessos, who think and act in all things according to the Latins. And not only from this do they suffer their own corruption and perdition, but after such audacity, they thus deceive and corrupt all Christians everywhere under the flock of Christ, and cause many scandals to the Orthodox Church. For this reason, this pious and most faithful man, a champion and zealot for all orthodoxy, the aforementioned metropolitan of Caesarea in Cappadocia, not tolerating the innovation and corruption of Christ’s Church by the heterodox against the most orthodox and sound faith we hold, requested to receive a synodical opinion from us, the three orthodox hierarchs in Syria—namely, Philotheus of Alexandria, Dorotheus of Antioch, and Joachim of Jerusalem—so that he might repel those who do not think rightly from throughout his entire eparchy, ^D and he, as he is the first-born [in rank] and orthodox. Wherefore, we likewise define synodically, in the name of the consubstantial, life-creating, and undivided holy Trinity, that those metropolitans and bishops everywhere who were not ordained for virtue and piety, and furthermore likewise those who are styled abbots and spiritual fathers, and likewise priests and deacons, and simply those of all ecclesiastical vote, being otherwise profane and unworthy, and having seized the opportunity of heresy and the persecution of orthodoxy, and having run unworthily, by way of vainglory alone and heresy, to bishoprics and metropolitanates, as if they were saviors of souls, so that together with them they might corrupt others and all the orthodox flock of Christ our true God, and who possess neither the fear of God, nor concern for piety, that is to say, we decree from this day forth they are to be idle and unhallowed from all sacred action and ecclesiastical status, until piety shall be examined both commonly and ecumenically. Thus, then, having been persuaded, let them be idle and unhallowed. But those who rise up and resist like brigands and illegally, let them be excommunicated and alienated from the holy, supersubstantial, and consubstantial Trinity, as disobedient and argumentative. Likewise also those who receive them, and consent to such things, and defend them. We restore the aforementioned most holy metropolitan, who is also the hypertimos and Exarch of all the East, that as a herald of piety and orthodoxy he may proclaim piety everywhere, not fearing for the sake of truth the face of an emperor, or a patriarch who does not think and act rightly, nor of a rich man, or of a man in power; but with boldness, holding the faith and orthodoxy without fear and without hesitation, in accordance with the command, he has our permission from now on, for the sake of piety, to rebuke, censure, and correct those who do not think rightly in every place, as far as he is able to travel, having received from us authority by the grace and power given to us by the holy Spirit, and he is obligated to preserve piety against these men, being incorruptible and righteous in so doing. For this reason, there was given to him also our written opinion, inscribed synodically by our own hands in the month of April, in the year 6741 of the current sixth indiction, and in the year of Christ 1443. [index: entries preserved]

1445.

To the emperor, however, these things: ^B Most powerful and most imperial, most serene lord and emperor, may I be found ceaselessly making prayers to God that your power might be preserved from every opposing incident, and for our own spiritual joy. Let it be known to your holy majesty that we have received a first, a second, and a third letter from the Pope Eugenius concerning the union of the Church, so that we might accept this without remainder, just as it happened, and that we might commemorate the Pope. Such, then, simply, is what the Pope wrote; but he showed us nothing of how the deed came to happen. But I, according to the letter sent to me from our most holy lord, the lord Joseph, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch, remained until now, knowing that at Florence there was no synodal, canonical, and unconstrained letter, according to the traditions of the holy apostles and the holy seven ecumenical councils and the divine Fathers. But the Latins, having devised countless machinations, ^C annulled the agreements and transgressed their written oaths; they distorted the truth and, finally, in a tyrannical manner, they ratified their own lawless dogmas again, and whatever else they held against the canons. And by far the worst and most impious thing is that, among other things, they did not shrink from the addition in the common creed of the faith, but even delivered it in writing to be confessed by all. For this reason I answered the Pope in this way: that if he adheres to the traditions of the holy ecumenical councils and confirms them, and [confirms] whatever canonical and legal things such divine Fathers decreed, then I myself also hold to the council at Florence, and I receive the commemoration of the Pope, provided that the Pope sends us such a confession in writing according to the legal and ancient tradition and custom. Without this, however, I neither accept the council at Florence nor the commemoration of the Pope, but even those among us who assent to such things—both to the council at Florence, clearly, and to the commemoration of the Pope without the aforementioned sound confession of his—if they be of the clergy, we hold them from now on suspended and un-priestly from every sacred function; if they be of the senate, excommunicated and cut off from communion according to the canons of those who preached God and the disciples of Christ and the divine and ecumenical seven councils. These things, then, we wrote to him.

Now also we declare these things to your majesty: that if you acted, as though our own race were utterly enfeebled and therefore forced in every way ^D to receive help, and you deemed it an equal economy, or whether you fell into the ways of the Latins and accepted the addition out of necessity, or whether, having now turned away from those monstrous utterances and impieties of theirs, you confess the sound tradition in the divine creed according to all the divine Scriptures, without wavering, and you adhere to it and are persuaded, just as all the pious emperors before you, then not only do we have the resolve to perform the beloved commemoration of your majesty, but we intend also to fulfill a perpetual and eternal petition to God for the sake of your power, and most especially for your soul, through which, propitiating the divine [will] each day, we may communicate with you, and [for] the transgressions committed in knowledge and ignorance. For thus, then, there will be for you mercy for trespasses, and thus forgiveness for sins of ignorance, if you do not annul the divine traditions. But if you wait and tolerate the matters of the heterodox, as being foreign to every canonical and synodal tradition, we shall not only cut off the commemoration of your majesty, but we shall add the burden of penance, so that the rot of the foreign and harmful dogma may not infect the Church of Christ, inasmuch as we were called shepherds of piety and we confessed so in writing before God and the holy angels. Therefore, we do not endure to shepherd the Church of piety like hirelings, nor do we spare soul and blood, but for the sake of Christ and the Gospel we are ready to give soul, and flesh, and blood, and whatever else we possess on earth. But if, in a tyrannical manner, you illegally force and persuade the free and unsubjugated Church of Christ, know this, that we will deprecate the piety [of the situation], but we will not endure to be silent henceforth, but according to the [divine] instruction, having tested [them], we intend to rebuke this. Wherefore also we send these things to your holy majesty together with the most honorable monk and spiritual [father]...

^A lord Macarius, our humble person’s son, who will also announce to your majesty the things concerning the council, which we have entrusted to him. For believe, we long for nothing more than the union of elder Rome and all the Italians, provided they come to the truth. But if they contend to establish falsehood, we cannot commune with them, not even if they beheaded us all in one day. It is better to die piously from time to time, which is the end we are destined for. Therefore, persuade yourself also, ^B O most serene and divine emperor, to follow the divine institutions and the laws of Christ, and the traditions of his God-proclaimed disciples, just as you have lived piously until now, as your fathers acknowledge, having died piously and holily in their deeds. For there is nothing ambiguous in our piety, such that you should fall into perplexity or doubt regarding Christian dogmas. But yet, no race has made such precision and investigation regarding the faith as the Fathers have done in the faith of Christ. Wherefore, ^C having found the testimonies from the creation of the world, proclaimed at different times by the Holy Spirit through the holy prophets, they embraced these firmly in the beginning; but later, when the shadow had passed by, through the grace of the Presence, the whole of the saving mystery of the dispensation was perfected; and thus, the most brilliant and life-giving resurrection having been completed, those who were initiates and disciples of the same vision, through the Holy Spirit, clearly declared this mystery and preached it to all, so that all of us following successively might rightly, and without missing the mark at all, [attain] the enjoyment of the unending kingdom from thence, of which may it be granted that we all attain in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen. In the month of December, the sixth indiction.

Most powerful, most humane, and most serene lord and emperor, we humbly and continuously beseech God that your majesty and empire may be preserved immune from every adverse fortune, for our spiritual ^D joy. Let it be known to your sacred majesty that we have received three letters from Pope Eugenius regarding the union of the Church, that we might embrace it as it was enacted, with judges removed, and that we might make commemoration of the Pope. And these things Pope Eugenius wrote to us plainly; but he did not teach by what manner that matter was transacted. However, through previous letters to me from the most holy brother Lord Joseph, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch, I have plainly and truly learned that the Council of Florence was not, as the Greeks and Latins had agreed by written oath, a canonical and free council according to the traditions of the apostles and the seven holy and ecumenical councils and the divine Fathers; but that the Italians, inventing infinite frauds, violated the covenants, perverted the things confirmed by oath, and in the end, like tyrants, re-established their impious dogmas, and prevailed in other matters against the canons; and what is worse and more impious, they did not neglect that addition to the common Creed of the faith with many others, but even handed it down in writing, that—alas, for the miserable!—it might be proclaimed by all. Wherefore I myself answered the Pope: If they have accepted the traditions of the holy universal councils and the determinations and whatever canonical and legitimate [things] those holy Fathers decreed, then I myself also embrace the Council of Florence and do not refuse the commemoration of the Pope: provided that the Pope sends to us a similar profession in writing, as legitimate and ancient tradition and custom prescribe. But if this is not done, I neither accept the Council of Florence nor the commemoration of the Pope. Furthermore, those of our own who have given their assent to similar things—namely, to the Synod of Florence and the commemoration of the Pope, without the aforementioned right confession of his—if they are of the clergy, we deprive them of every holy office and priestly ministry; if they are of the senate, we excommunicate them and segregate them from the communion of the faithful, according to the canons of God’s heralds and of the disciples of Christ and the prescriptions and traditions of the seven holy and universal councils. And these things we have written to him; but to your Majesty we make these things known. If he has given place to similar [actions], driven by all means out of concern for our nation, which is utterly afflicted and all but dead, so that you might provide yourself with aid, or perhaps emboldened by some other providence for the opinion of the Latins, or by some force you have embraced the addition, and now, with their absurdities and impieties removed, you confess and embrace without doubt the sound tradition in the divine symbol according to all the divine Scriptures, and believe in it, as those who held the empire before you did, then we also shall not only make affectionate commemoration of your majesty, [but] we shall beseech God with continuous and inexhaustible prayers for your empire, especially for your soul, by which every day we shall render God propitious to you, that He may grant pardon for the faults you have committed both deliberately and in ignorance. And by this reasoning you will attain mercy for sins and remission of ignorances, if you do not reject the divine traditions. But if you persist in being obstinate and support the dogmas of those who believe otherwise, since these things are foreign to all canonical and synodal tradition, we shall not only cut off the commemoration of your Majesty, but we shall even aggravate the punishments; lest the ruin of alien and harmful dogma gain strength in the Church of Christ; while we are called shepherds of piety, and have thus professed in writing before God and the holy angels. Wherefore we do not pasture the Church of piety like hirelings, nor is blood and soul more precious to us, but for Christ and His Gospel we are ready to pour out soul and flesh and blood and whatever else we possess upon the earth. But if, like a tyrant, you wickedly offer force, and strive to seduce the free Church, which is impatient of the yoke, know that we shall never desert piety, nor shall we bear silence with an equal mind, but according to the commandment we shall rebuke without fear, and with added threats, reproach [you]. Therefore we send these things to your Majesty together with the hieromonk and spiritual Father, the most excellent lord Macarius, and son of our mediocrity, who will also announce to your Majesty concerning the council, which we have commended to him. For believe me, we ardently desire, as does anyone else, the union of elder Rome and all the Italians, provided that they give their hand to the truth. But if they strive to establish a lie, we cannot commune with them, even if they should cut off the head from the necks of all in one day: it is best to lay down life piously at whatever hour, if one must die at long last. Therefore embrace, you also, O most serene and divine emperor, the sacred sanctions and laws of Christ, and the traditions of the heralds of God and the disciples of Christ, who have lived piously until these times, which your parents attest to you, having died piously and honestly. For there is nothing in our piety ambiguous that could be dragged into hesitation and doubt in Christian dogmas. But in fact, no nation has set such great disquisition and accurate examination in matters of faith as our own Fathers have in the faith of Christ, and therefore, having collected testimonies from the creation of the world, foretold at various times by the Holy Spirit through the holy prophets, they firmly provided faith in them before other things: later, the shadow having passed away, with the approach of grace, the whole and saving mystery of the dispensation was completed. And thus, with the most splendid and life-giving resurrection accomplished, his initiates and disciples, clearly declaring the mystery through the Holy Spirit, announced it to all, so that all posterity, following them rightly, might become participants in the kingdom that is always to endure, of which I hope it may happen for us to attain in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen. In the month of December, of the sixth indiction.

Gregory Melissenus, spiritual father or confessor of the emperor, upon the death of Metrophanes, or [upon his] abdication of the patriarchate, is substituted in his place in the summer of the year of Christ 1445, as Phranza writes. This Gregory, however, called Phranza Melissenus, does not seem to be different from the one surnamed Gregory Mamma.

He held the title of patriarch, once accepted, for as long as he lived; with no other person elected in his place among the Latins, nor even among the Greeks, until Constantinople was captured by the Turks. Nor did he die before Constantinople was captured by the Turks, as Phranzes seems to suggest in Book 3, chapter 19, when in the Commentaries of Pius II, Book 2, his death is recorded in the year of Christ 1459. The Constantinopolitan see, however, remained vacant from the year of Christ 1451 until Georgius Scholarius, who was the first patriarch after the capture of Constantinople.

Sermon of the most wise and most eloquent Lord Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus on the holy and equal-to-the-apostles myrrh-bearer Mary Magdalene

1. As we have carried out our discourse on other occasions, so now we intend to do the same, delineating the struggles of the blessed Magdalene, sketching her history, and proposing it for emulation. For she was not an unhelpful assistant to the teaching of the eternal Word, and for her part, she contributed not a little to the propagation of the Gospel. To us, considering all these things, it has seemed a necessary and special task to speak of this blessed woman, since a sermon could not be more fittingly prepared about any of the Lord’s disciples, nor more appropriately presented to those who are diligent in such matters. For whoever desires both to be initiated himself into heavenly things and to initiate others, and to communicate the words of faith to the world, will judge St. Magdalene worthy of every honor; and satisfying his own soul, he will also provide no small joy to those before whom he brings the praises of this woman ^A to the harbor of salvation and the asylum of faith, he fled; where, while he saw that this dissension endured for a longer time day by day, as the same writer reports. Nor indeed do I doubt that this Gregory is the same as the one who is termed Georgius Phranzes in Book 3, chapter 5, whom he says, indeed, in the month of August of the year of Christ 1451, departed from the city like an exile. For thus also Gregory the Cypriot is everywhere called Georgius, because, having taken the monastic habit, he was called Gregory from Georgius. Since these things are so, this Gregory or Georgius sat for about six years, and in order to provide for his own peace, he left Constantinople and went to Rome, ^B If ever at another time it was appropriate to perform the fitting thing in discourse, this same thing I think I shall now perform, having clearly cast myself into the contests of the blessed Magdalene, and having set her forth as the occasion for the current subject, having undertaken the work of zeal. Indeed, to the Word, which is beyond utterance and subsistent, she was not unhelpful in what she accomplished as a disciple, and she contributed no small portion of power to the living words of the proclamation. To us, who are contemplating on all sides, the discourse concerning her seems necessary and appropriate; for it would not be disposed toward any other of all people, than to those who, as far as possible, narrate her deeds in discourse and offer them to the ears of those who love learning. For since she existed to be initiated by the Word and to initiate others into heavenly things, and since her zeal was to convey the words of faith to the ends of the earth, she would altogether be honored, as is fitting, in words, and would be sweetened by the Spirit, and

will, I know, provide no small grace to those who may be emboldened ^A to speak concerning her. For whatever work a man may be devoted to while he yet lives, and in which he finds pleasure, in that very work, even after he has departed from here, if he is seen to be honored by any at all, he rejoices all the more and exults with an ineffable joy. Hence, it is fitting and appropriate that the disciple of the Word receive a eulogy from words. Yet, there is also another way in which a discourse about her is necessary for us. For to a man who has practiced rhetoric from his youth, and who has been nourished by these things as much as possible, and who puts all other things second to them, and for whom it is a duty to dedicate the first fruits of his words to God, what could be more pleasant than a discourse about the Word, and a narrative concerning those who have traversed the inhabited world with the word of faith?

And thirdly, I judge it to be an act of irrational, or rather, ungrateful men, to wish to pay as much thanks as possible to those who are ancestors by blood, and yet not to have any readiness to render fitting thanks to those who are the authors and causes of our spiritual regeneration, which is better. It is not at all unclear that the blessed Magdalene is without doubt regarded as a leader among those who are regenerated by the Spirit. For if it is right to attribute to a father the legitimacy and righteousness ^B of his children, as indeed it is and as it is said, then surely one would attribute the merits of the disciples to the teacher. And if any person, while wishing to be reckoned and named among the Christians, should wish to place any other teacher after Christ and apart from the blessed one of the Word, I do not think it would be easy for him to find such a one, so that one might reckon the things of the apostles to her in the present instance—a thing which I shall not say without reason, and by this discourse we may aptly provide the faith derived from them.

For if it is necessary to obey the divine Paul writing to those in Corinth: "But if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain" (I Cor. xv, 16). ^C And it was her lot, first of all, to see the risen Christ, and to announce the resurrection to the apostles, even if her words seemed as nonsense to them; to her, therefore, must also be attributed the things of the apostles, if he who first makes a discovery is considered among those of sound mind to be the one who makes the discovery. From this point on, it is better for the discourse to postpone the struggles, as it is in no way sensible to cross a great sea in an ill-equipped ship, or to attempt a massive billow in a tiny skiff—or, to say the same thing, to recount the great deeds of this blessed woman in a short and paltry speech—or to cede the work and the resulting ambition to others who happen to have sufficient power of speech, and who have the capacity to handle such a great struggle.

However, since there is no way to turn back, nor to escape the undertaking, having ventured thus far—for how could we not give room for reproach against ourselves by acting youthfully, in an evangelical sense, ^D while having put our hand to the plow, and yet turning to the contrary? It will be beneficial to have put one's hand to the work, and to proceed to the end is better and more useful than to depart with the work unfinished. But when shall we fulfill our vowed duty with the discourse, if we do not obey these Fathers, who exhort us daily, and do not allow us to rest before we have performed the duty of praising the blessed Magdalene? Since these things are so, with her help invoked, let us approach the matter and shake off all fear and sloth. Therefore, let the foundation and beginning of the discourse be to state what her origin was, and from what parents she was born. Then we shall say how she approached Christ, how it came about that she became a participant in the Gospel, and in what way she contributed to its promulgation.

^A II. But now, to recount the fatherland and family of this blessed woman is, I consider, quite beside our present purpose and beyond its scope. For it is manifest that for those who have lived according to God, their fatherland and blessed city is in paradise; their ancestors are the patriarchs and prophets; their friends are the apostles and the assembly of the righteous, and all those things which are held in reverence and honor in the heavenly Jerusalem. Although it is permitted to boast of these things, yet I consider it altogether inopportune and unfitting for the occasion to construct praise from those meager things which she herself left behind as being of no account. ^B For it is permitted for a man entirely material and who pursues happiness in merely earthly things to inquire whether a true fatherland consists in the richness and abundance of pastures; whether a city is well-situated, possessing walls and other amenities; whether it lies by the sea; and whether it acquires advantages for itself from other places while being exempt from the hardships that pertain to the sea. But that holy woman's lot was to become a partaker of that blessedness, and having spurned all things, to seek Christ, and to possess the heavenly Jerusalem as her fatherland, to tread earthly matter underfoot, and to be with God—nay, even to be united with Him. For nothing appeared to her worthy of praise that is abhorrent to divine things. ^C And although it would have been permitted to me to declare the fatherland of the holy woman, I do not fear that I might offend others to whom their city and fatherland seems to be preferred above other cities and worthy of all praise. For such is the condition of cities that, according to dignity, some are ranked and esteemed above others at will, whether they are considered great or small. Yet, lest we appear unjust in praising or blaming, when we set forth with just authority what her fatherland was, we do so; since the fatherland no less adorned her than it was adorned by her.

^D III. The fatherland, therefore, of the blessed disciple of the Word, Mary Magdalene, was that which God promised to the patriarch Abraham and his offspring, that is, the land of promise, given to the Israelites after they had fled from the Egyptian misery. Indeed, I entrust to the Holy Scripture the task of recounting its virtues and bringing forward the antiquity of its lineage and name. For with what words could anyone sufficiently declare its supereminent glory? It is better, therefore, to pass over the matter in silence than to utter words unworthy of the thing being praised, and to be an object of laughter and mockery to others. This, then, is the fatherland of the blessed Magdalene. But if she was born to an illustrious fatherland, [index: entries preserved]

she lacked nothing for the splendor of her family; she had parents who were not such as to be in need of others, nor of the prerogatives of the city, nor of whatever wealth sets them apart. For truly, from above, as from a chain, the excellence of nobility was theirs; springing from the eastern parts, they were noble in body, but yet more noble in soul. ^B The door was open for them, according to the example of Job, to every needy person, not drawing back from their countenances or driving them away. They were feet to the lame, and they acted as eyes to those who carried damaged vision. They helped widows most especially, adopting the children of those whose parents had long since departed this life, and thus they alleviated the hardship of orphanage by the care they bestowed upon them. What then? Should one think that those who did well to others indulged in luxury and softness at home? Not at all; rather, the constant exercise of the salutary Law was their occupation, the vigor of which required blood and the fragrance of victims. They brought forth, therefore, this blessed Mary around the middle of the reign of Caesar Octavius, who is also called by the other name, Augustus. And I deem it sufficient for their honor that they were heard of as the parents of such a daughter. For if it was fitting that such a woman, who so graced her life, and whose virtues exceed both mind and speech, should be brought into the light as an honor to her family, it was surely just that she should be born of such parents, who alone were worthy to be the parents of such a daughter. ^C When she had been weaned from milk and breasts and had just begun to plant her own feet upon the earth, she was not, according to Solomon, committed to learning to lean on a staff, nor to spinning wool, nor to dealing with silk threads, nor to embroidering garments with gold, but was instead consigned to the schools of teachers. And as a torch to the fire, or a horse to the field, as the proverb has it, so in a short time our blessed one was taught what the divine Moses wrote, what is read in the obscure Scriptures, and what the prophets and psalms relate. She applied herself most especially to the psalms, and devoted herself to them day and night; and she gave her attention to the prophetic passages as well, which most clearly announce all things concerning Christ, or rather, concerning the Anointed and Messiah.

^D IV. Now that her parents had departed this life, the daughter, even though she could have been idle and indulgent of her own temperament, did not abandon the study of letters. For she did not apply her mind to luxury, nor did she surrender herself to pleasures, nor did she dedicate herself to the softness of life, even though her age, her nature, and her desires invited her to it. For she held nothing to be more ancient than fasting, prayers, the mortification of the body, conversation with heavenly things, meditation on the Law, and reading of the Scriptures. She gave the same with a willing mind and with profusion to the needy, and with greater cheerfulness than they received. Thus she looked out for the lives of others, and to those who lacked the things necessary for life, she gave aid from her own riches with boldness of soul; nor did she, with her own

^A hands, disdain to wash with water the flesh of those suffering from the disease of men, which was infected with sores, and to heal their infirmity by whatever means she could. For she was eager to show charity not in words, but in deeds. Moreover, she was of such great sanctity of character and held virginity in such high honor that she would abstain from festivals and would not wish to be present at splendid public gatherings. She also abhorred attending on her cousins or conversing with men, as if it were a thing to be shunned. For, following a virginal life, she restrained herself from the pleasures of the senses through touch, being content if she could enjoy some desired object from afar and spiritually through contemplation. For she thought it shameful to perform through the body what she could perform through the mind, and she preferred to attain it without the wantonness of the eyes, using her mind—in such a way that those who in our own time presume to practice virginity might learn much from her. Fleeing from immoderate laughter, she restrained herself from prolixity of speech as much as possible, and she always delighted in a peaceful conversation with God, together with purity of mind and the continuous reading of the Scriptures, and before all things, she became for all a model of chaste virginity.

V. Thus, then, as the blessed woman was leading a life consecrated to God and ^B a sublime one, the father of envy could not rest, he who because of his own malignity always lies in wait for the righteous and trips up their heels on the way, as holy Scripture says. Thus, therefore, by associating the most wicked demons with our blessed one, he assaulted the house of chastity with all machines of war and, like robbers, mightily shook the tower of virginity; having stormed it as a citadel, he took possession of the whole city; and having devastated it and brought it under his own dominion, he took away whatever divine and holy things she possessed, and snatched away every virtue which she had acquired over a long period through multifarious exercise. And after he had made her, who was previously resplendent with many virtues, stripped bare, he departed from there, leaving her to be guarded by seven demons; for God permitted this, I think, intending to bring forth from it the seeds of great things. ^C For the author of malice believed it to be shameful and miserable that he should be overcome by one woman, he who, having overcome greater ones, had established Cain as a fratricide, had destroyed the whole human race by the flood, had wiped out Sodom by fire, and had finally handed over the whole human race to the worship of idols and other depraved desires. If, moreover, faith is to be placed in the mystical words which have come down to us from the ancients concerning the invasion of the seven demons—namely, that fear took hold of Satan from the time he heard the prophet saying, "Behold, the virgin shall be with child," ^D and that he snatched away the virginity of the blessed Magdalene, fearing lest the mystery of the incarnation be accomplished in her most of all. For already before that, the malignant one, on account of

the betrothal of Joseph to the virgin who bore the same name as her—the truly blessed and incorrupt—had thought to bring her within his snares. But thy snares were in vain, O wicked one. For the Word of God, coeternal with the Father, without beginning and incomprehensible, catches thee, the cunning one, by thine own malice. For moved in his own compassion, because the man whom he had created had been so defiled by thee, and not enduring this—with the concurrence of the Father who is without beginning, and the cooperation of the Spirit coessential and of equal honor with him—he, concealed from thee, the prince of darkness who seduced us by deceit, remained immutable as he was, and quietly descends, bowing the heavens, and dwells in the womb of the chaste and immaculate virgin.

VI.

VII.

with a word he delivers her from the demons and banishes them into the mountains. But she, when by becoming composed in mind she knew that she had escaped safely, without any delay interposed, bade farewell to the world and pressed upon the footsteps of the Master and Savior, having no regard for sex or for the consideration of external things. For seeing the lame leaping like deer, and the blind, having cast off the darkness of their eyes, joyfully gazing with new—if I may say so—eyes upon the most sweet sun; then the legion of demons rebuked and suddenly expelled like smoke; seeing, I say, the joints of a withered hand loosened and torn like the web of a spider, she concluded from all these things, and from the Scriptures, that he was the one expected for the liberation of Israel. For as she was one who laid claim to understanding, she perceived well that while it had been given to others also to do the like, yet it was not with such authority and abundance of power; for they performed all things servilely and only after prayers had been offered, whereas Christ, by saying, "I say to you," or "I will, be thou clean," performed the greatest miracles ^B more swiftly than a word, and showed a power and virtue greater than theirs. For at one time he walks across the sea expeditiously and with dry feet, at another he gives commands to demons by his own authority, at another he raises the dead in such a way that they lay aside death like sleep; and countless other things, with divine power assisting, he performed as he pleased with great authority.

VIII. Thus, therefore, having been guided by these signs, and having truly recognized that he was the Son of God, she never forsook him; but wherever services were to be rendered, she was present, listening to his conversations and precepts, accepting corrections with a joyful mind, and executing commands more swiftly than a word. Then, after some time had ^C passed, she came to know Christ's mother and his whole family and was joined to them with the strictest bonds of friendship; but not only with these, but also with Christ’s disciples and followers she entered into familiarity, just as she did with the house of Simon the Pharisee and with the family of Lazarus, with whom and his sisters it was easy and opportune for her to enter into friendship, inasmuch as they were friends of Christ himself, as the divine John says: "And Jesus loved Martha and Mary her sisters, and Lazarus." ^D He used to frequent their village and house and take up lodging with them, seeing that he had no house nor [place] where he might lay his head, while foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests. And it is possible to establish this with many other testimonies, but it becomes especially known from this: "For when Jesus," he says, "had come into a certain village (Bethany must be understood, for this is the fatherland of Lazarus and his sisters), a certain woman named Martha received him into her house; and there was a sister to her named Mary," and what follows. For after Christ had said, "Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her," he adds: "But a woman cried out with a loud voice to him: Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts which you have sucked." This woman

the sacred books beyond doubt declare to us to be the blessed Magdalene, as is evident from what follows. For after the marvelous Luke has recounted the affairs of Martha and Mary, and then the lifting up of the woman’s voice, and afterwards the account of him who possessed the mute demon—and the Pharisees slandered Christ, saying he cast out demons by Beelzebul—he himself refutes their opinion, saying: "Every kingdom divided against itself shall be laid waste." And after this: "If I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out?" And after a few words: "When the unclean spirit has gone out, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none he says: I will return to my house from which I came; and coming he finds it swept and adorned. Then he goes and takes seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering they dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first." However, he adds in the continuous flow of the text: "It came to pass, as he said these things, a certain woman lifted up her voice from the crowd and said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts which you have sucked." Thus, it is to be understood that this was none other than the Magdalene, who had heard of the seven demons, and had come to a remembrance of the passion from which Christ had delivered her when he was in Magdala, as the holy Gospel relates.

IX. On the mystery of redemption and the miracle of Lazarus

X. The envy of the Pharisees and the treachery of Judas

thirty pieces of silver, for which he sold Him who was truly worthy of so much. ^A From that moment, night came, and torches were lit, clubs were in hands, swords and daggers were drawn, and the defiled disciple, under the guise of friendship, handed over the good Master. Such were the circumstances, and the high priest’s courtyard held the great High Priest as a prisoner. How great, then, do you imagine the suffering of that blessed woman at that time was! Following, coming alongside, feigning ignorance, burning with inward grief, observing the entrances and exits, hanging upon the lips of all, noting who were those consenting to the sentence against Him, and who were judging the matter with blame, and reporting to the Mother whatever she might learn; with her heart no less torn, having her soul in suspense, yearning to know where the outcome of the affair might eventually lead. Indeed, one may also discern what she was, observing the events done to Him that were grievous even in mere telling: the false testimonies, the mockings, the scourging, the lashing, that shameful leading about in insult, the blows, the buffeting, the draping of the false purple, the crowning with thorns, and all those other things which it was possible for the bloodthirsty men to do, in the fullness of their authority, over You, O long-suffering Word. And when they had performed all that the senseless ones had done, and finally reached the place of the Skull, breathing slaughter and looking with savage and murderous intent—and the cross was now already raised high, and He was suspended, pierced by the nails—as if holding up the serpent ^B to shame, becoming a spectacle manifest to all, then it is probable that she, putting aside fear, approached Him—together with the Mother and the disciple—in that state of appearance, and clasped those immaculate feet, kissed the wounds with her mouth, mingled tears with the blood, and added such words as these: "What is this, O Lord and God? How vast is the ocean of Your loving-kindness! Is this how they recompense You, those who have received so many and so great benefits from You? They wrap You in a garment of insult, those whom You surrounded with a robe of purification; whom, like an eagle with outspread wings, You carried upon Your shoulders. They crown You with a crown of insult, those whom You Yourself crowned with glory and honor. They strike You with blows, those whom You delivered from the Egyptian slavery. They strike Your holy head with a reed, they to whom the sea, having been touched by a rod, was split open. To You in Your thirst they mix vinegar with gall, they whom You sated with manna in the desert, and for whom You opened a fountain of waters from a rock. They pierce Your feet with iron nails, those whom You led unharmed through the desert. But speak also a word to us women, who stand here with such great sadness. With valedictory words, console Your Mother who stands here, that she may be revived, and, in departing from the world, entrust to her some companion. For even if she brought You forth without pain, now, ^C as she sees You wounded with lashes, a sword pierces her soul. Speak a word to the disciple and the Mother, that You may comfort them."

XI. Seeing, therefore, the holy women so affected, it was natural that He should say that which was the Mother’s due of care.

and which made the disciple the cause of every honor: "Woman, behold your son; behold your Mother." ^A That she should be present, as has been said, and that such things should be related, and that the beloved disciple himself—it suffices to say, and brother—should stand by, he declares, saying: "There stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene." But because, on account of the Preparation, as the sacred Gospel declares, "that the bodies should not remain upon the cross, the lawless ones, truly in vain, asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. The soldiers came, it says, and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who was crucified with Him. But coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs; but one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately there came out blood and water." ^B What must we suppose the burning soul of that woman felt then? Doubtless she would have torn the audacious soldier to pieces, had not her feminine nature held her back, and forced her to think as a woman, even though she possessed a manly spirit. "Hold your hand," she says, "reckless soldier, lest a God-sent sword come upon you." With what fear, do you suppose, his soul was agitated at that sight? Certainly the hearts of the women who saw Christ’s side pierced by a spear were afflicted with the greatest pain. But how, when they saw Christ dead, did they not despair, cast down their spirits, rend their garments, seeing the rocks splitting, the sun hiding its light, the moon darkened, as if sympathizing with the suffering Creator? But not even the temple was to remain in its place; for it also, as if trembling at the unlawful deed, and acknowledging the Lawgiver hanging naked upon the tree, inflamed with righteous anger, tore its veil, just as the high priest had formerly torn his tunic. ^C But concerning these things, let the sacred Gospel discourse for me.

XII. When these things had happened against all hope, Magdalene, deciding that she ought no longer to delay, but having given herself entirely to the matter of the burial, approaches Joseph of Arimathea. For she knew him as one possessing a new tomb, which had never yet received the body of any man. And the place where it lay was most pleasant, situated in a most beautiful, open air, and furnished in the manner of a garden. Approaching him, and with those arguments by which she emboldened him—previously tracking out the tunnels and descents—she cast out every fear of danger from his spirit. For, as it says, "Having dared, he went in to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus." And the rest, let the divine Gospel relate to me.

XIII. And when Joseph and Nicodemus were about to take down that divine body from the cross, and needed the necessary tools for the extraction of the nails, such as pincers and a hammer, and whatever else was suitable for those things, she, being suspended in her soul, and as if fearful, lest anything be broken of ^D

raction of the nails, such as pincers and a hammer, and whatever else was suitable for those things, she, being suspended in her soul, and as if fearful, lest anything be broken of ^A His Lordly bones, she would urge Nicodemus to be careful; she kept kissing the nails, and applied the fragments to her eyes, and touched those feet which were truly beautiful, and which brought tidings of peace to all, and the hands, the work of which is the whole world, and above all, the creature that is strictly man. She embraced the whole body, but clung to the feet; yet she kept far from touching the face, which she did from reverence, and yielded that to the mother, to whom such right belonged by reason of her maternity. Then, groaning, she loosened her hair, and furrowed her cheeks with her nails; with outstretched hands, she comforted her mother, who was weak and with her head fallen back, unable to bear the weight of her distress, with gentle words. Nevertheless, for fear of the persecutors, they dared not sing funeral songs. Be that as it may, Joseph and Nicodemus began to wrap the body in a linen cloth, to embalm it with myrrh, and to deposit it in the sepulchre as a treasure. For Magdalene, pressing Joseph, said: "To you, it shall be a care to deliver the Lord, wrapped in the linen shroud, to burial." To this task she herself lent her hands, as did the mother herself, whose grief and care she shared. But when the Lord’s body was laid out to be carried ^B to burial, who could tell of the holy woman’s grief and mourning? Therefore, I think it better to pass this over in silence than to recount it in words not sufficiently worthy. Thus, therefore, He who inspires life in all is laid to rest in the sepulchre, about to bestow life.

XIV. On the zeal of the holy women.

XV. On the fourfold manifestation of the holy women at the tomb.

t altera Maria, sole oriente, ut Marcus refert. Et certe omnia quæ ad eam spectant, memoratu valde digna sunt. Postquam porro corpus sepultum fuerat, secundum quod dicit divus Matthæus, non abscessit, ut nec altera Maria, a sepulcro, sed e regione sedentes locum observarunt, quo positus erat. Postea domum redire debebant, cum Sabbati celebrandi gratia, tum quia deicidas metuebant. ^A

XVI. A Sermon on Saint Mary Magdalene

XVI. On the evening of the Sabbath, about the time of the cock-crowing (for you see how he clarifies it himself), as it was dawning toward the first day of the week, which is the Lord’s Day, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the sepulcher; she who is named in Mark and Luke as the mother of James and Joses, who is believed to be the Theotokos herself. “And behold,” he says, “there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it,” and so forth. This is the first visit of the Magdalene to the tomb. ^B

As they were proceeding on the way, Christ Himself met them, saying, “Rejoice.” For the race which had first heard, “In pain you shall bring forth children,” needed now to hear words of joy. But they, out of their longing, did something even bolder; for they approached and touched His feet and worshipped Him. And He told them not to be afraid, but to go and give the message of the Resurrection to the Apostles, desiring that a woman should be a messenger of joy to men, just as she had been the minister of the mishap to Adam. So, the holy women announced the Gospel to the Apostles. ^C

“But Peter, rising, ran in the night to the monument, and stooping down, saw only the linen cloths lying, and went away, wondering in himself at what had happened.” But when the Magdalene saw that Peter, being most fervent, had not examined things closely, she considered the matter of what was seen to be an impasse, and thought that what was seen was a phantom. Having therefore returned again, to verify accurately the things seen, and around dawn, as the day was just beginning to shine, she comes to the tomb for the second time, and sees the stone removed from the tomb, and reasoning with herself that she would again be disbelieved by the disciples. “She runs,” says the Evangelist, “and comes to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved.” For these were the most ardent among the disciples: the one as fervently loving, the other as being loved. ^D

And look now at the intent of the blessed woman; so that she might not be disbelieved again, she does not say, “He is risen,” for I do not know if it is true or not; this only I know, that His body is not in the tomb. She says therefore, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and I do not know where they have laid Him.” She immediately rouses the disciples, and runs with them, expectant of the investigation. Peter is led into the tomb, then also the other disciple, who arrived first just now at the tomb, and they behold the linen cloths lying, and the napkin involved in one place; and they saw, he says, and believed—not that He had risen, but that He had been taken away. “For as yet,” says John, “they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead. Then the disciples went away again to their own homes.”

^A XVII. Perhaps doubt assailed the blessed woman, so that she believed all these things to be a phantom; just as, in human fashion, she distrusted her own self, especially since the report had been spread with the greatest speed that His disciples had stolen His body by night. Yet she did not leave the sepulcher; but after the disciples had departed, “Mary,” as we read in the Scriptures, “stood outside weeping,” partly because she had despaired of the situation, and partly because she truly did not know whether He had been stolen, as the report went, or taken away in some other manner. While she was weeping, “she stooped down and looked into the tomb,” with an uncertain mind, “and saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been laid.” They say to her: “Woman, why do you weep? Whom are you seeking?” The words of those speaking are truly a rebuke: ^B Woman, after such a vision, why do you weep? You despair like a woman of all these things, and you are unable to judge any great matter. Whom are you seeking? Whom have you seen? Whose feet have you touched? Who has spoken to you? Is it He whom you are seeking? She says to them: “They have taken away my Lord from the tomb, and I do not know where they have laid Him.” Then the angels suddenly rose, and perhaps the Savior was present, and she turned round and saw Jesus standing, and did not know that it was Jesus, both because after the resurrection He was in an incorruptible body and not entirely visible except to those to whom He wished to be seen; and because her eyes, obscured by tears, could not see clearly; and because Christ had ordained it so. “Jesus says to her: Woman, why do you weep? Whom are you seeking?” She, thinking that He was the gardener, says to Him: “Sir, if you have carried Him away, tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away.” As if she were saying: If you are one of those who have carried Him away, tell me and I will take Him away. O woman’s love! O burning desire! Nothing truly is holier than true charity. But how did it come into her mind to take Him for the gardener? Certainly the sepulcher was located in a garden; but perhaps it is not absurd to designate by that name the first and true cultivator of paradise.

^C XVIII. When, therefore, Mary was thus searching for the body, running here and there, and His address touched her heart and marrow, a single voice turned the blessed woman’s eyes to the knowledge of the truth and called her by name: “Mary!” And when this sweet and familiar voice was heard, at the word she turned quickly: “Rabbouni,” she said, which is interpreted, “Master”; and she desired at the same time to touch His beautiful feet.

XIX. For after she had recognized Him by the help of her eyes and ears, and wished to be made more certain by touch—which, indeed, is passed over in silence in the Gospel—she hears: “Do not touch me.” For how would He have said this if He had not perceived that she was about to touch Him? “Do not touch me.” For after you touched Me with the other Mary, and were deemed worthy of so great a gift, you should not ^D deem it a small matter...

^A but, just as you sought me as a man in the sepulcher, recognize that I sit at the right hand of the Father; stand off; do not touch me; for in accordance with your thought, I have not yet ascended to my Father. Furthermore, he elevates her mind so that she may not think of him as a man, as at first, but also as God; for this reason he said, "I have ascended," as if to heaven, where my Father also dwells in a distinct way. "But go to my brothers, and tell them all that you have learned." Maria comes now a third time, and does not say as before, that he has risen, or even a second time, that they have taken away the Lord from the monument. "But," he says, "Mary Magdalene comes announcing to the disciples that she has seen the Lord, and these things he said to her." You have now also a third arrival of hers at the monument, early while it was still dark. But let the marvelous Mark record the fourth for me. "When the Sabbath had passed," he says, "Mary Magdalene, and Mary of James, and Salome, bought aromatic spices, so that coming they might anoint Jesus, while the sun had risen, [and they asked,] 'Who will roll away for us the ^B stone from the door of the monument?'" and the things that follow.

XX. But at this place it is possible for me to be perplexed: how does Magdalene, already convinced for the third time, go again to the tomb and say, together with the others, "Who will roll away the stone for us?" It is clear that she does not go as one doubting, but rather as one who will be a guide to the others, and who will narrate the things that have happened, and as having taken courage ^C from her arrival. Moreover, it is likely that she did not say, "Who will roll away the stone for us?" but rather Salome, who had not yet arrived at the tomb, and had only heard by report that a stone had been placed at the door of the tomb. For as Mark records, "Having risen early, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons"; and as Matthew [states], she was the first to see the earthquake and the stone rolled away from the tomb, and the angel sitting upon it; and as John says, "On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene comes early while it was still dark to the tomb, and sees the stone taken away from the tomb." If we do not grant that these things were said by Salome, we might drift into an abyss of contradiction; which is not reasonable.

XXI. Having therefore seen the stone removed from the monument (for it was also very large), and having gone inside the tomb (for the tombs among the Jews are very spacious), they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus; and being in ^D perplexity, they see men standing by them in shining garments, and having heard heavily, "Do you seek Jesus the Nazarene, the crucified? He has risen, he is not here"; having returned, he says, they reported all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. But being a mixed multitude, they were reproached; for their words, he says, appeared like folly. Others say that then Peter, having been moved somehow slightly, rose alone and ran to the monument. But Mark writes: "But he,

after they had gone out quickly, those around Joanna and Salome, the Marys, fled from the monument and said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid." ^A Thus, then, Magdalene, being the first to behold the resurrection, is also the first to bring the good news to the apostles, and she assists Eve in the befitting manner, announcing joy to the world. And such are the commemorations of the blessed Magdalene in the writings of the holy Gospels.

XXII. What occurred after the resurrection?

XXIII. After this, the holy women being gathered in the upper room with the apostles, devoted themselves to prayer.

^A XXIV. After some time had passed, the house of Sion held her, together with the Virgin who knew not a man, in the dwelling of the beloved disciple, just as the holy Gospel relates. But when the apostles had distributed the inhabited world among themselves by lot, and one was sent here and another there, and the dogma of the faith was already being proclaimed under the sun, she, breathing terribly against the murderers of God and being filled with zeal, lived for a little while with the Virgin, and having spent a short time with her, she departs, having associated only with her and the disciple who leaned upon the breast, and she conceives the plan to arrive in Rome, intending to receive from Caesar justice for the handling of the Master, woe to the ungrateful ones! Indeed, she dares so great a length of the journey, not considering the ways of women, O what burning zeal and steadfastness! carrying neither wallet, nor purse, nor anything else with her, but having seized the apostolic life, she set out on her journey. It is not at all uncertain that she was not neglectful of the things of the teaching; rather, she placed this before all things, saying some things and doing others, and giving faith to the word, both because it fell to her to see the mysterious things first, and because she was for others the leader of such a proclamation. And who could say how many ^B dreadful things befell her on the road? And what a multitude she catches in the net of the Gospel? Those who immerse themselves in the books of the Italians know these things, among whom great gifts from God to the blessed woman have been preserved even until now. But when she had come into the presence of Tiberius Caesar, she achieved that which she intended; and all went well as she had wished, and it went better than anyone could have thought; and those who dared to perform those crimes—I mean Annas, and Caiaphas, and Pontius Pilate—suffered what they deserved to suffer, as it is possible to hear from writers who are lovers of the truth. Then, having given the counsel that the believers should hold fast to the faith with perseverance, she left Rome and traveled through all of Italy, and the neighboring regions of Gaul; then she approached Phoenicia and Syria, and furthermore Pamphylia, having entered into them, and having sown the word of the faith for all, she returns again to Palestine after a long interval, and having spent a short time with the Virgin and Theotokos, she goes into Asia. For there she had heard that the virgin and beloved disciple, who had obtained the Gospel as his portion, was dwelling; she was carrying to him a ^C certain extraordinary burden: the red stone upon which the tradition says the life-giving Christ was laid in a manner befitting the dead after the descent from the divine wood, and was wrapped in a linen cloth by Joseph the honorable, to whom it is also miraculous to behold: for even now, the tears of the Mother of God appear everywhere like clots of blood, and as she, lamenting, fell upon her Son, which also turn the color of the stone to a gray hue; which stone was later transported from there to the city of Constantine, upon the shoulders ^D of pious emperors. XXV. Having sufficiently lived with him, and having become a guide to many toward the knowledge of the truth, and having kept the faith well and as was necessary, and having finished the course, and having deposited much glory concerning herself in the souls of all, consumed by a short illness she departed into eternal and blessed life, her soul...

^A entrusted into the hands of God, and her body, which was venerable even to the angels themselves, left to the beloved disciple, with whom she had carried out her ardent struggles and fervent loves for Christ. Wherefore, having been snatched away by a blessed death, as she deserved, she was duly wrapped by the Virgin and the disciple, and was buried in a hidden cave near Ephesus, as a most precious treasure, truly worthy of the celestial bridal chamber.

XXVI. To find a strong woman seemed to wise Solomon a thing most difficult; ^B but to us, from the time we have known this saint, it seems otherwise. For we see that she alone of all women performed deeds of men, and this so much so that she is not to be considered inferior to any of those who have shone forth in famous deeds. But if we compare her with those who have become illustrious for their noble acts, we shall easily show how greatly she surpassed the others in fortitude of soul and in other virtues. ^C If we wish to reproach Eve for anything, it must be said that she sinned by transgressing the commandment, and that, instigated by the counsel of the evil serpent, she seduced her husband—together with other things that are connected with the first sin. But out of reverence for our first mother I pass these over, yet it is enough to prove her superiority by the single example of Magdalene. For Eve, walking in paradise toward evening, once she knew the presence of God, hid herself from shame. Magdalene, walking in the garden toward dawn, asked for the Lord, whom she believed to be the gardener; she touched his beautiful feet, and, upon recognizing his voice, ^D she drew herself closer. I omit to say that Magdalene compensated for Eve’s sin, when the voice was heard: "Rejoice," which is the opposite of the lamentation. Sarah and Rebecca became great because they lived with the patriarchs. But for Magdalene it was most useful to converse with Him in whom they had faith, and to continue the discipleship until the end. Famous, too, is the sister of Moses, Miriam, who, after the crossing of the Red Sea, danced and celebrated God with hymns, striking the timbrel with the virgins. But Magdalene is far more famous, because she saw with her own eyes the very things that the other celebrated in song, and she announced the resurrection of Christ to the apostles and to the whole world as if with a timbrel. Deborah, woman and mistress of the Jewish nation, gained fame from the victory reported over enemies and her military deeds. Magdalene, on the other hand, made illustrious the report that she published of the evangelical history, and she won a victory over enemies who flee from the sight of the eyes. Anna, who had previously been sterile, brought seven children to light; she, however, inflamed with burning zeal and love for the Bridegroom, was not only liberated from the seven demons by which she was possessed, but she also brought forth and travailed through the fear of God—things which are opposed to those of Isaiah—and she conceived in a spiritual womb, and, what ought to be seen as the greatest of all things, she consecrated herself to God, in a marvelous way imitating the Queen of the South. For, led by love for the true and first wisdom, Christ, like the pacific Solomon and

^A gentle one, she approaches Him, and she admired the wisdom and grace that grew in Him, or rather, which was in Him by nature. You praise the hospitality of the widow of Zarephath and the Shunammite toward holy men, their ungrudging table, and the cruse of oil that never failed; praise also her life, consecrated to the service of her neighbor; praise the ointments which she shared by anointing the Holy of Holies, who sleeps the life-giving sleep, which even now are poured forth and flow everywhere by their fame. ^B She surpassed the zeal of Jael and Judith, for the former pierced the throat of Sisera with a nail, while the latter took off the head of the Assyrian Holofernes. And not only were Pilate and Caiaphas and Annas—who had plotted against Christ and became a sacrifice by the order of Caesar—defeated by her, but also those who deemed it necessary to cooperate with them, the Scribes and Pharisees, I know that you all hear. And why need I recount those who follow—Susanna, Esther, Salome? For she surpassed all of them entirely in temperance, in concern for the nation, and in endurance for Christ and because of Christ. She excelled all those who came after the grace, as many as were adorned with the crown of martyrdom, and those whose lives were distinguished by an ascetic way of life, by the very fact of seeing, beholding, and serving Christ, the true bridegroom ^C and lover of these souls. Yet I have something to say even more succinctly: for what the apostles are among all the saints, that is the Magdalene among the women who have lived pleasingly to God; for she vied with some, surpassed others, and became a pattern of life for all.

XXVII.

of every kind, to those who approach them with longing, and most effective intercessors with God, if indeed there is nothing more familiar than a disciple and a friend.

^A XXVIII. We dedicate this discourse to you for the sake of honor, O venerable disciple of the Word; we confer these first-fruits of speech and grace upon you, as one most worthy of such things. For since you yourself possess the greatest gift of eloquence, it is fitting that I, to the best of my ability, should bring forward something, at least in simple speech, in your honor. But if the work which I began twenty years ago is less than worthy of my powers and your glory, I beg you to overlook my simple discourse and forgive my temerity with that same indulgence with which your Master embraced the words and deeds of his friends and familiars; and support my words with your supplications. Then, perhaps, we shall be able to speak something worthy of your virtue; in the true Word, Christ our God, to whom is due glory, fortitude, honor, adoration, and veneration, with his eternal Father, and his holy, generous, and life-giving Spirit, now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS: PRAYERS

^C Prayer of the most holy Patriarch Callistus in a time of calamity for the people.

Note that these present prayers may also be recited in times of pestilential disease.

Lord and God, author of mercy and of all goodness, God of the miserable, Father of compassions, haven of sympathy, inexhaustible fount of clemency, you who govern all things by wisdom, who bind and again set free, who humble and again lift up; you who resist the proud, but give grace to the humble, by whose power all creation is preserved, both intellectual and sensible; whose judgments are a great abyss, ^D and whose ways are inscrutable; by whose Spirit all things are moved, in whose hand is the breath of all the living; to whom the stars are obedient, to whom all things are subject, and whom all creation serves; whom all the spiritual powers tremble before and celebrate with ceaseless praises; whom all things, even with mute voices, glorify; for you are the true Sun of justice, God, who form all things and by your sole clement will and benevolent nod transform all things: look upon your people, sinful and despairing, and enrich your...

rue Sun of justice, God, who form all things and by your sole clement will and benevolent nod transform all things: look upon your people, sinful and despairing, and enrich your ^A mercy toward them. Spare your inheritance, spare your people, spare the vine which your right hand has planted; and since you have your innate goodness interceding for us, remember the blood of your servants so often shed; remember your holy altars trampled by profane feet and consumed by fire; remember the pitiable age of children delivered into captivity by the impious, and by a foolish judgment abjuring their paternal religion and enrolled under the devil; and restrain now the rod of sinners raised against the just. For your holy name's sake, and for the sake of the ineffable mercy poured forth from your goodness, do not deliver us to the end. Grant to our Christ-loving king rest from this prevailing calamity, and security from civil tumult and sedition; strengthen his arm, subject the rebels to him, and compose all his armies into one concord and peace; and render him superior to all the machinations ^B of visible and invisible enemies. Send from your holy habitation an angel as a guardian to fight for your king, and grant him a realm composed and pacified in profound tranquility: so that in his peace your holy nation may lead a tranquil and quiet life, and finally, having dissipated by your unconquerable hand every other tumult and machination rising against the emperor, grant him a long life. Through the prayers of the most glorious and above all blessed Lady our Theotokos, of the ministers free from matter, and of all the saints who have pleased you from the beginning. Amen.

Another prayer of the same, in the affliction of the people

alone knowest and understandest, being known by them; that through us, thy worthless servants, thy all-holy name may be glorified: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Another similar prayer of the same author.

^A O all-good Lord, Creator of the universe, whose mercy is immeasurable and whose loving-kindness is inconceivable; who hast taken away all our iniquities and nailed them to the Cross, that thou mightest sanctify us, sinless and exempt from every stain: trusting in thee, we fall before thee in supplication, O long-suffering Lord, and contemplating the sea of thy unutterable and immeasurable loving-kindness, we cry out unto thee, the Lord easy to be reconciled: Save us. We do not offer our chants and hymns in the manner of a Pharisee, but in the manner of the publican; nor do we cry out like that wicked thief, but like that other, the grateful and thankful one, we cry out: Remember me. Therefore, let thy unsearchable mercy overcome our iniquities, and even if we turn and repent not as we ought, yet show forth in us the magnitude of thy loving-kindness. Have compassion and be reconciled, as one long-suffering, to thy people; stay the sickle of death, that it may not be sharpened against us; stay its swift and untimely cutting. Stay this just destruction of the pestilential disease; stay the sword raised against us, that we may not perish. For ^B against thee alone have we sinned. But also to thee alone do we fall down. Yea, O Lord, hearken unto us, thy sinful and worthless servants, in this hour, and do not cast away our prayers. Overlook our transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, those in knowledge and in ignorance, that thy all-holy name may be glorified also in us: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Another prayer similar to the others, of the same author.

O Lord easy to be reconciled, long-suffering and all-merciful, Author of every creature, both rational and intellectual; who didst grant being to all things out of nothing, and didst provide for our well-being; do not look down upon us, who fall before thy inconceivable goodness with praises and hymns bearing thanksgiving; and do not cast away our prayers and supplications for reconciliation; but look down from thy holy habitation, and behold, and visit this vine which thy right hand hath planted; and deliver us from this grievous and pestilential disease, from the cutting of death, that is, of both soul and body. For this fearful and unexpected calamity not only mortally strikes and corrupts bodies, ^D but also utterly destroys souls, as we are disposed toward impenitence and have stumbled against thee, our God. Therefore, we beseech thee and pray thee, that thou wouldest hearken to the prayer and supplication of thy people, and turn thy wrath away from us. Yea, O Lord, be not angry with us forever, nor prolong thy just indignation conceived against us; for none can stand before thee, or speak with confidence, nor shall any living be justified before thee. For all the righteousness of man is as a menstruous cloth,

no living man shall be justified in thy sight. For all the righteousness of man is as a filthy garment, according to the most eloquent Isaiah. For the mountains and the hills, held by the fear of thee, are shaken and tremble. Cease, therefore, O Lord, from thy wrath against us; turn away our captivity from the servitude of the ungodly; but also [change] that captivity ^A which happens in the mind, by the tempest and storm of temptations under the intellectual Pharaoh. For we are not able, being sinners in both respects, to sing to thee a song of thanksgiving in a strange land. Be mindful of us, O Lord, in mercy and compassions; send forth to us a faithful guardian angel, to whom our life is entrusted, that he may deliver us from this terrifying scourge of death, and from this unexpected sword ^B. So that, through this deliverance and relief, we may glorify thee, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the one divinity and kingdom, to whom is due all glory, honor, and worship, unto the ages. Amen.

Another prayer of the same, for the Christian people.

We beseech thee, and we pray to thee intensely, O God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that with a propitious eye thou mayest look upon thy people and upon thine inheritance, moved with compassion for us; and that it may please thee to restore our land, ^C which has been laid waste by reason of our iniquities, and has become captive and slave to the enemy, to its former liberty, just as once to that ancient Jacob, who bore the figure of thy only-begotten Son, thou didst restore to their own country all the inhabitants in the possession of the promised goods, by thy good pleasure and will. For, using thy customary love to man toward them, thou forgavest all their iniquities, didst appease thy wrath, and didst turn away the force of thy fury from them. Turn us, therefore, O our God, and grant us to be diligent in thy saving commandments; ^D turn thy wrath from us, and be not angry with us forever, nor extend thy wrath from generation to generation. O God, do thou turn and revive us, and thy people shall rejoice in thee. Show us thy mercy, and we shall hear of peace and exultation in thee. Yea, O Lord, hear us thy sinful and unprofitable servants in this hour, that glory and peace may dwell in our land. For trusting in thy help and aid, we the unworthy hope that mercy and truth shall go before our face. For besides thee we know no other, we call upon thy name; and do not turn us away to the end, but arise and stand up for the help of us sinners and humble ones, and, as one who is not mindful of wrongs and who repents over our wickednesses, turn our captivity. Still the storm of our calamities; forgive us our transgressions, so that in the relief from calamities, we may praise thee, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, with thy only-begotten Son, and with thy holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages.

Alie ejusdem oratio in imperatorem, et in ejus exercitum. ^A

Another prayer for the emperor and his army

Lord our God, who alone by the word of Thy wisdom created all things, and by Thy ineffable power didst bring them from nothing into being, and joining and gathering them into one—for all things are possible to Thee, and nothing is impossible to Thee; and for this reason, having joined and harmonized the seasons and times and years according to Thy will, and adorned this visible world, Thou who didst spread out the heaven and decorate it with colors, as Thou didst also that tabernacle through Moses, and didst establish that multitude and numberless race of Jews in order and concord, and didst set Moses over them as leader through Thy right hand and mighty arm. And having given them one authority, and kept them unharmed under Thy shelter and mighty hand, Thou who didst place the sun for the light of the day, and the moon for the rule of the night, who didst condense the multitude of stars in the firmament with stability, and gavest them their unceasing motion, and didst arrange them in order to keep their work by Thy command, so that they might not injure us at all, but might tirelessly turn in their course and motion according to Thy will, Thou who didst paint the earth, which before was invisible and obscure, suddenly brought into light for the human race with manifold beauty; Thou who, by Thy power, having been companion to Abraham, with all enemies subdued before them, on the journey... ^B Christian princes have been accustomed, no less than with arms, to take up prayer when they are about to lead out an army and join battle with their enemies. This example of piety and subjection toward God, whose successful advantage in wars is a gift, Constantine, the first among Christian princes distinguished by the royal name, left to us, who, as Eusebius relates (Life of him, book IV, ch. 4), according to his custom before the start of battle, in a separate tent (a tabernacle, namely, constructed in the likeness of a church and guarded by priests and deacons) dedicated the time to pouring out prayers to God. For he said it was not proper to rely on spears and place the hope of his affairs in arms or the strength of bodies, but to acknowledge God as the author of all things, of all good, and of life itself, to whom it is fitting to render established prayers with hands stretched out to heaven and the eyes of the mind raised on high. Let us implore Him in our prayers as the giver of victory and preserver, our guardian and helper. He himself prescribed the formula of praying to all the soldiers, and commanded that all should pray in the Latin tongue as follows: We acknowledge Thee the only God, we profess Thee as king, we call upon Thee as helper; through Thee we have achieved victories, through Thee we overcome enemies; from Thee we confess we have obtained our present prosperity, and hope that we shall obtain our future success. We are all Thy suppliants; from Thee we ask that Thou preserve our emperor Constantine, together with his pious children, safe and victorious for us for a very long time. He established that prayers of this kind should be made by the soldiers on the Lord’s day ^C and that such voices should be used by them in divine prayers.

Influenced by such instruction, the emperors have hardly ever, or never, set out on an expedition without first having offered prayer; which piety of theirs Zonaras, Gregoras (book V), Nicetas (book VI), and others celebrate, that their irruption against enemies might be consecrated by ecclesiastical blessings and every sacred impulse, according to the words of Gregoras (book III). And following the example of Constantine, Simocatta described the Emperor Maurice long ago (book V, last chapter) as pouring forth prayers throughout the night in a vast temple of the Christian religion, and the following day spending the whole time in supplications with the people at the house of the Mother of God, and partaking of the heavenly banquet, so that he might rush against the enemies more robustly. Returning to Byzantium, and having received the joyful news: He observed an all-night vigil in the greatest temple of the city, then going away to supplication with the people, he prayed to God that He might grant more illustrious trophies. And what Cedrenus wrote concerning Constantine, the son of Leo the Philosopher, as he was about to go to battle, you may believe was said of every other. The Emperor Constantine goes out to Mount Olympus, that he might be armed with the prayers of the Fathers who lived there, to undertake an expedition against the Saracens. But because, as Simocatta left written concerning Maurice: The wood of the cross of Christ is carried aloft on a golden spear, and precedes the emperor and the soldiers gathered around: a prayer of this kind to be recited at the sign is subjoined. ^D

and having uncovered the darkness, and having reshaped it into beauty for the sake of human nature, You who once accompanied that Abraham with Your divine power, ^A and delivered his enemies into his hand; You who strengthened Gideon, and crushed and annihilated the opposing forces; You who gave strength to the king and prophet David against that ancient Goliath, and finally destroyed him; You who through Your servant Moses liberated the race of the Hebrews from bitter servitude, and by Your invincible power and mighty hand drowned Pharaoh and his entire army, and sent him into the depths of the sea, and showed them the pillar of fire as a guide, so that their feet might not stumble; do You now also, O holy King of glory, send forth from Your holy dwelling-place, from the throne of the glory of Your kingdom, a pillar which is luminous and most brilliant, for the guidance and victory of my most powerful and holy emperor against enemies both visible and invisible; and strengthen him with Your right hand, and the faithful slaves and servants journeying with him, and grant him a peaceful and untroubled reign, and one superior to every sedition and civil war. Yes, O Lord God of mercy, hearken to me, Your humble and unworthy servant, in this hour, and strengthen him with Your invincible and unconquerable power, and strengthen his armies everywhere, and dissolve the hostile uprisings of those who are rising up against his authority. Bind them together in concord and righteous submission, and bestow upon him deep and undisturbed peace on land and at sea, and provide all things for his benefit; so that, having cast off the wars and commotions that are being stirred up, we may with one mouth and one heart glorify You, the God of wonders. For You are the King of peace and Savior of our souls, and to You we send up the glory, to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Another prayer of the same, for the elevation of the precious and life-giving Cross.

Lord our God, who didst deign to send forth Thy only-begotten Son, who was prepared to suffer all things for the salvation of our race, ^D and didst will that He endure the cross and death, so that He might deliver us from the bitter tyranny of death, and might lift up all to Himself through the adoration of the precious and life-giving cross, that invincible and unconquerable weapon; we beseech and entreat You, O Father of the self-subsistent and co-eternal Word who is to be glorified with You, that through such a life-giving cross, the Christian [race may be joined in one concord, granting to...]

and gather the nations into one consensus; and to the pious emperors who love Christ, grant not only ^A victory over invisible enemies, but also over those visible ones who oppose their power. For through the Cross, hell has been despoiled, the gates of paradise have been opened, the way to heaven has been made free, and we expect to attain a seat at the right hand of the Most High. Through it, the air has been sanctified, creation has been renewed, and all things heavenly and earthly have been compacted into one Church. Through it, kings reign; through it, the choir of martyrs, the company of pontiffs, the glory of monks, the ornament of priests, the honesty of women, and all things of this kind are governed, as is the worship of the Cross itself.

Yes, Lord our God, Father of mercies, fountain of pity, and unsearchable abyss of loving-kindness, hear me, a sinner and your unworthy servant, in this hour, and constrain the rod of sinners now stretched out against the lot of the righteous and against the portion of your desired inheritance, and do not deliver us to the end for your holy name’s sake; but to our emperor who loves Christ, grant a relaxation of the calamities that beset him, and a deliverance from the stresses, tumults, and seditions encroaching upon him. Strengthen his arm, confirm his kingdom, extend the borders of his empire, and bring those who rise up against him under his feet. Surround him with angelic hosts, grant him profound and secure peace, so that we too, having shaken off all battles and tumults, may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all piety and honesty, with one heart and one mouth ^C praising and celebrating you, our only true God; by the power of the precious and life-giving Cross, and by the intercessions of the Theotokos, who is blessed above all, and of all the saints. Amen.

Another prayer of the same author at the dedication of a holy temple

Lord our God, who by your word alone have brought all creation into being, and have adorned it in an ineffable manner beyond reason; who gathered your Spirit over the expanse, and poured out the solar light upon it at its beginning; who inspired your servant Moses to add some excellent praise to your most excellent handiwork, so that he said that you saw the light, that it was good, and called it a day: which we, also contemplating, and seeing this most bright sun initiating all creation with every day, celebrate you as the author of the true day and the light that knows no setting, you who through your Son willed for our nature to be consecrated by your Holy Spirit, so that in your house the righteous might shine more than the sun itself: we pray and beseech you, Father of the Word and Lord our God, that after your ineffable humanity and immense mercy, since the whole creation has received its beginning, and the old law in the new Testament ^D

received ^A a figure, through your divine manifestation on Mount Sinai, and in that wondrous bush, and in the tabernacle of testimony, and in that most beautiful temple of Solomon; so may you, with a propitious eye, look upon us, your sinful and unworthy servants, who inhabit this house reaching to the heavens, the pride of the inhabited world, the true altar of your ineffable glory; and send down your all-holy Spirit upon us and upon your inheritance, and according to the divine David, "renew a right spirit within our hearts," and "strengthen us with a princely spirit." And grant to our emperors trophies and victories against visible and invisible enemies, and to us, concord and peace; and to those who have brought about this structure and the dedication of the temple through divine love and with diligence, grant the forgiveness of their transgressions. Grant them petitions conducive to salvation, stir all to the fulfillment of your commandments, and bestow the initiation of the gift of your holy Spirit, that they may without condemnation worship you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent, through the prayers of the Theotokos and of all your saints. Amen.

Another prayer of the same for the dedication of a temple.

Pre-eternal Word, and only-begotten Son of God, true God, Creator of every creature, both sensible and intelligible, who didst adorn this creation in all wisdom; who didst bring together the moist and unformed nature of the waters above the earth into one gathering and collection, and by your divine Spirit moving above the waters, didst decorate the whole earth and consecrate the entire world; who didst also initiate that tabernacle of testimony skillfully crafted through Moses, and didst consecrate it with your holy Spirit; who didst command the wise Solomon to build a house holy and glorious to your ineffable and unutterable glory, and dedicate it with your holy Spirit, and didst grant to all the observers of that council of the Jews to be witnesses of the glory that then covered it and the grace of your holy Spirit; we beseech you and pray to you, Word without beginning, and Son of the Father who is without beginning, that in this hour also you would send down upon us the grace of ^D your all-holy Spirit, and establish and strengthen this temple now raised for your glorification and praise, guarding it until the consummation of the ages; and that you would dedicate it with your holy Spirit, so that we, offering to you in it the bloodless sacrifices, may become partakers of the holy Spirit, who is renewed in our inmost parts, and who strengthens the ruling faculty of our mind, and who mystically provides for the offering of spiritual sacrifices through the purification of the mind to you, our Master God, for the glory and honor of your Father who is without beginning and immortal, and of you, his only-begotten Son, and of the all-holy, and good, and life-creating Spirit; now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS: CONFESSIONAL PRAYER TO OUR CREATOR AND MAKER

In which are noted all corrupt human passions.

I reveal my soul before you, Father, Lord, Maker of heaven ^A and earth, compassionate, long-suffering, lover of mankind, all-good, long-suffering, most merciful, lover of good, most sympathetic, kind and merciful God. You know, you are aware of our weakness, and even more so of mine, a sinner, and unworthy of heaven and earth, that I am entirely filth and corruption, transgressing your holy commandments and your ordained dictates every day and every hour. And before your impartial and fearful judgment seat, my conscience convicts me that there is no sin that I have not committed, in word, in deed, in the deliberation of my mind, in perverse contemplation, through all my senses; and, to put it simply, I have squandered my whole life, shamefully and profligately, behaving in a disorderly manner. And your all-good grace has endured this, for I am not capable | at any hour of looking upon your light, and of enjoying your works, which were wisely fashioned for my sake, the unworthy one, whereby I have provoked and angered your all-holy and saving name. For what is there among the terrible things in life that I have not done with every member of my body? But since your mercy is infinite, and your goodness is unsearchable, and your forbearance and long-suffering toward me, a sinner, have endured even to this day, do not abandon me to the end. For you are the one who wills all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of their deeds, for whose sake also your only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, through ineffable mercy

^A did descend from heaven, enter the Virgin's womb, ^B then undergo the blows, the crucifixion, and the burial.

I, indeed, have sinned more than all, and have exceeded all in transgressions. By me, then, the greater part has been done; wherefore let your wonderful mercy also be manifested in me. For your good pleasure and dispensation, and his ineffable condescension, are for the sake of sinners. You know, you understand the secrets of my heart. Do not, therefore, set before my face the sins I have committed in word, in deed, in thought, in reflection, by night, by day, willingly, unwillingly, openly, secretly, from impulse, from study, from long-standing and temporary habit, in every day and hour and moment and twinkling of an eye, and to speak simply, in every movement and disposition of mine, both bodily and mental. You know, you know, O Lord, that there is no other upon the earth as I am in sins and profligacy and lewdness, and it is impossible to find another who has lived according to my deeds, from the time you brought forth this whole universe and established it from non-existence by the command of your authority. I have become like the arch-evil Satan beyond my forefathers; I have transgressed your immortal and holy commandments, and have cast myself out from the [paradise of] delight. I have become a fratricide, worse than Cain, having killed my soul through the body; I have surpassed Lamech, having drowned my mind and myself under a deluge of shameful pleasures; I have sinned more than those wretched ones in the deluge. The Sodomites are as nothing compared to the excess of my evils; I became an Egyptian and stiff-necked against your words, like Pharaoh, transgressing your law more than the Ninevites. What are the transgressions of Manasseh or the sin of David compared to my acts? I have sinned more than the thief, more than the publican, I have lived worse than the prodigal son, more than Peter I have denied you, more than the impenitent—to speak simply, more than all, and I have become likened to the leaders of wickedness, to the foul and evil demons, following in all their desires. ^C But do you show your mercies upon me; it is time for your ocean of goodness to appear. Work with me a sign for good, an abyss of long-suffering and goodness. I have sinned as no one else, I have transgressed as no other. I desire to repent, and I am not able to hold to my pacts even for one hour. I have sinned more than the hairs of my head. You alone are long-suffering, you are most merciful, and your philanthropy is transcendent. And now, show your mercy to one who has sinned most greatly. For this is why your compassion and goodness are beyond nature, because you save one who has sinned beyond nature. There is no sin that overcomes your mercy. Or rather, what am I saying? Your ocean of philanthropy is limitless, your long-suffering and goodness are incomparable and incomprehensible. But my offenses, even though they are most great and incomparable, compared to the unsearchable and limitless ocean of your compassion, are reckoned as a mere drop—and not mine alone, but also theirs who have sinned from the beginning of the world and more than I, if by any chance there is anyone who has surpassed me in evils. For this reason, I run to you, my good Master,

and Creator, and Supplier of my life, and I confess to you, my merciful God, what I have done. But you, putting forth your customary mercy, show upon me your ancient mercies, and have compassion on me, who have sinned more than all others in both deed and disposition; the arrogant, the proud, the vain-glorious, the high-minded, the haughty, the lifted-up, the disdainful, the self-willed, the lover of power, the ungrateful, the unthankful, the lover of the world, the soft, the quarrelsome, the fornicator, the profane, the abandoned, the base, the filthy, the lustful, the corrupter, the voluptuous, the licentious, the passionate, the lawless, the lover of money, the usurer, the lover of pleasure, the glutton, the greedy, the spendthrift, the self-indulgent, the insatiable, the drunkard, the slanderer, the unquiet, the slothful, the sleepy, the negligent, the grumbler, the deceitful, the curious, the envious, the malicious, the devilish, the murderer, the robber, the thief, the unjust, the extortioner, the covetous, the irascible, the hard-hearted, the unbending, the liar, the lover of shameful gain, the miser, the rancorous, the insubordinate, the disobedient, the backbiter, the babbler, the reviler, the whisperer, the jester, the foul-mouthed, the perjurer, the ironical, the deceiver, the insolent, the passionate, the vengeful, the impudent, the bitter, the unsympathetic, the merciless, the unfeeling, the evil, the vindictive, ^B the uncharitable, the inhospitable, the irreconcilable, the friendless, the contentious, the warlike, the quarrelsome, the reproachful, the drunkard, the intriguer, the troublesome, the lover of life, the low-minded, [the one who is] idle, fickle, vain, foolish, hypocritical, contemptible, devoid of forgiveness, hater of the good, hater of brothers, hater of virtue, unfinished, base, blasphemous, unclean, disobedient, self-condemned, impenitent, condemned, unredeemable, inexcusable, who has committed every kind of licentiousness and lawlessness, both in soul and body, and for this reason, am unworthy of all your philanthropy and compassion. Righteous indeed you are, O Lord, and I proclaim it with my tongue; but your philanthropy always triumphs, and bends from this to that. Do not, therefore, reprove me in your wrath. For if you, Lord, should observe iniquities, who shall stand? We do not, then, ignore that my guilt is greater than to be forgiven, because I have sinned more than all, and my iniquities have gone over my head, and my transgressions have multiplied more than the hairs of my head, or rather, even than the sand itself. I have defiled my [likeness] according to your image, I have rendered useless the garment of my soul, the lamp of my grace is extinguished, my lips are stained, I have falsified the light with absurd and irrational sights, seeking falsehood and vanity. O how many times, having repented, did I set myself in order, and yet, lying, I was found to be despising the wealth of your goodness toward me! O how many times in churches have I promised to lay aside my base deeds, and having gone out, I fall into the same and worse evils, as if forgetting my vows and my [hidden] and filthy state. Therefore, use, O Master,

thy innate mercy, the sea of the abyss and thine ineffable goodness. For just as my transgressions cannot be numbered, so is thy mercy and thy philanthropy ^B overflowing beyond measure. Therefore, in proportion to my transgressions, pour out upon me gratis thine inexhaustible goodness, for my mind is ever diligently set upon evil things. Remember what my substance is, that I am but breath, and I have been made like unto vanity; my days have vanished like smoke. Remember that I was conceived in sins; but with thee there is propitiation; save me for the sake of thy mercy. For having walked behind the desires of my flesh, I have become a mockery to the demons, wallowing throughout my whole life in the mire of bodily pleasures, by which, blinded and destitute of thy philanthropy from my youth, I have, until now, been led astray and enticed, ^B never having willed to follow thy commands, not considering that the wrath of thy threat against sinners is irresistible, nor being chastened by the edge of death and thy just judgment. For what shameful act have I not committed with excess and the greatest haste, feigning excuses in sins, polluting my mind with shameful thoughts, defiling my body with unclean acts, and rendering my spirit useless by evil consents? I alone have provoked thy wrath and kindled thine anger. Who then shall lament for me, who shall weep for me, the wretched one? Thou art a sympathetic and easily reconciled God of mercy and compassion, having an innate sea of philanthropy and ^C thy goodness, show it to me, do not snatch me away unrepentant, nor let me be that barren tree, that I may not become a spectacle to angels and men, and a pillar and example of evil to others, because of the sharp condemnation and cutting off of those being chastened. Open thy door to me as I knock, stretch out thy hand to me as I am sinking; for an abyss of pleasures tosses me about. For if thy philanthropy does not interpose, all that I do is as nothing. A great tyrant stands against me, the enemy, my own nature, my wicked disposition and habit. Already the time of my life has failed, the harvest of death is near, the sickle is sharpened, the axe has reached my root, and I have made progress toward the worse; the thief digs through the wall of my soul, the common enemy seeks, as a lion, to devour me entirely. The way is ready, the appointed day is fulfilled, the handwriting is ^D at hand, the accusers are like relentless executioners, the yoke is prepared, and I, the wretched one, am being tossed, and yet I do not even perceive it. Woe is me! What shall I become? Where shall I turn? Grant me repentance, O Master, and contrition for what has been done, and tears proportioned to the filth of my pleasures. Do not snatch me away unprepared, do not snatch me away without confession. Thou seest the assault of my wretched flesh, and my furnace of thoughts, flaming and overheated, and the evil habit, the inclination toward worse things. Save me through thy infinite mercy alone, have mercy on me for thy great and

^A bottomless abyss of readiness. Call me, then, in my misery, and receive me as I call upon thee; when I turn back, embrace me; heal the irreparable state of my soul, and save me by the judgment which thou knowest. I have no fervent tear, I have no true confession, nor anything else of that sort sufficient to call forth thy compassion. It is nothing strange if thou savest the righteous, if thou hast mercy on one who excels in virtue. But in me, who have sinned beyond measure, make thy mercy wonderful. For thou knowest the weakness of human nature; this thou didst clothe thyself in, being compassionate. Let not the multitude of my evils overcome thy immeasurable compassion. Overlook my iniquities, and as a Physician heal the incurable wounds of my soul. Thou seest the welts, or rather, my wound is over my whole body, and there is no balm to apply, nor oil, nor bandages. With thee alone, my master-craftsman God, to whom all things are easy—even things not yet brought into being—is it easy to heal these things, so that not even the slightest wound of wickedness remains. Save me, I cry again, for the sake of thy mercy, by which thou broughtest all things into being, by which thou hast descended to us who have sinned and provoked thee ten thousand times over. I am a debtor of ten thousand talents; forgive me the greater part, so that I may also love the more. I have sinned, O God, I have sinned against thee, I confess; but do not judge me according to my iniquities, nor turn thy face away from me, but let thy mercy be heard by me, or rather be heard clearly and be made manifest ^B by thy passion towards me. For thou art the God of those who repent, removing our iniquities from us as far as the East is from the West, and whitening our sins through repentance like snow and like wool. Therefore, whatever I have sinned from my youth until now, and whatever I may commit until the end of my life, forgive me, as thou art supremely good and merciful. And grant me time for repentance; grant me tears of contrition; brighten the lamp of my soul, which I dimmed and blackened by the subjects of my iniquities. And the former garment, the pure and undefiled one which I put on at baptism, clothe me with again, by thy visitation granting me boldness and a pledge of salvation from henceforth, and by the intercessions of the Mother who, without seed and in a supernatural manner, gave birth to thy Word, who is without beginning and before the ages; and of thy bodiless ministers; and of the honorable and glorious herald of repentance, prophet, Forerunner, and Baptist John; and of the holy and glorious and all-lauded apostles; and then of the second herald of repentance, John the all-wise and golden-mouthed; and of all those who from the ages have been well-pleasing to thee. For thou art blessed, together with thy Only-begotten Son, and thy life-creating and all-holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the unending ages of ages. Amen. ^{C D}

NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS: THE FALL OF JERUSALEM, AS JOSEPHUS RELATES IT

NICEPHORI CALLISTI XANTHOPULI DE EXCIDIO HIEROSOLYMITANO CARMEN IAMBICUM TRIMETRUM

The war having thus broken out openly, Vespasian was sent against the Judeans, And first he took all the surrounding cities, Among which were Jotapata and Joppe. But when he was about to attack the city itself, By the death of Nero he paused the war; He sent Titus hereafter to Galba. He learns, however, on the road of his (Galba's) end, Then Otho after him, and Vitellius again. Vespasian from that point took the sovereignty, And departs for Rome, having left Titus behind. He (Titus), having arrived, surveyed the city Which contained within—alas!—myriads of battles, And had received Simon the corrupter, Because of the sicarii and other evils. He therefore seized the entire strength of the temple. ^A Again an ambush of Romans against the Judeans. Titus clears the outlying areas, He gathers earthworks and branches by the city, Where the wall was quite level, There the attack of the rams was lofty. But the Hebrews cast fire upon the timber, For the wooden engine was fashioned by Titus, And the wall did not bear it, but broke through. Again, the ram (was brought) against the second wall, Its capture, and the flight of them once more; Famine pressing, a strange destruction of the people. The capture of the second wall (happened) here; The rebels were very hostile, Afflicting everything for the sake of the great famine. ^B Again Titus with raised earthworks, But again the tunnels of the Judeans, And a pillar and fire beneath the timbers. Titus then builds a great wall on the outside, Closing off every movement for the Hebrews on the outside. But the things of the famine—who could express them in words? The whole city was filled with how many corpses? How much gore and foul stench? How many, fleeing again to the enemy, Underwent destruction in a strange way! They swallowed gold, and then in excrement Evacuated it from their own bowels. ^C

The Romans were tearing apart many from [the enemy] there, Relying on their sixty myriads, Just as they would cast down those alone from above. Then they shake down the Antonia, And Sabinus has fallen, a man of noble spirit. At night the wall of the Antonia gave way; The Hebrews flee straight toward the temple, And a very intense battle had broken out, With a man of noble spirit falling in the battle, And the fire thereafter consumes the temple. The all-consuming strategy of famine Even persuaded mothers to eat their children, And fire was set once again at the gates of the house. Titus, meanwhile, kept ordering to quench the fire, Desiring to keep safe the sacred house of God. The rebels engage with the Romans, But are turned back; and again [the Romans] prevail. Titus urges them to save the people, Which was not at all pleasing to the army; And so the fire was consuming the whole house. Heaps of corpses thrown upon the ground, Surpassing number everywhere, and the fire burns. Others even cast themselves into the flame. Certain prodigies were symbols of the wickedness: A comet star resembling a sharp sword, And a light appeared at evening, extraordinary. And with a lamb, a sacrificial ox for God, The eastern gate opens of itself. And in the air, alas! [the phantom] of chariots, And at Pentecost, noises of shouting from above; And a certain man ran through the midst wailing, Alas, alas, crying out simply to all in the city! Who could express the profit of the scavengers? Titus says to the rebels inside To save themselves by abandoning their swords. From there, because they do not wish it, Titus again Lets his army loose to burn the city.

^A Titus gives the right hand [to the Jews] [who were] turning in the midst of the rebels, And keeps guard. But Simon drives away the fugitives. The Romans let the common folk go, But for the sake of plunder they sold the foreigners. Jesus the priest reveals many riches to the Romans, Along with robes of clothing. With the citadel above being moved by machines, The rebels flee toward the chasm below, And hiding themselves, they flee toward Siloam. But the power of the Romans oversees everything. Rejoicing, Titus encircled the city, Marveling at the walls, and pressing the struggle. The dead, I say, were one hundred and ten myriads in every battle. ^B And the captives were nine myriads, Together with seven thousands of the people, clearly. The rebels, साथ John and Simon, Having emerged from the famine to the ground below, Are handed over to the commander Rufus, And were brought to Rome in the midst of the people, Where finally they have their heads cut off. The Jews suffer evils in Antioch, A boundless host of wretches, From a race of common stock. Antiochus was a man evil in nature, From whom the crowds then, having rebelled, Destroy many of the Hebrews. Again the all-consuming fire was lit in the city, Antiochus, suspicious, into the middle guard, With many others of the race in dire straits. They announce the Jewish crowds to Titus, So that he might cast them out of Antioch quickly, And he is persuaded, indeed, sympathizing with the Jews. Once again, the destruction of Judea. Titus hastens back toward Rome, [And] Bassus the general arrives in Judea.

He captures many fortresses in the battle, among which is Machaerus, an extremely strong city, captured by the scourges of Eleazar. There also existed a large rue-plant, and a root that flashed at night like a beacon, by the tail of a woman, or rather by the tail of a dog, being pulled up without danger. Bassus, in the city of the forest of Jarden, desires to bring the whole matter to an end, with their fall and the army of the Romans. Then he dismisses the entire land, just as it was at the beginning for the Jews, to pay tribute to the Capitol of Rome. After Bassus died, Silas was general, who besieged the city of Masada with many mounds and battering rams and torches, while the Sicarii, led by Eleazar, gave counsel to burn the city with fire, and then to kill everyone with the Roman sword. And thus the strange portent is accomplished, except for a woman and some very young children. ^A Crinita stella similis ensi acerrimo. Eximia lux affulserat sub vesperam. Ad victimam vitulus et agnus visi erant, Porta ad orientalem plagam recluditur · Exercitus heu curruum per aerem!

All of them were destroyed by the sword. The general arrives, and marvels greatly at the endurance of the soul of the Hebrews. But the slaughter, in turn, for the Jews—in Alexandria, the factions of the Sicarii stirring up the mobs of the Hebrews, that they should not call Caesar master at all. Therefore, a great slaughter was poured out here. The calamity of the evil Sicarii arrives, even to the very places of Cyrene. Jonathan, fearing the rustic mob, [not daring] to approach him and see the portents, but being held, he stopped plotting those things. These, then, were the sufferings of Judea, having endured the final ruin by the Romans, especially because of the justice of Christ. Afterward, they revolt again while Hadrian is ruling in Rome with power. And they were utterly defeated by the sword again, many myriads having been visibly destroyed, so that very few remained alive. ^B Et vir vagans vicos per urbis fleverat Eheu! male omnibus ominatus incolis. Judæa clades has tulit gravissimas A Romuli expugnata tandem posteris, Ad vindicandam Messiæ illatam necem.

OF NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS XANTHOPULUS: SYNOPSIS OF DIVINE SCRIPTURE

Concerning the Holy Trinity

Concerning the Angels

Concerning Creation

Concerning Paradise and the Transgression

with plants, rivers, and the contemplation of the tree; He gives the place to Adam for his delight. The calling of all the creeping things and beasts, the ecstasy, the sleep, the formation of the woman Eve. Adam recognizes, and he undergoes the bond of love. Here is a rule: to eat everything except one. Their shameless nakedness in the place, shame, the leaves, and the sound of God's feet. Adam in terror, and the Word of God again; Eve is the pretext, the serpent, here is the judgment. The serpent having received dust, the birth-pains of Eve, the toils. The sweats of Adam, the ground full of thorns, and all dreadful things, and the tunic of skins, the curse, finally death, the falling away from the archetype, the cherubim circling as guards of the gates of Eden.

Concerning Cain and Abel, Seth and Enos. The birth of Cain and Abel, then the sacrifice; the eyes of God look upon the gifts of Abel. The envy of Abel, the murder, and deceitful words. The blood of the sheep crying out from the unjust murder. Seven just things for Cain, the curse, the trembling. Then Enoch was born next to Cain alone; of him Irad, Mehujael, Methuselah, Lamech, Jubal the harpist by lineage. After whom Jubel, and Tubal the hammer-striker. The death of Cain from Lamech the archer. Here also Seth, and the genealogy again, in whom Enos hoped in God alone; from whom Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, then Enoch was snatched away, being well-pleasing. A rebuke of the wickedness of the entire race of mortals, which had given itself over to all profligacy.

Concerning Noah and the flood. Noah, the ark, the flood here, the seeds of a new world containing an alien race. Good things for the vain, and for your race, O Noah, alone. A brief shattering, the raven sent out to the race, the twig of the dove, strange hopes. Behold the deliverance and the signs of the bow again, and the covenants of God with Noah. The catalog of the sons of Noah only, the lord of the place was seen, and of how much. The naming of the sons, Shem, Ham, Japheth. Wine here, and Noah having drunk, naked; the drunkenness of Ham to the shame of his father. The awakening again of Ham, a curse upon the sons of Noah. Shem, Arphaxad, Cainan, and Salah, Eber, Peleg, and evil counsel again; and the accounts extend as far as Nimrod the giant, the tower of Chalar, and the confusion of tongues. From the line of Peleg, the series to Terah; Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah, who brought Abraham the patriarch.

Concerning Abraham and Sarah. This man married Sarah the barren, young; having left paternal idols in his foreign way. Then he runs to Egypt because of a famine. ^A For the sake of Lot, the battle against Chedorlaomer, and Melchizedek receiving the tithes. Behold the words of the promise to Isaac, and Ishmael is born again of Hagar. From the land of Haran he remains at the oak of Mamre; the hospitality of the Trinity here, the destruction of the Sodomites to the end, and the type of Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt; Lot cohabits with his two daughters. In Gerar, Abimelech draws Sarah by force, and persuaded by God, releases her. Here he begets Isaac into the light; the temptation of Abram, and the testing of the offspring. The sacrifice of Isaac truly offered as an offering to God. The death of Sarah, the settlement of Keturah; ^B the oaths, the tomb, behold the lot of Abraham.

Concerning Isaac and Rebekah. Isaac comes together again with Rebekah; she bears twin sons, Jacob and Esau. The battle for the sake of the wife and the wells, against Abimelech, king of Gerar. The old age of Isaac, and his desire for food. Jacob stealing the strange blessing through his skin-covered hands; Esau in anger, and Jacob a fugitive. ^C Concerning Jacob and the Twelve Patriarchs. Where he sees the ladder that is lifted on high, he takes Rachel and Leah, the sons of Laban, through whom he begets the twelve-tribed race; Reuben, Simeon, and Levi these as the third, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher too, then Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, and Benjamin the last of all the offspring. His migration also, and the flight of Laban, his parting, and the struggle with the angel. Esau’s meeting, and behold the part of Rachel. The things concerning Shechem and Dinah are here; from there he runs back to the paternal land; the number of the sons of Jacob and Esau.

Concerning the interpretation of the dream of Joseph. The new dream of Joseph the all-fair, the envy of his brothers, and the deceit, then the sale, the sight of the tunic stained with gashes, and the father’s hidden tears for his yearning. ^D Here the catalog of the sons of Judah, the theft of the bride Tamar for the sake of giving offspring, Pharez, Zerah, behold the scarlet thread. Joseph sold into Egypt, the house of Potiphar, the incontinence of the mistress, Joseph’s self-control, the tunic, the deceit, then the prison, the favor of the jailer; in the prison, the interpretation of the dreams.

Concerning Pharaoh. The dreams of Pharaoh the king, the fat and the lean, and the ears of grain and the kine; the judgment of the dreams, Joseph’s power of authority, the bitter famine, the giving of the grain-measure, and the arrival of the brothers because of the famine; a recognition of them, and Simeon is again held.

^A Benjamin descends with them. The trial of the brothers here, the vessel cleverly hidden in the sack, the pursuit of them, the turbulence, the terrible words, the revelation of Joseph with tears, the fetching of the father, the extraordinary joy, the old age of Jacob, the command again for burial, the seal of Joseph alternating between the children, his death, the great mourning of Egypt, the release of Joseph from the fear of the brothers, the appointed removal of his bones. Then Joseph dies in Egypt.

EXODUS

Concerning the ten plagues. Their murmuring, the violence of the ten plagues, the river red, a great multitude of frogs, gnats the third, and the dog-fly again. The ruin of quadrupeds, the sixth, the blisters, hail and fire, and the locusts with the beetle, the darkness that can be felt, and the death of the first-born. The slaughter of the lamb, and the smearing of the blood, the plundering of golden vessels from the Egyptians, the flight of the Hebrews with the bones of Joseph, the pillar of fire and of cloud moving them, the repentance of Pharaoh, the stratagem.

Concerning the Red Sea. The parting of the Red, a strange passage, the total destruction of the Egyptians, the great song of Miriam singing. The waters of Marah and the sweetening by the wood, then the murmuring of the most wicked Hebrews, the gift of the manna, and the rain of birds again, again the thirst, the rod, water from the rock. Afterwards Jesus destroys Amalek, while Moses lifts his hands extendedly. The father-in-law meets Moses, speaks fittingly. The ultimate purification, and the divine gift of the tablets, the head of the calf, the breaking of the tablets again, the divine anger, the boldness of Moses. ^B The fast again, and the giving of other tablets, the construction of the tabernacle of testimony.

Concerning the Law. To these belonged the writing of the law of the tablets: The Lord is one, the only God of Israel. Thou shalt make no idol at all. Thou shalt not take the name of God in vain. Thou shalt make mention of the day of the Sabbath. Also, honor father and mother. These are one tablet; the other again: Thou shalt by no means commit adulterous marriage; nor shalt thou steal, openly or hiddenly. Nor again shalt thou kill out of thine anger thy neighbor, and cast away false testimony far, nor shalt thou covet whatever is dear to thy neighbor.

LEVITICUS

NUMBERS

^A

The death of Miriam, the scarcity of water. From the rock, water flowing for Moses, Aaron dying, and Eleazar the priest, The satiety of manna, and accounts of drunkenness. Evil sights, and the bronze serpent [that heals] the dead. Moses destroys Sihon and Og, Balak, king of Moab, is here, The seer Balaam blessing instead of cursing, The idol of Peor, and the daughters of Moab, The standing of Phinehas, and the ending of the evil again, The daughters of Zelophehad, and the judgment of Moses, Joshua son of Nun brought into the midst. He defeats the five kings of Midian by force, Moses dies, and the wizard Balaam, He fills the Jordan with two tribes, He builds cities, and also for those who fled.

DEUTERONOMY

Deuteronomy is here again, A recapitulation, as it were, Spoken in breadth by Moses to the Hebrews. Then he exhorts them not to trust in carvings at all, But to make mention of God in every way, To safeguard each thing greatly, To attribute and to describe everything to God, To stifle arrogance, to be pious with force, To lead the hardness away from the heart, To remember the law after drinking and eating, To offer sacrifices in one place, And to perform the Passover again in one city, To flee from seers and the omens of prodigies. Thence a prophecy of the coming of Christ. Then he exhorts them to bring words to completion, The forty stalks for the evildoer, Not to muzzle the mouth of an ox that treads grain, And to raise up seed to a dead kinsman. Thence a prophecy of the latter evils. Afterward, Joshua [replaces] Moses in his place, The second testimony of the ways, A reproof as it were of the Hebrews' drunkenness. Moses, ascending a great mountain, sees The land of promise, Palestine, And blesses the tribes in the end, And dying, disappears from life. But Joshua, called [son] of Nun, prevails. Against Jericho, the path of the spies, The search for them, the keeping by Rahab again, The request for salvation in the capture. The divided Jordan, cut through for Israel, The station of the twelve stones of the tribes, The circumcision from a stone blade, The Passover, the grain, the ceasing of the manna. The circling of Jericho by the elders. The sacking of it, and the salvation of Rahab, The theft of Achan, the stoning, a strange victory, The defeat of the Canaanites and the Amorites, The Gibeonites overcome by a ruse, Adonibezek against the city of Gibeon, He is their ally in a terrible way, ^A Against Gibeon, and the rebellion of the king, The altar of the tribes beyond the Jordan, Fitting words, and the outcome of the battle. The division of the land, the good inheritance, The lasting defeat of the kings round about, Joshua exhorting the tribes in the end, His death, and that of Eleazar, After whom Phinehas acts as priest of the race. Idols, worship, the Moabite Eglon rules over the race of the Hebrews.

JUDGES

Judges henceforth are established alone, Leading Israel from the battle of [their] enemies, Propitiously chosen from the tribe of Judah. The mixing of nations and God far away again, ^B And Chushan-Rishathaim, king of Syria, Enslaving Israel and prevailing in his evils; But God is with them, Othniel judging. The king of Moab again leads them out, Whom Ehud kills, and again judges Israel, After whom Shamgar slaughters the enemy. After some time, having transgressed the laws, They are mastered by the sting and the power of the Canaanites, But are free again through the seed of Barak, And through Deborah the prophetess alone, The battle of Jabin and the general Sisera, Whom Jael killed with the blade of a tent-peg. Again Israel is far from the law of God, And the enslavement to Midian is opposed. ^C The movement of Gideon from a vision of God, The fleece and the dew, the symbols of victory, Three hundred men who lapped [the] drink Slaughter twelve myriads with ease, Among whom are Zebah, Zalmunna, and Zeeb. After Gideon, Abimelech judges, Struck by a woman with a millstone on his head. After whom Tola, then Jair, another judge, Divine wrath, an Israelite slave To the children of Ammon, especially to the Ammonites. And Jephthah is established as judge, Who sacrificed his daughter after victory. After whom Ibzan, then Elon judges. Again Israel into the hands of the foreigners, ^D The judge Manoah having seen a strange vision, Who with his hands tears the jaws of the lion, A riddle, bitter-sweet, honey from the head, The acts of Samson from a woman's wickedness, And the foxes, the torches destroying the grain. The questioning of Samson, the betrayal by kin, The breaking of the bonds, and water from the jawbone, The side-posts of the gate lifted up, Delilah the woman, and the strange harvest of hair, Samson blind, and mocked much, And the house shaken down, with the satraps And the multitude, Samson having died with them. Another judge is Shamgar, lawlessness, A man from Ephraim carves a new carving. The city Laish, and the tribe of Dan here, The city Gibeon with the woman, the Levite,

The outrage of the woman, ignoble incontinence, From the outrage, a portion of all-night violence. Her division into twelve tribes, Thence a strange turmoil of all the tribes. The loss of women from the outrageously acting tribe, The seizing of modest virgins from other seed. And in Israel there was no king then Doing good things, and beloved by God.

RUTH

FIRST BOOK OF KINGS

^A He flees David by the counsel of his wife, Jonathan covers the David for Saul. The flight of David again, and the trial of the way, David slips away toward Abimelech, And eats the mystical loaves while hungry. He comes toward Achish, the king of Gath, And feigns ecstasy in his distress. Saul kills the elders toward Doeg. What was done grieves David beyond nature. Saul pursues, and David flees again. A cave, look! And Saul inside David, Saul eyes the hem of the garment here, And the spectacle reveals both and the injustices. Samuel dies, the one who sees not the one who foresees, The outrage of Nabal, and the release from his wife, Again Saul and David in the middle of the army, Having taken the spear, he brought Saul from the bed. David toward Achish takes Ziklag Against the army of the enemies of Saul, The necromancer, and David conquering foreigners, The mountains of Gilboa, and Saul’s wretched doom, Together with Jonathan, and David’s great lamentation.

SECOND BOOK OF KINGS

^A Absalom’s death by wood, hang by the hair. David laments, Joab leads back the host, A turning of Shimei, and the defiling of Mephibosheth. Forgiving the son to David, for Ziba’s sake, The slaughter of Amasa, and Sheba toward the city, A famine upon the earth, and the giving of Saul’s children, And continuous battles, and David dividing The people, Joab numbering the chariots, And nine hundred thousand were the thousands. ^A The prophet Gad giving one choice, Of three to David, called by God, The falling of the chest, boundless from death, David humble at the altar.

THIRD BOOK OF KINGS

CONCERNING THE PROPHET ELIAS

FOURTH BOOK OF KINGS

CONCERNING ELISHA

The Shunamite with her son embraced, Easily releases the bitterness of the pot, In barley loaves she feeds the many, She cleanses Naaman the leper in the Jordan. Naaman’s leprosy, by reason of gifts of gold, He draws the iron out of the Jordan, He strikes the army blind, and grants it to the enemies of the Syrians. A strong famine, and a woman in judgment ^A Having her child to eat, agreed upon, A swift end to the famine from Elisha, The moving of ten lepers, and the flight again, Sufficient grain, and a portion for the unbelieving one. Another famine, again towards the Shunamite, And the prediction of death for the King of Syria, Where indeed Hazael succeeded to the throne. Having died, Joram left Ahaziah, But the King of Judah kills him in turn; He slays Jezebel, who had hidden herself, He destroys the house of Ahab and Baal, In the midst of the death of Jehoahaz. After Ahaziah, the wicked Athaliah, Jehoiada the priest, from the offspring of Ahaziah, Anointed Joash as king. Another Joash after Jehoahaz, Gave the sign in the manner of victory, Five arrows against the statement and Syria, And Elisha, having died, raises the dead, Joash turned back the Syrians, yet from the third, And having died, Jeroboam is granted the power, In whose time the prophet Jonah was in life. The king of Joash of Judah grieves the power, Whom Joash takes prisoner, And plunders the city, though not to the end. He rules after him from the seed of Amaziah, And is indeed slaughtered by the sword near Syria, His successor and son of power, Azariah, In whose time Hosea speaks the prophecy. But Shallum unjustly struck Azariah, Whom Menahem removes again from power, Azariah’s son, King Jotham. After whom the child Ahaz rules for the most part, Idol-worshipping, not rightly honoring God, Against whom Rezin and Pekah of Remaliah Run into the city to make war upon God, The spoils are many, and there is much slaughter of the people. Then they are conquered by the force of the Assyrians, The allies of Ahaz and of Judah, In whose time the prophet Isaiah was then living. Having died, Ahaz left Hezekiah behind. Shalmaneser, the king of the Syrians again, Makes an expedition to the places of Samaria, When Hoshea was reigning at that time from the race, He overturns everything, he plunders the cities, And Hoshea seeks alliance with a friend. Therefore Shalmaneser moves the whole of Samaria Into the lands of the Assyrians. There is a complaint of Israel and Judah, And he sends Syrians to the cities of Samaria. Lions justly consume them.

4 He mixes in, then, also some of the Samaritans. He puts a stop to the evil of the lions there. Hezekiah, being a pious king, Destroys the altars and makes the temple beautiful, And shows the city adorned. Sennacherib runs toward the city of God, Shooting forth vain, fierce threats. A fervent prayer, a hidden alliance, And a night of boundless slaughter for the Assyrians, An archangel having acted against him invisibly. Sennacherib, doing evil, acts like a Samaritan, ^B Tobit burying the corpses cast out, Blindness for him, the bile from a fish, The tip of the liver, he speaks what is fitting, And Tobias strikes the demon from afar, And grants rays of light to the sower Tobit. Hezekiah is ill, an extension of years, A miraculous turning back of the light-bearer, The envoys of Merodach, a sight of the mysteries, The rebuke of Hezekiah by Isaiah, A wooden saw and the death of Isaiah. After Hezekiah, Manasseh, his offspring, rules, Most abominable of all, godless in the extreme, A sorcerer simply, and a murderer, an adulterer. But having been seized by sickness, he turned to God, And for the rest lived a pious life. But his son Amon, wicked, pays the penalty, Josiah, a son most pious in the extreme, Beyond all, honoring the laws of God, And doing all things beloved of God. Him, Necho, the King of the Egyptians, By shots of a bow brought to the darkness of Hades. Jehoahaz, the son of Necho, is again a Syrian, He governs the city, and brings out Jehoiakim, And grants the power over Israel to Eliakim, He pays tribute, for Israel was established, And a swift army with Nebuchadnezzar, Having ravaged the whole city of the Hebrews evilly, The king pays the tribute to the barbarian, And having re-entered the city again, He hides himself most quickly under the walls. And Jehoiakim, and Jeconiah, ^C With Esther, the mother, remain above the power. The most wicked king, Nebuchadnezzar, Goes forth with Jeconiah, Having seized them, he carries them to Babylon, With much plunder and with the chosen ones, With whom [were] Daniel and a chorus of three youths. And Zedekiah, whose position was Mattaniah, A king, he establishes in Jerusalem. An image, a vision of Nebuchadnezzar Strange, depicting the kingdoms. Daniel, then, is a finder, discerning, The honors of Daniel are excellent, And a divine title, Belteshazzar, for him. A golden image again of the Babylonian, Three young children, again the furnace of the deed, Zedekiah for the breaking of oaths, For he revolts from Nebuchadnezzar. ^D

^A And he burns the city with fire, And buries Jeremiah in the mire. Taking Zedekiah, he judges him for his oaths, Who broke the wall and turned to flight. He deprives him of his children and quenches his eyes, And leads him in chains to Babylon, And there he ends his life in confinement. Nebuzaradan burns the temple with fire, Slaying many, doing ten thousand evil things. Salem the noble general of Gedaliah; Ishmael with the Ammonites against Gedaliah And the Chaldeans approaches, and kills with the sword. And indeed, Jonathan with an army reaches them, He kills many, and turning with the troop, He marches quickly to the ruler of all the Hebrews And the power of Egypt. Idols henceforth are worshipped there. Then they were destroyed by the Assyrians, Who held all of Egypt in a later time. Nebuchadnezzar, having left this life, Thus gives the kingdom to Merodach, Who kills Jehoiakim and King Salem, His table-companion and fellow-councillor, Who had remained imprisoned for many years.

PARALIPOMENA I.

Merodach having died, Belshazzar is left in power. Belshazzar’s feast, and the vessels of God for drink, And the wall—a knuckle of a man writing, Daniel dissolving the writing of the fingers, And Belshazzar is killed by Darius. Daniel, envied by the satraps, Raised up untouched to the lions—a strange thing; Habakkuk comes carried from on high. The beginning is the rest, an angel of the week, Daniel returned, and the honor of Mandae. Again the vision of Daniel, the beasts, The judgment of Susanna by the hand of the elders.

PARALIPOMENA II.

The tomb of Darius; Cyrus the Persian king. The release of the Hebrews from captivity, And the forbidding of those living around From rising up against the city as was their duty and the people. Tomyris of the Massagetae destroys Cyrus; After whom Cambyses, the [son of] Nebuchadnezzar, Who, having conquered the Egyptians excellently, Succeeds poorly in the battle against the Ethiopians. The Jews subsequently revolt. Holofernes, therefore, with power, King Cambyses, full of boldness, leads [him] out, Stirs up against them until the city of Bethulia. Those inside fail for lack of liquid. Judith again cleverly destroys Holofernes, going out decorously: For sleeping alone inside the tent, Having raised the sword, she kills him. Thenceforth [he] honors the offerings to the house, And Achior worships those of the Hebrews. And Cambyses, the [son of] Nebuchadnezzar, ^A marching against the two Magi, Having crushed his foot, he dies a wretched death. After whom Darius, called [son] of Hystaspes, By a device, the glory of the Persians, Having prayed to God to grant as a gift To Jerusalem its restoration and gold. Zerubbabel fulfills the promise; A meal for the satraps, a banquet. From the drinking, Darius speaks words To his attendants sleeping round about. But when he found this guest, Zerubbabel, Held that truth is the only victor of all, He persuades Darius to grant the fulfillment of his oath. With Joshua son of Jehozadak the elder, Having taken some of the finest vessels of the house, ^B And the Scriptures, and power most accurately, Together with five myriad of the people, He arrives quickly at Jerusalem. They lay the foundations of the temple with toil. Again another hindrance from the Samaritans, Slandering them of revolt, forsooth, The strength of the wall, and the restoration of the house. Darius writes to the generals of Syria To give gold and to provide help. And thus the temple and the city rise, Sacrifice, the temple, the provision of unleavened bread. Among the priests, who were governed only By those well desiring the aristocracy, Down to the Hasmoneans and Maccabees.

ESTHER.

^C Magnates indeed of Darius, a banquet, The display of the woman, the shame of the queen, The wrath of Darius, the resolution, Esther in the midst, A good appearance, relative of Mordecai, From the captives of Darius, the spearman, Who reveals to the king the treachery of men, And thence having ascended to a height of great honor. Haman, leading the Hebrews; he, out of envy, Sets up a stake against Mordecai, Who in no way rendered him worthy honor. The motion of Esther for the whole race, Words to the ruler and the sword-bearer, A pitiful prayer, and the dissolution of the murder-plot. Haman, Darius at Esther’s banquet, And the scroll of the night, and good Mordecai, A councillor of Haman and the honor of Mordecai, Mordecai on horseback in purple robes, Haman leading [him] and dragging the horse at a walk, Haman towards Esther, having grasped her knees. Darius sees, he considers [Haman] a wrongdoer, Thence Haman [is] on the stake of condemnation, Mordecai the faithful father of Darius, And the great slaughter of those who were against the Hebrews, And the crucifixion of the ten sons of Haman.

EZRA FIRST.

The son of Darius, the master of the Persians, Xerxes, Honoring the race of the Hebrews with power, Ezra, a friend most of all, more than the others,

^A a letter of the ruler to the whole province. The venerable Ezra, running with a heavy weight of the people, distributes the laws to Jerusalem. He is admired, most of all in the chaos of works, and he leads the foreigners far away. He reads to the people the laws as well; much weeping, and speeches, a feast, a commandment, and the aged Ezra dies.

SECOND EZRA. Nehemiah also inquires again about the affairs at Salem, serving as cupbearer to Xerxes; he learns that they are suffering from those around them, he seeks the sovereign, and he receives writings. The wall arrives and speedily fills the temple; he establishes well the observing of the synagogues and the Sabbaths again, according to the law. He goes up to Xerxes, then to the city, doing excellent things, and he finishes his life. The kingdom of the Persians until Alexander. Artabanus destroys the power of Xerxes; next is Artaxerxes the Long-armed; and a second Xerxes and Sogdianus; the bastard Darius, and his son Artaxerxes; and another Artaxerxes of the name Ochus; Arses of Ochus, and Bagosas who killed him; and the last Darius in the race of the Persians, whom Alexander the Macedonian kills.

BOOK OF MACCABEES. After these things, a certain priest, John, for the sake of honor, killed one of his relations. Bagosas, then, the general of Artaxerxes, for seven years stirs up the troop. The priest Joiada, from the descendants of John; Manasseh is his kinsman, a strife of words; Sanaballat, the satrap of Darius, pledges his daughter to Manasseh. The pursuit of Manasseh from the divine temple of his father-in-law, and a burden, and a strange counsel; flight to him of those suffering the same in marriages; in the midst, the death of Darius. Sanaballat approaches Alexander, gives him sovereignty, receives back a favor: to set up a temple to God in Gerizim; there he henceforth makes Manasseh a priest, having divided shamefully the evil-natured peoples. Alexander of Macedon, [son] of Philip, with the Illyrians and Thracians, marched against the Persians at Athens; he defeats the satraps, he destroys the entire rule of the Persians from God, he seized Egypt, Syria, Palestine; he raises up the brilliant city named [after him]; he pulls down the land of the Tyrians and Sidonians; and life leaves him, as the story goes, by poison. Meanwhile, preparing the battle against Tyre, he asks the city of the Hebrews for an ally. The priest Jaddus does not give it, reasonably. After a little while, he arrives with full panoply. The priest then goes out, adorned. ^A Alexander honors the priest of God, approaches within the city, to the temple, and brings all his requests to an end. The Samaritans hear of the recompense for their equality, a test of them involving the flight from wickedness. Having taken all the cities, Alexander places Andromachus in Samaria. The Samaritans take him out of life; Alexander, having removed the Samaritans, settled the beloved Macedonians [there]. The death of Jaddus, [and] Onias, the son of the priest. After Alexander, the whole rule was divided into a tetrarchy for the grandees; Ptolemy son of Lagus holds Egypt. On the Sabbath, he clearly destroys the city of the Hebrews, and runs toward Egypt. After him, also Philadelphus, the son, having translated excellently the books of the Hebrews, [through] Demetrius of Phalerum with Aristeas. The release of the Hebrew slaves by them; and after Onias and Simon, Eleazar; and toward Antiochus, the maltreatment of the Hebrews, [Antiochus] having outgeneraled Ptolemy. Ptolemy's son, Epiphanes, held the position with an army in Palestine. To him, the rest of the Hebrews flee, again toward Antiochus as an opponent, and toward the son and wife of Ptolemy. The dowry of the daughter is the borders of Palestine. ^B And Ptolemy possesses the city of God. After Eleazar, Manasseh sacrificing to God; then Onias, the son of the friend of Simon. Ptolemy asks for the tribute by nation; Onias gives the least tax. He is angered; Joseph, his friend, approaches; he is brilliantly honored and collects taxes fairly. The son [is born] to Ptolemy, and [there are] birthdays, friends. The son of Joseph goes up, offering grace; Hyrcanus himself, bringing the best grace, [is caught in] an ambush of his kinsmen, and his death, and the death of Epiphanes, of Ptolemy. Again Antiochus [comes] to the city of God; the priest Jesus and Menelaus again; a strange sedition of two priests here. Menelaus, a fugitive, [goes] to Antiochus; Antiochus approaches, destroys the city, carries off its wealth, overturns, forces them to abandon their ancestral laws, [and] decrees all to imitate the life of the Greeks. Then Eleazar and the wise Maccabees, how manly they stood for the law; the Asmoneans with their father Mattathias. Given the order to sacrifice, [and] having killed Apelles in the slaughter, they flee immediately to the desert, with whom a myriad of the troop escapes. On the Sabbath, [there is] a battle, and the victory of the fugitives, an overthrow of all things on the Sabbath. After Mattathias, Simon the Maccabee leads the troop that loves the law.

And he slays many, having joined battle suddenly, Of the guardsmen of Antiochus, manfully. And indeed he cleanses the temple quickly, And does all things, turning them for the better. But Antiochus learns this and faints, And the young Antiochus, with Lysias, Enters the city of God by treaty then, A part [falling] from the elephant of Eleazar. And Philip is destroyed by Antiochus. Alcimus the priest, and the fugitive Onias Rise up against the people of the Egyptians. Lysias slays Antiochus again. Demetrius, the child of Seleucus, Alcimus stirs up accusations against the Maccabee, And Bacchides comes to Demetrius, Intending to do evil most quickly to the Maccabee, But he is turned away by Antiochus in vain. And Nicanor comes down with deceit again. And a great battle having joined in the city, Nicanor falls with a great crowd of people, And the people in turn give to the Maccabee The bright honor of the high priesthood. Again Bacchides, falling upon the Maccabee, Slays the man, most active by nature, And gives the power to the adversaries. The army of Judas, the noble Maccabee, They choose Jonathan, of the same blood, for power. And of this one, a battle joins with Bacchides; No one wins. Jonathan [goes] to the mountain, But Bacchides runs back to Demetrius. Again Bacchides [comes] for battle against Jonathan, But having been defeated, he looks toward treaties, And runs back to Demetrius again. A battle against Demetrius from Alexander, The glorious son of Ptolemy. Jonathan is an ally to Demetrius; Then toward Alexander he chooses friendship. The death of Demetrius by the marshes. When Philopator Ptolemy had died, Euergetes, Ptolemy, began to rule. ^A Alexander takes the daughter of this one; Jonathan gives [him] into friendship. And Demetrius, the son of Demetrius, comes; He rules Syria and other ancestral places. But the father-in-law of Alexander, Ptolemy, Having craftily dealt with Alexander by deceit, Gives his daughter to Demetrius, And the kingdom of Alexander of those places. The death of Alexander and of Ptolemy. Sedition of the Antiochians against Demetrius. A brilliant helper and friend is Jonathan; Seeking friendship, and toward it, Rome. Orphaned, Antiochus, the son of Alexander, With Tryphon comes down from the Arabs. Tumult thence, and panic for Demetrius. ^B Demetrius runs out to the Arabs, And having been captured, he pays the penalty, wretched and miserable. Tryphon, wishing to cut off Antiochus, Was as true [as he was] fearing Jonathan, And indeed, having seized Jonathan by deceit, He comes down straight to the places of Judea. And Simon, the offspring of Jonathan, He asked for talents, as if for the payment of a debt; Simon gives him a complaint, as one drawing back. And having taken him, he slays Jonathan again. Antiochus Sidetes, son of Demetrius, Rules Syria; friendly to the Jews. Antiochus, of the same blood as Demetrius, [Moves] towards Cleopatra, the wife of Demetrius. ^C He flees, and Tryphon then [goes] toward Orthosia, And having been burned, he ends his life. He breaks the treaties; the Sidetes, king of Simon, And Cendebeus campaigns against the city, But Jonathan, son of Simon, defeats him. Simon is slain by deceit toward Ptolemy, Who was called Abubus, a man of high standing. The son of Simon, Hyrcanus; Jonathan Campaigns against Ptolemy with speed, But he, having slain the brothers of Simon with the sword, Runs straight toward the tyrant Cotylas.

SYNOPSIS OF THE DIVINE SCRIPTURE

But Antiochus, brother of Demetrius, After battle and a myriad of injuries, Fulfilling the treaties, enters the city of God. Then he campaigns against the Parthians, To join battle with Arsaces alongside Antiochus. And Antiochus is slain in the battle; But Hyrcanus subdues many cities. ^D But Demetrius, having been freed, rules the Syrians. But the Syrians, [revolting] against Physcon, the Ptolemy, Choose Alexander for power, Who leads Demetrius out of his rule. And having stood far from his wife Cleopatra, Having suffered much, he died by a wretched fate. Grypus Antiochus, son of Demetrius.

entered into battle for power against Grypus, but having been stopped for a short time from the battle, Hyrcanus, paying tributes, brought much gold. The Cyzicenus, for the sake of the Samaritans, joining a strange battle against the sons of Hyrcanus, while sacrificing, Hyrcanus beholds the power of victory; he who fell bestowed the award—the judgment of the battle, and here the confusion of the friendship of the Pharisees.

Dying, Hyrcanus bestows the power upon his son, Aristobulus, king first and alone, ^A who destroyed the greatest part of his race, after whom his brother Antigonus, as it is told in the book of Strato as someone foretold, but he himself, having been polluted in his soul, vomits again. Jannaeus, kin, carries the power, and having done many terrible things to the Jews, Cleopatra approaches, and also Selene, having wars against the son of Ptolemy, who, having engaged Jannaeus in the matters of battle, set him by force, disgraced; and he took the city Ptolemais and again takes Alexandria; Cleopatra having departed for a time, so that she might establish Jannaeus on the throne, the Cyzicenus destroys Grypus, and again Seleucus, the son of Grypus, banishes him further from the power. The Cyzicenus takes Seleucus, and delivers his flame to fire at the end. Joining an unrestrained battle again against him are the sons of Grypus, kinsmen of Seleucus. Cleopatra leads Alexander, and he had been corrupted by a poisonous drug. Thus Alexander is chased away immediately, and again sees the power of Ptolemy.

And Jannaeus at last sacks Samaria before all, and clearly destroys it. And after the death of the young Ptolemy, Alexander ruled for a short time, and cutting off his sister Cleopatra, he brought a wretched death upon the throng, after whom there rules especially the son Philometor, the Philadelphus and young Ptolemy. And the Armenian Tigranes, the Parthian, having departed from the Parthians, ruling not a little in the place, fashioned in the land of Phoenicia and Syria the one called Dionysus from the Ptolemies. This one stirred up war against the Jews, and upon his death Aretas rules the power of Syria—he who raises the worst battle against the Jews, and again turns back toward the son of Grypus. Jannaeus settles the matters for battle and wins by force, and attacking Ituraea he leaves his life, having left the power to his wife Selene ^A with two gentle and infant children.

And Marcius reaches Syria then, having been sent as a general from earlier Rome. The son of Jannaeus, Hyrcanus, is a young king; but Aristobulus on the other hand is priest again; and being active in his ways, Aristobulus seizes the whole power alone, and he had rendered Hyrcanus idle, as if skillfully. But he, a fugitive, again comes down to Aretas, with Antipater, who had been beloved for a long time, and they come to battle against Aristobulus. Again, Aristobulus runs to Scaurus—whom Pompey, the general of Rome, ordered to oversee Palestine. This one turns Aretas away with suggestions. Again, Hyrcanus with his friend Antipater runs back to the general Pompey. Pompey immediately sends Gabinius on behalf of Hyrcanus to the city of the Jews. They do not receive Gabinius with words.

And Pompey comes later, sailing with a very heavy army, and he turns Aristobulus strongly, having overlooked the pouring out of gold; he slays and reaps, having engaged him in a great battle, and he takes Aristobulus alive; but he restores the whole power to Hyrcanus, showing him as lord and priest according to his due; and to Antipater he assigns Palestine, having declared him overseer of affairs. ^B Having taken Aristobulus himself with two sons, Pompey sails away to Rome. And in this way, clearly, the Jews were led to the Romans out of thoughtlessness.

In the future, Alexander, the son of Aristobulus, is a fugitive here to Judaea, who leads Hyrcanus out of power. And again he flees, having attacked Antony, and he is led to Rome as a prisoner again. Then Aristobulus with Antigonus flee together, and they organize a battle, but nevertheless Aristobulus dies before Antony, clearly as having been sent to Pompey; and the fugitive Antigonus is in the power of the Parthians; and those who had endured defeat by the power of the Romans, the throngs also revolt from Hyrcanus. And then Cassius sets up for a speech, plundering the temple—for the sake of Hyrcanus, as is claimed. Antigonus comes down with Parthians only. But Gabinius puts this one further away, immediately outside Mount Tabor.

Caesar monarch, death of Pompey; Antipater, a helper in every way, confirms the authority with his friend Hyrcanus. Antigonus approaches Caesar again. And Antipater is against this one only, and Antipater shows his sons as generals, Great Herod and Phasael, I say. Hence the murmuring of the throng of the Jews, fearing the tyrannical behavior, perhaps. ^D

^A The judgment of Hyrcanus, with favor and guile, Of those accusing Herod among the Jews. Caesar leads out the brother of Cleopatra, Ptolemy, from the power of the Egyptians, And bestows all the rule upon her alone. The taking off of Caesar in the midst again. Antigonus descends in the might of battle. Malichus leads Antipater out of life, Most especially by poison; but then, to Herod, Hyrcanus gives the position of Antipater, And having given more of his paternal association, He, being lifted up, little by little, in power, Becoming refractory, looks toward secession; But toward the friendship of those ruling in Rome He settles himself, fawning most zealously, Taking to marriage Mariamne, the daughter Of Aristobulus, the niece of Hyrcanus. The Caesar, Julius Gaius, once again Is chosen sole monarch and ruler in Rome, And Antony, general of all Asia. They accuse the entire lineage of Herod; Herod is a flatterer, and a portion of the accusers, Back to rule, and a movement of the band. Cast out himself, with Hyrcanus the friend, There is a powerful battle, and toward the power again Antigonus descends, together with Pacorus. Herod is a fugitive; the death of Phasael. Antigonus takes Hyrcanus alive, Gives him to the Parthians, and his limbs are maimed, But he himself girded up the power alone. Herod approaches Malichus the Arabian, Least well-received because of fear of the Parthians. He runs off, therefore, to Alexandria, Toward the judgment in Egypt for Cleopatra By Antony, and for the connection of marriage, With whom Herod also, by writings of Antony To the Caesar and to Rome, sails down. He is voted, therefore, the ruler of the Jews, Together with Sudius, the general Crates. After a three-year time, he sacks the city, And having taken Antigonus alive, in low spirits He gives him to Antony to send to Rome; But corrupted by gifts, he cuts him off with the sword, And Herod gives up many cities; He bestows Syria upon Cleopatra. Antony, running against the Parthians, Together with many myriads of the army— The whole rampart of the army was utterly defeated. Hyrcanus comes up from the Parthians again, He is honored brilliantly by the flatterer Herod, And is killed by some contrivances of guile. The priest Jael, of an obscure family, And then, the child of Alexandra, from images, By fear of Antony and of Cleopatra, A plot of flight for Alexandra with her offspring. The strangulation of Aristobulus by Herod. Herod comes to Antony quickly, To render accounts of the strangulation of Aristobulus, And the uncle Joseph, the words of Mariamne. ^A Herod returns again, brilliantly, Mysteries revealed, jealousy— Unjust, indeed; behold the share of Joseph, And loves of Cleopatra, as toward Herod; And many terrible things reach Judea. To Antony, it was quite undesirable to come Toward the power of Rome, and for the sake of the defeat of the Parthians. The Caesar comes, therefore, from the West. A battle is joined, and a naval engagement. Antony was defeated thence in the end; Cleopatra dies by poison, And Antony, by his own hand, far from life. Therein, Herod sends two writings also, Ordering by guile to grant them to the victor. Caesar was pleased, having won and taken these, ^B And Herod was distinguished as well-disposed above all; And he approaches Caesar in the latter days. He is honored brilliantly and revered more. Soemus, [revealing] secrets for the sake of the woman. Herod returns to the house; He loves the wife, but Mariamne was prideful. Thence he, in the midst of jealousy, Against Mariamne Salome is [set] toward Herod; A false report, poison from a ring, Revelation of mysteries, the share of Soemus, The trial against Mariamne, and the sword. Herod falling ill from loves for his spouse, The share of mother Mariamne and Alexandra. Thence, Herod is terrible in all things, Having destroyed his disposition, and especially breathing slaughter, An attack against him, the punishment for the guile, Famine consuming, and a variety of diseases; A great consolation for the famine [is] Herod, Cutting off his own ornaments and distributing to the poor. He who was hateful before, called benevolent, Loves the wife of Simon, and the daughter, He leads her to him, and the father Simon, the priest, Indicates Jesus, the son of Phabet, as unworthy, Doing many things not well, contrary to the law. Cities and houses he built, and monuments again, Simply for the favor of those ruling in Rome. He sends the offspring there also, for favor, Always adding worse things to the Jews. But Manaen and Polion alone— To honor them he existed, even for the sake of prophecy— And he, having pulled down the temple, and its foundation, Establishes it brilliant, having adorned it greatly; Then he sets a law for the house-breakers. Herod goes away toward Caesar again, And he carries the offspring toward the fatherland; And he yokes them to wives, again Salome For the sake of slander, and having conceived, That they are about to expose Herod in the midst. Thence, Antipater, the offspring of Herod, Well-disposed and good, but the others neglected greatly. Sent, Antipater goes up to Rome, And writes many things to his father against his brothers. He persuades him to arrive toward Rome. He goes up, therefore, having taken the offspring also. ^C

Caesar judges the case and scatters the strife, and the children are dear to him in power. Being a lover of beauty and loving glory all the more, he troubled many of his friends and kinsmen; but to those abroad he was pleasant and flowing with much gold. He opens also the tomb of David, and finding adornment, he takes not a little. Henceforth, civil discord is an inhabitant. Again, Antipater against his kinsmen. And Herod was aroused against Pheroras, because Salome despised the marriages of his daughter. Again, he weaves snares. Alexander goes up against Pheroras, and Salome is a pretext, behold, to his words; persistent punishments again of eunuch friends. Alexander is a prisoner, a finding of arguments, the extreme examination, and the potion at the end. But Alexander wrote to his father, saying that he knew all things and the wicked deeds, and he is released, indeed, by the words of Archelaus. Antipater, however, having taken Eurycles, again kindles in his father the things of hatred; and the tortures indeed of the guards of Herod, the bonds of the sons of Herod again twice, and he informs Caesar of all things by letters. And he, in turn, puts the whole matter and the judgment to him. Behold the trial, the condemnation, the boldness of Tyron toward the king; the accuser is the tyrant, the barber is Tryphon. Their examination, and the clear account of the treachery, hence, accordingly, Herod both strangles his offspring and stones their confederates. Herod sires Herod, another son, from the daughter of Simon, later. Friends of Pheroras are Antipater here, but Salome is opposed to these again, and the Pharisees to the wife of Pheroras. Pheroras is suspicious of the tetrarchy, and Antipater flees toward Rome. The death of Pheroras, but evils for Antipater; the accusations of Antipater are manifest. Antipater comes up from Rome. Varus dishonors him with words. The judgment of Herod, and words full of passion. Antipater in bonds; the cause again is Herod being ill and poorly in his time. The rumor of death, and the undoing of the golden eagle, and myriad ill-treatment of men here, a multitude of diseases consuming Herod. A bitter command to cut down the notables; he thought it necessary to kill Herod himself in prison, and the murder of Antipater. The division of the power, and Herod dying, the release of the notables was well-wrought. Archelaus goes off, running to Rome, along with Antipas particularly, and with Salome, against the Romans regarding the sedition of the Jews. An accusation before Caesar, and judgment again; Archelaus receives half the power. ^A And the other, Antipas, Philip, and the young Herod, [receive] the other half; hence the tetrarchy. A pseudo-Alexander arriving to Caesar. Glaphyra, recently spouse to Archelaus, is the daughter of Archelaus, but the wife of Alexander. Archelaus is a wrongdoer to his subjects; he is therefore cast out by Caesar from the bed. A dream of Archelaus, and again of Glaphyra. The death of these again from dreams. And after him to Cyrenius the power, who first completes the enrollment in a foreign land, under whom Christ is also born from the Virgin. From then on discord began even among the Hebrews from the man Zadok the wicked Gaulanite. And after Cyrenius was sent again Pomponius and Marcus Ambivius, then Rufus Annius, a plague of Caesar. And Tiberius is established as emperor, under whom the power of the Hebrews began just now; after whom, Pilate the Pontian [takes] the position, who having introduced into Caesarea the troop, carrying the images of Caesar by night. Sedition henceforth for the sake of the lawless; scarcity of water, expenditure of money; a public outcry again, and the clear indictment of Pilate, and the murder of many by the contrivance of the Hebrews. This man, [having seized] my God and the Word who had appeared, granting favor especially to the Jews, he nails to the cross and condemns to death. ^{B C} But He rose again and on the third day again, as the scriptures of the Gospels declare. The tetrarch Herod builds for Tiberias, Tiberias, the city, bringing favor. Paulina, chaste and modest in Rome, whom Mundus loved, shedding much gold. The pursuit of the chaste maiden, Annubis is the pretext in modesty; a wretched old woman ministers along with treachery. Mundus accomplishes the favor of his lusts. Reproach, insult; words to Tiberius. Priests slaughtered, and Mundus exiled from thence from Rome. Behold an assembly even to the mountain of Garize. And Pilate kills those who had gathered. Pilate [is sent] to Vitellius for judgment, and he had been sent to Rome for the sake of the murder. But Tiberius arrives, having departed from life. Vitellius releases to the Hebrews the sacred robe, as it is duty to carry it. Treaties with the Parthians concerning the king. ^D Vitellius has a battle with the tetrarch. The fate of Philip, brother of the tetrarch. Herod, sending the voyage to Rome, associates with Herodias, the consort of Philip, having particularly left Aretas, the wife from infancy, not according to the laws. This man extinguishes with the sword the lamp of my Christ, the axe-bearing Forerunner, who was cutting up by the root the dissoluteness of the law.

^A

An army then of Aretas against Herod; Vitellius writes from there to Caesar To provoke a hard battle against Aretas. But Tiberius had passed away, leaving life, And the army remains in the region. Gaius assumes the beginning of the power. Now Agrippa, the grandson of Herod of old, Being the son of the offspring of Aristobulus, Reaches by Gaius a height of honor, Having suffered much mostly in the former time Under Tiberius, being dear to the race, On account of debts and by the favor of Gaius, Having been bound in prison, he was sent away to the current ruler. Even if someone looking intently toward a bird Reported as quickly as possible the power, Which in time had been clearly brought to an end. For Gaius frees him immediately, And shows him to be king of the tetrarchy, Which Philip, the offspring of Herod, ruled; And Herodias was a kinswoman of Agrippa. He persuaded Herod to run to Rome, And she takes the tetrarchy of Agrippa. He went away, he sought, he found naught, And having been deceived long, and the power of Agrippa Clearly, as Caesar gives the whole to the one remaining. In Alexandria a war of Greeks With Hebrews was stirred up for the sake of Gaius, And Petronius was sent to Gaius To erect a strange statue in the middle of the city, The peoples were in conflict toward the words. Petronius writes these things to Gaius. He writes back in anger to Petronius. And regarding this, Agrippa immediately Presented a request, asking with fear, And having arrived, he exchanged life for death. And Agrippa having exerted himself with power, Claudius ascends to the power of the throne, And Agrippa is again the greatest king. He restored in writing to all the Jews The gift as from custom from the beginning, Agrippa paying the good judgment in every way. After a little he ascends, having left Agrippa; He offers strange thank-offerings to God, And hangs up the golden chain in the house, And a faction of the donors from the images. Prefect Silas, noble, a friend of old. A reproach to him and vain boldness. A loud-mouthed man in prison, and again In all things Agrippa was gentle and good, Loving to be honored, truly a fountain of gifts. On the arrival of Staton in the city, And performing festivals pleasing to the people, Having put on an extraordinary silver robe, He was acclaimed, and God was in the speeches. From there, therefore, moved by such prodigies, He went to Hades, running from a disease. The boy Agrippa is underage at Rome; But then Fadus Cuspius to Judea ^B Brings the divine robe into Antonia. Claudius again resolves it by the writings. But Herod, the kinsman of Agrippa, Had received the things of the temple and the elders. The queen of the Adiabenians here, With Izates, comes to the friendly son, A consolation of famine to Judea. By someone they were brought to the laws of God, The matters concerning the Parthians, and again the end of life, Theudas, a rebel, leading astray the peoples. His death, and the head toward the city. After Cuspius, Tiberius again. Children of Judas, again a faction of the peoples. Successor was Comanus of Tiberius. Herod, the kinsman of Agrippa, having died, Leaves the power to the younger Agrippa, Claudius Caesar having conceded it. In the temple, a disturbance from fear of the army, And destruction of many, and again another trial Of those violating and some against the law. A faction of the Galileans and of Jews, Arrival of them toward Claudius in Rome, Comanus out, and Felix into the power. Agrippa received the tetrarchies, That of Philip, and besides that of Lysanias. Felix takes Drusilla, the daughter of Agrippa. Nero after Claudius rules Rome, Impostors, men, slipped in among the Hebrews, Deceiving them, stirring up factions, A boundless group of robbers, and other ten thousands. The death of Jonathan the high priest from there. Another faction again of Syrians and Hebrews In Caesarea, and much destruction of them. A faction of elders here again, Porcius Festus replaces Felix, And a cry to Nero from the Jews Against Felix for things done by force. A letter of Nero on behalf of the Syrians, Which began every war for the Hebrews. From there again it grew into a great one, The destruction of the Sicarii, and a faction again. Agrippa built a great house, Which the Jews again block by law. Regarding this, also words to Nero. Annas the priest, having set the people together, Stoned the brother of the Lord, James, ^D And killed him in the divine house. After Festus, Albinus from Rome Cutting off many of the tares of evil, And constant changes of the elders. With Agrippa reigning as king then, Albinus puts to death many of the prisoners. After him another governor, Florus, Evil, small, as he was heavy to the Hebrews, And why the many and against the Romans battles, He himself visibly the cause out of malice, In the eleventh year of Nero's reign, And Florus bringing to completion the double again.

NOTICE ON THE FOLLOWING ASCETIC WORKS

^A PHILOKALIA OF THE HOLY NEPTIC FATHERS... printed at the expense of the most honorable and most God-fearing Lord Ioannes Maurocordatos, for the common benefit of the Orthodox. Venice, 1782. fol.

^B Callistus, the most holy Patriarch of Constantinople, who bore the surname Xanthopulus, flourished under Andronicus II Palaeologus, around the year 1360. Having been a disciple of Saint Gregory of Sinai (whose life he later wrote at length), he practiced asceticism on the Holy Mountain of Athos, at the Skete of Magoula, situated opposite the Monastery of Philotheou. He lived together with his fellow initiate Makros for twenty-eight years in total. He was also so dear to Ignatius, who was likewise a Xanthopulus, that the two appeared to be one soul in two bodies. Having later become Patriarch, and having set out for Serbia regarding the peaceful union of the Church there, he passed through the Holy Mountain; and from there, with the witty prophecy of Maximus, the so-called Kausokalybites, which said: "This elder has lost his crone," having been escorted, with the singing behind him also of the funeral chant: "Blessed are those whose way is blameless," he arrived in Serbia, where he exchanged the corruptible life for the incorruptible.

Symeon of Thessalonica also speaks somewhere concerning these two, when he is discussing the divinizing prayer: "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God," in these very words (Chap. 298, p. 210, line 5): "Especially in these our days, the God-inspired, God-bearing, and Christ-bearing men, who are truly inspired by God, have written in the Spirit concerning it (namely, about this prayer); such as our Father among the saints Callistus, who became Patriarch of this New Rome by God's appointment, and his like-minded fellow ascetic, the holy Ignatius. In a book composed by them, both spiritually and with godly wisdom, they philosophized most highly in one hundred chapters, setting forth the complete knowledge concerning this in the perfect number. They were also scions of this queen of cities, leaving everything behind, having formerly lived in virginity and monastic life under obedience, and as ascetics together, and later living ascetically and inseparably in a heavenly manner, and having kept the 'one in Christ' (which Christ himself prayed to the Father concerning us all) in themselves especially, they appeared as luminaries, according to Paul, holding fast to the word of life in the world. For they attained the unity in Christ and love to such a degree, beyond most of the sanctified, that there was not even a suspicion of any difference, even to a nod, tone of voice, or a moment of sadness; which is almost impossible among men.

And for this reason, having become angelic, and having maintained and acquired in themselves the peace of God, as he prayed—which is 'Jesus Christ, our peace' (as Paul said), who 'made both one,' whose peace 'surpasses all understanding'—having passed on peacefully, they now delight in the highest calm, and they see Jesus more clearly now, whom they loved from the soul and whom they truly sought; and they are with him, and partake insatiably of his most sweet and divine light; of which they also received the down payment from here, having been purified in contemplation and practice. And they attained the divine illumination on the Mount, just as the apostles did. And this has been shown to many clearly as a testimony, shining in their appearance, being seen like Stephen, as grace was poured into them not only in the heart, but also in their appearance. Therefore, they appeared like that great Moses (as those who saw them have testified), shining in a sun-like manner in their form; and although they have well suffered this blessed passion and know from experience, they clearly declare about the divine light, the natural energy and grace of God, and they bring the saints as witnesses; as also concerning the holy prayer.