Theodore the Reader (Notice)

C. Again, if he objects to you that the Trinity ought not to be named, because no synod has decreed it? N. I answer him this very thing, and nothing else: for just as it did not decree that it must be said, so neither did it prohibit it at all. C. On the other hand, if he were to say: "Just as it did not forbid it, so also that which is not contained in the words of the councils, it is entirely unfitting to say"—what will you answer to these things? N. I can demonstrate these things from the writings of the Fathers. C. But we also demonstrate from the writings of the Fathers that Christ is one of the Trinity. N. Although I easily believe that this too can be taught from the writings of the Fathers, I do not at all consent to say it, nor will I confer further with you, but I will tenaciously cherish my own opinion. ^B C. Indeed, I was wondering that human glory could prevail to such an extent that no conclusion could overcome you, so that, corrected by divine authority, you might accept a sentiment harmonious with the truth, which you had hitherto attacked. But because it has been determined by you to remain in your own opinion rather than to approve the true confession for the love of eternal blessedness, I myself will never judge you to be anything other than a heretic, you who do not approve that God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, who suffered in the flesh for our salvation, is one of the holy and undivided Trinity, to whom be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

JOANNIS MAXENTII AND OTHERS. EPISTLE TO THE BISHOPS EXILED IN SARDINIA.

THEODORUS LECTOR. NOTITIA.

The two Greek books of the *Collectanea* from ancient authors of ecclesiastical history by Theodorus Anagnostes, that is, the Reader, were published in Paris by Robert Estienne and in Basel at the Froben press in a Latin translation by Wolfgang Musculus. Possevinus adds that they exist in volume VII of the *Bibliotheca veterum Patrum* of Bignaeus, 2nd edition. Then he warns: "But those which Wolfgang Musculus translated, who is prohibited in the first class in the Roman Index, are to be read with caution on account of those things which we have said about him under the entry 'Socrates' and under the entry 'Sozomen'." They were further published at Cologny in the year 1612, not without the same interpretation by Musculus, in folio with other ecclesiastical histories. Vossius, *De historicis Graecis* book II, chapter 32: "He left two books of *Collectanea* of ecclesiastical history. It begins, however, at the death of Theodosius the Younger, and ends in the times of Justin, who began to rule in the year 518."

However, these historical *Collectanea* were not compiled by Theodorus, but by Nicephorus Callistus from the Ecclesiastical History of Theodorus, and dictated to others, as the prefixed title indicates: *Εκλογὴ ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς Ἱστορίας Θεοδώρου Αναγνώστου, ἀπὸ φωνῆς Νικηφόρου Καλλίστου τοῦ Ξανθοπούλου*. That is to say: *Extracts from the Ecclesiastical History of Theodorus Lector, from the voice of the dictating Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus*. When the translator omitted these final words, it resulted in these historical *Collectanea* being attributed to Theodorus, though they are in fact excerpts from his History made by Nicephorus Callistus. Baronius also warned us of this under the year 485. For Suidas relates that Theodorus, a reader of the Church of Constantinople, wrote an ecclesiastical history from the times of Constantine up to the reign of Justinian—a work clearly different from the very brief

^A two books of the *Collectanea*, which seem to be fragments rather than an ordered treatment of events. Therefore, this Theodorus wrote his own ecclesiastical history. Suidas says: "Theodorus, a reader of the Great Church of Constantinople, wrote an ecclesiastical history from the times of Constantine to the reign of Justinian." Theodorus, a reader of the Great Church of Constantinople, wrote an ecclesiastical history from the times of Constantine up to the reign of Justinian. Certain portions of the ecclesiastical history of Theodorus the Lector are recited in the seventh general synod, act 5; and from the fifth book in act 1; and by John of Damascus in his third oration *On the Images*; and by Suidas under the entry *Diodorus the Monk*, and in other places. But it must be investigated whether this is the same person as that Theodorus the Anagnostes, or Lector, whom Suidas treats under the entry *Kynegon*.

And perhaps he was no other than Theodorus, a reader from Constantinople, a Paphlagonian by birth, who in his ecclesiastical history continues a single, complete, and absolute narrative from Theodoret, Sozomen, and Socrates—in such a way, indeed, that he borrows for himself those things which those three narrate, from him who treated the matter more clearly and accurately; yet he expands upon the remaining parts, which only one of them had recorded in his history while the others were silent; yet in such a way that he preserves the time when the events took place and fits everything together most fittingly. Therefore, whoever reads him will have the three aforementioned historians at his disposal at one and the same time. From this history, the passage of time made two books remaining for us, which begin from the empire of Constantine the Great and end at the inauguration of the Emperor Julian under the consulship of Taurus and Florentius. By these, nearly countless places in Theodoret, Socrates, and Sozomen, corrupted by the carelessness of copyists, are restored and emended. They are kept in my possession, so prepared that when it is permitted by the printers, they may see the light [(a)]. And so that you also, reader, may have from him what he did in his history, take the proemium of the work.

"Since it fell to my lot by some decree to be a stranger in our Paphlagonian nation, in the metropolis named Gangra, and there to enjoy your holy and venerable presence, I was compelled by you, having received the themes from it, to collect the authors of ecclesiastical histories, and to arrange one composition from them. But since it is not holy to contradict a fatherly command, even if I lacked the appropriate phrasing, I came to such a task without delay, emboldened by your prayers. For the most admirable Eusebius, surnamed Pamphili, having labored on the collection of such ecclesiastical themes of learned men from ancient times—I mean not only those who philosophized among Christians but also among the Hebrews—and having composed this historical arrangement up to the twentieth year of the Christ-loving and, as truly ordained by God, reign of Constantine the most famous and blessed; having finished here, learned men, both God-beloved and very learned, have exercised zeal for such a structure of the theme, as the writing of the exposed works will testify—I mean Theodoret of blessed memory, the bishop of Cyrus, Sozomen, and Socrates, having made a treatise for the remaining times—not both setting the such gathering, but each one having philosophized privately and having recorded the accounts. Since, therefore, each was shown to have narrated some of the events that took place in their times as driven by the sequence, while some they narrated privately, I thought it reasonable to arrange in the present book what was collectively agreed upon by them, through him who narrates more clearly and concisely, noting in the margin that both have agreed; those things, however, which were exposed by each one again privately, I shall reveal. I shall begin the theme from the history of the most blessed Sozomen."

*Address to the Emperor Theodosius by Sozomen.* Regarding this Ecclesiastical History of Theodorus, we must note what Vossius reports in the twenty-second chapter of the second book of *On Greek Historians*: "Whence also Jodocus Coccius, in the index of authors which he prefixed to his *Catholic Treasury*, says that he lived in the year 520." Which was two years after the death of Anastasius. Therefore he only treats of Marcian, Leo, Zeno, Basiliscus, and Anastasius. I am speaking, however, of the Theodorus as we now have him in Greek and Latin in the corpus of *Ecclesiastical History*, and in Latin alone in the *Bibliotheca Patrum*, vol. VII, second edition. But he whom Suidas used began from Constantine the Great. Shall we say that it began so much higher up?

because in the final book he adds a few things about the years of Constantine the Great, Constantius, Theodosius the Great, Arcadius, and Theodosius the Younger? But these things are so meager that they do not deserve to be taken into consideration; especially since they are added at the end, in such a way that they seem to have been attached by someone else. Indeed, the two little books of *Collectanea* are so slight that they are hardly worthy of being called an *Ecclesiastical History*, as Suidas calls it. For my part, I fear they are merely certain excerpts. And this is all the more probable, because the inscription of the second book is, "From the second book." And toward the first book these things are prefixed: "Excerpts from the Ecclesiastical History from the voice of Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos." I believe Nicephorus Callistus (who lived in the year 1320) did not dictate the entire History of Theodorus to his amanuensis, but only those things which he thought were more worthy of being excerpted. And indeed, the appendix of Possevinus to the *Apparatus Sacer* testifies that an epitome of the ecclesiastical histories of Theodorus Lector and Philostorgius exists in the Bessarion Library at Venice. Likewise, an ecclesiastical composition of Theodorus Lector from various authors. Thus, it is fitting to distinguish between the proper History of Theodorus and the separate epitome of it. And that is indeed how it seems to me. Yet I will not fight if anyone, along with the very learned Labbe, should think this knot is untied by the idea that either Theodorus Lector wrote more histories, or that there were several "Theodorus Lectors." But if one may conjecture anything after these two most excellent men, I would say that one Theodorus continued the History from Constantine the Great to the times of Justinian, yet in such a way that he composed the first two books—since he had nothing better of his own—from Theodoret, Socrates, and Sozomen, who are considered to have treated those times more accurately than others; and that he wrote the remaining History down to the reign of Justinian by himself, since he possessed, besides those same men, other more diligent sources; and that Nicephorus Callistus excerpted two books of "eclogae" from these later books, but not from the two former ones, because whatever was contained there could be drawn more sincerely from the original sources themselves. And this man is called a "Paphlagonian Byzantine," not because he was a Byzantine by origin, but because he held the office of *lector* at Byzantium. Suidas indicated this to us: "Theodorus, one of the lectors of the Great Church of Constantinople." Theodorus, lector of the Great Church of Constantinople. Nor did Nicephorus Callistus intend anything else when he says in the Preface: "and the Byzantine lector Theodorus." For it does not mean that he was born at Byzantium, but that he served as a lector at Byzantium. John of Damascus, in his 3rd Oration *On Images*, uses the testimony of Theodorus the Constantinopolitan historiographer from his Ecclesiastical History concerning Gennadius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Whether he derived it from this man, or from another Byzantine historian named Theodorus, let others guess.

SECOND NOTICE.

Theodorus, historiographer of Constantinople, is praised by John of Damascus in bk. III *On Images*, p. 386 of the distinguished Lequien edition, who, on p. 380, further reports that he was a *lector* at Constantinople; which is also confirmed by Nicephorus, bk. II, ch. 1 of his *History*; by the author of the *Parastaseis chronicai* in Combefis’s *Origines Constantinopolitanae*, p. 19, in which he is called "Theodorus the chronographer, refreshed by readings," and by Suidas, who calls Theodorus "one of the lectors of the Great Church of Constantinople." This man, famous under the emperors Justin and Justinian, as it seems, wrote in two books a *Compendium of Tripartite Ecclesiastical History* from the books of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, which exists from the twentieth year of Constantine the Great up to the death of Constantius. For although it has not yet seen the light, it was in Greek manuscript in the possession of Allatius, who intended to publish it; and Valesius successfully used the various readings of that codex, transcribed by the hand of Sam. Tennulius, professor at Nijmegen, to clear up errors from the histories of those three men, and he even published the Proem in Greek and Latin after his Preface to Theodorus. I do not know whether that book of Allatius was transcribed from the Venetian codex of St. Mark, which Possevinus and Thomasinus in his catalogue of Venetian manuscripts mention. It certainly seems to have been defective in its final part, because it does not follow the thread of the History as far as the final years of Theodosius the Younger.

Furthermore, he himself composed on his own initiative an Ecclesiastical History, likewise in two books, from the final times of Theodosius the Younger, where Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret end, up to the Emperor Justin the Elder. These two books have themselves long since perished. There exist, however, from them ^A Excerpts *[taken down from the voice of Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos]*, preserved as dictated by Nicephorus Callistus. They appeared in Greek together with the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius and others, from a Royal codex (which Valesius also used exclusively), Paris, 1544, folio. Wolfgang Musculus translated them into Latin; his interpretation—to say nothing of the Bibliothecae Patrum and other Latin editions of ecclesiastical historians recounted above in the entry on Eusebius—exists also in the Greco-Latin Geneva edition of 1612, folio. Most recently, they were published with a translation and excellent notes by Henri Valesius, who also appended other fragments of Theodorus from Suidas, Theophanes, Damascenus, and the Seventh Synod, at the end of Theodoret, Evagrius, and Philostorgius, whose editions I have already mentioned. We must also add the *[fragment]* regarding expositions of the faith from the Ecclesiastical History, which Joseph Maria Suaresius brought forth from the Vatican Library and published with his own translation alongside the works of Saint Nilus, page 614; then those which are cited from Theodorus Lector in the *Origins of Constantinople* illustrated by Combefis. But where Damascenus, in *De imaginibus* III, page 375, praises the *tomos* or book of Theodorus’s *Ecclesiastical History* as the fourth, the second of these is to be understood, because he counted the two prior ones that I mentioned as a compendium from Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret combined, just as Suidas, who writes that Theodorus wove his history from the times of Constantine to those of Justinian. Thus, in the first session of the Seventh Synod, Volume III of the Binius edition, page 494, where the fifth book is cited, Valesius, in *Ad Theodorum*, page 580, warns that *proton* (first) should be read instead of *pempton* (fifth). Another passage is produced in that same Seventh Synod, or Second Nicaea, in the fifth session, page 609 sqq.

(a) Valesius thinks that Nicephorus would not otherwise have derived so much into his Histories from there, had he had the complete books of Theodorus, but that he used only these excerpts, ^B and that he dictated them to someone, and for that reason they are said to be *[from the voice of Nicephorus]*, just as the book of Leontius, *De sectis*, is inscribed *[From the voice of Theodorus the most pious abbot]* as dictated by Theodorus the abbot to his amanuensis.

EXCERPTS FROM THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF THEODORUS LECTOR, DICTATED BY NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS, SON OF XANTHOPULUS

FROM THE FIRST BOOK

1. Theodosius the Younger, having gone out to hunt ^A, was swept into the river Leucus, as Theodorus relates, and died the following night, and was buried in the tomb of his father Arcadius. He also says that the Empress Eudocia, having gone to Jerusalem, did not return anymore; and that Marina, a virgin, departed this life in the palace before her brother. Moreover, he says that Chrysaphius, who was also called Tzumas, was killed by order of Pulcheria; and that Eudocia sent to Pulcheria from Jerusalem the icon of the Mother of God [(a)], which the apostle Luke had painted.

2. Marcianus, an Illyrian by birth, who was a tribune, advanced in age, and excellent in war, was proclaimed emperor in the Hebdomon by the entire army.