The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus - Coptic ...

168
EVAGRIUS
31 Now, when writing to Alcison concerning Macedonius and Flavian,
the monastic community in Palestine spoke as follows, word for word: 97
After Peter was laid to rest, Alexandria and Egypt were again
separated o¡ by themselves since Athanasius, who took over
after Peter, sent a document anathematizing the Synod in the
synodical letters to the bishops of Constantinople, Antioch and
Jerusalem. 98 And since this was not accepted, from that time
Alexandria and Egypt and Libya have continued by themselves,
and the whole of the rest of the East by itself, while the West
would not tolerate being in communion with them on any
other terms except that both Peter Mongus and Acacius be
added to the anathema on Nestorius, Eutyches and Dioscorus.
And so, while the churches throughout the universe were in this
state, the genuine followers of Dioscorus and Eutyches were
everywhere reduced to a minute number. And when they were
all but on the point of disappearing from the earth so that they
did not exist, Xena|«as, who is truly a stranger to God 99 ^ with
For Euphemius’ removal in 496, see iii.23 (p. 121:32) and n. 113 below; the depositions of
Macedonius in 511 and Flavian in 512 are treated in the following chapters (iii.32^3).
97 Cf. iii.33 below for another extract from this letter, and ii.5 (p. 52) for a paraphrase.
The letter, which was composed towards the end of Anastasius’ reign (c. 515^16), is cited to
provide a narrative of the main stages in the depositions of Flavian of Antioch and Macedonius
of Constantinople, though in each case Evagrius also presents supplementary information.
Zachariah of Mitylene’s History, which had underpinned Evagrius’ account of
ecclesiastical events during the reigns of Leo and Zeno, terminated with the accession of
Anastasius, so that Evagrius was now forced to construct his narrative from what information
came to hand.
Alcison of Nicopolis was one of the leading Chalcedonian theologians of the early sixth
century (cf. ii n. 80 above).
98 Cf. iii.23, p. 121:19^22, where only the letter to Antioch is mentioned.
99 There is a pun on the name of Xena|«as (Philoxenus of Mabbug) and xenos, ‘stranger’.
Philoxenus, a Syriac speaker from Persia, was one of the leading Monophysite writers who,
with his contemporary Severus of Antioch, established a distinctive Monophysite theology.
He had been appointed bishop of Mabbug (Hierapolis) by Peter the Fuller in 485, and thereafter
managed to push much of the Patriarchate of Antioch to adopt a Monophysite position.
See Honigmann, E¤ve“ques 66^8; Frend, Rise 214^17; and for his doctrinal position,
Chesnut, Christologies part II.
Although there were relatively few people who accepted the extreme position of
Eutyches, the Palestinian monks have overstated the decline in support for Dioscorus
(witness the troubles of Peter Mongus at Alexandria) in order to exaggerate the impact of