The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus - Coptic ...

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY: BOOK III 177
were carried away by the arguments and brought under control,
of whom one is Marinus, the bishop of Beirut, 124 but others consented
under force and compulsion to the synodicals of Severus,
which contained an anathema both of the Synod and of the
others who had spoken of two natures or characters in the Lord,
the £esh and the divinity; others, after consenting under compulsion,
repented and retracted, among whom are those dependent
on Apamea; others completely refused to consent, among whom
are Julian of Bostra, and Epiphanius of Tyre, [133] and some
other bishops, it is said. 125 But the Isaurians, who have now
come to their senses, condemn themselves for the previous deception
while they anathematize Severus and his party. 126 Others,
however, of the bishops and clergy under Severus have left their
churches and £ed; among these both Julian of Bostra and Peter
of Damascus are living here, 127 as too is Mamas, one of the two
who appeared to be leaders of the Dioscorians, by whom indeed
Severus was restored; he has condemned their arrogance. 128
124 Marinus signed the declaration of faith that Severus made at his enthronement:
Kugener ‘Allocution’ 277^8.
125 Severus attempted to rally support for his strict doctrinal stance in a series of councils,
of which the most important was held at Tyre in 514, where a⁄rmations of loyalty could
be obtained; the patriarch of Antioch also had considerable powers of patronage (e.g.
Severus, Letters i.22), and could manipulate his ¢nancial power and disciplinary authority
to obtain agreement. Some areas, such as Second Syria, the province dependent on Apamea
(see Honigmann, E¤ve“ques 54^65; Peeters, ‘Hypatius’ 26^7), and individuals such as Epiphanius
of Tyre, the brother of the deposed Flavian, remained adamantly hostile: see Severus,
Letters i.24, 30, for disagreements and tension in Second Syria, and Letters of Severus 51
(PO 12, p. 326) on the impossibility of receiving Epiphanius back into communion, even if
he were to repent.
126 Isauria was an area where Severus had some support (cf. the earlier quotation from
the letter to Alcison at iii.31, with n. 106 above; Rufus, Plerophories 21^3, provides evidence
for Monophysites in the region); Severus also made a particular attempt to tighten up on
disciplinary matters and increase patriarchal control there, developments which might
have persuaded the local clergy to reject his doctrinal preferences.
127 In 517 a large group of anti-Severan monks gathered at the monastery of Maro,
south of Damascus, and appealed to Pope Hormisdas against their patriarch; this would
indicate that the local bishops, even though in exile, had strong support.
128 Mamas was the archimandrite of the anti-Chalcedonian monks at Eleutheropolis,
where Severus had begun his monastic career, and he accompanied Severus to Constantinople
in 508 to protest against the actions of Nephalius. But he had then come under the in£uence
of Sabas, who brought him to Jerusalem and reconciled him with Patriarch Elias; as a