The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus - Coptic ...

lvi
EVAGRIUS
historical narrative, of church a¡airs and secular material, and various
digressions and set pieces. Each book contains ecclesiastical documents,
often very substantial: the decision of First Ephesus and related texts
(i.4, 6), the acta of Chalcedon and an Encyclical of Leo (ii.4, 9^10, 18),
doctrinal Edicts of Basiliscus and Zeno, reactions to these, and extracts
from the letter to Alcison (iii.4^5, 7, 14 ,17, 20^1, 31, 33), texts related to
the Fifth Ecumenical Council (iv.38), 108 Justin II’s doctrinal Edict (v.4),
the dedications of Khusro II (vi.21). Each book also contains diversions
from the narrative. In Book i, Evagrius analyses the Devil’s assault on
the Church, relates Nestorius’ account of his exile, attacks pagans,
describes Symeon the Stylite’s lifestyle, and reviews the di¡erent types
of contemporary asceticism (i.1, 7, 11, 21). Book ii provides a description
of the shrine of Euphemia and her miraculous e¡usions (ii.3). In Book
iii, he moralizes on the consequences of lack of self-control and on opportunity,
and attacks the pagan historian Zosimus (iii.1, 26, 40^1). Book iv
contains accounts of numerous saints and miracles, as well as the
analysis of the plague and a description of S. Sophia (iv.7, 15, 26^9, 31,
33^6). In Book v, Evagrius pays considerable attention to the characters
of leading ¢gures, Justin, Gregory of Antioch, Tiberius and Maurice,
relates portents of Maurice’s succession, and reviews his own historiographical
predecessors (v.1, 6, 9, 13, 19, 21, 24). Book vi opens with a
panegyrical description of Maurice’s marriage, contains a formal
speech delivered by Gregory to the eastern army, and describes the
career of Symeon Stylites the Younger (vi.1, 11, 23). It is perhaps signi¢cant
that Books which contain a high proportion of ecclesiastical texts
(e.g. ii) have relatively little by way of other diversions from the narrative,
while the converse is also true (iv and v).
Evagrius employed di¡erent levels of stylistic presentation for his
di¡erent types of material, which has led to criticism of a choppy quality
in his style, with the £at narrative being interspersed with rhetorical highlights.
109 There is some justice in this complaint, but criticism might have
been even harsher if Evagrius had composed the whole work in his basic
narrative style, without any relief. Evagrius’ rhetoric frequently has a
point: thus his praise of Marcian is enhanced by elaborate periphrasis
108 Evagrius’ failure to quote any of Justinian’s religious pronouncements has already
been noted, and should probably be linked with Evagrius’ hostility to this emperor because
of his eventual lapse into heresy.
109 Caires, ‘Evagrius’ 49.