Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

three chapters and the fifth oecumenical council 81
issued a second document of the same import as the first, 107 which so much
enraged Vigilius that notwithstanding his recent experience he decided to
oppose it formally. Imperial officers had already succeeded in forcing him
to leave his place of sanctuary at the church of Sts Peter and Paul, and now
troops would have dragged him with his supporters from the altar of the
church of St Euphemia, where he next sought sanctuary. Justinian sent a
high-level delegation, which included Belisarius, to guarantee Vigilius’
safety if he returned to the palace of Placidia, but the pope refused to leave
and succeeded in publicizing his ill-treament. 108 Before the council began,
the patriarch Menas of Constantinople died, and was quickly replaced, late
in 552, by Eutychius of Amasea, who had distinguished himself as a supporter
of Justinian’s policy, and who could be relied upon to guide the
council in the right way. 109
If the preliminaries made a sorry story, the council and its aftermath were
no better. The Fifth Oecumenical Council opened in Constantinople on 5
May 553, attended by 166 bishops, of whom only nine came from Illyria and
none from Italy outside Milan and Rome. 110 Eustochius, the patriarch of
Jerusalem, was not present, and, though he was still in the city, Vigilius
refused to attend, responding to delegations from the council with a document
of his own which led to the council’s removing his name from the diptychs.
At last, however, he gave way, and in February 554 published a second
Constitutum and was formally reconciled with the emperor and council. The
unfortunate Vigilius died on the way back to Rome in June 555.
While scrupulously refraining from attending the council in person,
Justinian had pushed his views through, but without achieving any of his
objectives. Pelagius, Vigilius’ successor, was resisted by his own bishops,
while the Illyrian opposition spread into north Italy; in the east the
Monophysites were not reconciled, and the church of Persia reaffirmed its
attachment to Nestorianism. 111 In seventh-century Spain, Isidore of Seville
effectively denied the authority of the council, which was thus remembered
as either illegitimate or a failure; only Eustratius the deacon, apologist for
the patriarch Eutychius on the latter’s death some three decades later, could
bring himself to praise it as a major achievement. The Italian church had
been alienated just as Italy itself had been officially ‘recovered’, while the
growing Monophysite self-identity in the east had received encouragement.
The events leading up to the council and its outcome were also felt
sharply in North Africa. Victor of Tunnuna, who shared the experiences
107 Known as the Expositio rectae fidei, ed. Schwartz (1939), 73–111 (Greek and Latin); cf. Chron. Pasch.,
636–84 (not translated by Whitby and Whitby (1989)). 108 Stein, Bas-Empire ii.649–50.
109 Evagr. HE iv.38, V. Eutych., PG lxxxvi.3. 2300, with Allen, Evagrius 203.
110 ACO iv.1; numbers: Chrysos (1966); cf. Stein, Bas-Empire ii.654–69; Capizzi, Giustiniano 118–31;
Herrin, Formation of Christendom 119–25; Meyendorff, Imperial Unity 241–5. An account highly flattering
to Eutychius is given in Eustratius’ Life of the patriarch Eutychius, ed. Laga 1994: see Cameron (1988),
and see also Evagr. HE iv.38. 111 See Guillaumont (1969/70) 54–62.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008