Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

44 2. the eastern empire: theodosius to anastasius
aristocracy, 66 whose good will was further courted by the abolition of the
tax on senatorial land known as the collatio glebalis or follis. 67 The senatorial
aristocracy also appears to have resented the direction of ecclesiastical
policy in Theodosius’ final years, so that a reversal on this front might be
expected further to increase their sympathy for the new regime, 68 as well as
winning the favour of pope Leo who in turn had influence with
Valentinian’s court at Ravenna. 69
The embodiment of Marcian’s ecclesiastical policy was the oecumenical
council held at Chalcedon in 451, a watershed in the history of the church.
Dioscorus of Alexandria, the instigator of the Second Council of Ephesus,
was condemned and deposed; those in whose condemnation he had been
instrumental in 449 – Flavian of Constantinople and other supposed
Nestorian sympathizers – were rehabilitated; and a formula was sanctioned
which aimed to find common ground between the Antiochene and
Alexandrian positions on the relationship of the human and the divine in
Christ. The council brought immediate benefits for Marcian – he was hailed
as a new Constantine and relations between Constantinople and the pope
were much improved – but the Chalcedonian formula failed to reunite the
warring factions and, if anything, served to harden divergent tendencies. In
the eyes of supporters of the Alexandrian school of thought, it still made
too many concessions to unacceptable Antiochene ideas, and the rejection
of Chalcedon became a rallying-cry which strengthened their sense of separate
identity and gave rise during the ensuing decades to the so-called
Monophysite movement. Moreover, although the Chalcedonian definition
was compatible with Antiochene teaching, the council also reaffirmed
Nestorius’ condemnation as a heretic, prompting some adherents of the
Antiochene tradition also to reject Chalcedon and furthering the process
through which an independent Nestorian church eventually emerged.
The strength of popular feelings aroused by Chalcedon may be gauged
from the fact that Marcian was obliged to use military force to maintain
pro-Chalcedonian bishops in office in Alexandria and Jerusalem, and when
news of Marcian’s death reached the former city in 457, the incumbent was
lynched and replaced by an anti-Chalcedonian candidate whom Marcian’s
successor was in turn only able to replace by deploying troops. Of course,
incidents of this sort simply served to reinforce popular antagonism
towards Chalcedon and strengthen support for Monophysite theology in
Egypt and Palestine, and increasingly even in Syria. 70
66 Jones, LRE 219.
67 CJ xii.2.2 (450–5). Barnish (1989) discusses the evidence for how significant a source of income
68 this was for the government. Gregory (1979) 141–2, 166.
69 Stein (1959) i.312; Jones, LRE 219.
70 Frend, Monophysite Movement 148–69; Gray,Defence of Chalcedon 17–25; Meyendorff, Imperial Unity
187–90.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008