Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

830 27. the definition and enforcement of orthodoxy
enabled them to arrange for discussions in Constantinople with other anti-
Chalcedonians – remarkably, under the presidency of the Chalcedonian
patriarch John (569–70). The president stipulated that the sole basis of
negotiation between the two dissenting parties should be the works of
Severus of Antioch. The failure of these discussions was the immediate
cause of the publication of an imperial edict in 571, sometimes called the
second Henotikon. 73 The terms of the edict were moderate, and its inspiration
neo-Chalcedonian, but it was much less accommodating to
Monophysite demands than the draft edict presented at Callinicum.
Although the document is couched in Chalcedonian terms, there is no
mention of that council. Justin’s aim in this legislation was to unite both
Monophysites and Chalcedonians, and Monophysites among themselves,
and several Monophysite bishops, including Paul of Antioch and John of
Ephesus, were in fact beguiled into communion with the Dyophysites on
the understanding that Chalcedon would be anathematized. On withdrawing
from communion they were imprisoned, and, with Justin’s patience at
an end, persecution began in earnest, lasting until the emperor’s death in
578. In the west, too, Justin’s edict met with little success. However, the
prefect of Rome, Gregory, the future pope, was able to persuade the new
bishop of Milan, Laurentius, to join communion with Rome, thereby weakening
the Aquileian schism.
Between 569 and 571 John Philoponus had written a tract On the
Resurrection, which was strongly objected to by Conon but approved by
Athanasius. Subsequently the tritheists split into two groups, the Cononites
and the Athanasians, and the fortunes of tritheism after this point are inglorious.
Eugenius fled, Conon was exiled, and Athanasius died in 571. 74 While
this split meant the end of tritheist strength, the views of Philoponus and
Conon were attacked by both Chalcedonians and Monophysites in various
efforts to save orthodox christology.
According to the anti-Chalcedonian bishop and historian John of
Ephesus, Justin’s successor Tiberius (578–82) continued the persecution
instigated by Justin, but in a desultory manner. 75 On his accession there
was a demonstration in Constantinople against the Arian Goths, who, in
return for their service in the Byzantine army, had been permitted by
Tiberius to construct their own church in the capital. This religious tolerance
aroused suspicions about the emperor himself, and to clear his orthodoxy
he was constrained to take action against the Arians, Montanists and
Sabbatians, who were imprisoned but later dismissed on bail. 76 It was
during Tiberius’ reign, too, that a persecution was waged against pagans,
in retaliation for the persecution which the inhabitants of Heliopolis
73 E.g. by Frend, Monophysite Movement 322, 366. For the text of the edict see Evagr. HE v.4.
74 Allen, Evagrius 38. 75 John Eph. HE iii.15–16; pace Frend, Monophysite Movement 328.
76 John Eph. HE iii.13.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008