Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

justinian’s successors 833
tribes joined the Persians, seriously affecting both the Monophysites, whose
political arm was now cut off, and the strategic safety of the empire.
Under Maurice, the perpetual wrangling among Monophysites produced
yet another schism in the east. The death of Paul the Black in 581 did not
end the bad feeling between the patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria.
In 587 Peter of Antioch, formerly of Callinicum, and Damian of
Alexandria came to blows when the Antiochene patriarch criticized
Damian’s treatise against tritheism. This episode, which was characterized
by futile and tempestuous meetings between the patriarchs in Arabia and
Alexandria, led to a complete rupture, which was to last until their successors
were able to restore unity of a sort in 616. 88
Although cordial relations existed between east and west at this time, the
concerns in the west were different. The Aquileian schism continued there,
and on his succession in 590 as bishop of Rome, Gregory was careful to
proclaim the four oecumenical councils, likening them to the four gospels,
while reserving an ambiguous place for the Second Council of
Constantinople. 89 His mission of 596, bringing Christianity to the Anglo-
Saxons under the leadership of the monk Augustine, involved none of the
doctrinal complications associated with the two main differing interpretations
of orthodoxy found in the east.
Although by the end of the sixth century the Council of Chalcedon was
generally accepted in the west, in the east the separation between the
Monophysite and Chalcedonian churches continued. Among anti-
Chalcedonians in Syria and Egypt, in particular, an increasing part was being
played by nationalism, fuelled by the long-standing rivalry between Antioch
and Alexandria. Whether or not orthodoxy was successfully defined at
Chalcedon, its enforcement by emperors and ecclesiastical hierarchy had
failed, as had attempts to restore enduring unity between Christians in the
empire. Neither imperial legislation, which especially under Justinian
became an autocratic tool for enforcing orthodoxy, nor compromise theological
statements nor the deposition or exile of their bishops had persuaded
convinced anti-Chalcedonians to accept the council of 451 and the
Tome of Leo. The Second Council of Constantinople and its attempt to
remove all suspicion of Nestorianism from Chalcedon had succeeded only
in driving another wedge between east and west. But it was not simply that
orthodoxy as defined by Chalcedon had resisted enforcement. Monophysite
orthodoxy and cohesion were threatened by the rise of splinter groups and
by growing anarchy among the adherents of the one-nature christology.
88 For Peter’s side of the dispute see Ebied, Van Roey and Wickham (1981).
89 Greg. Ep. 3, 10; Murphy and Sherwood (1974) 127–8.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008