energetic people who contributed much to crowning his period with many important events in the internal life of the Empire. It is because of these events that historians no more look upon Theodosius as a weak and ill-fated emperor. One of the most influential persons during the reign of Theodosius was his sister, Pulcheria. She was the person who arranged the marriage of Theodosius and Athenaïs (later named Eudocia, at baptism), the daughter of an Athenian philosopher and a woman of high cultural attainment and some literary genius. She wrote a number of works, treating chiefly of religious topics, but reflecting also some of the contemporary political events.

With regard to external struggles, the eastern half of the Empire was more fortunate during the period of Theodosius II than was the western half during the same period. No strenuous campaigns had to be organized in the East, while the West was going through a very severe crisis because of the migrations of the Germans. The most terrific shock came to the Romans when the commander of the Visigoths, Alaric, entered Rome, the former capital of the pagan Roman Empire. Then the barbarians formed their first kingdoms on Roman territory in Western Europe and in Northern Africa. At the same time the eastern part of the Empire was for a while confronted with the Hun danger. These barbarians attacked Byzantine territory and reached almost as far as the walls of Constantinople in their ravaging raids. The Emperor was forced to pay them a large sum of money and cede the territory south of the Danube. Friendly relations were then established with the Huns, and an embassy headed by Priscus was sent from Constantinople to Pannonia. Priscus left an extremely interesting description of the court of Attila which reflects many of the customs and manners of the Huns. This description is particularly valuable because it may be taken as an account, not only of the life of the Huns, but also of the customs of the Slavs of the Middle Danube who were conquered by the Huns.104

Theological disputes and the Third Ecumenical Council.-The first two ecumenical councils definitely settled the question that Jesus Christ is both God and man. But this decision fell short of 104 For a free English translation of Pricus' account, see Bury, I, 279-88.

satisfying the probing theological minds haunted by the problem of how the union of the divine substance of Jesus Christ with his human nature was to be conceived. In Antioch at the end of the fourth century originated the teaching that there was no complete union of the two natures in Christ. In its further developments this teaching attempted to prove the absolute independence of Christ's human nature both before and after its union with the divine nature. As long as this doctrine remained within the confines of a limited circle of men it did not cause any serious disturbance in the church. But with the passing of the patriarchal throne of Constantinople to the Antiochene presbyter, Nestorius, an ardent follower of this new teaching, conditions changed considerably, because this Patriarch imposed the teaching of Antioch upon the church. Famous for his eloquence, immediately after his consecration he addressed the Emperor as follows: "Give me, my prince, the earth purged of heretics, and I will give you heaven as a recompense. Assist me in destroying heretics, and I will assist you in vanquishing the Persians."105 By heretics Nestorius meant all those who did not share his views on the independence of the human nature in Jesus Christ. Nestorius' name for the Virgin Mary was not the "Mother of God" but the "Mother of Christ," i.e., the "Mother of a man."

The persecutions by Nestorius of his opponents aroused a great storm in the church. Particularly strong was the protest against Nestorius by the Alexandrian Patriarch, Cyril, and Pope Celestine, who condemned the new heretical teaching at a council gathered in Rome. Theodosius, wishing to put an end to these church disputes, convoked at Ephesus the third Ecumenical Council, which condemned the Nestorian doctrine in the year 431. Nestorius was exiled to Egypt, where he spent the remainder of his life.

The condemnation of Nestorianism did not put an end to it; there still remained numerous followers of this teaching in Syria and Mesopotamia, and the Emperor ordered the administration of these provinces to take severe measures against them. The main center of Nestorianism was Edessa, the home of the famous school which spread the ideas of Antioch. In the year 489, during the reign 105 Socratis, Historia Ecclesiastica, VII, 29 (in English in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, II, 169).

of Zeno, this school was destroyed and the teachers and pupils were driven out of the city. They went to Persia and founded a new school at Nisibis. The King of Persia gladly admitted the Nestorians and offered them his protection, for, considering them enemies of the Empire, he counted on using them to his advantage when an opportunity arose. The Persian church of the Nestorian or SyroChaldean Christians was headed, as has been mentioned before, by a bishop who bore the title of Catholicos. From Persia Christianity in its Nestorian form spread widely into Central Asia and was accepted by a considerable number of followers in India.

The Council of Ephesus was followed in the Byzantine church itself, and in Alexandria in particular, by the development of new movements in opposition to Nestorianism. The followers of Cyril of Alexandria, while believing in the preponderance of the divine nature over the human in Jesus Christ, arrived at the conclusion that the human was completely absorbed by the divine substance; hence Jesus Christ possessed but one-divine-nature. This new teaching was called Monophysitism, or the Monophysitic doctrine, and its followers are known as the Monophysites (from the Greek μóvos, "one," and puois, "nature").106 With the aid of two ardent Monophysites, the Alexandrian bishop Dioscorus, and Eutyches, the archimandrite of a monastery in Constantinople, Monophysitism made great progress. The Emperor sided with Dioscorus, for he considered him an advocate of the ideas of Cyril of Alexandria. The new teaching was opposed by the Patriarch of Constantinople and by Pope Leo I the Great. Dioscorus then urged the Emperor to call a council in the year 449 at Ephesus, which is known in history as the "Robber Council." The Alexandrian party of Monophysites headed by Dioscorus, who presided at the council, by coercing those members of the council who did not agree with them, forced them to recognize the teaching of Eutyches (Monophysitism) as orthodox and to condemn the opponents of the new doctrine. The Emperor ratified the decisions of the council, officially recognizing it as an ecumenical council. Naturally the council fell short of 106 The problem of the origin of Monophysitism and its doctrine is very obscure; practically, we do not even know who was the originator of the Monophysitic doctrine. See, for example, J. Maspero, Histoire des patriarches d'Alexandrie (518-616) (Paris, 1923),

pp. 1-3.

establishing harmony in the church. A period of stormy disturbances followed, during which Theodosius died, leaving to his successors the solution of the problem of Monophysitism, highly important in Byzantine history.

Besides the stormy and significant religious events of the period of Theodosius, this epoch is historically important because of a number of events in the internal life of the Empire.

The higher school at Constantinople. Codex Theodosianus. The walls of Constantinople.-The organization of the higher school at Constantinople and the publication of the Theodosian Code, which took place during the reign of Theodosius, were both of great cultural significance in the life of the Byzantine Empire.

Until the fifth century the city of Athens, the home of the famous philosophic school, was the main center of pagan teaching in the Roman Empire. The Greek teachers of rhetoric and philosophy, better known as the sophists, came there from all parts of the Empire, some to display their knowledge and oratorical eloquence, others in hopes of obtaining good positions in the teaching profession. These teachers were partly supported from the imperial treasury, partly from the treasuries of various cities. Tutoring and lecturing was also better paid in Athens than elsewhere. The triumph of Christianity at the end of the fourth century dealt the Athenian school a heavy blow. The intellectual life of Athens was also greatly affected at the very close of the same century by the devastating advances of the Visigoths into Greece. Even after the departure of Alaric and the Visigoths, the Athenian school did not rise to its former position; the number of philosophers was greatly decreased. More severe than all the foregoing circumstances was the blow dealt to the Athenian pagan school by the organization of the higher school, or university, in Constantinople.

Since Constantinople had become the capital of the Empire, many rhetoricians and philosophers came to the new city, so that even before Theodosius II, a kind of high school might have existed in Constantinople. Teachers and scholars were invited to Constantinople from Africa, Syria, and other places. St. Hieronymus remarks in his Chronicle (360-62 A.D.): "Euanthius, the most. learned grammarian, died at Constantinople, and in his place Char

isius was brought from Africa."107 Accordingly the most recent student of the problem of the higher schools in Constantinople in the Middle Ages says that under Theodosius II the higher school was not founded, but reorganized.108

In the year 425 Theodosius II issued a decree dealing with the organization of a higher school.109 The number of professors was to be thirty-one; they taught grammar, rhetoric, jurisprudence, and philosophy. The teaching was conducted partly in Greek and partly in Latin.

The decree spoke of three rhetors (oratores) and ten grammarians who were to conduct their teaching in Latin, and five rhetors or sophists (sofistae) and ten grammarians who were to teach in Greek. In addition to this the decree provided for one chair for philosophy and two chairs for jurisprudence. While Latin still remained the official language of the Empire, the foundation of Greek chairs at the University indicates that the Emperor was beginning to see that in the new capital Greek had undeniable rights as the language most spoken and understood in the eastern part of the Empire. We might note that the number of Greek rhetors exceeded the number of Latin rhetors by two. The new higher school was given a separate building with large lecture-rooms and auditoriums. The professors were forbidden to tutor anyone privately in their homes; they were to devote all their time and efforts to teaching within the school walls. They were provided with a definite salary from the imperial exchequer and could advance to very high rank. This educational center at Constantinople became a dangerous rival of the Athenian pagan school, which was steadily declining. In the subsequent history of the Byzantine Empire the higher school of Theodosius II will stand out for long as the center about which were assembled the best cultural forces of the Empire.

From the period of Theodosius II also dates the oldest collection of decrees of Roman emperors which has come down to us.

107 S. Hieronymi, Chronicon (Migne, Patr. Lat. XXVII, cols. 689-90). See H. Usener, Vier lateinische Grammatiker, Rheinisches Museum, XXIII (1868), 492.

108 See Fr. Fuchs, Die Höheren Schulen von Konstantinopel im Mittelalter (LeipzigBerlin, 1926), p. 2.

100 Codex Theodosianus, XIV, 9, 3.