and demanded that it be signed by all the patriarchs and bishops. But this was not easy to accomplish. The West was troubled by the fact that the willingness to sign this imperial edict might mean an encroachment upon the authority of the council of Chalcedon. One learned deacon of Carthage wrote, "If the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon are being disputed, then is it not possible that also the Council of Nicaea might be subject to a similar menace?" In addition to this the question was raised as to whether it was permissible to condemn dead men, since all three writers died in the preceding century. Finally, some leaders of the West were of the opinion that by this edict the Emperor was violating the conscience of members of the church. This view was almost absent from the eastern church, where the intervention of the imperial power in deciding dogmatical disputes was approved by long practice. Furthermore, the problem of condemning the dead writers was settled by the reference to the King Josiah in the Old Testament, who not only put down the living idolatrous priests, but also opened the sepulchers of those who died long before his reign and burned their bones upon the altar (II Kings 23:16). Thus, while the eastern church was willing to accept the decree and condemn the Three Chapters, the western church expressed itself against it. In the end, Justinian's decree never received general church recognition.

In order to attract the western church to his support Justinian had to see to it, first of all, that the edict be approved by the Pope of Rome. Consequently the Pope of that period, Vigilius, was summoned to Constantinople, where he remained for more than seven years. Upon his arrival the Pope openly declared that he was against the edict and excommunicated the patriarch of Constantinople, Menas. But gradually, through various influences, Vigilius yielded to Justinian and Theodora, and in the year 548 he issued the condemnation of the Three Chapters, or the so-called "Judicatum," thus adding his voice to the votes of the four eastern patriarchs. This was the last triumph of Theodora, who was convinced

"Fulgentii Ferrandi, diaconi carthaginiensis, Epistola, VI, 7 (Migne, Patr. latina, 67, col. 926).

of the inevitable final victory of Monophysitism. She died in the same year.

The western church, however, did not approve of the concession made by Vigilius. The African bishops, having summoned a council, went even so far as to excommunicate him. Stirred by these events in the western church, the Pope wavered in his decision and revoked the Judicatum. In these circumstances Justinian decided to resort to the aid of an ecumenical council, which was convoked in Constantinople in the year 553.

The problem of this fifth Ecumenical Council was much narrower than the problems of the earlier councils. It did not have to deal with any new heresy; it was faced only with the problem of regulating some questions connected with the decisions of the third and fourth councils, relative partly to Nestorianism, but concerning primarily the Monophysitic faith. The Emperor was very desirous that the Pope, who was in Constantinople at the time, be present at the Council, but under various excuses Vigilius avoided attending it, so that all the sessions of the Council took place without him. The Council looked into the works of the three disputed writers and agreed with the opinion of the Emperor. The resolution of the Council condemned and anathematized "the impious Theodoret, who was bishop of Mopsuestia, together with his impious works, and all that Theodoret had written impiously, and the impious letter, attributed to Ibas, and those who have written or are writing to defend them (ad defensionem eorum)."45

The decrees of this Council were declared obligatory, and Justinian instituted a policy of persecuting and exiling the bishops who did not agree with the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Pope Vigilius was exiled to one of the islands of the Sea of Marmora. In the end he consented to sign the condemnation and was permitted to return to Rome, but he died on his way at Syracuse.

The West did not accept the decisions of the council of 553 until the end of the sixth century, and only when Gregory I the Great (590-604) proclaimed that "at the Synod, which was concerned with the Three Chapters, nothing was violated or in any

45 Mansi, IX, 376.

"46 the council of 553 was

way changed in the matter of religion,' recognized throughout the West as an ecumenical council on a par with the first four councils.

The intense religious struggle carried on by Justinian, which, according to his expectations, should have reconciled the Monophysites with the orthodox, did not bring the results the Emperor had hoped for. The Monophysites viewed calmly the development of religious events and did not seem satisfied with the concessions made to them. In the last years of his life Justinian distinctly favored the Monophysites. The bishops who disagreed with him were exiled. Monophysitism might have become the state religion, obligatory on all, and this would have led to new and very serious complications. But at this time the aged Emperor died, and with his death came a change in the religious policy of the government.

In summarizing all that has been said about the religious and ecclesiastical policy of Justinian the question might be asked whether or not he succeeded in establishing a united church in the Empire. The answer must, of course, be in the negative. Orthodoxy and Monophysitism did not become reconciled; Nestorianism, Manichaeism, Judaism, and, to some extent, paganism, continued to exist. There was no religious unity, and Justinian's attempt to bring it about must be admitted to have been a failure.

But in speaking of Justinian's religious policy we must not disregard the missionary activities of his period. As a Christian emperor he considered it his duty to spread Christianity beyond the boundaries of his empire. We know that in his time occurred the conversion of the Heruli on the Danube, of some Caucasian tribes, as well as of the native tribes of Northern Africa and the Middle Nile.

The internal policy of Justinian. The Nika revolt.—At the time of Justinian's accession to the throne the internal life of the Empire was in a state of disorder and disturbance. Poverty was widespread, especially in the provinces; taxes were not paid regularly. The factions of the circus, the large landowners, the relatives of Anastasius, robbed of their right to the throne, and finally, the 46 Epistolae Gregorii Magni, II, 36, in Mansi, IX, 1105. Gregorii I papae Registrum epistolarum, II, 49, in Monumenta Germ. Hist. Epistolarum, Tomus I (1891), 151.

dissenting religious groups, increased the internal troubles and created an alarming situation.

When mounting the throne, Justinian understood clearly that the internal life of the Empire was greatly in need of wide reforms, and he attacked this problem courageously. The main source of information on this phase of Justinian's activity are his Novels and The Secret History of his contemporary, Procopius, of whom we shall speak later. In recent times much valuable material has been found also in the papyri.

At the very beginning of his reign Justinian witnessed a frightful rebellion in the capital which nearly deprived him of the throne. The central quarter in Constaninople was the circus or the Hippodrome, the favorite gathering place of the inhabitants of the capital, so fond of chariot races. A new emperor, after his coronation, usually appeared at this Hippodrome in the imperial box, the Kathisma, to receive the first greetings of the mob. The charioteers wore robes of four colors: green, blue, white, and red. The chariot races remained the only spectacle at the circus since the time when the Christian church had prohibited gladiatorial combats. Wellorganized factions were formed around the charioteers of each color. These groups had their own treasury for financing the charioteers, their horses and chariots, and always competed and struggled with the parties of other colors. They soon became known under the names of Green, Blue, etc. The circus and the races, as well as the circus factions, came to the Byzantine Empire from the Roman Empire, and the later literary tradition attributes their origin to the mythical times of Romulus and Remus. The original meaning of the names of the four parties is also not very clear. The sources of the sixth century, i.e., those of Justinian's period, claim that these names corresponded to the four elements: the earth (green), water (blue), air (white), and fire (red). The circus festivities were distinguished by extreme splendor and the number of spectators sometimes reached 50,000.

The circus factions, designated in the Byzantine period as demes, gradually changed into political parties expressing this or the other political, social, or religious tendency. The voice of the mob in the circus became a sort of public opinion and voice of the

nation. "In the absence of the printing press," says Th. I. Uspensky, "the Hippodrome became the only place for a free expression of public opinion, which was at times compelling for the government." The emperor sometimes appeared in the circus in order

to offer the people explanations of his actions.

In the sixth century the most influential factions were the Blues (Venetoi), who stood for orthodoxy, hence they were also called the Chalcedonians (adherents of the council of Chalcedon), and the Greens (Prasinoi), who stood for Monophysitism. Back in the time of Anastasius a rebellion had broken out in the capital, and after terrible raids and destruction the orthodox party had proclaimed a new emperor and rushed to the Hippodrome, where the frightened Anastasius appeared without his diadem and ordered the heralds to announce to the populus that he was ready to renounce his title. When the mob beheld the Emperor in this pitiful state it calmed down and the revolt subsided. This episode is characteristically indicative of the influence exerted by the Hippodrome and the mob of the capital upon the government and the Emperor himself. As a Monophysite, Anastasius naturally favored the Greens.

With the accession of Justin and Justinian orthodoxy prevailed, and with that came the triumph of the Blues. Theodora, however, favored the Greens. Thus even on the imperial throne there were defenders of different factions.

The causes which called forth the formidable rebellion of 532 in the capital were numerous and diverse. The opposition directed against Justinian was threefold: dynastic, public, and religious. The surviving nephews of Anastasius felt that they had been circumvented by Justin's, and later Justinian's, accession to the throne. Supported by the Monophysitically minded party of the Greens, these descendants of Anastasius aimed to depose Justinian. The public opposition to Justinian came as a result of the general bitterness against the higher officials, especially against the famous jurist, Tribonian, of whom we spoke earlier, and the praetorian prefect, John of Cappadocia, who aroused great dissatisfaction among the people by their violation of laws and by their shameful extor47 Th. I. Uspensky, I, 506 (in Russian).