No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Debating the Faith in Early Islamic Egypt
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 June 2019
Abstract
This article explores a series of doctrinal disputations held in early Islamic Egypt, and known through the Hodegos of Anastasius of Sinai (fl. c. 670–c. 700). Using the text's prosopographical and contextual cues, it argues that these disputations occurred in the 680s, in the aftermath of Constantinople's Sixth Ecumenical Council (680/1), the decisions of which had thrown the Chalcedonian Christians of the caliphate into conflict and schism. In 686, it is argued, Anastasius had confronted the famed Edessene and Severan Athanasius bar Gūmōyē before the Marwānid prince ‘Abd al-'Azīz at Fusṭāṭ, and there been defeated. That defeat is indicative of the new-found position of the Egyptian Severan Church, which now flourished under Marwānid patronage.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019
Footnotes
I would like to thank Marek Jankowiak and Christian Sahner for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.
References
1 See Benjamin of Alexandria, 16th festal letter, ed. (Ethiopic) Müller, C. D. G., in Die Homilie über die Hochzeit zu Kana und weitere Schriften des Patriarchen Benjamin I. von Alexandrien, Heidelberg 1968, 302–51Google Scholar, and P.Köln V 215 (2 Apr. 663/674), with Hagedorn, U. and Hagedorn, D., ‘Monotheletisch interpretierte Väterzitate und eine Anleihe bei Johannes Chrysostomus in dem Kölner Osterfestbrief (P. Köln V 215)’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik clxxviii (2011), 143–57Google Scholar.
2 See, for example, (Ps.-)Benjamin of Alexandria, On the marriage at Cana, ed. C. D. G. Müller, in Die Homilie über die Hochzeit zu Kana, 52–285, esp. pp. 132–269; or the fragment of a letter edited by E. Amélineau: ‘Fragments coptes pour servir à l'histoire de la conquête de l’Égypte par les Arabes’, Journal asiatique 8th ser. xii (1888), 361–410 at pp. 368–78.
3 For the HP (Primitive) – thought to witness an earlier state of the text – see Seybold, C. F., Severus ibn al Muqaffa’, Alexandrinische Patriarchengeschichte von S. Marcus bis Michael I 61–767 nach der ältesten 1266 geschriebenen Hamburger Handschrift, Hamburg 1912Google Scholar. For the HP (Vulgate) see Evetts, B., ‘History of the patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria’, PO i (1904), 99–214Google Scholar, 381–518; v (1910), 1–215; x (1915), 357–552. On the nature and limits of this distinction see Pilette, P., ‘L'Histoire des patriarches d'Alexandrie: une nouvelle évaluation de la configuration du texte en recensions’, Le Muséon cxxvi (2013), 419–50Google Scholar. Note that for the dates of the Severan patriarchs this article follows Jülicher, A., ‘Die Liste der alexandrinischen Patriarchen im 6. und 7. Jahrhundert’, in Festgabe von Fachgenossen und Freunden Karl Müller zum siebzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht, Tübingen 1922, 7–23Google Scholar.
4 Anastasius of Sinai, Hodegos, ed. Uthemann, K.-H., in Anastasii Sinaitae Viae Dux, Turnhout 1981Google Scholar.
5 On Anastasius see now Uthemann's, K.-H. magisterial Anastasios Sinaites: byzantinisches Christentum in den ersten Jahrzehnten unter arabischer Herrschaft, Berlin 2015Google Scholar. Several of Uthemann's central arguments are summarised in his ‘Anastasius the Sinaite’, in A. Di Berardino (ed.), Patrology: the eastern Fathers from the Council of Chalcedon (451) to John of Damascus († 750), Cambridge 2006, 313–31, and ‘Anastase le Sinaïte’, in C.-G. Conticello (ed.), La Théologie byzantine et sa tradition, I/1: (VIe–VIIe s.), Turnhout 2015. For a wider perspective on Anastasius and his corpus, however, see Haldon, J., ‘The works of Anastasius of Sinai: a key source for the history of seventh-century East Mediterranean society and belief’, in Cameron, A. and Conrad, L. (eds), The Byzantine and early Islamic Near East, I: Problems in the literary source material, Princeton 1992, 107–47Google Scholar.
6 Richard, M., ‘Anastase le Sinaïte: l'Hodegos et le Monothélisme’, Revue des études byzantines xvi (1958), 29–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 See Uthemann, Anastasii Sinaitae Viae Dux, ccvi–ccxviii, and Anastasios Sinaites, esp. pp. 17–215.
8 See Hodegos i.3.28–30; vi.1.111–16; xiv.2.65–7. See also the brief reference to a debate with Colluthus, a Jewish sophist, at Antinoe: Hodegos xiv.1.37–9.
9 For his presence in Alexandria see the scholia at ibid. xxii.4.70–2; xxii.5.26.
10 For the theological content see Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 52–62.
11 See Hodegos x.1.1–3 (Uthemann edn, 143–59).
12 Hodegos x.2 (Uthemann edn, 159–90).
13 Hodegos x.3 (Uthemann edn, 190–2).
14 See the words put into the Augustalis's mouth at Hodegos x.3.17–19 (Uthemann edn, 191): ‘These bishops, upon hearing what occurred between the church and the Theodosians, came here seeking to dispute with your holiness.’ Pace Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites 56, who suggests that the Augustalis considers Anastasius a troublemaker, and is aligned with the Severans.
15 Note that between his accounts of the second and third disputations, Anastasius describes how, when he despaired at a certain passage in Cyril's To Succensus, ‘lord Isidore the librarian of the patriarchal palace [ὁ βιβλιοφύλαξ τοῦ πατριαρχείου] produced for me a book which contained this citation unadulterated’: Hodegos x.2.176–90 (Uthemann edn, 188–9).
16 Richard, ‘Anastase le Sinaïte’, 35–42.
17 See, for example, Ohme, H., ‘Oikonomia im monenergetisch–monotheletischen Streit’, Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum xii (2008), 308–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar at pp. 314–15, 332–3.
18 See Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 54–6.
19 ‘Θεοδῶρῳ αὐγουσταλίῳ’: P.Lond. IV 1392 l. 13. This is in the context of a dispatch to Alexandria. I am grateful to Sophie Kovarik for checking the reading in the British Library, which is clear. This Theodore is perhaps identical with the ‘Theodore archon (ارخن) of the city of Alexandria’ whom the HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 122), HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 26–7) places there c. 700.
20 SB XX 15101. On the office of Alexandrian Augustalis after the conquest see now Bruning, J., The rise of a capital: Al-Fusṭāṭ and its hinterland, 18/639–132/750, Leiden 2018, 45–9Google Scholar.
21 Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac 13, ed. Porcher, E. in ‘Vie d'Isaac, patriarche d'Alexandrie de 686 à 689, écrite par Mena, évêque de Pchati’, PO xi (1915), 299–390Google Scholar at p. 379, describing the later part of Isaac's patriarchate (689–c. 692).
22 See, for example, in Arcadia: P.Prag. I 64 (28 May 636): ‘Φλ(αουίῳ) Θεοδοσίῳ τῷ εὐκλεεστάτῳ στρατηλά(τῃ) δουκὶ καὶ αὐγουσταλίῳ ταύτης τῆς Ἀρκάδων ἐπαρχ(ίας)’. But cf. the absence of augoustalios in, for example, BGU III 750 (21 Aug. 655), CPR XIV 32 (19 Aug. 655/670), CPR VIII 82 (9 Aug. 699/700), 83 (676–725).
23 Uthemann makes the cautious suggestion that the meetings might have occurred under Benjamin or Agathon: Anastasios Sinaites, 56.
24 See Gascou, J., ‘Oktokaidekaton’, in Atiya, A. S. (ed.), The Coptic encyclopedia, New York 1991Google Scholar, vi. 1826b–7b.
25 One candidate is the deacon, and then priest, George, whom the bishops attempted to elect as patriarch after John iii: see HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 120); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 22–4); Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac 11 (Porcher edn, 348–53).
26 Note that at Hodegos x.2.6.1 (Uthemann edn, 175) we find instead Γρηγόριος ὁ Νυστάξας.
27 See HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 114); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 9).
28 Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac (Porcher edn, 354). ‘Lower’ is perhaps here a mistake for ‘Upper’.
29 See HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 120, 129, 133); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v 20, 22, 42, 49).
30 ‘And the blessed bishop Gregory, bishop of Kais, was a Syrian, and [Agathon] had appointed him as a bishop’ ( والاسقف المغبوط غريغوريس اسفق القيس كان سرياني وكان اوسمه اسقف ’): HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 114); cf. HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 9), which seems to misread the same passage and to create a phantom ‘Joseph’: ‘In [Agathon's] time was the blessed bishop Gregory, bishop of Kais, and a Syrian called Joseph’ ( وكان قى ايامه الاسقف المغبوط اغريغوريوس اسقف القيس وسريانى اسمه يوسف ). Note that ‘and’ (– و ) in the previous sentence has been added by the editor (ibid. n. 6). I am grateful to Julien Decharneux for his comments on these passages. For the distinction between the two recensions see n. 3 above.
31 Note that in introducing the third disputation Hodegos x.3.4–9 states: ‘And so with the heretics sufficiently and unambiguously disgraced by the drama which we inflicted upon them, and since they no longer had anyone left to open their mouth against those of the catholic church, they sent into Egypt and summoned certain bishops whom they considered learned – amongst whom was also the bishop of Cynopolis [ἐν οἷς καὶ ἦν ὁ Κυνωπολίτης]’ (Uthemann edn, 190). This might suggest a distinction between the latter and Gregory Nystazōn, although the qualification ‘also’ suggests to me that the bishop participated but was not amongst those who had to be summoned.
32 For the end of the patriarchate see the patriarchal lists in Theophanes, Chronographia, AM 6136–45 (= 644/5–653/4), ed. de Boor, C. in Theophanis chronographia, Leipzig 1883, 343Google Scholar; Nicephorus, Chronographia, ed. C. de Boor, in Nicephori archiepiscopi Constantinopolitani opuscula historica, Leipzig 1880, 81–135 at p. 129; Eutychius, Annals (Antiochene Recension), ed. L. Cheiko, in Eutychii patriarchae Alexandrini annals, Beirut 1906–9, ii. 28. The last Roman patriarch, Peter, was appointed in July 642: John of Nikiu, Chronicle 121, ed. Zotenberg, H., in Chronique de Jean, évêque de Nikiou, Paris 1883, 219Google Scholar. Thereafter a topotērētēs represented the see in East Roman affairs; see nn. 68, 70 below.
33 HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 112–13); (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 5–6). The latter gives ‘Theodore’, but notes ‘Some mss. have “Theodosius”’ (n.1).
34 Death of Theodosius: HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 115); (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 10).
35 See Hodegos vi.1.120–1 (Uthemann edn, 99): ὅπερ καὶ προήγαγεν ἡμῖν ἐν Βαβυλῶνι Ἀθανάσιος ὁ νοτάριος (with reference to Severus's Philalethes); Hodegos x.1.2.36–7 (Uthemann edn. 147): Ταύτην τὴν χρῆσιν παραγαγὼν ἠρώτησα Ἀθανάσιον ἐν Βαβυλῶνι λέγων … (with reference to a quotation from Cyril, and with a small amount of subsequent dialogue). See also, at Hodegos iv.3–7 (Uthemann edn, 82), the citation from the Christological letter which Athanasius sent ‘to the holy catholic church in Babylon, when our Christ-loving and orthodox brothers there requested it’. For Anastasius' interest in Babylon see also Tales i.15, 28, 29; ii.14, ed. A. Binggeli, in ‘Anastase le Sinaïte: Récits sur le Sinaï et Récits utiles à l’âme: édition, traduction, commentaire’, unpubl. PhD diss. Paris IV 2001, i. 188, 203, 204, 235; ii. 359–62.
36 Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac (Porcher edn, 358–62).
37 Michael the Great, Chronicle xi.16; Chronicle to 1234 cxlix. The pair depend on Dionysius of Tel Maḥre, and Michael reveals that Dionysius in turn depended on one Daniel, son of Samuel, of the Ṭur Abdin.
38 HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 116, 122, 135); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 12, 48–9, 54); Eutychius, Annals (Antiochene recension) (Cheikho edn, ii. 41); Ps.-Abū Ṣāliḥ, Churches and monasteries of Egypt, ed. B. T. A. Evetts, in Churches and monasteries of Egypt and some neighbouring countries, Oxford 1895, fo. 53a.
39 al-Kindī, Kitāb al–wūlat, ed. R. Guest, in The governors and judges of Egypt, Leiden 1912, 59; perhaps also Ibn ‘Abd al-Ḥakam, Futūḥ Misr, ed. Torrey, C., in Futūḥ Miṣr wa-akhbāruhā, New Haven 1922, 98Google Scholar.
40 See nn. 42–3 below.
41 On Athanasius and the Gūmōyē see Debié, M., ‘Christians in the service of the caliph: through the looking glass of communal identities’, in Borrut, A. and Donner, F. M. (eds), Christians and others in the Umayyad state, Chicago, Il 2016, 53–71Google Scholar.
42 For the office with honorific see P.Lond. IV 1447 lines 139, 141, 144, 189, 191, 192. Athanasius and Isaac also bear the title chaltoularios in Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac (for example at pp. 347 and 358 in the Porcher edn).
43 P.Lond. IV 4 1412 (Aphrodito, ind. 12–13) lines 14–15, 20–1, 26–7, 32–3, 38–9, 42–3, 46–7, 55–6, 61–2, 70–1, 86–7, 101–2, 116–17 (the names appearing together in each instance).
44 Anastasius of Sinai, Hodegos xv (Uthemann edn, 264).
45 Ibid. (Uthemann edn, 264–5).
46 For this see Anastasius of Sinai, Against the monotheletes, i.107–8, ed. Uthemann, K.–H. in Sermones duo in constitutionem hominis secundum imaginem Dei, Turnhout 1985, 35–83Google Scholar at p. 61.
47 Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 22–4, 151–7; cf. Richard, ‘Anastase le Sinaïte’, 32.
48 Uthemann, Anastasios, 9–10; cf., however, Binggeli, Anastase le Sinaïte, ii. 343–4, using the reference to Athanasius to support his later dating of the text (see n. 50 below).
49 See the reports in HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 116); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 12); Michael the Great, Chronicle xi.16; and Chronicle to 1234 cxlix, all suggesting that he was appointed alongside ‘Abd al-‘Azīz.
50 Binggeli, Anastase le Sinaïte, ii. 341–4; contra Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 154–6.
51 On Anastasius’ theological polemic against the letter, which ties the denial of two Christological wills to the earlier, anti-Tritheist assertion that what is said of Christ qua God must also be said of Father and Spirit, see Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 157–60.
52 For ‘Abd al-‘Azīz's later gathering, at Ḥulwān, of the different Christian factions in the period c. 697–c. 700 (reportedly for three years) see HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 126–9), HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 34–42). And cf. n. 59 below, on the Controversy of John.
53 Such a defeat, and a subsequent retreat to Sinai, might also explain the scholion added (in 691 or 692?) to the florilegium within Anastasius’ account of the first disputation, in which he states ‘But since the race of heretics loves blame, know that we wrote the citations from memory while in the desert, and at a loss for instructive books’: Hodegos x.1.2.197–204 (Uthemann edn, 158). This would seem to mean this section of the Hodegos, rather than the original florilegium, since Anastasius before the first disputation was in Alexandria, and active in its libraries.
54 To John iii is attributed the dialogic Questions of Theodore, ed. Lantschoot, A. van, in Les Questions de Théodore: texte sahidique, recensions arabes et éthiopienne, Vatican City 1957Google Scholar; and he is perhaps the patriarch John who authored an Encomium on Saint Menas, ed. Drescher, J., in Apa Mena: a selection of Coptic texts relating to St. Menas, Cairo 1946, 73–96Google Scholar. He is also the reported author of an Encomium on John of Scetis now embedded in the latter's Life: Zanetti, U., Saint Jean, higoumène de Scété (VII siècle): vie arabe et épitomé éthiopien, Brussels 2015Google Scholar.
55 See John of Nikiu, Chronicle, ed. Zotenberg, in Chronique. On his career see HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 120, 125); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 20–2, 32–4); Mena of Nikiou, Life of the Patriarch Isaac 12 (Porcher edn, 354).
56 See Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac. To Mena is also attributed the Martyrdom of Saint Macrobius, ed. (Coptic) Hyvernat, H., in Les Actes des martyrs de l’Égypte tirés des manuscrits coptes de la Bibliothèque Vaticane et du Musée Borgia, Paris 1886–7Google Scholar, 225–46. See HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 125); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 34).
57 George the Archdeacon was compiler of the biographies from Cyril up to Simon within the HP: Heijer, J. den, Mawhūb ibn Manṣūr ibn Mufarriğ et l'historiographie copto-arabe: étude sur la composition de l'Histoire des patriarches d'Alexandrie, Louvain 1989, 81–156Google Scholar, esp. pp. 142–3 (although I would argue that George's compilation included the patriarchate of Alexander to 715).
58 For Zacharias's career (as monk on Scetis, then bishop of Xois) see HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 131); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 46); Copto-Arabic synaxarium 21st Amchir (Basset edn, PO xi. 838–9). For hagiographies see Life of John the Little extant in Bohairic, Sahidic, Arabic and Syriac versions (Mikhail, M. S. A. and Vivian, T., The holy workshop of virtue: the Life of John the Little by Zacharias of Sakhā, Collegeville, Mn 2010Google Scholar; also the Arabic and Ethiopic versions of a lost Life of Abraham and George (unedited but described in Zanetti, U., ‘Le Dossier d'Abraham et Georges, moines de Scété’, in Jullien, F. and Pierre, M.-J. [eds], Monachismes d'Orient: images, échanges, influences: hommage à Antoine Guillaumont, Turnhout 2011, 227–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar). For homilies see On the ascent of our Lord to Jerusalem and On Jonah, ed. H. De Vis, in Homélies coptes de la Vaticane II, repr. Louvain 1990, 5–57, and the unedited On the holy family (extant in a number of Arabic manuscripts, but described in brief in Davis, S., ‘Ancient sources for the Coptic tradition’, in Gabra, G., Be thou there: the holy family's journey in Egypt, Cairo 2001, 133–62Google Scholar at p. 151).
59 See also the so-called Controversy of John, in which John iii debates a Jew and a Chalcedonian at the court of ‘Abd al-‘Azīz. This is edited (Coptic) in Evelyn-White, H. G., The monasteries of the Wadi ’n Natrûn, New York 1926–33, i. 171–5Google Scholar. There the editor also describes the Arabic versions, which are unedited but contained in BN, Paris, mss Ar. 215, 4881.
60 For Severan churches at Ḥulwān see HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 121, 129); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 24–5, 42); Mena, Life of Isaac 13 (Porcher edn, 368, 384); Ps.-Abū Ṣāliḥ, Churches and monasteries of Egypt, fo. 53a; Eutychius, Annals (Cheikho edn, 41). On Ḥulwān at large see Timm, S., Das christlich-koptische Ägypten in arabischer Zeit, Wiesbaden 1984–92, 1074–8Google Scholar; and for ‘Abd al-‘Azīz's wider building activities see Kubiak, W. B., ‘‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Marwan and the early Islamic building activity and urbanism in Egypt’, Africana Bulletin xlii (1994), 7–19Google Scholar. On its palace complexes see Grossmann, P., Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, Leiden 2002, 417–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Grossmann identifies Palace A with the Severan patriarchal palace.
61 HP (Primitive) (Seybold 115); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 10, 12).
62 St Mark: HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 119); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 18); Angelion: Life of Isaac 12 (Porcher edn, 363).
63 Mena of Nikiu, Life of Isaac 12 (Porcher edn, 358–63).
64 Indications of tension between the regime of ‘Abd al-'Azīz and its Christian subjects are discussed in P. Booth, ‘Images of emperors and emirs in early Islamic Egypt’ (forthcoming). For the changing contexts under his successors see now J. Mabra, Princely authority in the early Marwānid state: the life of ‘Abd al-‘Azīz b. Marwān, Piscataway, NJ 2017, esp. pp. 119–59.
65 For the monenergist-monothelete crisis see M. Jankowiak, ‘Essai d'histoire politique du monothélisme à partir de la correspondance entre les empereurs byzantins, les patriarches de Constantinople et les papes de Rome’, unpubl. PhD diss. Paris–Warsaw 2009, and P. Booth, Crisis of empire: doctrine and dissent at the end of late antiquity, Berkeley, Ca 2014.
66 See especially the Acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, ed. R. Riedinger, Concilium universale Constantinopolitanum tertium, ACO ser. 2.2, Berlin 1990–2, ii. 594–600; HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 98–9); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO i. 491–2).
67 See HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 101); HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO i. 497); P.Köln V 215 (as n. 1 above).
68 See Acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, i. 230, in which Macarius, patriarch of Antioch, recalls how his predecessor Macedonius, the Constantinopolitan patriarch Peter, and the Alexandrian topotērētēs Theodore (ὁ τοποτηρητὴς τῆς Ἀλεξανδρέων Θεόδωρος) condemned Maximus’ doctrine, along with other resident bishops and the Constantinopolitan senate. On this council see Jankowiak, Essai, 351–3, and Booth, Crisis of empire, 322–3.
69 On the situation in Syria see J. Tannous, ‘In search of monotheletism’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers lxviii (2014). 29–67. Tannous suggests that monenergism-monotheletism was a ‘regional orthodoxy’ amongst Syrian Chalcedonians at the time of the Sixth Council.
70 See Acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, i. 20; cf. Eutychius, Annals (Antiochene Recension) (Cheiko edn, ii. 35), calling the see of Alexandria vacant.
71 See Acts of the Quinisext, ed. H. Ohme and others, in Concilium Constantinopolitanum a. 691/2 in Trullo habitum, ser. 2.2.4, Berlin 2013, 62 (with the scholia at 10–11, calling Peter patriarch). I am grateful to Marek Jankowiak for the reference.
72 See Michael the Great, Chronicle 11.12, speaking of the Sixth Council.
73 The Council did not go unnoticed in Severan circles: see the garbled account of the monothelete crisis in HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 115–16), HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 11), placed at the beginning of the account of John iii (681–9). See also MacCoull, L., ‘The paschal letter of Alexander ii, patriarch of Alexandria: a Greek defense of Coptic theology under Arab rule’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers xliv (1990), 27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
74 HP (Primitive) (Seybold edn, 119), HP (Vulgate) (Evetts edn, PO v. 18–19). The Chalcedonian communities named are the اهل اغرو / اهل اغروة and the اهل اسخنطس / اهل سخيطس, i.e. the peoples of Agarwa and of Saḫīṭus/Asḫanṭus (?). Their identification is however unclear; cf. Timm, Das christlich-koptische Ägypten, 75–6, 2238–9.
75 See n. 6 above.
76 See Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 188–210, on Hodegos i–ii. For the same sections see Richard, ‘Anastase le Sinaïte’, 39–41, who assigned them to his proposed second edition.
77 Cf. also Binggeli, Anastase le Sinaïte, ii. 344, and Uthemann, Anastasiso Sinaites, 210–12.
78 ‘Οὕτως ἐρωτήσατε αὐτοὺς καὶ ὑμεῖς καὶ οὕτως ἁρμόσασθε πρὸς αὐτοὺς κατὰ τὸν προκείμενον σκοπόν, τοὺς μὲν Ἰακωβίτας περὶ φύσεως, τοὺς δὲ Ἁρμασίτας περὶ θεανδρικῆς ἐνεργείας’: Hodegos xiii.6.19–20 (Uthemann edn, 231); ‘Ταῦτα καὶ πρὸς Ἁρμασίτας ἀπορητέον’: Hodegos xiii.9.91 (Uthemann edn, 251).
79 Doctrina partum, ed. F. Diekamp, in Doctrina patrum de incarnatione Verbi, Münster 1907, 271.
80 So ibid. pp. lxxix–lxxx. See also Richard, ‘Anastase le Sinaïte’, 30–2, and Uthemann, Anastasios Sinaites, 24–5.
81 See Acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, ii. 630; cf. the visit to Alexandria of Paul, archbishop of Crete, in December 655, as reported in Theodore of Paphos, Life of Spyridon xx, ed. P. van den Ven, in La Légende de saint Spyridon, évêque de Trimithonte, Louvain 1953, 89: ‘Παύλου τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου ἀρχιεπισκόπου Κρήτης κατὰ συγκυρίαν ἀπὸ Αἰγύπτου ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει ἀνερχομένου καὶ ἐκεῖ παρατυχόντος.’ It is tempting to connect this mission with the trial and condemnation of Maximus the Confessor at Constantinople in the same year – that is, it reported events and shored up the monenergist-monothelete credentials of the Chalcedonians at Alexandria.