THE PATRIARCATE OF ALEXANDRIA

BOOK I FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA TO THE RISE OF NESTORIANISM.
I	The Foundation of the Church
II	The Foundation of the Church (continued)
III	Origen
IV	The Octapla
V	The Decian Persecution and its results
VI	The Millenarian Controversy
VII	Question of Re-Baptism
VIII	Valerian persecutes the Church
IX	Rise of the Sabellian Heresy
X	War, Famine, and Plague in Alexandria
XI	End of S. Dionysius
XII	S. Maxinius and S. Theonas
XIII	Persecution of Diocletian
XIV	S. Antony and the Rise of Monasticism
XV	The Arian Heresy
XVI	The Great and Ecumenical Council of Nicea
XVII	Conversion of Ethiopia
XVIII	Athanasius falsely accused concerning Ischyras and Arsenius
XIX	First Exile of S. Athanasius
XX	Egyptian Monasticism
XXI	Second Exile and Return of S. Athanasius
XXII	Third Exile of S. Athanasius
XXIII	Fourth and Fifth Exiles of S. Athanasius : his Return and Death
XXIV	Pontificate of Peter
XXV	Pontificate of Timothy
XXVI	Destruction of the Temple of Serapis: Theophilus at Constantinople
XXVII	The Early Pontificate of S. Cyril

BOOK II. THE RISE OF THE NESTORIAN HERESY, A.D. 428, TO THE DEPOSITION OF DIOSCORUS, AND THE GREAT SCHISM, A.D. 451.
I	Nestorius preaches and defends his Heresy
II	The Ecumenical Council of Ephesus
III	Reconciliation of Antioch with Alexandria
IV	The Rise and Progress of Eutychianism
V	The "Robbers' Meeting" at Ephesus
VI	The Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon

The sources whence a History of the Church of Alexandria is to be derived, are so many and so various, and some of them so little known, that it will be perhaps useful to particularize them. They naturally divide themselves into two branches; those which treat of the whole, and those which only embrace a portion, of Alexandrian History.

There are works which relate the Annals of the Egyptian Church from the preaching of S. Mark to the time at which their respective authors lived; those of Le Quien, Renaudot, Sollerius, and Wansleb.

The treatise De Patriarchatu Alexandrino of the learned Dominican Father, Michael Le Quien, is contained in the Second Volume of his Oriens Christianus. The plan of this work is well known. It commences with a general sketch of the rise, progress, rights, privileges, and character of the Church of Alexandria : of the heresies by which it has been infested, and the duties which were claimed from it by the Church Catholic. It proceeds to a list of the Patriarchs, both heretical and Melchite; giving, under each, a slight and brief review of his actions. It concludes with a catalogue of all the Sees which are known to have been its suffragans; and a list under each, of all the Prelates who are recorded as having filled that particular See. The patient industry, accuracy, fairness, and moderation of this work are above praise : it did not, however, receive the last touches of its author; and occasionally self-contradictions may be discovered in it. It is evident also from many accidental hints that the writer was not acquainted with Arabic; a circumstance which must considerably detract from the worth of such a history. Nevertheless, it is very valuable as an outline which may be filled up from other sources; and it is the only complete history which we possess of the Catholic Church of Alexandria.

Very different is the character of the next work I have to mention; the “History of the Jacobite Patriarchs of Alexandria”, written by the learned Eusebe Renaudot. It extends from the time of S. Mark to the year 1703; but, after the great schism, leaving the Catholic succession of Patriarchs, it confines itself to the heretical successors of Dioscorus. It is extracted principally from the “Patriarchal History”, that is to say, the history of the Jacobite Patriarchs commenced by Severus, Bishop of Aschumin, and carried on by Michael of Tanis, Mauhoub the son of Mansour, Mark the son of Zaraa, and others, as far as the conclusion of the Patriarchate of Cyril the son of Laklak; that is to say, down to the year 1243. The immense learning of Renaudot, his acquaintance with nearly thirty languages, his devotion to Eastern literature, and the advantage which he enjoyed in being able to consult the unrivalled collection of Manuscripts in the King’s Library at Paris, have rendered his work, so far as it goes, more complete than probably any other scholar could have made it. Besides his translations from the historians whom I have just mentioned, and whose works yet remain manuscript, he has enriched his history from other writers, both such had been already printed in his time, as Eutychius and Elmacinus, and those which have been given to the world since, as is the case with Makrizi. His pages also embrace very copious accounts of the succession of Caliphs, and of the rise and fall of the various Mahometan Dynasties; and occasionally refer to the doings or sufferings of the Catholic Patriarchs. But with all these merits, the work has also all the faults of Renaudot; it is insufferably long, tedious and confused; learning is wasted in the discussion of points known to all the world; and the thread of the history broken and taken up again in the most perplexing manner imaginable. In this place we may also mention the Discursus of the same author de Patriarcha Alexandrino of his Collection of Oriental Liturgies.

The next work I shall mention is that of Wansleb, a Dominican Missionary in Egypt. It also relates entirely to the Jacobite succession; and had the merit of being the first work in which their history was introduced to Europe. It is divided into seven parts. The first treats of the constitution of the Jacobite Church; the second of its customs and present state; the third of its belief; the fourth of its ceremonies; the fifth of its canons : the sixth gives a catalogue of its Patriarchs; and the seventh of its principal writers. The small size of this volume, its continual inaccuracies, and the scanty information which it furnishes on any subject, renders it nearly useless, except for occasional reference. The catalogue of Patriarchs is translated from the Arabic of Abu'lberkat; with a continuation by later hands in the manuscript which Wansieb consulted.

The fourth history is the “Chronological Series of Alexandrian Patriarchs”, written by the Jesuit, John Baptist Sollerius; and prefixed to the fifth volume of June, in the Bollandist Acts of the Saints. This treatise, which fills a hundred and sixty closely printed folio pages, is little more than an amplification of the work of Wansieb. Sollerius, besides his general acquaintance with Ecclesiastical history, had little to fit him for the task; he was not acquainted with the Eastern languages; he had access to no manuscripts; nor had he any private sources of information, except a communication from the Jesuit Bernati, then a missionary in Ethiopia. The consequence is that he relies too much on the comparatively worthless materials which were in his possession; he is anxious to reconcile dates with each other, which are none of them consistent with truth; and he endeavours to settle minute points of chronology in times when an approximation to accuracy is all that can be hoped for. His treatise does not pretend to be a history, and, except for its dates, adds little to our knowledge of the Alexandrian Church. Of the Catholic Patriarchs this writer takes hardly any notice.

Besides the works which I have mentioned, the latest of which only comes down to the year 1730, I have had two other sources of information. I applied in the spring of 1844 to His late Holiness, Hierotheus, then Catholic Patriarch of Alexandria, for the history of his predecessors since the beginning of the eighteenth century; and the results of that inquiry will be found in their proper place. I also obtained, through the kindness of a Jacobite Priest, a complete list of the Patriarchs of that sect from Dioscorus to Peter VII, who now fills that post; and from the same quarter I also received some interesting information as to the present state of the Jacobites in Egypt.

I come now to speak of those authors who have treated of a part of the period which this work embraces. The first of these is Eutychius. Of his history of the Catholic Patriarchs of Alexandria I have spoken in treating of his own Patriarchate; and it is needless therefore to say anything further here, than that I believe that nothing which he relates of interest down to the time when his annals terminate, namely the year 938, will be found to have been omitted in this work. Without professing any very great obligations to him, I may yet observe that some of the facts which he relates in the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries, are mentioned only by himself.

The next author whom I shall name is the Jacobite Elmacinus, as translated and edited by Erpenius. His Saracenic History only incidentally mentions the Jacobite Patriarchs of Alexandria; but his accuracy and truth stand very high : and when he fixes a date, his testimony is to be received beyond that of any other author. I have in the history already given his character; and need therefore say nothing more of him here.

I will next mention the Mahometan Makrizi, who, while he draws great part of his information from Elmacinus, nevertheless adds considerably to it, and is highly to be commended for his accuracy and fairness. Of his work, which extends to the year 1327, I have also spoken in the proper place.

The “History of Dynasties” written by Abu'lpharaj, better known by his name of Gregory Bar-Hebraeus, and translated and edited by Pococke, is also not without its value as a contribution to Alexandrian History. We are frequently indebted to it for some hint as to the actions of the Caliphs, which may serve to clear up points left in the dark by Elmacinus or Makrizi.

I now come to speak of the Ethiopic Church. The character of Ludolph’s History, and Commentary on his History, is too well known to need any observations here. It is only wonderful that a man possessing an acquaintance with the Ethiopic language, which has been attained by no other European before or since his time, should have added so little to our knowledge of that country. The facts which are to be gleaned from this vast folio he scattered thinly among the heap of rubbish with which they are surrounded; and his ignorance of everything but the language itself, his absurd confidence in some worthless Ethiopic compositions, and his blind prejudice, manifest themselves throughout.

The “Church History of Ethiopia” of Dr. Michael Michael Geddes is one of the most despicable compositions which was ever inflicted on the public. His only qualification for historian of that country was his knowledge of Portuguese, and a tolerable acquaintance with the various works in which the proceedings of the missionaries in that country are related. His prejudice against everything connected with Rome is such, that nothing can be taken upon his testimony : his principal value lies in his pointing out original sources of information. He had been Chaplain to the British Factory at Lisbon; and was under the patronage of Bishop Burnet.

A much fairer work is the “History of Christianity in Ethiopia”, written by the celebrated La Croze. It does not pretend to the same fullness as Geddes, and is derived from nearly the same sources : but, although a Protestant, the author is unable, like the English Divine, to see nothing but excellence in the Ethiopian, or faults in the Roman, Church.

The first book of this History extends from the Foundation of the Church of Alexandria to the rise of the Nestorian heresy. Besides the ordinary Church historians, such as Eusebius, Sozomen, and Socrates, the works of S. Athanasius are of course my chief authority. But I am also bound to express my obligation to the very able Life of S. Dionysius by Byauns the Bollandist; to the Propaganda edition of the works of the same Father; to the Benedictine Life of S. Athanasius, and to Tillemont’s Annals of that Patriarch. In a less degree, De la Rue’s Life of Origen and Huet’s Origeniana have been of service to these pages.

The second book comprises the controversy on the Incarnation, from the first outbreak of Nestorius, to the deposition of Dioscorus. Here, of course, I am principally indebted to the works of S. Cyril; to Tillemont’s Life of that Father; to Garnier’s edition of Marius Mercator; to the two editions of S. Leo’s works, — the one by Cacciari, the other by the Ballerini : and to the very accurate chronological researches of Pagi.

The third book comprises the history of the Alexandrian Church, from the commencement of the great schism to the subjection of both Catholic and Jacobite Communions to the arms of the Caliphs. Here we begin to derive assistance from the works of Eutychius, Elmacinus, Makrizi, and Severus : Liberatus, Evagrius, and the Chronicon of Victor are also our guides. The Patriarchate of S. John the Almoner is indebted to the labours of Stilting the Bollandist in the fourth volume of September in the Acts of the Saints; — and the Epistles of S. Gregory throw some light on the Alexandrian annals of that period. To the Life of S. John the Almoner, in the second volume of the Bollandist January, I am less indebted.

In the fourth book, which extends from the Conquest of Amrou to the Vizirate of Saladin, Severus and his continuers are my chief guides. Of the Catholic Church, when Eutychius deserts us, we know nothing more than can be picked up by incidental notices of the Byzantine historians. These are generally few and far between; with the exception of a tolerably detailed account of the proceedings of Athanasius II afforded in the prolix pages of George Pachymeres. For the Crusades, so far as they affected Egypt, I have depended principally on Wilken’s Geschichte der Kreuzüge, and the authors alleged by him. I have also derived, in Jacobite history generally, very important assistance from the Chronicle of Gregory Bar-Hebraeus, as epitomized in the second volume of the Bibliotheca Orientalis of Asseman.

The fifth book embraces the period between the elevation of Saladin and the first interference of the Portuguese in Ethiopia. Here we are worse off for materials than at any other period. Its most important event is the great confessional controversy, — and the remarkable history of Mark the son of Kunbar. But from a.C. 1243, when the Patriarchal History ends, to 1490, I am compelled to confess that Alexandrian annals are hardly more than catalogues of names.

The sixth book comprises the remainder of my task, and sixth divides itself into two distinct portions. The first of these is the rise, progress, and decline of Roman Influence in Ethiopia. Here, besides Geddes, La Croze, and Ludolph, we have the advantage of Bruce’s very clear Abyssinian history; and the original authorities are Alvarez, Tellez, and the account of the Patriarch Joao Bermudez; which latter is translated in Purchases Pilgrimage, and thence retranslated by La Croze. The other subject is the attempt made, in the seventeenth century, to engraft Calvinism in the Oriental Church; and as this part of history is extremely important, and very little known, I have preferred rather to overstep the bounds I proposed to myself than to treat it cursorily. My authorities, on the Roman side, are, principally, the Perpetuité de la Foy, and the Defense de la Perpetuité; the Creance de VEglise Orientale of Simon; the De Consensu of Leo Allatius; and the incidental notices of Le Quien and Benaudot. On the Oriental side,—the Councils of Constantinople, Jassy, and Bethlehem, as given in Labbe; the History of the Russian Church by Mouravieff; the Chronicon of Philip of Cyprus : to which I may add the “Present State of the Greek Church” of Ricaut, — a very fair writer. On the Calvinistic side, — Crusius’s Turco-Graecia; Claude’s Reply to the Perpetuité, and his Doctrine of the Catholic Church, which is a Reply to the Defense; Aymon’s Memoirs of the Greek Church ; Smith’s Account of the Greek Church, both in English and Latin : to which may be added Dr. Covell’s account of the same Church. I also applied to the Public Library at Geneva, for permission to copy all the hitherto unpublished letters of Cyril Lucar’s preserved in that Library; and among these the reader will find a very important and hitherto unprinted one, to the Archbishop De Dominis, on the publication of his work De Repuhlica Christiana. To all these I must add, the Life of Cyril Lucar from the pen of Dr. Beaven, which appeared in several numbers of the British Magazine.

I had intended to affix an excursus in defence of the very early chronology adopted in the first Section : want of space has obliged me to forbear. A vindication of it may, however, be found in the Bollandist Life of S. Peter under the 29th of June. For the same reason, I have been obliged to omit the list of Egyptian martyrs in the Tenth Persecution, to which reference is made at its conclusion.

Two remarks connected with orthography may not be out of place. The first is, that I have adopted the two different spellings, Dioecese and Diocese, to signify two different things. By the former I mean its old sense, the jurisdiction of an Exarch or Patriarch, as the Dioecese of Ephesus, the Dioecese of Alexandria : by the latter, that of a Bishop. Fleury, in like manner, speaks of le and la Diocese. The other is, that I have followed the Oriental method of spelling names, after the Mahometan invasion. Thus, Chail is written for Michael; Chenouda for Sanutius : Abdel-Messiah for Christodulus. I have not done so, however, where the name is that of one well known as an author. Thus, I do not refer to Said Ebn Batric, but to Eutychius.

I have now to express my obligations for the valuable assistance I have received in this work. I desire gratefully to commemorate the kindness of His late Holiness, Hierotheus, to whom I had hoped to inscribe the History of his Church. My thanks are also especially due to the Rev. Edmund Winder, British Chaplain at Alexandria, for the indefatigable kindness with which he has collected and transmitted to me information; to Alfred S. Walne, Esq., Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul at Cairo, who was so obliging as to wait on the Patriarch with the queries I had transmitted to him; and to the Vicar of the Jacobite Patriarch at Alexandria, (whoso name I regret not to know,) who furnished me with a great deal of valuable information as to the state of that Communion.

But, in a most especial manner, my warmest thanks are due to the Rev. W. H. Mill, D.D., late Principal of Bishop’s College, who, with the greatest kindness, gave me the advantage of his remarks on most of the sheets, as they passed through the press; and to whom I am indebted for several corrections, and for some important references to sources of information with which I was previously unacquainted. I have also to express my obligations to my friend the Rev. B. Webb, M.A., who finally read through most of the sheets of this history before they were struck off; a work of which he only who has tried it can calculate the trouble or the use.

I am indebted also to D. José Xavier Cerveira e Sousa, Bishop of Funchal and Arguim, for the kindness with which he furnished me with any book which was contained in his Episcopal Library : and to Canon Antonio Pestana, Rector of the Seminary in Funchal, for the obliging manner in which he put the valuable library of that institution completely at my disposal. Portuguese libraries are especially valuable to a historian of the Alexandrian Church : for the works of Tellez and Alvarez are not to be procured in England. Lastly, I would thank M. Chastel, Professor of Ecclesiastical History, and Librarian of the public library at Geneva, for the great pains which he took in procuring the transcription of Cyril Lucar’s letters; and M. Grivel, for the success with which he deciphered them. They are written in a mixture of bad Latin, bad Italian, and (occasionally) bad Greek : and the hand-writing is as bad as the language.

I trust that, whatever judgment may be formed of this history, while its deficiencies are noted, its difficulties will also be remembered. If the chronology shall sometimes appear unsatisfactory, it is no shame to fail where Renaudot, Le Quien, and Sollerius are often egregiously wrong. If I appear sometimes to compress a century into comparatively few pages, it is a century to which, as connected with Alexandria, Baronius and Fleury do not devote one.

I have reserved, for my Introduction to the study of the History of the Oriental Church, some remarks which it seems right to make on the spirit in which such a book should be written. The historian should write, not as a member of the Roman, not as a member of the English, Church; but, as far as may be, with Oriental views, feelings, and even, perhaps, prepossessions. Mouravieff’s history is a perfect example in its kind. It was intended that this Introduction should have been prefixed to the present volumes. But it swelled to a size which precluded the possibility of that arrangement; and has been also kept back for valuable information which I hope to receive from Constantinople and Damascus.