* List of Byzantine emperors [Список византийских императоров]. Traditionally, the line of Byzantine emperors is held to begin with the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor, who rebuilt {After siding with Pescennius Niger against the victorious Septimius Severus, the city was besieged by Roman forces and suffered extensive damage in AD 196. Byzantium was rebuilt by Septimius Severus, now emperor, and quickly regained its previous prosperity. It was bound to Perinthus during the period of Septimius Severus. The strategic and highly defensible (due to being surrounded by water on almost all sides) location of Byzantium attracted Roman Emperor Constantine I who, in AD 330, refounded it as an imperial residence inspired by Rome itself, known as Nova Roma. After his death the city was called Constantinople (Greek Konstantinoupolis, "city of Constantine").} the city of Byzantium as an imperial capital, Constantinople, and who was regarded by the later emperors as the model ruler. It was under Constantine that the major characteristics of what is considered the Byzantine state emerged: a Roman polity centered at Constantinople and culturally dominated by the Greek East, with Christianity as the state religion. The Byzantine Empire was the direct legal continuation of the eastern half of the Roman Empire following the division of the Roman Empire in 395. Emperors listed below up to Theodosius I in 395 were sole or joint rulers of the entire Roman Empire. The Western Roman Empire continued until 476. Byzantine emperors considered themselves to be rightful Roman emperors in direct succession from Augustus; the term "Byzantine" was coined by Western historiography only in the 16th century. The use of the title "Roman Emperor" by those ruling from Constantinople was not contested until after the Papal coronation of the Frankish Charlemagne as Holy Roman Emperor (25 December 800), done partly in response to the Byzantine coronation of Empress Irene, whose claim, as a woman, was not recognized by Pope Leo III. Constantinian dynasty (306–363). Constantine I "the Great" [Fl. Valerius Constantinus] (19 September 324 – 22 May 337). Born at Naissus ca. 272 as the son of the Augustus Constantius and Helena. Proclaimed Augustus of the western empire upon the death of his father on 25 July 306, he became sole ruler of the western empire after the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312. In 324, he defeated the eastern Augustus Licinius and re-united the empire under his rule, reigning as sole emperor until his death {The Roman Empire was divided into an eastern half and a western half in 285 CE by the Emperor Diocletian. Diocletian's reign stabilized the empire and marks the end of the Crisis of the Third Century. He appointed fellow officer Maximian as Augustus, co-emperor, in 286. Diocletian reigned in the Eastern Empire, and Maximian reigned in the Western Empire. Diocletian delegated further on 1 March 293, appointing Galerius and Constantius as junior co-emperors (each with the title Caesar), under himself and Maximian respectively. Under the Tetrarchy, or "rule of four", each emperor would rule over a quarter-division of the empire.}. Constantine completed the administrative and military reforms begun under Diocletian, who had begun ushering in the Dominate period {The Dominate is the name sometimes given to the "despotic" later phase of imperial government, following the earlier period known as the "Principate", in the ancient Roman Empire. This phase is more often called the Tetrarchy at least until 313 when the empire was reunited.}. Actively interested in Christianity, he played a crucial role in its development and the Christianization of the Roman world, through his convocation of the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea. He is said to have received baptism on his deathbed. He also reformed coinage through the introduction of the gold solidus, and initiated a large-scale building program, crowned by the re-foundation the city of Byzantium as "New Rome", popularly known as Constantinople. He was regarded as the model of all subsequent Byzantine emperors. // Constantine was the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity (With the possible exception of Philip the Arab (r. 244–249)). Although he lived much of his life as a pagan, and later as a catechumen, he began to favor Christianity beginning in 312, finally becoming a Christian and being baptised by either Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop, or Pope Sylvester I, which is maintained by the Catholic Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church. He played an influential role in the proclamation of the Edict of Milan in 313, which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire. He convoked the First Council of Nicaea in 325, which produced the statement of Christian belief known as the Nicene Creed. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre was built on his orders at the purported site of Jesus' tomb in Jerusalem and became the holiest place in Christendom. The papal claim to temporal power in the High Middle Ages was based on the fabricated Donation of Constantine. He has historically been referred to as the "First Christian Emperor" and he did favour the Christian Church. While some modern scholars debate his beliefs and even his comprehension of Christianity (Constantine was not baptised until just before his death), he is venerated as a saint in Eastern Christianity. (Constantine the Great). Constans I [Fl. Iulius Constans] (22 May 337 – 18 January 350). Born c. 323, the third surviving son of Constantine I. Caesar since 333 and Augustus from 9 September 337, he inherited the central third of Roman Empire upon his father's death, and became sole emperor in the west following the death of Constantine II in 340. An ardent supporter of Athanasius of Alexandria, he opposed Arianism. Constans was assassinated during the coup of Magnentius. Constantius II [Fl. Iulius Constantius] (22 May 337 – 3 November 361). Born on 7 August 317, as the second surviving son of Constantine I, he inherited the eastern third of Roman Empire upon his father's death, sole Roman Emperor from 353, after the overthrow of the western usurper Magnentius. Constantius' reign saw military activity on all frontiers, and dissension between Arianism, favoured by the emperor, and the "Orthodox" supporters of the Nicene Creed. In his reign, Constantinople was accorded equal status to Rome, and the original Hagia Sophia was built. Constantius appointed Constantius Gallus and Julian as Caesares, and died on his way to confront Julian, who had risen up against him. Julian "the Apostate" [Fl. Claudius Iulianus] (3 November 361 – 26 June 363). Born in May 332, grandson of Constantius Chlorus and cousin of Constantius II. Proclaimed by his army in Gaul, became legitimate Emperor upon the death of Constantius. Killed on campaign against Sassanid Persia. Non-dynastic (363–364). Jovian [Iovianus] (28 June 363 – 17 February 364). Born c. 332. Captain of the guards under Julian, elected by the army upon Julian's death. Died on journey back to Constantinople. Valentinianic dynasty (364–379). Valentinian I [Valentianus] (26 February 364 – 17 November 375). Born in 321. An officer under Julian and Jovian, he was elected by the army upon Jovian's death. He soon appointed his younger brother Valens as Emperor of the East. Died of cerebral haemorrhage. Valens [Valens] (28 March 364 – 9 August 378). Born in 328. A soldier of the Roman army, he was appointed Emperor of the East by his elder brother Valentinian I. Killed at the Battle of Adrianople. Gratian [Gratianus] (9 August 378 – 19 January 379). Born on 18 April/23 May 359, the son of Valentinian I. Emperor of the West, he inherited rule of the East upon the death of Valens and appointed Theodosius I as Emperor of the East. Assassinated on 25 August 383 during the rebellion of Magnus Maximus. Theodosian dynasty (379–457). Theodosius I "the Great" (19 January 379 – 17 January 395). Born on 11 January 347, in Spain. Aristocrat and military leader, brother-in-law of Gratian, who appointed him as emperor of the East. He reunited the whole Empire after defeating Eugenius at the Battle of the Frigidus, on 6 September 394. Arcadius (17 January 395 – 1 May 408). Born in 377/378, the eldest son of Theodosius I; proclaimed Augustus on 16 January 383. On the death of Theodosius I in 395, the Roman Empire was permanently divided between the East Roman Empire, later known as the Byzantine Empire, and the West Roman Empire. Theodosius' eldest son Arcadius became emperor in the East while his younger son Honorius became emperor in the West. Theodosius II "the Younger" (1 May 408 – 28 July 450). Born on 10 April 401, the only son of Arcadius; proclaimed Augustus on 10 January 402. Succeeded upon the death of his father. As a minor, the praetorian prefect Anthemius was regent in 408–414. He died in a riding accident. Marcian [Marcianus] (25 August 450 – 27 January 457). Born in 396. A soldier and politician, he became emperor after being wed by the Augusta Pulcheria, sister of Theodosius II, following the latter's death. Died of gangrene. Leonid dynasty (457–518). Leo I "the Butcher" (7 February 457 – 18 January 474). Born in Dacia ca. 400, and of Bessian origin, Leo became a low-ranking officer and served as an attendant of the Gothic magister militum, Aspar, who chose him as emperor on Marcian's death. He was the first emperor to be crowned by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the first one to legislate in Greek. His reign was marked by the pacification of the Danube and peace with Persia, which allowed him to intervene in the affairs of the West, supporting candidates for the throne and dispatching an expedition to recover Carthage from the Vandals in 468. Initially a puppet of Aspar, Leo began promoting the Isaurians as a counterweight to Aspar's Goths, marrying his daughter Ariadne to the Isaurian leader Tarasicodissa (Zeno). With their support, in 471 Aspar was murdered and Gothic power over the army was broken. Leo II "the Younger" (18 January – November 474). Born 468, he was the grandson of Leo I by Leo's daughter Ariadne and her Isaurian husband, Zeno. He was raised to Augustus on 17 November 473. Leo ascended the throne after the death of his grandfather, on 18 January 474. He crowned his father Zeno as co-emperor and effective regent on 29 January. He died shortly after. Zeno (November 474 – 9 April 491). Born ca. 425 in Isauria, originally named Tarasicodissa. As the leader of Leo I's Isaurian soldiers, he rose to comes domesticorum, married the emperor's daughter Ariadne and took the name Zeno, and played a crucial role in the elimination of Aspar and his Goths. He was named co-emperor by his son on 29 January 474 and became sole ruler upon the latter's death, but had to flee to his native country before Basiliscus in 475, regaining control of the capital in 476. Zeno concluded peace with the Vandals, saw off challenges against him by Illus and Verina, and secured peace in the Balkans by enticing the Ostrogoths under Theodoric the Great to migrate to Italy. Zeno's reign also saw the end of the western line of emperors. His pro-Monophysite {anti-Chalcedonian} stance made him unpopular and his promulgation of the Henotikon {condemning both Monophysitism, held by Eutyches {monophysite: divinity consumed humanity} and Nestorianism {radical dyophysitism}} resulted in the Acacian Schism with the papacy. Basiliscus (9 January 475 – August 476). General and brother-in-law of Leo I, seized power from Zeno and crowned himself emperor on 12 January. Zeno was restored soon after. Died in 476/477. Anastasius I "Dicorus" (11 April 491 – 9 July 518). Born ca. 430 at Dyrrhachium, he was a palace official (silentiarius) when he was chosen as her husband and Emperor by Empress-dowager Ariadne. He was nicknamed "Dikoros" (Latin: Dicorus), because of his heterochromia {differently colored eyes or eyes that have more than one color}. Anastasius reformed the tax system and the Byzantine coinage and proved a frugal ruler, so that by the end of his reign he left a substantial surplus. His Monophysite sympathies led to widespread opposition, most notably the Revolt of Vitalian and the Acacian Schism. His reign was also marked by the first Bulgar raids into the Balkans and by a war with Persia over the foundation of Dara. He died childless. Justinian dynasty (518–602). Justin I [Iustinus] (9 July 518 – 1 August 527). Born c. 450 at Bederiana (Justiniana Prima), Dardania. Officer and commander of the Excubitors bodyguard under Anastasius I, he was elected by army and people upon the death of Anastasius I. Justinian I "the Great" [Petrus Sabbatius Iustinianus] (1 August 527 – 14 November 565). Born in 482/483 at Tauresium (Taor), Macedonia. Nephew of Justin I, raised to co-emperor on 1 April 527. Succeeded on Justin I's death. Attempted to restore the western territories of the Empire, reconquering Italy, North Africa and parts of Spain. Also responsible for the corpus juris civilis, or the "body of civil law," which is the foundation of law for many modern European nations. Justin II "the Younger" [Iustinus Iunior] (14 November 565 – 5 October 578). Born c. 520. Nephew of Justinian I, he seized the throne on the death of Justinian I with support of army and Senate. Became insane, hence in 573–574 under the regency of his wife Sophia, and in 574–578 under the regency of Tiberius Constantine. Tiberius II Constantine [Tiberius Constantinus] (5 October 578 – 14 August 582). Born c. 535, commander of the Excubitors, friend and adoptive son of Justin. Was named Caesar and regent in 574. Succeeded on Justin II's death. Maurice [Mauricius Tiberius] (14 August 582 – 27 November 602). Born in 539 at Arabissus, Cappadocia. Became an official and later a general. Married the daughter of Tiberius II and was proclaimed emperor on 13 August 582. Named his son Theodosius as co-emperor in 590. Deposed by Phocas and executed on 27 November 602 at Chalcedon. Non-dynastic (602–610). Phocas (23 November 602 – 5 October 610). Subaltern in the Balkan army, he led a rebellion that deposed Maurice. Increasingly unpopular and tyrannical, he was deposed and executed by Heraclius. Heraclian dynasty (610–695). Heraclius (5 October 610 – 11 February 641). Born c. 575 as the eldest son of the Exarch of Africa, Heraclius the Elder. Began a revolt against Phocas in 609 and deposed him in October 610. Brought the Byzantine-Sassanid War of 602–628 to successful conclusion but was unable to stop the Muslim conquest of Syria. Officially replaced Latin with Greek as the language of administration. Constantine III [Heraclius Constantinus] (11 February – c. 25 May 641). Born on 3 May 612 as the eldest son of Heraclius by his first wife Fabia Eudokia. Named co-emperor on 22 January 613, he succeeded to throne with his younger brother Heraklonas following the death of Heraclius. Died of tuberculosis, allegedly poisoned by Empress-dowager Martina. Heraklonas [Constantinus Heraclius] (11 February – c. November 641). Born in 626 to Heraclius' second wife Martina, named co-emperor on 4 July 638. Succeeded to throne with Constantine III following the death of Heraclius. Sole emperor after the death of Constantine III, under the regency of Martina, but was forced to name Constans II co-emperor by the army, and was deposed by the Senate in September 641 (or early 642). Constans II "the Bearded" [Flavius Heraclius] (c. November 641 – 15 July 668). Born on 7 November 630, the son of Constantine III. Raised to co-emperor in summer 641 after his father's death due to army pressure, he became sole emperor after the forced abdication of his uncle Heraklonas. Baptized Heraclius, he reigned as Constantine. "Constans" is his nickname. Moved his seat to Syracuse, where he was assassinated, possibly on the orders of Mizizios. {Constans attempted to steer a middle line in the church dispute between Orthodoxy and Monothelitism (...) prohibiting further discussion of the natures of Jesus Christ by decree in 648 (the Type of Constans).} Constantine IV "the Younger" (September 668 – c. 10 July 685). Born in 652, co-emperor since 13 April 654, he succeeded following the murder of his father Constans II. Erroneously called "Constantine the Bearded" by historians through confusion with his father. He called the Third Council of Constantinople which condemned the heresy of Monothelitism, repelled the First Arab Siege of Constantinople, and died of dysentery. Justinian II "the Slit-nosed" (685 – 695). Born in 669, son of Constantine IV, he was named co-emperor in 681 and became sole emperor upon Constantine IV's death. Deposed by military revolt in 695, mutilated (hence his surname) and exiled to Cherson, whence he recovered his throne in 705. Twenty Years' Anarchy (695–717). Leontios (695 – c. 15 February 698). General from Isauria, he deposed Justinian II and was overthrown in another revolt in 698. He was executed in February 706. Tiberius III Apsimar (c. 15 February 698 – c. 21 August 705). Admiral of Germanic origin, originally named Apsimar. He rebelled against Leontios after a failed expedition. Reigned under the name of Tiberius until deposed by Justinian II in 705. Executed in February 706. Justinian II "the Slit-nosed" (second reign) (c. 21 August 705 – 4 November 711). Returned on the throne with Bulgar support. Named son Tiberius as co-emperor in 706. Deposed and killed by military revolt. Philippikos Bardanes (4 November 711 – 3 June 713). A general of Armenian origin, he deposed Justinian II and was in turn overthrown by a revolt of the Opsician troops. Anastasios II Artemios (4 June 713 – late 715). Originally named Artemios. A bureaucrat and secretary under Philippikos, he was raised to the purple by the soldiers who overthrew Philippikos. Deposed by another military revolt, he led an abortive attempt to regain the throne in 718 and was killed. Theodosius III (c. May 715 – 25 March 717). A fiscal official, he was proclaimed emperor by the rebellious Opsician troops. Entered Constantinople in November 715. Abdicated following the revolt of Leo the Isaurian and became a monk. Isaurian dynasty (717–802). Leo III "the Isaurian" (25 March 717 – 18 June 741). Born c. 685 in Germanikeia, Commagene, he became a general. Rose in rebellion and secured the throne in spring 717. Repelled the Second Arab Siege of Constantinople and initiated the Byzantine Iconoclasm. Constantine V "the Dung-named" (18 June 741 – 14 September 775). Born in July 718, the only son of Leo III. Co-emperor since 720, he succeeded upon his father's death. After overcoming the usurpation of Artabasdos, he continued his father's iconoclastic policies and won several victories against the Arabs and the Bulgars. He is given the surname "the Dung-named" by hostile later chroniclers. Artabasdos (June 741 – 2 November 743). General and son-in-law of Leo III, Count of the Opsician Theme. Led a revolt that secured Constantinople, but was defeated and deposed by Constantine V, who blinded and tonsured him. Leo IV "the Khazar" (14 September 775 – 8 September 780). Born on 25 January 750 as the eldest son of Constantine V. Co-emperor since 751, he succeeded upon his father's death. Constantine VI (8 September 780 – 19 August 797). Born in 771, the only child of Leo IV. Co-emperor since 14 April 776, sole emperor upon Leo's death in 780, until 790 under the regency of his mother, Irene of Athens. He was overthrown on Irene's orders, blinded and imprisoned, probably dying of his wounds shortly after. Irene of Athens (19 August 797 – 31 October 802). Born c. 752 in Athens, she married Leo IV on 3 November 768 and was crowned empress on 17 December. Regent for her son Constantine VI in 780–790, she overthrew him in 797 and became empress-regnant. In 787 she called the Second Council of Nicaea which condemned the practice of iconoclasm and restored the veneration of icons to Christian practice. Deposed in a palace coup in 802, she was exiled and died on 9 August 803.

* Edict of Milan [Миланский эдикт] (313). The Edict of Milan (Latin: Edictum Mediolanense) was long believed to be the February AD {supposed} 313 agreement to treat Christians benevolently within the Roman Empire. Western Roman Emperor Constantine I and Emperor Licinius, who controlled the Balkans, met in Mediolanum (modern-day Milan) and, among other things, agreed to change policies towards Christians following the Edict of Toleration issued by Emperor Galerius two years earlier in Serdica. The Edict of Milan gave Christianity legal status and a reprieve from persecution but did not make it the state church of the Roman Empire. That occurred in AD 380 with the Edict of Thessalonica. The document is found in Lactantius' De Mortibus Persecutorum and in Eusebius of Caesarea's History of the Church with marked divergences between the two. Whether or not there was a formal 'Edict of Milan'  is no longer really debated among scholars who generally reject the story as it has come down in church history. The version found in Lactantius is not in the form of an edict. It is a letter from Licinius to the governors of the provinces in the Eastern Empire he had just conquered by defeating Maximinus later in the same year and issued in Nicomedia. History. Since the fall of the Severan dynasty in AD 235, rivals for the imperial throne had bid for support by either favouring or persecuting Christians. The previous Edict of Toleration by Galerius had been recently issued by the emperor Galerius from Serdica and was posted at Nicomedia on 30 April 311. By its provisions, the Christians, who had "followed such a caprice and had fallen into such a folly that they would not obey the institutes of antiquity", were granted an indulgence. "Wherefore, for this our indulgence, they ought to pray to their God for our safety, for that of the republic, and for their own, that the commonwealth may continue uninjured on every side, and that they may be able to live securely in their homes." Their confiscated property, however, was not restored until 313, when instructions were given for the Christians' meeting places and other properties to be returned and compensation paid by the state to the current owners: "the same shall be restored to the Christians without payment or any claim of recompense and without any kind of fraud or deception." It directed the provincial magistrates to execute this order at once with all energy so that public order may be restored and the continuance of divine favour may "preserve and prosper our successes together with the good of the state." The actual letters have never been retrieved. However, they are quoted at length in Lactantius' On the Deaths of the Persecutors (De mortibus persecutorum), which gives the Latin text of both Galerius's Edict of Toleration as posted at Nicomedia on 30 April 311 and of Licinius's letter of toleration and restitution addressed to the governor of Bithynia and posted at Nicomedia on 13 June 313. Eusebius of Caesarea translated both documents into Greek in his History of the Church (Historia Ecclesiastica). His version of the letter of Licinius must derive from a copy posted in the province of Palaestina Prima (probably at its capital, Caesarea) in the late summer or early autumn of 313, but the origin of his copy of Galerius's Edict of 311 is unknown since that does not seem to have been promulgated in Caesarea. In his description of the events in Milan in his Life of Constantine, Eusebius eliminated the role of Licinius, whom he portrayed as the evil foil to his hero Constantine.[citation needed] The Edict {of 311} was in effect directed against Maximinus Daia, the Caesar in the East who was at that time styling himself as Augustus. Having received the emperor Galerius' instruction to repeal the persecution in 311, Maximinus had instructed his subordinates to desist, but had not released Christians from prisons or virtual death-sentences in the mines, as Constantine and Licinius had both done in the West. Following Galerius' death, Maximinus was no longer constrained; he enthusiastically took up renewed persecutions in the eastern territories under his control, encouraging petitions against Christians. One of those petitions, addressed not only to Maximinus but also to Constantine and Licinius, is preserved in a stone inscription at Arycanda in Lycia, and is a "request that the Christians, who have long been disloyal and still persist in the same mischievous intent, should at last be put down and not be suffered by any absurd novelty to offend against the honour due to the gods." The Edict is popularly thought to concern only Christianity, and even to make Christianity the official religion of the Empire (which recognition did not actually occur until the Edict of Thessalonica in 380). Indeed, the Edict expressly grants religious liberty not only to Christians, who had been the object of special persecution, but goes even further and grants liberty to all religions: "When you see that this has been granted to [Christians] by us, your Worship will know that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases; this regulation is made that we may not seem to detract from any dignity of any religion." — "Edict of Milan", Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors (De Mortibus Persecutorum). Since Licinius composed the Edict with the intent of publishing it in the east[citation needed] upon his hoped-for victory over Maximinus, it expresses the religious policy accepted by Licinius, a pagan, rather than that of Constantine[citation needed], who was already a Christian. Constantine's own policy went beyond merely tolerating Christianity: he tolerated paganism and other religions, but he actively promoted Christianity.[citation needed] Religious statement. Although the Edict of Milan is commonly presented as Constantine's first great act as a Christian emperor, it is disputed whether the Edict of Milan was an act of genuine faith. The document could be seen as Constantine's first step in creating an alliance with the Christian God, who he considered the strongest deity. At that time, he was concerned about social stability and the protection of the empire from the wrath of the Christian God: in this view, the Edict could be a pragmatic political decision rather than a religious shift. However, the majority of historians believe that Constantine's conversion to Christianity was genuine, and that the Edict of Milan was merely the first official act of Constantine as a dedicated Christian. This view is supported by Constantine's ongoing favors on behalf of Christianity during the rest of his reign. The Edict of Milan required that the wrong done to the Christians be righted as thoroughly as possible; it claims “it has pleased us to remove all conditions whatsoever.” The edict further demanded that individual Romans right any wrongs towards Christians, claiming that “the same shall be restored to the Christians without payment or any claim of recompense and without any kind of fraud or deception.” These provisions indicate that more than just the establishment of justice was intended. After demanding the immediate return of what was lost by the Christians, the edict states that this should be done so that “public order may be secured”, not for the intrinsic value of justice or the glory of God. The exhortation to right wrongs as a matter of urgency reflects the leaders' desires to avoid unfavorable consequences, which in this case included social unrest and further conquests. Constantine was superstitious and believed enough in the existence of the non-Christian gods to not want to offset the balance of good and evil. It was believed that, the sooner this balance was restored by the Romans establishing a state of justice with the Christians, the sooner the state would become stable.[citation needed] // Edict of Milan, proclamation that permanently established religious toleration for Christianity within the Roman Empire. It was the outcome of a political agreement concluded in Mediolanum (modern Milan) between the Roman emperors Constantine I and Licinius in February 313. The proclamation, made for the East by Licinius in June 313, granted all persons freedom to worship whatever deity they pleased, assured Christians of legal rights (including the right to organize churches), and directed the prompt return to Christians of confiscated property. Previous edicts of toleration had been as short-lived as the regimes that sanctioned them, but this time the edict effectively established religious toleration. The extant copies of the decree are those posted by Licinius in the eastern parts of the empire. Encyclopaedia Britannica -  Edict of Milan

* Constantine the Great [Константин I Великий] (c 272-337). Constantine I (Latin: Flavius Valerius Constantinus; Greek translit. Kōnstantînos), also known as Constantine the Great, was Roman emperor from 306 to 337. Born in Naissus, Dacia Mediterranea (now Niš, Serbia), he was the son of Flavius Constantius (a Roman army officer born in Dacia Ripensis who had been one of the four emperors of the Tetrarchy). His mother, Helena, was Greek and of low birth. Constantine served with distinction under the Roman emperors Diocletian and Galerius. He began by campaigning in the eastern provinces (against barbarians, and the Persians) before he was recalled in the west (in 305 AD) to fight along side his father in Britain. After his father's death in 306, Constantine became emperor; he was acclaimed by his army at Eboracum (York, England). He emerged victorious in the civil wars against emperors Maxentius and Licinius to become the sole ruler of the Roman Empire by 324. As emperor, Constantine enacted administrative, financial, social and military reforms to strengthen the empire. He restructured the government, separating civil and military authorities. To combat inflation he introduced the solidus, a new gold coin that became the standard for Byzantine and European currencies for more than a thousand years. The Roman army was reorganised to consist of mobile units (comitatenses), and garrison troops (limitanei) capable of countering internal threats and barbarian invasions. Constantine pursued successful campaigns against the tribes on the Roman frontiers—the Franks, the Alamanni, the Goths and the Sarmatians—even resettling territories abandoned by his predecessors during the Crisis of the Third Century {The Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis (235–284 AD), was a period in which the Roman Empire nearly collapsed under the combined pressures of barbarian invasions and migrations into the Roman territory, civil wars, peasant rebellions, political instability (with multiple usurpers competing for power), Roman reliance on (and growing influence of) barbarian mercenaries known as foederati and commanders nominally working for Rome (but increasingly independent), plague, debasement of currency, and economic depression.}. Constantine was the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity. Although he lived much of his life as a pagan, and later as a catechumen, he began to favour Christianity beginning in 312, finally becoming a Christian and being baptised by either Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop, or Pope Sylvester I, which is maintained by the Catholic Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church. He played an influential role in the proclamation of the Edict of Milan in 313, which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire. He convoked the First Council of Nicaea in 325, which produced the statement of Christian belief known as the Nicene Creed. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre was built on his orders at the purported site of Jesus' tomb in Jerusalem and became the holiest place in Christendom. The papal claim to temporal power in the High Middle Ages was based on the fabricated Donation of Constantine. He has historically been referred to as the "First Christian Emperor" and he did favour the Christian Church. While some modern scholars debate his beliefs and even his comprehension of Christianity, he is venerated as a saint in Eastern Christianity. The age of Constantine marked a distinct epoch in the history of the Roman Empire and a pivotal moment in the transition from classical antiquity to the Middle Ages. He built a new imperial residence at Byzantium and renamed the city Constantinople (now Istanbul) after himself (the laudatory epithet of "New Rome" emerged in his time, and was never an official title). It subsequently became the capital of the Empire for more than a thousand years, the later Eastern Roman Empire being referred to as the Byzantine Empire by modern historians. His more immediate political legacy was that he replaced Diocletian's Tetrarchy with the de facto principle of dynastic succession, by leaving the empire to his sons and other members of the Constantinian dynasty. His reputation flourished during the lifetime of his children and for centuries after his reign. The medieval church held him up as a paragon of virtue, while secular rulers invoked him as a prototype, a point of reference and the symbol of imperial legitimacy and identity. Beginning with the Renaissance, there were more critical appraisals of his reign, due to the rediscovery of anti-Constantinian sources. Trends in modern and recent scholarship have attempted to balance the extremes of previous scholarship. Sources. Constantine was a ruler of major importance, and has always been a controversial figure. The fluctuations in his reputation reflect the nature of the ancient sources for his reign. These are abundant and detailed, but they have been strongly influenced by the official propaganda of the period and are often one-sided; no contemporaneous histories or biographies dealing with his life and rule have survived. Early life. (...) In July AD 285, Diocletian declared Maximian, another colleague from Illyricum, his co-emperor. Each emperor would have his own court, his own military and administrative faculties, and each would rule with a separate praetorian prefect as chief lieutenant. Maximian ruled in the West, from his capitals at Mediolanum (Milan, Italy) or Augusta Treverorum (Trier, Germany), while Diocletian ruled in the East, from Nicomedia (İzmit, Turkey). The division was merely pragmatic: the empire was called "indivisible" in official panegyric, and both emperors could move freely throughout the empire. In 288, Maximian appointed Constantius to serve as his praetorian prefect in Gaul. Constantius left Helena {Constantine's mother} to marry Maximian's stepdaughter Theodora in 288 or 289. Diocletian divided the Empire again in AD 293, appointing two caesars (junior emperors) to rule over further subdivisions of East and West. Each would be subordinate to their respective augustus (senior emperor) but would act with supreme authority in his assigned lands. This system would later be called the Tetrarchy. Diocletian's first appointee for the office of Caesar was Constantius; his second was Galerius, a native of Felix Romuliana. According to Lactantius, Galerius was a brutal, animalistic man. Although he shared the paganism of Rome's aristocracy, he seemed to them an alien figure, a semi-barbarian. On 1 March, Constantius was promoted to the office of caesar, and dispatched to Gaul to fight the rebels Carausius and Allectus. In spite of meritocratic overtones, the Tetrarchy retained vestiges of hereditary privilege, and Constantine became the prime candidate for future appointment as caesar as soon as his father took the position. Constantine went to the court of Diocletian, where he lived as his father's heir presumptive. (...) Constantine adopts the Greek letters Chi Rho for Christ's initials. Maxentius' forces were still twice the size of Constantine's, and he organized them in long lines facing the battle plain with their backs to the river. Constantine's army arrived on the field bearing unfamiliar symbols on their standards and their shields. According to Lactantius "Constantine was directed in a dream to cause the heavenly sign to be delineated on the shields of his soldiers, and so to proceed to battle. He did as he had been commanded, and he marked on their shields the letter Χ, with a perpendicular line drawn through it and turned round thus at the top, being the cipher of Christ. Having this sign (☧), his troops stood to arms." Eusebius describes a vision that Constantine had while marching at midday in which "he saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing the inscription, In Hoc Signo Vinces" ("In this sign thou shalt conquer"). In Eusebius's account, Constantine had a dream the following night in which Christ appeared with the same heavenly sign and told him to make an army standard in the form of the labarum. Eusebius is vague about when and where these events took place, but it enters his narrative before the war begins against Maxentius. He describes the sign as Chi (Χ) traversed by Rho (Ρ) to form ☧, representing the first two letters of the Greek word ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ (Christos). A medallion was issued at Ticinum in 315 AD which shows Constantine wearing a helmet emblazoned with the Chi Rho, and coins issued at Siscia in 317/318 AD repeat the image. The figure was otherwise rare and is uncommon in imperial iconography and propaganda before the 320s. It wasn't completely unknown, however, being an abbreviation of the Greek word chrēston (good), having previously appeared on the coins of Ptolemy III, Euergetes I (247–222 BCE). (...) Foundation of Constantinople. Diocletian had chosen Nicomedia in the East as his capital during the Tetrarchy – not far from Byzantium, well situated to defend Thrace, Asia, and Egypt, all of which had required his military attention. Constantine had recognized the shift of the center of gravity of the Empire from the remote and depopulated West to the richer cities of the East, and the military strategic importance of protecting the Danube from barbarian excursions and Asia from a hostile Persia in choosing his new capital as well as being able to monitor shipping traffic between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. Licinius' defeat came to represent the defeat of a rival centre of pagan and Greek-speaking political activity in the East {In 286 Nicomedia became the eastern and most senior capital city of the Roman Empire (chosen by the emperor Diocletian who ruled in the east), a status which the city maintained during the Tetrarchy system (293–324).  The Tetrarchy ended with the Battle of Chrysopolis (Üsküdar) in 324, when Constantine defeated Licinius and became the sole emperor. In 330 Constantine chose for himself the nearby Byzantium (which was renamed Constantinople, modern Istanbul) as the new capital of the Roman Empire.}, as opposed to the Christian and Latin-speaking Rome, and it was proposed that a new Eastern capital should represent the integration of the East into the Roman Empire as a whole, as a center of learning, prosperity, and cultural preservation for the whole of the Eastern Roman Empire. Among the various locations proposed for this alternative capital, Constantine appears to have toyed earlier with Serdica (present-day Sofia), as he was reported saying that "Serdica is my Rome". Sirmium and Thessalonica were also considered. Eventually, however, Constantine decided to work on the Greek city of Byzantium, which offered the advantage of having already been extensively rebuilt on Roman patterns of urbanism, during the preceding century, by Septimius Severus and Caracalla, who had already acknowledged its strategic importance. The city was thus founded in 324, dedicated on 11 May 330 and renamed Constantinopolis ("Constantine's City" or Constantinople in English). Special commemorative coins were issued in 330 to honor the event. The new city was protected by the relics of the True Cross, the Rod of Moses and other holy relics, though a cameo now at the Hermitage Museum also represented Constantine crowned by the tyche {presiding tutelary deity who governed the fortune and prosperity of a city, its destiny} of the new city. The figures of old gods were either replaced or assimilated into a framework of Christian symbolism. Constantine built the new Church of the Holy Apostles on the site of a temple to Aphrodite. Generations later there was the story that a divine vision led Constantine to this spot, and an angel no one else could see led him on a circuit of the new walls. The capital would often be compared to the 'old' Rome as Nova Roma Constantinopolitana, the "New Rome of Constantinople". Religious policy. {Further information: Constantine the Great and Christianity, Constantine I and paganism, and Constantine the Great and Judaism} Constantine was the first emperor to stop the persecution of Christians and to legalize Christianity, along with all other religions/cults in the Roman Empire. In February 313, he met with Licinius in Milan and developed the Edict of Milan, which stated that Christians should be allowed to follow their faith without oppression. This removed penalties for professing Christianity, under which many had been martyred previously, and it returned confiscated Church property. The edict protected all religions from persecution, not only Christianity, allowing anyone to worship any deity that they chose. A similar edict had been issued in 311 by Galerius, senior emperor of the Tetrarchy, which granted Christians the right to practise their religion but did not restore any property to them. The Edict of Milan included several clauses which stated that all confiscated churches would be returned, as well as other provisions for previously persecuted Christians. Scholars debate whether Constantine adopted his mother Helena's Christianity in his youth, or whether he adopted it gradually over the course of his life. Constantine possibly retained the title of pontifex maximus which emperors bore as heads of the ancient Roman religion until Gratian {359-383} renounced the title. According to Christian writers, Constantine was over 40 when he finally declared himself a Christian, making it clear that he owed his successes to the protection of the Christian High God alone. Despite these declarations of being a Christian, he waited to be baptized on his deathbed, believing that the baptism would release him of any sins he committed in the course of carrying out his policies while emperor. He supported the Church financially, built basilicas, granted privileges to clergy (such as exemption from certain taxes), promoted Christians to high office, and returned property confiscated during the long period of persecution. His most famous building projects include the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and Old Saint Peter's Basilica {Vatican City}. In constructing the Old Saint Peter's Basilica, Constantine went to great lengths to erect the basilica on top of St. Peter's resting place, so much so that it even affected the design of the basilica, including the challenge of erecting it on the hill where St. Peter rested, making its complete construction time over 30 years from the date Constantine ordered it to be built. Constantine might not have patronized Christianity alone. He built a triumphal arch in 315 to celebrate his victory in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312) which was decorated with images of the goddess Victoria, and sacrifices were made to pagan gods at its dedication, including Apollo, Diana, and Hercules. Absent from the Arch are any depictions of Christian symbolism. However, the Arch was commissioned by the Senate, so the absence of Christian symbols may reflect the role of the Curia at the time as a pagan redoubt. In 321, he legislated that the venerable Sunday should be a day of rest for all citizens. In 323, he issued a decree banning Christians from participating in state sacrifices. After the pagan gods had disappeared from his coinage, Christian symbols appeared as Constantine's attributes, the chi rho between his hands or on his labarum {vexillum, military standard}, as well on the coin itself. The reign of Constantine established a precedent for the emperor to have great influence and authority in the early Christian councils, most notably the dispute over Arianism. Constantine disliked the risks to societal stability that religious disputes and controversies brought with them, preferring to establish an orthodoxy. His influence over the Church councils was to enforce doctrine, root out heresy, and uphold ecclesiastical unity; the Church's role was to determine proper worship, doctrines, and dogma. North African bishops struggled with Christian bishops who had been ordained by Donatus {rigorist: "flawless clergy"} in opposition to Caecilian {moderate} from 313 to 316. The African bishops could not come to terms, and the Donatists asked Constantine to act as a judge in the dispute. Three regional Church councils and another trial before Constantine all ruled against Donatus and the Donatism movement in North Africa. In 317, Constantine issued an edict to confiscate Donatist church property and to send Donatist clergy into exile. More significantly, in 325 he summoned the First Council of Nicaea, most known for its dealing with Arianism and for instituting the Nicene Creed. He enforced the council's prohibition against celebrating the Lord's Supper on the day before the Jewish Passover, which marked a definite break of Christianity from the Judaic tradition. From then on, the solar Julian Calendar was given precedence over the lunisolar Hebrew calendar among the Christian churches of the Roman Empire. Constantine made some new laws regarding the Jews; some of them were unfavourable towards Jews, although they were not harsher than those of his predecessors. It was made illegal for Jews to seek converts or to attack other Jews who had converted to Christianity. They were forbidden to own Christian slaves or to circumcise their slaves. On the other hand, Jewish clergy were given the same exemptions as Christian clergy. (...) Illness and death. From his recent illness, Constantine knew death would soon come. Within the Church of the Holy Apostles, Constantine had secretly prepared a final resting-place for himself. It came sooner than he had expected. Soon after the Feast of Easter 337, Constantine fell seriously ill. He left Constantinople for the hot baths near his mother's city of Helenopolis (Altinova), on the southern shores of the Gulf of Nicomedia (present-day Gulf of İzmit). There, in a church his mother built in honor of Lucian the Apostle {Lucian the Apostle - Lucian of Beauvais, 290 killed during the Diocletian persecution ??}, he prayed, and there he realized that he was dying. Seeking purification, he became a catechumen, and attempted a return to Constantinople, making it only as far as a suburb of Nicomedia. He summoned the bishops, and told them of his hope to be baptized in the River Jordan, where Christ was written to have been baptized. He requested the baptism right away, promising to live a more Christian life should he live through his illness. The bishops, Eusebius records, "performed the sacred ceremonies according to custom". He chose the Arianizing bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, bishop of the city where he lay dying, as his baptizer. In postponing his baptism, he followed one custom at the time which postponed baptism until after infancy. It has been thought that Constantine put off baptism as long as he did so as to be absolved from as much of his sin as possible. Constantine died soon after at a suburban villa called Achyron, on the last day of the fifty-day festival of Pentecost directly following Pascha (or Easter), on 22 May 337. (...) From these and other accounts, some have concluded that Eusebius's Vita was edited to defend Constantine's reputation against what Eusebius saw as a less congenial version of the campaign. Following his death, his body was transferred to Constantinople and buried in the Church of the Holy Apostles, in a porphyry sarcophagus that was described in the 10th century by Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus in the De Ceremoniis. His body survived the plundering of the city during the Fourth Crusade in 1204, but was destroyed at some point afterwards. Constantine was succeeded by his three sons born of Fausta, Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans. A number of relatives were killed by followers of Constantius, notably Constantine's nephews Dalmatius (who held the rank of Caesar) and Hannibalianus, presumably to eliminate possible contenders to an already complicated succession. He also had two daughters, Constantina and Helena, wife of Emperor Julian. Legacy. Constantine reunited the Empire under one emperor, and he won major victories over the Franks and Alamanni in 306–308, the Franks again in 313–314, the Goths in 332, and the Sarmatians in 334. By 336, he had reoccupied most of the long-lost province of Dacia which Aurelian had been forced to abandon in 271. At the time of his death, he was planning a great expedition to end raids on the eastern provinces from the Persian Empire. He served for almost 31 years (combining his years as co-ruler and sole ruler), the third longest-serving emperor behind Augustus and Basil II. In the cultural sphere, Constantine revived the clean-shaven face fashion of the Roman emperors from Augustus to Trajan, which was originally introduced among the Romans by Scipio Africanus. This new Roman imperial fashion lasted until the reign of Phocas. The Holy Roman Empire reckoned Constantine among the venerable figures of its tradition. In the later Byzantine state, it became a great honor for an emperor to be hailed as a "new Constantine"; ten emperors carried the name, including the last emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire. Charlemagne used monumental Constantinian forms in his court to suggest that he was Constantine's successor and equal. Constantine acquired a mythic role as a warrior against heathens. The motif of the Romanesque equestrian, the mounted figure in the posture of a triumphant Roman emperor, became a visual metaphor in statuary in praise of local benefactors. The name "Constantine" itself enjoyed renewed popularity in western France in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Canonization. The Orthodox Church considers Constantine a saint (Saint Constantine), having a feast day on 21 May, and calls him isapostolos—an equal of the Apostles.

* Lactantius [Лактанций] (240-320; author). Lucius Caecilius Firmianus signo Lactantius was an early Christian author who became an advisor to Roman emperor, Constantine I, guiding his Christian religious policy in its initial stages of emergence, and a tutor to his son Crispus. (...) Prophetic exegesis. Like many writers in the first few centuries of the early church, Lactantius took a premillennialist view, holding that the second coming of Christ will precede a millennium or a thousand-year reign of Christ on earth. According to Charles E. Hill, "With Lactantius in the early fourth century we see a determined attempt to revive a more “genuine” form of chiliasm." Lactantius quoted the Sibyls extensively (although the Sibylline Oracles are now considered to be pseudepigrapha). Book VII of The Divine Institutes indicates a familiarity with Jewish, Christian, Egyptian and Iranian apocalyptic material. Attempts to determine the time of the End {by Lactantius ??} were viewed as in contradiction to Acts 1: "It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by his own authority," and Mark 13: "But of that day or hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (...) Works. (...) Institutiones Divinae ("The Divine Institutes"), written between 303 and 311. This is the most important of the writings of Lactantius. It was "one of the first books printed in Italy and the first dated Italian imprint." As an apologetic treatise, it was intended to point out the futility of pagan beliefs and to establish the reasonableness and truth of Christianity as a response to pagan critics. It was also the first attempt at a systematic exposition of Christian theology in Latin and was planned on a scale sufficiently broad to silence all opponents. Patrick Healy notes, "The strengths and the weakness of Lactantius are nowhere better shown than in his work. The beauty of the style, the choice and aptness of the terminology, cannot hide the author's lack of grasp on Christian principles and his almost utter ignorance of Scripture." Included in this treatise is a quote from the nineteenth of the Odes of Solomon, one of only two known texts of the Odes until the early twentieth century. However, his mockery of the idea of a round earth was criticised by Copernicus as "childish".

* Julian the Apostate [emperor; Юлиан Отступник] (331-363). Julian (Latin: Flavius Claudius Julianus) was Roman emperor from 361 to 363, as well as a notable philosopher and author in Greek. His rejection of Christianity, and his promotion of Neoplatonic Hellenism in its place, caused him to be remembered as Julian the Apostate by the Christian Church. (...) Julian was a man of unusually complex character: he was "the military commander, the theosophist, the social reformer, and the man of letters". He was the last non-Christian ruler of the Roman Empire, and he believed that it was necessary to restore the Empire's ancient Roman values and traditions in order to save it from dissolution. He purged the top-heavy state bureaucracy, and attempted to revive traditional Roman religious practices at the expense of Christianity. His attempt to build a Third Temple in Jerusalem was probably intended to harm Christianity rather than please Jews. Julian also forbade the Christians from teaching and learning classical texts.

* Theodosius I [Феодосий I Великий] (347-395). Theodosius I, also called Theodosius the Great, was Roman emperor from 379 to 395. He is best known for making Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire and great architecture projects in Constantinople. A native of Hispania, Theodosius was the son of a top-ranking general, count Theodosius, on whose staff he served in several military campaigns. In the 370s the younger Theodosius received an independent military command in the Balkans, where he repelled several incursions by the Sarmatians. Around 375 he was forced by mysterious circumstances to retire to his Spanish estates, and court intrigues brought about his father's execution, but he returned to imperial favor two years later and received further promotions. In 379, the emperor Gratian belatedly raised Theodosius to imperial rank to carry on the war in the Balkans against the Goths, after much of the eastern Roman armies and their emperor, Valens, had been killed at the Battle of Adrianople. The new emperor's resources were not sufficient to drive the invaders out, and, in 382, the Goths were allowed to settle south of the Danube as autonomous allies of the Empire. In 386, Theodosius signed a treaty with the Sasanian Empire, which partitioned the long-disputed Kingdom of Armenia and secured a durable peace between the two powers. Theodosius was a devout Christian and an adherent of the trinitarian creed of Nicaea, which he imposed as the official orthodoxy. Deviant sects, especially Arianism, were declared heretical and punished. With regards to paganism, the Emperor was ambivalent: he allowed traditional cults to function with relative freedom and cultivated good relations with unconverted landed aristocrats, but is seen as having done little to prevent the damaging or destruction of several classical-era temples by fanatic Christians or simple lack of maintenance. Between 380 and 387, Theodosius resided mainly at his capital Constantinople, while the western provinces remained in charge of the emperors Gratian and Valentinian II, whose sister he married. During his time there, he commissioned the honorific Column of Theodosius, the Theodosian Walls and the Golden Gate, which are among the greatest surviving works of Roman architecture. Theodosius marched west twice, in 388 and 394, after both Gratian and Valentinian were killed, to defeat the two pretenders that rose to replace them, Magnus Maximus and Eugenius. After his final victory over Eugenius in September 394, Theodosius became master of the Empire, but died shortly afterwards in January 395, probably due to his exertions in the campaign. Theodosius's management of the empire was marked by heavy tax exactions, and, according to the heavily biased Paulinus of Milan, by a court in which "everything was for sale". He is also credited with presiding over a revival in classical art that some historians have termed a "Theodosian renaissance". He died without having consolidated control of his armies or of his Gothic allies. After his death, Theodosius's young and incapable sons were the two augusti Arcadius (r. 383–408), who inherited the eastern empire and reigned from Constantinople, and Honorius (r. 393–423), who received the western empire. The two courts spent much of their effort in attacking each other or in vicious internal power struggles. The administrative division endured until the fall of the western Roman empire in the late 5th century.

* Edict of Thessalonica [Cunctos populos, state church; Фессалоникийский эдикт] (380). The Edict of Thessalonica (also known as Cunctos populos), issued on 27 February AD 380 by three reigning Roman emperors, made the catholicism of Nicene Christians in the Great Church the state church of the Roman Empire. It condemned other Christian creeds such as Arianism as heresies of "foolish madmen," and authorized their persecution. Background. In 313 the emperor Constantine I, together with his eastern counterpart Licinius, issued the Edict of Milan, which granted religious toleration and freedom for persecuted Christians. By 325 Arianism, a school of christology which contended that Christ did not possess the divine essence of the Father but was rather a primordial creation and an entity subordinate to God, had become sufficiently widespread and controversial in Early Christianity that Constantine called the Council of Nicaea in an attempt to end the controversy by establishing an empire-wide, i.e., "ecumenical" orthodoxy. The council produced the original text of the Nicene Creed, which rejected the Arian confession and upheld that Christ is "true God" and "of one essence with the Father." However, the strife within the Church did not end with Nicaea, and the Nicene credal formulation remained contentious even among anti-Arian churchmen. Constantine, while urging tolerance, began to think that he had come down on the wrong side, and that the Nicenes—with their fervid, reciprocal persecution of Arians—were actually perpetuating strife within the Church. Constantine was not baptized until he was near death (337), choosing a bishop moderately sympathetic to Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia, to perform the baptism. Constantine's son and successor in the eastern empire, Constantius II was partial to the Arian party, and even exiled pro-Nicene bishops. Constantius' successor Julian (later called "The Apostate") was the only emperor after the conversion of Constantine to reject Christianity, attempting to fragment the Church and erode its influence by encouraging a revival of religious diversity, calling himself a "Hellene" and supporting forms of Hellenistic religion. He championed the traditional religious cultus of Rome as well as Judaism, and furthermore declared toleration for all the various unorthodox Christian sects and schismatic movements. Julian's successor Jovian, a Christian, reigned for only eight months and never entered the city of Constantinople. He was succeeded in the east by Valens, an Arian. By 379, when Valens was succeeded by Theodosius I, Arianism was widespread in the eastern half of the Empire, while the west had remained steadfastly Nicene. Theodosius, who had been born in Hispania, was himself a Nicene Christian and very devout. In August, his western counterpart Gratian promoted persecution of heretics in the west. Edict. The Edict of Thessalonica was jointly issued by Theodosius I, emperor of the East, Gratian, emperor of the West, and Gratian's junior co-ruler Valentinian II, on 27 February 380. The edict came after Theodosius had been baptized by the bishop Ascholius of Thessalonica upon suffering a severe illness in that city. "EMPERORS GRATIAN, VALENTINIAN AND THEODOSIUS AUGUSTI. EDICT TO THE PEOPLE OF CONSTANTINOPLE. It is our desire that all the various nations which are subject to our Clemency and Moderation, should continue to profess that religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition, and which is now professed by the Pontiff Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic holiness {!!}. According to the apostolic teaching and the doctrine of the Gospel, let us believe in the one deity of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. We order the followers of this law to embrace the name of Catholic Christians; but as for the others, since, in our judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give to their conventicles {conventicle - a secret or unlawful religious meeting, typically of nonconformists} the name of churches. They will suffer in the first place the chastisement of the divine condemnation and in the second the punishment of our authority which in accordance with the will of Heaven we shall decide to inflict. GIVEN IN THESSALONICA ON THE THIRD DAY FROM THE CALENDS OF MARCH, DURING THE FIFTH CONSULATE OF GRATIAN AUGUSTUS AND FIRST OF THEODOSIUS AUGUSTUS"— Codex Theodosianus, xvi.1.2. Importance. The edict was followed in 381 by the First Council of Constantinople, which affirmed the Nicene Symbolum and gave final form to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. The edict was issued under the influence of Ascholius, and thus of Pope Damasus I, who had appointed him. It re-affirmed a single expression of the Apostolic Faith as legitimate in the Roman Empire, "catholic" (that is, universal) and "orthodox" (that is, correct in teaching). The Nicene Creed states: "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty ... And in one Lord Jesus Christ." It declares Jesus Christ be "consubstantial (homo-ousios) with the Father," which may be interpreted as numerical or as qualitative sameness (See Homoousion). The creed adds that we also believe in the Holy Spirit but does not say that the Holy Spirit is homo-ousios with the Father. The Edict of Thessalonica goes much further and declares "the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" to be "one deity ... in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity." Enforcement of the Edict. "In January of the following year (381), another edict forbade the heretics to settle in the cities." "In the same year, after the reformulation of the Nicene doctrine by the Council of Constantinople ... the procouncil of Asia was ordered to deliver all churches to these bishops 'who profess that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one majesty and virtue'." In 383, the Emperor ordered the various non-Nicene sects (Arians, Anomoeans, Macedonians, and Novatians) to submit written creeds to him, which he prayerfully reviewed and then burned, save for that of the Novatians, who also supported Nicene Christianity. The other sects lost the right to meet, ordain priests, or spread their beliefs. “The execution of Priscillian and his followers may be cited as typical of the treatment of heretics conditions in that time.” In 384, Priscillian was condemned by the synod of Bordeaux, found guilty of magic in a secular court, and put to death by the sword with a number of his followers. Theodosius forbade heretics to reside within Constantinople, and in 392 and 394 confiscated their places of worship {what the IMPERIAL pagan Romans had done to the Christians}. Фессалоникийский эдикт. Фессалоникийский эдикт (также известный как cunctos populos) — государственный акт, адресованный народу города Константинополя, который был издан 27 февраля 380 года тремя царствующими римскими императорами. Сделал никейское христианство государственной религией Римской Империи. На II Вселенском соборе Церкви, состоявшемся в Константинополе в 381−382 года, этот эдикт и пояснения к нему были официально закреплены в качестве основополагающего принципа политики государства по отношению к религии.

* Christianity as state church of the Roman Empire [Христианство как государственная религия в Римской империи] (380). The state church of the Roman Empire refers to the church approved by the Roman emperors after Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380, which recognized the catholicism of Nicene Christians in the Great Church as the Roman Empire's state religion. Most historians refer to the Nicene church associated with emperors in a variety of ways: as the catholic church, the orthodox church, the imperial church, the imperial Roman church, or the Byzantine church although some of those terms are also used for wider communions extending outside the Roman Empire. The Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, and the Catholic Church all claim to stand in continuity from the Nicene church to which Theodosius granted recognition, but do not consider it to be a creation of the Roman Empire. Earlier in the 4th century, following the Diocletianic Persecution of 303–313 and the Donatist controversy that arose in consequence, Constantine the Great had convened councils of bishops to define the orthodoxy of the Christian faith and to expand on earlier Christian councils. A series of ecumenical councils convened by successive Roman emperors met during the 4th and the 5th centuries, but Christianity continued to suffer rifts and schisms surrounding the theological and christological doctrines of Arianism, Nestorianism, and Miaphysitism. In the 5th century, the Western Roman Empire decayed as a polity; invaders sacked Rome in 410 and in 455, and Odoacer, an Arian barbarian warlord, forced Romulus Augustus, the last nominal Western Emperor, to abdicate in 476. However, apart from the aforementioned schisms, the church as an institution persisted in communion, if not without tension, between the East and West. In the 6th century, the Byzantine armies of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I recovered Italy and other regions of the Western Mediterranean shore. The Byzantine Empire soon lost most of these gains, but it held Rome, as part of the Exarchate of Ravenna, until 751, a period known in church history as the Byzantine Papacy. The early Muslim conquests of the 7th–9th centuries would begin a process of converting most of the then-Christian world in the Levant, Middle East, North Africa, regions of Southern Italy and the Iberian Peninsula to Islam, severely restricting the reach both of the Byzantine Empire and of its church. Christian missionary activity directed from the capital of Constantinople did not lead to a lasting expansion of the formal link between the church and the Byzantine emperor, since areas outside the Byzantine Empire's political and military control set up their own distinct churches, as in the case of Bulgaria in 919. Justinian I, who became emperor in 527, recognized the patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem as the supreme authorities in the state-sponsored Chalcedonian church apparatus (see the Pentarchy). However, Justinian claimed "the right and duty of regulating by his laws the minutest details of worship and discipline, and also of dictating the theological opinions to be held in the Church". In Justinian's day, the Christian church was not entirely under the emperor's control even in the East: the Oriental Orthodox Churches had seceded, having rejected the Council of Chalcedon in 451, and called the adherents of the imperially-recognized church "Melkites", from Syriac malkâniya ("imperial"). In Western Europe, Christianity was mostly subject to the laws and customs of nations that owed no allegiance to the emperor in Constantinople. While Eastern-born popes appointed or at least confirmed by the emperor continued to be loyal to him as their political lord, they refused to accept his authority in religious matters, or the authority of such a council as the imperially convoked Council of Hieria of 754. Pope Gregory III (731–741) was the last Bishop of Rome to ask the Byzantine ruler to ratify his election. With the crowning of Charlemagne by Pope Leo III on 25 December 800 as Imperator Romanorum, the political split between East and West became irrevocable. Spiritually, Chalcedonian Christianity persisted, at least in theory, as a unified entity until the Great Schism and its formal division with the mutual excommunication in 1054 of Rome and Constantinople. The empire finally collapsed with the Fall of Constantinople to the Islamic Ottoman Turks in 1453. The obliteration of the empire's boundaries by Germanic peoples {in the early Middle Ages (??)} and an outburst of missionary activity among these peoples, who had no direct links with the empire, and among Pictic and Celtic peoples who had never been part of the Roman Empire, fostered the idea of a universal church free from association with a particular state. On the contrary, "in the East Roman or Byzantine view, when the Roman Empire became Christian, the perfect world order willed by God had been achieved: one universal empire was sovereign, and coterminous with it was the one universal church"; and the church came, by the time of the demise of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, to merge psychologically with it to the extent that its bishops had difficulty in thinking of Nicene Christianity without an emperor. The legacy of the idea of a universal church carries on in today's Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodox Churches, and the Church of the East. Many other churches, such as the Anglican Communion, claim succession to this universal church.

* Theodosius II [Theodosius the Younger; Феодосий II, Флавий Феодосий II] (401-450). Theodosius II (Greek: Theodósios), commonly called Theodosius the Younger, was Roman emperor for most of his life, proclaimed Augustus as an infant in 402 and ruling as the eastern Empire's sole emperor after the death of his father Arcadius in 408. His reign was marked by the promulgation of the Theodosian law code and the construction of the Theodosian Walls of Constantinople. He also presided over the outbreak of two great Christological controversies, Nestorianism and Eutychianism.

* Codex Theodosianus [Theodosian Code; Кодекс Феодосия] (439). The Codex Theodosianus (Eng. Theodosian Code) was a compilation of the laws of the Roman Empire under the Christian emperors since 312. A commission was established by Emperor Theodosius II and his co-emperor Valentinian III on 26 March 429 and the compilation was published by a constitution of 15 February 438. It went into force in the eastern and western parts of the empire on 1 January 439. The original text of the codex is also found in the Breviary of Alaric (also called Lex Romana Visigothorum), promulgated on 2 February 506. (...) Christianity. Apart from clearing up confusion and creating a single, simplified and supersedent code, Theodosius II was also attempting to solidify Christianity as the official religion of the Empire, after it had been decriminalised under Galerius' rule and promoted under Constantine's. In his City of God, St. Augustine praised Theodosius the Great, Theodosius II's grandfather, who shared his faith and devotion to its establishment, as "a Christian ruler whose piety was expressed by the laws he had issued in favor of the Catholic Church". The Codex Theodosianus is, for example, explicit in ordering that all actions at law should cease during Holy Week, and the doors of all courts of law be closed during those 15 days. It also instituted laws punishing homosexuality, which represented a departure from policy under the period of the Roman Republic, under which homosexuality was tolerated and perhaps mocked but was not illegal. The first laws granting tax exemption to the church appear in the Codex and are credited to Constantine and his son Constantius II. These laws specify that all clergy, their family members, and church-owned land was exempt from all compulsory service and tax payments, with the exception that land owned by the clerics themselves was still taxed. Кодекс Феодосия. Кодекс Феодосия (лат. Codex Theodosianus) — первое официальное собрание законов Римской империи. // Theodosian Code (404–527) {??}. In 404, Jews were excluded from certain governmental posts. In 418, they were barred from the civil service, and from all military positions. In 425, they were excluded from all remaining public offices, both civilian and military—a prohibition which Justinian I reiterated. Such restrictions, however, inevitably compromised the theological arguments for restricting the Jewish religion; although they empowered the Christian citizens of the empire at the expense of its Jews, all laws dealing with the Jews implicitly recognized the continued existence and legality of the Jewish religion. Thus Emperor Theodosius II found that he had to balance the first two of the three factors governing the treatment of Jews in the empire—theology, political pragmatism and enforceability. He could not, however, effectively control the third. In 438, Theodosius had to reaffirm the prohibition on Jews holding public office, because it had been poorly enforced. Even in 527, a decree which renewed this prohibition began by observing that "heedless of the laws' command [they have] infiltrated public offices". There was one office, however, that Jews were not forbidden from assuming. This was the office of decurion, a tax collector who was required to pay all deficits in revenue from his own pocket. Theodosius II, who laid out much of the legal precedent and foundation for Byzantine law in his Theodosian Code, permitted Jews, like other citizens, to hire a substitute to perform the duties of decurion in their place. Justinian, whose legal code included 33 laws relating to the Jews, initially maintained this ability, but it was abolished in 537. Sharf explains that the purpose of this was so that the Jews "never enjoy the fruits of office, but only suffer its pains and penalties". (History of the Jews in the Byzantine Empire)

* Justinian I [Юстиниан I] (482-565). Justinian I (Latin: Flavius Petrus Sabbatius Iustinianus), also known as Justinian the Great, was the Byzantine emperor from 527 to 565. His reign is marked by the ambitious but only partly realized renovatio imperii, or "restoration of the Empire". This ambition was expressed by the partial recovery of the territories of the defunct Western Roman Empire. His general, Belisarius, swiftly conquered the Vandal Kingdom in North Africa. Subsequently, Belisarius, Narses, and other generals conquered the Ostrogothic kingdom, restoring Dalmatia, Sicily, Italy, and Rome to the empire after more than half a century of rule by the Ostrogoths. The praetorian prefect Liberius reclaimed the south of the Iberian peninsula, establishing the province of Spania. These campaigns re-established Roman control over the western Mediterranean, increasing the Empire's annual revenue by over a million solidi. During his reign, Justinian also subdued the Tzani, a people on the east coast of the Black Sea that had never been under Roman rule before. He engaged the Sasanian Empire {Sassanid Empire, Empire of Iranians, Neo-Persian Empire} in the east during Kavad I's reign, and later again during Khosrow I's; this second conflict was partially initiated due to his ambitions in the west. A still more resonant aspect of his legacy was the uniform rewriting of Roman law, the Corpus Juris Civilis, which is still the basis of civil law in many modern states. His reign also marked a blossoming of Byzantine culture, and his building program yielded works such as the Hagia Sophia. He is called "Saint Justinian the Emperor" in the Eastern Orthodox Church. Because of his restoration activities, Justinian has sometimes been known as the "Last Roman" in mid-20th century historiography. Religious activities. Justinian saw the orthodoxy of his empire threatened by diverging religious currents, especially Monophysitism, which had many adherents in the eastern provinces of Syria and Egypt. Monophysite doctrine, which maintains that Jesus Christ had one divine nature rather than a synthesis of divine and human nature, had been condemned as a heresy by the Council of Chalcedon in 451, and the tolerant policies towards Monophysitism of Zeno and Anastasius I had been a source of tension in the relationship with the bishops of Rome. Justin reversed this trend and confirmed the Chalcedonian doctrine, openly condemning the Monophysites. Justinian, who continued this policy, tried to impose religious unity on his subjects by forcing them to accept doctrinal compromises that might appeal to all parties, a policy that proved unsuccessful as he satisfied none of them. Near the end of his life, Justinian became ever more inclined towards the Monophysite doctrine, especially in the form of Aphthartodocetism {the body of Christ was divine and therefore naturally incorruptible and impassible, and only perished by Jesus Christ's conscious willing decision to let it happen}, but he died before being able to issue any legislation. The empress Theodora sympathized with the Monophysites and is said to have been a constant source of pro-Monophysite intrigues at the court in Constantinople in the earlier years. In the course of his reign, Justinian, who had a genuine interest in matters of theology, authored a small number of theological treatises. Religious policy. As in his secular administration, despotism appeared also in the Emperor's ecclesiastical policy. He regulated everything, both in religion and in law. At the very beginning of his reign, he deemed it proper to promulgate by law the Church's belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation, and to threaten all heretics with the appropriate penalties, whereas he subsequently declared that he intended to deprive all disturbers of orthodoxy of the opportunity for such offense by due process of law. He made the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan creed the sole symbol of the Church and accorded legal force to the canons of the four ecumenical councils. The bishops in attendance at the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 recognized that nothing could be done in the Church contrary to the emperor's will and command, while, on his side, the emperor, in the case of the Patriarch Anthimus, reinforced the ban of the Church with temporal {worldly, earthly} proscription {a decree of condemnation to death or banishment}. Justinian protected the purity of the church by suppressing heretics. He neglected no opportunity to secure the rights of the Church and clergy, and to protect and extend monasticism. He granted the monks the right to inherit property from private citizens and the right to receive solemnia, or annual gifts, from the Imperial treasury or from the taxes of certain provinces and he prohibited lay confiscation of monastic estates. Although the despotic character of his measures is contrary to modern sensibilities, he was indeed a "nursing father" of the Church. Both the Codex and the Novellae contain many enactments regarding donations, foundations, and the administration of ecclesiastical property; election and rights of bishops, priests and abbots; monastic life, residential obligations of the clergy, conduct of divine service, episcopal jurisdiction, etc. Justinian also rebuilt the Church of Hagia Sophia (which cost 20,000 pounds of gold), the original site having been destroyed during the Nika riots {The Nika riots, Nika revolt or Nika sedition took place against Emperor Justinian I in Constantinople over the course of a week in 532 AD. They were the most violent riots in the city's history, with nearly half of Constantinople being burned or destroyed and tens of thousands of people killed.}. The new Hagia Sophia, with its numerous chapels and shrines, gilded octagonal dome, and mosaics, became the centre and most visible monument of Eastern Orthodoxy in Constantinople. Religious relations with Rome. From the middle of the 5th century onward, increasingly arduous tasks confronted the emperors of the East in ecclesiastical matters. Justinian entered the arena of ecclesiastical statecraft shortly after his uncle's accession in 518, and put an end to the Acacian schism {schism between the Eastern and Western Christian Churches, lasted 35 years, from 484 to 519 AD; drift in the leaders of Eastern Christianity toward Miaphysitism}. Previous Emperors had tried to alleviate theological conflicts by declarations that deemphasized the Council of Chalcedon, which had condemned Monophysitism, which had strongholds in Egypt and Syria, and by tolerating the appointment of Monophysites to church offices. The Popes reacted by severing ties with the Patriarch of Constantinople who supported these policies. Emperors Justin I (and later Justinian himself) rescinded these policies and reestablished the union between Constantinople and Rome. After this, Justinian also felt entitled to settle disputes in papal elections, as he did when he favoured Vigilius and had his rival Silverius deported. This new-found unity between East and West did not, however, solve the ongoing disputes in the east. Justinian's policies switched between attempts to force Monophysites to accept the Chalcedonian creed by persecuting their bishops and monks – thereby embittering their sympathizers in Egypt and other provinces – and attempts at a compromise that would win over the Monophysites without surrendering the Chalcedonian faith. Such an approach was supported by the Empress Theodora, who favoured the Monophysites unreservedly. In the condemnation of the Three Chapters, three theologians that had opposed Monophysitism before and after the Council of Chalcedon, Justinian tried to win over the opposition. At the Fifth Ecumenical Council, most of the Eastern church yielded to the Emperor's demands, and Pope Vigilius, who was forcibly brought to Constantinople and besieged at a chapel, finally also gave his assent. However, the condemnation was received unfavourably in the west, where it led to new (albeit temporal) schism, and failed to reach its goal in the east, as the Monophysites remained unsatisfied – all the more bitter for him because during his last years he took an even greater interest in theological matters. Authoritarian rule. Justinian's religious policy reflected the Imperial conviction that the unity of the Empire presupposed unity of faith, and it appeared to him obvious that this faith could only be the orthodox (Nicaean). Those of a different belief were subjected to persecution, which imperial legislation had effected from the time of Constantius II and which would now vigorously continue. The Codex contained two statutes that decreed the total destruction of paganism, even in private life; these provisions were zealously enforced. Contemporary sources (John Malalas, Theophanes, and John of Ephesus) tell of severe persecutions, even of men in high position.[dubious – discuss] The original Academy of Plato had been destroyed by the Roman dictator Sulla in 86 BC. Several centuries later, in 410 AD, a Neoplatonic Academy was established that had no institutional continuity with Plato's Academy, and which served as a center for Neoplatonism and mysticism. It persisted until 529 AD when it was finally closed by Justinian I. Other schools in Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, which were the centers of Justinian's empire, continued. {missionary activities, conversions} In Asia Minor alone, John of Ephesus was reported to have converted 70,000 pagans, which was probably an exaggerated number. Other peoples also accepted Christianity: the Heruli, the Huns dwelling near the Don, the Abasgi, and the Tzanni in Caucasia. The worship of Amun at the oasis of Awjila in the Libyan desert was abolished, and so were the remnants of the worship of Isis on the island of Philae, at the first cataract of the Nile. The Presbyter Julian and the Bishop Longinus conducted a mission among the Nabataeans, and Justinian attempted to strengthen Christianity in Yemen by dispatching a bishop from Egypt. The civil rights of Jews were restricted and their religious privileges threatened. Justinian also interfered in the internal affairs of the synagogue and encouraged the Jews to use the Greek Septuagint in their synagogues in Constantinople. The Emperor faced significant opposition from the Samaritans, who resisted conversion to Christianity and were repeatedly in insurrection. He persecuted them with rigorous edicts, but could not prevent reprisals towards Christians from taking place in Samaria toward the close of his reign. The consistency of Justinian's policy meant that the Manicheans too suffered persecution, experiencing both exile and threat of capital punishment. At Constantinople, on one occasion, not a few Manicheans, after strict inquisition, were executed in the emperor's very presence: some by burning, others by drowning. Юстиниан I. Фла́вий Пётр Савва́тий Юстиниа́н (лат. Flavius Petrus Sabbatius Iustinianus), более известный как Юстиниа́н I или Юстиниан Великий (483, Тавресий, Верхняя Македония — 14 ноября 565, Константинополь) — византийский император с 1 августа 527 года вплоть до своей смерти в 565 году. Сам Юстиниан в указах называл себя Цезарем Флавием Юстинианом Аламанским, Готским, Франкским, Германским, Антским, Аланским, Вандальским, Африканским, так как при нём были присоединены многие земли бывшей Западной Римской империи, в частности, упразднены королевство вандалов и аланов в Африке, королевство остготов в Италии, присоединена часть земель королевства вестготов в Испании. Вестготы, франки, алеманны, анты признали себя вассалами императора. На Востоке Юстиниан участвовал в войне Аксума против Химьяра, войне с лахмидами, вёл Иберийскую войну с Персией, после чего заключил вечный мир с Персией, который продлился 8 лет. За время перемирия с Сасанидской Персией Юстиниан сосредоточился на восстановлении прежних западных территорий. На Западе Юстиниан завладел большой частью земель Западной Римской империи, распавшейся после Великого переселения народов, где варварские правители земель Западной империей до Юстиниана признавали власть императоров Константинополя только номинально, в том числе Апеннинским полуостровом, юго-восточной частью Пиренейского полуострова и частью Северной Африки. Юстиниан, полководец и реформатор, — один из наиболее выдающихся монархов раннего средневековья. Его правление знаменует собой окончательный этап перехода от римских традиций к византийскому стилю правления. Ещё одним важным событием является поручение Юстиниана о переработке римского права, результатом которого стал новый свод законов — свод Юстиниана (лат. Corpus iuris civilis). Указом императора, был полностью перестроен сгоревший собор Святой Софии в Константинополе, поражающий своей красотой и великолепием и остававшийся на протяжении тысячи лет самым грандиозным храмом христианского мира. Почитается в лике благоверных. Память совершается в Православной Церкви 14 (27) ноября и в среду Светлой седмицы в Соборе синайских святых. В 529 году Юстиниан закрыл Платоновскую академию в Афинах, в 542 году император упразднил должность консула. Во время правления Юстиниана произошли первая пандемия чумы, которая унесла половину населения Византии, похолодание 535—536 годов и крупнейший бунт в истории Византии и Константинополя — восстание «Ника», спровоцированное налоговым гнётом и церковной политикой императора. (...) Политические взгляды. (...) Юстиниан первый отчетливо противопоставлял народной воле «милость Божию», как источник верховной власти. С его времени зарождается теория об императоре, как «равном апостолам», получающем благодать прямо от Бога и стоящем над государством и над церковью. Бог помогает ему побеждать врагов, издавать справедливые законы. Войны Юстиниана получают уже характер крестовых походов (везде, где император будет господином, воссияет правая вера). Всякий акт свой он ставит «под покровительство св. Троицы». Юстиниан — как бы предвозвестник или родоначальник длинной цепи «помазанников Божьих» в истории. Такое построение власти (римско-христианское) вдохнуло в деятельность Юстиниана широкую инициативу, сделало его волю притягательным центром и точкой приложения многих других энергий, благодаря чему царствование его достигло действительно значительных результатов. Он сам говорил: «Никогда до времени нашего правления Бог не даровал римлянам таких побед… Возблагодарите небо, жители всего мира: в ваши дни осуществилось великое дело, которого Бог признавал недостойным весь древний мир». Много зол Юстиниан оставил не излеченными, много новых бедствий породила его политика, но тем не менее величие его прославила почти при нём возникшая в различных областях народная легенда. Все страны, воспользовавшиеся впоследствии его законодательством, возвеличили его славу.

* Nika riots [Nika revolt/sedition; Восстание «Ника»] (532). The Nika riots (Greek: Stásis toû Níka), Nika revolt or Nika sedition took place against Emperor Justinian I in Constantinople over the course of a week in 532 AD. They were the most violent riots in the city's history, with nearly half of Constantinople being burned or destroyed and tens of thousands of people killed. Ника (восстание). Восстание «Ника» (бунт «Ника»; греч. букв. — «Побеждай!» — лозунг восставших) — крупнейший бунт в истории Константинополя и Византии, произошедший при правлении императора Юстиниана I в 532 году. В результате Константинополь был существенно разрушен, а при подавлении восстания было убито более 30 тысяч человек {bloody suppression}. Восстание было вызвано налоговым гнётом, произволом чиновников, притеснением монофизитов, что не устраивало многие слои населения и заставило партии ипподрома объединиться и выступить против правительства. Предпосылки. Византинист А. А. Васильев выделял три основных группы оппозиции: 1) Династическая. После правления императора Анастасия императором стал дядя Юстиниана Юстин I, в то время как у Анастасия остались племянники, желавшие низложить Юстиниана. 2) Общественная. Недовольство высшим чиновничеством, в особенности — юристом Трибонианом и префектом претория Иоанном Каппадокийским, их нарушением законов, вымогательствами и жестокостью. 3) Религиозная. В начале правления Юстиниана монофизиты стали испытывать стеснения. Восстание началось 13 января 532 года на Императорском ипподроме, во время проведения гонки колесниц. Болельщики зрелищ (гладиаторских боёв, а затем, с введением христианства (и запрета боёв императором Гонорием) — цирковых представлений и скачек {horse race}) как старой Римской, так и в Восточной империях делились на несколько группировок по цветам, в частности, колесниц, за которые болели и которые ими содержались: белые, зелёные, красные, синие (соответствовали стихиям: воздуху, земле, огню и воде). На протяжении нескольких веков самыми крупными и влиятельными были две основные партии — «голубые» (венеты) и «зелёные» (прасины), причём в правление Юстиниана руководство партии венетов состояло из крупных землевладельцев и сенаторской аристократии, а руководство партии прасинов — из богатых купцов и промышленников. Эти партии были разделены и по религиозному вопросу: венеты являлись христианами, поддерживавшими решения Халкидонского собора, прасины были монофизитами. Юстиниан и его жена императрица Феодора благоволили венетам. Согласно Тайной истории Прокопия Кессарийского, Феодора в детстве, после смерти своего отца — смотрителя зверинца в цирке — была отвергнута прасинами, и семье дали кров и работу венеты. (...) Подавление бунта. Во дворце началась паника. Юстиниан уже рассматривал план побега, но его жена императрица Феодора заявила, что лучше смерть, чем изгнание: «Порфира — лучший саван». Значительный вклад в подавление бунта внёс армянский полководец Нарсес: именно он сумел подкупить и завербовать на сторону императора большинство сенаторов. Таким образом, восстание лишилось большинства своих предводителей. Нарсес сумел убедить сенаторов в том, что восстание подготовили простолюдины, и после тайной встречи с ним сенаторы начали скандировать Justiniane Auguste, tu vincas (Юстиниан Август, ты побеждаешь). 18 января малочисленные правительственные войска, возглавляемые полководцами Юстиниана — Велизарием и Мундом, — внезапно напали на собравшихся на ипподроме для коронации Гипатия бунтовщиков и учинили резню, во время которой на ипподроме и в его окрестностях погибло около 35 тысяч человек. Пытавшихся бежать с ипподрома уничтожили отряды, возглавляемые Нарсесом. Итоги. Гипатий и его брат Помпей[en] были арестованы и на следующий день казнены. Трупы были выставлены на всеобщее обозрение, вдове Гипатия разрешили захоронить супруга, останки Помпея выкинули в море. Ссылке и конфискации имущества подверглись ряд патрициев, в том числе родственники императора Анастасия и Гипатия (позже Юстиниан признает часть из них невиновными, возвратит из ссылки и передаст часть прежнего имущества). Подавление восстания ещё больше укрепило власть Юстиниана, и до этих событий имевшую неограниченный характер. Трибониан и Иоанн Каппадокийский на короткое время оказались в опале. Вскоре первый принял участие в обработке дигестов, и в 533 году стал магистром оффиций (квесторство было возвращено ему раньше). Второй через два года снова стал префектом претория, его способности понадобились для отстройки столицы (в ходе которой на месте базилики Святой Софии был возведён одноимённый храм) и финансирования вандальской войны.

* Agapetus [deacon; ??] (~500; political theologian, writer). Agapetus was a deacon of the church of Hagia Sophia at Constantinople (about 500). He was a reputed tutor of Justinian, and author of a series of exhortations in seventy-two short chapters addressed around 527 to Justinian (Patrologia Graecae, LXXXVI, 1153–86). The first letters of each chapter form an acrostic of dedication that reads: "The very humble Deacon Agapetus to the sacred and venerable Emperor Justinian". The repute in which this work was held appears from its common title, viz. the Royal Sections. The book deals in general terms with the moral, religious, and political duties of a ruler. In form it is quite sententious and rhetorical, and resembles closely a similar work in the romance of Barlaam and Josaphat. Both of these seem to be based on Isocrates, and on Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus. The work of Agapetus was eminently fitted for the use of medieval teachers by reason of its content, the purity of its Greek diction, and its skillful construction. It was widely current in Russia providing the formulations of monarchical ideology. It was translated into Latin, French and German and was highly commended by the humanists of the Renaissance. Some twenty editions of it appeared in the sixteenth century. [no Russian page: Агапит — автор «Поучения» Агапита] // Joseph Volotsky restated the formula of an early Byzantine ecclesiastical writer Agapetus that the tsar was a "man in essence, but his power is that of God" and that he was God's deputy on Earth. (Joseph Volotsky)

* Procopius [Прокопий Кесарийский] (c 500-565+; historian). Procopius of Caesarea was a prominent late antique Greek scholar from Caesarea Maritima. Accompanying the Byzantine general Belisarius in Emperor Justinian's wars, Procopius became the principal Byzantine historian of the 6th century, writing the History of the Wars, the Buildings, and the Secret History. Прокопий Кесарийский. Проко́пий Кесарийский (лат. Procopius Caesarensis; между 490 и 507 — после 565) — византийский историк; секретарь полководца Велизария. (...) Прокопий не только был очевидцем ключевых событий истории Византии того периода, но и благодаря своему положению имел доступ к информации, в том числе и секретной, на самом высоком уровне. Более того, в силу положения секретаря Велизария, Прокопий вёл его переписку, составлял доклады Велизария Юстиниану и участвовал в переговорах с важнейшими государственными деятелями той эпохи — и это придаёт особую ценность его произведениям, поскольку когда Прокопий приводит текст речи или письма Велизария, можно быть уверенным, что с высокой степенью вероятности этот текст аутентичен — поскольку сам Прокопий его записал, если не написал изначально.

* John Italus [Иоанн Итал] (XI). John Italus or Italos (Greek: Iōánnēs ho Italós; Latin: Johannes Italus) was a neoplatonic Byzantine philosopher of the eleventh century. He was Calabrian in origin, his father being a soldier. He came to Constantinople, where he became a student of Michael Psellus in classical Greek philosophy. He succeeded Psellus in his position as head of the philosophical school. Subsequently, some of his tenets were found heretic in 1076-77 by Patriarch Cosmas I of Constantinople, and in 1082 he was personally condemned, having come into conflict with Emperor Alexios I Komnenos. (...) He was passionate, and rude in disputation, not abstaining even from personal violence; but eager to acknowledge his impetuosity, and ask pardon for it, when the fit was over. His school was crowded with pupils, to whom he expounded the writings of Proclus and Plato, Iamblichus, Porphyry, and Aristotle. His turbulence and arrogance of spirit seem to have been infectious; for Anna Comnena {Byzantine princess and author of the Alexiad, an account of the reign of her father, the Byzantine emperor, Alexios I Komnenos} declares that many seditious persons (tyránnous) arose among his pupils; but their names she could not remember: they were, however, before the accession of Alexios I Komnenos. The disturbances which arose from the teachings of Italus attracted the emperor's attention apparently soon after his accession; and by his order, Italus, after a preliminary examination by Isaac Comnenus, the brother of Alexios, was cited before an ecclesiastical court. Though protected by the patriarch Eustratius, whose favour he had won, he narrowly escaped death from the violence of the mob of Constantinople, and he was forced publicly and bareheaded to retract and anathematize eleven propositions, embodying the sentiments which he was charged with holding. He was charged with teaching the transmigration of souls, with holding some erroneous opinions about ideas, and with ridiculing the use of images in worship {'iconoclasm'}; and he is said to have succeeded in diffusing his heresies among many of the nobles and officers of the palace, to the great grief of the orthodox  emperor. Notwithstanding his enforced retractation, he still continued to inculcate his sentiments, until, after a vain attempt by the emperor to restrain him, he was himself sentenced to be anathematized and banished to the Monastery Zoödochos Pege; but as he professed repentance, the anathema was not pronounced publicly, nor in all its extent. He afterwards fully renounced his errors, and made the sincerity of his renunciation manifest. The above account rests on the authority of Anna Comnena, whose anxiety to exalt the reputation of her father, and her disposition to disparage the people of Western Europe, prevents our relying implicitly on her statements. Иоанн Итал. Иоанн Итал — византийский философ XI века. Родом из Италии, ученик Пселла, наследовал ему звание «υπατος των φιλοσόφων». Искусный диалектик, особенно прославился своей преподавательской деятельностью, посвящённой толкованию Аристотеля, но также и Платона, и неоплатоников. Сущность учения Иоанна сводится к платоновским идеям, к предсуществованию душ и творению мира из предвечной материи, а также к переселению душ. Имеются данные, приписывающие Иоанну неправославное учение о божественном воплощении. Когда в начале царствования Алексея Комнина {византийский император Алексей I Комнин, 1056/1057-1118} было издано распоряжение, ограничившее свободу философского мышления авторитетом священного Писания и святоотеческих творений, то Иоанн, как выразитель другого направления, сложившегося в Византии около середины XI века, предан был анафеме, вместе со своим учением, сведённым к 11 статьям. Вследствие этого Иоанн отказался от своего учения о переселении душ и от порицания святых икон, учение же об идеях старался истолковать применительно к православным воззрениям.

* =========================== BYZANTIUM VS ROME ==================================

* Patriarchate [Патриархат, институт патриаршества]. Patriarchate is an ecclesiological term in Christianity, designating the office and jurisdiction of an ecclesiastical patriarch. Three patriarchates were established by the apostles as apostolic sees in the 1st century: Rome {Roman bishop = patriarch = Pope}, Antioch, and Alexandria. Added to these were Constantinople in the 4th century, and Jerusalem in the 5th century. Eventually, together, these five were recognised as the pentarchy by the Council of Ephesus in 431. In the rest of the history of Christianity, a few other patriarchates were gradually recognised by any of these above ancient episcopal sees. With time, eventually some of them fell due to military occupations following the Islamic conquests of the Middle East and North Africa, and became titular or honorary patriarchates with no actual institutional jurisdiction on the original site. Pentarchy. Five ancient patriarchates of the Pentarchy, headed by patriarchs as the highest-ranking bishops in the Christian Church prior to the Great Schism, were the patriarchates of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. The East-West Schism of 1054 split the Latin-rite see of Rome from the four Byzantine-rite patriarchates of the East, thus forming distinct Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. The four Eastern Orthodox patriarchates (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), along with their Latin Catholic counterpart in the West, Rome, are distinguished as "senior" (Greek: presbygenē, "senior-born") or "ancient" (palèphata, "of ancient fame") and are among the apostolic sees, having had one of the Apostles or Evangelists as their first bishop: Andrew, Mark, Peter, James, and Peter again, respectively. In the case of Constantinople, Apostle Andrew had visited the city of Byzantium in 38 AD, not Constantinople, as the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great had not yet declared Constantinople in 330 AD as the new capital of the Roman Empire on the grounds of the former city of Byzantium. Apostle Andrew appointed the bishop Stachys the Apostle who remained bishop in Byzantium until 54 AD. Therefore in the case of Constantinople the Apostolic See is the See of Byzantium. // The pope is the patriarch of Rome, or patriarch of the West as he is sometimes called, while at the same time holding other offices. He is the bishop of Rome and rules the See of Rome just as any other bishop rules his diocese. (New Catholic Encyclopedia - ROME, PATRIARCHATE OF)

* Patriarch [Патриарх]. The highest-ranking bishops in Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Catholic Church (above major archbishop {Eastern Catholic Churches} and primate {a title or rank bestowed on some important archbishops in certain Christian churches}), the Hussite Church, and the Church of the East are termed patriarchs (and in certain cases also popes – such as the Pope of Rome or Pope of Alexandria, and catholicoi – such as Catholicos Karekin II). The word is derived from Greek patriarchēs, meaning "chief or father of a family", a compound of patria, meaning "family", and archein, meaning "to rule". Originally, a patriarch was a man who exercised autocratic authority as a pater familias over an extended family. The system of such rule of families by senior males is termed patriarchy. Historically, a patriarch has often been the logical choice to act as ethnarch of the community identified with his religious confession within a state or empire of a different creed (such as Christians within the Ottoman Empire). The term developed an ecclesiastical meaning, within the Christian Church. The office and the ecclesiastical circumscription of a Christian patriarch is termed a patriarchate. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are referred to as the three patriarchs of the people of Israel, and the period during which they lived is termed the Patriarchal Age. The word patriarch originally acquired its religious meaning in the Septuagint version of the Bible.

* Apostolic see [Апостольский Престол]. An apostolic see is an episcopal see whose foundation is attributed to one or more of the apostles of Jesus or to one of their close associates. In Catholicism the phrase, preceded by the definite article and usually capitalized, refers to the See of Rome {Престол Рима; Holy See, Святой Престол}. Tertullian (c. 155 − c. 240) gives examples of apostolic sees: he describes as churches "in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally" the following churches: Corinth, Philippi, Ephesus, and Rome. Tertullian says that from these "all the other churches, one after another, derived the tradition of the faith, and the seeds of doctrine, and are every day deriving them, that they may become churches. Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches". Cited by early apologists for doctrinal authority. Tertullian himself and the slightly earlier Irenaeus (c. 130 – c. 200) speak of the succession of bishops of sees founded directly by the apostles as sources for sure Christian doctrine. Irenaeus argues that, to know what is true Christian doctrine, it is enough to learn the teaching of some of the oldest churches or at least one, in particular that of Rome: "If the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to 'the perfect' apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. [...] Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question?" Tertullian's arguing is similar: From the apostles the churches they founded received the doctrine that the apostles received directly from Christ, and from those churches the more recent churches received the same doctrine. Every heresy is more recent and, being different, is erroneous. Distinct from jurisdictional authority. Jurisdictional authority of particular episcopal sees over others is not necessarily associated with the apostolic origin of the see. Thus, the fourth canon of the First Council of Nicaea of 325 attributed to the bishop of the capital (metropolis) of each Roman province (the "metropolitan bishop") a position of authority among the bishops of the province, without reference to the founding figure of that bishop's see. Its sixth canon the same council recognized the wider authority, extending beyond a single imperial province, traditionally held by Rome and Alexandria, and the prerogatives of the churches in Antioch and the other provinces. Of Aelia, the Roman city built on the site of the destroyed city of Jerusalem, the council's seventh canon reads: "Since custom and ancient tradition have prevailed that the Bishop of Aelia should be honoured, let him, saving its due dignity to the Metropolis, have the next place of honour." The metropolis in question is generally taken to be Caesarea Maritima, though in the late 19th century Philip Schaff also mentioned other views. The see of Constantinople was elevated to a position of jurisdictional prominence not on the grounds of apostolic origin but because of its political importance as the capital of the Roman Empire. The First Council of Constantinople (381), held in what by then had been the political capital for half a century, decreed in a canon of disputed validity: "The Bishop of Constantinople, however, shall have the prerogative of honour after the Bishop of Rome; because Constantinople is New Rome." It was later ranked second among the sees in the theory of Pentarchy: "[F]ormulated in the legislation of the emperor Justinian I (527–565), especially in his Novella 131, the theory received formal ecclesiastical sanction at the Council in Trullo (692), which ranked the five sees as Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." For another pentarchic see, that of Alexandria, the reputed founder and close associate of the apostle Peter, Saint Mark, is not called an apostle in the New Testament.

* Three Petrine sees vs five Pentarchy sees [3 престола Петра ?? <> 5 престолов пентархии]. Council of Nicaea. This Council's recognition of the special powers of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch served as the basis of the theory of the three Petrine sees {Rome} (Rome and Antioch were said to be founded by Saint Peter and Alexandria by his disciple Mark the Evangelist) that was later upheld, especially in Rome and Alexandria, in opposition to the theory of the five Pentarchy sees {Byzantium}. The Byzantine view of the pentarchy had a strongly anti-Roman orientation. Nearly all the Byzantine writers who treated the subject of the pentarchy assumed that Constantinople, as the seat of the ruler of the empire and therefore of the world, was the highest among the patriarchates and, like the emperor, had the right to govern them. This feeling was further intensified after the East–West Schism in 1054, which reduced the pentarchy to a tetrarchy, but it existed long before that. The idea that with the transfer of the imperial capital from Rome to Constantinople primacy in the Church was also transferred is found in undeveloped form as early as John Philoponus (c. 490 – c. 570); it was enunciated in its most advanced form by Photios I of Constantinople (c. 810 – c. 893), and was embraced by his successors, including Callistus Ι (1350–1353, 1355–1363), Philotheus (1353–1354, 1364–1376), and Nilus (1379–1388). Thus, for the Byzantines of the first half of the second millennium, the government of the Christian Church was a primacy belonging to the patriarchate of Constantinople, which however was choosing not to insist on it with regard to the west. This was illustrated by Nilus Doxapatris, who in 1142–43 insisted strongly on the primacy of the Church of Constantinople, which he regarded as inherited from Rome because of the transfer of the capital and because Rome had fallen into the hands of the barbarians, but who expressly restricted Byzantine authority to the other three eastern patriarchates. Patriarch Callistus, mentioned above, did the same about two hundred years later. "In other words, Rome was definitely excluded from the Constantinopolitan sphere of influence and put on a par with Constantinople {and not the other way around}, as can be inferred from Nilus's statement that the bishops of Constantinople and Rome, and only these two, were called oecumenical patriarchs." (Pentarchy) // I've put together some thoughts on the 3 Petrine Sees and the Pentarchy and would appreciate your guys' input. Historically there were 3 churches that legitimately claimed to be carrying on the tradition of the Apostles by virtue of having been founded by Saint Peter or his immediate successor (Saint Mark): Rome, Antioch and Alexandria. {Mark the Evangelist. Peter went to Antioch, then through Asia Minor, and arrived in Rome in the second year of Emperor Claudius (AD 42). Somewhere on the way, Peter encountered Mark and took him as travel companion and interpreter. Mark the Evangelist wrote down the sermons of Peter, thus composing the Gospel according to Mark, before he left for Alexandria in the third year of Claudius (AD 43). According to tradition, in AD 49, about 19 years after the Ascension of Jesus, Mark travelled to Alexandria and founded the Church of Alexandria.} Antioch fell into decline during the Muslim-Byzantine wars due to being very close to the front lines, and was essentially destroyed during the crusades. Alexandria was usurped by the Byzantine Empire following the Council of Chalcedon, which brutally oppressed Egyptians who did not follow the Byzantine appointee. And then the Muslims conquered Alexandria, and its population gradually dwindled due to numerous conquests and earthquakes, and most of the people in its jurisdiction converted to Islam. Rome, on the other hand, has flourished and continued to lead all of Christendom in the teaching of the Apostles from the Chair of Saint Peter despite 2000 years of being oppressed and repeatedly conquered by the likes of the Goths, Byzantines, Lombards, Franks, Spanish, Austrians, fascists, Nazis and Americans. The Pentarchy is an invention of the 6th Century Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, who sought to elevate Jerusalem and Constantinople to the same plain as the 3 Petrine Sees. Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70, and although rebuilt by Emperor Hadrian 135, it remained an "unimportant Roman town" until Constantine rebuilt it as a Christian city in AD 335. Constantinople has no claim to Apostolic importance other than that the Apostle Andrew visited there and installed a bishop, Stachys, before moving on and eventually being martyred in Patras. But the same could really be said for countless cities across the ancient world that were visited by the Apostles, so Constantinople is really of no importance, other than that 300 years after the life and death of Jesus Christ, the Roman Emperor decided to move the capital there. In summary, of the 5 alleged centers of Apostolic authority in the 1st Millennium: Constantinople has no legitimate claim to Apostolic authority. Jerusalem, having been destroyed in AD 70, was never really an authority in the early Church. Antioch's practical influence died out by the 7th Century when it was conquered by Muslims, and then ceased to exist in the 13th Century. Alexandria's claim to Apostolic authority rests on Saint Mark, the student of Saint Peter, and is thus derivative and secondary in importance to the See that Saint Peter directly pastored and blessed with his martyrdom. Rome is the only Petrine See that can still claim to be an Apostolic authority for the entire catholic church. || 1. If Constantinople has no legitimate claim to Apostolic authority because its first bishop was ordained by St. Andrew, then neither do Antioch, where St. Peter merely tarried before installing a new bishop, or Alexandria, which was actually founded by St. Mark, not St. Peter himself. 2. I don't like the notion of blaming the Emperor Justinian for the Pentarchy as if the Pentarchy is not legitimate. It is legitimate by virtue of Sacred Council. It was when, by Council, the four Sees were elevated to Patriarchates that they were recognized as such and it was by Council that Constantinople received such recognition. 3. If we want to play the politics game, the Orthodox can do the same with Rome, which fell out of temporal power after Constantine moved the Roman government East. They would claim Roman's grasp on primacy is one of an attempt to continue exertion of power after it lost its seat as the temporal authority of the Empire. 4. Again, with Justinian, he recognized the primacy of Rome. I just posted these quotes yesterday from his writings to the See of Rome. "Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches." To Hormisdas he wrote: "Let your Apostleship show that you have worthily succeeded to the Apostle Peter, since the Lord will work through you, as Supreme Pastor, the salvation of all." 5. You miss an important point that is recognized by both East and West. Rome is not merely a Petrine See. It is the See where St. Peter ended his life and from whence he held his primacy in his last days. Not only this, but Rome was not founded just by Peter, but was founded by both Sts. Peter and Paul. Rome's origin is both Petrine and Pauline. 6. I'm not sure who these points are supposed to convince. If it's Protestants, they don't adhere to the Pentarchy. If it's the Orthodox, I made a significant note above regarding the political argument. And I know many Orthodox who only accept Constantinople as the Ecumenical Patriarchate by virtue of Council. I know some who think it should go to a Petrine See, but who remain faithful to the Council's judgment on the matter. || Those are great quotes from Justinian I. I think I misstated the Pentarchy issue and blamed him for trying to steal power from Rome, whereas it seems the first time the Pentarchy was used to try to steal power from Rome was the Quintisext {Quinisext} Council in the 7th Century. || Erastian seems like the perfect word for Constantinople. All of its claims to authority in the Church rest on the political whims of the Roman/Byzantine emperors, who came to see themselves (not the patriarch) as the head of Christendom. The more I read about Byzantine history, the more I see the Byzantine emperor kidnapping and oppressing the Pope and even his own orthodox Christians like Chrysostom (who naturally was from the Petrine See of Antioch), as well as supporting countless heresies, only to be rebuked by the Pope in Rome. With this historical background, I don't understand how anyone can think the Eastern Orthodox churches have any legitimate claim against Rome. I mean, shouldn't the fundamentalists who harp on about Constantine set their sights on Constantinople, not Rome? Thoughts on the 3 Petrine Sees (and the Pentarchy).

* Pentarchy [Eastern model; Пентархия]. Pentarchy is a model of Church organization historically championed in the Eastern Orthodox Church. It was formulated in the laws of Emperor Justinian I (527–565) of the Roman Empire. In this model, the Christian church is governed by the heads (patriarchs) of the five major episcopal sees of the Roman Empire: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. The idea came about because of the political and ecclesiastical prominence of these five sees, but the concept of their universal and exclusive authority was firmly tied to the administrative structure of the Roman Empire. The pentarchy was first legally expressed in the legislation of Emperor Justinian I, particularly in Novella 131. The Quinisext Council of 692 gave it formal recognition and ranked the sees in order of preeminence, but its organization remained dependent on the emperor, as when Leo the Isaurian altered the boundary of patriarchal jurisdiction between Rome and Constantinople. Especially following Quinisext {practice of the Church of Constantinople as orthodox}, the pentarchy was at least philosophically accepted in Eastern Orthodoxy, but generally not in the West, which rejected the Council, and the concept of the pentarchy. The greater authority of these sees in relation to others was tied to their political and ecclesiastical prominence; all were located in important cities and regions of the Roman Empire and were important centers of the Christian Church. Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were prominent from the time of early Christianity, while Constantinople came to the fore upon becoming the imperial residence in the 4th century. Thereafter it was consistently ranked just after Rome. Jerusalem received a ceremonial place due to the city's importance in the early days of Christianity. Justinian and the Quinisext Council excluded from their pentarchical arrangement churches outside the empire, such as the then-flourishing Church of the East in Sassanid Persia, which they saw as heretical. Within the empire they recognized only the Chalcedonian (or Melkite) incumbents, regarding as illegitimate the non-Chalcedonian claimants of Alexandria and Antioch. Infighting among the sees, and particularly the rivalry between Rome (which considered itself preeminent over all the church) and Constantinople (which came to hold sway over the other Eastern sees and which saw itself as equal to Rome, with Rome "first among equals"), prevented the pentarchy from ever becoming a functioning administrative reality. The Islamic conquests of Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch in the 7th century left Constantinople the only practical authority in the East, and afterward the concept of a "pentarchy" retained little more than symbolic significance. Tensions between East and West, which culminated in the East–West Schism, and the rise of powerful, largely independent metropolitan sees and patriarchates outside the Byzantine Empire in Bulgaria, Serbia, and Russia, eroded the importance of the old imperial sees. Today, only the sees of Rome and of Constantinople still hold authority over an entire major Christian church, the first being the head of the Catholic Church and the second having symbolic hegemony over the Eastern Orthodox Church.

* Greek East and Latin West [Греческий Восток и Латинский Запад] (III). Greek East and Latin West are terms used to distinguish between the two parts of the Greco-Roman world, specifically the eastern regions where Greek was the lingua franca (Anatolia, Greece, the Balkans, the Levant and Egypt) and the western parts where Latin filled this role (The Maghreb, Central Europe, Gaul, Iberia, Italy and the British Isles). During the Roman Empire a divide had persisted between Latin- and Greek-speaking areas; this divide was encouraged by administrative changes in the empire's structure between the 3rd and 5th centuries, which led ultimately to the establishment of separate administrations for the Eastern and Western halves of the Empire. After the fall of the Western Part, pars occidentalis, of the Empire, the terms "Greek East" and "Latin West" are applied to areas that were formerly part of the Eastern or Western Parts of the Empire, and also to areas that fell under the Greek or Latin cultural sphere but that had never been part of the Roman Empire. This has given rise to two modern dichotomies. The first is the split of Chalcedonian Christianity that developed in Europe between Western Christianity (the forerunner of Roman Catholicism which Protestantism split from in 1517) and Eastern Orthodoxy {East-West Schism of 1054}. Second, Europeans have traditionally viewed the Greco Roman Mediterranean (extending from Spain to Syria) as having an East/West cultural split. Cultures associated with the historical Romance, Germanic, Scandinavian, Hungarians, Finns, Balts, Celts, Catholic Slavs and the historical Western Churches (Central and Western Europe) have traditionally been considered Western; these cultures adopted Latin as their lingua franca in the Middle Ages. Cultures associated with the Eastern Roman Empire and Russian Empire (Greeks, Orthodox Slavs, Romanians, Georgians and to a lesser extent Thracian and Anatolian Turks, Albanians and Bosniaks) have traditionally been considered Eastern; these cultures all used Greek or Old Church Slavonic as a lingua franca during the early Middle Ages. Use with regard to the Roman Empire. At the start of late antiquity, beginning with the reorganization of the empire's provincial divisions during the reign of Diocletian (ruled 284–305), the concept of the Greek East developed to stand in contradistinction to the Latin West. Thereafter, Greek East refers to the Greek-speaking provinces mentioned above (after 395 mostly in the Greek-speaking Eastern Roman Empire) in contradistinction to the provinces in Western Europe, Italia (excluding the Catepanate of Italy, where they still spoke Greek) and Northwest Africa (after 395 in the Latin-speaking Western Roman Empire). Use with regard to Christianity. "Greek East" and "Latin West" are terms used also to divide Chalcedonian Christianity into the Greek-speaking, Orthodox peoples of the Eastern Mediterranean Basin, centered on the Byzantine Empire, and the Latin-speaking Catholic peoples of Western Europe. Here, Latin West applies to regions that were formerly part of the Western Roman Empire, specifically Italia, Gallia (Gaul), Hispania, Northwest Africa, and Britannia, but also to areas that had never been part of the Empire but which later came under the culture sphere of the Latin West, such as Magna Germania, Hibernia (Ireland), Caledonia (Scotland). In this sense, the term "Latin" came to refer to the liturgical and scholarly language of Western Europe, since many of these countries did not actually speak Latin. The term "Greek" varies in how it is applied. In the most narrow sense, after the rise of the Roman Empire it is only applied to the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. The term "Latin" has survived much longer as a unifying term for the West because the Latin language survived until very recently as a scholarly and liturgical language despite the fragmentation and religious changes in Western Europe. The Greek language, by contrast, died out somewhat quickly in the Arab lands, and the Slavic nations never fully embraced the language despite their long religious affiliation with the Eastern Romans/Byzantines.

* Cyprian of Carthage - Ecclesiology [Киприан Карфагенский - Экклезиология] (III). Cyprian's conception of the Church manifests itself in his treatment of Baptism, the Eucharist, penance, and the ministry, as also in his relations with the laity (parents and children, virgins, etc.), with his clergy, and with his fellow bishops. He had a keen sense of the unity of the Church which was shown in his own church of Carthage, not only by the assertion of his episcopal authority over the faithful, but also by his normal practice of making no clerical appointment without first consulting his clergy and people {sobornost}. All alike had committed themselves to Christ {i.e. were part of the unity}; and their union with him, which had begun with the remission of sin in Baptism, was fostered and strengthened by the Eucharist and repaired or restored by almsdeeds or by the official Penance in which bishop, clergy, and faithful cooperated with the repenting sinner. The Universal Church. The Carthaginian Church was only part of a greater unity: the unity, first, of the African Churches, whose bishops met in frequent synods, and then of all the rightful bishops of the ecclesia catholica, whose common faith and concord were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Hence heresy and schism were equally abhorrent to Cyprian as breaches of the one faith and of the charity that the unity of the Church demanded. Anyone who broke with his bishop put himself outside the Church; and a bishop who broke away from the consortium of his fellow bishops not only put himself outside the Church, but forfeited all his episcopal powers, as did a bishop who betrayed the faith under persecution or who led a scandalous life. In reaction, perhaps, to Tertullian's montanism {direct revelation} {<>}, Cyprian believed that the Spirit was not active save through the legitimate bishops of the Church; hence his stand against heretical baptism and orders. He did not allow for any uncovenanted action of the Spirit, and while he was wont to quote "He that is not with Me is against Me" (Lk 11.23), he never quoted "He that is not against you is for you" (Lk 9.50). His attitude was later explicitly adopted by the donatists. St. augustine, while refuting them, rightly excused Cyprian's mistake {??} as a result of the incomplete understanding, in earlier times, of the complexities of sacramental efficacy. In the interval the Church's practice had been defined on the lines laid down by Pope Stephen, against Cyprian's intransigence, but with qualifications that met some of Cyprian's criticisms. New Catholic Encyclopedia - CYPRIAN, ST. // This book assesses episcopal cooperation as envisioned by the third-century bishop Cyprian of Carthage. It outlines and assesses the interactions between local bishops, provincial groups of bishops, and the worldwide college. Assessing these interactions sheds light on the relationship between Cyprian’s strong sense of local autonomy and the reality that each bishop was responsible to the world-wide college. Episcopal consensus was the sine qua non, for Cyprian, for a major issue of faith or practice to become one that defined membership in the college and, ultimately, the Church. The book brings this assessment into a modern scholarly debate by concluding with an evaluation of the ecclesiology of the Orthodox scholar Nicolas Afanasiev and his critiques of Cyprian. Afanasiev lamented Cyprian as the father of universal ecclesiology and claimed that Cyprian’s college wielded authority above that of the local bishop. This book argues that Afanasiev fundamentally misconstrued Cyprian’s understanding of collegiality {sobornost}. It is shown that, for Cyprian, collegiality was the framework for the common ministry of the bishops and did not infringe on the sovereignty of the local bishop. Rather, it was the college’s collective duty to define the boundaries of acceptable Christian belief and practice. BENJAMIN SAFRANSKI - St. Cyprian of Carthage and the College of Bishops

* East-West division of the Roman empire [Раздел Римской империи] (IV-VI). Several events from the 4th to 6th centuries mark the period of transition during which the Roman Empire's Greek East and Latin West diverged. Constantine I (r. 324–337) reorganised the empire, made Constantinople the new capital and legalised Christianity. Under Theodosius I (r. 379–395), Christianity became the state religion and other religious practices were proscribed. Theodosius was a devout Christian and an adherent of the trinitarian creed of Nicaea, which he imposed as the official orthodoxy. Deviant sects, especially Arianism, were declared heretical and punished. With regards to paganism, the Emperor was ambivalent: he allowed traditional cults to function with relative freedom and cultivated good relations with unconverted landed aristocrats, but is seen as having done little to prevent the damaging or destruction of several classical-era temples by fanatic Christians or simple lack of maintenance. In the reign of Heraclius (r. 610–641), the Empire's military and administration were restructured and Greek was adopted for official use in place of Latin.

* Fall of the Western Empire [Падение западной империи] (476). The fate of Western Rome was partially sealed in the late third century, when the Emperor Diocletian divided the Empire into two halves—the Western Empire seated in the city of Milan, and the Eastern Empire in Byzantium, later known as Constantinople. Diocletian's reign stabilized the empire and marks the end of the Crisis of the Third Century. He appointed fellow officer Maximian as Augustus, co-emperor, in 286. Diocletian reigned in the Eastern Empire, and Maximian reigned in the Western Empire. // An early instance of the partition of the Empire into East and West occurred in 293 when Emperor Diocletian created a new administrative system (the tetrarchy), to guarantee security in all endangered regions of his Empire. He associated himself with a co-emperor (Augustus), and each co-emperor then adopted a young colleague given the title of Caesar, to share in their rule and eventually to succeed the senior partner. Each tetrarch was in charge of a part of the Empire. The tetrarchy collapsed, however, in 313 and a few years later Constantine I reunited the two administrative divisions of the Empire as sole Augustus. // In 476, the Germanic leader Odoacer staged a revolt and deposed the Emperor Romulus Augustulus. From then on, no Roman emperor would ever again rule from a post in Italy, leading many to cite 476 as the year the Western Empire suffered its deathblow.

* Canon 9 of the Council of Chalcedon [Constantinople, jurisdiction; 9ое правило Халкидонского Собора] (451). // IF any Clergyman have a matter against another clergyman, he shall not forsake his bishop and run to secular courts; but let him first lay open the matter before his own Bishop, or let the matter be submitted to any person whom each of the parties may, with the Bishop's consent, select. And if any one shall contravene these decrees, let him be subjected to canonical penalties. And if a clergyman have a complaint against his own or any other bishop, let it be decided by the synod of the province. And if a bishop or clergyman should have a difference with the metropolitan of the province, let him have recourse to the Exarch of the Diocese, or to the throne of the Imperial City of Constantinople, and there let it be tried. ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON IX. Litigious clerics shall be punished according to canon, if they despise the episcopal and resort to the secular tribunal. When a cleric has a contention with a bishop let him wait till the synod sits, and if a bishop have a contention with his metropolitan let him carry the case to Constantinople. JOHNSON. Let the reader observe that here is a greater privilege given by a General Council to the see of Constantinople than ever was given by any council, even that of Sardica, to the bishop of Rome, viz., that any bishop or clergyman might at the first instance bring his cause before the bishop of Constantinople if the defendant were a metropolitan. Medieval Sourcebook: Council of Chalcedon, 451

* Canon 28 of the Council of Chalcedon [Rome vs Constantinople] (451). Canon 28 grants equal privileges (isa presbeia) to Constantinople as of Rome because Constantinople is the New Rome as renewed by canon 36 of the Quinisext Council. Pope Leo declared the canon 28 null and void and only approved the canons of the council which were pertaining to faith. Initially, the Council indicated their understanding that Pope Leo's ratification was necessary for the canon to be binding[citation needed]. However, the Canon has since been viewed as valid by the Eastern Orthodox Church. (Council of Chalcedon) // Eastern Orthodox today state that Council of Chalcedon canon 28 explicitly proclaimed the equality of the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople and that it established the highest court of ecclesiastical appeal in Constantinople. (East–West Schism)

* Holy See [Святой Престол, Папский Престол] (I). The Holy See (Latin: Sancta Sedes), also called the See of Rome, is the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, known as the Pope, which includes the apostolic episcopal see of the Diocese of Rome with universal ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the worldwide Catholic Church, as well as a sovereign entity of international law, governing the Vatican City. According to Catholic tradition it was founded in the first century by Saints Peter and Paul and, by virtue of Petrine and papal primacy, is the focal point of full communion for Catholic Christians around the world. As a sovereign entity, the Holy See is headquartered in, operates from, and exercises "exclusive dominion" over the independent Vatican City State enclave in Rome, of which the pope is sovereign. It is organized into polities of the Latin Church and the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches, and their dioceses and religious institutes. The apostolic see of Diocese of Rome was established in the 1st century by Saint Peter and Saint Paul, then the capital of the Roman Empire, according to Catholic tradition. The legal status of the Catholic Church and its property was recognised by the Edict of Milan in 313 by Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, and it became the state church of the Roman Empire by the Edict of Thessalonica in 380 by Emperor Theodosius I. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476, the temporal legal jurisdisction of the papal primacy was further recognised as promulgated in Canon law. The Holy See was granted territory in Duchy of Rome by the Donation of Sutri in 728 of King Liutprand of the Lombards, and sovereignty by the Donation of Pepin in 756 by King Pepin of the Franks.  The Papal States thus held extensive territory and armed forces in 756–1870. Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne as Roman Emperor by translatio imperii in 800. The pope's temporal power peaked around the time of the papal coronations of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire from 858, and the Dictatus papae in 1075, which conversely also described Papal deposing power. Several modern states still trace their own sovereignty to recognition in medieval papal bulls.  The sovereignty of the Holy See was retained despite multiple sacks of Rome during the Early Middle Ages. Yet, relations with the Kingdom of Italy and the Holy Roman Empire were at times strained, reaching from the Diploma Ottonianum and Libellus de imperatoria potestate in urbe Roma regarding the "Patrimony of Saint Peter" in the 10th century, to the Investiture Controversy in 1076–1122, and settled again by the Concordat of Worms in 1122. The exiled Avignon Papacy during 1309–1376 also put a strain on the Papacy, which however finally returned to Rome. Pope Innocent X was critical of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 as it weakened the authority of the Holy See throughout much of Europe. Following the French Revolution, the Papal States were briefly occupied as the "Roman Republic" from 1798 to 1799 as a sister republic of the First French Empire under Napoleon, before their territory was reestablished.

* Критика утверждений о посещении, смерти и погребении Петра в Риме [Criticism of claims as to Peter's presence, death and buriel in Rome]. Ряд критиков отмечает отсутствие каких-либо прямых упоминаний в Священном Писании о том, что Пётр посещал Рим. Об этом, например, не сообщает Иустин Философ, писавший в первой половине II века в Риме. «Согласно Гал. 2:9, Пётр, Иаков и Иоанн рукопожатием заключили соглашение с Павлом и Варнавою, что Павел и Варнава проводят свою деятельность среди язычников, а Пётр, Иаков и Иоанн — среди иудеев. Павел, который писал послание к церкви в Риме, в конце его приветствует двадцать семь лиц поимённо, но среди них Пётр не упоминается. Также и во многих посланиях, которые он писал церквам и отдельным лицам, Пётр не упомянут ни одного раза». При этом о пребывании апостола в Риме пишут раннехристианские авторы: Ориген (III век), Лактанций (нач. IV века), Евсевий Кесарийский («Церковная история», 325 год). Как отмечает шотландский исследователь Александр Хислоп, самое раннее упоминание о пребывании Петра в Риме датируется концом II века, причём это упоминание приведено в сомнительном произведении конца второго — начала третьего столетия под названием «Клементин», где говорится о встрече Петра с Симоном Волхвом. Пётр поставил под сомнение чародейские способности Симона и потребовал доказательств его сверхъестественных способностей. Тогда колдун взлетел в воздух, а Пётр опустил его на землю, да так быстро, что колдун сломал ногу. Также довод о том, что Пётр не посещал Рим, строится на распределении апостолами мест своей проповеди. Сам Пётр утверждал, что писал своё первое послание из Вавилона (1Петр. 5:13), и, по мнению ряда исследователей, он имел в виду реальный город, а не иносказательное название Рима. Во дни Петра настоящий Вавилон ещё существовал. Кроме того, в Вавилоне была значительная иудейская община. (Апостол Пётр). Connection to Rome. In a tradition of the early Church, Peter is said to have founded the Church in Rome with Paul, served as its bishop, authored two epistles, and then met martyrdom there along with Paul. Papacy. Saint Peter portrayed as a Pope in the Nuremberg Chronicle The Catholic Church speaks of the pope, the bishop of Rome, as the successor of Saint Peter. This is often interpreted to imply that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. However, it is also said that the institution of the papacy is not dependent on the idea that Peter was Bishop of Rome or even on his ever having been in Rome. Coming to Rome. New Testament accounts. There is no obvious biblical evidence that Peter was ever in Rome, but the first epistle of Peter does mention that "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son" (1 Peter 5:13). It is not certain whether this refers to the actual Babylon or to Rome, for which Babylon was a common nickname at the time, or to the Jewish diaspora in general, as a recent theory has proposed. While the church in Rome was already flourishing when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans about AD 57, he greets some fifty people in Rome by name, but not Peter whom he knew. There is also no mention of Peter in Rome later during Paul's two-year stay there in Acts 28, about AD 60–62. Church Fathers. The writings of the 1st century Church Father Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35 – c. 107) refer to Peter and Paul giving admonitions to the Romans, indicating Peter's presence in Rome. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130 – c. 202) wrote in the 2nd century that Peter and Paul had been the founders of the Church in Rome and had appointed Linus as succeeding bishop. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215) states that "Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome (A.D. 190)." According to Origen (184–253) and Eusebius, Peter "after having first founded the church at Antioch, went away to Rome preaching the Gospel, and he also, after [presiding over] the church in Antioch, presided over that of Rome until his death". After presiding over the church in Antioch for a while, Peter would have been succeeded by Evodius and thereafter by Ignatius, who was a student of John the Apostle. Lactantius, in his book called Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died, written around 318, noted that "and while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and stedfast temple unto the Lord." (Saint Peter)

* Papal States. The Papal States (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus; also Dicio Pontificia), were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the pope from 756 until 1870. They were among the major states of Italy from the 8th century until the unification of Italy, between 1859 and 1870. The state had its origins in the rise of Christianity throughout Italy, and with it the rising influence of the Christian Church. By the mid-8th century, with the decline of the Byzantine Empire in Italy, the Papacy became effectively sovereign. Several Christian rulers - including the Frankish kings Charlemagne and Pepin the Short - further donated lands to be governed by the Church. During the Renaissance, the papal territory expanded greatly and the pope became one of Italy's most important secular rulers as well as the head of the Church. At their zenith, the Papal States covered most of the modern Italian regions of Lazio (which includes Rome), Marche, Umbria and Romagna, and portions of Emilia. These holdings were considered to be a manifestation of the temporal power of the pope, as opposed to his ecclesiastical primacy.

* Temporal power of the Holy See [Временная/Мирская власть Святого Престола]. The temporal power of the Holy See designates the political and secular influence of the Holy See, the leading of a State by the pope of the Catholic Church, as distinguished from its spiritual and pastoral activity. Pope Gregory II's defiance of the Byzantine emperor Leo III the Isaurian as a result of the first iconoclastic controversy (726 AD) in the Byzantine Empire, prepared the way for a long series of revolts, schisms and civil wars that eventually led to the establishment of the temporal power of the popes. For over a thousand years popes ruled as sovereign over an amalgam of territories on the Italian peninsula known as the Papal States {territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the pope from the 8th century until 1870}, from the capital, Rome. Avignon also came under the jurisdiction of the Papal States in 1348. // The papal claim to temporal power in the High Middle Ages was based on the fabricated Donation of Constantine. The Donation of Constantine (Latin: Donatio Constantini) is a forged Roman imperial decree by which the 4th-century emperor Constantine the Great supposedly transferred authority over Rome and the western part of the Roman Empire to the Pope.

* Patriarch of the West [Патриарх Запада, Западный Патриарх] (V-XXI). Patriarch of the West was, on several occasions between AD 450 and 2006, one of the official titles of the bishop of Rome, as patriarch and highest authority of the Latin Church. The title no longer appears among the official ones, starting from the publication of the 2006 Annuario Pontificio. History. The origin of the definition of the patriarch of the West is linked to the disestablishment of the ancient system based on the three apostolic centers of Rome, Antioch (both founded by Saint Peter) and Alexandria (founded by Saint Mark, the disciple of Peter), and the establishment, despite papal opposition, of the new Pentarchy, with the First Council of Constantinople in 381 and the Council of Chalcedon in 451, which led to the elevation of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Jerusalem. In this system, with the exception of Rome, the other four patriarchates fell under the authority of the Byzantine Empire and came to correspond with territorially well-defined entities. Rome, on the other hand, became the seat with authority over the territories of the Western Roman Empire. In 450, Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II addressed a letter to Pope Leo I, in which he explicitly mentioned him as a patriarch for the West (this is the first mention of a pope in this capacity). After the Western Roman Empire collapsed in 476 and Justinian I extended the eastern legislation on Rome with the Pragmatic sanction of 554, the imperial ecclesiastical system of the Pentarchy was fully put into effect. In 642 {Constans II ??}, as the Byzantine emperors were imposing the support for Miaphysitism on the popes, Pope Theodore I formally assumed for the first time the title of patriarch of the West. Renunciation. On 22 March 2006, the Vatican released a statement explaining the omission of the title from the Annuario Pontificio on the grounds of expressing a "historical and theological reality" and of "being useful to ecumenical dialogue". The title patriarch of the West symbolized the pope's special relationship with, and jurisdiction over, the Latin Church {and so .. ??}—and the omission of the title neither symbolizes in any way a change in this relationship, nor distorts the relationship between the Holy See and the Eastern Churches, as solemnly proclaimed by the Second Vatican Council. // Но в 2006-м году папа Бенедикт 16-й отказался от титула «Западный Патриарх», традиционного для понтификов. // В отношениях Ватикана с православными церквями при Бенедикте XVI, судя по всему, никаких особых изменений не произошло. В 2006 году официальный титул папы римского стал короче (согласно папскому ежегоднику «Annuario Pontificio») — из формулировки исчезло «Патриарх Запада». (Бенедикт XVI) // Полная титулатура Римского епископа до 2006 года включала среди прочих титул «Патриарх Запада». (Патриарх (церковный сан))

* Papal primacy [Примат папы римского] (XI ??). Papal primacy, also known as the primacy of the bishop of Rome, is a Christian ecclesiological doctrine concerning the respect and authority that is due to the pope from other bishops and their episcopal sees. The doctrine is accepted at a fundamental level by both the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church, though the two disagree on the nature of primacy. English academic and Catholic priest Aidan Nichols wrote that "at root, only one issue of substance divides the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Churches, and that is the issue of the primacy." The French Eastern Orthodox researcher Jean-Claude Larchet wrote that together with the Filioque controversy, differences in interpretation of this doctrine have been and remain the primary causes of schism between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. In the Eastern Orthodox Churches, some understand the primacy of the bishop of Rome to be merely one of greater honour, regarding him as primus inter pares ("first among equals"), without effective power over other churches. Other Orthodox Christian theologians, however, view primacy as authoritative power: the expression, manifestation and realization in one bishop of the power of all the bishops and of the unity of the Church. The Catholic Church attributes to the primacy of the pope "full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered," a power that it attributes also to the entire body of the bishops united with the pope. The power that it attributes to the pope's primatial authority has limitations that are official, legal, dogmatic, and practical. In the Ravenna Document, issued in 2007, representatives of the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church jointly stated that both East and West accept the bishop of Rome's primacy at the universal level, but that differences of understanding exist about how the primacy is to be exercised and about its scriptural and theological foundations. East-West Schism. The dispute about the authority of Roman bishops reached a climax in the year 1054, when the legate of Pope Leo IX excommunicated Patriarch of Constantinople Michael I Cerularius. Leo IX had, however, died before the legate issued this excommunication, depriving the legate of its authority and thereby rendering the excommunication technically invalid. Similarly, a ceremony of excommunication of Leo IX then performed by Michael I was equally invalid, since one cannot be posthumously excommunicated. This event led to the schism of the Greek-rite and Latin-rite Churches. In itself, it did not have the effect of excommunicating the adherents of the respective Churches, as the tit-for-tat excommunications, even had they been valid, would have applied to the named persons only. At the time of the excommunications, many contemporary historians, including Byzantine chroniclers, did not consider the event significant. // The Roman Primacy. The dispute between Pope Stephen and the African bishops raises the question of Cyprian's attitude to the papacy, which has given rise to much barren controversy in the past. This was partly a result of the so-called interpolations in Cyprian's De unitate but chiefly because of the mistaken assumption, common to both sides, that if the papal primacy was of divine origin, Cyprian would have recognized it on the baptismal issue and bowed before it. Catholics strove to prove that he did, others that he did not. But it is now generally recognized that in the first centuries the position of the bishop of Rome was not so clear-cut as to constitute a doctrine explicitly believed by every part of the Church, but was the subject of a development analogous to that of many other elements of the faith. Cyprian's attitude (of which his dispute with Stephen was only a short, if violent, phase) represents one of the stages of that development in the African area. If he based the unity of the Church on the concord of bishops—the "collegiality of the episcopate"—it was because they all derived their responsibilities and powers in the Church from Peter "on whom the Church was built." He argued that Christ had first entrusted them to that one man alone (Peter) to show that all the shepherds of the Church should act as one, that is, in harmony with one another. But this theory, true as far as it went, put all bishops on the same level and left vague the position of the bishop of Rome in spite of his having inherited, in a more special way, the Cathedra Petri. In practice Cyprian generally showed the greatest regard toward Rome and recognized his obligation to inform its bishop of any important development in his own Church. Even when he thought that Pope Stephen was imperiling the unity of the Church by recognizing heretical baptism, he never considered that Stephen should be deposed, as he had Marcianus of Arles for his Novatianism. In fact, he showed by his conduct a certain consciousness of elements in the mystery of the Church that he did not allow for in this theory of its unity. Thus if each bishop was free to "rebaptize" or not (as Cyprian's second council assured the pope), what would Cyprian do when heretics reconciled by Stephen visited Carthage? According to him they had never been baptized and, logically, he would have to refuse them communion. Without being aware of it, he was undermining that very unity of the Church that he had so much at heart. Whether Cyprian ever came to see the ambiguity of his position is not known; but even if Stephen excommunicated him (which is quite uncertain), after Stephen's death Cyprian's relations with Rome seem to have been renewed. Rome must have soon forgotten the brush with Cyprian, since it included the day of his martyrdom among the very few feasts of its earliest calendar, that of the chronographer of 354, and set his name permanently among the martyrs selected for special mention in the canon of its liturgy. New Catholic Encyclopedia - CYPRIAN, ST.

* Papal supremacy [Папское первенство] (V). {the Bishop of Rome's claim to universal jurisdiction} Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered that, in brief, "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls." The doctrine had the most significance in the relationship between the church and the temporal state, in matters such as ecclesiastic privileges, the actions of monarchs and even successions. Saint Gelasius I, who served from 492 to 496, in a controversy with Anastasius, the Byzantine emperor, likewise fought to maintain the doctrine of papal supremacy. This dispute was an incipient point of conflict between the Holy See and the Empire. From the late 6th to the late 8th centuries there was a turning of the papacy to the West and its escape from subordination to the authority of the Byzantine emperors of Constantinople. This phase has sometimes incorrectly been credited to Pope Gregory I (who reigned from 590 to 604), who, like his predecessors, represented to the people of the Roman world a church that was still identified with the empire. Unlike some of those predecessors, Gregory was compelled to face the collapse of imperial authority in northern Italy. As the leading civil official of the empire in Rome, it fell to him to take over the civil administration of the cities and to negotiate for the protection of Rome itself with the Lombard invaders threatening it. Another part of this phase occurred in the 8th century, after the rise of the new religion of Islam had weakened the Byzantine Empire and the Lombards had renewed their pressure in Italy. The popes finally sought support from the Frankish rulers of the West and received from the Frankish king Pepin The Short the first part of the Italian territories later known as the Papal States. With Pope Leo III's coronation of Charlemagne, first of the Carolingian emperors, the papacy also gained his protection. In the Letters of the Second Ecumenical Council of Nicea, the Roman Church is referred to as the "head of all churches" twice; at the same time it affirms Christ to be the head of the Church, and the Apostle Peter is referred to as the "chief [of the] Apostles"—but when listed with Paul they are together referred to as the "chief apostles." From the middle of the 11th century and extending to the middle of the 13th century was the second great phase in the process of papal supremacy's rise to prominence. It was first distinguished in 1075 by Gregory VII's bold attack on the traditional practices whereby the emperor had controlled appointments to the higher church offices. The attack spawned the protracted civil and ecclesiastical strife in Germany and Italy known as the Investiture Controversy. Secondly, it was distinguished in 1095 by Urban II's launching of the Crusades, which, in an attempt to liberate the Holy Land from Muslim domination, marshaled under papal leadership the aggressive energies of the European nobility. Both these efforts, although ultimately unsuccessful, greatly enhanced papal prestige in the 12th and 13th centuries. Opposition arguments from early church history. The Dictatus papae, which some attributed to Pope Gregory VII (11th century), states that "the Roman pontiff alone can with right be called universal". The popes have not on the basis of this right employed the title "universal bishop". Pope Gregory I (6th century) condemned use by the patriarch of Constantinople of this title, and even said that whoever claims it "is, in his elation, the precursor of Antichrist" {??}. Opposition arguments from Church Councils. Not one Ecumenical council was called by a pope; all were called by Byzantine emperors {!!}. The Church Fathers' writings and the Ecumenical councils never speak of any papal election. (...) Opposition arguments from the Eastern Orthodox doctrine. Catholic Cardinal and theologian Yves Congar stated: "The East never accepted the regular jurisdiction of Rome, nor did it submit to the judgment of Western bishops. Its appeals to Rome for help were not connected with a recognition of the principle of Roman jurisdiction but were based on the view that Rome had the same truth, the same good. The East jealously protected its autonomous way of life. Rome intervened to safeguard the observation of legal rules, to maintain the orthodoxy of faith and to ensure communion between the two parts of the church, the Roman see representing and personifying the West...In according Rome a 'primacy of honour', the East avoided basing this primacy on the succession and the still living presence of the apostle Peter. A modus vivendi was achieved which lasted, albeit with crises, down to the middle of the eleventh century." Eastern Orthodox understanding of Catholicity. The test of catholicity is adherence to the authority of Scripture and then by the Holy Tradition of the church. It is not defined by adherence to any particular See. It is the position of the Orthodox Church that it has never accepted the pope as de jure leader of the entire church. All bishops are equal 'as Peter' therefore every church under every bishop (consecrated in apostolic succession) is fully complete (the original meaning of the word catholic - katholikismos, "according to the whole"). Referring to Ignatius of Antioch, in Letter to the Smyrnaeans, "Let Nothing Be Done Without the Bishop", Carlton wrote: "Contrary to popular opinion, the word catholic does not mean "universal"; it means "whole, complete, lacking nothing." ...Thus, to confess the Church to be catholic is to say that She possesses the fullness of the Christian faith. To say, however, that Orthodox and Rome constitute two lungs of the same Church is to deny that either Church separately is catholic in any meaningful sense of the term. This is not only contrary to the teaching of Orthodoxy, it is flatly contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, which considered itself truly catholic."

* ================================================================================

* Byzantine Papacy [??] (537-752). The Byzantine Papacy was a period of Byzantine domination of the Roman papacy from 537 to 752, when popes required the approval of the Byzantine Emperor for episcopal consecration, and many popes were chosen from the apocrisiarii (liaisons from the pope to the emperor) or the inhabitants of Byzantine-ruled Greece, Syria, or Sicily. Justinian I conquered the Italian peninsula in the Gothic War (535–554) and appointed the next three popes, a practice that would be continued by his successors and later be delegated to the Exarchate of Ravenna. With the exception of Martin I, no pope during this period questioned the authority of the Byzantine monarch to confirm the election of the bishop of Rome before consecration could occur; however, theological conflicts were common between pope and emperor in the areas such as monothelitism and iconoclasm. Greek-speakers from Greece, Syria, and Sicily replaced members of the powerful Roman nobles in the papal chair during this period. Rome under the Greek popes constituted a "melting pot" of Western and Eastern Christian traditions, reflected in art as well as liturgy. // Western Church. {Main article: Byzantine Papacy} Justinian I conquered the Italian peninsula in the Gothic War (535–554) and appointed the next three popes, a practice that would be continued by his successors and later be delegated to the Exarchate of Ravenna. The Byzantine Papacy was a period of Byzantine domination of the papacy from 537 to 752, when popes required the approval of the Byzantine Emperor for episcopal consecration, and many popes were chosen from the apocrisiarii (liaisons from the pope to the emperor) or the inhabitants of Byzantine Greece, Byzantine Syria, or Byzantine Sicily. (Caesaropapism) // Согласно католической точке зрения, цезарепапизм возник в Византийской империи при Юстиниане I, которого они, в отличие от православных, не признают святым. (Цезаропапизм)

* Byzantine Iconoclasm [Иконоборчество в Византии] (XIII-IX). Byzantine Iconoclasm (Greek, romanized: Eikonomachía, literally, "image struggle" or "war on icons") refers to two periods in the history of the Byzantine Empire when the use of religious images or icons was opposed by religious and imperial authorities within the Orthodox Church and the temporal imperial hierarchy. The First Iconoclasm, as it is sometimes called, existed between about 726 and 787. The Second Iconoclasm was between 814 and 842. According to the traditional view {??}, Byzantine Iconoclasm was started by a ban on religious images by Emperor Leo III and continued under his successors. It was accompanied by widespread destruction of images and persecution of supporters of the veneration of images. The pope remained firmly in support of the use of images throughout the period, and the whole episode widened the growing divergence between the Byzantine and Carolingian traditions in what was still a unified church, as well as facilitating the reduction or removal of Byzantine political control over parts of Italy. // Byzantine era. Government-led iconoclasm began with Byzantine Emperor Leo III, who issued a series of edicts between 726 and 730 against the veneration of images. The religious conflict created political and economic divisions in Byzantine society; iconoclasm was generally supported by the Eastern, poorer, non-Greek peoples of the Empire who had to frequently deal with raids from the new Muslim Empire. On the other hand, the wealthier Greeks of Constantinople and the peoples of the Balkan and Italian provinces strongly opposed iconoclasm. (Iconoclasm)

* Photios I of Constantinople [Фотий I, патриарх Константинопольский] (c 810/820-893). Photios I, also spelled Photius, was the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople from 858 to 867 and from 877 to 886. He is recognized in the Eastern Orthodox Church as Saint Photios the Great. Photios is widely regarded as the most powerful and influential church leader of Constantinople subsequent to John Chrysostom's archbishopric around the turn of the fifth century. He is also viewed as the most important intellectual of his time – "the leading light of the ninth-century renaissance". He was a central figure in both the conversion of the Slavs to Christianity and the Photian schism, and is considered "[t]he great systematic compiler of the Eastern Church, who occupies a similar position to that of Gratian {a canon lawyer from Bologna, "Father of Canon Law"} in the West," and whose "collection in two parts...formed and still forms the classic source of ancient Church Law for the Greek Church." Photios was a well-educated man from a noble Constantinopolitan family. Photius's great uncle was a previous patriarch of Constantinople, Saint Tarasius. He intended to be a monk, but chose to be a scholar and statesman instead. In 858, Emperor Michael III (r. 842–867) decided to confine Patriarch Ignatius in order to force him into resignation, and Photios, still a layman, was appointed to replace him. Amid power struggles between the pope and the Byzantine emperor, Ignatius was reinstated. Photios resumed the position when Ignatius died (877), by order of the Byzantine emperor. The new pope, John VIII, approved Photios's reinstatement. Catholics regard as legitimate a Fourth Council of Constantinople (Roman Catholic) anathematizing Photios {869–870; while he was deposed}, while Eastern Orthodox regard as legitimate a subsequent Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox), reversing the former {879–880; already reinstated}. The contested councils mark the end of unity represented by the first seven Ecumenical Councils. Studies show that Photios was venerated as a saint as early as the 9th century, and by the Roman Church as late as the 12th century. Nonetheless, Photios was formally canonized by the Orthodox Church in 1847. (...) The confinement and removal of Ignatios and the speedy promotion of Photios at first caused only internal controversy within the Church of Constantinople, and in 859 a local council was held, examining the issue and confirming the removal of Ignatios and election of Photios. In the same time, partisans of Ignatios decided to appeal to the Church of Rome, thus initiating ecclesiastical controversy on an ecumenical scale as the Pope and the rest of the western bishops took up the cause of Ignatios. The latter's confinement and removal without a formal ecclesiastical trial meant that Photios's election was uncanonical, and eventually Pope Nicholas I sought to involve himself in determining the legitimacy of the succession. His legates were dispatched to Constantinople with instructions to investigate, but finding Photios well ensconced, they acquiesced in the confirmation of his election at a synod in 861. On their return to Rome, they discovered that this was not at all what Nicholas had intended, and in 863 at a synod in Rome the pope deposed Photios, and reappointed Ignatius as the rightful patriarch, triggering a schism. Four years later, Photios was to respond on his own part by calling a Council and excommunicating the pope on grounds of heresy – over the question of the double procession of the Holy Spirit {it was Photius who raised the philioque issue as a reason to excommunicate a pope}. The situation was additionally complicated by the question of papal authority over the entire Church and by disputed jurisdiction over newly converted Bulgaria. {so Photius just raised the issue of filioque as an excuse to excommunicate the pope ??}

* Двукратный собор [Council of Constantinople of 861, Protodeutera] (861). Двукратный собор 861 года иначе Перво-Второй — поместный собор Константинопольской Церкви, состоявшийся в церкви Святых Апостолов в Константинополе в мае 861 под председательством патриарха Фотия в присутствии императора Михаила III. На Соборе присутствовали 318 епископов, включая папских легатов. Соборные акты не сохранилось: они были сожжены на соборе в 869 году сторонниками патриарха Игнатия. Относительно названия собора, предполагают, что он назван «Двукратным», так как собирался дважды. О причинах перерыва в соборных заседаниях достоверно ничего неизвестно. Рассказ Зонары, о том, что на соборе были беспорядки, вызванные «инославными», других подтверждений не имеет и достоверным не считается. Правила Собора, хотя и не являющегося вселенским, входят в Книгу правил Православной Церкви и таким образом суть документы её внутреннего права (канонического кодекса). Council of Constantinople (861). The Council of Constantinople of 861, also known as Protodeutera, was a major Church Council, convened upon the initiative of Emperor Michael III of Byzantium and Patriarch Photios I of Constantinople, and attended by legates of Pope Nicholas I. The Council confirmed the deposition of former Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople, and his replacement by Photios. Several dogmatic, ecclesiological and liturgical questions were also discussed, and seventeen canons were produced. Decisions of the Council were initially approved by papal legates, but their approval was later annulled by the Pope. In spite of that, the Council is considered as valid by the Eastern Orthodox Church.

* Photian schism [Фотиева схизма] (863-867). The Photian Schism was a four-year (863–867) schism between the episcopal sees of Rome and Constantinople. The issue centred on the right of the Byzantine Emperor to depose and appoint a patriarch without approval from the papacy. In 857, Ignatius was deposed or compelled to resign as Patriarch of Constantinople under the Byzantine Emperor Michael III for political reasons. He was replaced the following year by Photius. The pope, Nicholas I, despite previous disagreements with Ignatius, objected to what he considered the improper deposition of Ignatius and the elevation of Photius, a layman, in his place. After his legates exceeded their instructions in 861 by certifying Photius's elevation, Nicholas reversed their decision in 863 by condemning Photius. The situation remained the same until 867. The West had been sending missionaries to Bulgaria. In 867, Photius called a council and excommunicated Nicholas and the entire western Church. That same year, high ranking courtier Basil I usurped the imperial throne from Michael III and reinstated Ignatius as patriarch. After Ignatius died in 877, Photius was brought back, but an agreement between him and Pope John VIII prevented a second schism. Photius was deposed again in 886, and spent his years in retirement condemning the West for its alleged heresy. (...) The main problem was the papal claim to jurisdiction in the East, not accusations of heresy. The schism arose largely as a struggle for ecclesiastical control of the southern Balkans and because of a personality clash between the heads of the two sees, both of whom were elected in the year 858 and both of whose reigns ended in 867. The Photian Schism thus differed from what occurred in the 11th century, when the pope's authority as a first among equals was challenged on the grounds of having lost that authority through heresy {filioque}. The Photian Schism polarized the East and West for centuries, partially over a false but widespread belief in a second excommunication of Photius. This idea was finally debunked in the 20th century, which has helped rehabilitate Photius to some degree in the West.

* Император Лев VI Философ [Leo VI the Wise] (866-912). Как и большинство императоров Македонской династии, Лев был человек безусловно незаурядный. Воспитанник ученейшего Фотия, он писал анакреонтики, проповеди, оракулы, под его именем известна «Тактика» - сочинение о воинском искусстве, и не случайно потомки дали Льву прозвище Философа или Мудрого. Вместе с тем был он плаксив, часто непоследователен, склонен подпадать под чужое влияние. Еще в юности он любил предаваться довольно странному для наследника престола развлечению: отправляться по ночам в бедной одежде на прогулки по ночной столице, проверяя бдительность стражников; он был чрезвычайно доволен, когда как-то раз солдаты приняли его за бродяжку и отправили в тюрьму. Видимо, зная слабости Льва, Василий I {predecessor} однажды загадочно произнес, обращаясь к приветствовавшей вышедшего из тюрьмы наследника толпе: 'Это по поводу моего сына вы прославляете Бога? Ну так я вам скажу, что ему же вы будете обязаны долгими днями труда и печали». Варварская энциклопедия: Император Лев VI Философ

* Fourth Council of Constantinople [Catholic Church; Четвёртый Константинопольский собор] (869-870). The Fourth Council of Constantinople was the eighth ecumenical council of the Catholic Church held in Constantinople from October 5, 869, to February 28, 870. It was poorly attended, the first session by only 12 bishops and even the final one by only 103. In contrast the pro-Photian council of 879-80 was attended by 383 bishops. The Council met in ten sessions from October 869 to February 870 and issued 27 canons. The council was called by Emperor Basil I the Macedonian, with the support of Pope Hadrian II. It deposed Photios, a layman who had been appointed as Patriarch of Constantinople, and reinstated his predecessor Ignatius. The Council also reaffirmed the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea in support of icons and holy images and required the image of Christ to have veneration equal with that of the gospel book. A later council, the Greek Fourth Council of Constantinople, was held after Photios had been reinstated on the order of the emperor. Today, the Catholic Church recognizes the council in 869–870 as "Constantinople IV", while the Eastern Orthodox Churches recognize the councils in 879–880 as "Constantinople IV" and revere Photios as a saint. At the time there was no question of this involving an East-West schism, since Rome was represented at, and accepted, both councils. The previous seven ecumenical councils are recognized as ecumenical and authoritative by both Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Christians.

* Fourth Council of Constantinople [Eastern Orthodox; Четвёртый Константинопольский собор, Софийский Собор] (879-880). The Fourth Council of Constantinople was held in 879–880. It confirmed the reinstatement of Photius I as patriarch of Constantinople. The result of this council is accepted as having the authority of an ecumenical council by Eastern Orthodox Christians, who sometimes call it the Eighth Ecumenical Council.

* Photian controversy - Filioque [Филиокве] (IX). Political events that followed additionally complicated the issue. According to John Meyendorff, and John Romanides the Frankish efforts to get new Pope Leo III to approve the addition of Filioque to the Creed were due to a desire of Charlemagne, who in 800 had been crowned in Rome as Emperor, to find grounds for accusations of heresy against the East. The Pope's refusal to approve the interpolation of the Filioque into the Creed avoided arousing a conflict between East and West about this matter. During his reign (r. 795–816), and for another two centuries, there was no Creed at all in the Roman rite Mass. Reasons for the continuing refusal of the Frankish Church to adopt the positions of the Church of Rome on necessity of leaving Filioque outside of Creed remained unknown. Faced with another endorsement of the Filioque clause at the Frankish Council of Aachen (809) pope Leo III denied his approval and publicly posted the Creed in Rome without the Filioque, written in Greek and Latin on two silver plaques, in defense of the Orthodox Faith (810) stating his opposition to the addition of the Filioque into the Creed. Although Leo III did not disapprove the Filioque doctrine, the Pope strongly believed the clause should not be included into the Creed.[l] In spite of the efforts of the Church of Rome, the acceptance of the Filioque clause in the Creed of the Frankish Church proved to be irreversible. In 808 or 809 apparent controversy arose in Jerusalem between the Greek monks of one monastery and the Frankish Benedictine monks of another: the Greeks reproached the latter for, among other things, singing the creed with the Filioque included. In response, the theology of the Filioque was expressed in the 809 local Council of Aachen (809). Photian controversy Around 860 the controversy over the Filioque broke out in the course of the disputes between Patriarch Photius of Constantinople and Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople. In 867 Photius was Patriarch of Constantinople and issued an Encyclical to the Eastern Patriarchs, and called a council in Constantinople in which he charged the Western Church with heresy and schism because of differences in practices, in particular for the Filioque and the authority of the Papacy. This moved the issue from jurisdiction and custom to one of dogma. This council declared Pope Nicholas anathema, excommunicated and deposed. Photius excluded not only "and the Son" but also "through the Son" with regard to the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit: for him "through the Son" applied only to the temporal mission of the Holy Spirit (the sending in time). He maintained that the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit is "from the Father alone".[verify] This phrase was verbally a novelty, however, Eastern Orthodox theologians generally hold that in substance the phrase is only a reaffirmation of traditional teaching. Sergei Bulgakov, on the other hand, declared that Photius's doctrine itself "represents a sort of novelty for the Eastern church". Bulgakov writes: "The Cappadocians expressed only one idea: the monarchy of the Father and, consequently, the procession of the Holy Spirit precisely from the Father. They never imparted to this idea, however, the exclusiveness that it acquired in the epoch of the Filioque disputes after Photius, in the sense of ek monou tou Patros (from the Father alone)"; Nichols summarized that, "Bulgakov finds it amazing that with all his erudition Photius did not see that the 'through the Spirit' of Damascene and others constituted a different theology from his own, just as it is almost incomprehensible to find him trying to range the Western Fathers and popes on his Monopatrist side." Photius's importance endured in regard to relations between East and West. He is recognized as a saint by the Eastern Orthodox Church and his line of criticism has often been echoed later, making reconciliation between East and West difficult. At least three councils – Council of Constantinople (867), Fourth Council of Constantinople (Roman Catholic) (869), and Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox) (879) – were held in Constantinople over the actions of Emperor Michael III in deposing Ignatius and replacing him with Photius. The Council of Constantinople (867) was convened by Photius to address the question of Papal Supremacy over all of the churches and their patriarchs and the use of the Filioque. The council of 867 was followed by the Fourth Council of Constantinople (Roman Catholic), in 869, which reversed the previous council and was promulgated by Rome. The Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox), in 879, restored Photius to his see. It was attended by Western legates Cardinal Peter of St Chrysogonus, Paul Bishop of Ancona and Eugene Bishop of Ostia who approved its canons, but it is unclear whether it was ever promulgated by Rome.

* Filioque - Adoption in the Roman Rite (1014). Latin liturgical use of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed with the added term spread between the 8th and 11th centuries. Only in 1014, at the request of King Henry II of Germany (who was in Rome for his coronation as Holy Roman Emperor and was surprised by the different custom in force there) did Pope Benedict VIII, who owed to Henry II his restoration to the papal throne after usurpation by Antipope Gregory VI, have the Creed with the addition of Filioque, sung at Mass in Rome for the first time. In some other places Filioque was incorporated in the Creed even later: in parts of southern Italy after the Council of Bari in 1098 and at Paris seemingly not even by 1240, 34 years before the {1274} Second Council of Lyon defined that the Holy Spirit "proceeds eternally from the Father and from the Son, not as from two principles but from a single principle, not by two spirations but by a single spiration". Since then the Filioque phrase has been included in the Creed throughout the Latin Rite except where Greek is used in the liturgy. Its adoption among the Eastern Catholic Churches (formerly known as Uniate churches) has been discouraged.[dead link] (Filioque) // The common tradition says the filioque first appeared in the Nicene Creedat the Third Council of Toledo in 589. In contrast, the manuscript evidence indicates it first appeared at the Eighth Council of Toledo in 653. The date of the insertion can be narrowed further based on a letter of Isidore of Seville(d. 636). This letter (ep. 6) has been typically considered spurious, but the evidence supports its authenticity. SHAWN C. SMITH - The Insertion of the Filioque into the Nicene Creed and a Letter of Isidore of Seville

* Great Schism [East–West Schism; Разделение церквей, Великое разделение, Великая схизма] (1054). East–West Schism (Great Schism or Schism of 1054). The East–West Schism (also the Great Schism or Schism of 1054) is the break of communion since the 11th century between the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches. The schism was the culmination of theological and political differences which had developed during the preceding centuries between Eastern and Western Christianity. A succession of ecclesiastical differences and theological disputes between the Greek East and Latin West preceded the formal split that occurred in 1054. Prominent among these were: the procession of the Holy Spirit, whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist, the Bishop of Rome's claim to universal jurisdiction, and the place of the See of Constantinople in relation to the pentarchy. In 1053, the first step in the process which led to a formal schism was taken: the Greek churches in southern Italy were forced to conform to Latin practices and if any of them did not, they were forced to close. In retaliation, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Michael I Cerularius ordered the closure of all Latin churches in Constantinople. In 1054, the papal legate sent by Leo IX travelled to Constantinople for purposes that included refusing Cerularius the title of "Ecumenical Patriarch" and insisting that he recognize the pope's claim to be the head of all of the churches. The main purposes of the papal legation were to seek help from the Byzantine emperor in view of the Norman conquest of southern Italy and deal with recent attacks by Leo of Ohrid against the use of unleavened bread and other Western customs, attacks that had the support of Cerularius. The historian Axel Bayer says the legation was sent in response to two letters, one from the emperor seeking assistance in arranging a common military campaign by the eastern and western empires against the Normans, and the other from Cerularius. On the refusal of Cerularius to accept the demand, the leader of the legation, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, O.S.B., excommunicated him, and in return Cerularius excommunicated Humbert and the other legates. The validity of the Western legates' act is doubtful because Pope Leo died and Cerularius' excommunication only applied to the legates personally. Still, the Church split along doctrinal, theological, linguistic, political, and geographical lines, and the fundamental breach has never been healed, with each side sometimes accusing the other of falling into heresy and initiating the division. The Latin-led Crusades, the Massacre of the Latins in 1182, the West's retaliation in the Sacking of Thessalonica in 1185, the capture and pillaging of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in 1204, and the imposition of Latin patriarchs made reconciliation more difficult. Establishing Latin hierarchies in the Crusader states meant that there were two rival claimants to each of the patriarchal sees of Antioch, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, making the existence of schism clear. Several attempts at reconciliation did not bear fruit. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras I nullified the anathemas of 1054, although this nullification of measures which were taken against a few individuals was essentially a goodwill gesture and did not constitute any sort of reunion. // Adrian Fortescue - The Orthodox Eastern Church, 1907.

* East-West hostilities [Восток-Запад - вражда] (XII). Another ancient rift is also in the process of being smoothed over. In 1054, the "Great Schism" split the Roman Church in two when the Pope in Rome and the Patriarch in Constantinople excommunicated each other over issues of theology and papal authority {~}. Old antipathies were further aggravated by the rise of Italian Catholic merchants into dominant positions in the trade and financial sectors of Constantinople, where they displaced native Greek traders. This smoldering discontent erupted into violence when Greek Catholics in Constantinople attacked the Roman Catholic merchants {Massacre of the Latins, 1182}. In 1204, crusaders on the Fourth Crusade launched by Pope Innocent III conquered and brutally sacked the magnificent city of Constantinople. Rome's imposition of Latin patriarchs on the defeated Greeks spawned a legacy of hatred and mistrust between the Eastern and Western branches of "Christendom" that has lingered for more than 950 years. RETURNS, REBELLIONS AND ROME

* Резня латинов [Massacre of the Latins] (1182). Резня латинян — одно из самых масштабных массовых убийств в истории. Резня произошла в Константинополе, столице Византии, в 1182 году, в годы правления Алексея II Комнина. Мать Алексея II Комнина, Мария Антиохийская, была регентшей при двенадцатилетнем сыне. Будучи сестрой Боэмунда III, Мария покровительствовала «франкам» в ущерб грекам, что вызывало ненависть её подданных. Первый бунт против Марии был подавлен, однако во время второго бунта были уничтожены все уроженцы Запада, исключая венецианцев, посаженных в тюрьму Мануилом Комнином. Одним из инициаторов бунта был претендент на престол Андроник. Хотя точное число жертв неизвестно, католическая община, составлявшая в то время около 60 тыс. человек, исчезает с карты города; возможно, части удалось спастись бегством. Особенно пострадали общины генуэзцев и пизанцев. Около 4000 выживших были проданы в рабство туркам. Massacre of the Latins. The Massacre of the Latins (Italian: Massacro dei Latini) was a large-scale massacre of the Roman Catholic (called "Latin") inhabitants of Constantinople, the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, by the Eastern Orthodox population of the city in April 1182. The Roman Catholics of Constantinople at that time dominated the city's maritime trade and financial sector. Although precise numbers are unavailable, the bulk of the Latin community, estimated at 60,000 at the time by Eustathius of Thessalonica, was wiped out or forced to flee. The Genoese and Pisan communities especially were decimated, and some 4,000 survivors were sold as slaves to the (Turkish) Sultanate of Rum. The massacre further worsened relations and increased enmity between the Western and Eastern Christian churches, and a sequence of hostilities between the two followed.

* Fourth Crusade [Четвёртый крестовый поход] (1202–1204). The Fourth Crusade was a Latin Christian armed expedition called by Pope Innocent III. The stated intent of the expedition was to recapture the Muslim-controlled city of Jerusalem, by first conquering the powerful Egyptian Ayyubid Sultanate, the strongest Muslim state of the time. However, a sequence of economic and political events culminated in the Crusader army's 1204 Sack of Constantinople, the capital of the Greek Christian-controlled Byzantine Empire, rather than Egypt as originally planned. In late 1202, financial issues led to the Crusader army conducting the siege of Zara, sacking the Catholic city of Zara (Zadar) on the Adriatic Sea, which was then brought under Venetian control. When the Pope heard of this, he excommunicated the Crusader army. In January 1203, en route to Jerusalem, the Crusader leadership entered into an agreement with the Byzantine prince Alexios Angelos to divert the Crusade to Constantinople and restore his deposed father Isaac II Angelos as emperor. The intent of the Crusaders was then to continue to Jerusalem with promised Byzantine financial and military aid. On 23 June 1203, the main Crusader army reached Constantinople, while other contingents (perhaps a majority of all crusaders) continued to Acre. In August 1203, following the siege of Constantinople, Alexios was crowned co-emperor. However, in January 1204 he was deposed by a popular uprising. The Crusaders were no longer able to receive their promised payments from Alexios. Following the murder of Alexios on 8 February, the Crusaders decided on the outright conquest of the city. In April 1204, they captured and plundered the city's enormous wealth. Only a handful of the Crusaders continued to the Holy Land thereafter. The conquest of Constantinople was followed by the fragmentation of the Byzantine Empire into three states centered in Nicaea, Trebizond and Epirus. The Crusaders then founded several new Crusader states, known as Frankokratia, in former Byzantine territory, largely hinged upon the Latin Empire of Constantinople. The presence of the Latin Crusader states almost immediately led to war with the Byzantine successor states and with the Bulgarian Empire. The Nicaean Empire eventually recovered Constantinople and restored the Byzantine Empire in 1261. The Fourth Crusade is considered to have solidified the East–West Schism. The crusade dealt an irrevocable blow to the Byzantine Empire, contributing to its decline and fall.

* Siege of Constantinople [Осада Константинополя] (1203). The siege of Constantinople in 1203 was a Crusader siege of the capital of the Byzantine Empire, in support of the deposed emperor Isaac II Angelos and his son Alexios IV Angelos. It marked the main outcome of the Fourth Crusade.

* Осада и падение Константинополя [Sack of Constantinople] (1204). Взятие Константинополя (13 апреля 1204 года) войсками крестоносцев было одним из эпохальных событий средневековой истории и имело далеко идущие последствия для всей Европы. Взятию предшествовали две довольно напряжённые осады — осада 1203 года и 1204 годов, в ходе которых свои усилия объединили венецианский флот и западноевропейская (преимущественно французская) пехота. После захвата города начались массовые грабежи и убийства греко-православного населения, что было своего рода местью за резню латинян греками в 1182 году. 9 мая новым императором был провозглашён Балдуин Фландрский, что положило начало формированию целой плеяды «латинских» государств на захваченных крестоносцами территориях, хотя греческая знать на периферии империи не покорилась и продолжала борьбу. Sack of Constantinople. The Sack of Constantinople occurred in April 1204 and marked the culmination of the Fourth Crusade. Crusader armies captured, looted, and destroyed parts of Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire. After the capture of the city, the Latin Empire (known to the Byzantines as the Frankokratia or the Latin Occupation) was established and Baldwin of Flanders was crowned Emperor Baldwin I of Constantinople in the Hagia Sophia. After the city's sacking, most of the Byzantine Empire's territories were divided up among the Crusaders. Byzantine aristocrats also established a number of small independent splinter states, one of them being the Empire of Nicaea, which would eventually recapture Constantinople in 1261 and proclaim the reinstatement of the Empire. However, the restored Empire never managed to reclaim its former territorial or economic strength, and eventually fell to the rising Ottoman Sultanate in the 1453 Siege of Constantinople. The sack of Constantinople is a major turning point in medieval history. The Crusaders' decision to attack the world's largest Christian city was unprecedented and immediately controversial. Reports of Crusader looting and brutality scandalised and horrified the Orthodox world; relations between the Catholic and Orthodox churches were catastrophically wounded for many centuries afterwards, and would not be substantially repaired until modern times. The Byzantine Empire was left much poorer, smaller, and ultimately less able to defend itself against the Seljuk and Ottoman conquests that followed; the actions of the Crusaders thus directly accelerated the collapse of Christendom in the east, and in the long run helped facilitate the later Ottoman Conquests of Europe. // Среди причин, вызвавших 4-й Крестовый поход, центральное место занимал антагонизм папства и Византии. В основе предприятия лежала агрессивная политика папы Иннокентия III, поставившего своей целью установить политическое и церковное главенство Римской курии над феодальным миром не только Запада, но и Востока. Журнал Московской Патриархии - ЗАХВАТ КОНСТАНТИНОПОЛЯ ЛАТИНЯНАМИ В 1204 ГОДУ (К 750-летию события)

* Latin Empire [Latin Empire of Constantinople, Imperium Romaniae, 'Frankokratia'; Латинская империя, «франкократия»] (1204-1261). {<> Byzantine Papacy 537-752} The Latin Empire, also referred to as the Latin Empire of Constantinople, was a feudal Crusader state founded by the leaders of the Fourth Crusade on lands captured from the Byzantine Empire. The Latin Empire was intended to replace the Byzantine Empire as the Western-recognized Roman Empire in the east, with a Catholic emperor enthroned in place of the Eastern Orthodox Roman emperors. (...) Like the term "Byzantine Empire", "Latin Empire" was not a contemporary term used by the empire itself or the rest of the world. The Byzantines referred to the Latin Empire as the Frankokratia ("rule of the Franks") or the Latinokratia ("rule of the Latins") and the Latin Emperors themselves referred to the empire by various names, commonly imperium Constantinopolitanum (lit. Empire of Constantinople), but also imperium Romaniae (lit. Empire of Romania) and imperium Romanorum (lit. Empire of the Romans). The term Romania ("Land of the Romans") had been used unofficially by the population of the Byzantine Empire for their country for centuries. Латинская империя. Латинская империя, Латинская Романия, Константинопольская империя (фр. Empire latin de Constantinople, лат. Imperium Romaniae; 1204—1261) — средневековое государство, образованное после четвёртого крестового похода на землях Византийской империи. На латинском языке она называлась Романия (Romania). Первоначально византийская знать была отстранена от управления государством. Однако при императоре Генрихе I византийские архонты были включены в состав господствующего слоя, а византийские чиновники получили различные должности. Важную роль в государстве играли католические феодалы. В Латинской империи были сохранены многие традиции Византии, а также православная церковь, но католическая церковь пользовалась большим влиянием, чем православная. Этот период в истории Византии получил название «франкократия». // Frankokratia [Latinokratia] (1204-XVII). The Frankokratia (sometimes anglicized as Francocracy, lit. "rule of the Franks"), also known as Latinokratia ("rule of the Latins") and, for the Venetian domains, Venetokratia or Enetokratia ("rule of the Venetians"), was the period in Greek history after the Fourth Crusade (1204), when a number of primarily French and Italian states were established by the Partitio terrarum imperii Romaniae on the territory of the dissolved Byzantine Empire. The term derives from the name given by the Orthodox Greeks to the Western European Latin Church Catholics: "rule of the Franks or Latins". The span of the Frankokratia period differs by region: the political situation proved highly volatile, as the Frankish states fragmented and changed hands, and the Greek successor states re-conquered many areas. With the exception of the Ionian Islands and some islands or forts which remained in Venetian hands until the turn of the 19th century, the end of the Frankokratia in most Greek lands came with the Ottoman conquest, chiefly in the 14th to 17th centuries, which ushered in the period known as "Tourkokratia" ("rule of the Turks"; see Ottoman Greece).

* Second Council of Lyon [Второй Лионский собор] (1274). The Second Council of Lyon was the fourteenth ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, convoked on 31 March 1272 and convened in Lyon, Kingdom of Arles (in modern France), in 1274. Pope Gregory X presided over the council, called to act on a pledge by Byzantine emperor Michael VIII {Palaiologos} to reunite the Eastern church with the West. The main topics discussed at the council were the conquest of the Holy Land and the union of the Eastern and Western Churches. In the second session, the fathers approved the decree Zelus fidei, which contained no juridical statutes but rather summed up constitutions about the perils of the Holy Land, the means for paying for a proposed crusade, the excommunication of pirates and corsairs and those who protected them or traded with them, a declaration of peace among Christians, a grant of an indulgence for those willing to go on crusade, restoration of communion with the Greeks, and the definition of the order and procedure to be observed in the council. The Greeks conceded on the issue of the Filioque (two words added to the Nicene Creed), and union was proclaimed, but the union was later repudiated by Andronicus II, heir to Michael VIII. The council also recognized Rudolf I as Holy Roman Emperor, ending the interregnum.

* Essence–energies distinction [различие сущности и энергии Бога] (XIII). In Palamite theology, there is a distinction between the essence (ousia) and the energies (energeia) of God. It was first formulated by Gregory Palamas (1296–1359) as part of his defense of the Athonite monastic practice of hesychasmos against the charge of heresy brought by the humanist scholar and theologian Barlaam of Calabria. In layman's terms, God's essence is distinct from God's energies in the same manner as the Sun's essence and energies are distinct. The Sun's essence is a ball of burning gas, while the Orthodox hold that God's essence is incomprehensible. As the Sun's essence is certainly unapproachable and unendurable, so the Orthodox hold of God's essence. As the sun's energies on Earth, however, can be experienced and are evidenced by changes that they induce (ex. melting, hardening, growing, bleaching, etc.), the same is said of God's energies—though perhaps in a more spiritual sense (ex. melting of hearts or strength, hardening of hearts, spiritual growth, bleaching to be "white as snow," though more physical and psychological manifestations occur as well as in miracles, and inspiration, etc.). The important points being made are that while God is unknowable in His essence, He can be known (i.e. experienced) in His energies, and such experience changes neither who or what God is nor who or what the one experiencing God is. Just as a plant does not become the Sun simply because it soaked up the light and warmth and grew, nor does a person who soaks up the warmth and light of God and spiritually grows ever become God—though such may be called a child of God or "a god." Orthodox theologians generally regard this distinction as a real distinction, and not just a conceptual distinction. Historically, Western Christian thought, since the time of the Great Schism, has tended to reject the essence–energies distinction as real in the case of God, characterizing the view as a heretical introduction of an unacceptable division in the Trinity and suggestive of polytheism. Historical background. The essence–energy distinction was formulated by Gregory Palamas of Thessaloniki (1296–1359), as part of his defense of the Athonite monastic practice of hesychasmos, the mystical exercise of "stillness" to facilitate ceaseless inner prayer and noetic contemplation of God, against the charge of heresy brought by the humanist scholar and theologian Barlaam of Calabria. According to catholic-church.org, The Ultimate Reality and Meaning of the Palamite theology consists of the distinction between God’s Essence and Energy. This is a way of expressing the idea that the transcendent God remains eternally hidden in His Essence, but at the same time that God also seeks to communicate and The Distinction between God’s Essence and Energy unite Himself with us personally through His Energy. The mystagogical teachings of hesychasm were approved in the Orthodox Church by a series of local Hesychast councils in the 14th century, and Gregory's commemoration during the liturgical season of Great Lent is seen as an extension of the Sunday of Orthodoxy. Eastern Orthodox views. Essence and energy. In Eastern Orthodox theology God's essence is called ousia, "all that subsists by itself and which has not its being in another", and is distinct from his energies (energeia in Greek, actus in Latin) or activities as actualized in the world. The ousia of God is God as God is. The essence, being, nature and substance[clarification needed] of God as taught in Eastern Christianity is uncreated, and cannot be comprehended in words. According to Lossky, God's ousia is "that which finds no existence or subsistence in another or any other thing". God's ousia has no necessity or subsistence that needs or is dependent on anything other than itself. It is the energies of God that enable us to experience something of the Divine, at first through sensory perception and then later intuitively or noetically. As St John Damascene states, "all that we say positively of God manifests not his nature but the things about his nature." Distinction between essence and energy. Real distinction. According to anti-Western polemicist John Romanides, Palamas considers the distinction between God's essence and his energies to be a "real distinction", as distinguished from the Thomistic "virtual distinction" and the Scotist "formal distinction". Romanides suspects that Barlaam accepted a "formal distinction" between God's essence and his energies. Other writers agree that Palamas views the distinction between the divine essence and the divine energies as "real". According to Vladimir Lossky of the neopatristic school, if we deny the real distinction between essence and energy, we cannot fix any clear borderline between the procession of the divine persons (as existences and/or realities of God) and the creation of the world: both the one and the other will be equally acts of the divine nature (strictly uncreated from uncreated). The being and the action(s) of God then would appear identical, leading to the teaching of pantheism. Modern interpretation. Some contemporary scholars argue against describing Palamas's essence–energies distinction in God as a metaphysically "real" distinction. Orthodox philosophical theologian David Bentley Hart expresses doubt "that Palamas ever intended to suggest a real distinction between God's essence and energies." G. Philips argues that Palamas's distinction is not an "ontological" distinction but, rather, analogous to a "formal distinction" in the Scotist sense of the term. According to Dominican Catholic theological historian Fr. Aidan Nichols, Palamas's essence–energies distinction is not a mere "formal" distinction "demanded by the limited operating capacities of human minds". According to Anna N. Williams's study of Palamas, which is more recent than the assessments of Hart and Philips, in only two passages does Palamas state explicitly that God's energies are "as constitutively and ontologically distinct from the essence as are the three Hypostases," and in one place he makes explicit his view, repeatedly implied elsewhere, that the essence and the energies are not the same; but Williams contends that not even in these passages did Palamas intend to argue for an "ontological or fully real distinction," and that the interpretation of his teaching by certain polemical modern disciples of his is false. Orthodox criticism of Western theology. Eastern Orthodox theologians have criticized Western theology, especially the traditional scholastic claim that God is actus purus, for its alleged incompatibility with the essence–energies distinction. Christos Yannaras writes, "The West confuses God's essence with his energy, regarding the energy as a property of the divine essence and interpreting the latter as "pure energy" (actus purus)" According to George C. Papademetriou, the essence–energies distinction "is contrary to the Western confusion of the uncreated essence with the uncreated energies and this is by the claim that God is Actus Purus". Roman Catholic perspectives. The Roman Catholic Church distinguishes between doctrine, which is single and must be accepted by Roman Catholics, and theological elaborations of doctrine, about which Catholics may legitimately disagree. With respect to the Eastern and Western theological traditions, the Catholic Church recognizes that, at times, one tradition may "come nearer to a full appreciation of some aspects of a mystery of revelation than the other, or x it to better advantage." In these situations, the Church views the various theological expressions "often as mutually complementary rather than conflicting." According to Meyendorff, from Palamas's time until the twentieth century, Roman Catholic theologians[who?] generally rejected the idea that there is in God a real essence–energies distinction. In their view, a real distinction between the essence and the energies of God contradicted the teaching of the First Council of Nicaea on divine unity. Catholic theologian Ludwig Ott held that an absence of real distinction between the attributes of God and God's essence is a dogma of the Catholic Church. In contrast, Jürgen Kuhlmann argues that the Roman Catholic Church never judged Palamism to be heretical, adding that Palamas did not consider that the distinction between essence and energies in God made God composite. According to Kuhlmann, "the denial of a real distinction between essence and energies is not an article of Catholic faith". According to Meyendorff, the later twentieth century saw a change in the attitude of Roman Catholic theologians to Palamas, a "rehabilitation" of him that has led to increasing parts of the Western Church considering him a saint, even if uncanonized. Some Western scholars maintain that there is no conflict between the teaching of Palamas and Roman Catholic thought on the distinction. According to G. Philips, the essence–energies distinction of Palamas is "a typical example of a perfectly admissible theological pluralism" that is compatible with the Roman Catholic magisterium. Jeffrey D. Finch claims that "the future of East-West rapprochement appears to be overcoming the modern polemics of neo-scholasticism and neo-Palamism". Some Western theologians have incorporated the essence–energies distinction into their own thinking. Protestant views. Kierkegaard and the relationship to existentialism. {See also: Christian existentialism} The Danish Lutheran philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, widely considered the father of existentialism, expressed (pseudonymously as Anti-Climacus) in his 1846 book Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments that an approach to God which holds that the Father's hypostasis (existence) has logical primacy over his ousia (essence or substance). Hence the teaching that the core of existentialist philosophy can be understood as the maxim, "existence precedes essence." This has caused many Western observers to see Eastern Orthodox Christian theology as existentialistic (since the Essence–Energies distinction also somewhat holds the view).[39] This also accounts for other existentialist works, such as Fyodor Dostoevsky's 1864 novel Notes from Underground. In the case of Dostoevsky, his existentialist outlook would have drawn from his Russian Orthodox faith, but there is no record of Dostoevsky (and the Eastern Orthodox church in general) being exposed to or influenced by Kierkegaard's philosophical works. // {WTF: Formal distinction}

* Константин XI Палеолог [Constantine XI Palaiologos] (1405-1453). Константи́н XI (XII) Палеоло́г Дра́гаш (или Дра́гас) — последний византийский император, правивший в 1449—1453. Погиб во время захвата Константинополя турками. Constantine XI Palaiologos. Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos or Dragaš Palaeologus (8 February 1405 – 29 May 1453) was the last Byzantine emperor, reigning from 1449 until his death in battle at the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. Constantine's death marked the end of the Byzantine Empire, which traced its origin to Constantine the Great's foundation of Constantinople as the Roman Empire's new capital in 330. Given that the Byzantine Empire was the Roman Empire's medieval continuation, with its citizens continually referring to themselves as Romans, Constantine XI's death and Constantinople's fall also marked the definitive end of the Roman Empire, founded by Augustus almost 1,500 years earlier. <> Константин IX Мономах (ок 1000-1055; византийский император) Constantine IX Monomachos.