Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Daniel de Figueiredo
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | Franca. 2018-03-26. |
| Institution: | Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp). Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais. Franca |
| Defense date: | 2018-03-16 |
| Advisor: | Margarida Maria de Carvalho |
| Abstract | |
This research aims to analyze the political-religious and administrative performance of the emperor Theodosius II (401–450 A. D.) related to the management of the Nestorian Controversy, conflict that emerged in the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Eastern Roman Empire during the second half of his rule, from 428 to 450 A. D. In the theological sphere, this controversy was related to the disagreements maintained by the bishops Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius of Constantinople regarding the understanding of the interaction between the human and the divine nature of Christ incarnate. Consistent with the respective political-religious imaginary to which each one belonged, Cyril, a native of that region in Egypt, advocated a union (ἕνωσις) between those two natures, whereas Nestorius, a native of Antioch, in the province of Syria I, defended only a conjunction (συνάφεια) between them. Such divergent opinions resulted in a polarization of the Eastern Roman society regarding those ideas, considering that religious and political aspects used to be perceived as being narrowly interlaced in Late Antiquity. The extent of the conflict can be verified by the participation of officials from various segments of the imperial administration who aligned with the formed factions, as such conflicts, in that context, were also related to ideological constructions that contributed to provide support and unity to the imperial power. The adherence of the officials indicates that Theodosius II not only did manage a theological conflict between members of the ecclesiastic hierarchy but also that his intervening in the conflict demanded him to negotiate his own position on the topography of power with segments of the aristocracy that composed these groups of officials. Therefore, we characterize the conflict not only as a theological one, but also as a political-administrative one. This perception was made possible through the cataloging and mapping of the imperial and episcopal letters analyzed, which allowed us to visualize the formation of the sociability networks kept between imperial officials and bishops. Data extracted from those documents, particularly those referring to the prosopographical data of the letters’ authors, or from those individuals mentioned in the letters, were analyzed in contrast with Nestorius’s work entitled Book of Heraclides, and Cyril’s work entitled Against Nestorius, in order to reinforce the perception of synergy between the bishops and officials in the defense of their common political-religious interests. Thus, we study the hypothesis that Theodosius II and those who assisted him in elaborating his strategies of action, were not only negotiating the doctrinal unity around a religious orthodoxy with members of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. Such negotiations also aimed at keeping the imperial unity regarding cultural, political, administrative, and territorial elements, with other groups that had the power, i.e. imperial officials that used to contribute to legitimate the position of centrality of Theodosius II as a ruler. The concessions game established by the emperor by alternating support between cyrillian and nestorian groups, which can be observed during the Council of Ephesus I (431), the Formula of the Reunion (433), the Synod of Constantinople (448), and the Council of Ephesus II (449) do not indicate a political inability of Theodosius II to conduct the conflict, as frequently recorded in the historiography on the subject. From our standpoint, such moves included strategic negotiations that aimed at accommodating interests and balancing powers with the aristocracies of officials from various regions of the empire and that joined the bishops in the theological dispute. (AU) | |
| FAPESP's process: | 13/24320-4 - The political-religious role of Emperor Theodosius II in controversy between Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius of Constantinople (AD 428-450) |
| Grantee: | Daniel de Figueiredo |
| Support Opportunities: | Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate |