Petrus
Could not find Petri in Logeion dictionaries.
Petri Proper-name noun: masculine genitive singular of Petrus
Æstimans seu taxans ad 27. florenos Rhenenses auri, 40. Petros auri, 18. scuta, etc.
Pietre, Monetæ minutioris species. Lit. remiss. ann. 1455. in Reg. 189. Chartoph. reg. ch. 34 :
La suppliante requist à icellui Saunier qu'il voulsist lui prester cent Pietres pour autres ses affaires.Aliæ ann. 1474. in Reg. 195. ch. 1157 :
Et presta lors son maistre au suppliant ung Pietres et cinq patars, faisant lors iceulx trente solz.
Prosiliit ad arma cum suis ; et benedictione ac remissione a Legato recepta, cum idem Legatus maledixisset hostibus in nomine Domini, Comes alta voce S. Petrum invocans adjutorem, processit ad pugnam.De copiis vero laicis testatissimum id reliquit Bruno de bello Saxonico :
Ibi quidam de nostris adversarium sibi videns obvium, velut suum salutavit socium dicens S. Petre, quod nomen Saxones pro symbolo tenebant omnes in ore.Hæc post Carolum de Aquino in Gloss. milit.
Latin emperor of Constantinople, belonged to that branch of the Courtenay family which was descended from the kings of France. He was chosen to succeed the emperor Henry in 1217, being then in France, where he held the dignity of count of Auxerre. While traversing Epeirus with an army on his way to Constantinople, he was made a prisoner by Theodore, despot of Epeirus, and died in captivity in 1219, having never sat on the throne. We consequently dis miss him, and only mention that his successor was his second son, Robert. [W.P]
(Πέτρος), literary and ecclesiastical.
1. Of Alexandria (1). Petrus or Peter, the first of that name in the st of the bishops of Alexandria, succeeded Theonas in that see sometime between Easter and the latter part of November, A. D. 300, according to Tillemont's calculation ; and exercised his episcopal functions more than eleven (Eusebius says for twelve) years. Of the time and place of his birth we have no account. Cave considers that he was probably born at Alexandria, and that he was there "trained alike to virtue and to sacred literature by his predecessor Theonas ;" but we do not know that these statements ments are more than inferences from his being chosen to succeed Theonas. He had not occupied the see quite three years when the persecution commenced by the emperor Diocletian [Diocletianus] and continued by his successors, broke out A. D. 304. During its long continuance Peter was obliged to flee from one hiding-place to another. The monk Ammonius (De Caede SS. Patrum in Monte Syna et in Solitudine Raithu, apud Valesium, Not. ad Euseb. H. E. 7.32) attests this; and Peter himself, if confidence may be placed in a discourse said to have been delivered by him in prison and given in certain Acta Petri Alexandrini (apud Valesium, ibid.) states that he found shelter at different times in Mesopotamia, in Phoenicia, in Palestine, and in various islands; but if these Acta are the same that were published by Coméfis in his Selecti Martyrum Triumphi, 8vo. Paris, 1660, their authority is materially lessened by the inter-polations of Symeon Metaphrastes. Cave conjectures that he was imprisoned during the reign of Diocletian or Maximian Galerius [Maximianus II.], and if there is truth in the account given by Epiphanius (Haeres. 68.1-5) of the origin of the schism in the Egyptian churches, occasioned by Meletius of Lycopolis [Meletius, literary and ecclesiastical, No. 3], the conjecture is probably correct; and if so, Peter must have obtained his release, as this imprisonment must have been antecedent to the deposition of Meletius by Petrus, and the commencement of the Meletian schism. In the ninth year of the persecution Peter was, suddenly and contrary to all expectation, again arrested and was beheaded, by order of Maximin Daza [Maximinus II.], without any distinct charge being brought against him. Eusebius speaks with the highest admiration of his piety and his attainments in sacred literature, and he is revered as a saint and martyr both in the Eastern and Western Churches. His martyrdom is placed by an ancient Oriental chronicle of the bishops of Alexandria, translated by Abraham Echellensis (Paris, 1651), on the 29th of the month Athur or Athyr, which corresponds sometimes to the 25th, and sometimes to the 26th November. His memory is now cele 26th, except in Russia, where the more ancient computation, which placed it on the 25th, is still followed. An account of the martyrdom (Acta Martyrii) of Peter, in the Latin version of Anastasi Bibliothecarius, is given by Surius, De Probatis Sanctorum Vitis, a. d. 25 Nov.; and the Greek Acta of Symeon Metaphrastes are given, with a Latin version, in the Selecti Martyrum Triumphi of Combéfis already cited. Works Sermones
Peter wrote several works, of which there aro very scanty remains. 1. Περὶ μετανοίας λόγος, Sermo de Poenitentia. 2.Λόγος εἰς τὸ Πάσχα, Sermo in Sanctum Pascha. Editions
These discourses are not extant in their original form, but fifteen canons relating to the lapsi, or those who in time of persecution had fallen away, fourteen of then from the Sermo de Poenitentia, the fifteenth from the Sermo in Sanctum Pascha, are contained in all the Canonum Collectiones. They were published in a Latin version in the Micropresbyticon, Basel, 1550; in the Orthodoxographa of Heroldus, Basel, 1555, and of Grynaeus, Basel, 1569; in the first and second editions of De la Bigne's Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris, 1575 and 1589, and in the Cologne edition, 1618. They are given also in the Concilia.
In the edition of Labbe (vol. i. col. 955) and in that of Hardouin (vol. i. col. 225) they are given in Greek with a Latin version, but without notes; but in the Συνοδικόν, sive Pandectae Canonum of Bishop Beveridge (vol. ii. p. 8, fol. Oxon. 1672) they are accompanied by the notes of Joannes Zonaras and Theodorus Balsamon. They are entitled Τοῦ μακαρίου ἀρχιεπισκόπου Ἀλεξανσρείας Πέτρου καὶ μάρτυρος κανόνες ἐπιφερόμενοι ἐν τῷ περὶ μετανοίας αὐτοῦ λόγῳ Beati Petri Archiepiscopi Alexandrini et Martyris Canones qui feruntur in Sermone ejus de Poenilentia.
It is only in some MSS. and editions that the separate source of the fifteenth canon is pointed out. A passage from the Sermo in Sanctum Pascha, or from some other work of Peter's on the same subject, is given in the Diatriba de Paschate prefixed to the Chronicon Alexandrinum s. Paschale, and published separately in the Uranologion of Petavius, fol. Paris, 1630, p. 396, &c. As the Diatriba is mutilated, and the extract from Peter forms its present commencement, it was hastily inferred by some critics that the Diatriba itself was the work of Peter, the title of the citation being considered as applying to the whole treatise; but Cave and others have observed that the Diatriba was written not before the latter part of the sixth century. A Vatican MS. from which the text of the Bonn edition of the Chronicon is taken, describes the work of Peter from which the citation is taken, as addressed Τρικεντίῳ τινι, Cuidam Tricentio. 3. Περὶ θεότητος βιβλίον, Liber de Divinitate s. Deitate.
There is a citation from this treatise in the Acta Concilii Ephesini; it occurs in the Actio prima, and a part of it is again cited in the Defensio Cyrilli which is given in the sequel (pars 3.100.2) of the Act. Editions
Three citations in Latin, one of them a version of the passage in the Defensio Cyrilli, are given in the Acta Concilii Chalcedon. Actio prima. (Concilia, vol. iii. col. 508, 836, vol. iv. col. 286, ed. Labbe, vol. i. col. 1399, vol. ii. col. 241, ed. Hardouin.) 4. Περὶ τῆς ἐπιδημίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ, Homilia de Adventa Saluatoris s. Christi. Editions
A short citation from this occurs in the Latin version of the work of Leonitus of Byzantium [Leontius, literary, No. 5], Contra Nestorianos et Eutychianos, lib. i. (apud Galland. Biblioth. Patrum, vol. xii. p. 669).
A fragment in the original is given in a part of the Greek text of Leontius published by Mai in his Scriptorum Vet. Noua Collectio, vol. vii. p. 134, 4to. Romae, 1833. 5, 6. Two fragments Editions
Two fragments, one described, ἐκ τοῦ πρώτου λόγου περὶ τοῦ μηδὲ προυπάρχειν τὴν ψυχὴν, μηδε ἁμαρτήσασαν τοῦτυ εἰς τὸ σῶμα βληθῆναι, Ex primo Sermone, de eo quod nec praeexstitit Anima, nec cum peccasset propterea in Corpus missa est, the other as, ἐκ τῆς μυσταγωγίας ἧς ἐποιήσατο πρὸς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν μέλλων τὸν τοῦ μαρτυρίου στέφανον ἀναδέχεσθαι, Ex Mystagogia quam fecit ad Ecclesiam cum Martyrii Coronam suscepturus esset, are cited by the emperor Justinian, in his Epistola (s. Tractatus ad Mennam CPolilanum adversus Origenem, given in the Acta Concilia CPolitani II. s. Oecunmenici V. (Concilia, vol. v. col. 652, ed. Labbe, vol. iii. col. 256, 257, ed. Hardouin.) Another fragment of the same discourse is contained in the compilation Leontii et Joannis Rerum Sacrarum Lib. II. published by Mai in the above cited Collectio, vol. vii. p. 85. 7. Epislola S. Petri Episcopi ad Ecclesiam Alexandrinam
noticing some irregular proceedings of the schismatic Meletius. This letter, which is very short, was published in a Latin version by Scipio Maffei, in the third volume of his Obsercazione Letterarie (6 vols. 12mo. Veronae 1737-1740). 8. διδασκαλία, Doctrina.
A fragment of this work is cited by Leontius and Joannes, and was published by Mai (ibid. p. 96). We have no certain information of any other works of Peter. Fragments
A fragment of one of his works, of which the title is not given, is cited by the emperor Justinian in his Tractatus contra Monophysitas, published by Mai in the Collectio already cited, vol. vii. pp. 306, 307.
The Epistoa de Lapsi Tempore Persecutionis, in the Bodleian library (Codd. Baroccian. No. clviii.; see Catatlog. MStorutm Angliue et Hibern.), is probably the same as the Canones; and a fragment from an Epistola ad Epicteutum, extant in a MS. in the library of St. Mark at Venice, is probably not from Peter but from Athanasius.
Some passages (quaedam loca) from the writings of Peter are given in the Πανδέκτης τῶν ἑρμηνειῶν τῶν θειων ἐντολῶν τοῦ Κυρίου, Pandecta de Interpretatione Mandatorum Divinorum, of Nicon [Nicon, literary, No. 3). Editions
The published fragments of Peter's works, with the exception of the passage in the Diatriba de Paschate, the Latin citations in the Acta Concilii Chalcedon., and the fragments cited by Justinian, are given in the fourth volume of Galland's Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 91, &c. Further Information
Euseb. H.E. 7.32, 8.13, 9.6, cum notis Valesii; Athanasius, Apolog. contra Arianos, 100.59; Epiphan. l.c. ; Concilia, ll. cc.; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 301, vol. i. p. 160, ed. Oxford, 1740-1743; Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. v. p. 436, &c.; Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. ix. p. 316, &c.; Galland. Biblioth. Patrumt, proleg. ad vol. 4.100.6.)
2. Of Alexandria (2), was presbyter of the Church at Alexandria during the life-time of Athanasius, whom he accompanied for many years in his wanderings and shared his dangers. Athanasius before his death had nominated Peter as his successor, and after his decease his appointment was carried into effect with the great applause of the orthodox part of the Alexandrian populace and with the approval of the neighbouring bishops, A. 100.373. But the Arians, then in the ascendant under the emperor Valens, though they had, from reverence or fear, conceded the quiet possession of the see to the age and authority of Athanasius [Athanasius], were by no means disposed to acquiesce in the appointment of an orthodox successor; and Peter was at once deposed, and, according to Socrates and Sozomen, imprisoned by the officers of the emperor. Tillemont and Galland, however, doubt if he was imprisoned. At any rate he soon made his escape, and, getting on board ship, fled to Rome, where he was kindly received by the pope Damasus I., leaving his Arian competitor Lucius [Lucius, No. 2] in possession of the churches of Alexandria. On the departure of Valens from Antioch (A. D. 378) to his fatal war with the Goths, Peter, who had returned from Rome with letters from Damasus, confirming his title to the see, recovered possession of the churches by favour of the populace, who expelled Lucius, and compelled him to flee to Constantinople. Peter, however, survived his restoration only for a short time, dying A. D. 381, and being succeeded in his bishopric by his own brother Timotheus or Timothy. Valesius (Not. ad Sozomten. H. E. 7.9) describes Peter as the abettor of Maximus the Cynic [Maximus Alexandrinus] in his usurpation of the see of Constantinople, but Theodoret (H. E. 5.8) ascribes the transaction to Timotheus. (Socrates, H. E. 4.20-22, 37; Sozonten, H. E. 6.19, 39 Theodoret, H.E.4.20-22.)
Peter was held in the highest esteem by his con temporaries. Gregory Nazianzen unites him in the same eulogy with St. Athanasius; and the emperor Theodosius the Great, in one of his laws, refers to the faith preached by hint as the standard of orthodoxy. (Tillemont, Men. vol. vi. p. 580, &c.) Two productions of Peter have been preserved in part:--1. Ἐπιστολὴ s. Γράμματα, Epistola, a letter sent by him, after his escape from Alexandria, to all the churches, giving an account of the persecutions and other atrocities perpetrated by Lucius and the Arian party. Theodoret has given a large extract, probably the chief part of this, in the original Gretk (H. E. 4.22). 2. Epsitola ad Episcopos et Presbyteros atque Diaconos pro vera Fide in exsilio constitutos, s. ad Episcopos, Presbyteros, atque Diaconos qui sub Valente Imperatore Diocaeaream fuerant exules missi. Facundus has preserved two passages of this in a Latin version in his Pro Defensione Trium Capitulorum, lib. 4. c.2, lib. 11. c.2. These fragments of the works of Peter are given from Theodoret and Facundus, in the seventh volume of the Bibliotheca Patrum. of Galland. (Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 371, vol. i. p.254 ; Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. ix. p. 318; Galland. Bibliotheca Patrum, proleg. ad vol. 7.100.6.)
3. Of Alexandria (3). [No. 22.]
4. Of Antioch (1). [No. 17.]
5. Of Antioch (2). Contemporary with Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople [Michael, No. 6], and Leo of Achridia [Leo, No. 2], and united with them in hostility to the Latin Church, was Petrus or Peter, the third patriarch of Antioch of that name in the current tables of the occupants of that see, which commence with the Apostle Peter. Peter obtained the patriarchate in the year 1053, and in the same year he sent synodical letters to the patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, and to the pope, Leo IX., signifying his accession. Works Profession of Faith
Cave states that he sent to the pope "a profession of his faith," but it is probable that he has applied this term to the synodical letter, of which a Latin version appears among the letters of Leo IX.; but Le Quien, who had in his possession the Greek text of these synodical letters, complains of the great discrepancy between the Greek text and the Latin version. Letters
Two letters of Peter appear in Greek with a Latin version, in the Monumenta Ecclesiae Graecae, of Cotelerius, vol. ii. pp. 112, 145. The first is entitled Epistola ad Dominicum Gradensem, and is an answer to Dominicus Gradensis s. Venetus, patriarch of Venice or Aquileia, whose letter, in the collection of Cotelerius, precedes that of Peter; the second is addressed to Michael Cerularius, Epistola ad Michaelem Cerulariwm, and is preceded by a letter of Michael to Peter, to which it is the answer. A considerable part of this letter had previously been published by Leo Allatius, in his De Consensu Ecclesiarum Orient. et Occident. lib. 3.12.4. According to Cave, Peter bitterly inveighed against the lives and doctrines of the Latin clergy, and especially against the addition of the words "filioque" to the creed; while, according to Le Quien, he preserved a more impartial tone, and showed every where "a disposition averse to schism." Another Letter
There is extant in MS. at Vienna, another letter of Peter, Petri Epistola ad Joannem Tranensem in Apulia Episcopum, relating to the matters in dispute between the Eastern and Western Churches. Further Information
Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 1040, vol. ii. p. 132; Oudin, Comment. de Scriptorzb. et Scriptis Eccles. vol. ii. col. 605; Lambec. Comment. de Biblioth. Caesaraea, lib. v. cod. ccxlvii. Nos. 19, 20, 22, col. 261-265, ed. Kollar; Le Quien, Oriens Christian. vol. ii. col. 754.
6. Apostolus, the Apostle. Works
Various apocryphal writings were, in the earlier periods of the Church, circulated under the name of the Apostle Peter. 1. Κατὰ Πέτρου Εὐαγγέλιον, Euangelium Petri s. Evangeliumn secundum Petrum.
This is mentioned by Origen Commentar. in Matthaeum, tom. xi.), b>y Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 3.3, 25, 6.12), by Jerome (De Viris Illustrib. 100.1), by Theodoret (Haeret. Fabul. Compend. 2.2), who confounds it with the Euangelium Nazaraneorum, or Gospel used by the Nazarenes; and, according to two MSS., but not according to the printed editions by Pope Gelasius (Decretum de Libris Apocryphis.) This Euangelium Petri must not be confounded with the Euangelium Infantiae, which an Oriental tradition ascribes to Peter; and still less with the canonical Gospel of Mark, which has sometimes been named after Peter, because supposed to have been written under his direction. The apocryphal Gospel of Peter is not extant. Serapion of Antioch, a Christian writer near the close of the second century, wrote a refutation of the fables contained in it, by which some Christians at Rhossus in Syria had been led into heresy. Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 6.12) quotes a passage of this work of Serapion. (Fabric. Cod. Apocryph. p. 137.) 2. Πράξεις Πέτρου, Actus s. Acta Petri.
This work, is mentioned by Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 2.3), by Jerome (l.e.), by Isidore of Pelusium (Epistol. 2.99), and apparently by Philastrius (De Haeres. lxxxvii.), who speaks of an apocryphal work of Peter as received by the Manichaeans. It is not unlikely that these Acta Petri were substantially identical with or incorporated in the Recognitiones Clementiae [Clemens Romanus]; for Photius (Biblioth. codd. 112, 113) states that many copies of the Recognitiones were preceded by an introductory letter to james, the Lord's brother (Ἐπιστολἠ πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόθεον Ἰάκωβον, Epistola ad Fratrem Domini Jacobum), of which there were two copies, one as from the Apostle Peter, stating that he had himself written his Πράξεις, Acta, and sent the to James, who had requested to have them; the other, as from Clement, stating that he had written the Acta at the command of Peter. Photius conjectured, with apparent reason, that there were two editions or copies of the Acta Petri, of which the one written as by himself had been lost, while the other, which was either the same with the Recognitiones, or was incorporated in them, had been generally diffused. There is some room, however, to doubt the identity of the lost edition with the work mentioned by Eusebius and the other ancient writers. (Comp. Grabe, Spicilegium, vol. i. p. 78.) 3. Epistola ad Fratrem Domini Jacobum
just mentioned. Turrianus, in his Apologia pro Epistolis Pontificum, published (lib. 4. c.1, and lib. 5. c.23) a letter of Peter to James, which Cotelerius. in his Patres Apostolici, prefixed to the Clementina s. Homilicae Clementinae. a work which Cave appears justly to characterize as only another edition or form of the Recognitiones. We consider the Ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς Ἰάκωβον, Epistola ad Jacolbum, published by Turrianus and Cotelerius, to be the one mentioned by Photius; though Fabricins, who has reprinted it in his Codex Apocryphus N.T. vol. ii. p. 997, &c. regards it as a different one. 4. Πέτρου ἀποκάλυψις, Petri Apocalypsis s. Reuelatio.
This work is mentioned by Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 3.3), Jerome (l.c.), Sozomen (H. E. 7.19), and in some copies of the Stichometria subjoined to the Chronographia of Nicephorus of Constantinople. It was cited by the heretic Theodotus, as appears from a passage in the Ὑποτυπώσεις, Hypotyposes of Clemens of Alexandria, noticed by Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 6.14). Sozomen (l.c.) states that the work was, in his time, read once a year in some of the churches in Palestine. A passage in Latin, cited by Jacobus de Vitriaco in the thirteenth cetury, as from the Apocalypsis Petri (apud Grabe. Spicileyium, vol. i. p. 76), must be from a much later work than that noticed by Clement, Eusebius, and Jerome, for it bears internal evidence of having been written after the rise of Mohammedanism. 5. Πέτρου κήρυγμα, Petri Praedicatio
Mentioned by Clement of Alexandria (Stromat. libb. i. vi.), Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 3.3), and Jerome (l.c.,) A few fragments of this work have been collected by Grabe (Spicileg. vol. i. p. 62, &c.), from Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, Gregory Nazianzen, and others. Dodwell supposed that the Epistola ad Jacobum (No. 3) was the introduction to the Praedicatio, but his opinion is rejected by Grabe (ibid. p. 59). The work entitled Διδασκαλία Πέτρου, Doctrina Petri, quoted by Origen (Praef. ad Libros, Πεὶ ἀρχῶν, vers. Rufini) and Damascanuse cenus (Parallel. 2.16), is probably only another name for the Praedicatio *Grabe, ibid. pp. 56, 57). The Κατήχησις Πέτρου, Catechesis Petri, formerly in the Coislin library at Paris, is also apparently the same work. 6. Petri Judicium s. Duae Viae
This work is mentioned by Rufinus (Erposit. Symboli) and Jerome (l.c.). Grabe suspects that no such work ever existed; but that the supposition of its existence arose from Rufinus mistaking κρμα, the abbreviation of κήρυγμα, for κρίμα and that Jerome was misled by the error of Rufinus. The work is certainly not mentioned by Eusebius. 7. Ἡ θεία λειτουργία τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου Πέτρου, Missa Apostolica s. Diuinum Sacrificium S. Apostoli Petri Editions
This work was published in Greek, with a Latin version by Fed. Morel. Paris, 1595, and has been reprinted (sometimes in Latin only) in various editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum. The Πέτμου περίοδοι, Circuitus s. Peregrinationes s. Itinerarium Petri
mentioned repeatedly by the ancients, appear to be only so many titles for the Recognitiones of Clement. The Πέτρου καὶ Ἀπίωνος ʽς. Ἀππίωνοσ̓ διάλογοι, Petri et Apionis Disputationes Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 3.38; Hieron. De Viris Illlustr. 15), was not ascribed to Peter as its author, but to Clement of Rome. Eusebius speaks of it as a spurious work, recently produced, and not noticed by more ancient writers. Valesius (not. ad Euseb. l.c.) thinks it was a second, and now lost part of the Recognitiones. The Praecepta Petri et Pauli and the Πέτρου καὶ Παύλου τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων διατάξεις, Petri et Pauli SS. Apostolorum Constitutiones
Now or formerly extant in the Medicean library at Florence, and the Bodleian at Oxford, appear to be portions of the well-known Constitutiones Apostolicae (Grabe, Spüleg. vol. i. pp. 85, 86). Planctus Petri Apostoli Vicarii
The Planctus Petri Apostoli Vicarii (Fabric. Cod. Apocryph. N. T. vol. iii. p. 721) is one of a parcel of forged documents, partly written on parchment, partly inscribed on leaden plates, professing to be Latin translations from the Arabic, which were dug up in a mountain near Granada, near the close of the sixteenth century. Epistola, ad Pipinum Regem Francorum et Carolum ac Carlomannum Filios ejus
The Epistola, ad Pipinum Regem Francorum et Carolum ac Carlomannum Filios ejus, written by Pope Stephen III. in the name of the Apostle Peter, soliciting aid against the Lombards, is regarded by Fabricius rather as a piece of rhetorical affectation than a fraud. Editions
The Epistola is given by Baronius, in his Annales Ecclesiastici, ad ann. 755, xvii. &c. Further Information
Grabe, Spicileg. SS. Patrum, vol. i. pp. 55-81; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. i. p. 6; Fabric. Codex Apocryphus N. T. passim.
7. Of Argos.
There were two bishops of Argos of the name of Peter, authors of works extant in MS. or print.
One Peter, bishop of Argos, wrote an Elogium Cosmae et Damiani SS. Anargyrorumn in Asia s. Oratio in sanctos et gloriosos Anargyros et Thaumaturgos Cosmum et Damianum, which has never been printed.
It is to be observed that Le Quien considers the Elogium SS. Cosmace et Damiani to be by Petrus Siculus, and not by another Peter. Further Information
Fabric. Bibl. Graec.vol. x. p. 214, vol. xi. p. 336; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. ii. Dissert. i. p. 15.
The other is termed Petrus Siculus or Peter the Sicilian, and acquired his bishopric after A. D. 790.
He is probably the same person as the Petrus Siculus who was sent by the emperor Basil the Macedonian [Basilius I. Macedo to Tabrica in the district or on the frontier of Melitene near the Euphrates, to negotiate an exchange of prisoners, apparently with the chiefs of the Paulicians ; a purpose which, after a residence of nine months, he effected. Works 1. Life of St. Athanasius
Petrus Siculus wrote a life of St. Athanasius, bishop of Methone in the Peloponnesus. Editions Latin Editions
The life of St. Athanasius is given in the Latin version of the jesuit Franciscus Blanditius in the Acta Sanctorum of the Bollandists, Januar. vol. ii. p. 1125, &c. It is entitled Petri Siculi, humillimi Argivorum Episcopi, Funebris Oratio in B. Athanacsium, Methones Episcopum. An Account of the Paulicians
He wrote an account of the Paulicians, or as he designated them, Manichaeans. Editions Latin Editions
The account of the Paulicians was translated into Latin, and published by Matthaeus Raderus, 4to. Ingolstadt, 1604, and has been reprinted in various editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum. It is entitled Petri Siculi Historia de vane et stolida Manichaeorum Haeresi tanquam Archiepiscopo Bulgarorum nuncupata. It is in the sixteenth volume of the Lyon edition of the Bibliotheca, fol. 1677. Further Information
Miraeus, Auctarium de Scriptor. Eccles. 100.256; Vossius, De Historicis Graecis, lib. 4. c.19; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 870, vol. ii. p. 55; Acta Sanctorum, l.c. ; Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. x. p. 201; Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, vol. ii. col. 184.
8. Chartophylax. [No. 15.]
9. Chrysolanus or Grosolanus, was archbishop of Milan, A. D. 1110, having previously held some less important see. He was sent by Pope Paschal II. on a mission to the emperor Alexius I. Comnenus, and engaged eagerly in the controversy on the procession of the Holy Spirit. Works Πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα κύριον Ἀλέξιον τὸν Κομνηνόν λόγος, κ. τ. λ. Ad Imperatorems Domninum Alexium Comnenum Oratio, &c.
His only title to be noticed in this work, within the limits of which he does not properly fall, is derived from his having composed Πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα κύριον Ἀλέξιον τὸν Κομνηνόν λόγος, κ. τ. λ. Ad Imperatorems Domninum Alexium Comnenum Oratio, &c., designed to prove the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son as well as from the Father. Editions
This was published in the Graecia Orthodoxa of Allatius, vol. i. p. 379, &100.4to, Rome, 1652, and given in a Latin version by Baronius, Annal. Eccles. ad ann. 1116. viii. &c. Further Information
Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. xi. p. 335; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 1110, vol. ii. p. 191.
10. Chrysologus. This ecclesiastic (a saint in the Romish Calendar) is thought to have been born at Forum Cornelii (now Imola) in the northern part of Italy, and was educated by Cornelius, a bishop, and perhaps (though Tillemont doubts it) of that city. He received ordination as presbyter, or, as some think, as deacon only, from the same prelate; and became archbishop of Ravenna, as Tillemont thinks, before A. D. 431, but according to Cave in A. D. 433, and died in or before A. D. 451, in which year Pope Leo the Great wrote a letter to a Leo bishop of Ravenna, who must have been a successor of Peter Chrysologus. The statement in the life prefixed to the first edition of his Homiliae, that he lived till near the close of the century, must be inaccurate. Peter acquired his surname from his eloquence. Works
Peter's published writings consist of, 1. Homiliae s. Sermones
In Latin. Among these Homiliae, which amount in number to a hundred and seventy-six, some are improperly attributed to Peter. Five of these Sermones were printed in the Spicilegium of D'Achéry (vol. vii. p. 12, &c.) under the name of Peter Damiani, an Italian ecclesiastic of much later date, to whom in D'Achéry's MS. they were ascribed; but the error was discovered, and they were assigned by D'Achéry in his Index Generalis, to Chrysologus, their true author. Editions
They were first published in 12mo. Paris, 1544, with this title Divi Petri Chrysologi archiepiscopi Ravennatis, uiri eruditissimi atque sanctissimi, insigne et pervetustum opus Homiliarum nunc primum in lucem editum : and have been frequently reprinted. They appear in the seventh volume of the Lyon edition of the Bibliotheca Patrum, fol. 1677. 2. Ἐπιστολὴ Πέτρου ἐπισκόπου Π̓αξέννης ἀντιγραφεῖσα πρὸς Εὐτυχῆ τὸν ἀρχιμανδρίτην (*)Epistola Petri Ravennatisnatis Episcopi ad Eutychem Abbatem.)
This letter is a reply to one addressed by the heresiarch Eutyches to Peter, complaining of the condemnation passed on him by Flavianus of Constantinople [EUTYCHES ; Flavianus, Ecclesiastics, No. 3]. Editions
This letter was published by Gerard Vossius in the original Greek with a Latin version, at the end of the works of Gregory Thaumaturgus, 4to. Mayence, 1604. It is reprinted in the Concilia (vol. iv. col. 36, ed. Labbe; vol. ii. col. 21, ed. Hardouin). Further Information
Tillemont, *Me/moires, vol. xv. p. 184, &c.; Cave, Hist. Litt.. ad ann. 433, vol. i. p. 422; Oudin, De Scriptor. et Scriptis Eccles. vol. i. col. 1250.
11. Cnapheus. [No. 17.]
12. Of Constantinople. [No. 15.]
13. Damascenus. Confusion with Joannes Damascenus
Among the works of Joannes Damascenus [Damascenus, Joannes] (vol. i. p. 652, ed. Le Quien) are an Epistola ad Zachariam, and a short piece entitled Caput de immaculato Corpore, &c. The Epistola is cited by Michael Glycas at the end of the twelfth century, in certain letters extant in MS., as having been written by Joannes Damascenus; and both pieces were published under the name of that author by Petrus Pantinus, 8vo. Antwerp, 1601; and by Fronto Ducaeus, Paris, 1603 and 1619. These editors were supported by the authority of MSS. in ascribing them to Joannes; but internal evidence showed that such ascription was erroneous ; and the authority of a more perfect MS. enabled Le Quien to restore them to their true author. Works
As published by Michael Glycas (ubi suprá) they bear respectively these titles, 1. Ἐπιστολὴ τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου Πέτρου τοῦ Μανσοὺρ πρὸς Ζαχαρίαν ἐπίσκοπον Δοάρων, Epistola sanctissimi Petri Mansur ad Zachariam episcopumn Doarorum. 2. Τοῦ αὐτοῦ κε φάλαιον περὶ τοῦ ἀχράντου σώματος οῦ μεταλαμβά νομεν Ejusdem Caput de immaculato corpore cujus participes sumus. Identity of this Peter
It is by no means clear who this Peter was. His surname Mansur makes it probable that he was of the same family as Joannes Damascenus, by whom that surname was borne. Le Quien thinks that the writer of the letter was not Peter, metropolitan of Damascus, an intimate friend of Joannes Damascenus, who, for writing against the doctrines of the Mohammedans and the Manichaeans (i. e. the Paulicians), had his tongue cut out, and was banished by order of the Caliph Walid into Arabia Felix, where he suffered martyrdom. (Theophane, Chronographia, ad A. M. 6234 = A. D. 743, p. 349, ed. Paris, p. 278, ed. Venice, vol. i. p. 641, ed. Bonn.) Theophanes mentions (ibid.) another Peter, as having suffered martyrdom from the Saracens at Maiuma, the port of Gaza in Palestine, about the same time, and adds that Joannes Damascenus had written in honour of this Peter. Le Quien, though he refers to this passage in Theophanes, gives no intimation that he regarded the martyr of Maiuma as the author of the pieces in question: but he has observed that a quotation from the Liturgy of St. James, or of Jerusalem, in the Epistola, shows that the writer was an ecclesiastic of Palestine. There was a later Peter of Damascus, a Greek monk, who flourished in the middle of the twelfth century, and wrote several works an the discipline of a monastic life, which are found in MS. in various libraries: but it is hardly likely that he wrote the Epistola and the Caput, for Michael Glycas would hardly have ascribed pieces of so recent an origin to Joannes Damascenus, a writer of four hundred years previous to his own time. If either of the above-mentioned persons was the writer, we think the balance of probability is in favour of the martyr of Maiuma. Further Information
Le Quien, Opera Damasceni, l.c. ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. ix. p. 717, vol. xi. p. 336; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. ii. Dissert. i. p. 15.
14. Diaconus. Works De Incarnatione et Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi Liber
In the controversy excited near the beginning of the sixth century by the monks, whom ecclesiastical writers call "Scythae," who came from the diocese of Tomi, on the south bank of the Danube [Maxentius, Joannes], Peter, a deacon, took a prominent part. He had accompanied the delegates sent to Rome by the monks, and while at Rome united with his colleagues in addressing to Fulgentius, and the other African bishops who were then in exile in Sardinia, a work entitled De Incarnatione et Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi Liber. To this Fulgentius and his companions replied in another treatise on the same subject. Editions
The work of Peter, which is in Latin, was published in the Monumenta SS. Patrum Orthodoxographa of Grynaeus, Basel, 1569, and has been reprinted in various editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum. It is in the ninth volume of the Lyon edition, fol. A. D. 1677, and in the eleventh vol. of the edition of Galland, fol. Venice, 1776. Further Information
Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 520, vol. i. p. 505; Ittigius, De Bibliothecis Patrum, pp. 21, 40, 436, 503; Galland. Bibliota. Patrum. Proleg. ad vol. 11.100.4.
15. Diaconus. In the Jus Graeco-Romanum of Leunclavius, lib. vi. pp. 395-397, are given Ἐρωτήματα ἅπερ ἔλυσεν ὁ τιμιώτατος χαρτοφύλαξ κύριος Πέτρος, καὶ διάκονς τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ μεγάλη ἐκκλησίας, ἐν ἔτελ σχ́, Interrogationes quas sol vit reverendissimus Chartularius, Dominus Petrus, idemque Diaconus Majoris Ecclesiae (sc. of St. Sophia at Constantinople) A. M. 6600 = A. D. 1092. We learn from this title that the author lived about the close of the eleventh century in the reign of Alexius I. Comnenus, and that he held the offices described, which is all that is known of him. There are, or were, extant in MS. in the King's Library at Paris, Petrus Diaconus et Philosophus de Cyclo et Indictione, and Petri Diaconi et Philosophi Tractatus de Sole, Luna, et Sideribus (Codd. cmxxix. No. 7. and mmmlxxxxv.), but whether this Petrus Diaconus is the canonist is not clear. (Leaunclav. Jas Gr. Rom. l.c.; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. xi. p. 334; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 1092, vol. ii. p. 161; Catalog. MSS. Biblioth. Reg. vol. ii. pp. 182, 606, fol. Paris, 1740.)
16. Of Edessa. Peter, a Syrian by birth, and a presbyter of the church at Edessa, and an eminent preacher, wrote Tractatus variarunm Causarum, treatises on various subjects, and composed Psalms in metre like those of Ephrem the Syrian. Trithemius ascribes to him Commentarii in Psabnos : and says that he wrote in Syriac. All his works have perished. (Gennadius, De Viris Illustr. c. 74; Trithem. De Scriptorib. Eccles. 100.167.)
17. Fullo, or sometimes retaining the Greek word Gnafheus or Cnapheus (Πέτρος ὁ Γναφεύς or Κναφεύς), the Fuller, patriarch of Antioch in the middle of the fifth century. He was a priest or monk of the neighbourhood of Constantinople: but whether he originally followed the business of a Fuller, before embracing a religious life, or whether he carried it on while a monk is uncertain. Acacius of Constantinople (apud Liberat. Breviar. 100.18), states that he was hegumenos, or abbot of a monastery at Constantinople; and that on account of his offences, or of accusations against him, "crimina," (their nature is not stated) he fled to Antioch. The Laudatio S. Barnabae, c. 3.32, of Alexander the Cyprian monk (apud Acta Sanctorum, Junii, vol. ii. p. 447), and the Synodicon Vetus, first published by Jo. Pappus, and reprinted in the Biblioth. Graeca, of Fabricius (vol. xii. p. 396) describe him as a monk of the monastery of the Acoemetae at Constantinople, who accompanied Zeno, son-in-law to the emperor Leo I., when sent to Antioch. On the other hand, Theodorus Lector (H. E. 1.20), whom Theophanes and Cedrenus follow, says he was a presbyter of the Church of St. Bassa the Martyr at Chalcedon. Tillemont endeavours to arrange and harmonize these various statements as follows : that Peter was originally a monk in the monastery of the Acoemetae, which he places in the neighbourhood of Constantinople, but on the Asiatic side of the Bosporus; that having been expelled and obliged to flee on account both of immorality and heresy, he resorted to Constantinople, where he led the life of a parasite and a gourmand, and gained an introduction to Zeno (Tillemont is thus far supported by the monk Alexander); and that he was then, by Zeno's interest, made presbyter of the Church of St. Bassa. The third step in this arrangement is, however, by no means satisfactory. Almost all our authorities agree that he accompanied Zeno to Antioch; and is, as is not improbable, the charge or the consciousness of some offence rendered his absence from Constantinople convenient, if not necessary, Acacius would not be far out in describing his journey as a flight. Peter appears to have held the monophysite doctrine, the controversy respecting which then agitated the whole Eastern Church : and on his arrival at Antioch, the patriarchate of which city was then held by Martyrius, a supporter of the Council of Chalcedon, he determined on the audacious enterprise of occupying that high office. Persuading Zeno to favour his attempt, he engaged on his side a number of those inclined to the Monophysite doctrine, (Theodorus Lector and others call them Apollinarists [Apollinaris, No. 2.], but it is likely that the Monophysites generally are meant,) and excited much dissension and tumult, among other causes of which was his adding to the sacred hymn called the Trisagion, the words "who Wast crucified for us," which constituted one of the party tests of the Monophysites, and his anathemnatizing all those who refused to sanction the alteration, and charging Martyrius himself with being a Nestorian. Martyrius, unable to stop the disorder by his own authority, went to Constantinople, where, through the influence of the patriarch Gennadius [Gennadius, No. 1], he was honorably treated by the emperor Leo I., and returned to Antioch, trusting that the imperial favour would enable him to quell all disturbance. Disappointed in this hope by the obstinacy of his opponents, and disgusted with his failure, he abdicated the patriarchate, which was immediately occupied by Peter. Leo, however, was not to be thus braved; and, at the instigation of Gennadius, he immediately expelled the intruder, in whose place Julian was with general approval elected. Peter was sentenced to banishment to the Oasis of Upper Egypt, but he contrived to escape from exile, and returning to Constantinople, obtained refuge in the monastery of the Acoemetae, where he remained till the revolt of Basiliscus against Zeno, having bound himself by oath to abstain from exciting further troubles. His usurpation of the See of Antioch may be placed in A. D. 469.
When Basiliscus (A. D. 475) had expelled Zeno from Constantinople, it appears to have been his first policy to court the Monophysite party, whom Leo and Zeno had repressed; and, at the persuasion of Timotheus Aelurus, Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria, whom he had recalled from exile, he issued an encyclical letter to the various prelates of the church, anathematizing the decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon. To this letter Peter gave his formal assent: and obtained a decree restoring him to the patriarchate of antioch. to which city he was immediately sent. (A. D. 476.) The Monophysites regained their ascendancy. Julian was expelled, and soon after died of grief: and Peter resuming the patriarchal authority, excited, by again restoring the clause "who wast crucified for us," and by repeating his anathemas, fresh tumults, which led to plundering and murder. But the recovery of the imperial power by Zeno checked his career: a synod was assembled at Antioch (A. D. 477), in which he was deposed, chiefly by the agency of one of his own partizans, John Codonatus [Joannes, No. 10], whom he had appointed bishop of Apameia. He was bianished to Pityus, from whence he contrived to escape, or was allowed to go to Euchaita in Pontus, where he found refuge in the church of St. Theodore. Tillemeont thinks he even returned to Antioch, but this is quite unlikely. John Codonatus meanwhile succeeded to the vacant patriarchate; but be being deposed after three months, Stephen, a supporter of the Council of Chalcedon, succeeded, and he dying soon after, another Stephen was appointed in his room. But the Monophysites of Antioch, though deprived of their leader, were both active and powerful : they accused the first (the Synodicon Ketus of Pappus says the second) of the two Stephens of Nestorianisim, and apparently succeeded in deposing him : for Theophanres says, that a council of the Eastern bishops, assenibled at Laodiceia by the emperor's command, "restored himn" (ἀποκατέστησεν) to his episcopal throne. The second Stephen (Tillemont and Valesius, Not. ad Evagr. H. E. 3.16 say the first) was tumultuously murdered according to Evagrius by the boys of Antioch, but according to Malelas by the Monophysite party among his own clergy, who apparently restored, not Peter indecd, for he was too far removed, but the other Monophysite, John codonatus. However, Acacius, patriarch of Constantinople, bought him off with the archbishopric of Tyre, and placed Calandion at Antioch in his room : but Calandion was soon banished, either on a charge of Nestorianism, or because he was a partizan of Illas and Leontius [Illus] ; and the Monophysites, now again completely in the aseendant, prevailed on Zeno to consent to the restoration of Peter, after the latter had signed the emperor's "Henoticon," or decree for the unity of the Church. This final rostoration of Peter is placed by Theophanes in A. M. 5978, Alex. era, = A. D. 485 or 486. The Western Church, which all along retained its allegiance to the Council of Chalcedon, anathematized Peter in a council held at Rome (A. D. 485); but to no purpose. Protected now by Zeno, and strong in the predominance of hs own party, he retained the patriarchate at least for three years, till his death, which is placed by Victor of Tunes in A. D. 488, by Theophanes in A. M. 5983, Alex. era, = A. D. 490 or 491. Theophanes charges him with various offences against ecclesiastical rule, and with many acts of oppression in this last period of his episcopacy; and the charge derives credit from the previous character and conduct of Peter and his party. One of the latest manifestations of his ever-restless ambition was an attempt to add the island of Cyprus to his patriarchate. He was succeeded in the see of Antioch by Palladius, a presbyter of Seleuceia.
The Concilia contain (vol. iv. col. 1098, &c. ed Labbe ; vol. ii. col. 817, 823, 835, &c. ed. Hardouin) a number of letters from various Eastern or Western prelates to Peter : but their genuineness is strongly disputed by Valesins (Observation. Ecclestiastic. ad Evagrium, lib. i.; De Petro Fullone et de Synodis adcersus cum congregatis, 100.4), and other modern critics. Further Information
Evagrius, H. E. 3.5, 10, 16, 23, cum not, Valesii; Theodor. Lector. H. E. 1.20-22, 30, 31, 2.2, cum not. Valesii; Breviculus de Historia Entychianitychinisiarum s. Gesta de Nomine Acacii apud Concilia (vol. iv. col. 1079, ed. Labbe) ; laberatus, Breriarium, 100.18; Theophanes, Chronog. pp. 104-116, ed. Paris, pp. 83-93, ed. Venice, vol. i. pp. 187-209, ed. Bonn; Malelas, Chronog. lib. xv. vol. ii. pp. 88-91, ed. Hody, vol. ii. pp. 32, 33, ed. Venice, pp. 379-381, ed. Bonn; Victor Tunnunensis, Chronicon ; Alexander Monach. Cyprius, Landatio S. Barnabae, 100.3, apud Aeta Sanctorum, l.c.; Synodicon Vetus apud Fabricium, l.c. ; Vales. Observ. Eccles. ad Evagr. lib. i.; Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. xvi., and Hist. des Emp. vol. vi.; Le Quien. Oriens Christianus, vol. ii. col. 724, &c.; Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. xi. p. 336.
18. Gnapheus. [No. 17.]
19. Magister. [No. 25.]
20. Mansur. [No. 13.]
21. Mediolanensis, of Milan. [No. 9.]
22. Mongus or Moggus (Πέτρος ὁ Μογγὸς), Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria in the fifth century. Liberatus (Breviarium, 100.16) gives him also the surname of Blaesus, the Stammerer. He was ordained deacon by Dioscorus, successor of Cyril, who held the patriarchate for seven years A. D. 444-451). Peter was the ready participator in the violences of Dioscorus, and earnestly embraced his cause, when he was deposed by the Council of Chalcedon, withdrawing from the communion of the successor of Dioscorus, Proterius, who supported the cause of the council, and uniting in the opposition raised by Timothy Aelrus and others. (Liberat. ibid. 100.15.) He was consequently sentenced by Proterius, apparently to deposition and excommunication. (Liberat. Ibid.) Whether he was banished. as well as Timothy Aelurus, is not clear, but he seems to have accompanied Timothy to Alexandria, and to have been his chief supporter when, after the death of the emperor Mareian, he returned, and either murdered Proterius or excited the tumults that led to his death A. D. 457. Timothy Aelurus was immediately raised to the patriarchate by his partizans, but was shortly after banished by the emperor Leo L, the Thracian, who had suceeded Marcian : Peter also was obliged to flee. Another Timothy, surnamed Salofaciolus, a supporter of the Council of Chaleedon, was appointed to succeed Proterius in the patriarchate. When, in the following reign of Zeno, or rather during the short usurpation of Basiliscus, Timotheus Aelurus was recalled from exile (A. D. 475), and was sent from Constantinople to Alexandria to re-occupy that see. he was joined by Peter (Liberatus, ibid. 100.16), and his party, and with their support drove out his competitor Salofaciolus, who took refuge in a monastery at Conopus. On the downfal of Basiliscus and the restoration of Zeno, Timothy Aelurus was allowed. through the emperor's compassion for his great age. to retain his see; but when on his death (A. D. 477) the Monophysite bishopis of Egypt, without waiting for the emperor's directions, elected Peter (who had previously obtained the rank of archdeacon) as his successor, the emperor's indignation was so far roused, that he determined to put the new prelate to death. His anger, however, somewhat abated, and Peter was allowed to live, but was deprived of the patriarchate, to which Timothy Salofaciolus was restored. On the death of Salofaciolus, which occurred soon after, John of Tabenna, surnamed Talaia or Talaida [Joannes, No. 115, was appointed to succeed him; but be was very shortly deposed by order of Zeno, on some account not clearly ascertained, and Peter Mongus was unexpectedly recalled from Euchaita in Pontus, whiter he had been banished, and was (A. D. 482) restored to his see. His restoration appears to have been part of the policy of Zeno, to unite if possible all parties, a poliey which Peter, whose age and misfortunes appear to have ahated the fierceness of his party spirit, was ready to adopt. He consequently subscribed the Henoticon of the cmperor, and readmitted the Proterian party to communion on their doing the same. John of Tabenna had meanwhile fled to Rome, where the pole Simplicius, who, with the Western Church, steadily supported the Council of Chalcedon, embraced his cause, and wrote to the emperor in his behalf. Felix II. or III., who succeeded Simplicius (A. D. 483) was equally zealous on the same side. Peter had some difficulty in maintaining his position. In order to recover the favour of his Monophysite friends, whom his subservience to Zeno's policy had alienated, he anathematized the Council of Chalcedon; and then, to avert the displeasure of Acacius of Constantinople and of the Court, to whose temlporizing course this decisive step was adverse, he denied that he had done so. Evagrius> (H. E. 3.17) has preserved the letter he wrote to Acacius on this occasion, which is the only writing of Peter now extant. By this tergiversation he preserved his see, and was enabled to brave the repeated anathemas of the Western Church. When, however, to recover the attachment of the Monophysites, he again anathematized the Council of Chalcedon; and Euphemius, the newly elected patriarch of Constantinople, forsaking the policy of his predecessors, took part with the Western Church against him, his difficulties became more serious. What result this combination against him might have produced, cannot now be known; death removed him from the scene of strife A. D. 490, shortly before the death of Zeno. He was succeeded in the see of Alexandria by another Monophysite, Athanasin II. (Evagrius, H. E. 3.11-23; Breviculus Historiae Eutycliianistarum. s. Gesta de Nomine Acacii, apud Concilia, vol. iv. col. 1079, ed. Labbe; Liberatus, Breviarium, 100.15-18; Theophanes, Chronographia, pp. 107-115, ed. Paris, pp. 86-92, ed. Venice, vol. i. pp. 194-206, ed. Bonn; Victor Tunnunensis, Chronion ; Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. xvi.; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 477, vol. i. p. 455; Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. xi. p. 336 ; and Synodicon Vetus, apud Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. xii. pp. 398, 399; Le Quien, Orins Christianus, vol. ii. col. 416, &c.)
23. Of Nicomedeia. Of the prelates, who with certain deacons and monks had to clear themselves in the third Constantinopolitan or sixth oecumenical council (A. D. 680), from the suspicion of holding the Monothelite heresy, the leader was Peter, metropolitan of Nicomedeia. Peter and his companions appeared before the council, and delivered to them, upon oath, solemn written confessions of their belief in the orthodox doctrine of two wills in Christ; the confessions were of considerable length, and all exactly alike, and are given in the original Greek with a considerable hiatus, but completely in a Latin version in the Acta Concilii CPolitani III., Actio x.; or according to one of the Latin versions of the Acta given by Hardouin, in Actio ix. (Concilia, vol vi. col. 784, 842, ed. Labbe, vol. iii. col. 1202, 1248, 1537, 1561, ed. Hlardouin ; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 680, vol. i. p. 595.)
24. Orator. [No. 25.]
25. Patricius et Magister, a Byzantine historian of the sixth century. He was born at Thessalonica (Procop. De Bell. Gotthic. 1.3), in the province of Macedonia, then included in the praetorian praefecture of Illyricum, on which account he is said to have been an Illyrian. (Procop.l.c.) Peter settled at Constantinople, where he acquired distinction as a rhetor or advocate, a profession for which his cultivated mind, agreeable address, and natural powers of persuasion, were admirably adapted. These qualifications pointed him out to the discernment of the emperor Justinian I. as suited for diplomatic life, and he was sent by him (A. D. 534) as ambassador to Amalasuntha. regent, and Theodatus, one of the chieftains of the Ostrogoths in Italy. On his way, at Aulon, near the entrance of the Adriatic, on the coast of Epeirus, or perhaps before his arrival there, Peter heard of the death of Athalaric, the young Ostrogothic king, of the marriage of Amalasuntha and Theodatus and their exaltation to the throne of Italy, and of their subsequent dissensionsand the imprisonment of Amalasuntha. heconsequently despatched intelligence of these important events to the emperor, while he himself waited at Aulon for further instructions. Justinian, without delay, undertook to vindicate the cause of the imprisoned queen, and directed Peter to declare his purpose openly to Theodatus. Peter immediately proceeded (A. D. 535), to Italy; but his arrival was speedily followed by the murder of Amalasuntha, an event extremely opportune for the ambitious views of Justinian, who. through Peter, immediately declared war against the Ostrogoths, on account of the queen's death. Such is the account given in one place by Procopius (ibid. 100.4); but he elsewhere (Hist. Arcan. 100.16) charges Peter with instigating Theodatus to commit the murder, being secretly commissioned to do so by the jealousy of Theodora, Justinian's wife, who held out to him, as an inducement to comply with her desire, the hope of great advancement. The baseness of Theodatus was alarmed by the declaration of war, and by the successes of Belisarins, who rapidly conquered Sicily; and he negotiated with Peter, who had not yet quitted Ravenna, a peace by which he ceded Sicily to Justinian, engaged to pay a yearly tribute in money, and to furnish him yearly with a body of Ostrogothic soldiers ; he consented also to restrict the exercise of his own power within very narrow limits, and to exercise it under the supremacy of Justinian. He at the same time commissioned Peter, in case the emperor should reject these terms, to promise an unconditional abdication; binding him, however, by oath not to reveal this second offer, unless the emperor should have previously rejected the first. Peter returned to Byzantium: the first offer was rejected, and the second then divulged and accepted ; and Peter with another ambassador, Athanasius, was sent back to Italy to complete the arrangement. But Theodatus meanwhile, encouraged by some disasters which the Byzantine forces had sustained in Dalmatia, had changed his mind : he not only refused to fulfil his promise of submission, but violated the law of nations by imprisoning the ambassadors. (Ibid. De Bell. Gotthico, 1.6-8.) Peter and his colleague remained in captivity until Belisarius, by detaining some Ostrogothic ambassadors, compelled Vitiges, who had succeeded Theodatus, to release them about the end of A. D. 438. (Ibid. 2.22.) On his return, Peter received, as Procopius (Hist. Arcan. 100.16,) intimates by Theodora's interest, and as a reward for his participation in procuring Amalasuntha's death, the high appointment of magister officiorum, but incurred, according to the same authority, general odium by the part he had acted. He exercised his authority with the most unbridled rapacity; for although he was, according to Procopius, naturally of a mild temper, and by no means insolent, he was at the same time the most dishonest of all mankind, κλεπτίστατος δὲ ἀνθρώπων ἁπάντων. Ibid. 100.24.)
Several years afterwards (about A. D. 550), Peter, who retained his post of magister officiorum, and had in addition acquired the dignity of patrician (a dignity which Niebuhr not inaptly compares to that of privy councillor in England), was sent by Justinian to negotiate a peace with Chosroes I. king of Persia; but Chosroes, who did not desire peace, dismissed him, with a promise of sending an ambassador of his own to Constantinople to effect the proposed arrangement. Shortly afterwards (A. D. 551 or 552) Peter was engaged in some negotiations with Pope Vigililus, then at Chalcedon : at this time he possessed, in addition to his other honours, the dignity of ex-consul or consul codicillaris, and the office of referendarius. (Vigil. Papa, Epistola ad Universam Eccles. apud Concilia, vol. iii. col. 3. ed. Hardouin.) In A. D. 562 Peter was again sent to arrange the terms of a peace with Chosroes; and meeting Zichus, the Persian commissioner at or near Dara in Mesopotamia, and afterwards proceeding to the court of Persia to negotiate with Chosroes himself, succeeded in concluding a treaty. Menander, who has narrated the affair at length Excerpta de Legationibus, pp. 133-147, ed. Paris, pp. 88-99, ed. Venice, pp. 346-373, ed. Bonn), has given at some length several of the speeches of Peter during the negotiation. Peter died shortly after. (Menander, ibid.) some suppose he is the Petrus Rhetor mentioned in an Epigramma (No. xviii.) of Leontius inthe Anthologia (vol. iii. p. 107, ed. Brunck, vol. iv. p. 77, ed Jacobs), as killed by the falling of a theatre. He left a son named Theodore, who successively held the offices of magister officiorum and "comes largitionum," and was sent by the emperor Justin II. (A. D. 576) on an embassy to Chosroes. (Menander apud Excerpta, 120, ed. Paris, p. 80, ed. Venice, p. 319, ed. Bonn, cum nota Valesii.) Peter was held in the highest esteem in his own day. Niebuhr has collected various testimonies of his reputation from Byzantine authors. Works
Suidas, who has two articles on Peter (Πέτρος ὁ ῥήτωρ and Πέτρος simply) ascribes to him two works. 1. Ἱστορίαι, Historiae, 2. Πεὶ πολιτικῆς καταστάσεως, De Stato (or De constitutione) Reipublicae. Historiae
Of the Historiae considerable portions are preserved in the Excerpta de Legationibus, made by order of the emperor Constantine Pophyrogenitus. [Constantinus VII. ; Priscus.] The earliest extract latest to the transactions of the Caesar Julian, afterwards emperor, in Caul in the reign of Constantius II. From the date of theses extracts and a short fragment, subjoined to the Excerpta in the Bonn edition, Niebuhr infers that the Historiae began with Augustus, or rather with the second triumvirate, and continued to a period a little later than the time of Constantine the Great, where the Historia of Eunapius [Eunapius] became more full. Niebuhr conjectures that Peter epitomized the Historia of Dio Cassius as far as that work extended. The De Reipublicae is conjectured by Angelo Mai to be the anonymous work composed in the form of a dialogue between the patrician Menas and the referendarius Thomas Περὶ πολιτικῆς, Dr Re publica, briefly analysed by Photius (Biblioth. Cod. 37), and of which Mai considered large fragments, deciphered in a palimpsest, and published by himself under the title Περὶ πολιτικη-ς ἐπιστήμης, De scientia Politica, in his Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio, vol. ii. pp. 590, &c. to be a part. But if the work mentioned by Suidas be, as is most likely, that in which Peter defined the duties of a magister officiorum, as noticed by Joannes Lydus (De Magistratibus, 2.25. 26), and from which considerable portions (lib. 1. c.84, 85, certainly, and 100.86-95, probably) of the work of constantine Porphyrogenitus De Caeremoniis Aulae byzantinae are taken, it must have been a different kind of work from that described by Photius. It is not ascertained in which of his works Peter published the account of his negotiations with Chosroes, whether in one of those mentioned by Suidas, or in some other work not mentioned. Menander, who cites the work (apud Excerpta, p. 429, ed Bonn), describes it as ἡ τοῦ αὐτοῦ Πέτρου συναγωγή, Ejusdem Petri Collectio, a title somewhat indefinite, but which seems to indicate a different work from either of those mentioned by Suidas. The accounts could not have been given in the Historiae, unless this came down to a much later period than Niebuhr supposes; but it may have formed part of the De Reipublicae Statu, if we suppose a part of that work to have been devoted to defining and illustrating the duty of ambassadors. Editions
All the remains of Peter are given in the Bonn edition of the Excerpta de Legationibus,. Further Information
The valuable prefatory dissertation tation by Niebuhr, De Historicis quorum Reliquiae hoc Volumine continentur, has been our chief guide in this article.
Compare Reiske's Praefatio, c. ii. to the work of Constantine Porphyrogenitus De Caeremoniis ; the dissertation by Mai, De Fragmentis Politicis Petri Magistri, in the volume already cited of his Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio, pp. 571, &c.; Fabric. Bibl. Craec. vol. vi. p. 135, vol. vii. p. 538, vol. viii. p. 33; and Vossius, De Historicis Graecis, 2.100.22.
26. Patricius, a Greek saint, who lived early in the ninth century, and of whom a life, taken from the Menaea of the Greeks, is given in the original Greek, with a Latin version, and a Commentariolus Praevius by Joannes Pinius in the Acta Sanctorum, Julii (vol. i. pp. 289, 290). This Petrus had fought in the bettle (A. D. 811) against the Bulgarians, in which the emperor Nicephorus I. was defeated and slain.
27. Patricius, a Greek different the foregoing, and belonging to a somewhat later period. Works Epigram
He presented to the emperor Leo VI. Sapiens [Leo VI.] who began to reign A. D. 886, a copy of Theodoret's Curatio Graecarum Adfectionum, to which he prefixed an Epigramma. Editions
This is printed at length by Lambecius in his commentarius tarius de biblioth. Caesaraea, vol. s. lib. iv. col. 399, &c., ed. Kollar. Further Information
Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. xi. p. 338.
28. Of Ravenna. [No. 10.]
29. Rhetor. [No. 25.]
30. Of Sebaste, an ecclesiastic of the fourth century. He was the youngest of the ten children of Basil and Emmelia, wealthy and excellent persons of Caesareia in Cappadocia, who had the happiness of numbering among their children those eminent fathers of the church, Basil the Great [Basilius, No. 2], and Gregory of Nyssa [Gregorius Nyssenus, St.]. Peter was born, according to Tillemont's calculation, before A. D. 349, and almost immediately before his father's death. His early education was conducted by his sister St. Macrina, who in the emphatic phrase of Gregory of Nyssa, "was every thing to him, father, teacher, attendant (παιδαγωγὸς), and mother." The quickness of the boy enabled him readily to acquire anything to which his attention was directed; but his education appears to have been conducted on a very narrow system; profane learning was disregarded and the praise given him by his brother Gregory that he attained, even in boyhood, to the heights of philosophy, must be taken, with the limitation which such a restrictive system would necessarily imply. If, however, his literary culture was thus narrowed, his morals were preserved pure; and if he fell short of his more eminent brothers in variety of attainments, he equalled them in holiness of life. The place of his education appears to have been a nunnery at Annesi or Annesa on the river Iris, in Pontus, established by his mother and sister : and with them, or in the monastery which his brother Basil had established on the other side of the river, much of his life was passed. In a season of scarcity (A. D. 367, 368?) such was his benevolent exertion to provide for the destitute, that they flocked to him from all parts, and gave to the thinly-peopled neighbourhood in which he resided the appearance of a populous town. He had the satisfaction of being present with his sister at his mother's death-bed, and received her dying benediction. Her death appears to have occurred about the time of Basil's elevation to the bishoprick of the Cappadocian Caesareia, about A. D. 370 : soon after which, apparently, Peter received from Basil ordination to the office of presbyter, probably of the church of Caesareia ; for Basil appears to have employed his brother as his confidential agent in some affairs. (Basil. Maritimis Episcopis Epistola editt. vett., cciii. edit. Benedictin.) Peter, however, retained a house, which Basil describes as near Neocaesareia (Basil, Meletio Epistola cclxxii. editt. vett., ccxvi. edit. Benedictin), but which was probably at or near Annesi, where he had been brought up, and where his sister Macrina still resided. It was probably after the death both of Basil and Macrina, about the year 380, as Tillemont judges, that Peter was raised to the bishopric of Sebste, (now Siwas) in the Lesser Armenia. A passage of Theodoret (H. E. 4.30) has been thought to imply that he was raised to the episcopate during the reign of Valens, which terminated in A. D. 378; but the passage only implies that he took an active part in the struggle carried on during that reign by the bishops of the orthodox party against Arianism. which he might very well do, though not himself a bishop. His elevation preceded the second general council, that of Constantinople, A. D. 380-381, in which he took part. (Theodoret, H. E. 5.8.) In what year he died is not known : but it was probably after A. D. 391; and certainly before the death of his brother, Gregory of Nyssa (who survived till A. D. 394, or later), for Gregory was present sent at Sebaste at the first celebration of his brother's memory, i. e. the anniversary of his death, which occurred in hot weather, and therefore could not have been in January of March, where the martyrologies place it. (Greg. Nyssen, Epistol. ad Flauian. Opera, vol. iii. p. 645, &c. ed. Paris, 1638.) Works Letter prefixed to the Contra Eunomium Libri of Gregory of Nyssa
The only extant writing of Peter is a letter prefixed to the Contra Eunomium Libri of Gregory of Nyssa, and published with the works of that father. It is entitled Τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις πατρὸς ἡμῶν Πέτρου ἐπισκόπου Σεβαστείας ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς τὸν ἅγιον Γρηγόριον Νύσσης τὸν αὑτοῦ ἀδελφόν, sancti Patris nostri Petri Episcopi Sebasteni ad S. Gregorium Nyssenum fratrem suum Epistola. Influence upon his brother Gregory
Peter does not appear to have been ambitious of authorship, and probably felt the disqualification arising from his restricted education. Some of the works of his brother Gregory were, however, written at his desire, such as the above-mentioned treatises against Eunomius and the Explicatio Apologetica in Hexaemeron. The De Hominis Opificio is also addressed to him by Gregory, who, both in this treatise and in the Explicatio in Hexaemeron, speaks of him in the highest terms. Demonstratio
A work extant in Arabic, bearing the title of Demonstratio, cited by Abraham Echellensis Eutych. Vindic. Pars ii. p. 486, and Not. ad Catalog. Hebedjesu, p. 51), is ascribed to the three brothers, Basil, Gregory, and Peter; but its genuineness is, to say the least, very doubtful. Further Information
Greg. Nyssen. De Vita S. Macrinae ; Basil. ll. cc. ; Theodoret, ll. cc. ; Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. ix. p. 572, &c.; Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, vol. i. col. 424; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 370, vol. i. p. 246.
31. Siculus. [No. 7.] [J.C.M]