George A. Bevan, The New Judas: The Case of
Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428-451 CE
J. Edward
Walters
Rochester College
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
James E. Walters
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2019
Volume 22.1
For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full
copyright.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/article/hv22n1prwalters
J. Edward Walters
George A. Bevan, The New Judas: The Case of
Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428-451 CE
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol22/HV22N1PRWalters.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2018
vol 22
issue 1
pp 313–315
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study
of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth
Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the
best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
File created by James E. Walters
George A. Bevan, The New Judas: The Case of
Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428-451 CE, Late Antique History and
Religion 13 (Leuven: Peeters, 2016). Pp. XII + 374; €87.
J. Edward Walters, Rochester College
The broad historical narrative of the tumultuous career of Nestorius, from the
eruption of the theotokos controversy to the Council of
Ephesus and ultimately his retirement in exile, is generally well known among
historians of late ancient Christianity. Particularly for the history of Syriac
Christianity, the dispute that arose between Nestorius and Cyril of Alexandria
opened a fault line that divided Christian communities, and the aftershocks of those
events are evident still today in the ecclesiastical makeup of global Christianity.
Despite the fact that the significant events of the mid-fifth century have been
subjected to rigorous historical examination in scholarly literature, the primary
historical sources of these events are so numerous and complex that it can often be
difficult to strike a balance between granular detail of specific events and grand,
sweeping narratives of orthodoxy and heresy, ecclesiastical power struggles, and the
dynamics of imperial Christian court politics.
The present volume by George Bevan is an impressive achievement of harmony in this
regard: it is a rigorously researched historical account that, when necessary,
recounts the unfolding of day-by-day events, but it also never fails to situate the
historical minutiae within the relevant broader frameworks. The true strength of
Bevan’s approach is his use of a very complex body of primary literature, much of
which he describes in the first chapter of the book. Bevan’s command of this
literature allows him to offer insights into the history of the Nestorian
controversy that have often been overlooked in previous scholarship. The subtitle of
the work (“The Case of Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428-451 CE”) provides
an accurate description of both the temporal confines and the approach of this
study: the singular focus of Bevan’s historical narrative is the intersection of
ecclesiastical affairs and imperial politics in the narrowly defined time range.
This book is not a theological introduction to the issues of the Christological
controversy; it certainly deals with theological issues, but this is first and
foremost a historical reconstruction of the ecclesio-political machinations of
Nestorius, Cyril, Theodosius II, and everyone immediately connected to them.
The first chapter, as mentioned briefly above, introduces the reader to the complex
web of historical sources that pertain to Nestorius. The second chapter provides a
brief overview of what is known about Nestorius prior to his election to the
bishopric of Constantinople. In the third chapter, Bevan’s focus sharpens on the
early period of Nesotrius’ career and the initial uproar regarding the theotokos controversy. There are two particular historical
claims that Bevan asserts in this chapter that are worth noting: first, Bevan argues
that it was likely not Nestorius’ own preaching that produced the controversial
anti-theotokos position, but rather that of two of his
associates (Anastasius and Dorotheus). Second, and more significant in the recent
history of scholarship on this episode, Bevan downplays the role of Pulcheria in the
condemnation of Nestorius’ position and, furthermore, argues against her overall
signifi-cance in the early stages of the controversy. The fourth chapter is a
thorough (indeed at times tedious) historical reconstruction of the events of the
summer of 431, including a day-by-day recounting of the Council of Ephesus. Here,
one of Bevan’s primary contributions is a reconsideration of the timeline for the
Nestorian and Cyrilene camps reporting to the Emperor Theodosius. Namely, Bevan
argues that despite the delayed arrival of Nestorius’ supporters, their use of the
official imperial network would have allowed them to report their condemnation of
Cyril to Theodosius before Cyril’s earlier condemnation of Nestorius could arrive at
court.
The next three chapters deal with the aftermath of Ephesus and the events that
precipitated the Council of Chalcedon. Chapter Five covers in great detail the
immediate aftermath of Ephesus, focusing on the years 432-433, the politics
surrounding Cyril’s “Twelve Anathemas” and their reception in the East, and the
reunion “peace treaty” negotiated between Cyril and John of Antioch. Bevan’s primary
argument in this chapter is that John of Antioch outmaneuvered Cyril politically in
their negotiations, though John himself could not unite all of the opponents to
Cyril’s anathemas. The following chapter (Chapter Six) turns to oft-neglected years
immediately following the peace of 433, focusing on the time period of the bishopric
of Proclus in Constantinople and Nestorius’ contin-ued efforts to negotiate from his
exiled “retirement.” Chapter Seven covers the final decade leading up to the Council
of Chalcedon (440-450) and focuses almost exclusively on the ecclesio-political
developments that would ensure, once and for all, Nestorius’ exile and defamation,
culminating with the death of Theodosius II and the ascension of Marcian. Following
this, Bevan concludes the work with an epilogue that briefly overviews the long-term
aftermath of the Nestorian controversy.
The book concludes with two appendices and a biblio- graphy. The first appendix is a
detailed discussion of Cyril’s Homily IV, the dating and
authenticity of which are disputed. The second appendix is a detailed breakdown of
the contents of the complex work attributed to Nestorius known as the Liber Heraclidis. Unfortunately, the book does not include an
index of any kind. At the very least, an index of named individuals would be
incredibly useful and make the volume more accessible for researchers.
Overall, this volume is an impressive work of scholarship. Bevan’s use of a wide
array of primary source materials is exemplary, and the focus on Nestorius as the
center of a web of complex ecclesial and imperial threads helps provide clarity and
a sense of direction through a difficult historical landscape.