Crisis of Empire. Phil Booth
anyone think I write the saints’ miracles because of my faith [pisteōs heneka].”224 We thus encounter in the Miracles the same stance that Leontius of Neapolis, at least, attributes to Sophronius’s patron, John the Almsgiver: a firm adherence to Chalcedonian doctrine and to the protection of its rites from heretical pollution, but a simultaneous commitment to conversion through engaged dialogue. From a later perspective—when, as we shall see, Sophronius’s attitude both to heretics and to doctrinal dialogue becomes far more aggressive, and when the man himself becomes the emperor’s principal doctrinal antagonist—that stance here seems quite remarkable.
Both changes of attitude—that is, the move toward a more developed understanding of the spiritual benefits conferred through the eucharist and the simultaneous hardening of attitudes both to heretics and to doctrinal dialogue—proceeded hand in hand with the deepening crisis of the Eastern empire. Although the Miracles of Cyrus and John itself maintains a stubborn silence on the looming shadow of Khusrau’s invasion, as Sophronius set down his pen in Alexandria the Persian campaign from which he and Moschus had fled had entered a more ambitious phase. Perhaps taking advantage of Heraclius’s revolt against the emperor Phocas, in 610 Persian armies had crossed the Euphrates and invaded the provinces of the Mediterranean seaboard. One force passed from Armenia into Asia Minor and in 611 captured Caesarea in Cappadocia. To the south, a separate Persian force overran Antioch and surrounding cities and then extended operations southward to Phoenicia, where Damascus capitulated in 613. From there that same force seized control of Caesarea, the metropolis of Palestina Prima, and in 613 the emperor Heraclius suffered a significant defeat at Antioch, breaking the Roman resistance.225
The Persian capture and occupation of Jerusalem that followed that defeat were to send shock waves throughout the Christian world and force Sophronius and his associates to retreat to the Latin West. Here, alienated from the East and dependent upon Western aristocrats for patronage, those same associates began to explore an alternative model of the Christian Church, a model that made a far more advanced attempt to reconcile the clerical and monastic vocations and with them their competing eucharistic and ascetical theologies. In its immediate context, that model partook of a broader process of ideological realignment through which Chalcedonian Christians, much like their anti-Chalcedonian equivalents in the period before, attempted to comprehend a situation in which the coinherence of empire and Church had been destabilized. But as the crisis in the East deepened and assumed a doctrinal dimension, and as the alienation of Sophronius and his colleagues from Constantinople became more entrenched, so would that new vision come to be deployed for far more subversive ends. Sophronius, in the Miracles of Cyrus and John, writes during the calm before the storm. But Miracles 69 nevertheless portends an imminent future in which he would challenge the authority of the emperor, recognize the preeminence of Rome, and question the ideal of a Christian empire:226
This man [John] was a Roman, not born in a city that is subject to the tribute of the Romans but having Rome itself, which rules first among them, as his fatherland and city. For truly Rome desired that this be added to its own glory—that is, to take pride in the miracles of Cyrus and John as things that are the more sacred, knowing these things to be brighter by far than crowns and scepters and the purple. For such things have their origin on earth, and are once more dissolved into earth.
1. For his Cilician origins see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 171 [PG 87:3, 3037C], which says of one Zoilus that “we shared the same upbringing.” The F manuscript adds to his name ho Aigeotēs, thus confirming Moschus’s own origins; see Chadwick (1974) 56; Pattenden (1975) 41 n. 1; Maisano (1982) 247. See also the references to Cilician monasteries at John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 27–29, 31–32, 51, 57–58, 81–87, 90, 100; and to Cilician ascetics ibid. 3, 22, 41, 59, 61, 115, 123, 166, 182–83.
2. See Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow [Usener 91]; and the references to Theodosius’s higoumen as “our father” at 92–94. For the authorship of the Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow see below pp. 106–8.
3. See John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 40 [PG 87:3, 2893D], Emeina gar en autēi etē deka; with the chronological reconstruction of Schönborn (1972) 63f.; Chadwick (1974) 55f. For tales involving this community and its members see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 41–42, 45, 62–67, 139–40.
4. For Sophronius as Moschus’s disciple see Sophronius, Miracles 70.8; Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow [Usener 92]. Moschus himself refers to Sophronius with various terms of respect (“‘lord,” “brother,” “son,” “companion,” “sophist”); see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow preface, 69, 77, 92, 102, 110–11, 113, 135, 157, 162; Clugnet (1905) 51–54 no. 8. For speculation as to their meeting see, e.g., Chadwick (1974) 59, suggesting the aristocratic pilgrim Sophronius may have selected Moschus as a spiritual guide in Palestine. For Sophronius’s origins in Damascus see his own comments at Miracles 70.4 and in the Epigrams 1 [PG 87:3, 3421C–D]. For their relationship see Chadwick (1974) 59; also the recent observations of Krueger (2011) esp. 28–38.
5. For the Egyptian visit see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 78; also Nissen (1938) 354–56 no. 1; and Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow [Usener 92], stating that Moschus had been sent “on service” (eis diakonian); cf. the Synaxarium of Constantinople (cited in Schönborn [1972] 57), stating that Sophronius went for the purposes of paideia. For Sophronius’s intention to become a monk at this stage see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 110, also 69; and for his initiation ibid. 102, with the interpretation of Chadwick (1974) 57. For Sophronius as a monk of Theodosius see Sophronius, Miracles 70.4 and Epigrams 1 [PG 87:3, 3421C-D]. The contention of Chadwick (1974) 59 that “Sophronius’s decision to renounce the world was taken in consequence of his cure at Menouthis” places it too late. Cf. Schönborn (1972) 65f., and John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 92, 102, 111, 135, preceding the pair’s departure from the East and referring to Sophronius with the monastic titles “Abba” and “Brother.”
6. See John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 67 [PG 87:3, 2917C]: Emeina gar en autēi etē deka. For further tales associated with this laura John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 45, 62–68. For its location on Sinai see ibid. 134 [PG 87:3, 2997C], where Patriarch John of Jerusalem (575–93) is said to be constructing a nearby reservoir eis to Sina. Binns (1994) 50, however, locates the laura in Judaea, for the Latin of the PG gives in Sigma, so that he reads “in [the shape of] Sigma,” thinking that “the semi-circular shape of a sigma, as it was then written, would have become the distinguishing feature of a new reservoir.” (The F manuscript on which the PG Latin is based also gives Sigma; see Maisano [1982] 246.) The reason for referring to its shape, however, is still unclear, and Binns is incorrect that Sinai was nevertheless “far outside” the jurisdiction of Jerusalem’s patriarch. It is perhaps preferable, therefore, to follow the reading in the PG, with Chadwick (1974) 57, and to locate Moschus on Sinai in this period, where numerous tales of the Spiritual Meadow are situated, and where he himself later wished to be buried; see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 122–27; Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow [Usener 92].
7. Prologue to the Spiritual Meadow [Usener 91].
8. Ibid. Cf. Sophronius, Miracles 70.4 [Marcos 395], in which Sophronius says that he came to Alexandria “for a reason which it is not necessary to recall in writing.” For Moschus’s presence in Antioch see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 39, 88–89. It is probable that before departing for Alexandria the pair visited Seleucia and Cilicia, where two tales in the Spiritual Meadow place them; see John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 79–80.
9. Sophronius, Miracles 70.4 [Marcos 395].
10. For the disease (epichusis or platukoria) see Sophronius’s words at Prologue to the Miracles 9 and Miracles 70.1–7.
11. See Sophronius, Miracles 70.8–2. At ibid. 70.8 [Marcos 396] Saint Cyrus appears to Sophronius “in the divine habit of a monk and in the same form as John [Moschus], the patient’s spiritual father and teacher, who was with him at the martyrs’ tomb and praying for his disciple and child.” Moschus appears again at Sophronius, Miracles 70.13. For this particular miracle, which includes Sophronius’s renunciation of Homer, see now Agosti (2011).
12. For the text as a memorial see Sophronius, Prologue to the Miracles 1. For the text as the payment of a debt owed to the saints see ibid. 8 and Miracles