of the soul’s preexistence and of apokatastasis as “indifferent and harmless” (mesa kai akinduna); see Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Sabas 88 [Schwartz 188]; Life of Cyriacus 12 [Schwartz 229]; with Hombergen (2001) 231–52.
63. See Leontius of Byzantium, Against the Nestorians and Eutychians [PG 86:1, 1285A–B].
64. See esp. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Cyriacus 11–14 [Schwartz 229–31]. For speculation on the origin of Cyril’s information see Guillaumont (1962) 150f.; Flusin (1983) 81–83; Hombergen (2001) 255–87. Cf. also George Hieromonachus, On Heresies 9, with Richard (1947) esp. 243–48.
65. Although Origen was condemned at the council, the aforementioned fifteen anathemas were produced and ratified before it; see Diekamp (1899) 131–32, 137; Guillaumont (1962) 133–40; Hombergen (2001) 287–328.
66. See Flusin (1983) 41–86. The apparent exception is at Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Sabas 3 [Schwartz 88], echoing Evagrius Ponticus, On the Eight Evil Spirits [PG 79, 1145A], but as Hombergen (2001) 225f. indicates, substituting the Evagrian praktikē for agathoergia.
67. Hombergen (2001) 368. For a similar suggestion see Perrone (2001) 246, 256–58. Cf. the archaeological comparison of Sabas’s Great Laura with the New Laura in Hirschfeld (2001) 345.
68. See esp. Perczel (2006–7) 52–57.
69. In general Cyril’s hagiographies are replete with references to monastic ordination, but for the specific ordination of his protagonists, all at the same stage of their careers, see Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Euthymius 5 [Schwartz 13]; Life of Sabas 19 [Schwartz 103f.]; Life of John the Hesychast 3 [Schwartz 202]; Life of Cyriacus 7 [Schwartz 226]; Life of Theodosius 1 [Schwartz 236]; Life of Theognius [Schwartz 242]; Life of Abraham 2 [Schwartz 244]. On ordination within the text see Flusin (1983) 148–53; Sterk (2004) 203–6.
70. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Euthymius 28–29 [Schwartz 45–47]. For scattered reference to Cyril’s monks taking the eucharist, both public and private, see Patrich (1995) 245–52.
71. Barsanuphius and John, Questions and Answers 605 [Neyt and Angelis-Noah 824–26].
72. See above n. 24.
73. For the minimalist approach to the ecclesial sacraments in post-Evagrian ascetic theorists see, e.g., the comments of Plested (2004) 111, 114f., 197f.
74. Philoxenus of Mabbug, Letter to Abraham and Orestes [ed. and trans. Frothingham 28f., 44–46]; and Michael the Syrian, Chronicle 9.30. On Stephen see also Jacob of Serug, Letter to Stephen bar Sudaili. For analysis see esp. now Pinggéra (2002) 7–22; also Frothingham (1886); Hausherr (1933); Guillaumont (1961a); Widengren (1961). On the text of the letter see also Jansma (1974).
75. Philoxenus of Mabbug, Letter to Abraham and Orestes [ed. and trans. Frothingham 28–31].
76. Philoxenus of Mabbug, Letter to Abraham and Orestes [ed. and trans. Frothingham 36–37].
77. See Hausherr (1933) 186f.; also Guillaumont (1961a) 1483. For the Origenist influence see Marsh (1927) 247f.; also Widengren (1961) 161–68, distinguishing the cosmological influence of Origen and the anthropological influence of Evagrius.
78. See, e.g., Harb (1969).
79. Watt (1980), contra Guillaumont (1962) 207–13, 231–58. For Philoxenus’s sanitized Evagrianism see also Halleux (1963), e.g., 423–28; Daley (1995) 629f. For his eucharistic emphasis see Michelson (2008). For the sanitization of Evagrius in Syriac see also Guillaumont (1962) 259–90, on the Evagrian commentary of Babai the Great.
80. For the identity see Frothingham (1886) 49–55, 63–68; Marsh (1927) 222–32; and now Pinggéra (2002) 7–26.
81. For a précis of the contents see Frothingham (1886) 91–111; Marsh (1927) 204–10.
82. For this Evagrian influence on the Book of the Holy Hierotheos see esp. Hausherr (1933) 187–92; Pinggéra (2002) 70–73; also Guillaumont (1962) 318–23; Daley (1995) 630.
83. For the date of Stephen’s arrival, ca. 509–12, see Frothingham (1886) 57–59; for Cyril’s date for the outbreak of the crisis, in 514, see Diekamp (1899) 17. For the coincidence see Guillaumont (1962) 305; Hombergen (2001) 360–65.
84. Stephen bar Sudaili, Book of the Holy Hierotheos 3.7 [ed. and trans. Marsh 72*–74*, 78–81]. Cf. Arthur (2008) 133f. on this “spiritual and allegorical” interpretation of the eucharist.
85. For discussion of these early references see Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 11–18. Arthur (2008) 104–9. Despite his apparent miaphysite origins, however, Ps.-Dionysius was quickly adopted by both anti-Chalcedonians and Chalcedonians; see Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 18–22.
86. For various attempts to identify him see, e.g., U. Riedinger (1956: Peter the Fuller); Esbroeck (1993: Peter the Iberian); Arthur (2008) 184–87 (Sergius of Resh‛aina). See also Lourié (2010).
87. See esp. Perczel (2001) 265–82; also idem (1999a, b); Evans (1980) 28–34; Arthur (2008) 175–87. For a more subtle approach to the question of Ps.-Dionysius’s ties to other authors connected with the Origenist crisis see the excellent Golitzin (1994) 341–45. In light of Leontius of Byzantium’s alleged Origenism we may also note his complex attitude to the Ps.-Dionysian corpus, as revealed in Evans (1980); Perczel (2000b).
88. For the suggested dependence of Stephen on Ps.-Dionysius see, e.g., Marsh (1927) 210–13, 233–46; Guillaumont (1961a) 1486f., (1962) 327 with n. 89; Golitzin (1994) 343; Hombergen (2001) 362f.; Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 33, 40 n. 51. For a challenge to the extent of that dependence and the suggestion of certain interpolations of Dionysian material within Stephen’s text see, e.g., Frothingham (1886) 81–83; Hausherr (1933) 192–94, 198f.; Arthur (2001).
89. Pinggéra (2002) 96–155.
90. So also Perczel (2001) 279.
91. See Stephen bar Sudaili, Book of the Holy Hierotheos 1.12. But cf. ibid. 1.10, with Arthur (2001) 370f.
92. See the famous exposition of hierarchy at Ps.-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy 3, with Louth (2007) 170f. on his hierarchies’ mediation of illumination “not of being.” Cf. idem (1989) 106.
93. See Arthur (2001) 371, (2008) 18f.
94. The literature on Ps.-Dionysius is now vast. On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy see, e.g., Louth (1989) esp. 52–77; Golitzin (1994) esp. 119–232.
95. See esp. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.1 [Heil 104].
96. See Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.3.
97. For a description of the clerical triad see ibid. 5.4–7; for the laical triad ibid. 6.1–3.
98. Ibid. 6.1.3 [Heil 116]. For the elevation of monks above the baptized see also the account of the monastic tonsure at Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 6.3.2–5. On the Areopagite’s theology of the monastic life contained here and in Letters 8 see in detail Roques (1961).
99. See esp. Hathaway (1969) 64–66, 86–104, on the letter to Demophilus. Cf. also Roques (1961) 296–305.
100. Ps.-Dionysius, Letters 8.1 [Ritter 175–77]. Cf. Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.7 [Heil 109]; Letters 8.2–3 [Ritter 180f.]; with Louth (1989) 65–67.
101.
