Opposing Ways of Life: The Dialectician and the Monk

Paideia and Prejudice

The notion of paideia , allied with the strict moral code that traditionally accompanied inherited wealth and leisure, distinguished the well-born few from the common man.^[156] The Graeco-Roman cultural ideal created a universal linguistic and moral code for the scions of late Roman elites from Spain to Syria, but few progressed beyond rudimentary paideia to

[154] See Epiphanius, Panarion 76.3.7.

[155] See Meyer, "Dialectic and Questioning," 281-89.

[156] On the relationship between wealth, leisure, and intellectual pursuits in antiquity, see J.-M. André, L'otium dans la vie morale et intellectuelle romaine, des origines à l'époque augustéenne (Paris, 1966).

attain greater mastery and professionalism in chosen fields.^[157] A formula tethering paideia to the mores of the landed aristocracy only served to reinforce social prejudices and boundaries at a time when a greater number of careers were in theory ouvertes aux talents .^[158]

For many, paideia served as a means of exhibiting status, not a way to acquire it. The elder Iamblichus expressed a conventional view when he explained that paideia did not aim to prepare an individual for a specific goal in life.^[159] To specialize prematurely in one field for the sake of professional advancement without first securing a firm grounding in all-round education or egkuklios paideia was likely to provoke scorn.

Prosopographical studies of the later empire have shown that, in the latter part of the fourth century, a solid core of middling elites, consisting mostly of curiales and local decurions, occupied the highest rungs of the ecclesiastical positions in eastern cities.^[160] These Christians brought to their vocation the traditional social values of the upper classes and required little by way of christianization to become immediately acceptable.^[161] It is thus not surprising that Christian writers should echo the known, established prejudices of the secular elites.

It was in people's descriptions of themselves and others that these underlying views were expressed. Gregory of Nazianzus, for example, compared himself to his rival Helladius of Caesarea (who was either a curialis or a principalis ):

Should certain people view us naked and judge between us two our suitability for the priestly office, what would one possess which is superior to what the other has? Birth ()? Upbringing ()?

[157] See I. Karayannopoulos, "St. Basil's Social Activity: Principles and Praxis," in Fedwick, ed., Basil of Caesarea , 1:375-91, at 381: "We must, therefore, draw a line between the classical paideia and education that the rich gave their children, and the study of rhetoric by those who learned it in order to become professional teachers." On the relationship of training to official positions, see F. S. Pedersen, "On Professional Qualifications for Public Posts in Late Antiquity," Classica et Mediaevalia 31 (1975): 161-213.

[158] See K. Hopkins, "Social Mobility in the Later Roman Empire: The Evidence of Ausonius," CQ n.s. 11 (1961): 239-49; idem, "Elite Mobility in the Roman Empire," in M. Finley, ed., Studies in Ancient Society (London, 1974), 103-120; Ramsay MacMullen, "Social Mobility and the Theodosian Code," JRS 54 (1964): 49-53; Kaster, Guardians of Language , 32-95.

[160] A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire 284-602 (Oxford, 1964), 2:925-29. See the conclusions of the prosopographic studies of fourth-century bishops: F. D. Gilliard, "The Social Origins of Bishops in the Fourth Century" (Ph.D. diss., University of California at Berkeley, 1966); T. A. Kopecek, "The Social Class of the Cappadocian Fathers," Church History 42 (1973): 453-66, esp. 460-61; and A. Rousselle, "Aspects sociaux du recrutement ecclésiastique au IV siècle," Méanges d'Archéologie et d'Histoire de l'École Française de Rome 89 (1977): 333-70.

[161] See Van Dam, "Emperors, Bishops, and Friends."

Free association with the mighty and the famous? Knowledge of theological matters ()? All the qualities are found among us in more or less equal measure.^[162]

This juxtaposition highlights the patches of common ground on which were based the alliances of late antique ecclesiastical and secular elites.^[163] Birth to a prominent family, a proper upbringing, friends and relations in high places, a modicum of learning, even gnosis: these were the qualities that entitled a man to the consideration of his peers and the devotion of the less fortunate.

The creation of this common culture, of course, entailed acts of social exclusion. Even among pagan philosophers, the language of social prejudice was frequently mobilized against a rival with devastating effect.^[164] As is well known, using ethos as both defense and offense was a venerable part of Greek rhetorical tradition dating at least to the time of the Attic orators.^[165] Classically trained Christians like Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nazianzus, both of whom had studied under the sophist Prohaeresius in Athens, were no strangers to this tradition of ethical invective.^[166]

Gregory was thoroughly familiar with the polished rhetorical styles of the Second Sophistic and knew well how to compose a psogos , a negative biographical characterization.^[167] In a famous example, he methodically defamed a fellow countryman, George of Cappadocia, the Arian bishop of Alexandria and erstwhile mentor of Aetius. George, later lynched by an angry pagan mob in Alexandria for his attacks on temples, was unkindly described by Gregory as having been born near the border of Cappadocia (a slight to proud Cappadocians), the result of a half-servile union (i.e., like a mule's mixed progenitors), and as having risen

[162] Gregory of Nazianzus, Ep . 249.32. See M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie zu den Schriften Gregors von Nazianz , Theophaneia 13 (Bonn, 1960), 94-95, s.v. "Helladius I"; P. Devos, "S. Grégoire de Nazianze et Hellade de Césarée en Cappadoce," AB 79 (1961), 91-101; Kopecek, "Social Class of the Cappadocian Fathers," 453-66, esp. 455, 455n. 16. In general, see E. F. Bruck, Kirchenväter und soziales Erbrecht (Berlin/Göttingen/Heidelberg, 1956), esp. 3, 17-18. On Gregory's family, see J. Bernardi, "Nouvlles perspectives sur la famille de Grégoire de Nazianze," VChr 38 (1984): 352-59; P. Gallay, La vie de saint Grégoire de Nazianze (Lyons/Paris, 1943), 250-51.

[163] See R. Van Dam, "Emperors, Bishops, and Friends in Late Antique Cappadocia," JTS n.s. 37 (1986): 53-76.

[164] See the delightful essay by G. E. L. Owen, "Philosophical Invective," Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 1 (1983): 1-25.

[165] See W. Süss, Ethos (Leipzig, 1910), 247-54.

[166] Socrates, Hist. eccl . 4.26; Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 6.17.1.

[167] See R. R. Ruether, Gregory of Nazianzus: Rhetor and Philosopher (Oxford, 1969), 111. On the psogos, see Rhetores Graeci (C. Walz, ed., 9:402-3).

from menial labor without a liberal education.^[168] Though these slights should not be accepted at face value, it is important to remember that ancient rhetors, to assassinate character most convincingly, preferred accentuating existing defects to inventing nonexistent ones.^[169]

For people with reputations as arrivistes , avarice and ambition usually featured prominently in the catalogue of their vices. Gregory of Nazianzus related with relish a rumor that George embezzled funds destined for the relief of the poor in Alexandria and used them instead for bribery in high places.^[170]

Similar ad hominem attacks were made against Aetius and Eunomius. Gregory of Nyssa coldly observed that Aetius had once been a hired manual laborer engaged in a degrading menial trade (, ).^[171] The Syrian was further upbraided by Epiphanius of Salamis for not having had the benefit of a proper education in his youth.^[172] Characterization of someone as apaideutos had implications beyond the lack of formal education; it distinguished a successful barbarian general or nouveau riche merchant from the ranks of the established aristocracy. The charge thus suggested that Aetius lacked the moral formation that was normally nurtured through early association with a grammarian.^[173]

Gregory of Nyssa stated that Eunomius was known to have once been a pedagogue, a position customarily staffed by slaves.^[174] Interestingly, at times Eunomius seemed to accept his opponents' characterization of his lowly origins. Here we see the two sides engaged in a kind of ritual dance: as the Cappadocians resorted to a language of social condescension, Eunomius willingly became the social outsider, casting him-

[168] Gregory of Nazianzus, Or . 21.16; see Kopecek, History of Neo-Arianism , 1:138-45.

[169] Cicero, De oratore 2.43.182: "Valet igitur multum ad vincendum probari mores et instituta et facta et vitam eorum, qui agent causas, et eorum, pro quibus, et item improbari adversariorum, animosque eorum, apud quos agetur . . . conciliantur autem animi dignitate hominis, rebus gestis, existimatione vitae, quae facilius ornari possunt, si modo sunt, quam fingi si nulla sunt. " Emphasis mine.

[170] On the wealth and power of the Alexandrian patriarchs, and the use of such resources as bribes at the imperial court, see P. Batiffol, "Les presents de saint Cyrille à la cour de Constantinople," in Études de liturgie et d'archéologie chrétienne (Paris, 1919), 154-79.

[171] Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun . 1.38 (Jaeger, ed., 1:35). Gregory could not resist making Aetius a swindler as well; see Contra Eun . 1.40-41 (Jaeger, ed., 1:36).

[173] See Kaster, Guardians of Language , 11-14. Aetius' deficiency in breeding and comportment would become more exaggerated in later traditions; see R. Vaggione, "Some Neglected Fragments of Theodore of Mopsuestia's Contra Eunomium," JTS n.s. 31 (1980): 403-70, esp. 408-19.

[174] Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun . 1.49-50 (Jaeger, ed., 1:39).

self in the role of the humble champion of truth, whose opponents stood in error regardless of their worldly wealth and rank.^[175]

It is arguable that this social gulf separated the Cappadocians and Eunomius more effectively and irreconcilably than any amount of theological and philosophical disagreement. In such matters, style was of supreme importance. Gregory of Nyssa, referring to his Contra Eunomium , requested that his readers devote special attention to the parts in which he demolished the arguments employed by Eunomius in his Apologia Apologiae to justify the trial imagery used in his Liber apologeticus ; but here substance, while important, is somewhat eclipsed by the duel between the two over the issue of prose style.^[176] Eloquence of language, an attainment emblematic of one's paideia , became part of the contest because even the educated person with little interest in theological learning appreciated the cadences of well-balanced phrases.

Although more accomplished than that of Aetius, Eunomius' prose revealed to trained eyes many belabored rhetorical devices and the tortuous style of the much-maligned Second Sophistic, though he was dearly able to compose in good Attic Greek. Eunomius' rhetorical ploy was attributed by his enemies to an excessive desire to impress his audience. His baroque presentation betrayed an obsession with scoring points () and the inability to admit defeat or show proper deference.

Using the language of a wrestling match—deliberately adopted to answer Eunomius' earlier interpretation of his appointment to the bishopric of Cyzicus as an athlos , a prize for victory—Gregory of Nyssa called Eunomius a "bad sport" for not admitting defeat in argument. An explicit analogy between athletic contest and verbal argumentation can be traced to ancient works, including Aristotle's De sophisticis elenchis :

For just as unfairness in an athletic contest takes a definite form and is an unfair kind of fighting, so contentious reasoning is an unfair kind of fighting in argument; for in the former case those who are bent on victory at all costs stick at nothing, so too in the latter case do contentious arguers. Those, then, who behave like this merely to win a victory, are generally regarded as contentious and quarrelsome, while those who do so to win a reputation which will help them make money are regarded as sophistical. . . . Quarrelsome people and sophists use the same arguments, but not for the same reasons; and the same argument will be sophistical and contentious but not from the same point of view. If the semblance of victory is the motive, it is contentious; if the semblance of wisdom, it is sophistical: for sophistry is an appearance of wisdom without the reality.^[177]

[175] See Eunomius, Liber apologeticus 27 (Vaggione, Eunomius , 72-73).

[176] Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun . 1.11ff. (Jaeger, ed., 1.25ff.).

[177] Aristotle, De sophisticis elenchis 11.171b (Forster and Furley, eds., 62-63).

Viewed in this light, Eunomius and those like him were at once contentious and sophistic. To a well-born male in late antiquity, this kind of unsporting behavior was to be expected only of someone who was not a gentleman. A clever person who would violate the rules of a sport could not be relied on to uphold social peace and the greater good, but instead would most likely stir up trouble for the sake of self-aggrandizement. All in all, it was far better to affect simplicity and detachment than to become too clever and obsessed with victory.

Eunomius was, to be sure, sensitive to such criticisms. He maintained that he did not advance his self-consciously controversial theological views out of ambition () or a love of rivalry (). Using the rhetoric of outsiders, he pronounced that true judgment transcended social considerations, even the powerful claims of kinship, "which so often darken the soul's power of judgement."^[178] Yet his radical subordination of philia to personal philosophical judgment certainly undermined the very basis of the authority of ecclesiastical elites, who depended on philia to knit together their privileged social worlds.^[179]

What was outrageous about Aetius, Eunomius, and their sympathizers was not so much their theology as the manner in which they sought to propagate it. According to Sozomen, Aetius was deposed from the diaconate

because he wrote in a combative manner () to demonstrate a philosophical position () which diverged from the expressed ecclesiastical position, and because he constructed arguments in a dishonorable fashion (), and because he was the cause of the uproar and factionalism in the churches ().^[180]

Thus Aetius was accused of recklessly bringing about with his dialectical art what elites in the ancient world feared most, confusion and strife, tarache and stasis . This he did because he was not properly formed in paideia . The cultivation of paideia was a process of socialization that ideally enabled a person to know how to act responsibly in public.^[181]

[178] Eunomius, Liber apotogeticus 2 (Vaggione, Eunomius , 36-37).

[179] See Van Dam, "Emperors, Bishops and Friends," 53-76.

[180] Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 4.24 (Bidez, ed., 178).

[181] An admirable description of the mores of paideia is given by Faster in Guardians of Language , 60-61, where he interprets the meaning of verecundia in Macrobius' Saturnalia :

One of the cardinal virtues, verecundia can be translated as 'modesty'; more accurately (if more cumbersomely), it names the sense of propriety deriving from a regard for the opinion of other men and an awareness of one's own position (especially one's hierarchical position) relative to others in a given context. . . . Verecundia is the virtue of knowing one's place, the virtue par excellence of the status quo , an abundantly social virtue, regulating the behavior of men in groups.

These social virtues, the fruits of prescribed moral formation, were said to be lacking in the Anomoeans, who spoke with misplaced parrhesia .^[182] Gregory of Nyssa accused them of not knowing when to speak and when to remain silent.^[183] By contrast, the philosopher Chrysanthius, who belonged to the senatorial rank, knew, according to Eunapius, what to say and what to leave unspoken ().^[184] Synesius,^[185] a leading citizen and later bishop of Cyrene, claimed that only properly educated persons knew how to act responsibly in public by adhering to the middle course; "the uneducated fellow, on the other hand, normally fell prey to one of two extremes: either to stay silent altogether or to speak aloud on matters that one customarily kept silent on ()."^[186]

Paideia and Ascetic Virtues

Ancient paideia was not merely a program of education. Most of all, it was a process of moral formation and a way of life. In this respect, the marks of traditional paideia , including the cultivation of philanthropic and ascetic virtues, came to represent useful defenses against the demanding claims of the dialectical questioners. In stark contrast to the individualistic and confrontational tendencies of the latter ethos , the ascetic way of life shunned dissension. Though an ascetic could periodically exercise his parrhesia on behalf of the just,^[187] or to correct those who had lapsed into error,^[188] he was normally someone who stood above unseemly sectarian rivalry.^[189] When Basil of Caesarea advised Chilo on the proper behavior for a Christian ascetic, he cautioned him especially about the need to shun controversy because someone who wished to find God must be "quiet of demeanour, not hasty in speech, nor contentious (), quarrelsome (), vainglorious, nor given to interpreting of texts ()."^[190]

[182] Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 6.26 (Bidez, ed., 275-76).

[184] Eunapius, VS 500.

[185] See E. Cavalcanti, "Y a-t-il des problèmes eunomiens dans la pensée trinitaire de Synésius.?" SP 13 (1975): 138-44.

[186] Synesius of Cyrene, Dion (PG 66:1128A). See C. H. Coster, "Synesius, a curialis of the Time of the Emperor Arcadius," Byzantion 15 (1940-41): 10-38.

[187] See Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 7.6 (Bidez, ed., 307-8).

[188] See Isidore of Pelusium, Ep . 5.171.

[189] A wise person gives good, uninterested advice, whereas a clever person calculates for his own advantage; see Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 6.13.1144a.

[190] Basil, Ep . 42 (Deferrari, ed., 1:248-49).

The strong opposition between the values of dialectician and ascetic was frequently invoked in the polemic against the former. In his Contra Eunomium , partly an apologia defending his brother Basil against Eunomius' accusations that the Caesarean prelate was lacking in intelligence, Gregory of Nyssa asked his readers to compare the characters of his brother and Eunomius and then to choose between them.^[191] The manner in which the choice was presented left no doubt as to how his readers ought to make their selection: Basil, when not yet a priest, had distributed his inheritance to the poor, while Eunomius had disgraced himself by living a dissolute life in Constantinople;^[192] Basil cultivated an austere and sober way of life, while Eunomius indulged his appetites.^[193] Sozomen later pronounced his judgment that Eunomians in general did not practice philosophy in deed, for they

were not in the habit of praising a good way of life () or manners or mercy toward those in need—unless they should extol the same deeds—as much as someone who would discourse in an eristic fashion and would appear to triumph in syllogistic reasoning. Such a person is considered pious () above all others.^[194]

This portrayal unmistakably served the polemical purpose of deprecating the Anomoeans before an audience unsympathetic to their obsessive cleverness and lack of concern for Christian works.^[195] It would, however, be rash simply to pass by this comment as an entirely unfounded accusation, for ancient polemic often contained a kernel, however small, of truth. Furthermore, I suggest that this alleged social attitude harmonizes with a particular cultural model that can adequately describe the Anomoean movement.

Even within fairly homogenous cultures, people seldom ascribe the same degree of worth to an identical set of cultural values. Thus we cannot assume that the vast majority of late antique Christians appreciated the kinds of "Christian works" cited by Sozomen to an equal extent,

[191] Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun . 1.10 (Jaeger, ed., 1:25).

[192] On Basil's activities as a benefactor, see S. Giet, Les idées et l'action sociales de saint Basile (Paris, 1941), esp. 419-23; B. Gain, L'Église de Cappadoce au IV siècle d'après la correspondance de Basile de Césarée 330-379, OCA 225 (Rome, 1985), 277-87.

[193] See Jerome, De viris illustribus 23. In the competition between Justin Martyr and Crescens, gluttony and the fear of death were two faults that discredited a philosopher from consideration.

[194] Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 6.26 (Bidez, ed., 272-73).

[195] See Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun . 3.1-2 (Jaeger, ed., 2:3-4) on people's natural suspicions toward those who were clever in speech. This was already a tired topos; see Socrates' claim not to be deinos legein in Plato's Apologia 1. See M. Girardi, "'Semplicità' e ortodossia nel dibatitto antiariano di Basilio di Cesarea: la raffigurazione dell'eretico," Vetera Christianorum 15 (1978): 51-74.

or that their definitions of a eusebes , a pious person, necessarily agreed. The Anomoeans exemplified a culture of great upward social mobility, particularly in the persons of Aetius and Eunomius, whose status was achieved by the charismatic authority derived from their verbal skills. Their eristic abilities could only be validated in open contests with others: the agon was therefore a necessary part of their world.

The centrality of dialectical prowess to Anomoean culture could in theory find expression in venues less confrontational than out-and-out debates, but this redirection often did not occur during the pioneering generation. Subsequent generations usually took up the agenda of cultivating the aristocratic reserve and philanthropy expected of the upper classes. Further, it is likely that Eunomius and his associates did not sympathize with monastic ideals because the cenobitic form of Christian asceticism had been propagated in Asia Minor by their inveterate enemies, Eustathius of Sebaste and Basil of Caesarea.^[196]

This convoluted conflict continued into the fifth century. In contrast to the orthodox responses in adversarial sources already discussed, the writings of Philostorgius present the Eunomian case.^[197] Philostorgius' family, originally from Cappadocia, embraced the teachings of Eunomius when his father Carterius converted his mother, uncles, and grandfather from a Nicene theological position.^[198] The family's self-conscious choice to depart from the stance of Basil of Caesarea, under whom Carterius' father-in-law served as priest, is a testament to the vital appeal of this sectarian alternative in fifth-century Cappadocia.

As a young man of about twenty, Philostorgius had been deeply impressed by Eunomius during a visit to his estate, to which he had retired from 387 to 390, and had eventually written a laudatory biography (now lost). Later the historian became a partisan in the losing battle against imperial orthodoxy. Indeed, his Historia ecclesiastica , characterized by Photius of Constantinople as an encomium of heretics,^[199] omitted mention of many prominent figures who were unsympathetic to Eunomius' cause, including John Chrysostom, as if to impose on these figures the penalty of damnatio memoriae .

Refuting the charge that Eunomians harbored no love for good deeds or an ascetic way of life, Philostorgius expressed open admiration for certain ascetics who were not Eunomians. His glowing portrayal of

[196] See D. Amand, L'ascèse monastique de saint Basile (Paris, 1949); M. Simonetti, La crisi ariana nel IV secolo (Rome, 1975), 411-18.

[197] See G. Geutz, RE 20:119-22, s.v. "Philostorgius 3."

[198] See Philostorgius, Hist. eccl . 9.8-9.

[199] Photius, Bibliotheca 137-38.

Theophilus Indus, a monk supposed to have converted many inhabitants of India to Christianity, may be attributed to his appreciation for Theophilus as a seasoned traveler and as a successful missionary.^[200]

Philostorgius followed this account by saying that Eunomians too were willing and able to convert others. He pointed to certain early fifth-century Eunomians who were known as rigorous ascetics and performers of miracles. Among his examples was Agapetus, a Eunomian who performed many paradoxa erga , miraculous wonders, causing witnesses to convert to Christianity.^[201] We may reasonably surmise that this decidedly apologetic emphasis arose, at least partly, as a response to criticisms of Anomoeans reviewed earlier.

But Philostorgius' interest in asceticism did not extend to the institution of organized monasticism featured prominently in the accounts of Theodoret, Socrates, and Sozomen. The modem editors of Philostorgius' Historia ecclesiastica , comparing Theodoret's exaggerated reverence toward monks, propose convincingly that Philostorgius should not be expected to approve of an institution that received its impetus from Eunomius' enemies, Eustathius of Sebaste and Basil of Caesarea.^[202]

Monks were drawn predominantly from the ranks of the humiliores ; these unkempt souls found little favor with urban elites. Pagan disdain for illiterate black-robed monks was faintly echoed by the lay Christian Sozomen, an admirer of ascetics who nevertheless recognized their ignorance of civilized conduct, including the settling of differences. In his account of the Origenist controversy, Sozomen related that

a certain terrible conflict () reigned among the monks out of this. They did not think that they should persuade each other by conducting debates () among themselves in an orderly fashion (), but they turned to deeds of outrage ().^[203]

The crude, barbaric "simplicity" of the desert monks did not commend itself to Philostorgius. Like Socrates and Sozomen after him, he was an educated layman who valued culture. Judging from his work, both his learning and his range of interests exceeded those of his anti-Eunomian counterparts. Philostorgius was conversant in biblical studies and was keenly interested in the intricacies of dogmatic controversies,

[200] See Philostorgius, Hist. eccl . 2.6; 3.4-5.

[201] See Philostorgius, Hist. eccl . 2.8.

[202] Bidez and Winkelmann, eds., cxii-cxiii. See C. A. Frazee, "Anatolian Asceticism in the Fourth Century: Eustathios of Sebastea and Basil of Caesarea," Catholic Historical Review 66 (1980): 16-33; L. Lèbe, "Saint Basile et ses règles morales," Revue Bénédictine 75 (1965): 193-200.

[203] Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 8.12 (Bidez, ed., 366).

which he described with a familiarity noticeably missing from Socrates' and Sozomen's narratives.^[204]

Philostorgius possessed many other admirable qualities. Like Cosmas Indicopleustes, he was a sectarian layman well-traveled and well-informed about contemporary scientific theories regarding earthquakes, meteorites, astronomy, cosmography, and similar phenomena.^[205] He also had some knowledge of medicine.^[206] Allusions in the Historia ecclesiastica indicate a grasp of ancient learning comparable to that of the classicizing historians writing at around the same time.^[207] Yet at heart Philostorgius was resolutely Christian, to the extent of composing refutations to Porphyry's attacks on Christianity.^[208]

It is remarkable that the Eunomian interpretation of Christianity continued to attract strong devotion within the intellectual circles of an imperial state that had tried repeatedly to stamp it out through public humiliation^[209] and stiff legal penalties, including the imposition of the infamia of an intestabilis , the deprivation of one's competence to make a legally binding testament.^[210] Clearly, the intellectual rigor of Eunomian Christianity appealed to Philostorgius and many like him.

In Philostorgius the new wine had aged in the span of a generation. Skill in debate still figured significantly in his work, but the charisma of being deinos legein now stood as one among many virtues. The uncompromising sharpness of the first generation of dialectical questioners had mellowed into a culturally more established, and more rounded, form of habitus . It may not be too much to say that in Philostorgius a synthesis was achieved between the values of the Cappadocians and those of the early Anomoeans.

[204] Philostorgius' Hist. eccl . 9.14, 9.14a; contrast Sozomen, Hist. eccl . 6.27, where the author explained that he neither understood well nor could easily explain the dogmatic controversies.

[205] See Bidez and Winkelmann, eds., cix.

[206] See Philostorgius, Hist. eccl . 3.15.

[207] See R. C. Blockley, The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus , ARCA. Classical and Medieval Texts, Papers and Monographs 6 (Liverpool, 1981), 86-94.

[208] Philostorgius, Hist. eccl . 10.10.

[209] According to Parastaseis syntomai chronikai 39, Theodosius II erected in the forum of Constantinople statues of Eunomius, Arius, Sabellius, and Macedonius, so that passersby could "shit, piss, and spit" on them. These were still visible in the eighth century.

[210] E.g., Codex Theod. 16.5.17, 21-23, 25, 27, 31-32, 34, 36, 49, 58, 61, 65; 16.6.7. On the implications of the imposition of infamia on individuals, see A. H. J. Greenidge, Infamia: Its Place in Roman Public and Private Law (Oxford, 1894), 144-53, 186-99.