Theodosius
This able general. from whom descended a line of Roman emperors, after having acquired a great military reputation, was sent A. D. 367 by Valentinian I. to drive away the Picts and Scots, who were ravaging Britain. Theodosius crossed the straits from Boulogne with his troops of Heruli, Batavians, Jovii, and Victores, and landed at Sandwich. On his road to London he defeated several hordes of the barbarian invaders ; and the citizens of London, who were despairing of their safety, gladly received him within their walls. After establishing order and confidence, he commenced his operations against the invaders, and in two campaigns cleared the province of its savage enemies, and repaired and strengthened the military positions. He drove the Caledonians to the northern part of the island. and formed a province or provincial division of Valentia, or Valentiniana, so named in honour of Valentinian. This tract composed the country between the wall of Severus and the rampart of Antoninus, which Theodosius recovered from the enemy. The history of these campaigns is recorded by Ammianus Marcellinus (27.8, 28.3). Claudian leads us to infer that Theodosius also pursued the enemies of Rome on the stormy seas of the North; and the Orkneys and Thule were stained with the blood of the Picts and the Saxons. (In Quart. Cons. Honor. 31, &c.)
Theodosius, on his return from Britain A. D. 370, was rewarded for his services with the rank of master-general of the cavalry, and being stationed on the Upper Danube, he defeated the Alemanni. In A. D. 372, Firmus, a Moor, the son of Nabal or Nubal, the most powerful of the Moorish princes who professed obedience to the sovereignty of Rome, revolted against the Roman authority; and the natives, who were exasperated at the tyranny of Count Romanus, the governor of A frica, joined the standard of Firmus. The Moorish chieftain plundered Caesarea, on the site of the modern Algiers, and made himself master of Mauritania and Numidia ; and he is said to have assumed the title of king. Romanus being unable to oppose this active enemy, Theodosius was sent to Africa about the close of 372 or the beginning of 373. He sailed from the Rhone and landed at Igilgilis, before the Moorish chief heard of his coming. The first step of Theodosius was to arrest Romanus, whose maladministration was considered to be the cause of the revolt. The campaign against Firmus is recorded by Ammianus (29.5) in a long, most confused, and corrupt chapter, out of which Gibbon has extracted a narrative. Firmus had the cunning and treachery of Jugurtha, and Theodosius displayed all the talents of Metellus, in his negotiations with the Moor, and in pursuit of him through a country which presented unexpected difficulties to regular troops. Firmus at last fled to Igmazen, king of the Isaflenses, a people of whose position Ammianus gives no indication. Igmazen was summoned to surrender Firmus, and after having felt the Roman power, and the consequences of refusal, he determined to give him up. Firmus escaped by a voluntary death. He first made himself drunk, and while his guards were asleep, hanged himself by a rope, which he fixed to a nail in the wall. The dead body was given up to Theodosius, who led his troops back to Sitifis. In the reign of Valens, A. D. 376, Theodosius was beheaded at Carthage. The cause of his execution is unknown. (Gibbon, Decline and Fall, vol. 4.100.25; Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, vol. v., where all the authorities are referred to.) [G.L]
1. was the son of Theodosius, who restored Britain to the empire, and was beheaded at Carthage. The family of Theodosius was Spanish, and the future emperor was born in Spain, about A. D. 346, as some say at Italica, the birth-place of Trajan, though other authorities say that he was a native of Cauca in Gallicia. His panegyrists derive his descent from Trajan, but this lofty lineage seems not to have been discovered until Theodosius was invested with the imperial purple.
Theodosius received a good education; and he learned the art of war under his own father, whom he accompanied in his British campaigns. During his father's lifetime he was raised to the rank of Duke (dux) of Moesia, where he defeated the Sarmatians (A. D. 374), and saved the province. On the death of his father (A. D. 376), he retired before court intrigues to his native country, where he cultivated his own lands, which probably lay near his native place between Segovia and Valladolid. At this the he was already married to a Spanish woman, Aelia Flacilla or Placilla, who is sometimes called Placidia, by whom he became the father of Arcadius, Honorius, and a daughter Pulcheria. From this peaceful retirement he was called in the thirty-third year of his age to receive the imperial purple. Valens, the colleague of Gratian, had recently lost his life at Hadrianople (A. D. 378), where the Roman army was completely broken by the Goths, and Gratian, feeling himself unable to sustain the burden of the empire, invited Theodosius to fill the place of Valens. Theodosius was declared Augustus by Gratian at Sirmium in Pannonia, on the 19th of January A. D. 379. He was intrusted with the administration of Thrace, Asia, and Egypt, which had been held by Valens, together with Dacia and Macedonia. The new emperor of the East had the conduct of the war against the Goths.
The history of Ammianus Marcellinus ends with the death of Valens, and the authorities on which the historian of the reign of Theodosius has to rely, are greatly inferior to Ammianus. Their character is well expressed by Gibbon in a few words, and they are referred to by Tillemont (Histoire des Empereurs, v.), with his usual diligence and accuracy.
The Romans were disheartened by the bloody defeat which they had sustained on the plains of Hadrianople, and the Goths were insolent in their victory. Theodosius was too prudent to lead dispirited troops against a successful enemy, and he formed his head quarters at Thessalonica, the capital of the diocese or division of Macedonia, from whence he could watch the movements of the Goths. In four years' campaigns (A. D. 379-382), of which the particulars are imperfectly recorded, Theodosius revived the courage of the Roman soldiers, and while he seems to have prudently kept aloof from any general engagement, he took all opportunities of attacking his enemy in detail, and securing for his men the advantage of victory without the danger of defeat. The Goths, who were not held together by any well-constituted authority, and only by the ability of their commander Fritigern, became disorganized by his death, and were split up into numerous bands which went about seizing all that they wanted, and destroying that which they had not the prudence to reserve for another time. Jealousy arose between the Ostrogoths and the Visigoths; and Theodosius by his agents added the inducement of money to those who were discontented. Modares, a chieftain of rank, went over to the Romans, among whom he obtained the rank of mastergeneral, and he earned his reward by surprising and massacring a body of Goths, and carrying off a great number of captives with four thousand waggons (Zosimus, 4.25). In A. D. 381, Athanaric was compelled to leave his forests, and to cross the Danube; and many of those who had formerly acknowledged Fritigern as their leader, and were weary of anarchy, now yielded obedience to this Gothic judge. Tillemont conjectures that Athanaric was expelled by Fritigern, Alatheus, and Saphrax; but Gibbon's narrative seems to signify (for seems is all the meaning that in many cases can be imputed to it) that Fritigern was already dead. However Athanaric was too old and too prudent to carry on war with the new emperor : he listened to proposals of peace, and he even went to Constantinople to visit the emperor. Theodosius left the city to meet him, and received him with the greatest respect. The Goth was struck with amazement at the magnificence of Constantinople, and exclaimed that the Roman emperor was an " earthly God." Athanaric fell ill at Constantinople, and died there. Theodosius gave him a splendid funeral, and erected a monument to his memory. This politic behaviour gained over the whole army of Athanaric; and the adhesion of so large a body of the Visigoths was followed by the submission of the rest. " The general or rather final capitulation of the Goths may be dated four years, one month, and twenty-five days after the defeat and death of the emperor Valens." (Gibbon; comp. Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, vol. v. p. 216.)
The Ostrogoths, who had retired from the provinces of the Danube about four years ago, returned (A. D. 386) to the lower course of that river recruited by an army of Scythians, whom none of the inhabitants on the banks of the Danube had ever seen before (Zosimus, 4.38). Promotus, the general on the Thracian frontier, who knew that he was a match for the invaders, thought it prudent to draw them over to the south bank, without letting them wait for their opportunity in the winter; and by his spies he encouraged them to hope that by secretly crossing the river, they might destroy the Roman army. The passage was made on a dark night in numerous canoes; but the Ostrogoths discovered their mistake when they found the south bank of the Danube guarded by a triple row of vessels through which they could not penetrate. At the same time the Roman galleys descending the river, swept before them the frail boats of the Ostrogoths, and Alatheus the king, and his bravest troops, were either drowned in the Danube or destroyed by the sword. Those who escaped sued for mercy to the Romans. It is uncertain whether Theodosius had personally any share in this victory. Zosimus says that after the victory Promotus sent for Theodosius, who was at no great distance. If the historian Zosimus unjustly deprives Theodosius of all merit, the poet Claudian made amends for it by flattery and exaggeration.
A treaty was made with the Goths, the precise date and terms of which do not appear to be known; but they were settled within the limits of the empire, in tracts which were neglected or unoccupied. A colony of Visigoths was established in Thrace, and the remains of the Ostrogoths were planted in Phrygia and Lydia. They were not scattered among the population of Thrace or Asia Minor, but they obtained whole districts in which they still lived as a Gothic people, acknowledging the emperor as their sovereign. but probably retaining jurisdiction in all disputes among themselves The chieftains still governed their followers, lowers, but there was no kingly dignity. Forty thousand Goths were kept in the service of the Eastern empire, under the title of Foederati, and were distinguished from the other troops by golden collars, better pay. and more licence. But though the Goths were thus converted from enemies into dubious allies. their settlement within the limits of the empire is justly viewed as the immediate cause of the downfal of the western division. In the civil war against Maximus (A. D. 388), some of those barbarians who were in his army listened to the proposals of Maximus. but their treachery being discovered, they fled into the marshes and forests of Macedonia, where they were pursued by Theodosius and cut to pieces.
Maximus, a native of Spain, like Theodosius, was living in Britain in retirement or in exile. When this province revolted against Gratian. Maxims was chosen their leader. and he invaded Gaul with a powerful army. Gratian fled from Paris to Lyon, where he was overtaken by Andragathius, the commander of the cavalry of Maximus and put to death (A. D. 383). Maximus sent an envoy to Theodosius to explain and justify his conduct, to excuse the assassination of Gratian as having been accomplished without his orders. and to offer to the emperor of the East peace or war. A war with the fierce soldiers of the north would perhaps have been an unequal contest for Theodosius, whose dominions had recently suffered from the ravages of the Goths; and reluctantly, as we may conclude, he made a treaty with Maximus, whom he acknowledged emperor of the countries north of the Aips, but he secured to Valentinian the brother of Gratian, Italy, Africa, and western Illyricum Thus the empire was divided into three parts; one of which, an empire won by usurpation, consisted of three rich countries, -- Spain, Gaul, and Britain.
Theodosius was the son of a Christian father, whose ancestors acknowledged the creed of Nicaea ; and next to Constantine he became the great glory of the Christian church. The merits of Gratian secured him from the orthodox Christians a rank equivalent to that of a saint; and after his death they found a worthy successor to his orthodoxy in the more vigorous emperor of the East. Theodosius was not baptized until the end of the first year of his reign, when he was admonished by a serious illness no longer to delay this ceremony. In A. D. 380, before he commenced operations tions against the Goths, he was baptized at Thessalonica salonica by the archbishop Ascolius, in the orthodox faith of the Trinity; and his baptism was immeddiately followed by a solemn edict which fixed the faith of his subjects (Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, vol. v. p. 198; Cod. Theod. 16. tit. 1. s. 2), and branded with the name of heretics all who dissented front the imperial creed. The edict declared " according to the discipline of the apostles, and the doctrine of the gospel, let us believe the sole deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, under an equal Majesty and a pious Trinity : we authorise the followers of this doctrine to assume the title of Catholic Christians; and as we judge that all others are extravagant madmen. we brand them with the name of heretics, and declare that their conventicles shall no longer usurp the respectable appellation of churches : besides the condemnation of divine justice, they must expect to suffer the severe penalties which our authority, guided by heavenly wisdom, shall think proper to inflict on them" (Gibbon, vol. 5.100.27). The faith which Theodosius so ardently embraced can hardly be supposed to be the result of a subtle inquiry into the metaphysical distinction between the sameness of substance or strict homoousian doctrine of Athanasius, and the similarity of substance in the Father and the Son, or the homoiousian doctrine it which some of the Arians sought refuge. A singular anecdote is told of Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium and afterwards a saint, who administered to Theodosius a practical lesson on the homoousian doctrine. It was in A. D. 383, just after Theodosius had raised his son Arcadius to the rank of Augustus, and the two emperors were seated on a throne to receive the homage of their subjects. Amphilochius saluted Theodosius with reverence; his son he addressed with the familiarity of an equal. The emperor, indignant at this rudeness, ordered the bishop to be dragged from his presence, when he exclaimed. " Such is the treatment, O emperor, which the King of heaven has prepared for those impious men who affect to worship the Father, but who refuse to acknowledge the equal majesty of his divine Son." Theodosius embraced the bishop, and never forgot the lesson. Arcadius was at this time about six years of age.
Constantinople was the head-quarters of Arianism at the time of the accession of Theodosius ; but his baptism in the orthodox faith and his edict gave the Catholics hopes of their supremacy being re-established. The emperor entered Constantinople with his army, and offered Damophilus the Arian prelate the alternative of subscribing to the creed of Nicaea or of resignation. Damophilus resigned his dignities, and retired into exile and poverty. Gregory of Nazianzus, who had laboured hard to restore the Catholic faith at Constantinople, was placed on the archiepiscopal throne which Damophilus had left vacant. Early in A. D. 381, Theodosius declared his intention to expel from all the churches both bishops and clergy who should refuse to profess the creed of Nicaea; and Sapor, his lieutenant, was armed with full powers to effect a change, which was accomplished without disturbance in all the Eastern empire. In the month of May (A. D. 381) a meeting of one hundred and fifty bishops who formed the first general council of Constantinople, and the second of the oecumenical general councils, was assembled to confirm and complete the creed that had been established by the council of Nicaea. The council had to explain some things which were ambiguous, and to dispose of the sect of the Macedonians, who, to the heresy of homoiousianism, added that of a belief that the Holy Ghost was created (κτιστόν). * Gibbon seems to have misunderstood the nature of this heresy. The council declared the equal divinity of the Holy Ghost, the third person in the Trinity, which dootrine has prevailed in the Eastern church without interruption to the present time. After the death of Meletius, Gregory of Nazianzus presided in this council, and he has left a picture of the turbulent and disorderly proceedings which characterised its close.
Theodosius, after establishing the supremacy of the Catholic faith by the council of Constantinople, proceeded to give it effect. In the course of fifteen years (A. D. 380-394) he published fifteen decrees against heretics, or those who were not of his own creed. The penalties were most particularly directed against those who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity; and they extended to ministers, assemblies, and the persons of heretics. It was about the time that the council was sitting that he deprived all persons who apostatised from Christianity to Paganism of the right which every Roman citizen had enjoyed at least from the time of the Twelve Tables, of disposing of his property by testament. In July (A. D. 381) he forbade the Arians and Eunomians to build any church ; and the law appears to mean that every place of worship which they already possessed should be taken from then. The various enactments against heretics are contained in the Code of Theodosius (16. tit. 5. s. 6-23; and the commentary of Gothofredus) : the Eunomians, whose guilt consisted in denying any resemblance between the two substances, stances, and who were accordingly Anomoeans, were also deprived of the power of testamentary disposition, and of taking by testamentary gift : they seem, in fact, to have been deprived of all the rights of citizens. The Manichaean heresy was punishable with death; and the same penalty threatened the Audians or the Quartodecimans, who celebrated the festival of Easter on the wrong day. To the reign of Theodosius belonged the glory or the infamy of establishing Inquisitors of Faith, who seem to have been specially enjoined to look after the crime of the Quartodecimans. Though Theodosius thus established the principle of persecution, it is said that his rival Maximus was the first Christian prince " who shed the blood of his Christian subjects on account of their religious opinions." It is fortunate for the fame of Theodosius that there is not the same evidence of his giving effect to his own laws as there is for the severity of Maximus, under whose reign Priscillianus and others suffered death for heresy at Treves, A. D. 385.
In A. D. 387 Maximus, not content with the possession of Spain, Gaul, and Britain, aspired to wrest Italy from the feeble hands of Valentinian II., who as an Arian was disliked by his Catholic subjects of Italy, and was opposed in his heretical projects by the zeal of Ambrose, the Catholic archbishop of Milan. Maximus was in sight of Milan, before Valentinian and his mother Justina, who directed the administration, were aware of his hostile intentions; and he entered the city without resistance. Justina and her son embarked from one of the harbours in the north part of the Hadriatic and arrived in safety at Thessalonica. No resistonce was made to Maximus, except by the small town of Aemona, on the border of Italy. Theodosius visited Justina and her son at Thessalonica, and reminded Valentinian that his opposition to the faith of Nicaea was the cause of his own ruin and of the success of Maximus. Valentinian, it is said, acknowledged his errors, and returned to the true faith; and the orthodox emperor promised to restore him to his throne : but perhaps he was influenced by other motives than gratitude to Gratian, and zeal in support of the Catholic faith. Theodosius was a widower; and Valentinian had a sister Galla, young and beautiful. Tillemont would fix the marriage of Theodosius and Galla a year before the visit to Thessalonica at the close of A. D. 886; or he would make a compromise by admitting that Theodosius asked her in marriage in A. D. 386, but did not actually marry her till A. D. 387 (Histoire, &c. vol. v. p. 740): his desire was to protect the piety of Theodosius from the scandal of a sensual motive. But Zosimus (4.44) states that Justina, a woman of influence, fluence, who knew the amorous propensities of Theodosius, prevailed over the irresolution of the emperor by her daughter's tears and beauty. Theodosius saw her and was captivated : he asked her of her mother for his wife, but he only obtained tained her on condition of restoring Valentinian. Though Gibbon has preferred the authority of Zosimus, there is some evidence opposed to it; and yet the narrative of Zosimus is so precise and circumstantial that it is difficult not to give credit to it. There is nothing improbable in the fact of a passion for a woman determining a political question.
After Theodosius had decided on his course, his operations were rapid and vigorous. He found Maximus encamped near Siscia, in Pannonia, a city situated on the great river Save. Maximus had not talent equal to his ambition, and Theodosius had a force which confounded the soldiers of the usurper by a mode of attack to which they were unaccustomed. His Huns, Alans, and his Goths were mounted archers, who annoyed the heavy troops of Gaul and Germany by the irregularity of a Parthian attack. Maximus, after sustaining one defeat on the banks of the Save, and probably a second, fled across the Alps, and shut himself up in Aquileia, just before Theodosius reached the gates. But in spite of his Moorish guard, he was given up to Theodosius by his own soldiers and the people of Aquileia, with his hands tied behind him. Theodosius, according to his panegyrist Pacatus, was not indisposed to pardon but his soldiers , saved him the difficulty of a decision, by dragging Maximus from his presence and beheading him. Maximus had left his son Victor in Gaul, with the title of Caesar, or perhaps of Augustus. Arbogastes, the active general of Theodosius, seized the youth, and put him to death a short time after his father. Theodosius spent the winter at Milan, and in the following year (June 13th, 389) he entered Rome in triumph, accompanied by Valentinian and his own son Holnorius.
Two events in the life of Theodosius may be brought into juxtaposition as evidence of his uncertain character and his savage temper. In A. D. 387, the city of Antioch complained of increased taxation, the necessary consequence of the wars in which the emperor had been engaged; and Antioch, as it had not suffered from an enemy whose ravages had been confined to Europe, was unwilling to bear its share of the expense of the Gothic campaigns. The complaints of the citizens were soon changed into active riot (February) : the states of the emperor, of his father, and of his wife Placilla, were thrown down; but these idle demonstrations were quickly suppressed by an armed force. The governor sent to the emperor at Constantinople an account of these riots, and the citizens of Antioch, in great alarm, despatched Flavian their bishop, and the senator Hilarius, to acknowledge their guilt and to pray for forgiveness. In March the judgment of the emperor was brought by Hellebicus and Caesarius, two of his officers, who declared that Antioch was degraded from the rank of a city, was stripped of its possessions and privileges, and reduced to the condition of a village dependent on Laodicea. The places of public amusement were shut up, and the usual distribution of corn was stopped, which was equivalent to a sentence of starvation against those who were accustomed to receive this pauper's allowance. A severe investigation was made into the circumstances of the riot, and those who were convicted by the extraordinary commissioners of the emperor peror lost their property, and were reduced to beggary. Some of the rioters, or of the accused, were put to death. The commissioners, however, suspended the complete execution of the emperor's sentence against the city, and Caesarius went to Constantinople to obtain a final answer from the emperor to the petition of the people and the prayers of the monks and hermits, who left their solitudes, and crowded to Antioch, to intercede for the metropolis of the East. The emperor had already relented at the entreaty of the bishop and the eloquent address of the senator; the senate of Constantinople had interceded for Antioch, and Theodosius pardoned the city, and all who had taken part in the riot. The property of those who had been convicted was restored, the poor got their allowance again, and Antioch resumed its former dignity and jurisdiction. Tillemont has collected all the circumstances of this affair of Antioch (Histoire, &c., vol. v. p. 261, &c.), at great length.
In A. D. 390, Thessalonica, the metropolis of the Illyrian provinces, was disturbed by a riot during the emperor's residence at Milan. Botheric. who commanded the soldiers there, had imprisoned one of the charioteers of the Circus, who had solicited a youth to a shameless intercourse. The populace in vain called for their favourite charioteer during the celebration of the games : the general kept him in the prison which his crime had merited. It seems that the populace was ready for insurrection ; a trifling cause was enough to set them in motion, and the garrison was weak. Botheric and his officers were overpowered and assassinated by the people, and their bodies were dragged about the streets. An inquiry into the riot, and the punishment of the guilty, was necessary and just; but Theodosius punished a whole city, guilty and innocent together. It is said that his minister Rufmus prompted the emperor to issue his savage orders, notwithstanding the intercession of the bishops. An army of barbarians was sent to Thessalonica instead of a civil commission supported by a sufficient force. The people were invited to the games of the Circus, and they came without suspicion; but as soon as the place was full, the soldiers received the signal for a massacre. For three hours the spectators were indiscriminately exposed to the fury of the soldiers, and seven thousand of them, or, as some accounts say, more than twice that number, paid the penalty of the insurrection. The soldiers, it is said, were ordered to produce a certain number of heads, an order which aggravates the guilt of Theodosius, who, if not softened by the usual feelings of humanity, might have remembered the city in which he had so often resided. This massacre, unparalleled in history, is a stain on the name of Theodosius, an eternal brand of infamy. Tillemont, who has so minutely recorded the clemency of Theodosius in the affair of Antioch, observes, " that this year (A. D. 390) is celebrated for the cruelties which the order of Theodosius caused to be committed at Thessalonica, and still more celebrated for the penance which Theodosius performed to expiate so great a crime. We only touch, in a few words, on an event so illustrious and important, because we reserve it for the his tory of St. Ambrosius." The illustrious and important event was the penance, more illustrious and important in the eyes of the pious historian than the unpardonable crime of massacring thousands. It is singular, as Gibbon remarks, that Zosimus, who is certainly not partial to Theodosius, perhaps hardly just, and exposes his faults, dots not mention the massacre of Thessalonica; and yet the fact is not doubtful.
Ambrosius, the archbishop of Milan, thought that the civil administration was an affair in which the clergy had an interest; and a riot at Callinicum on the Persian frontier, in which the fanatics of the place, at the instigation of their bishop, had burnt a place of worship of the Valentinians, and the synagogue of the Jews, found an apologist in the archbishop of Milan. The provincial magistrate had condemned the bishop to rebuild the synagogue, or to make good the damage, and the rioters to be punished; and the emperor confirmed this equitable and moderate sentence. But to tolerate difference of opinion was, in the archbishop's judgment, the same as to persecute the orthodox ; and Theodosius was compelled, by the archbishop's monitions and lectures, to let the bishop and his turbulent flock go unpunished. " St. Ambrosius," says Tillemont, " thought that a prince who pardoned so many other similar acts, ought not to expose the Christian religion to the insults of its enemies by so rigorous an order." The massacre of Thessalonica was a trial for the firmness of Ambrosius : he who thought that the burning of a Jew synagogue ought not to be punished could hardly overlook the massacre of a Christian city. He retired from the emperor's presence, but he represented his crime to him in a letter, and he told him that penitence alone could efface his guilt. But the archbishop was prudent in his remonstrances, and to protect himself, he called in the aid of a vision, in which he said that he had been warned not to offer the oblation in the name of Theodosius, nor in his presence. When the emperor proceeded to perform his devotions in the usual manner in the great church of Milan, the archbishop stopped him at the door, and demanded a further acknowledgment of his guilt. The conscience-struck Theodosius humbled himself before the church, which has recorded his penance as one of its greatest victories. He laid aside the insignia of imperial power, and in the posture of a suppliant in the-church of Milan, entreated pardon for his great sin before all the congregation. After eight months, the emperor was restored to communion with the church, at Christmas, A. D. 390.
Theodosius spent three years in Italy, during which he established Valentinian on the throne of the West, a measure for which his historians may claim the merit of generosity; for he probably would have had no difficulty in keeping the western empire, which he had wrested from the usurpation of Maximus. Theodosius returned to Constantinople early in November A. D. 391.
Valentinian II. did not long maintain his power, Arbogastes, who had served Gratian with fidelity, and had contributed under Theodosius to the overthrow of Maximus, was appointed master-general of the forces in Gaul. But he aspired to govern a master who had not vigour enough to command obedience, and the emperor's authority gradually declined. In A. D. 392 Valentinian made a last effort to resume his power, and he personally announced to Arbogastes that he was dismissed from all his employments. The general received the announcement with contempt; and in a few days after Valentinian was found dead. It was believed that he had been strangled by order of Arbogastes. The barbarian, who did not think it prudent to assume the imperial purple, set up Eugenius, a rhetorician, and formerly his secretary, as emperor of the West. Theodosius received the ambassadors of Eugenius, who announced his elevation, with dissembled indignation, for he was ill disposed to renew a war in the west, which he had only just ended. But his own pride, and the tears of his wife Galla, the sister of Valentinian, urged him to punish the usurper. Two years were spent in the preparation for this war; but the emperor, with prudent precaution, imitating the example of those who consulted the god of Delphi in the times of heathenism, sent a favourite eunuch to ask the advice of John of Lycopolis, an Egyptian anchorite, whether he should make war on Eugenius, or wait till Eugenius attacked him. John declared that Theodosius would be victorious, but yet not without loss and bloodshed, as in the war with Maximus ; that he would die in Italy after his victory, and leave to his son the empire of the west. " Thus Theodosius did not engage in this war any more than in the other, except by the order which God gave to him by his prophet." (Tillemont).
Theodosius prepared himself to fulfil the prophecy by recruiting his legions, with the aid of his two master-generals Stilicho and Timasius. Arbogastes, who commanded for Eugenius, posted himself on the border of Italy, but allowed Theodosius to pass the Julian Alps, and enter the plains which extend to Aquileia. Here he found the formidable army of Arbogastes, consisting of hardy Gauls and Germans. Theodosius attacked the enemy, but he was compelled to retire with great loss, particularly of his Gothic allies. Arbogastes now occupied the passes in his rear, and the emperor's position was most critical. But he was saved by the treachery of the generals of Eugenius, who sent to express their readiness to desert, if the rewards which they asked were granted. Theodosius accepted their conditions, and led his troops to a fresh attack on the camp of the enemy. A tempest, that rose during the battle, and blew full in the face of the troops of Eugenius, contributed to their discomfiture and the victory of Theodosius. The head of Eugenius was separated from his body, while he was suing for mercy at the feet of his conqueror; and Arbogastes, after wandering in the mountains, terminated his fortunes by his own sword. Theodosius received the submission of the west, and, at the intercession of Ambrosius, used his victory with moderation.
Theodosius died on the seventeenth of January A. D. 395, four months after the defeat of Eugenius, whether, as some say, in consequence of the fatigues of war, or, as others, in consequence of intemperate habits, it is not possible to decide. The two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, had already been elevated to the rank of Augusti, and it was arranged that the empire should be divided between them. Honorius was not in the war against Eugenius, but he came to Milan before his father died, and received from him the gift of the empire of the west. The arrival of Honorius was celebrated by the games of the Circus, at which the dying emperor assisted. Assessment
The formal destruction of paganism marks the reign of this orthodox emperor. " The ruin of paganism, in the age of Theodosius," says Gibbon, "is perhaps the only example of the total extirpation of any ancient and popular superstition, and may therefore deserve to be considered as a singular event in the history of the human mind." Without admitting the truth of this remark as to the total extirpation of paganism, we must assign to Theodosius the design to extirpate it. His rigorous steps to wards the overthrow of the ancient religion are traced by Tillemont with minute diligence (vol. v. p. 229, &c.). In December 381 he prohibited sacrifices, either by day or by night, in the temples or out of the temples; and also he forbade the curious inquisition into futurity by the examination of the viscera of animals. Libanius, in his oration in defence of the temples, written probably about A. D. 384, says, that the laws of Theodosius at that time had not closed the temples, nor prohibited persons from going there, nor the burning of incense, but only the sacrifice of animals. But so long as the temples existed, the old religion would subsist ; and therefore to destroy it the temples must be destroyed. Libanius complains that people, clothed in black (no doubt he means monks,) ran in bodies to the temples,overthrew the altars, pulled down the roofs and the walls, and sometimes killed the priests who resisted. He says, however, that soldiers were also employed in this work of demolition, and that in fact no temples were destroyed without the order of the emperor. Some few temples were converted into Christian churches, and thus preserved ; " but in almost every province of the Roman world, an army of fanatics, without authority and without discipline, invaded the peaceful inhabitants; and the ruin of the fairest structures of antiquity still displays the ravages of those barbarians, who alone had time and inclination to execute such laborious destruction."' (Gibbon.) The lands of the temples were probably given to the Christian churches as a general rule. (Tillemont.) Cynegius, the praetorian prefect of the East, was sent by Theodosius in 386 into Egypt, the seat of all monstrous superstitions, with a commission to prohibit idolatry, and to close the temples. It does not appear that he had any power to destroy them. It was probably not till 389 that the Christians obtained their great triumph over the idolatry of Egypt, by the destruction of the magnificent temple of Serapis at Alexandria. The fall of this great idol shook the popular belief of Egypt to its foundation. The emperor had given his orders to destroy the statue of Serapis; but the heathens believed that the deity would resent the slightest affront to his majesty. A soldier, bolder than the rest, encouraged by the archbishop Theophilus, dealt a blow against the cheek of Serapis with a ponderous axe, and the face of the idol fell to the ground. The deity silently submitted to his fate; the idol was broken in pieces, and dragged through the streets of Alexandria. The overthrow of the old religion, which was still practised, was accomplished by the last edict of Theodosius in 390 (Cod. Theod. 16. tit. 10. s. 12), which in harsh and intolerant terms, censured by a modern Christian writer, forbade, under severe penalties, in some cases extending to death, " the worship of an inanimate idol by the sacrifice of a guiltless victim." The spirit of the Theodosian edicts was that of the most bitter persecution; and while we commend his wishes to purge society of gross and debasing superstitions, we cannot reconcile the laws of the emperor with the religion which he professed, nor admit that persecution would have been so efficient a cure of idolatry as the inculcation of the doctrines of Christ, and the example of a practice conformable to them. But he who could order the massacre of Thessalonica was ill adapted to teach a faith which was contradicted by his practice.
The reign of Theodosius is one of the most important periods of the later empire. Gibbon has sketched it in a masterly manner, but too favourably for the character of Theodosius; who was probably a voluptuary, a sensualist, certainly a persecutor, cruel and vindictive. That he possessed some great qualities cannot be denied; and his natural temper may have been mild, but it was unequal and uncertain ; it wanted sufficient consistency to entitle him to the name of a truly great and good man. Tillemont has, with unwearied industry which allows nothing to escape it, collected, in his dry, annalistic fashion, all the materials for the reign of Theodosius; and Gibbon has largely availed himself of the labours of the learned ecclesiastic.
[G.L]
was the only son of the emperor Arcadius, who died on the first of May, A. D. 408. Theodosius was born early in A. D. 401, and was declared Augustus by his father in January A. D. 402. There is a story that Arcadius, by his testament, made Yezdigerd, king of Persia, the guardian of his son; but it hardly deserves notice, and certainly not refutation. On the death of Arcadius, the government was given to or assumed by the praefect Anthemius, the grandson of Philip, a minister of Constantius, and the grandfather of the emperor Anthemius. In A. D. 405 Anthemius was made consul and praetorian praefect of the East. He faithfully discharged his duty as guardian of the empire and the infant emperor. In the year in which Arcadius died. the Huns and the Scyrri entered Thrace under Uldin. who rejected all terms of accommodation, but, being deserted by some of his officers, the recrossed the Danube, after losing a great number of his Huns. The Scyrri, who loitered in his rear, were either killed or made prisoners, and many of the captives were sent to cultivate the lands in Asia. Anthenius strengthened the Illyrian frontiers. and protected Constantinople, by building what were called the great walls, probably in A. D. 413.
Theodosius had a sister, Pulcheria, born A. D. 399, who, in A. D. 414, became the guardian of her brother and the administrator of the empire, before she was sixteen years of age : she was declared Augusta on the fourth of July, A. D. 414. Pulcheria was undoubtedly a woman of some talent, though of a peculiar kind. She superintended the education of her brother, and directed the government at the same time; nor did her influence cease with the minority of Theodosius. [Pulcheria.] She educated her brother after her own ascetic notions; and though his literary instruction was not neglected, nor the exercises proper to form his health and strengthen his body, his political education was limited to the observance of the forms and ceremonials of the court. It may be that Pulcheria, with some vigour of understanding, had no knowledge of the more important duties of a man who is at the head of a nation. Pulcheria and her sisters, Arcadia and Marina, had publicly dedicated themselves to the service of God and to a life of chastity; and the whole imperial household was regulated in conformity to this principle. " Pulcheria," says Tillemont, a great admirer of this saint, " accustomed Theodosius to pray incessantly, to visit the churches often, and to make them presents; to respect the bishops and other ministers of the altar, &c." But if the young emperor was carefully protected against the dangers to which a youth in an exalted station is exposed, he was not trained in those studies which befit a man and an emperor. To excel in mechanical occupations, to write a fine hand, which, in a private station, may give amusement, and are at least harmless, imply in a prince a want of taste and of talent for more important things, or an illdirected education. Theodosius had, in fact, little talent, and his education was not adapted to improve it. He passed a blameless youth, for he was shut up in his palace, except when he went a hunting ; and he possessed the negative virtues of a retired and austere life. The ecclesiastics extol him for his piety and his respect to the church ; and he prosecuted the work which his grandfather commenced, by demolishing to their foundations the temples of idols, the monuments of the superstition and of the taste of the pagans. It was his ambition not to leave a vestige of the ancient religion behind him.
He published various edicts against heretics, and an edict specially directed against Gamaliel. the last patriarch of the Jews. By an edict of the 16th May, 415, he declared it incest for a widower to marry his wife's sister. and the children of such a marriage were made bastards. Constantius, in A. D. 355, had already enacted the same law, which, though enacted again in our own times, is protested against by the common understanding of mankind.
The great event of the life of an emperor who was a nullity, was his marriage, which was managed by his sister, who managed every thing. The woman whom his sister chose for his wife. and whom Theodosius married (probably in A. D. 421), was the accomplished Athenais, who, after her baptism, for she was a heathen, received the name of Eudocia. Her life from this time is intimately connected with the biography of her husband, and is told at length elsewhere. [Eudocia.]
About the close of A. D. 421 war broke out between the emperor of the East and Varanes or Bahram, the successor of Yezdigerd. A Christian bishop had signalized his zeal by burning a temple of the fire-worshippers at Susa, and this excess was followed by a persecution of the Christians by the Magi. This persecution, begun at the close of the reign of Yezdigerd, was continued under his successor ; and some Christian fugitives crossed the frontiers into the Roman territories to seek protection. The Persian king claimed the fugitives, but his demand was refused; and this, added to other causes of dispute, kindled a war between the two empires. Theodosius was not a soldier, and the war was carried on for about two years by his general Ardaburius, with no important results. The defence of Theodosiopolis in Mesopotamia has immortalised the name of its warrior bishop Eunomus. The town had been besieged by the enemy for some time, but the bishop and his flock stoutly held out, and destroyed the wooden towers of the enemy. The obstinate resistance of the place provoked the blasphemy of a Persian prince, who threatened to burn the temple of God when he took the town. The bishop, shocked at his impious threats, pointed at him a balista, which bore the potent name of St. Thomas, and the formidable machine discharged a stone which struck the blasphemer dead. Upon this the king of Persia lost heart, and withdrew his troops. (Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, vol. 6.100.13.)
Socrates, the chief authority for the history of the Persian war, says that Theodosius, notwithstanding his success in the war, was the first to propose terms of peace. A truce for one hundred years was concluded between the Persians and the Romans. The kingdom of Armenia, now extin-guished, was divided between the Persians and the Romans, an arrangement which gave to the empire of the East a new and extensive province. The division of Armenia probably followed the conclusion of a second Persian war, A. D. 441. In A. D. 423 died Honorius the emperor of the West. Placidia, the sister of Honorius, had been sent away from Italy, with her sons Valentinian and Honorius, by the Western emperor, a short time before his death, and she took refuge at Constantinople. The throne of the West was usurped by Joannes, who declared himself emperor. Theodosius refused to acknowledge the usurper, and sent against him a force commanded by Ardaburius. The usurper was taken in Ravenna, and his head was cut off, A. D. 425. Theodosius was enjoying the games of the Circus at Constantinople when the news came, and he showed his piety, as Tillemont remarks, by stopping the entertainment, and inviting all the people to go to the church with him, to return thanks to God for the death of the tyrant. Whether Theodosius had no ambition to keep the empire of the West, or those who governed him determined his conduct, he resolved to confer it on his youthful cousin Valentinian. Eudocia, the daughter of Theodosius, was betrothed to the young emperor, and she was married to him in A. D. 437.
The reign of the younger Theodosius was not free from the religious troubles which had distracted the reign of his grandfather Theodosius. The great dispute which originated with Nestorius, who was made patriarch of Constantinople in A. D. 428, and ended in the Council of Ephesus, A. D. 431, is described at length under Nestorius.
The Huns had ravaged the eastern provinces in the reign of Arcadius, the father of Theodosius ; and they were now the formidable neighbours of the empire on the frontier of the Danube. In A. D. 441 the Huns, under Attila and his brother Bleda, crossed the Danube, and took Viminiacum in Moesia; they broke through the Illyrian frontier, the fortresses of which offered only a feeble resistance, destroyed Sirmium, Singidunum (Belgrade), Sardica, and other towns, and extended their ravages into Thrace. Theodosius recalled the troops from Sicily which he had sent against Genseric king of the Vandals, and collected from Asia and Europe all the men that he could muster; but his generals were unable to direct this force efficiently, and after several defeats they retreated towards Constantinople, which alone, of all the cities between the Archipelago and the Euxine, remained for the protection of the emperor. The history of the ravages of Attila comprehends several years, and they were apparently interrupted by intervals of peace, for it was not till A. D. 447, the year of the great earthquake which destroyed part of the walls of Constantinople and threw down fifty seven towers, that the Huns approached, the capital, and peace was finally made. In A. D. 447 448 Theodosius concluded a disgraceful peace with the king of the Huns, to whom was given up a territory on the Danube extending from Singidunum to Novae, in the diocese of Thrace, and fifteen days' journey in breadth. The annual subsidy that had hitherto been paid to Attila, was increased from seven hundred pounds of gold to twenty-one hundred, and six thousand pounds of gold were to be paid on the spot. Theodosius had exhausted his treasury by extravagant expenditure, and his unfortunate subjects, who had been pillaged by the Huns, were pillaged again by this unwarlike and feeble emperor, to supply the demands of the barbarian conqueror. Attila also required all the deserters from his camp to be given up, and he claimed back, without any ransom, all his men who had been taken prisoners.
In A. D. 448 or 449 Theodosius sent an embassy to Attila, at the head of which was Maximin. The ambassador was accompanied by the historian Priscus, who has left a most interesting account of the domestic habits of Attila. [Priscus.] The proposed object of the embassy was to maintain the good understanding between the emperor of the East and the king of the Huns; but Theodosius had a private object to accomplish, the execution of which was entrusted only to Vigilius, the interpreter ; and this was the assassination of Attila. The ambassador passed through Sardica, and crossed the Danube; and in some place north of this river he had his first interview with Attila, whom he was obliged to follow in his progress northwards before he could conclude the business on which he was sent. The narrative of Priscus leads us to infer that the place in which the king of the Huns gave his final reception to the ambassador was in the plains of northern Hungary. The proposal to assassinate Attila had been made at Constantinople by the eunuch Chrysaphius, who then reigned in the name of Theodosius, and made to Edecon, a chieftain of the Scyrri. Vigilius was the median of communication between Chrysaphius and Edecon, who was to receive for his reward some of the wealth on which he had gazed with admiration at Constantinople. The scheme was communicated to the emperor, who approved of it. The emperor's conduct was rendered more disgraceful by the fact that Maximin, his ambassador, was exposed to all the danger of the discovery of this treachery, and, being kept in ignorance of it, had not even the choice of refusing to conduct the embassy. Edecon discovered the treachery to Attila, who, more generous than the Christian emperor, disdained to punish Vigilius, though he confessed his guilt; and looking at the affair as a matter of business, the barbarian took two hundred pounds of gold, instead of the life of Vigilius. But he sent two ambassadors to Constantinople, who boldly rebuked the emperor for his guilt, and demanded the head of Chrysaphius. Instead of directly refusing the demand, Theodosius sent a fresh embassy, loaded with presents, to deprecate the wrath of Attila, who preferring gold to vengeance, pardoned the emperor and his guilty associates : he even abandoned all claim to the country south of the Danube; but here his liberality was not great, for he had made it a desert.
In June A. D. 450, Theodosius was thrown from his horse as he was hunting near Constantinople, and received an injury from which he died, in the fiftieth year of his age and the forty-second of his long and inglorious reign. His sister Pulcheria succeeded him, but prudently took for her colleague in the empire the senator Marcian, and made him her husband. Works Codex Theodosianus
In the reign of Theodosius, and that of Valentinian III., who was emperor of the West from A. D. 425 to 455, was made the compilation called the Codex Theodosianus. In A. D. 429 the administration of the Eastern Empire declared that there should be formed a collection of the Constitutions of the Roman emperors from the time of Constantine to that date, after the model of the two collections of Gregorianus and Hermogenianus. The arrangement of the constitutions was to be determined by the matter to which they referred, and those which treated of several matters were to be divided, and each part placed under its appropriate title. Those constitutions which had been altered by subsequent constitutions were not always to be rejected, but the date of each constitution was to be given, and they were to be arranged in the order of time. Eight functionaries (illustres et spectabiles) and an advocate were appointed to compile this code. Nothing was done till A. D. 435, when a new commission was appointed with the same power as the former commission, and the additional power of making changes in the constitutions. The new commissioners were sixteen, part of whom were of the rank of Illustres, and part of the rank of Spectabiles. On the fifteenth of February, A. D. 438, the Code was published, and it was declared to be from the first of January, A. D. 439, the only authority for the " Jus Principale," or that law which was formed by imperial constitutions, from the time of Constantine. In the same year the Code was published at Rome, as law for the Western Empire also, by Valentinian.
The Code consists of sixteen books, which are divided into titles, with appropriate rubricae or headings; and the constitutions belonging to each title are arranged under it in chronological order. The first five books comprise the greater part of the constitution which relates to Jus Privatum ; the sixth, seventh, and eighth books contain the law that relates to the constitution and administration ; the ninth book treats of criminal law; the tenth and eleventh treat of the public revenue and some matters relating to procedure; the twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth books treat of the constitution and the administration of towns and other corporations; and the sixteenth contains the law relating to ecclesiastical matters. MSS Sources
The Theodosian Code has been preserved in an epitome contained in the Breviarium which was made by order of Alaric II., king of the Visigoths, in A. D. 506, but several constitutions and some entire titles are omitted in this epitome. It has also been preserved in the MSS. of the original Code, yet only in an incomplete form, and we have consequently to refer to the Breviarium for a considerable part of the Theodosian Code. The constitutions in the Code of Justinian, which belong to the period comprised in the Theodosian Code, are taken from the Code of Theodosius, but have undergone considerable alterations. Editions
After the edition of Cujacius, Paris, 1686, fol., the foundation for the text of the last eleven books of the Code was the MSS. of the original Code; but for the first five books and the beginning of the sixth book (tit. 1, and the beginning of title 2) the text of the epitome in the Breviarium was the foundation. The best of these editions, after the time of Cujacius, and that which is invaluable for the commentary, is that of J. Gothofredus. which was edited after his death by A. Marville, Lyon, 1665, 6 vols. folio; and afterwards by Ritter, Leipzig, 1736-1745, fol.
Recent discoveries have added to the last eleven books, and furnished considerable and most important additions to the first five books. The first discoveries which furnished materials for the text of the Code, were made by A. Peyron, at Turin, in a palimpsest : these discoveries have enabled us to make considerable additions to the first five books. These additions were published by Peyron in 1823. In 1820 Clossius discovered, in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, a MS. of the Breviarium, into which the copyist has transferred various pieces from a MS. of the original Code : they were published by Clossius in 1824. Wenck published in 1825, Leipzig, 8vo., the first five books of the Code, as we now possess them, with critical and explanatory notes.
The last and most complete edition of the text of the Theodosian Code is that by Hänel in the Corpus Juris Ante-justiniancum, published at Bonn, 1837. Assessment
The Theodosian Code, by its adoption in the Western Empire, established a uniformity of law in the East and the West. But as new laws would occasionally be necessary, and it was desirable to maintain this uniformity, it was agreed between the Eastern and the Western emperors, that future constitutions, which might be published in one part of the empire, should be forwarded to the other, and promulgated there also. The new constitutions were called Novellae Leges, or simply Novellae. In A. D. 447 Theodosius sent a number of such Novellae to Valentinian, who in the following year confirmed and promulgated them in the Western Empire. These Novellaee form the first collection of Novellae which followed the compilation of the Theodosian Code. Further Information
Gibbon, Hist. vol. 5.6.8vo. ed. : Tiliemont, Histoire des Empereurs, vol. vi.; and as to the Theodosian Code, Puchta, Instit. vol. i. ; and Böcking, Instit. i. p. 50. [G.L]
III., was compelled, perhaps, against his will, to be proclaimed emperor of the East in A. D. 716, by the fleet, which also declared that Anastasius, his predecessor, was unfit to reign. Theodosius filled the unimportant office of a collector of the revenue when he was taken to Constantinople to be crowned Emperor of the East. In January 716, he was proclaimed emperor, and in the following year he prudently abdicated, and left the throne for Leo the Isaurian, who commanded the troops in the East. Theodosius spent the rest of his life in the tranquil retirement of a monastery. [G.L]
literary.
1. Of Bithynia. a mathematician, who is referred to by Vitruvius (9.9. s. 8.1, Schneid.) as the inventor of a universal sun-dial (horologium πρὸς πᾶν κλῖμα). Strabo (xii. p.566) mentions him among the eminent natives of Bithynia, and informs us that his sons were also mathematicians. He must have lived before the time of Augustus, and therefore he cannot be, as some have supposed, the same person as Theodosius of Tripolis, who appears to have flourished later than the reign of Trajan. (See No. 2.)
2. Of Tripolis, a mathematician and astronomer of some distinction, was a philosopher of the sect of the Sceptics, or, to speak more exactly, a follower of Pyrrhon, whose philosophy, Theodosius himself contended, ought not properly to be called sceptical (D. L. 9.70). Works Attested works
Among other works of his, Suidas (s. v.) mentions a Commentary on the κεφάλαια of Theudas, who appears from another passage of Diogenes (9.116) to have lived not very long before the time of Sextus Empiricus, and therefore about the reign of Trajan. Suidas also enumerates σκεπτικὰ κεφάλαια among the works of Theodosius (s. v. and also s. v. Πυῤῥώνιος), and the same work is mentioned by Diogenes (9.70). Of the ancient mathematicians, Ptolemy does not refer to Theodosius, but his works are quoted by Theon, in his Commentary on Ptolemy, by Pappus, in his συναγωγή, and by Proclus, in his Hypotyposis Astronomica, p. 7.
Suidas mentions the following as his mathematical and astronomical works : -Σφαιρικὰ ἐν Βιβλίοις τρισίν, Περὶ ἡμερῶν καὶ νυκτῶν δύο, ὑπόμνημα εἰς τὸ Ἀρχιμήδους Ἐφόδιον, Διαγραφὰς οἰκιῶν ἐν Βιβλίοις γ́, Ἀστρολογικά, Περὶ οἰκήσεων. Of these works, some have been printed. Sphaerica (On the Sphere)
The work on the Sphere is a treatise on the properties of the sphere, and of the circles described on its surface. Editions Latin Editions
The Sphaerica was first published in an ancient Latin version, edited by John Vögelin, Paris, 1529, 4to.; and other Latin versions were published by F. Maurolycus, with the Sphaerica of Menelaus, and the work of Autolycus on the Sphere, Messanae, 1558, fol.; by Jos. Auria, with Autolycus, from six MSS. in the Vatican, 1588, 4to.; by Dr. Isaac Barrow, in his edition of Archimedes, Lond. 1675, 4to.; and by And. Celsius, Upsal. 1730, 12mo. Greek Editions
The first edition of the Greek text was published by Joannes Pena, the royal mathematician of France, Bellov. 1558, 4to.: many of the demonstrations, which are defective in the work of Theodosius, were supplied by Pena from Euclid's Elements, and other geometrical works, both ancient and modern.
Another edition, founded on that of Pena, with the further aid of some MSS. at Oxford, from which, however, no readings of consequence were obtained, was published by Joseph Hunt, Oxon. 1707. 8vo. Translations
There are also translations of the work into English, by Edward Sherbourne, as an appendix to his version of the Sphaerica of Manilius, Lond. 1675, fol., and into German, by E. Nizze, whose notes are of high value, Stralsund, 1826, 8vo. περὶ ημερῶν καὶ νυκτῶν, de Diebus et Noctibus Editions
Theodosius' work περὶ ημερῶν καὶ νυκτῶν, de Diebus et Noctibus, was published from a MS. in the Vatican, in Latin only, with ancient Scholia, and figures, by Jos. Auria, Romae, 1591, 4to.; the propositions, without demonstrations, having been previously edited by Conrad Dasypodius, Argentorat. 1572, 8vo. Περὶ οἰκήσεων Editions
Fabricius states that the book Περὶ οἰκήσεων was also published in Latin, by Jos. Auria, Romae, 1587, 4to.; but the edition is not mentioned in Hoffmann's Lexicon Bibliographicum. Editions and MSS
In the great collection of the works of the ancient mathematicians, planned by Edward Bernard, after whose death the synopsis of the intended edition was published by Thomas Smith, Lond. 1704, 8vo., the known works of Theodosius were to have had a place in the seventh volume.
There are many MSS. of the above three works, in the principal libraries of Europe, in Greek, Latin, and Arabic. The other works of Theodosius appear to be entirely lost. Further Information
Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iv. pp. 21-23, 213; Menag. ad Diog. Laert. 9.70.
3. Another native of Tripolis of this name, is mentioned by Suidas (s. v.) as the author of an heroic poem on the Spring, and of various other works ἔγραψε δἰ ἐπῶν εἰς τὸ ἔαρ, καὶ ἕτερα διάφορα). Eudocia (p. 229) identifies him with the preceding.
4. A Neo-Platonist, the disciple of Ammonius, and the father-in-law of Zethus, the disciple of Plotinus. (Porphyr. Vit. Plot. 7.)
5. Of Alexandria, a grammarian.
He is supposed to have lived about the time of Constantine the Great. Works
His Commentary on the τέχνη γραμματική of Dionysius Thrax, as well as a work by him περὶ ὅρου, and other grammatical works, and also a Commentary on Theodosius himself, by Georgius Choeroboscus, exist in MS. in various libraries. A full account of these MSS. is given by Fabricius and Harless (Bibl. Graec. vol. vi. pp. 301, 308, 350). Editions
His chief grammatical work, the commentary on Dionysius, amplified by the additions of later Byzantine grammarians, was published by C. G. Göttling, under the title of Theodosii Alexandrini Grammatica, Lips. 1822, 8vo. ; the Prooemium having been published before in Osann's Philemonis Grammatici quae supersunt, Berol. 1821, 8vo., and a portion of the work, under the title of Theodori Grammatici Alex. Canones de Declinatione Nominum et Conjugatione Verborum, by Imm. Bekker, in the third volume of his Anecdota, Berol. 1821, 8vo. Further Information
Hoffman, Lexicon Bibliograph. Scriptor. Graecorum.
6. Respecting Theodosius, surnamed 6 ὁ μικρός, a supposed Epitomator of Dio Cassius, but apparently in fact only a copyist, see Harless's additions to the notice of him by Fabricius. (Bibl. Graec. vol. v. p. 142.)
7. Melitinus, a Byzantine historian. Works Chronicon
A MS. copy of his Chronicon was brought from Constantinople to Tübingen by Stephen Gerlach. ED
A fragment of this, respecting the marriage of the emperor Theophilus with Theodora of Paphlagonia, in A. D. 830, was appended to the epitome of the Aethiopica of Heliodorus, published by Martin Crusius at Frankfort, 1584. The entire work has never been printed. There is also a MS. in the royal library at Munich. Further Information
Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. vii. p. 472 ; Vossius, de Hist. Graec. p. 504, ed. Westermann ; Tafel, de Theodosio Melitino, ineditae Historiae Byzantinae scriptore, ex Codice Tubingensi Notitia Literaria, Prog. Aead. Tubing. 1828, 4to.
8. Another writer of the history of the later Roman empire, was a Syracusan monk, in the tenth century of our era. Works Account of the Taking of Syracuse
He wrote an account of the taking of Syracuse by the Spanish Arabs, in the form of a letter to Leo Diaconus. Editions Latin Editions
A Latin version of which, by the monk Joasaph, or Josaphat, has been published in a more or less complete form in the various collections of works on the history of Italy (Muratori, Script. Rer. Ital. vol. i. pt. ii. p. 257a). Greek Editions
The Greek text was first published, with a new Latin version and notes, by C. B. Hase, in his edition of Leo Diaconus, Paris, 1819, fol. Further Information
Vossius, de Hist. Graec. p. 504, ed. Westermann; Hoffmann, Lexicon. Bibliograph. Scriptor. Graecorum, s. vv. Theodosius and Leo.
9. Diaconus, a third Byzantine historian, who appears to have lived about the same time as the preceding. Works five ἀκροάσεις in iambic verse
He was the author of five ἀκροάσεις in iambic verse, on the subject of the expedition of Nicephorus Phocas to Crete, in A. D. 961. Editions
This was first published in Greek and Latin by Fl. Cornelius, in his Creta Sacra, Venet. 1755, 4to.; again, by P. F. Fogginius, in his Nova Appendix Corporis Historiae Byzantinae, Romae, 1777, fol.; and lastly, with notes and a vocabulary of words peculiar to the author, by F. Jacobs, in his edition of Leo Diaconus, in the Corpus Script. Hist. Byzant. Bonn. 1828, 8vo. Further Information
Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. vii. p. 533; Vossius, de Hist. Graec. l.c. ; Hoffmann, Lexicon, ll. cc.
10. A monk, the titles of whose answer to the arguments against the resurrection of the body, and another work in refutation of John Philoponus, are given by Photius (Bibl. Cod. 22, comp. Cod. 22.) [P.S]
(Θεοδόσιος), a physician who must have lived in or before the fifth century after Christ, as he is quoted by Aetius (2.2. 54, p. 276). He is perhaps the same person who is to Ptolemy quoted by Rhazes. (See Haller's Bibl. Med. Pract. vol. i. p. 354.) [Theodotius] [W.A.G]
(Θεοδόσιος). (1) Surnamed The Great, Roman emperor of the East, A.D. 378-395. He was the son of the general Theodosius who restored Britain to the Empire, and was beheaded at Carthage in the reign of Valens (A.D. 376). The future emperor was born in Spain about A.D. 346. He received a good education; and he learned the art of war under his own father, whom he accompanied in his British campaigns. During his father's lifetime he was raised to the rank of Duke (dux) of Moesia, where he defeated the Sarmatians (374) and saved the province. On the death of his father he retired before court intrigues to his native country. He acquired a considerable military reputation in the lifetime of his father; and after the death of Valens, who fell in battle against the Goths, he was proclaimed emperor of the East by Gratian, who felt himself unable to sustain the burden of the Empire. The Roman Empire in the East was then in a critical position; for the Romans were disheartened by the bloody defeat which they had sustained, and the Goths were insolent in their victory. Theodosius, however, showed himself equal to the difficult position in which he was placed; he gained two signal victories over the Goths, and concluded a peace with the barbarians in 382.
In the following year (383) Maximus assumed the imperial purple in Britain, and invaded Gaul with a powerful army. In the war which followed Gratian was slain; and Theodosius, who did not consider it prudent to enter into a contest with Maximus, acknowledged the latter emperor of the countries of Spain, Gaul, and Britain, but he secured to Valentinian, the brother of Gratian, Italy, Africa, and western Illyricum. But when Maximus expelled Valentinian from Italy in 387, Theodosius espoused the cause of the latter, and marched into the West at the head of a powerful army. After defeating Maximus in Pannonia, Theodosius pursued him across the Alps to Aquileia. Here Maximus was surrendered by his own soldiers to Theodosius and was put to death. Theodosius spent the winter at Milan, and in the following year (389) he entered Rome in triumph, accompanied by Valentinian and his own son Honorius. Two events in the life of Theodosius about this time may be mentioned as evidence of his uncertain character and his savage temper. In 387 a riot took place at Antioch, in which the statues of the emperor, of his father, and of his wife were thrown down; but these idle demonstrations were quickly suppressed by an armed force. When Theodosius heard of these riots, he degraded Antioch from the rank of a city, stripped it of its possessions and privileges, and reduced it to the condition of a village dependent on Laodicea. But in consequence of the intercession of Antioch and the Senate of Constantinople, he pardoned the city, and all who had taken part in the riot. The other event is an eternal brand of infamy on the name of Theodosius. In 390, while the emperor was at Milan, a serious riot broke out at Thessalonica, in which the imperial officer and several of his troops were murdered. Theodosius resolved to take the most signal vengeance upon the whole city. An army of barbarians was sent to Thessalonica; the people were invited to the games of the Circus; and as soon as the place was full, the soldiers received the signal for massacre. For three hours the spectators were indiscriminately exposed to the fury of the soldiers, and 7000 of them, or, as some accounts say, more than twice that number, paid the penalty of the insurrection. St. Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan, represented to Theodosius his crime in a letter, and told him that penitence alone could efface his guilt. Accordingly, when the emperor proceeded to perform his devotions in the usual manner in the great church of Milan, the archbishop stopped him at the door, and demanded an acknowledgment of his guilt. The conscience-struck Theodosius humbled himself before the church, which has recorded his penance as one of its greatest victories. He laid aside the insignia of imperial power; in the posture of a suppliant in the church of Milan he asked pardon for his great sin before all the congregation; and, after eight months, the emperor was restored to communion with the Church.
Theodosius spent three years in Italy, during which he established Valentinian II. on the throne of the West. He returned to Constantinople towards the latter end of 391. Valentinian was slain in 392 by Arbogastes, who raised Eugenius to the Empire of the West. This involved Theodosius in a new war; but it ended in the defeat and death both of Eugenius and Arbogastes in 394. Theodosius died at Milan, four months after the defeat of Eugenius, on the 17th of January, 395. His two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, had already been elevated to the rank of Augusti, and it was arranged that the Empire should be divided between them, Arcadius having the East, and Honorius the West. Theodosius was a firm Catholic, and a fierce opponent and persecutor of the Arians and all heretics. It was in his reign also that the formal destruction of paganism took place; and we still possess a large number of the laws of Theodosius, prohibiting the exercise of the pagan religion, and forbidding the heathen worship under severe penalties, in some cases extending to death.
(2) A Roman emperor of the East, A.D. 408-450. He was born in 401, and was only seven years of age at the death of his father Arcadius, whom he succeeded. Theodosius was a weak ruler; and his sister Pulcheria, who became his guardian in 414, possessed the virtual government of the Empire during the remainder of his long reign. The principal external events in the reign of Theodosius were the war with the Persians, which only lasted a short time (421-422), and was terminated by a peace for a hundred years; and the war with the Huns, who repeatedly defeated the armies of the emperor, and compelled him at length to conclude a disgraceful peace with them in 447 or 448. Theodosius died in 450, and was succeeded by his sister Pulcheria, who prudently took for her colleague in the Empire the senator Marcian, and made him her husband. Theodosius had been married in 421 to the accomplished Athenaïs, the daughter of the sophist Leontius, who received at her baptism the name of Eudocia. Their daughter Eudoxia was married to Valentinian III., the emperor of the West. In the reign of Theodosius, and that of Valentinian III., was made the compilation called the Codex Theodosianus. It was published in A.D. 438. It consists of sixteen books, which are divided into titles, with appropriate rubricae or headings; and the constitutions belonging to each title are arranged under it in chronological order. The first five books comprise the greater part of the constitution which relates to ius privatum; the sixth, seventh, and eighth books contain the law that relates to the constitution and administration; the ninth book treats of criminal law; the tenth and eleventh treat of the public revenue and some matters relating to procedure; the twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth books treat of the constitution and the administration of towns and other corporations; and the sixteenth contains the law relating to ecclesiastical matters.
Literary.—(1) Of Bithynia, a mathematician, mentioned by Strabo and by Vitruvius, the latter of whom speaks of him as the inventor of a universal sun-dial.
(2) Of Tripolis, a mathematician and astronomer of some distinction, who appears to have flourished later than the reign of Trajan. He wrote several works, of which the three following are extant, and have been published: (a) Σφαιρικά, a treatise on the properties of the sphere, and of the circles described on its surface; (b) Περὶ Ἡμερῶν καὶ Νυκτῶν; and (c) Περὶ Οἰκήσεων.