224 PETRUS. Petrua Diaconiis is the canonist is not clear. (Leunclav. Jus Gr. Rom. I. c. ; Fabric. BiU. Graec. vol. xi. p. 334; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 1092, vol. ii. p. 161 ; Cataloq. MSS. Biblicdh. Reg. vol. ii. pp. 182, 606, fol. Paris, 1740.) 16. Of Edessa. Peter, a Syrian by birth, and a presbyter of the church at Edessa, and an emi- nent preacher, wrote Tradatus variarum Cau- sarum, treatises on various subjects, and composed Psalms in metre like those of Ephrem the Syrian. Trithemius ascribes to him Commentarii in Psalmos : and says that he wrote in Syriac. All his works have perished. (Gennadius, De Viris Illustr. c. 74 ; Trithem. De Scriptorib. Ecdes. c. 167.) 17. FuLLO, or sometimes retaining the Greek word Gnapheus or Cnapheus (IleTpos o Tva- <p€vs or Kt/a<pivs the Fuller, patriarch of Antioch in the middle of the fifth century. He was a priest or monk of the neighbourhood of Con- stantinople : but whether he originally followed the business of a Fuller, before embracing a religious life, or whether he carried it on while a monk is uncertain. Acacius of Constantinople (apud Li- berat. Breviar. c. 18), states that he was hegu- menos, or abbot of a monastery at Constantinople ; and that on account of his offences, or of accu- sations against him, "crimina," (their nature is not stated) he fled to Antioch. The Laudatio S. Barnxjbae^ c. iii. § 32, of Alexander the Cyprian monk (apud Acta Sanctorum, Junii, vol. ii. p. 447), and the Synodicon Vetus, first published by Jo. Pappus, and reprinted in the Biblioth. Graeca, of Fabricius (vol. xii. p. 396) describe him as a monk of the monastery of the Acoemetae at Con- stantinople, who accompanied Zeno, son-in-law to the emperor Leo I., when sent to Antioch. On the other hand, Theodonis Lector (//. E. i. 20), whom Theophanes and Cedrenus follow, says he was a presbyter of the Church of St. Bassa the Martyr at Chalcedon. Tillemont endeavours to arrange and harmonize these various statements as follows : that Peter was originally a monk in the monastery of the Acoemetae, which he places in the neighbourhood of Constantinople, but on the Asiatic side of the Bosporus ; that having been expelled and obliged to flee on account both of immorality and heresy, he resorted to Constantinoplfe, where he led the life of a parasite and a gourmand, and gained an introduction to Zeno (Tillemont is thus far supported by the monk Alexander) ; and that he was then, by Zeno's interest, made presbyter of the Church of St. Bassa. The third step in this arrangement is, however, by no means satisfactory. Almost all our authorities agree that he accom- panied Zeno to Antioch ; and if, as is not im- probable, the charge or the consciousness of some offence rendered his absence from Con- stantinople convenient, if not necessary, Acacius would not be far out in describing his journey as a flight. Peter appears to have held the mono- physite doctrine, the controversy respecting which then agitated the whole Eastern Church : and on his arrival at Antioch, the patriarchate of which city was then held by Martyrius, a supporter of the Council of Chalcedon, he determined on the audacious enterprise of occupying that high oflUce. persuading Zeno to favour his attempt, he engaged on his side a number of those inclined to the Monophysite doctrine, (Theodorus Lector and others call them Apollinarists [Apollinaris, PETRUSr No. 2.], but it is likely that the Monophysites generally are meant,) and excited much dissension and tumult, among other causes of which was his adding to the sacred hymn called the Trisagion, the words " who wast crucified for us," which con- stituted one of the party tests of the Monophysites, and his anathematizing all those who refused to sanction the alteration, and charging Martyrius himself with being a Nestorian. Martyrius, unable to stop the disorder by his own authority, went to Constantinople, where, through the influence of the patriarch Gennadius [Gennadius, No. 1], he was honourably treated by the emperor Leo L, and re- turned to Antioch, trusting that the imperial favour would enable him to quell all disturbance. Disap- pointed in this hope by the obstinacy of his oppo- nents, and disgusted with his failure, he abdicated the patriarchate, which was immediately occupied by Peter. Leo, however, was not to be thus braved ; and, at the instigation of Gennadius, he immediately expelled the intruder, in whose place Julian was with general approval elected. Peter was sentenced to banishment to the Oasis of Upper Egypt, but he contrived to escape from exile, and returning to Constantinople, obtained refuge in the monastery of the Acoemetae, where he remained till the revolt of Basiliscus against Zeno, having bound himself by oath to abstain from exciting further troubles. His usurpation of the See of Antioch may be placed in A. d. 469. When Basiliscus (a.d. 475) had expelled Zeno from Constantinople, it appears to have been his first policy to court the Monophysite party, whom Leo and Zeno had repressed ; and, at the persua- sion of Timotheus Aelurus, Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria, whom he had recalled from exile, he issued an encyclical letter to the various pre- lates of the church, anathematizing the decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon. To this letter Peter gave his formal assent : and obtained a decree re- storing him to the patriarchate of Antioch, to which city he was immediately sent. (a. d. 476.) The Monophysites regained their ascendancy. Ju- lian was expelled, and soon after died of grief: and Peter resuming the patriarchal authority, ex- cited, by again restoring the clause " who wast cru- cified for us," and by repeating his anathemas, fresh tumults, which led to plundering and murder. But the recovery of the imperial power by Zeno checked his career: a synod was assembled at Antioch (a.d. 477), in which he was deposed, chiefly by the agency of one of his own partizans, John Codonatus [Joannes, No. 10], whom he had ap- pointed bishop of Apameia. He was banished to Pityus, from whence he contrived to escape, or was allowed to go to Euchaita in Pontus, where he found refuge in the church of St. Theodore. Tillemont thinks he even returned to Antioch, but this is quite unlikely. John Codonatus meanwhile succeeded to the vacant patriarchate ; but he being deposed after three months, Stephen, a supporter of the Council of Chalcedon, succeeded, and he dying soon after, another Stephen was appointed in his room. But the Monophysites of Antioch, though deprived of their leader, were both active and powerful : they accused the first (the Synodicon Vetus of Pappus says the second) of the two Stephens of Nestorianism, and apparently succeeded in deposing him : for Theophanes says, that a council of the Eastern bishops, assembled at Laodiceia by the emperor's command, "restored him" (dTroKaTea-TTjaej') to
