Chrysaphius, a eunuch in the court of Theodosius iI intrigues and diplomacy between east and west

2022 HABIS 53 Universidad de Sevilla 53 - 2022 HABIS 53 SEVILLA 2022 DIRECTORES Antonio Luis Chávez Reino y Pilar Pavón Torrejón CONSEJO DE REDACCIÓN Luis Ballesteros Pastor (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José Luis Escacena Carrasco (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José Beltrán Fortes (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Antonio Bravo García (Universidad Complutense, España), Antonio Caballos Rufino (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José María Candau Morón (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Francisca Chaves Tristán (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Juan Fernández Valverde (Universidad Pablo de Olavide, España), Enrique García Vargas (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José María Maestre Maestre (Universidad de Cádiz, España), Carlos Márquez Moreno (Universidad de Córdoba), José Luis Moralejo Álvarez (Universidad de Alcalá, España), Salvador Ordóñez Agulla (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Antonio Ramírez de Verger (Universidad de Huelva, España), José Miguel Serrano Delgado (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José Solís de los Santos (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Francisco Villar Liébana (Universidad de Salamanca, España) SECRETARIOS Francisco José García Fernández e Irene Pajón Leyra CONSEJO ASESOR Rutger J. Allan (Universidad de Amsterdam, Holanda), Manuel Bendala Galán (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, España), Alberto Bernabé Pajares (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España), Genaro Chic García (Universidad de Sevilla, España), José Antonio Correa Rodríguez (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Francisco Javier Fernández Nieto (Universidad de Valencia, España), Manuel García Teijeiro (Universidad de Valladolid, España), Juan Gil Fernández (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Luis Gil Fernández (Universidad Complutense, España), Cristóbal González Román (Universidad de Granada, España), Simon J. Keay (†) (Universidad de Southampton, Reino Unido), Peter Kruschwitz (Universidad de Viena, Austria), Pilar León Alonso (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Francisco J. Lomas Salmonte (Universidad de Cádiz, España), Jesús Luque Moreno (Universidad de Granada, España), José María Luzón Nogué (Universidad Complutense, España), M.ª Cruz Marín Ceballos (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Patrizio Pensabene (Universidad de Roma “La Sapienza”, Italia), Miguel Rodríguez- Pantoja Márquez (Universidad de Córdoba, España), Diego Ruiz Mata (Universidad de Cádiz, España), Eustaquio Sánchez Salor (Universidad de Extremadura, España), Bartolomé Segura Ramos (Universidad de Sevilla, España), Emilio Suárez de la Torre (Universidad Pompeu Fabra, España), Nicolas Tran (Universidad de Poitiers, Francia) Reservados todos los derechos. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro pueden reproducirse o transmitirse por ningún procedimiento electrónico o mecánico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabación magnética o cualquier almacenamiento de información y sistema de recuperación, sin permiso escrito de la Editorial Universidad de Sevilla. Este volumen ha sido parcialmente financiado por las Facultades de Filología y Geografía e Historia de la Universidad de Sevilla. © Editorial Universidad de Sevilla 2022 c/ Porvenir, 27. 41013 Sevilla Teléfonos: 954 48 74 46 - 74 51. Fax: 954 48 74 43 Correo electrónico: [email protected] http://www.editorial.us.es Impreso en España-Printed in Spain ISSN 0210-7694 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis Depósito Legal: SE-669-1994 Maquetación: Referencias Cruzadas - [email protected] Impresión: Pinelo Talleres Gráficos, s.l.-Salteras. Sevilla 7 ÍNDICE EKAITZ RUIZ DE VERGARA OLMOS. Aspectos narratológicos del Himno homérico a Deméter ....................................................................... 9 DIEGO ANDRÉS CARDOSO BUENO. La alimentación en la comunidad filosófica de los terapeutas de Alejandría ................................................... 29 SERGIO GARCÍA-DILS DE LA VEGA / SALVADOR ORDÓÑEZ AGULLA. Inscripción funeraria de Astigi ................................................. 45 JESÚS CAOS HUERTA RODRÍGUEZ. La recepción del término Sodoma en el Pedagogo 2.89.2-3 de Clemente de Alejandría: una lectura platónica de la hybris de los sodomitas ....................................................... 53 MARÍA DEL ROSARIO HERNANDO SOBRINO. Inscripción del “cortijo de Cobo”, término de Linares, Jaén (ms. BNE 2537/24): un nuevo testimonio de la fórmula pietatis causa ...................................................... 71 MARTA ÁLVARO BERNAL. Exposición e infanticidio femenino en Roma: análisis y revisión de la cuestión ................................................................. 87 ALICIA ORTIZ GÓMEZ. El significado de las palabras en los Carmina Latina Epigraphica funerarios: el caso de pignus ...................................... 107 ANTONIO D. PÉREZ ZURITA. La fórmula ex testamento en la Bética: finalidad, tipología epigráfica y participación de las instituciones ............. 125 SILVIA ACERBI. Chrysaphius, a eunuch in the court of Theodosius II: intrigues and diplomacy between East and West ........................................ 145 RAÚL ARANDA GONZÁLEZ. La producción de rocas decorativas en época visigoda a través de las fuentes textuales.......................................... 165 JOAN CARBONELL MANILS / HELENA GIMENO PASCUAL / DAVID MARTÍNEZ CHICO. Estrechando el cerco a un taller andaluz de producción de piezas epigráficas ‘falsas’ more antiquo ......................... 187 RESEÑAS............................................................................................................ 199 M. von Albrecht, Ad scriptores Latinos. Epistulae et colloquia, Perugia, Graphe.it Edizioni, 2022 (M. Rodríguez-Pantoja) 199 ● J. Alden Schlosser, Herodotus in the Anthropocene, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2020 (G. Domingo Solà) 202 ● A. Alvar Nuño (ed.), Historiografía de la esclavitud, Madrid, Dykinson, 2019 (F. Cidoncha Redondo) 205 ● B. Antela-Bernárdez, M. Mendoza (eds.), Filipo II de Macedonia, Madrid - Sevilla, UAM Ediciones - Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, 2021 (C. García García) 209 ● J. Beltrán Fortes, H. Gimeno Pascual, B. Mora Serrano, Sobre inscripciones y monedas. El anticuario Francisco Xavier Delgado Jurado en los primeros decenios del siglo XIX. Schedae epigráficas sevillanas y monetario, Sevilla, Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, 2020 (S. Ordóñez Agulla) 212 ● J. Beltrán Fortes, M. L. Loza Azuaga, Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani. España. Provincia de Cádiz (Hispania Ulterior Baetica), Cádiz - Tarragona, Universidad de Cádiz - Institut Català d’Arqueologia Clàssica, 2020 (D. Becerra Fernández) 215 ● G. Carrasco Serrano (coord.), Economía romana en Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, 2020 (S. Vargas-Vázquez) 219 ● S. Casamayor Mancisor, La vejez femenina en la antigua Roma: cuerpos, roles y sentimientos, Ediciones Trabe - Universidad de Oviedo, 2019 (I. del Castillo Bargueño) 223 ● R. M.ª Cid López, A. Domínguez Arranz, R. M.ª Marina Sáez (eds.), Madres y familias en la Antigüedad. Patrones femeninos en la transmisión de emociones y de patrimonio, Gijón, Trea, 2021 (M. Oria Segura) 226 ● F. Cidoncha Redondo, El concubinato y el contubernio en la sociedad romana (siglos I a. C.- III d. C.), Sevilla, Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, 2021 (M. Álvaro Bernal) 229 ● G. Cruz Andreotti, F. Machuca Prieto, Etnicidad, identidad y barbarie en el mundo antiguo, Madrid, Editorial Síntesis, 2022 (A. Terol Pacheco) 233 ● L. Edmunds, Greek Myth, Berlin - Boston, De Gruyter, 2021 (S. Acerbo) 237 ● E. Ferrer Albelda (ed. cient.), La ruta de las Estrímnides. Navegación y conocimiento del litoral atlántico de Iberia en la Antigüedad, Sevilla - Alcalá de Henares, Universidad de Sevilla - Universidad de Alcalá, 2019 (A. Gómez Peña) 242 ● F. J. García Fernández, E. Ferrer Albelda, Ciudad y Territorio: Los orígenes del urbanismo en el Bajo Guadalquivir, Jaén, Editorial Universidad de Jaén, 2021 (E. Rodríguez González) 246 ● J.C. Iglesias-Zoido (ed.), Conciones ex historicis excerptae: Nuevos estudios sobre las antologías de los discursos historiográficos, Coimbra, Imprensa da Universidade da Coimbra, 2020 (M. Muñoz Peñuela) 249 ● R. López Gregoris (ed.), Mujer y violencia en el teatro antiguo, Madrid, Catarata, 2021 (M. Moreno) 251 ● F. López Sánchez, La moneda en la Antigüedad, Madrid, Editorial Síntesis, 2019 (V. M. López Trujillo) 252 ● J. Martínez-Pinna, El nacimiento de la República romana (ca. 509-486 a. C.), Zaragoza - Sevilla, Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza - Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, 2020 (I. Moreno Marín) 256 ● J. Moralejo Ordax, Ejército y soldados de Roma. Epigrafía y territorio en la Hispania Citerior altoimperial, Madrid, Editorial del CSIC, 2021 (J. Andreu Pintado) 260 ● E. Ortiz De Urbina, J. M. Vallejo (eds.), Métodos y técnicas en Ciencias de la Antigüedad. Estudios sobre investigación y docencia, Vitoria, Universidad del País Vasco, 2018 (A. Díaz Fernández) 263 ● P. Pavón (ed.), Conditio femina. Imágenes de la realidad femenina en el mundo romano, Roma, Edizioni Quasar, 2021 (S. Ordóñez Agulla) 267 ● R. Rehm, Euripides: Electra, London, Bloomsbury, 2021 (A. Valverde García) 271 ● M. Requena Jiménez, Los espacios de la muerte en Roma, Madrid, Editorial Síntesis, 2021 (D. León Ardoy) 273 ● D. Romero-González, I. Muñoz-Gallarte, G. Laguna-Mariscal (eds.), Visitors from beyond the Grave: Ghosts in World Literature, Coimbra, Coimbra University Press, 2019 (M. del M. Suárez Oramas) 276 ● R. Serrano Madroñal, Los circunceliones: fanatismo religioso y descontento social en el África tardorromana, Madrid, CSIC, 2020 (A. Fajardo Alonso) 279 ● J. Signes Codoñer, Breve guía de la literatura griega desde Hesíodo hasta Pletón, Madrid, Cátedra, 2019 (F. J. González Mora) 282. HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 145 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 145 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II: INTRIGUES AND DIPLOMACY BETWEEN EAST AND WEST* Silvia Acerbi Universidad de Cantabria [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-8326-4591 CRISAFIO, UN EUNUCO EN LA CORTE DE TEODOSIO II: INTRIGAS Y DIPLOMACIA ENTRE ORIENTE Y OCCIDENTE ABSTRACT: In this paper we analyse the role of political and ecclesiastical mediation played at the court of Constantinople by the powerful praepositus sacri cubiculi Χρυσάφιος, a key figure both in the rise of Theodosius II and in the doctrinal choices that led the emperor to support the Monophysite trend and to convene the Second Council of Ephesus (449). Despite his diplomatic relevance, the eunuch has received very little attention by the historiography devoted to Late Antiquity in the Pars Orientis of the Empire. KEYWORDS: Late Antiquity; Theodosius II; imperial court; eunuchs; diplomacy. RESUMEN: En el presente artículo analizamos el papel de mediación política y eclesiástica desempeñado en la corte de Constantinopla por el influyente praepositus sacri cubiculi Χρυσάφιος, una figura fundamental tanto en el ascenso de Teodosio II como en las elecciones doctrinales que llevaron al emperador a apoyar la corriente monofisita y a la convocatoria del II Concilio de Éfeso (449). A pesar de su relevancia diplomática, el eunuco ha sido objeto de muy escasa atención por parte de la historiografía dedicada a la Antigüedad Tardía en la Pars Orientis del Imperio. PALABRAS CLAVE: Antigüedad Tardía; Teodosio II; corte imperial; eunucos; diplomacia. RECIBIDO: 15/01/2022 ACEPTADO: 13/05/2022 * This paper is framed within the Investigation project PGC2018-099798-B-I00 (Heterotopias de la autoridad y de la sacralidad en el Mediterráneo cristiano tardoantiguo) funded by the Ministry of University of the Spanish Government. 146 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 “An account of Theodosius’ reign based on the careers of officeholders has yet to be written”,1 remarked J. Harries in the early 1990s. It would be a line of research –also ignored in a recent volume devoted to the last representative of the Theodosian dynasty2– capable of showing how far high-ranking Late Antique “civil servants” used religion as a tool for political survival as well as for promotion. Under Theodosius II, the upper spheres of the Empire, the heads of government departments, the advisors and most loyal confidants of the emperor and professionals of war and finance, formed a power group that, in the dialectic between social classes, which was rarely pacifist, was able to establish itself as a determinant element within the complex relationships between the imperial court and an increasingly demanding uox populi. Among these, certain significant personalities, at the head of the main scrinia of the imperial chancellery, formed, in Peter Brown’s words, “the top of an imaginative pyramid that linked a discreet but persistent network of upper-class persuasion to Imperial court”3 and zealously controlled the monopoly of power. Perhaps the most representative of these, in the last years of Theodosius II’s long reign, was the eunuch Chrysaphius Tzoumas4, because of the important role he played as a confident and plenipotentiary collaborator of the emperor5, together with his mentor, the monk Eutyches, in connivance with the Bishop of Alexandria, Dioscorus and against the Constantinopolitan Flavian, in the heated political-religious dispute represented by the second Council of Ephesus, better known as the Latrocinium Ephesinum (449)6. As a filter, secretary, mediator and confident, the eunuch went beyond his real position in the hierarchy, as according to some sources he began his career in the court as the subordinate of the praepositus sacri cubiculi Urbicius and according to others as the primicerius of the chamber while also a spatarius, a member of the imperial guard. He came to exercise pressures that were dangerous to resist, especially when anyone attempted to alter the consensus in imperial religious policy (Flavian the Bishop of Constantinople came to understand that at his cost). On another occasion7, I have described the intrigues following Ephesus II, which removed first 1 Harries 1994: 36 and Elton 2006: 136-138. Vid. Zecchini 2002 and Millar 2006. 2 Vid. Kelly 2013. 3 Brown 1988: 69. Regarding the pyramidal structure of the imperial hierarchy, see Cameron 1976: 81 and Carile 1988: 123-176. 4 PLRE 2.295: Chrisaphius. See Scholten 1994: 248; for the second name, spelt in different ways, Theod. Lect. HE 1.1.166: Τζουμᾶς; Io. Mal. Chron. 14.3634: τὸν λεγόμενος Ζτομμᾶν; Geor. Cedr. 1.601.13: Ζουμνᾶ; see Honigmann 1954: 22-23, who proposes that it is a transliteration of the Syrian name Saumā, in connection with the Syrian archimandrite Bar Sauma, who was active in the years before the Second Council of Ephesus. 5 On the role of eunuchs in the Byzantine world, see Ringrose 1996: 86-93; Ringrose 2003: 129; Tougher, 1999: 89-100; Küfler 2001: 31-36 and 308; Sidéris 2002: 161-175 and Spadaro 2006: 535-572. 6 On the controversial synod, stygmatised as Latrocinium by Leo I (ep. to Pulcheria Augusta), see Acerbi 2001. 7 Chew 2006: 207-227; Busch 2015 and Acerbi 2021: 96-114. 147HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II Pulcheria and later Eudocia from the court, and also succeeded in eliminating a series of men faithful to the latter –Cyrus of Panopolis, preafectus praetorius8, and the magister militum Paulinus9– in sum, how, thanks to the support of a circle of “avid parasites”10 that swarmed around him, he was able to transform his influence into a kind of regency. Here we would like to complete the human and political profile of the charismatic eunuch in his no less intense fall, by analysing the background of the dynamics between the lay and ecclesiastic ruling classes in the Imperial Court, in a very significant moment in the relationships between East and West. The εὐφημίαι recorded in the Syriac transcription of the Second Council of Ephesus, which we have studied in a previous work on the processes of social aggregation in Late Antique cities11, provide the ranked stratification of the Theodosian administration in the mid fifth century12. The people of Edessa, in a public demonstration that took place in 448, acclaimed enthusiastically and rhythmically, according to the established praxis, the names of the emperor and the eunuch and also those of the highest public servants in the Eastern Empire13: Protogenes praefectus praetorio Orientis14, Nomus, quaestor sacri palatii15, Urbicius, praepositus sacri cubiculi16, Anatolius, magister militum and patrician17, the comes Theodosius18, the consul Senator19 and the praeses Chaereas20. On the eve of the Latrocinium, Theodosius II’s policy was supported by a relatively enlightened group of senators, a small elite that exercised an efficacious balance between the imperial court and internal and external pressure groups.21 8 PLRE 2.336-339: Cyrus7. On this person, “poet and courtier, civil servant and builder, bishop and hagiographer”, see Cameron 1982: 130 and Constantelos 1971: 455-463. Regarding his role, cryptopagan for some, Christian for others, see Torallas 2015: 257. 9 PLRE 2.846-847: Paulinus8. 10 Cfr. Gow 1965 and Cameron (1982: 136) attributes the fr. 9.136 to Cyrus of Panopolis, and suggests precisely that it alludes to Chrysaphius’ circle. 11 Acerbi 2010. 12 The mention of Chrysaphius demonstrates, against the opinion generally accepted until now, –see Delmaire 1984: 144 y Chrysos 1981: 467– that the highest officeholders were not remembered in popular acclamations in their hierarchical order, see Scholten 1994: 115-116. 13 “Thou, the One God! To Theodosius victory, One God, give the Romans victory! To the Eparchs many years, To Protogenes many years– … To Nomus many years–… To Zeno the General many years, To Chrysaphius many years, To Urbicius many years, To Anatolius the Patrician many years. May Anatolius be preserved to the Roman Empire, to Senator many years, to count Theodosius many, to Chereas many, may he be preserved to the Augusti…”: Perry 1881: 49-50. 14 PLRE 1.927: Fl. Flor(entius) Romanus Protogenes. 15 PLRE 1.785: Nomus1. 16 PLRE 1.1188-1190: Urbicius1, cfr. Scholten 1994: 237-239, and Clauss 1984: 1245. 17 PLRE 2.84-85: Anatolius10. 18 PLRE 2.1101: Theodosius11. 19 PLRE 2.990: Fl. Senator4. 20 PLRE 2.282: Flauius Thomas Iulianus Chaereas. 21 For all of them, see a summary in Guilland 1976: 140-174 and Millar 2006: 193. 148 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 This group included Senator, the consul in 436 and correspondent of Theodoret of Cyrrhus, who valued him very highly, who, together with Anatolius, was responsible for the difficult negotiations with the Huns that preceded the treaty in 44322; Anatolius, who had signed another two treaties, and was himself consul in 440, patrician, magister militum praesentialis, and closely linked to Nomus with whom in 449 he had undertaken an important mission in Attila’s camp, to be explained below; and Nomus, consul in 445, after holding the prestigious post of magister officiorum, who was presented in the Proceedings of the Council of Chalcedon as “he who has the control of the whole world in his hands”23. The prosopographic data confirm that also Urbicius, even after being supplanted by Chrysaphius in the chamber as regards his personal consideration, held an important position in the imperial staff. They were nearly all connected with Theodosius’s western policies and the military and diplomatic missions in relation to the Huns, who at that time had intensified their pressure on the limes of the Empire and had even reached the gates of the βασιλέουσα πόλις24. The emper- or’s strategy had been to agree their withdrawal in return for onerous tributes, as the military expeditions had rarely been successful. The idea was to avoid the expense of a new campaign in which the possibilities of victory were very low. In addition to the strictly military costs, the ferocity of the extremely mobile nomadic people had caused numerous human casualties (extermination of population over vast territories) and economic losses (serious damage to agriculture)25. Therefore, advised by his faithful minister Chrysaphius, Theodosius II opted not to take arms against the enemy26. As well as attempting to maintain peace and avoid repeating the events of between 441 and 443, the line now adopted protected much of the Eastern population from the tough financial burden it had suffered in the last decade in the first half of the fifth century because of sieges, earthquakes, shortages and epidemics27. At the same time, a demographic and 22 Bayless 1976: 176-179; Zecchini 1999: 777-791 and Azzara 2003. Write Zecchini 2015: 309 : “Gli Unni privilegiarono sempre lo strumento diplomatico, solo sporadicamente affiancato dalla pressione militare, per ottenere migliori condizioni economiche (sussidi aurei; zone franche di mercato) e soprattutto una chiara linea di demarcazione tra due zone d’influenza”. 23 ACO 2.1.1.21. 24 For these nomadic people, cfr. Thompson 1948; Moravcsik 1958: 479-488; Maenchen-Helfen 1973; Thompson 1999; Rouché 2009; Kelly 2008; Roberto 2010; Bozoky 2012; Gordon 2013 and Kim 2013. 25 Carile 1988: 55-87. 26 The tough conditions Attila demanded from Theodosius II are described in the fr. 3 of Prisc. The text has been interpreted in different ways, see Wirth 1967: 54; Maltese 1977: 265; Maltese 1979: 297-320.; see also Whitby 1992: 295-303; Lee 1993; Pohl 2013: 64-83; Nechaeva 2014 and Drocourt and Malamut 2020. Above all, as if it had been planned, there were multiple fronts. As well as by the Huns, pressure was being exercised by the Persians, Vandals, Isaurians, Saracens, Ethiopians, Blemmyes and other nomadic tribes, Sartor 2008: 43-84 and Thompson 1948: 95-96. 27 Nestorius’ Bazaar of Heracleides: 318, describes the desperate situation in the East at the time of Attila’s two great invasions (441-443 and 447): “People had been annihilated by the plague and famine, by the lack of rain and then by hailstones, by heat and tremendous earthquakes, by terror and all kind of 155HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II ing the political-institutional prerogatives of their social group. A class solidarity formed around Chalcedonian orthodoxy in which theological adhesion was largely instrumental. The elimination of Chrysaphius was doubtlessly a priority for the newly-en- throned imperial couple Marcian and Pulcheria64. In summer 449, soon after the Second Council of Ephesus, the dispute with the Isaurian general Flavius Zeno65 whom Theodosius II suspected of planning a conspiracy to take power, had ended in bloody riots66. It was a forewarning67. Chrysaphius then agreed to call Aspar68, who from that time onwards gradually regained the favour of the court and, indeed, who became Marcian’s principal mentor. The sources provide details, sometimes contradictory, about the circumstances of the eunuch’s execution69. According to Marcelinus’s Chronicon, it took place in the same year as Theodosius’s death, in 45070. Insisting on the auaritia that led him to his death, Marcelinus seems to be referring to the greed with which Chrysaphius was notoriously known to sell his favours but mostly to accusations of extortion in connection with his major role in Theodosius II’s taxation policy71. Both Victor of Tunnuna72 and Prosperus of Aquitania73 mention the causes and circumstances in which the eunuch became trapped in the net of his acquaintances, those scheming relationships in the court –aulicorum fauore– thanks to which he had been able to pull the strings of imperial policies during a decade. Greek historians provide more precise information. Theodor Lector74 attributes Chrysaphius’s death to Pulcheria. Theophanes’s account gives more details75. As mentioned above, before dying, Theodosius had become aware that he 64 Goubert 1951: 315-318. 65 On the Isaurian commander, called by the eunuch himself in 447 to defend Constantinople from the attacks of the Huns, cfr. Demandt 1970: 742-743, PLRE 2.1199. Fl. Zeno6; the magister militum had been opposed to Chrysaphius’s policy towards the Huns. See also Lee 2013: 90-108. 66 On the circumstances, see Prisc., fr. 8, 12-14 (FGH 4.93-98), and Io. Ant. (fr. 199, FHG 4.613). 67 Gregory thinks that the disturbances had been encouraged by opponents of the Second Council of Ephesus, i.e. Chrysaphius’s opponents, as “their resistance to imperial religious policy made them dangerous natural allies of the usurper”, Gregory 1986: 165. 68 Thompson 1946: 22 and Thompson 1948: 219. 69 Marcell. chron. a. 450 83; Prosperus Chron. Min. 1.481; Victor of Tunnuna 1.481; Theod. Lect. 165; Chron. Pasch. 590; Theoph. Chronogr. 101. 70 Marcell. chron. 83: Chrisaphius eunuchus Pulcheriae Theodosii sororis nutu sua cum avaritia interemptus est. 71 However, during the Late Empire, the taxation system was so oppressive that very few emperors or ministers could escape from that type of accusation: Bury 1923: 348. Forty-one years before, the eunuch Eutropius had been the object of the same accusation with Arcadius: uenale suffragium; Zos. 5.13. 72 Victor of Tunnuna Chron. 11.2.185. 73 Prosp. Chron. Min. 1.481. 74 Theod. Lect. HE 1.1. 75 Theoph. Chronogr, 101-103. 156 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 had been a victim of the schemes of the cubicularius, and realising the outrage suffered by Flavian and other innocent bishops, had banished Chrysaphius to an island and made Pulcheria return to the palace. Also in this version, like in that of Theodor Lector, it was Pulcheria who decided his death and handed him over to Jordanes76, the son of the Vandal magister militum John77 whom Chrysaphius had had assassinated at the start of his career in the court. It was an exquisitely cruel revenge that freed the pious empress from any scruples of conscience78. The eunuch’s definitive exit from the political scene –also taking with him Urbicius the praepositus sacri cubiculi who was forced to leave the court and withdraw to a monastic life79– must have pleased his numerous enemies and made a noticeable change to the political balance of power, not only in the palace but also in the city. The reason for his execution, which according to Malalas was called for not by Pulcheria but by Marcian, was said to be the circumstance that Chrysaphius was the main patron of the Greens80. These, and the segments of society they represented, mainly craftsmen, traders and merchants, who had been favoured by the eunuch’s financial policies, lost importance and support after his execution. Unlike his predecessor, Marcian was a keen supporter of the Blues81 who, we may imagine, attended the capital punishment with great interest. According to the Chronicon Paschale82, this took place in the imperial city, in the surroundings of the Gate of Melantias83. Only two years later, many of those who had been closely associated with the eunuch in his attempt to placate the Empire’s enemies – Anatoloius, Nomus, Senator and Protegenes, together with Florentius, another of Theodosius II’s men, who had supported the subsidies policy by backing it with their prestige and had very likely manipulated the failed conspiracy against Attila, attended the Council of Chalcedon. They sat among the lay dignitaries representing Emperor Marcian and supported a religious policy opposed to that of Theodosius, like convinced defenders of a new orthodoxy84. Once again, here appears the versa- 76 PLRE 2.620, Iordanes3. 77 PLRE 2.597, Ioannes13. 78 As noted by Gibbon 1781 (3.34): “[…] Pulcheria ascended the throne, then she indulged her own and the public resentment by an act of popular justice. Without any legal trial the eunuch Chrysaphius was executed before the gates of the city; and the immense riches which had been accumulated by the rapacious favourite served only to hasten and to justify his punishment”. On the disputed participation of the empresses in the Christological conflicts at the time, see now Blaudeu 2003. 79 In the monastery of Rufinian, founded and run by the monk Hipatius, see Callinic. Vida de Hipacio 15, ed. R. Teja 2009. It seems that he died there at a very old age, during the reign of Anastasius (491-598). 80 Io. Mal. Chron. 368. 81 Miller, Vandome and McBrewster 2010: 592; Cameron 1988: 233; Heucke 1994. In the Council of Chalcedon, the Greens had no ecclesiastic support; see Vespignani 1985: 61-101 and Vespignani 2010. 82 Chron. Pasch. 590. 83 For the identification of the place, probably a gate in the city walls, see Goubert 1951: 316-317. 84 Delmaire 1984: 165. 157HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II tility and flexibility of the lay ruling class, parallel to the ecclesiastical class (the chameleon-bishops that Theodoret of Cyrrhus speaks of)85. Thanks to this ideological flexibility and adaptability, and a notable capacity of class cohesion, these “enlightened liberals” survived the dissolution of the political system through which they had been able to exert power, maintaining an unquestionable capacity of political influence and even strengthening and legitimising it, within a completely new reality. However, to do that, Chrysaphius, the eternal mediator, had to be sacrificed. Bibliography Acerbi 2001: S. Acerbi, Conflitti politico-ecclesiastici in Oriente nella tarda antichità: il II concilio di Efeso (449) (Madrid 2001). Acerbi 2010: S. Acerbi, “Processi di polarizzazioni sociali, clientelismi e rivolte popolari nelle città dell’Oriente tardoantico”, Veleia 27 (2010) 267-283. Acerbi 2021: S. Acerbi, “Κατὰ μίμησιν τῆς μακαρίας Πουλχερίας. Diffrazioni storiografiche per speculum haeresiae”, in R. Villegas, M. Chiriatti (eds.), Imperial and Royal Women: Public Portraits of Power in Late Antiquity and Byzantium (Leiden 2021) 96-114. Azzara 2003: C. Azzara, Le invasioni barbariche (Bologna 2003). Baldwin 1980: B. Baldwin, “Priscus of Panion”, Byzantion 50 (1980) 18-61. Bayless 1976: W. N. Bayless, “The Treaty with the Huns of 443”, AJPh 97 (1976) 176-179. Bekker 1837: I. Bekker, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn 1837). Bevan - Gray 2008: G. Bevan, P. R. Gray, “The Trial of Eutiches: A New Interpretation”, ByzZ 101 (2008) 617-657. Blaudeau 2003: P. Blaudeau, “Les Augustae garantes de la continuité de la politique religieuse théodosienne? Regard sur l´engagement respectif de Pulcherie et d´Eudocie dans la controverse christologique après la mort de Théodose II (450-460)”, in P. Delage (ed.), Les Pères de l´Église et les femmes. Actes du Colloque de La Rochelle 6-7 set. 2003 (La Rochelle 2003) 368-399. Blaudeau 2011: P. Blaudeau, “Un archevêque d’Alexandrie assasin? Retour sur une incrimination lancée à l´encontre de Dioscure”, in P. Buzi, A. Camplani (eds.), Christianity in Egypt. Literary Production and Intellectual Trends. Studies in Honor of Tito Orlandi (Rome 2011) 86-100. Blaudeau 2012: P. Blaudeau, “Discours apologétique et stratégie de substitution: le cas de Flavien de Constantinople dans le Liber Heraclidis de Nestorius”, in D. Boisson, É. Pinto, P. Mathieu (eds.), L´Apologétique chrétienne. Expressions de la pensée de l´Antiquité à nos jours (Rennes 2012) 99-111. 85 Thdt. Ep. 125 (to John of Germanicia). 158 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 Blockey 1981-1983: R. C. Blockley, The fragmentary classicizing historians of the later Roman Empire, vols. I-II (Liverpool 1981-1983). Blockey 2003: R. Blockley, “The Development of Greek Historiography: Priscus, Malchus, Candidus”, in G. Marasco (ed.), Greek and Roman Historiography in Late Antiquity. Fourth to Sixth Century A. D. (Leiden-Boston 2003), 289-315. Boor 1903: C. Boor, Excerpta historica iussu imperatoris Constantini Porphyrogeniti confecta. Excerpta de legationibus (Berlin 1903). Bornmann 1979: F. Bornmann, Fragmenta Prisci Panitae (Firenze 1979). Bozoky 2012: E. Bozoky, Attila et les Huns (Paris 2012). Brown 1988: P. Brown, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity. Towards a Christian Empire (Madison 1988). Burghess 1993-1994: R. W. Burghess, “The Ascension of Marcian in the Light of Chalcedonian Apologetic in Monophisite Polemic”, ByzZ 86/87 (1993-1994) 47-68. Bury 1923: J. B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire, vols. I-II (New York 1923). Busch 2015: A. Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie. Macht und Repräsentation kaiserlicher Frauen im 5. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart 2015). Cameron 1976: A. Cameron, Circus Factions. Blues and Green at Rome and Byzantium (Oxford 1976). Cameron 1982: A. Cameron, “The Empress and the Poet. Paganism and Politics at the Court of Theodosius II”, in J. Winkler, G. Williams (eds.), Later Greek Literature (Cambridge 1982) 217-290. Camplani 2013: A. Camplani, “La percezione della crisi religiosa calcedonese in alcuni testi storici e agiografici prodotti negli ambienti dell´episcopato di Alessandria”, Adamantius 19 (2013) 240-257. Carile 1988: A. Carile, “I nomadi nelle fonti bizantine”, in Popoli delle steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari, XXXV Settimana del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo (Spoleto 1988) 55-87. Carile 1998: A. Carile, “Gerarchie e caste”, in Morfologie sociali e culturali in Europa fra Tarda Antichità e Alto Medioevo, XV Settimana di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’alto Medioevo (Spoleto 1998) 123-176. Carolla 2000: P. Carolla, Excerpta historica iussu Constantini Porphyrogeniti confecta. Excerpta de legationibus Romanorum (Berlin - Boston 2000). Carolla 2008: P. Carolla, Excerpta et fragmenta. Priscus Panita (Berlin 2008). Carolla 2016: P. Carolla, “Priscus of Panion, John Malalas and the Chronicon Paschale: a Complex Relationship”, in E. Juhász (ed.), Byzanz und das Abendland IV. Studia Byzantino-Occidentalia (Budapest 2016) 51-70. Chew 2006: K. Chew, “Virgins and Eunuchs: Pulcheria, Politics and the Death of Emperor Theodosius II”, Historia 55 (2006) 207-227. Chrysos 1981: E. Chrysos, “Die Amaler-Herrschaft in Italien und das Imperium Romanum”, Byzantion 51 (1981) 430-474. 159HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II Clauss 1984: M. Clauss, Urbicius, praepositus imperii, in Sodalitas. Scritti in onore di A. Guarino, vol. III (Napoli 1984). Constantelos 1971: D. J. Constantelos, “Kyros Panopolites, Rebuilder of Constantinople”, GRBS 12 (1971) 455-463. Cosentino 2013: S. Cosentino, “Guardando i barbari dalle rive del Bosforo”, in Potere e politica nell’età della famiglia teodosiana (395-455) (Bari 2013) 125-139. Croke 1981: B. Croke, “Anatolius and Nomus: Envoys to Attila”, ByzSlav 42 (1981) 159-170. Delmaire 1984: R. Delmaire, “Les dignitaires laïcs au concile de Chalcédoine. Notes sur la hiérarchie et les préséances au milieu du Ve s.”, Byzantion 54 (1984) 141-175. Demandt 1970: A. Demandt, “Magister Militum”, RE Suppl. XII (1970) 742-743. Doblhofer 1955: Ε. Doblhofer, Byzantinische Diplomaten und östliche Barbaren. Aus den Excerpta de legationibus des Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos ausgewählte Abschnitte des Priskos und Menander Protektor (Graz 1955). Drocourt - Malamut 2020: N. Drocourt, E. Malamut (eds.), La diplomatie byzantine, de l’Empire romain aux confins de l’Europe (Ve-XVe s.), The Medieval Mediterranean 123 (Leiden 2020). Elton 2009: H. Elton, “Imperial Politics at the Court of Theodosius II”, in A. Cain, N. Lenski (eds.), The Power of religion in Late Antiquity (Farnham 2009) 136-138. Ensslin 1926-1927: W. Ensslin, “Maximinus und sein Begleiter, der Historiker Priskos”, Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher 5 (1926-1927) 1-9. Frend 1972: W.H.C. Frend, “The Monks and the End and the Survival of the East Roman Empire in the Fifth Century”, P&P 54 (1972) 3-24. Gibbon 1781: E. Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. vol. III (London 1781). Given 2014: J. Given, The Fragmentary History of Priscus: Attila, the Huns and the Roman Empire, AD 430-476 (Merchantville 2014). Gordon 2013: C. D. Gordon, The Age of Attila. Fifth Century Byzantium and the Barbarians (Ann Arbor 2013). Goubert 1951: P. Goubert, “Le rôle de Sainte Pulchérie et de l’eunuque Chrysaphios”, in A. Grillmeier, H. Batcht (eds.), Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. I (Würzburg 1951) 302-321. Gow 1965: Gow, A. S. F., The Greek Anthology: Sources and Ascriptions (Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies. Supplementary Paper n. 9) (London 1965). Gregory 1986: Gregory, T. E., Vox Populi: Popular Opinion and Violence in the Religious Controversies of the Fifth Century A.D. (Columbus, Ohio, 1986). Guilland 1976: R. Guilland, “Patrices des IVe et Ve siècles”, in R. Guilland (ed.), Titres et fonctions de l’Empire byzantine (London 1976) 140-174. 160 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 Harries 1994: J. Harries, “Pius Princeps: Theodosius II and Fifth Century Constantinople”, in P. Magdalino (ed.), New Constantines. The Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, (4th-13th Centuries), 26th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, S. Andrew, March 1992 (Belfast 1994) 35-44. Heucke 1994: C. Heucke, Circus und Hippodrom als politischer Raum. Untersuchungen zum grossen Hippodrom von Konstantinopel und zu entsprechenden Anlagen in spatantiken Kaiserresidenzen (Hildesheim - Zürich - New York 1994). Hohlfelder 1984: R. Hohlfelder, “Marcian’s Gamble: a Reassessment of Eastern Imperial Policy towards Attila”, AJAH 9 (1984) 54-69. Honigmann 1954: E. Honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie (Louvain 1954). Kelly 2008: C. Kelly, Attila and the Huns. Barbarian Terror and the Fall of Roman Empire (Oxford 2008). Kelly 2009: C. Kelly, Attila e la caduta di Roma (Milano 2009). Kelly 2013: C. Kelly (ed.), Theodosius II. Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity (Cambridge 2013). Kim 2013: H. J. Kim, The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe (Cambridge 2013). Küfler 2001: M. Küfler, The Manly Eunuch: Masculinity, Gender Ambiguity and Christian Ideology in Late Antiquity (Chicago - London 2001). Lee 1993: A. D. Lee, Information and Frontiers: Roman Foreign Relations in Late Antiquity (Cambridge 1993). Lee 2013: A. D. Lee, “Theodosius and His Generals”, in C. Kelly (ed.), Theodosius II. Rethinking the Roman Empire (Cambridge 2013) 90-108. Liebschuetz 2003: W. Liebschuetz, “Pagan Historiography and the Decline of the Empire”, in G. Marasco (ed.), Greek and Roman Historiography in Late Antiquity (Leiden 2003) 177-218. Luibheid 1965: C. Luibheid, “Theodosius II and Heresy”, JEH 16 (1965) 13-38. Macrides 2010: R. Macrides, History as Literature in Byzantium (Aldershot 2010). Maenchen-Helfen 1973: O. Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture (Berkeley 1973). Maltese 1977: E. V. Maltese, “Note ed osservazioni sul testo di Prisco di Panium”, Helikon 17 (1977) 263-275. Maltese 1979: E.V. Maltese, “A proposito dell’opera storica di Prisco di Panium”, QS 5 (1979) 297-320. Manmana 2008: C. G. Manmana, Alla Corte dell’Imperatore. Autorità civili, militari ed ecclesiastiche nella Tarda Antichità (Catania 2008). Manmana 2014: C. G. Manmana, Il potere e i suoi inganni. Nuovi modelli di comportamento nella Tarda Antichità (Roma 2014). Milazzo 2010: A. Milazzo, “Aspetti della storiografia tardoantica: Prisco di Panion”, MediterrAnt 13 (2010) 99-112. Millar 2006: F. Millar, A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under Theodosius II (408–450) (Berkeley - Los Angeles - London 2006). 161HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II Miller - Vandome - McBrester 2010: F. P. Miller, A. F. Vandome, J. McBrewster (eds.), Chronicon Paschale (Beau-Bassin, Île Maurice 2010). Moravcsik 1958: G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica. Die byzantinischen Quellen der Geschichte der Turkvolker, I, (Berlin 1958). Müller 1841: K. Müller, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum, vol. I (Paris 1841). Müller 1851: K. Müller, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum, vol. IV (Paris 1851). Müller 1870: K. Müller, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum, vol. V/1 (Paris 1870). Nechaeva 2012: E. Nechaeva, “Gli sciti delle grandi migrazioni”, in C. Ebanista, M. Rotili (eds.), La trasformazione del mondo romano e le grandi migrazioni. Nuovi popoli dall’Europa settentrionale e centro-orientale alle coste del Mediterraneo (Napoli 2012) 20-31. Nechaeva 2014: E. Nechaeva, Embassies-Negotiations-Gifts. Systems of East Roman Diplomacy in Late Antiquity (Stuttgart 2014). Perry 1881: S. Perry, The Second Synod of Ephesus, together with certain extracts relating to it, from Syriac Manuscript preserved in the British Museum and now first edited (Dartford 1881). Pohl 2013: W. Pohl, “Ritualized encounters: late Roman Diplomacy and the Barbarians, fifth-sixth century”, in A. Beihammer, S. Constantinou, M. G. Parani (eds.), Court Ceremonies and Rituals of Power in Byzantium and the Medieval Mediterranean. Comparative Perspective (Leiden - Boston 2013) 64-86. Reinhardt 2000: E. Reinhardt (ed.), Tempus Implendi Promissa: homenaje al Prof. Dr. Domingo Ramos-Lissón (Pamplona 2000). Ringrose 1996: M. Ringrose, “Living in the Shadow: Eunuchs and Gender in Byzantium”, in G. Herdt (ed.), Third Sex, Third Gender: Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture and History (New York 1996) 86-93. Ringrose 2003: M. Ringrose, The Perfect Servant. Eunuchs and the Social Construction of Gender in Byzantium (Chicago 2003). Roberto 2000-2002: U. Roberto, “Prisco e una fonte romana del V secolo”, Rom- Barb 17 (2000-2002) 117-159. Roberto 2010: U. Roberto, “I popoli delle steppe e lo spazio mediterraneo: Unni, Avari, Bulgari”, in U. Eco (ed.), Il Medioevo: Barbari, cristiani, musulmani, (Milano 2010) 65-70. Rouché 2009: M. Rouché, Attila, la violence nomade (Paris 2009). Sartor 2008: G. Sartor, “L’empire des Théodoses et les regna Orientis (379-450): politique militaire et diplomatie imperiale à l’égard des foederati orientaux”, AntTard 16 (2008) 43-84. Scholten 1994: H. Scholten, Der Eunuch in Kaisernähe. Zur politischen und sozialen Bedeutung des praepositus sacri cubiculi im 4. und 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (Frankfurt - Berlin - Berne - New York - Paris - Wien 1994). Scott 2012: R. Scott, “From Propaganda to History to Literature: The Byzantine Stories of Theodosius’ Apple and Marcian’s Eagle”, in R. Scott (ed.), Byzantine Chronicles and the Sixth Century (Farnham, Surrey 2012) 115-131. 162 SILVIA ACERBI HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 Sidéris 2002: G. Sidéris, “Eunuchs of Light. Power, Imperial Ceremonial and Positive Representations of Eunuchs in Byzantium (4th-12th Centuries AD), in S. Tougher (ed.), Eunuchs in Antiquity and Beyond (London 2002) 161-175. Spadaro 2006: M. D. Spadaro, “Gli eunuchi nell’impero bizantino”, in Comportamenti e immaginario della sessualità nell’alto medioevo, LII Settimana di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo (Spoleto 2006) 535-572. Teja 1995: R. Teja, La “tragedia” de Éfeso (431). Herejía y poder en la Antigüedad tardía (Santander 1995). Teja 2012: R. Teja, “El oro de la iniquidad de Cirilo de Alejandría en el concilio de Éfeso”, CrSt 33 (2012) 397-423. Thompson 1945: E. A. Thompson, “The camp of Attila”, JHS 65 (1945) 112-115. Thompson 1946: E. A. Thompson, “Isaurians under Theodosius II”, Hermathena 68 (1946) 18-31. Thompson 1948: E. A. Thompson, A History of Attila and the Huns (Oxford 1948). Thompson 1950: E. A. Thompson, “The Foreign Policies of Theodosius II and Marcian”, Hermathena 76 (1950) 58-75. Torallas 2015: S. Torallas, “Una casa llena de oscuridad: Shenute y los paganos y una traducción al español de «No porque un zorro ladre»”, CCO 12 (2015) 257. Tougher 1999: S. Tougher, “Image of Effeminate Men: The Case of Byzantine Eunuchs”, in D. M. Madley (ed.), Masculinity in Medieval Europe (London 1999) 89-100. Treadgold 2007: W. Treadgold, The Early Byzantine Historians (Basingstoke 2007). Vallejo-Girvés 2000: M. Vallejo-Girvés, “Obispos exiliados: mártires políticos entre el Concilio de Nicea y la eclosión monofisita”, in E. Reinhardt (ed.), Tempus Implendi Promissa: homenaje al Prof. Dr. Domingo Ramos-Lissón (Pamplona 2000) 507-533. Vespignani 1985: G. Vespignani, “Il circo e le fazioni del circo nella storiografia bizantinistica recente”, RSBS 5 (1985) 61-101. Vespignani 2010: G. Vespignani, Ippodromos. Il circo di Costantinopoli Nuova Roma dalla realtà alla storiografia (Spoleto 2010). Whitby 1992: M. Whitby, “From Frontier to Palace: the Personal Role of the Emperor in Diplomacy”, in J. Shepard, S. Franklin (eds.), Byzantine Diplomacy A.D. 300-800: Means and Ends, Papers from the 24th. Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies (Aldershot 1992) 295-303. Whitby 2003: M. Whitby, The Church Historians and Chalcedon, in G. Marasco (ed.), Greek and Roman Historiography (Leiden 2003) 449–495. Wirth 1967: G. Wirth, “Attila und Byzanz. Zur Deutung einer fragwürdigen Priscusstelle”, ByzZ 60 (1967) 41-69. Zecchini 1999: G. Zecchini, “Prassi romana e prassi unna nelle reciproche relazioni politiche”, MediterrAnt 2 (1999) 777-791. 163HABIS 53 (2022) 145-163 - © Universidad de Sevilla - ISSN 0210-7694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/Habis.2022.i53.09 CHRYSAPHIUS, A EUNUCH IN THE COURT OF THEODOSIUS II Zecchini 2002: G. Zecchini, “L’immagine di Teodosio II nella storiografia ecclesiastica”, MediterrAnt 5 (2002) 529-546. Zecchini 2015: G. Zecchini, “La politica dell’impero d’Oriente nei Balcani dal 453 al 518”, in U. Roberto, L. Mecella (eds.), Governare e riformare l’Impero al momento della sua divisione: Oriente, Occidente, Illirico (Roma 2015) 309-324. Zuckerman 1994: C. Zuckerman, “L’Empire d’Orient et les Huns. Notes sur Priscus”, T&MByz 12 (1994) 159-182.