The Melitian Schism: Development, Sources, and Interpretation.

Peter Van Nuffelen

The Melitian schism, named after its founder, Melitius bishop of Lycopolis, is one of the early Christian
schismatic groups that originated in the context of a persecution. Although discussed at the Council of
Nicaea (325), it is not as well-studied as the two most famous schisms of this sort: the Novatians, who
split from the church in Rome during the persection of Decius (249-251), and the Donatists, who
challenged the authority of Caecilian of Carthage in AD 311. Nor is the schism well-understood: even
recent studies perpetuate the erroneous views that it was primarily a dispute about the reintegration of
the lapsi1 and that it was a mainly Coptic movement representing the autochthonous inhabitants of
Egypt.2 In fact, the schism deserves more attention, for its origins and early phase are unusually well-
documented. Besides the information gleaned from traditional sources, such as the writings of
Athanasius of Alexandria (328-373) and the fifth-century church historians Socrates, Sozomen, and
Theodoretus, we possess a series of documents that can be traced back to the archives of the church of
Alexandria and several papyri that shed light on the mood among the followers of Melitius in the period
after the Council of Nicaea. The studies collected in this volume offer an in-depth account of this early
period: in them, Hans Hauben, professor emeritus at the Catholic University of Leuven, draws on his skills
as a historian and a papyrologist to offer meticulous assessments of the value of the documents so as to
come to a balanced reconstruction and interpretation of the schism. The richness of the documentation,
and its peculiar character, renders unambiguous interpretation often difficult and these collected studies
hence contain revisions of earlier positions. Together they can be read as a synthesis of the origins and
the development of the Melitian schism, especially until the Synod of Tyre (335), after which date our
information peters out. The present introduction serves as a general guide to the schism, its
development, sources, and interpretations and hopes to offer background and context that will make
Haubens studies more accessible. The bibliography at the end of this introduction, containing all
publications relevant for the history of the schism, hopes to provide a useful tool for further study of the
schism.

Development

The Melitian schism started in the year 306, when the Diocletianic persecution was still in full swing.
Melitius, bishop of Lycopolis since 304, had intervened in the dioceses of four imprisoned bishops from
the Delta and had performed ordinations there, probably in 305. 3 Questioning Peter of Alexandrias
rather meek attitude towards the civil authorities, Melitius also obtruded in Alexandria whilst Peter was
in hiding (February 306). The root of the conflict thus lies in Melitius high view of the role of a Christian
bishop in times of persecution, which he apparently thought incompatible with flight and accomodation.
Melitius predecessor had been deposed for idolatry, 4 and it would have required from Melitius a good
dose of self-confidence and esteem for the function of bishop to have accepted an ordination during a
persecution. Scholars have long tended to accept Epiphanius account, which points to different attitudes
1 Norris 2007:74-75.
2 Watts 2010:173.
3 See Hauben 1989 = III in this volume.
4 Barns and Chadwick 1973.
towards the reintegration of lapsi (Christians who had complied with the authorities) as the root of the
conflict.5 Yet Epiphanius reflects a later pro-Melitian view, which moreover assimilates the Melitians to a
schism similar to Donatism and Novatianism. In fact, Peters and Melitius attitude towards the lapsi
differed in degree rather than in substance, with the former favouring lighter penalties and an immediate
start of the period of penance, even before the persecution had ended. 6 Yet it became very soon an
important issue, besides the usurpation of authority, and one that further poisoned the relationship
between Melitius and Peter. Probably shortly before Easter 306, Melitius himself was arrested and
deported to the quarries of the Thebaid. In the Easter period, Peter provisionally excommunicated
Melitius with a letter to the Alexandrians, and he also set out his own policy towards the lapsi thus
laying the ground for an intensification of the conflict with Melitius. At around the same time, Peter
called a synod that excommunicated Melitius.

Melitius did not back down. Deported by the authorities to Palestine, he organised his own so-called
Church of Martyrs, for which he ordained presbyters, deacons as well as bishops, 7 something he may
have done already when held captive in the Thebaid. 8 This act closed off the possibility of an easy
reconciliation with Peter. It was one thing for Melitius to take onto himself the tasks that other bishops
performed inadequately in his eyes. To create his own hierarchy, however, radically questioned the
legitimacy of Peter and his bishops. Moreover, the denomination Church of Martyrs indicates the self-
confident rigorism that seems to characterise Melitius actions.

Little is known about what happened after the end of the persecution, suggesting that the deadlock
simply continued with Melitius going his own way. Both sides could claim that the persecution had
boosted their authority: Peter had, after all, suffered martyrdom in 311, whereas Melitius had spent
many years in forced labour. Yet, if Epiphanius is to be believed, relations with Alexander of Alexandria,
the successor of Peter after the ephemere Achillas, were not all that bad. 9 It is probably in this period
that the Melitians started to form the monastic communities that the papyri attest for the years 330-
350s. It has been argued that the Melitians created an alternative monastic ideal, different from that of
the Pachomian and Antonian strands in Egyptian monasticism. 10 The period of relative calm may indeed
have helped the Melitians to institutionalise their movement.

The rise of Arianism, being, among other things, another challenge to the authority of the bishop of
Alexandria, probably troubled the uneasy co-existence that may have existed for a while. The anti-Arian
polemic stemming from the Alexandrian patriarchate tends to link Melitians and Arians, 11 but it is unclear
to what extent this coalition already existed before the Council of Nicaea (325) and the election of

5 Vivian 1988:27 n. 90 lists those who do so. See also note 1.

6 Vivian 1988:35; Carroll 1989:78-79.
7 Epiphanius, Panarion 68.3.6-8. Cf. Papaconstantinou 2006:80.
8 There is an inscription referring to the catholic church of Melitius in the quarries of Mons Porphyrites, which may
stem from Melitius activities there: SEG 8 (1937) 647 with Hauben 2005:764 n. 111 = XIV in this volume and ajtar
and Wipszycka 1994:75-85.
9 Epiphanius, Panarion 68.3.9.
10 Goehring 1993 and 1997; Martin 2007:20-21.
11 Arianism was a fractured and multifacetted movement. In this period it may be better designated as Eusebians,
although that is also a polemical construct: cf. Gwynn 2007.
Athanasius (328), if at all. The primary importance of Arianism for the history of the Melitian schism is
not so much this later coalition than the fact that Arianism rekindled the passions that had lain dormant
for a while. Arianism also gave the Melitian schism an international dimension, as the case of Melitius
and his followers was now discussed at the Council of Nicaea (325). The proposed solution aimed at
reintegrating the bishops of the schism into the orthodox church. 12 Its leader, Melitius, was confined to
Lycopolis and only allowed to retain the title of bishop, but he was not to exercise any episcopal functions
anymore. The rest of the bishops retained their title and were to become second in rank in their diocese
after the Nicene bishop. They could not act without the consent of that bishop. At the death of the
Nicene bishop, succession was not automatic: Melitians first had to be judged to see if they were worthy
of that honour and they had to be accepted by the people and the bishop of Alexandria. In order to
facilitate the process of reintegration, Melitius had to hand over a list of bishops to Alexander of
Alexandria, a list that is preserved by Athanasius. 13 That list also indicates that John Arcaph should remain
in Alexandria with Alexander to be the direct interlocutor of the bishop of Alexandria. 14 On top of all this,
Nicaea ordered that the reintegration of bishops could only happen at the condition of a more mystical
ordination (mystikotera cheirotonia). Views about the exact meaning of this diverge: traditionally this has
been interpreted as a symbolic imposition of hands as a sign of reconciliation, 15 but Hans Hauben has
argued for a stronger interpretation.16 In his view, Nicaea imposed a re-ordination of all Melitian clerics.
The interpretation of this condition is not without importance. On the former view, Nicaea imposed
rather lenient conditions on the Melitians, who could retain their rank and whose ordinations were
recognised as valid. On Haubens interpretation, the Council of Nicaea was more stringent: although it
could not reject the value of the ordinations, it clearly considered them inadequate. In combination with
the fact that the Melitian bishops could not automatically lay claim to their see when its Nicene
incumbent died, this suggests that, whilst at the surface Nicaea seemed to preach leniency, in fact the
conditions were rather unfavourable for the Melitians. This could explain why the success of this
agreement was short-lived.

Another cause for the breakdown of the agreement was the erratic behaviour of Melitius. At first he
acquiesced in the decisions of Nicaea: he handed over the libellus with his bishops, shortly after the
return of Alexander from the council. 17 Towards the end of his life (ca. 326-327), however, Melitius
backed away from the agreement, and he appointed John Archaph as his successor at the head of the
schism.18 The reasons for this change in attitude are impossible to gauge, but several factors may have
played a role. As said, the conditions imposed at Nicaea may have been experienced as too harsh. In
addition, Epiphanius reports a persecution of Melitians by Alexander after Melitius death. Given
Epiphanius generally confused account, it may be difficult to determine what was cause and what was
effect: Alexander may have wished to force the agreement so as to bring the schism to a speedy end,

12 Athanasius, De Decretis Nicaenae Synodi 36. See Hauben 2000b = IX in this volume.
13 Athanasius, Apologia Secunda 71.6. See Hauben 1989-1990 = IV in this volume.
14 Hauben 1994 = VI in this volume and Hauben 2000b = IX in this volume.
15 Restated, against Hauben 1987 = II in this volume, by Martin 1989a.
16 Hauben 1987 = II in this volume and Hauben 2000b = IX in this volume.
17 Van Nuffelen 2005.
18 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 2.21.1-2. Hauben 1994a = VI in this volume and Hauben 2000b = IX in this
volume.
thus upsetting the Melitians, or the persecution may have been the result of the Melitian withdrawal
from the agreement.19 An additional element may have been that the years 326-327 are precisely the
time when it was becoming increasingly clear that the decisions of Nicaea regarding the Arians were
being subverted with imperial acquiescence. 20 Melitius may have considered it to be an injustice that only
his followers should not get the rehabilitation that was being prepared for the Arians. 21 At any rate, the
rise of resistance against the Council of Nicaea, and the fact that Constantine was not willing to enforce
them at all costs, may have generated the view that the decisions of the Council were open for revision.

Whatever the precise reasons for the renewal of the conflict, it is clear that tensions in the church of
Egypt were at a high when Alexander died in 328. The election of Athanasius as his successor would be
another, and final, turning point in the history of the schism. Again, the facts are not easy to assess. In
line with the recent tendency to correct the hagiographical image of Athanasius with the critical views of
his enemies, scholars have tended to lend credence to the Arian version recorded by Sozomen, 22
according to which Melitian and Nicene bishops swore to choose a common candidate to succeed
Alexander. Yet seven bishops broke that agreement and Athanasius was ordained by them. 23 Athanasius
thus stands accused of squandering the last chance at unification. As we have seen, things were much
more complicated than that: in the face of the tensions that existed in the last years of Alexanders life, so
much irenism is suspect. If there is a historical core in the irenic Arian account, then it might be that there
was a sense among the Egyptian bishops that a less strict person than Athanasius would be better suited
to deal with the current problems. Yet one must also note that if Athanasius had indeed been ordained
against the will of the vast majority of bishops, it remains remarkable that no firmer action was taken
against such an usurpation of the see, as we know could happen in other disputed elections (such as that
of Damasus in Rome in 366). Even the Melitians themselves did not elect a counterbishop, 24 nor did the
Arians. All of this suggests that Athanasius already had or very soon acquired the firm backing of (a
crucial part of) his episcopate and the presbyters in Alexandria. At any rate, after Melitius had rejected
Nicaea with the appointment of John Archaph and after Athanasius had been elected, there was no room
anymore for compromise: Arians and Melitians, now allied against their common foe, would be the
continuous target of Athanasius polemic and sometimes violent action. In this context, it is
understandable that both groups, even if theologically different, 25 would start to collaborate more closely
against their common enemy,26 as they did to have Athanasius deposed at the Synod of Tyre (335). The
tensions that such actions and Athanasius reprisals generated in Alexandria can be very well sensed in
the letters from the archive of Paieous.27

19 Epiphanius, Panarion 68.5.1-2.

20 Van Nuffelen 2004:330-346.
21 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 2.21.3 establishes the opposite causal relationship: the Arians are spurred into
action by the revisionism of Melitius. Given the fact that Arian revisionism does not start in Egypt but with Eusebius
of Nicomedia, this is unlikely to be correct. Sozomen may be reflecting the Alexandrian polemical association of
Melitius and Arius.
22 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 2.17.4.
23 Barnes 1993:18; Parvis 2006:111; Isele 2010:131-136. See Martin 1996:321-338 for a close analysis of the texts.
24 Hauben 2004c = XIII in this volume.
25 Choat 2006:128-131 argues that there is no trace of Arianism in the extant Melitian papyri.
26 Martin 1996:341-389; Parvis 2006:218 and 258. The account of Parvis is to be used with caution.
27 Hauben 2001 = X in this volume and Hauben 2004a = XII in this volume.
After the middle of the fourth century, information about the Melitians rapidly declines. Although they
continue to surface in works of heresiology,28 the anonymous author of the Syntagma on the Council of
Nicaea, written around 475, clearly had little idea about the Melitians beyond what he had read in
Theodoretus church history.29 Theodoretus accuses them of adopting Jewish and Samaritan customs, 30 in
what sounds like a blanket accusation. In Egyptian sources they continue to surface until the patriarchate
of Michael (744-768).31

Sources

For the early history of the schism we are relatively well documented. Four groups of sources can be
distinguished.

The first source, and the most influential one in Late Antiquity, were the polemical writings of Athanasius
of Alexandria. The successor of Alexander shaped himself as the great fighter against Arianism and
defender of Nicaea,32 and one way of defeating his opponents was the publication of a series of polemical
works, such as the De Decretis Nicaenae Synodis, Historia Arianorum and Apologia Secunda. The genre of
these works can be defined as collections of documents, that is they gather objective proofs, mainly
letters from official bodies such as councils and secular officials, to show the truth of Athanasius
position. The letters are inserted into a narrative argument which is developed in usually brief sections
that link together the various documents. Such collections thus combine a great semblance of objectivity
with a profoundly partisan context and interpretation. 33 The impact of Athanasius writings cannot be
underestimated. Particularly important is that they provided indirectly and directly the outline for the
story of Arianism and Melitianism as told by the fifth-century church historians, Socrates, Sozomen, and
Theodoretus. These historians used Athanasius directly, whilst at the same time using a number of
complementary sources. Some of the latter were, in turn, also influenced by Athanasius. 34
Notwithstanding their partisan nature, Athanasius works preserve for us important documents, such as
the catalogue of bishops Melitius handed over to Alexander after Nicaea. 35

The second main source is constitued by the remnants of what has been called the History of the
Alexandrian Episcopate and which was probably composed in the early fifth century (before 419). 36 Some
of its parts have been known for a long time: the Codex veronensis LX (58) contains Latin translations of
the so-called Fundamentalurkunden (a letter to Melitius by four imprisoned bishops and his

28 Timothy the Presbyter, PG 86.40.

29 Anonymus of Cyzicus, Ecclesiastical History 2.34.1.
30 Theodoretus, Ecclesiastical History 1.9.14.
31 History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria, PO 5:198-199. See also The Life of Pamin (Amlineau 1895:737-741;
Lucchesi 1980) and Constantine, The second Panegyric on Saint Claudius of Antioch, PO 35:592-669. For further
references and discussion, see Camplani 1990 and Hauben 1998a = VII in this volume.
32 Barnes 1981 and Martin 1996.
33 For further literature about this genre, see Van Nuffelen 2002.
34 Van Nuffelen 2004.
35 Athanasius, Apologia Secunda 71.6. cf. Hauben 1989-1990 = IV in this volume.
36 It is to be distinguished from the so-called Coptic Ecclesiastical History, which was produced at least half a
century later.
excommunication by Peter, together with short narratives linking the texts) 37 and the Historia acephala;38
Sozomen used a fuller version of the Historia acephala for events in Alexandria,39 traces of which can be
detected in the Ecclesiastical History of Theodoretus too.40 Later hagiographical sources have drawn on
this source too, possibly indirectly: the Latin version of the Martyrium Petri Alexandrini, composed in the
ninth century in Naples by Guarimpotus, 41 as well as a similar Ethiopic text, show up important parallels
with the works just listed.42 Recently, a new Ethiopic witness to the History of the Alexandrian Episcopate
has been discovered.43 The importance of this new text for the Melitian schism seems to lie in the fact
that it adds to the documents and narratives already known from the Codex veronensis some new
narrative material and a list of bishops ordained by Peter I of Alexandria. 44 Publication has been
announced several times but is still awaited. Given the fact that we already knew much of what this
history relates about the Melitian schism, the new witness will probably not revolutionise the study of
the schism. Yet it will invite us to revisit the early origins of the schism. It is important to emphasise that,
notwitstanding its value, the reconstructed History of the Alexandrian Episcopate is not an objective
source. It has in fact been argued that it was not a church history in the traditional sense of the word, but
a collection of documents.45 The History of the Alexandrian Episcopate thus resembled more the
polemical works of Athanasius than it did the church history of Socrates or Sozomen: it provides a
selection of documents and facts designed to put the enemies of the church of Alexandria, the Arians
and the Melitians, in a bad light.46 In that way, this second source for the Melitian schism is fairly similar
to the first one.

Epiphanius of Salamis (ca. 310/20-402) included the Melitians in chapter 68 of his Panarion, just before
the chapter on the Arians. Because of its synthetic character and easy access, it has long been the main
source for the study of the schism. Yet it needs to be handled with care. Not only is it as much of what
Epiphanius wrote rather confused, he also includes apparently pro-Melitian information (possibly
drawn from eye witnesses) in a fundamentally anti-Melitian argument. Whereas some historical data can
be gleaned from his account, it must be used with caution. 47

The fourth source, papyrus documents composed by Melitians, give us a much more immediate access to
the Melitian community. There are four groups of documents relevant for the history of the schism: 48 (1)
The archive of Paieous (ca. 330-340); 49 (2) The correspondence of Paphnutius (mid-fourth century); 50 (3)

37 Kettler 1936.
38 Martin and Albert 1985.
39 Especially Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 1.15. For a full list of parallels see Van Nuffelen 2002 and 2004.
40 Van Nuffelen 2002.
41 BHL 6692-6693= PG 18:453-460.
42 Haile 1980.
43 Bausi 2006.
44 Orlandi 1974; Camplani 2004, 2006a, 2006b, 2007 and 2009.
45 Van Nuffelen 2002.
46 See already Williams 1986.
47 Hauben 2004c = XIII in this volume; Hauben 2005 = XIV in this volume.
48 See Choat 2006:128-129 and Hauben 1998:330 n. 8 = VII in this volume.
49 Bell 1924:38-99 = P.Lond. VI 1913-1922; Crum 1927.
50 Bell 1924:100-120 = P.Lond. VI 1923-1929.
The archive of Nepheros (around 350-360);51 (4) an archive relating to Melitian monks at the monastery
of Labla (511-513).52 The evidence for the Melitian nature of the archive of Nepheros is circumstantial but
is now widely accepted.53 These documents are virtually the only ones to inform us on the self-
understanding of the Melitians. It is therefore interesting to note that in the documents from Labla, in
the sixth century, the Melitians referred to themselves with that name. The archive of Paieous is of
particular interest as it provides a direct insight in the Melitian community shortly before the crucial
Synod of Tyre, when Arians and Melitians combined forces to have Athanasius deposed. 54

Interpretation

For a long time it has been asserted that the Melitian schism constituted a rebellion of the
autochthonous, Coptic population against the Greek patriarchate. 55 The idea that heresies and schisms
were national movements in disguise has now been convincingly rebutted: for the Melitian schism, one
cannot see a difference in background and origin between its adherents and those of the Nicene
church.56

The interpretation of the schism as a national movement has now been replaced by a more subtle model,
one that is, however, not wholly different from the preceding. It has been emphasised that the early
fourth century is the period when the bishop of Alexandria started to expand his authority so as to
become the supreme head of the Egyptian Church. Especially in Alexandria this generated tensions, as
the local presbyters traditionally wielded important power in their districts and had a strong say in who
was to become the bishop of the city. 57 Melitius, as well as Arius, rebelled against this transition from a
more collegiate mode of governance to a more monarchic one not to say, in the case of Egypt, the
transition to almost absolute power for the bishop of Alexandria. 58 It is undoubtedly correct to set the
way the Alexandrian patriarch dealt with the Melitian schism in the context of the development of his
authority: in particular Athanasius exploited the possibilities offered by the presence of two internal
enemies to enhance his own position and extend control over all aspects of church life in Egypt, including
monasticism. Yet, it is questionable whether the rise of monarchic episcopate in Alexandria actually
constituted a cause of Melitius actions.59 Leaving aside the fact that we know very little about the power
balance in the church of Egypt under Peter I, it must be noted that Melitius challenged Peter for being

51 Kramer, Shelton and Browne 1987 = P.Neph.

52 McGing 1990.
53 It has been doubted by Martin 1996:43-47 but re-affirmed by Hauben 2001 = X in this volume; Wipszycka
2009:82.
54 Hauben 1981 = I in this volume, Hauben 2001 = X in this volume, Hauben 2002b = XI in this volume, Hauben
2004a = XII in this volume.
55 Barnard 1973:188-189; Frend 1974; Vivian 1988:37-38; Griggs 1990:117-130; Carroll 1989.
56 Wipszycka 1996:51-52; Martin 1981:43; Hauben 1989-1990:165 = IV in this volume; Camplani 1990:329. See the
classic paper of Jones 1959.
57 Wipszycka 2006 with further references.
58 Martin 1986:267; Williams 1986:51-52; Camplani 1990:318; Pietri 1995:256. Wipszycka 2006:89 suggests, for
example, that the Melitians continued the old practice of election and ordination of presbyters and bishops by
presbyters. Given the fact that at a later stage in the schism we only know of Melitian presbyters, ordination of
presbyters by presbyters is indeed likely. Yet this custom may have arisen out of need and does not have to be a
conscious return to an hallowed Egyptian tradition.
59 See already Hauben 2004c:63 n. 50 = XIII in this volume.
too weak a man. Usurping the functions of Peter in Alexandria when the bishop was in hiding, Melitius
stepped in to fill a lack of authority, to set the example that Peter should have set. It used to be thought
that Melitius aimed at usurping the position of Alexander and occupying the see of Alexandria. 60 Yet this
was not the case. In fact, it is now established that the Melitians never elected a counterbishop in
Alexandria:61 whatever the precise reasons for this, it suggests that a direct challenge of the position of
the bishop of Alexandria was not their first concern. More fundamentally, an interpretation that sees the
Melitian schism as a response to an extension of the authority of the bishop of Alexandria, inverses the
agency and suggests that the prime cause of the events were not Melitius actions but the power drive of
the bishop of Alexandria. This stands in line with the tendency of current scholarship to rightly question
the triumphalist narratives stemming from the Alexandrian church and to revaluate the fate of the
victims of its power drive. If we use this model as a single fundamental explanation, however, we risk not
only to misunderstand the origins of the schism, but also to despoil Melitius of his honest convictions.

Rather than wishing to propose a single explanatory model for the entire history of the schism, we should
try to develop a more dynamic understanding. Indeed, the first decades of the fourth century are marked
by many fluctuations and sudden changes in the church: persecution, triumph of the church, doctrinal
troubles with the rise of Arianism, and erratic imperial involvement. The aims of Melitius and the causes
for his actions at different moments in the history of the schism may well have been influenced by the
changes in the wider context. During the persecution, Melitius was primarily concerned with maintaining
the integrity of the church, in two senses: as an institution, against the onslaught of the secular powers;
and spiritually, against the weakness of its current leaders. His strong convictions express themselves in
his challenge of the authority of Peter and in his insistence on a more rigorist line in dealing with lapsi.
His community could hence present itself as more pure than the rest of the church of Egypt.
Circumstances changed profoundly after the end of the persecutions and the conversion of Constantine.
Contrary to what Melitius may have thought in 306, the Egyptian church emerged quite strong out of the
persecutions: not only could the official church boast the crown of martyrdom for Peter, thus establishing
beyond doubt his credentials against Melitius doubts, but the ensuing peace allowed the church to
reestablish and re-assert itself. Path-dependency probably ensured that Melitius continued to lead his
own church, but if the absence of reports on the period 311-325 suggests anything, it is that both sides
were content to let matters rest. Things changed with the rise of Arianism. Because of its international
dimension and the doctrinal nature of the difference (contrary to the disciplinary one that characterised
Melitianism), it was a much more serious problem than Melitianism for Alexander of Alexandria. For both
sides in the conflict, it probably meant the end of the armistice. There is no evidence regarding the role
of the Melitians in the run-up to Nicaea: anti-Melitian sources, in particular the so-called History of the
Alexandrian Patriarchate, stress the life-long connection between Arianism and Melitianism; yet, our only
source to report a pro-Melitian version, Epiphanius, stresses the initial hostility of the Melitians towards
the Arians.62 Wherever the truth lies, the rise of Arianism offered opportunities to both sides. The
Melitians may have sensed a possibility to improve their position. For Alexander of Alexandria, the
difficulty in settling the Arian dispute amicably may have demonstrated the need to set his house in
60 Telfer 1955. See the critique of Wipszycka 1992:147.
61 Hauben 1981 = I in this volume still thought the Melitians had ordained a bishop for Alexandria, but that view is
corrected by van Minnen 2001. Hauben 2004c = XIII in this volume spells out the consequences of this fact.
62 Epiphanius, Panarion 68.4.1-2.
order. It may or may not have been his desire to extend his power in taking on both Melitians and Arians,
yet it is obvious that his success at Nicaea did so. If handled well, conflict can indeed establish ones
power base. The rise of Arianism is thus crucial for the history of the Melitian schism after its initial
establishment during the persecution, as also later events show: Melitius tries to wriggle out of the
agreements of Nicaea at the same time as the Arians did, and both groups would form strong alliances in
the run-up to the Synod of Tyre where they challenged Athanasius. What the Melitians hoped to gain by
this is not clear, but one suspects that they hoped that an Arian bishop would leave them alone and
permit them to have their own churches. By now, having started out as a movement that cared for the
integrity of the church, Melitianism had developed into one that cares for its own integrity a not
uncommon nor surprising development.

The distinct customs that sources allege for the Melitians, 63 probably originated at this time. Just as
accusations symbolically excluded the Melitians from the body of the church, such customs helped to
define their own identity. Yet many of such customs, such as the use of apocryphal texts and divination,
and the practice of irregular ordinations, are attested in hostile sources, 64 and it must be asked if the
practices that for example Athanasius accuses the Melitians of, are not rather polemical disqualifications.
Athanasius Festal Letter for the year 369, for example, accuses the Arians and Melitians of mummifying
and exposing the bodies of martyrs. This is, in fact, an Egyptian custom, 65 and rather than singling out a
specific custom of heretics in Egypt, Athanasius is polemically linking his enemies to forbidden customs.
He thus succeeds in accusing the heretics of illegitimate and pagan practices whilst also showing to his
orthodox flock that adherence to these practices makes them run the risk of being accused of heresy. 66
Such polemical strategies make it very difficult for any study of the schism to see how they developed
their own identity.

The interpretation suggested here tries to lift the Melitian schism out of a single interpretative model,
namely that of a rebellion against the extension of the power of the bishop of Alexandria, and to
reposition it in the complex historical events of the early fourth century. Rather than seeing it as a
response to one factor outside itself, it was the result of the interaction between internal and external
elements just as all historical events.

63 There is no evidence for heretical theological views, notwithstanding Simonetti 1990.

64 Camplani 1990:332; Carroll 1989; Hauben 1998a = VII in this volume.
65 Athanasius, Life of Antonius 90. Cf. Camplani 1990:335; Martin 1996:700-702.
66 For further references to later polemical accounts, see Camplani 1990:343; Hauben 1998 = VII in this volume.
List of abbreviations

BHL = 1898-1901. Bibliotheca hagiographica Latina. 2 vols. Brussels.

PG = Migne, J.P. 1857-1866. Patrologia Graeca. Paris.

PO = Graffin, F., et al., eds. 1903-. Patrologia Orientalis. Paris and Turnhout, B.

SEG = Hondius, J.J.E., et al., eds. 1923-. Supplementum epigraphicum graecum. Leiden, Amsterdam, and
Boston.

For abbreviations of papyrus collections, see the Checklist of Editions of Greek, Latin, Demotic, and Coptic
Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets (http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist.html).
For abbreviations of journal titles used in the articles republished in this volume, see for the most part
the list drawn up by LAnne philologique (J. Marouzeau et al. 1927-. LAnne philologique. Bibliographie
critique et analytique de lantiquit grco-latine. Paris; http://www.annee-philologique.com/aph/).

Bibliography
Aalders, G.J.D. 1979. De grote vergissing. Kerk en Staat in het begin van de vierde eeuw. Kampen, NL.
Alberigo, J. [G.] et al., eds. 1973. Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta. 3rd edition. Bologna.
Amann, E. 1928. Mlce. Dictionnaire de thologie catholique 10:531-6.
Amann, E. 1937. Rordinations. Dictionnaire de thologie catholique 13.2:2385-2431.
Amlineau, E. 1895. Monuments pour servir lhistoire de lgypte chrtienne aux IVe, Ve, VIe et VIIe
sicles. Mmoires publis par les membres de la Mission archologique franaise au Caire, vol. 4, pt. 2.
Paris.
Amidon, Ph.R. 1990. The Panarion of St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis. Selected Passages. New York and
Oxford.
Andresen, C., and A.M. Ritter. 1993. Geschichte des Christentums. Vol. 1.1, Altertum. Stuttgart.
Arnold, D.W.-H. 1989. Sir Harold Idris Bell and Athanasius: A Reconsideration of London Papyrus 1914.
Studia Patristica 21:377-83.
Arnold, D.W.-H. 1991. The Early Episcopal Career of Athanasius of Alexandria. Notre Dame, IN, and
London.
Bagnall, R.S. 1993. Egypt in Late Antiquity, Princeton, NJ.
Barison, P. 1938. Ricerche sui monasteri dellEgitto bizantino ed arabo secondo i documenti dei papiri
greci. Aegyptus 18:29-148.
Barnard, L.W. 1973. Athanasius and the Meletian Schism in Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
59:181-9.
Barnard, L.W. 1975. Some Notes on the Meletian Schism in Egypt. Studia Patristica 12.1:339-405.
Barnard, L.W. 1992. Studies in Athanasius Apologia Secunda. European University Studies XXIII 467. Bern.
Barnes, T.D. 1981. Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge, MA, and London.
Barnes, T.D. 1993. Athanasius and Constantius. Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire.
Cambridge, MA, and London.
Barns, J., and H. Chadwick. 1973. A Letter Ascribed to Peter of Alexandria. Journal of Theological Studies
24:443-55.
Baumeister, Th. 1972. Martyr invictus. Der Martyrer als Sinnbild der Erlsung in der Legende und im Kult
der frhen koptischen Kirche. Zur Kontinuitt des gyptischen Denkens. Mnster.
Baus, K., and E. Ewig. 1973. Die Reichskirche nach Konstantin dem Grossen. Die Kirche von Nikaia bis
Chalkedon. Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, edited by H. Jedin, vol. 2, pt. 1. Freiburg, Basel, and Vienna.
Bausi, A. 2006. La collezione aksumita canonico-liturgica. Adamantius 12:43-70.
Baynes, N.H. 1924. Review of Bell 1924. Journal of Hellenic Studies 44:311-3.
Baynes, N.H. 1948. Sozomen I.15. Journal of Theological Studies 49:165-8.
Bell, H.I. 1924. Jews and Christians in Egypt. The Jewish Troubles in Alexandria and the Athanasian
Controversy. With Three Coptic Texts edited by W.E. Crum. London [= P.Jews = P.London VI].
Bell, H.I. 1925. Bibliography. Graeco-Roman Egypt. Papyri (1923-1924). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
11:84-124.
Bienert, W.A. 1995. Epiphanios v. Salamis. Lexikon fr Theologie und Kirche 3:723-5.
Bradshaw, P.F. 1995. Ordination IV.1. Theologische Realenzyklopdie 25:343-5.
Brakke, D. 1994. Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of
Alexandrias Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter. Harvard Theological Review 87:395-419.
Brakke, D. 1995. Athanasius and the Politics of Ascetism. Oxford.
Brakmann, H. 1979. Alexandreia und die Kanones des Hippolyt. Jahrbuch fr Antike und Christentum
22:139-49.
Cabrol, F. 1907. Alexandrie. lection du patriarche. Dictionnaire darchologie chrtienne et de liturgie
1:1204-10.
Camplani, A. 1989. Le lettere festali di Atanasio di Alessandria. Studio storico-critico. Rome.
Camplani, A. 1990. In margine alla storia dei Meliziani. Augustinianum 30:313-51.
Camplani, A., ed. 1997. LEgitto cristiano. Aspetti e problemi in et tardo-antica. Studia Ephemeridis
Augustinianum 56. Rome.
Camplani, A. 1999. Review of Martin 1996. Augustinianum 39:187-222.
Camplani, A., ed. 2003. Atanasio di Alessandria, Lettere Festali. Anonimo, Indice delle Lettere Festali.
Introduzione, traduzione e note. Letture cristiane del primo millennio 34. Milan.
Camplani, A. 2004. Lautorappresentazione dellepiscopato di Alessandria tra IV e V secolo: questioni di
metodo. Annali di storia dellesegesi 21:147-85.
Camplani, A. 2006a. Lidentit del patriarcato di Alessandria tra storia e rappresentazione storiografica.
Adamantius 12:8-42.
Camplani, A. 2006b. Lettere episcopali, storiografia patriarcale e letteratura canonica: a proposito del
Codex veronensis LX (58). Rivista di storia del cristianesimo 3:117-64.
Camplani, A. 2007. LHistoria ecclesiastica en copte et lhistoriographie du sige piscopal dAlexandrie.
propos dun passage sur Mlitios de Lycopolis. In Actes du Huitime Congrs international dtudes
coptes, Paris, 28 juin 3 juillet 2004, 2 vols., edited by N. Bosson and A. Boudhors, 417-24. Orientalia
Lovaniensia Analecta 163. Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, MA.
Camplani, A. 2009. Pietro di Alessandria tra documentazione darchivio e agiografia popolare. In:
Volksglaube im antiken Christentum, edited by H. Grieser and A. Merkt, 138-56. Darmstadt.
Camplani, A. Forthcoming. Melitianer. Reallexicon fr Antike und Christentum. Mnster.
Carroll, S.T. 1989. The Melitian Schism: Coptic Christianity and the Egyptian Church. Ph.D. diss., Miami
University. Oxford, OH.
Choat, M. 2002. The Development of Usage of Terms for Monks in Late Antique Egypt. Jahrbuch fr
Antike und Christentum 45:5-23.
Choat, M. 2006. Belief and Cult in Fourth-Century Papyri. Studia Antiqua Australiensia 1. Turnhout, B.
Corcoran, S. 1996. The Empire of the Tetrarchs. Imperial Pronouncements and Government AD 284-324.
Oxford.
Cramer, W. 1999. Peleus, Neilos, Patermuthios u. Elias. Lexikon fr Theologie und Kirche 8:13.
Crum, W.E. 1927. Some Further Melitian Socuments. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 13:19-26.
Deissmann, A. 1923. Licht vom Osten. Das Neue Testament und die neuentdeckten Texte der hellenistisch-
rmischen Welt. 4th ed. Tbingen.
Delehaye, H. 1922. Les martyrs dgypte. Analecta Bollandiana 40:5-154.
Derda, T., and E. Wipszycka. 1994. Lemploi des titres abba, apa et papas dans lgypte byzantine.
Journal of Juristic Papyrology 24:23-56.
Devos, P. 1965. Une passion grecque indite de S. Pierre dAlexandrie. Analecta Bollandiana 83:157-87.
DiMaio, M. 1996. Imago veritatis aut verba in speculo: Athanasius, the Meletian Schism, and Linguistic
Frontiers in Fourth-Century Egypt. In Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity. Papers from the 1 st
Interdisciplinary Conference on Late Antiquity, the University of Kansas, March 1995, edited by R.W.
Mathisen and H.S. Sivan, 277-84. Aldershot, KS.
DiMaio, M., and D.W.-H. Arnold. 1992. Per vim, per caedem, per bellum: A Study of Murder and
Ecclesiastical Politics in the Year 337 A.D. Byzantion 62:158-211.
Doelger, F.J. 1934. Klingeln, Tanz und Hndeklatschen im Gottesdienst der christlichen Melitianer in
Aegypten. Antike und Christentum. Kultur- und religionsgeschichtliche Studien 4:245-65. Mnster.
Drake, H.A. 1986. Athanasius First Exile. Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 27:193-204.
Drake, H.A. 2000. Constantine and the Bishops. The Politics of Intolerance. Baltimore.
Duchesne, L. 1911. Histoire ancienne de lglise, vol. 2. 5th edition. Paris.
Dnzi, F. 1998. Melitios v. Lykopolis. Lexikon fr Theologie und Kirche 7:86.
Duval, A. et al., eds. 1994. Les Conciles oecumniques. Les dcrets. Vol. 1.2, Nice I Latran V. Paris.
Elliott, T.G. 1992. Constantine and the Arian Reaction after Nicaea. Journal of Ecclesiastical History
43:169-94.
Elliott, T.G. 1996. The Christianity of Constantine the Great. New York.
Ensslin, W. 1934. Theonas 5. RE 5A:2085.
Faivre, J. 1914. Alexandrie. Dictionnaire dhistoire et de gographie ecclsiastiques 2:289-369.
Falivene, M.R. 1998. The Herakleopolite Nome. A Catalogue of the Toponyms with Introduction and
Commentary. American Studies in Papyrology 37. Atlanta, GA.
Fedalto. 1984. Liste vescovili del patriarcato di Alessandria. Studia Patristica 31:249-323.
Fernndez Hernndez, G. 1984. El cisma meleciano en la Iglesia egipcia. Gerin 2:155-80.
Fernndez Hernndez, G. 1985. La eleccin episcopal de Atanasio de Alejandra segn Filostorgio.
Gerin 3:211-29.
Fischer, J.A. 1987. Die Synode zu Alexandrien im Jahr 306. Archivum Historiae Conciliorum 19:62-70.
Fliche A., and V. Martin. 1950. Histoire de lglise depuis les origines jusqu nos jours. Vol. 3, De la paix
constantinienne la mort de Thodose, by J.R. Palanque, G. Bardy, and P. de Labriolle. Paris.
Frankfurter, D. 1993. Elijah in Upper Egypt. The Apocalypse of Elijah and Early Egyptian Christianity.
Minneapolis, MN.
Frend, W.H.C. 1965. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church. Oxford.
Frend, W.H.C. 1972. Heresy and Schism as Social and National Movements. In: Schism, Heresy, and
Religious Protest, edited by D. Baker, 37-56. Cambridge.
Frend, W.H.C. 1974. Athanasius as an Egyptian Christian Leader in the Fourth Century. New College
Bulletin (Edinburgh) 8.1:20-37. Reprinted in Religion Popular and Unpopular in the Early Christian
Centuries, XVI. London 1976.
Frend, W.H.C. 1984. The Rise of Christianity. London.
Frend, W.H.C. 1989. The Church in the Reign of Constantius II (337-361). Mission-Monasticism-Worship.
In Lglise et lEmpire au IVe sicle, edited by A. Dihle, 73-112. Entretiens Hardt 34. Genve.
Galtier, P. 1930. Imposition des mains. Dictionnaire de thologie catholique 7.2:1302-1425.
Gelzer, H. 1893. Ungedruckte und wenig bekannte Bistmerverzeichnisse der orientalischen Kirche II.
Byzantinische Zeitschrift 2:22-70.
Ghedini, G. 1925a. Luce nuove dai papiri sullo scisma meleziano e il monachismo in Egitto. La Scuola
Cattolica 53 (Ser. VI, vol. VI): 261-80.
Ghedini, G. 1925b. Review of Bell 1924. Aegyptus 6:273-7.
Ghedini, G. 1936. Paganesimo e cristianesimo nelle lettere papiracee greche dei primi secoli d.Cr. In Atti
del IV Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, Firenze, 28 aprile 2 maggio 1935, 333-50. Aegyptus.
Serie Scientifica 5. Milan.
Girardet, K.M. 1975. Kaisergericht und Bisschofsgericht. Studien zu den Anfngen des Donatistenstreites
313-315 und zum Prozess des Athanasius von Alexandrien 328-346. Antiquitas I 21. Bonn.
Goehring, J.E. 1993. Melitian Monastic Organization: A Challenge to Pachomian Originality. Studia
Patristica 25:388-95. Reprinted in Goehring 1999, 187-95.
Goehring, J.E. 1997. Monastic Diversity and Ideological Boundaries in Fourth-Century Christian Egypt.
Journal of Early Christian Studies 5:61-84. Reprinted in Goehring 1999, 196-218.
Goehring, J.E. 1999. Ascetics, Society, and the Desert. Studies in Early Egyptian Monasticism. Harrisburg,
PA.
Greenslade, S.L. 1953. Schism in the Early Church. London.
Griggs, C.W. 1990. Early Egyptian Christianity. From its Origins to 451 C.E. Coptic Studies 2. Leiden.
Gryson, R. 1973. Les lections ecclsiastiques au IIIe sicle. Revue dhistoire ecclsiastique 68:353-404.
Gryson, R. 1979. Les lections piscopales en Orient au IVe sicle. Revue dhistoire ecclsiastique
74:301-45.
Gwatkin, H.M. 1900. Studies of Arianism. 2nd ed. Cambridge.
Gwynn, D.M. 2007. The Eusebians: The Polemic of Athanasius of Alexandria and the Construction of the
Arian controversy. Oxford.
Haas, C. 1991. The Alexandrian Riots of 356 and George of Cappadocia. Greek, Roman and Byzantine
Studies 32:281-301.
Haas, C. 1993. The Arians of Alexandria. Vigiliae Christianae 47:234-45.
Haas, C. 1997. Alexandria in Late Antiquity. Topography and Social Conflict. Baltimore and London.
Hahn, J. 2004. Gewalt und religiser Konflikt. Studien zu den Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Christen,
Heiden und Juden im Osten des Rmischen Reiches (von Konstantin bis Theodosius II). Klio Beihefte NF 8.
Berlin.
Haile, G. 1980. The Martyrdom of St. Peter Archbishop of Alexandria. Analecta Bollandiana 98:85-92.
Halkin, F. 1963. LApologie du martyr Philas de Thmuis (Papyrus Bodmer XX) et les Actes latins de
Philas et Philoromus. Analecta Bollandiana 81:5-27.
Hanson, R.P.C. 1988. The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381.
Edinburgh.
Hardy, E.R. 1952. Christian Egypt: Church and People. Christianity and Nationalism in the Patriarchate of
Alexandria. New York.
Hauben, H. 1981. On the Melitians in P. London VI (P. Jews) 1914: The Problem of Papas Heraiscus. In
Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Congress of Papyrology, New York, 24-31 July 1980, edited by
L. Koenen, R.S. Bagnall, G.M. Browne, and A.E. Hanson, 447-56. American Studies in Papyrology 23.
Chico, CA (= I in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1987. La rordination du clerg mlitien impose par le Concile de Nice. Ancient Society
18:203-7 (= II in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1989. La premire anne du schisme mlitien (305/306). Ancient Society 20:267-80 (= III in
this volume).
Hauben, H. 1989-1990. Le catalogue mlitien rexamin. In Opes Atticae. Miscellanea philologica et
historica Raymondo Bogaert et Hermanno Van Looy oblata, edited by M. Geerard, J. Desmet, and R.
Vander Plaetse, 155-67. Sacris Erudiri 31. Bruges (= IV in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1994a. Jean Arkhaph, vque de Memphis, dans le catalogue mlitien. In Philohistr.
Miscellanea in honorem Caroli Laga septuagenarii, edited by A. Schoors and P. Van Deun, 23-33.
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 60. Leuven (= V in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1994b. Review of Le lettere festali di Atanasio di Alessandria. Studio storico-critico, by A.
Camplani. Unione Accademica Nazionale. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari. Roma 1989. Orientalia
Lovaniensia Periodica 25:281-5 (= VI in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1998a. The Melitian Church of the Martyrs. Christian Dissenters in Ancient Egypt. In
Ancient History in a Modern University. Proceedings of a Conference held at Macquarie University, 8-13
July 1993 to mark twenty-five years of the teaching of Ancient History at Macquarie University and the
retirement from the Chair of Professor Edwin Judge. Vol. 2, Early Christianity, Late Antiquity and Beyond,
edited by. T.W. Hillard, R.A. Kearsley, C.E.V. Nixon, and A.M. Nobbs, 329-49. Macquarie University, NSW,
Grand Rapids, MI, and Cambridge, UK (= VII in this volume).
Hauben, H. 1998b. The Alexandrian Patriarch as Pharaoh. From Biblical Metaphor to Scholarly Topos. In
Egyptian Religion. The Last Thousand Years. Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Jan Quaegebeur. Part 2,
edited by W. Clarysse, A. Schoors, and H. Willems, 1341-52. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 85. Leuven (=
XV in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2000a. John Arkhaph and the Bishop (Athan., Apol. sec. 71.6). A Reassessment. Ancient
Society 30:271-5 (= VIII in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2000b. Das Konzil von Nicaea (325) zur Wiederaufnahme der Melitianer. Versuch einer Text-
und Strukturanalyse. In Timai Ioannou Triantaphyllopoulou, edited by J. Velissaropoulou-Karakosta, S.N.
Troianos, K.A. Bourdara, M.P. Stathopoulos, and N. Klamaris, 357-79. Athens (= IX in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2001. Le Papyrus London VI (P. Jews) 1914 dans son contexte historique (mai 335). In Atti
del XXII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, Firenze, 23-29 agosto 1998. Vol. 2, edited by I. Andorlini,
G. Bastianini, M. Manfredi, and G. Menci, 605-18. Florence (= X in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2002a. On the Invocation of the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity in Byzantine Oath and
Dating Formulas. Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 139:158-60 (= XVI in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2002b. Aurlios Pageus, alias Apa Paious, et le monastre mlitien dHathor. Ancient
Society 32:337-52 (= XI in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2004a. Catholiques et Mlitiens Alexandrie la veille du Synode de Tyr (335). In Coptic
Studies on the Threshold of a New Millennium. Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of
Coptic Studies, Leiden, 27 August 2 September 2000. Vol. 2, edited by M. Immerzeel, J. van der Vliet, et
al., 905-21. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 133. Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, MA (= XII in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2004b. Christ versus Apollo in Early Byzantine Kourion? With a note on the so-called Panayia
Aphroditissa in Paphos. In Philomathestatos. Studies in Greek, Patristic, and Byzantine Texts Presented
to Jacques Noret for his Sixty-Fifth Birthday, edited B. Janssens, B. Roosen, and P. Van Deun, 269-84.
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 137. Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, MA (= XVII in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2004c. Heraiscus as Melitian Bishop of Heracleopolis Magna and the Alexandrian See.
Journal of Juristic Papyrology 34:51-70 (= XIII in this volume).
Hauben, H. 2005. piphane de Salamine sur le schisme mlitien. In Storiografia e Agiografia nella Tarda
Antichit. Alla ricerca delle radici cristiane dellEuropa. Atti del Convegno della Facolt di Lettere Classiche
e Cristiane dellUniversit Pontificia Salesiana (Roma, 21-22 gennaio 2005), edited by B. Amata and G.
Marasco, 737-70. Salesianum 67.4. Rome (= XIV in this volume).
von Hefele, C.J., and H. Leclercq. 1907. Histoire des conciles daprs les documents originaux. Vol. 1, pt. 1.
Paris.
Holl, K. 1925. Die Bedeutung der neuverffentlichten melitianischen Urkunden fr die
Kirchengeschichte. Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philos.-hist. Kl.:18-
31. Reprinted in Gesammelte Aufstze zur Kirchengeschichte. Vol. 2, Der Osten, Tbingen 1928, 283-97.
Isele, B. 2010. Kampf um Kirchen: Religise Gewalt, heiliger Raum und christliche Topographie in
Alexandria und Konstantinopel (4. Jh). Mnster.
Jones, A.H.M. 1959. Were Ancient Heresies National or Social Movements in Disguise? Journal of
Theological Studies 10:280-98.
Judge, E.A. 1977. The Earliest Use of Monachos for Monk (P. Coll. Youtie 77) and the Origins of
Monasticism. Jahrbuch fr Antike und Christentum 20:72-89.
Judge, E.A., and S.R. Pickering. 1977. Papyrus Documentation of Church and Community in Egypt to the
Mid-Fourth Century. Jahrbuch fr Antike und Christentum 20:47-71.
Keil, V. 1989. Quellensammlung zur Religionspolitik Konstantins des Grossen. Darmstadt.
Kemp, E.W. 1955. Bishops and Presbyters at Alexandria. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 6:125-42.
Kettler, F.H. 1936. Der melitianische Streit in Aegypten. Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft 35:155-93.
Kidd, B.J. 1922. A History of the Church to A.D. 461. 3 vols. Oxford.
Klein, M.J. 1988. Untersuchungen zu den kaiserlichen Steinbrchen an Mons Porphyrites und Mons
Claudianus in der stlichen Wste gyptens. Habelts Dissertationsdrucke. Reihe Alte Geschichte 26. Ph.D.
diss., Frankfurt University. Bonn.
Kortekaas, G.A.A. 1987. Acta Phileae and Commento agli Acta Phileae. In Atti e passioni dei martiri,
edited by A.A.R. Bastiaensen et al., 247-337 and 498-581.
Kortekaas, G.A.A. 1988. De Acta van Phileas. In De heiligenverering in de eerste eeuwen van het
christendom, edited by A. Hilhorst, 136-50. Nijmegen.
Kramer, B. 1993. Neuere Papyri zum frhen Mnchtum in gypten. In Philanthropia kai Eusebeia.
Festschrift fr Albrecht Dihle zum 70. Geburtstag, edited by G.W. Most, H. Petersmann, and A.M. Ritter,
217-33. Gttingen.
Kramer, B., J.C. Shelton, and G.M. Browne, 1987. Das Archiv von Nepheros und verwandte Texte.
Aegyptiaca Treverensia 4. Mainz.
Krause, M. 1981. Das christliche Alexandrien und seine Beziehungen zum koptischen Aegypten. In
Alexandrien. Kulturbegegnungen dreier Jahrtausende im Schmeltztiegel einer mediterranen Grostadt,
edited by N. Hinske et al., 53-62. Aegyptiaca Treverensia 1. Mainz.
ajtar, A., and E. Wipszycka. 1994. Deux katholikai ekklesiai dans le Mons Porphyrites. Journal of Juristic
Papyrology 24:71-85.
Lallemand, J. 1964. Ladministration civile de lgypte de lavnement de Diocltien la cration du
diocse (284-382). Contribution l'tude des rapports entre lgypte et lEmpire la fin du III e et au IVe
sicle. Acadmie Royale de Belgique. Classe des Lettres. Mmoires 57.2. Brussels.
Lietzmann, H. 1975. Geschichte der alten Kirche. 4th-5th edition (= reprint of the 3rd-4th edition 1961 =
1937-1944). Berlin and New York.
Litinas, N. 1994. Villages and Place-Names of the Cynopolite Nome. Archiv fr Papyrusforschung
40:157-64.
Lorenz, K. 1979. Das Problem der Nachsynode von Nica (327). Zeitschrift fr Kirchengeschichte 90:22-
40.
Lucchesi, E. 1980. Un fragment indit de la vie copte de Pamin. Analecta Bollandiana 98:422.
Luibheid, C. 1983. The Alleged Second Session of the Council of Nicaea. Journal of Ecclesiastical History
34:165-74.
McGing, B.C. 1990. Melitian Monks at Labla. Tyche 5:67-94.
McGing, B.C. 1995. Greek Papyri from Dublin. Bonn. [P.Dubl.]
Maehler, H. 1976. Zur Amtszeit des Prfekten Sossianus Hierocles. In Collectanea Papyrologica. Texts
published in honor of H.C. Youtie, edited by A.E. Hanson. Vol. 2, 527-33. Bonn.
Maraval, P. 1995. Alexandrie et lgypte. In Histoire du christianisme des origines nos jours. Vol. 2,
Naissance dune chrtient (250-430), edited by C. and L. Pietri, 863-901. Paris.
Martin, A. 1974. Athanase et les Mlitiens (325-335). In Politique et thologie chez Athanase
dAlexandrie. Actes du Colloque de Chantilly, 23-25 septembre 1973, edited by Ch. Kannengiesser, 31-61.
Thologie historique 27. Paris.
Martin, A. 1979. Lglise et la khra gyptienne au IV e sicle. Revue des tudes augustiniennes 25:3-26.
Martin, A. 1981. Aux origines de lglise Copte: limplantation et le dveloppement du christianisme en
gypte (Ie-IVe sicles). Revue des tudes anciennes 83:35-56.
Martin, A. 1986. La rconciliation des lapsi en gypte. Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 12:256-89.
Martin, A. 1989a. Les conditions de la radmission du clerg mlitien par le Concile de Nice. Ancient
Society 20:281-90.
Martin, A. 1989b. Le fil dArius: 325-335. Revue dhistoire ecclsiastique 84:297-333.
Martin, A. 1989c. Les relations entre Arius et Mlitios dans la tradition alexandrine. Une histoire
polmique. Journal of Theological Studies 40:401-13.
Martin, A. 1996. Athanase dAlexandrie et lglise dgypte au IVe sicle (328-373). Collection de lcole
franaise de Rome 216. Rome.
Martin, A. 2003. Aux origines de lAlexandrie chrtienne: topographie, liturgie, institutions. In
Origeniana octava. Origen and the Alexandrian Tradition. Papers of the 8 th International Origen Congress,
Pisa, 27-31 August 2001, edited by L. Perrone et al., vol. 1, 105-20. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum
Theologicarum Lovaniensium 164. Leuven.
Martin, A. 2007. Les relations entre le monachisme gyptien et linstitution ecclsiastique au IV e sicle.
In Foundation of Power and Conflict of Authority in Late Antique Monasticism, edited by A. Camplani and
G. Filoramo, 13-46. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 157. Leuven.
Martin, A., and M. Albert, eds. and trans. 1985. Histoire acphale et Index syriaque des Lettres festales.
Sources chrtiennes 317. Paris.
Merkel, F. 1985. Handauflegung II. Theologische Realenzyklopdie 14:422-28.
Naldini, M. 1998. Il Cristianesimo in Egitto. Lettere private nei papiri dei secoli II-IV. 2nd edition. Fiesole.
Nautin, P. 1963. piphane de Salamine. Dictionnaire dhistoire et de gographie ecclsiastiques 15:617-
31.
Norris, F.W. 2007. Greek Christianities. In The Cambridge History of Christianity. Vol. 2, Constantine to c.
600, edited by A. Casiday and F.W. Norris, 70-117. Cambridge.
Norton, P. 2007. Episcopal Elections 250-600. Hierarchy and Popular Will in Late Antiquity. Oxford.
Orlandi, T. 1974. Ricerche su una storia ecclesiastica alessandrina del IV secolo. Vetera Christianorum
11:257-96.
Orlandi, T. 1975. SullApologia (contra Arianos) di Atanasio di Alessandria. Augustinianum 15:49-79.
Papaconstantinou, A. 2006. Historiography, Hagiography, and the Making of the Coptic Church of the
Martyrs in Early Islamic Egypt. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 60:65-86.
Parvis, S. 2006. Marcellus of Ancyra and the Lost Years of the Arian Controversy 325-345. Oxford.
Pearson, B.A., and J.E. Goehring, eds. 1986. The Roots of Egyptian Christianity. Philadelphia.
Peeters, P. 1925. Review of Bell 1924. Analecta Bollandiana 43:140-3.
Pietri, C. 1995. Lpanouissement du dbat thologique et ses difficults sous Constantin: Arius et le
Concile de Nice. In Histoire du christianisme des origines nos jours. Vol. 2, Naissance dune chrtient
(250-430), edited by C. and L. Pietri, 249-68. Paris.
Pourkier, A. 1992. Lhrsiologie chez piphane de Salamine. Paris.
Rousseau, Ph. 1985. Pachomius. The Making of a Community in Fourth-Century Egypt. Berkeley, Los
Angeles, and London.
Saltet, L. 1907. Les rordinations. tude sur le sacrement de lordre. Paris.
Sayce, A.H. 1890. Deux contrats grecs du Fayoum. Revue des tudes grecques 3:131-44.
Schebler, A. 1936. Die Reordinationen in der altkatholischen Kirche unter besonderer Bercksichtigung
der Anschauungen Rudolph Sohms. Kanonistische Studien und Texte 10. Bonn.
Schmelz, G. 2002. Kirchliche Amtstrger im sptantiken gypten nach den Aussagen der griechischen und
koptischen Papyri und Ostraka. Archiv fr Papyrusforschung. Beiheft 13. Munich and Leipzig.
Schneemelcher, W. 1962. Epiphanius von Salamis. Reallexikon fr Antike und Christentum 5:909-27.
Schubart, W. 1925. Review of Bell 1924. Gnomon 1:23-35.
Schwartz, E. 1959. Gesammelte Schriften. Vol. 3, Zur Geschichte des Athanasius. Berlin.
Seeck, O. 1921. Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt. 6 vols. 2nd edition. Stuttgart.
Sheridan, M. 1997. Il mondo spirituale e intellettuale del primo monachesimo egiziano. In Camplani
1997, 177-216.
Silli, P., ed. 1987. Testi costantiniani nelle fonti letterarie. Materiali per una palingenesi delle costituzioni
tardo-imperiali 3. Milan.
Simonetti, M. 1975. La crisi ariana nel IV secolo. Rome.
Simonetti, M. 1990. Il concilio di Alessandria del 362 e lorigine della formula trinitaria. Augustinianum
30:353-60.
Stander, H.F. 1993. The Clapping of Hands in the Early Church. Studia Patristica 26:75-80.
Stein, E. 1959. Histoire du Bas-Empire. Vol. 1, De ltat romain ltat byzantin 284-476. Paris.
Stevenson, J., and W.H.C. Frend. 1987. A New Eusebius. Documents Illustrating the History of the Church
to A.D. 337. 2nd edition. London.
Tanner, N.P., et al., eds. 1990. Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils. Vol. 1, Nicaea I to Lateran V. London
and Washington.
Telfer, W. 1943. The Codex Verona LX (58). Harvard Theological Review 36:169-246.
Telfer, W. 1949. St. Peter of Alexandria and Arius. Analecta Bollandiana 67:117-30.
Telfer, W. 1952. Episcopal Succession in Egypt. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 3:1-13.
Telfer, W. 1955. Meletius of Lycopolis and Episcopal Succession in Egypt. Harvard Theological Review
48:227-37.
Tetz, M. 1979. Athanasius von Alexandrien. Theologische Realenzyklopdie 4:333-49.
Turner, C.H. 1923. Cheirotonia, Cheirothesia, Epithesis cheiron (and the accompanying verbs). Journal of
Theological Studies 24:496-504.

van Minnen, P. 2001. P. Harrauer 48 and the Problem of papas Heraiscus in P.Lond. VI 1914. Tyche
16:103-5.
Van Nuffelen, P. 2001. Les Lettres festales dAthanase dAlexandrie: les erreurs chronologiques de
lIndex syriaque. Revue des tudes augustiniennes 47:85-95.
Van Nuffelen, P. 2002. La tte de lhistoire acphale. Klio 84:125-40.
Van Nuffelen, P. 2004. Un hritage de paix et de pit. tude sur les Histoires ecclsiastiques de Socrate et
de Sozomne. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 142. Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, MA.
Van Nuffelen, P. 2005. Three Historical Problems in the Apologia secunda of Athanasius. Sacris Erudiri
44:93-115.
Veilleux, A. 1986. Monasticism and Gnosis in Egypt. In Pearson and Goehring 1986, 271-306.
Vivian, T. 1988. St. Peter of Alexandria, Bishop and Martyr. Philadelphia.
Vogel, C. 1970. Limposition des mains dans les rites dordination en Orient et en Occident. La maison-
Dieu 102:57-72.

Vogel, C. 1972. Chirotonie et chirothsie. Importance et relativit du geste de limposition des mains
dans la collation des ordres. Irenikon 45:7-21 and 207-38.

Watts, E.J. 2010. Riot in Alexandria. Tradition and Group Dynamics in Late Antique Pagan and Christian
Communities. The Transformation of the Classical Heritage 46. Berkeley.
Wilcken, U. 1924. Review of Bell 1924. Archiv fr Papyrusforschung 7:308-11.
Williams, F. 1987. The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I (Sects 1-46). Nag Hammadi Studies 35.
Leiden, New York, Copenhagen, and Cologne.
Williams, F. 1994. The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III (Sects 47-80, De Fide). Nag
Hammadi and Manichaean Studies 36. Leiden, New York, and Cologne.
Williams, R. 1986. Arius and the Melitian Schism. Journal of Theological Studies 37:35-52.
Williams, R. 1987. Arius: Heresy and Tradition. London.
Wilsdorf, H. 1986. Zur Historia Christianorum ad metalla damnatorum. In Studien zur alten Geschichte
Siegfried Lauffer zum 70. Geburtstag am 4. August 1981 dargebracht von Freunden, Kollegen und
Schlern, edited by H. Kalcyk, B. Gullath, and A. Graeber, vol. 3, 1031-48. Rome.
Winter, J.G. 1933. Life and Letters in the Papyri. Ann Arbor, MI.
Wipszycka, E. 1972. Les ressources et les activits conomiques des glises en gypte du IV e - VIIIe sicle.
Papyrologica Bruxellensia 10. Brussels.
Wipszycka, E. 1983. La Chiesa nellEgitto del IV secolo: Le strutture ecclesiastiche. In Les transformations
dans la socit chrtienne au IVe sicle, Congrs de Varsovie (25 juin-1er juillet 1978), Section I, 182-201.
Miscellanea Historiae Ecclesiasticae 6. Bibliothque de la Revue dhistoire ecclsiastique 67. Louvain-la-
Neuve. Reprinted in Wipszycka 1996c, 139-56.
Wipszycka, E. 1988. La christianisation de lgypte aux IV e-VIe sicles. Aspects sociaux et ethniques.
Aegyptus 68:117-65. Reprinted in Wipszycka 1996c, 63-105.
Wipszycka, E. 1992a. Le nationalisme a-t-il exist dans lglise byzantine? Journal of Juristic Papyrology
22:83-128. Reprinted in Wipszycka 1996c, 9-61.
Wipszycka, E. 1992b. Fonctionnement de lglise gyptienne aux IV e-VIIIe sicles (Sur quelques aspects).
In Itinraires dgypte. Mlanges Maurice Martin, edited by C. Decobert, 115-45. Cairo. Reprinted in
Wipszycka 1996c, 195-224.
Wipszycka, E. 1994. Le monachisme gyptien et les villes. Travaux et mmoires 12:1-44. Reprinted in
Wipszycka 1996c, 281-336.
Wipszycka, E. 1996a. Les clercs dans les communauts monastiques dgypte. Journal of Juristic
Papyrology 26:135-66.
Wipszycka, E. 1996b. Contribution ltude de lconomie de la congrgation pachmienne. Journal of
Juristic Papyrology 26:167-210.
Wipszycka, E. 1996c. tudes sur le christianisme dans lgypte de lAntiquit tardive. Studia Ephemeridis
Augustinianum 52. Rome.
Wipszycka, E. 1997a. Le istituzioni ecclesiastiche in Egitto dalla fine del III allinizio dellVIII secolo. In
Camplani 1997, 219-71.
Wipszycka, E. 1997b. Quand a-t-on commenc voir les moines comme un groupe part? Pour
comprendre Vita Antonii 46, 2-5. Journal of Juristic Papyrology 27:83-92.
Wipszycka, E. 2006. The Origins of Monarchic Episcopate in Egypt. Adamantius 12:71-90.
Wipszycka, E. 2009. Moines et communauts monastiques en gypte (IVe-VIIIe sicles). Journal of Juristic
Papyrology. Supplement 11. Warsaw.
Worp, K.A. 1994. A Checklist of Bishops in Byzantine Egypt (A.D. 325 - c. 750). Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie
und Epigraphik 100:283-318.
Young, F.M. 1983. From Nicaea to Chalcedon. A Guide to the Literature and its Background. London.