The Elevation of the See of Constantinople at the Council of Chalcedon
The Course of the Procedure
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21866500 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mikhail V Gratsianskiy (0000-0002-6981-3216, St.Tikhon's Orthodox University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 236-251 |
| Publication date | 2021-12-30 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta Serija 4 Istorija Regionovedenie Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1998-9938 • E-ISSN: 2312-8704 |
| Publisher | Volgograd State University (PUBLISHER • RU) |
| DOI | 10.15688/jvolsu4.2021.6.19 |
| OpenAlex | W4206284484 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 2 |
Introduction. Despite multiple references to the proposed topic in the scholarly literature, it still seems relevant to identify and consistently describe the entire set of measures taken at the Council of Chalcedon in order to raise the status of the see of Constantinople. Methods. The work is based on the application of the historicalcritical method of analysing source data of the original text, compiled in Greek and Latin. Analysis. The article consistently describes and analyses the church-political steps and actions taken during the conciliar meetings, which paved the way for the elevation (“addition to honour”) of the see of Constantinople, which took place during the 17th conciliar act. These measures included the corroboration of the status of the Council of Constantinople in 381 as the Second Ecumenical Council, the use of the ecclesiastical and political actions of the see of Constantinople in the previous period as court of appeal and “superprovincial” instance as precedents, as well as a demonstration of the equal status of the Archbishop of Constantinople in relation to his Roman counterpart. The result was the adoption of the so-called 28th canon and its approval by the officials presiding at the council, and then by the emperor Marcian himself. Results. The author concludes that the actions taken by the officials, who were presiding at the council, and the representatives of the Church of Constantinople during the council were planned and consistently aimed at establishing the equal honour of the see of Constantinople in relation to the see of Rome and its second place in regard to the latter. He also points to certain similarities in the process of elevation of both sees
Ancient history · Appeal · Archbishop · Emperor · Honour · Political science · Politics · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Byzantine Studies and History · Classics · Historical and Religious Studies of Rome · History · Law · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |