This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE COPTIC CHURCH IN THE PAST
221

successors are the line of Coptic Patriarchs, acknowledged by the great mass of Egyptian Christians, which still exists.

So at last, after all this confusion, we come to a fairly clear parting of the ways. Apollinaris and his successors are the Melkite Patriarchs, Peter III and his form the Coptic line. Here we are concerned with the Copts. A few words will be enough with which to dismiss the Melkites, before we come back to our main subject.

Apollinaris was succeeded by John I (568-579); then came Eulogius (579-607), the friend and correspondent of Pope St. Gregory I (590-604); then Theodore (607-609) and John II, surnamed the Almoner (609-620). George (621-630) followed; then Cyrus (630-642), who accepted Monotheletism and by it won over many Monophysites to a false union (p. 210). During his time came the Arab conquest (639). He was succeeded by Peter II (643-c. 655), also a Monothelete, who, finding all Egypt in the hands of the Arabs, and the Copts recognized by the new masters as the Christianity of the country, went back to Constantinople and stayed there, thus setting an example of non-residence which was to be followed by many of his successors. After the death of Peter II the Melkite see was vacant for over seventy years. It was again filled by Cosmas I in 727 (to about 775). This line then continues, with various interruptions, till now. The Melkite Patriarchs shared in the schism of Photius and Cerularius; in the 13th century they adopted the Byzantine rite; they became more and more Byzantinized, Greeks ruling over a little flock in the midst of the hostile Copts. After the Moslem conquest, for long periods, finding they had little to do in Egypt, they went to reside at Constantinople. Mere servants of the Byzantine Patriarch, generally nominated by him, they added to the splendour of his court their Patriarchal vestments and empty title.[1] When they were in Egypt these Orthodox Patriarchs lived at Cairo, like their Coptic rivals. Their history belongs to that of the

  1. An obvious parallel is the case of the Latin Patriarchs and bishops set up in the East by the Crusaders. When all the Crusaders' lands were lost, when there were practically no more Latin communities in the Levant, these came to Rome and carried on merely titular lines as ornaments of the Papal Court.