earnest Catholics renounced Peter's communion; and tidings of this turn of events disturbed the mind of Acacius, who sent to Alexandria for an authentic account. Peter then surpassed himself in an evasive letter, which Evagrius has preserved. Acacius was glad to accept his explanations, as he could not afford to break with Mongus; but he had now to deal with the clear head and resolute will of pope Felix II. (or III.), the successor of Simplicius, who listened readily to the complaints of the exiled Talaia and other Egyptian bishops (Evagr. iii. 20) against Peter, and sent two bishops, Vitalis and Misenus, to Constantinople to denounce Peter and summon Acacius to defend himself before a council at Rome. The legates were partly coaxed and partly frightened into communicating with the resident agents of Peter at Constantinople, and brought back to Rome letters in which Zeno and Acacius assured Felix that Peter was an orthodox and meritorious prelate (Evagr. iii. 20; Mansi, vii. 1055, 1065, 1081). Their weakness was punished by deposition; and Felix, with his synod, proceeded not only to anathematize Peter as an "Eutychian" usurper, but even to excommunicate the bp. of Constantinople as his patron (July 28, 484). He then wrote again to Zeno, desiring him to "choose between the communion of Peter the apostle and that of Peter the Alexandrian" (Mansi, vii. 1066). Nothing daunted, Acacius broke off communion with Rome and upheld Peter to the last, although he must have felt his conduct highly embarrassing, for Peter again anathematized the proceedings of Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo, and those who would not accept the writings of Dioscorus and Timotheus Aelurus (Evagr. iii 22). He expelled certain orthodox bishops, and, from one named John, transferred the abbacy or hegumenate of Diolchos to his friend Ammon (Liberat.). These proceedings being reported to Zeno, he sent Cosmas to rebuke Peter and restore peace. Peter again modified his tone, and wrote to Acacius, as if acknowledging Chalcedon. This double-dealing, becoming known in Egypt, provoked some Monophysite clerics, monks, and laymen to disown him and to meet for worship apart, omitting his name in their diptychs (Liberat. 18), and these uncompromising dissentients became known as "Acephali" (Leontius, de Sectis, v. 2), and obtained as their bishop one Esaias from Palestine (Liberat.). When Fravitas, or Flavitas, succeeded Acacius in 489, he wrote to both Felix (Liberat. 18) and Peter (Evagr. iii. 23); but after four months he died, and was succeeded by Euphemius, who, on discovering Peter's real position in regard to the council of Chalcedon, indignantly broke off all relations with him (Evagr. iii. 23). A new strife between Constantinople and Alexandria was imminent, when Peter Mongus, respected by none, died at the end of Oct. 490 (Le Quien, ii. 422), leaving behind numerous works (Neale, ii. 24).
[W.B.]
Petrus (10) (surnamed Fullo, "the Fuller"), intruding patriarch of Antioch, 471–488, a Monophysite, took his surname from his former trade as a fuller of cloth. Tillemont shews considerable skill in harmonizing various statements of his earlier life (Empereurs, t. vi. p. 404). He considers that Peter was originally a member of the convent of the Acoimetae, which he places in Bithynia on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus, and being expelled thence for dissolute life and heretical doctrine, passed over to Constantinople, where he became a parasite to persons of distinction, by whom he was introduced to Zeno, the future emperor, the son-in-law of Leo, whose favour he secured, obtaining through him the chief place in the church of St. Bassa, at Chalcedon. Here his true character having speedily become known, he fled to Zeno, who was then setting out for Antioch as commander of the East. Arriving at Antioch a.d. 463, Peter's unbridled ambition soared to the patriarchal throne, then filled by Martyrius, and having gained the ear of the rabble, be adroitly availed himself of the powerful Apollinarian element among the citizens and the considerable number who favoured Eutychian doctrines, to excite suspicions against Martyrius as a concealed Nestorian, and thus caused his tumultuous expulsion and his own Election to the throne. This was in 469 or 470 (Theod. Lect. p. 554; Labbe, iv. 1009, 1082). When established as patriarch, Peter at once declared himself openly against the council of Chalcedon, and added to the Trisagion the words "Who wast crucified for us," which he imposed as a test upon all in his patriarchate, anathematizing those who declined to accept it. According to the Synodicon, he summoned a council at Antioch to give synodical authority to this novel clause (Labbe, iv. 1009). The deposed Martyrius went to Constantinople to complain to the emperor Leo, by whom, through the influence of the patriarch Gennadius, he was courteously received; a council of bishops reported in his favour, and his restoration was decreed (Theod. Lect. p. 554; Liberat. c. 18, p. 122). But notwithstanding the imperial authority, Peter's personal influence, supported by the favour of Zeno, was so great in Antioch that Martyrius's position was rendered intolerable and, wearied by violence and contumely, he soon left Antioch, abandoning his throne again to the intruder. Leo was naturally indignant at this audacious disregard of his commands, of which he was apprised by Gennadius, and he despatched an imperial decree for the deposition of Peter and his banishment to the Oasis (Labbe, iv. 1082). According to Theodorus Lector, Peter fled, and Julian was unanimously elected bishop in his room, a.d. 471, holding the see until Peter's third restoration by Basiliscus in 475 (Theophan. p. 99; Theod. Lect. p. 533). During the interval Peter dwelt at Constantinople, in retirement in the monastery of the Acoimetae, his residence there being connived at on a pledge that he would not create further disturbances (Labbe, iv. 1009, 1082; Theophan. p. 104). During the short reign of the usurper Basiliscus (Oct. 475–June 477) the fortunes of Peter revived. Under the influence of his wife Basiliscus declared for the Monophysites, recalled Timothy Aelurus, patriarch of Alexandria, from exile, and by his persuasion issued an encyclical letter to the bishops calling them to anathematize the decrees of Chalcedon (Evagr. H. E. iii. 4). Peter gladly complied,
