had recognised him as orthodox[1], the imperial commissioners stood up for his right to be a member of the council[2], and the synod rehabilitated him after he had consented to anathematize Nestorius[3]. Nevertheless he was not forced to retract his book against Cyril's anathematisms. In the same way Ibas of Edessa, who had likewise been deposed in 449[4], was at Chalcedon reinstated as bishop[5], without having been forced to recant what he had said in his letter to Maris about Cyril's "Apollinarism" as he called it, although this letter had been condemned by the Robber-synod.
Hence it follows, that the decision of Chalcedon was interpreted in very different ways by the western church, by the adherents of Cyril and by Theodoret, Ibas and other Antiochians. It is, therefore, impossible to answer in one sentence the question whether Nestorius was orthodox according to the standard of the Chalcedonian definition.
It is certain that he could have accepted the creed of Chalcedon and its standards of faith as easily as Theodoret, for he could have reconciled himself to Cyril's epistola dogmatica if understanding the ἕνωσις καθ' ὑπόστασιν in the sense of a personal union, and what Theodoret, yielding to pressure, had anathematized in
