Coin of Maximin 1.
Maximin II, DAZA,Roman emperor, was originally an lUyrian peasant, who served in the Roman armies, and was raised by Galerius, who was his relative, to the rank of militarj- tribune, and lastly, A.D. 303, at the time of the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, to the dig- nity of Cicsar, receiving for his share the government of .Syria and Egypt. After the death of Galerius, in 311. Maximin and Licinius divided his dominions between them, and Maximin obtained the whole of the Asi- atic provinces. Both he and Licinius behaved ungrate- fully towards the family of tialerius. their common ben- efactor. Valeria, the daughter of Diocletian and widow of Galerius. having escaped from Licinius into the do- minions of Maximin, the latter offered to marrj- her, and on her refusal banished her with her mother into the deserts of Syria. He gained unenviable notoriety
MAXIMUS
917
MAXIMUS
by li'-s severity towards his Christian subjects, and made war against the Armenians. A new war having broken out between Licinius and Maximin, the latter advanced as for as Adrianople, but was defeated, tied into Asia, and died of poison at Tarsus in 313. — English Cyclop, s. v.
Coin of Mashnin II.
Maximus Alexandrinus, called also the Cynic Philosopher, was born in the fourth century, in Alexan- dria, of Christian parents of rank. He united the faith of an orthodox believer with the appearance and con- duct of a cynic philosopher, and was greatly respected b}' the leading theologians of the orthodox party. Athanasius, in a letter written about A.D. 371 {Epist. ad Maxim. Philosoph. in Opip. i, 917, etc., ed. Benedict.), compliments him on a work written in defence of the orthodox faith. Tillemont and the Benedictine editor of the works of Gregory Nazianzen (M^onitui7i ad Orat. xxv), misled by the virulent invectives of that father, attempt to distinguish between this Maximus and the one to whom Athanasius wrote, for the reason that Athanasius could never have approved of so worthless a character. They also distinguish him from the INIaxi- mus to whom Basil the Great addressed a letter (£p. 41, Paris, 1839) in terms of great respect, discussing some points of doctrine, and soliciting a visit from him ; but they are not successful in either case. The Maximus Scholasticus, liowever, to whom Basil also wrote (^Ep. 42), was a different i^erson. In A.D. 374, during the reign of the emperor Valens, in the persecution carried on by Lucius, Arian patriarch of Alexandria, Maximus was barbarously scourged and banished to the Oasis, on account of his zeal for orthodoxy, and the alacrity with which he aided those enduring the same persecutions (Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. xxv, c. 13, 14). He was re- leased at the end of four years, probably on the death of Valens ; and it was soon after this event that he pre- sented to the emperor Gratian at Milan his work De Fide, written against the Arians (compare Jerome, De Viris Illusir, c. 127). He wrote also against other here- tics, but whether in the same work or in another is not certainly known ; and he disputed ably against the hea- thens. He appears to have returned from Milan and visited Constantinople, where Gregory Nazianzen had just been made patriarch, A.D. 379. Gregory received him with the greatest honor, and pronounced an ora- tion (Orat. xxv) in his praise, where his warm panegy- rics cause the commendations of Athanasius and Basil to seem exceedingly tame. He welcomed him at his table, treated him with much confidence and regard, but was subsequently grievously disappointed in him. Whether in the succeeding events Jlaximus was himself ambi- tious or merely the tool of others, does not appear. Profiting by the sickness of Gregory, and supported by some Egyptian ecclesiastics, sent by Peter, patriarch of Alexandria, luider whose guidance they professed to act, Maximus was ordained, during the night, patri- arch of Constantinople, in the place of Gregory, whose election had not been perfectly canonical. This bold proceeding greatly excited the indignation of the peo- ]rle, with whom Gregory was popular. The emperor Theodosius, to whom the usurper applied, showing him no favor, the latter withdrew to Alexandria, from whence he was speedily expelled by his patron Peter (see Gregory Nazianzen, Carmen de Vita sua, vss. 750- 1029). The resignation of Gregory did not benefit IMaximus. His election was declared null and void by the second general council, and the presbyters whom he had ordained were declared not to be presbyters {Co7i-
cil. Consfaniinop. can. 3, sec. Dionys. Exiguum ; Capital. G, sec. Isidor. Mercat; apud Concil. vol. i, col, 809, 810, ed. Hardouin). He attempted again to assert his claims to the patriarchate; but, though the Italian bishops seemed inclined for a time to second his efforts, he met with no permanent success. The invectives of Gregory Nazianzen against Maximus {Carmina, sec. De Vita sua, 1. c, ; In Invidos, vs. IG, etc.; In Maximum) were written after their struggle for the patriarchate, and contrast strongly with his former praises in his twenty- tifth Oration, to which some of Gregory's admirers, to conceal the inconsistency, prefixed the name of Heron or Hero (/« Laudem Heronis ; Jerome, De Viris Illustr. 1. c), which it still bears. The work of Maximus, De Fide, which is well spoken of by Jerome, is lost. (See Athenas, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Jerome, I. c. ; Sozo- men, //. i', vii, 9, cum not. Vales; Tillemont, 3Iemoires, ix, 443, etc. ; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 380, i, 27G, ed. Ox- ford, 1740-42; Fabricius, Bibl. Grceca, iii, 520). — Smith, Diet. Or. and Rom. Biog. vol. ii, s. v.