Scanned text contains errors.
MAXIMUS AEGIENSIS (6 Alytets), of Aegae in Cilicia, a writer contemporary with Apol- lonius of Tyana [apollonius tyanaeus], of some of whose transactions he wrote an account, which was part of the materials employed by Phi- lostratus [philostratus] in his biography of that philosopher. (Philostr. Apollon. Vit. i. 3 ; Euseb. In Hierodem, c. 2, 3 ; Tzetzes, Chilias. II. Hist. 60, vs. 974, Chilias. IX. Hist. 291, vs. 865 ; Voss. De Hist. Graec. in 10.) [J. C. M.]
MAXIMUS ALEXANDRINUS,known also as the cynic philosopher ( kvvik&s <pt\6<ro<f>os)9 was a native of Alexandria, the son of Christian parents of rank, who had suffered on account of their religion; but whether from Pagan or Arian violence is not clear. Maximus united the faith of an orthodox believer with the garb and deportment of a cynic philosopher, and was held in great respect by the leading theologians of the orthodox party. A thanasius, in a letter written about A. d. 371 (Epist. ad Maxim. PMlosoph. Opp. vol. i. p. 917, &c. ed. Benedict.), pays him several compliments on a work written in defence of the orthodox faith. Tillemont and the Benedictine editor of the works of Gregory Nazianzen (Monitum ad Orat. xxv.), misled by the virulent invectives of that father, attempt to distinguish between our Maximus and the one to whom Athanasius wrote, on the ground that Athanasius could never have spoken so well of so worthless a character. They also distinguish him from the Maximus to whom Basil the Great addressed a letter (Ep. 41, editt. vett. 9, ed. Benedict, vol. iii. p. 90, ejusd. edit. p. 127, ed. Benedict, alterae, Paris, 1839) in terms of the highest respect, discussing some doctrinal questions, and soliciting a visit from him; but they are not successful in either case. However, the Maximus Scholasticus, to whom Basil also wrote (ftp. 42, editt. vett. 277, ed. Benedict.), was a different person. In A. d. 374, during the reign of the emperor Valens, in the persecution carried on by Lucius, Arian patriarch of Alexandria [Lucius, No. 2], Maximus was cruelly scourged, and banished to the Oasis, on account of his zeal for orthodoxy and the promptitude with which he succoured those who suffered in the same cause (Gregor. Nazianz. Oral. xxv. c. 13, 14). He obtained his release in about four years (/&.), probably on the death of Valens ; and it was perhaps soon after his release that he presented to the emperor Gratian at Mediolanum (Milan), his work IIcpl rrjs irlffrecas, De Fide, written against the Arians (comp. Hieron. De Virislllustr. c. 127). Tillemont, however, thinks that the work was presented to the emperor when Maximus was in Italy, a. d. 382, after the council of Constantinople. He wrote also against other heretics, but whether in the same work or in another is not clear (Greg. Naz. -ib.) ; and disputed ably against the heathens (76.). Apparently on his return from Milan he visited Constantinople, where Gregory Nazianzen had just been appointed to the patriarchate (a. d* 379). Gregory received him with: the highest honour ; and pronounced an oration in his praise (Orat. xxv.), compared with which the sober commendations of Athanasius, and Basil are cold and tame. He received him at his table, and treated him with the greatest confidence and regard. He was, however, grievously disappointed in him. Whether the events which followed were the results solely of the ambition of Maximus, or whether Maximus was himself the tool of others,
is not clear. Taking advantage of the sickness of Gregory, and supported by some Egyptian ecclesiastics, sent by Peter, patriarch of Alexandria, under whose directions they professed to act, Maximus was ordained, during the night, patriarch of Constantinople, in the place of Gregory, whose election had not been perfectly canonical. This audacious proceeding excited the greatest indignation among the people, with whom Gregory was popular. Nor did the emperor Theodosius, then at Thessa-lonica, to whom the usurper applied, show them any favour. Maximus therefore withdrew to Alexandria, from which he was in a short time expelled by his patron, Peter. (Gregor. Nazian. Carmen de Vita sua, vss. 750—1029.)
The resignation of Gregory, who was succeeded in the patriarchate of Constantinople by Nectarius, did not benefit Maximus. His election was declared null by the second general (first Constanti-nopolitan) council, and the presbyters whom he had ordained were declared not to be presbyters. (Concil. CPolit. can. 3. sec. Dionys. Exiguum ; Capital. 6. sec. Isidor. Mercat.; apud Concil. vol. i. col. 809,810, ed. Hardouin.) He attempted even after this to assert his claims to the patriarchate ; but though the Italian bishops for a while seemed disposed to support him, he met with no success. The invectives of Gregory Nazianzen against Maximus (Carmina9 sc. De Vita sua, 1. c.; In Invidos, vs. 16, &c. ; In Maximum) were written after their struggle for the patriarchate, and contrast singularly with the praises of his twenty-fifth Oration, to which some of Gregory's admirers, to conceal the inconsistency, prefixed the name of Heron or Hero, Els 'Hpwj/a, In Laudem Heronis (Hieron. De Viris Illustr. 1. c.), which it still bears. The work of Maximus, De Fide, which is well spoken of by Jerome, is lost. (Athanas., Basil., Gregor. Nazianz., Hieronym. II. cc.; Sozo-men, H. E. vii. 9. cum not. Vales. ; Tillemont, Memoires, vol. ix. p. 443, &c. ; Cave, Hist. LiU. ad anh. 380, vol. i. p. 276, ed. Oxford, 1740—42 ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iii. p. 520.) [J. C. M.] MA'XIMUS, L. A'PPIUS, a distinguished Roman general in the reigns of Domitian and Trajan. In A. d. 91 Maximus quelled the revolt of Antonius in Germany, and at the same time had the magnanimity to burn all the letters of the latter, that they might not expose others to the vengeance of Dqmitian. In a. D. 101 he fought with success under Trajan in the Dacian war against Decebalus. In a. d. 115 he was one of Trajan's generals in the Parthian war ; but here his good fortune failed him, for he was defeated and perished in this year. We learn from the Fasti that he was consul in a. d. 103. (Dion Cass. Ixvii. 11, Ixviii. 9, 30) There is some doubt about the exact form of his name. Dion Cassius names him simply L. Maximus ; but Domitian, in a letter contained among those of Pliny (x. 66), and the Fasti call him L. Appius Maximus, which is the form we have adopted. But Martial (ix. 85), and Aurelius Victor (Epit. 11. § 10), give to the conqueror of Antonius the name of Appius Norbanus. These statements can only be reconciled by supposing that his full name was L. Appius Maximus Norbanus.