福卡斯統治下的無政府時期，成為晚期羅馬帝國歷史的最後一個階段。在此階段，古代帝國最終滅亡，而晚期羅馬帝國階段，或早期拜占廷帝國階段也終告結束。拜占廷帝國從這場危機進入了一個完全不同的階段，它得以拋棄垂死的政治生活遺產，吸取全新的充滿生機和活力的資源。拜占廷的歷史，正確地說是中世紀希臘帝國的歷史由此拉開了序幕。
【注釋】
[1]cf.moravcsik，byzantinoturcica i，165 ff.，for a most instructive analysis of the 插racteristics of byzantine sources.
[2]ed.e.schwartz and t.mommsen，3 vols.，leipzig 1903-9;small edition by e.schwartz，leipzig 1914.cf.also the notes by e.schwartz，pw 6（1907），1370 ff.
[3]ed.i.a.heikel，leipzig 1902.h.grégoire，b 13（1938），561 ff.，has questioned the authenticity of the vita and thinks that at any rate the material was worked over and interptions made at the end of the fourth century.most schrs reject this thesis.cf.the forceful counter-arguments by n.h.baynes，bz 39（1939），46 ff.；j.vogt，‘berichteüber kreuzeserscheinungen aus dem 4.jh.n.chr.’，ménges grégoire i（1949），593 ff.and constantin der grosse und sein jahrhundert（1949），164 ff.；a.piganiol，‘sur quelques passages de vita constantini’，ménges grégoire 2（1950），513 ff.，and empire chrétien，p.xiii;h.dorries，das selbstzeugnis kaiser konstantins，abh.d.akad.d.wiss.zu gottingen，phil-hist kl.，3 folge，no.34（1954）；a.h.m.jones，‘notes on the genuineness of the constantinian documents in eusebius’life of constantine，journ.l.hist.5（1954），196 ff.；j.moreau，‘zum problem der vita constantini’，historia 4（1953），234 ff.；k.nd，‘die religiose haltung kaiser konstantins’，studia patristica 1（1957），549 ff.on the other hand，grégoire’s thesis is supported by p.orgels，‘a propos des erreurs historiques de vita constantini’，ménges grégoire 4（1953），575 ff.
[4]ed.c.rk，berlin 1910，1915.
[5]müller，fhg 4，7-56.cf.also excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），591-9.
[6]müller，fhg 4，57-68.
[7]ed.l.mendelssohn，leipzig 1887.
[8]müller，fhg iv，69-100;v，24-6.excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），121-255，575-91.
[9]migne，pg 67，28-842.
[10]migne，pg 67，843-1630.
[11]ed.l.parmentier，leipzig 1911.
[12]ed.j.bidez and l.parmentier，london 1898.
[13]trans.j.m.schonfelder，munich 1862 and r.p.smith，oxford 1860.a new edition of the third and most important part of this work，with atin trantion，is given by brooks，corpus script.christ.or.scriptores syri，series 2，t.3.1935，1936（inessible to me）.cf.the great monograph by a.p.djakonov，ioann efesskij i ego cerkovno-istoricěsfie trudy（john of ephesus and his lesiastical history），st.petersburg，1908，and idem‘izvestija joanna efesskogo i sirijskich chronik o vjanach 6-7 vv.’，（ount of the vs in the sixth and seventh centuries in john of ephesus and the syriac chronicles），vestnik drevnej istorii 1946，1，20 ff.
[14plete edition in mansi.for the councils of ephesus and 插lcedon there is the new critical edition by e.schwartz，acta conciliorum oecumenicorum vol.i，fasc.1-5（1922－30）；vol.ii，fasc.1-6（1922－30）；vol.ii，fasc.1-4（1933-6）。
[15]ed.j.bidez and f.cumont，paris 1922，1924.
[16]ed.l.dindorf，leipzig 1832.
[17]ed.r.forster，leipzig 1903-27.
[18]migne，pg 66，1053-1616；french trantion of thewith amentary，c.lbrade，le discours sur royautéde synésios cyrène à l’empéreur arcadios，paris 1951.for the work and the personality of this great rhetorician，cf.idem，synésios de cyrène，hellène et chrétien，paris 1951.
[19]ed.j.haury，leipzig 1905，1906，1913.
[20]on procopius and his writings see the detailed study by b.rubin，prokopios von kaisareia，stuttgart1954（=re，xxii，2），in which all the earlier literature is listed.see also the bibliography in moravcsik，byzantinoturcica 1，496-500.
[21]ed.b.g.niebuhr in cb.a russian trantion with a detailed introduction is given in m.v.levcenko，agafij.o carstrovanii justiniana（agathias，on the reign of justinian），moscow-leningrad 1953.
[22]müller，fhg iv，220-69.excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），170-221，442-77.
[23]ed.c.de boor，leipzig 1887.russian trantion：feofkt simokatta，istorija，moscow 1957.
[24]unless otherwise indicated，the bonn corpus of byzantine historians（cb）is used.
[25]müller，fhg iv，535-622;v，27-38.
[26]ed.t.mommsen and p.m.meyer，i，1，2，2，berlin 1905;trans.c.pharr，princeton 1952.
[27]institutiones.digesta，ed.p.krüger，1911;2：codex justinianus，ed.p.krüger，1906;novee，ed r.scholl-g.kroll，1912
[28]ed.o.seeck，berlin 1876.
[29]ed.r.wünsch，leipzig 1903.on the dating of the work see stein，bas-empire，729 ff.，838 ff.
[30]cf.stein，bas-empire，723 ff.
[31]the onlyplete edition of this important work is by j.scheffer，ups 1664.on the much disputed question of its date see moravcsik，byzantinoturcica 1，417 ff.and vizantiski izvori 1，128.
[32]cf.n.h.baynes the hellenistic civilization and east rome，o.u.p.1946（reprinted in byzantine studies，pp.i ff.）.on the hellenistic tradition of culture and education cf.the pratingments of r.j.h.jenkins，byzantium and byzantinism.lectures in memory of louise taft semple，the university of cincinnati 1963，pp.8 ff.
</br>
【注釋】
[1]cf.moravcsik，byzantinoturcica i，165 ff.，for a most instructive analysis of the 插racteristics of byzantine sources.
[2]ed.e.schwartz and t.mommsen，3 vols.，leipzig 1903-9;small edition by e.schwartz，leipzig 1914.cf.also the notes by e.schwartz，pw 6（1907），1370 ff.
[3]ed.i.a.heikel，leipzig 1902.h.grégoire，b 13（1938），561 ff.，has questioned the authenticity of the vita and thinks that at any rate the material was worked over and interptions made at the end of the fourth century.most schrs reject this thesis.cf.the forceful counter-arguments by n.h.baynes，bz 39（1939），46 ff.；j.vogt，‘berichteüber kreuzeserscheinungen aus dem 4.jh.n.chr.’，ménges grégoire i（1949），593 ff.and constantin der grosse und sein jahrhundert（1949），164 ff.；a.piganiol，‘sur quelques passages de vita constantini’，ménges grégoire 2（1950），513 ff.，and empire chrétien，p.xiii;h.dorries，das selbstzeugnis kaiser konstantins，abh.d.akad.d.wiss.zu gottingen，phil-hist kl.，3 folge，no.34（1954）；a.h.m.jones，‘notes on the genuineness of the constantinian documents in eusebius’life of constantine，journ.l.hist.5（1954），196 ff.；j.moreau，‘zum problem der vita constantini’，historia 4（1953），234 ff.；k.nd，‘die religiose haltung kaiser konstantins’，studia patristica 1（1957），549 ff.on the other hand，grégoire’s thesis is supported by p.orgels，‘a propos des erreurs historiques de vita constantini’，ménges grégoire 4（1953），575 ff.
[4]ed.c.rk，berlin 1910，1915.
[5]müller，fhg 4，7-56.cf.also excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），591-9.
[6]müller，fhg 4，57-68.
[7]ed.l.mendelssohn，leipzig 1887.
[8]müller，fhg iv，69-100;v，24-6.excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），121-255，575-91.
[9]migne，pg 67，28-842.
[10]migne，pg 67，843-1630.
[11]ed.l.parmentier，leipzig 1911.
[12]ed.j.bidez and l.parmentier，london 1898.
[13]trans.j.m.schonfelder，munich 1862 and r.p.smith，oxford 1860.a new edition of the third and most important part of this work，with atin trantion，is given by brooks，corpus script.christ.or.scriptores syri，series 2，t.3.1935，1936（inessible to me）.cf.the great monograph by a.p.djakonov，ioann efesskij i ego cerkovno-istoricěsfie trudy（john of ephesus and his lesiastical history），st.petersburg，1908，and idem‘izvestija joanna efesskogo i sirijskich chronik o vjanach 6-7 vv.’，（ount of the vs in the sixth and seventh centuries in john of ephesus and the syriac chronicles），vestnik drevnej istorii 1946，1，20 ff.
[14plete edition in mansi.for the councils of ephesus and 插lcedon there is the new critical edition by e.schwartz，acta conciliorum oecumenicorum vol.i，fasc.1-5（1922－30）；vol.ii，fasc.1-6（1922－30）；vol.ii，fasc.1-4（1933-6）。
[15]ed.j.bidez and f.cumont，paris 1922，1924.
[16]ed.l.dindorf，leipzig 1832.
[17]ed.r.forster，leipzig 1903-27.
[18]migne，pg 66，1053-1616；french trantion of thewith amentary，c.lbrade，le discours sur royautéde synésios cyrène à l’empéreur arcadios，paris 1951.for the work and the personality of this great rhetorician，cf.idem，synésios de cyrène，hellène et chrétien，paris 1951.
[19]ed.j.haury，leipzig 1905，1906，1913.
[20]on procopius and his writings see the detailed study by b.rubin，prokopios von kaisareia，stuttgart1954（=re，xxii，2），in which all the earlier literature is listed.see also the bibliography in moravcsik，byzantinoturcica 1，496-500.
[21]ed.b.g.niebuhr in cb.a russian trantion with a detailed introduction is given in m.v.levcenko，agafij.o carstrovanii justiniana（agathias，on the reign of justinian），moscow-leningrad 1953.
[22]müller，fhg iv，220-69.excerpta de legationibus，ed.c.de boor（1903），170-221，442-77.
[23]ed.c.de boor，leipzig 1887.russian trantion：feofkt simokatta，istorija，moscow 1957.
[24]unless otherwise indicated，the bonn corpus of byzantine historians（cb）is used.
[25]müller，fhg iv，535-622;v，27-38.
[26]ed.t.mommsen and p.m.meyer，i，1，2，2，berlin 1905;trans.c.pharr，princeton 1952.
[27]institutiones.digesta，ed.p.krüger，1911;2：codex justinianus，ed.p.krüger，1906;novee，ed r.scholl-g.kroll，1912
[28]ed.o.seeck，berlin 1876.
[29]ed.r.wünsch，leipzig 1903.on the dating of the work see stein，bas-empire，729 ff.，838 ff.
[30]cf.stein，bas-empire，723 ff.
[31]the onlyplete edition of this important work is by j.scheffer，ups 1664.on the much disputed question of its date see moravcsik，byzantinoturcica 1，417 ff.and vizantiski izvori 1，128.
[32]cf.n.h.baynes the hellenistic civilization and east rome，o.u.p.1946（reprinted in byzantine studies，pp.i ff.）.on the hellenistic tradition of culture and education cf.the pratingments of r.j.h.jenkins，byzantium and byzantinism.lectures in memory of louise taft semple，the university of cincinnati 1963，pp.8 ff.
</br>