Originally Posted by Huon

I think that your problem comes from the word "sects". In a modern nation, a sect is a group of people who are not different from the other people, except some beliefs.

In the ancient Middle Age, we are speaking of nations, who gave themselves a name, had leaders usually born in a noble family, a common religion, and an army. They had a language, which was not latin or greek.

From some ill-known reasons, they wanted to install themselves in the Roman empire. The german historians speak of "Völkerwanderungen", the french historians of "grandes invasions". You can understand that these two expressions are not neutral. The Gauls did not like to be the victims of invasions. Well, they invaded Gaul around 500 BC, but that was ancient history...

The religious question is not a central problem to these nations. It happens that they can change their beliefs. If that happens, everybody follows the leader.

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I understand, but why aren't the apologetic writings and council canons translated into specific references in the Theodosian Code or into anecdotal writings about which groups (however you define them) and leaders with their properties were eliminated??

Originally Posted by Duvduv

why aren't the apologetic writings and council canons translated into specific references in the Theodosian Code or into anecdotal writings about which groups (however you define them) and leaders with their properties were eliminated??