During the years leading up to the Arab conquest of Northern Africa, there was a sharp (ethno?)-religious divide between the Greek-speaking, Chaceldonian portion of the Eastern Roman Empire (Greece, Anatolia) versus the Aramaic/Coptic-speaking, Monophysite portion (Syria, Egypt). Why did this divide occur in a seemingly geographic fashion? How much of this schism was due to cultural reasons?
>>2577686
I think it was a lot due to languages. Coptic clergy spoke Coptic to a Coptic audience. Greek priests had no chance of wining the propaganda war.
>>2577698
Well, the question is then why Coptic clergy were more sympathetic to Monophysitism than the imperial Chalcedonian orthodoxy.
>>2577716
Just happens, some people in the central clergy, like the archbishop, gets it in their head, that jesus is not human. With writings, education of clergy and spreading of the word, soon all of Egypt is Monophysite.
>>2577686
It occurred not because of geographic or cultural factors, but because Christianity is a very dumb religion apt to break apart as many people argue over its arcane minutiae. As you can see, this problem occurred even in many ethnically and culturally homogeneous parts within Europe and North Africa, bickering over lapsing, whether Jesus farted like a human and other utter nonsense
Meanwhile it took almost a thousand years for the superior Islam's breakaway branch, Shiism to become theologically diffused from Sunnism
>>2577757
Why didn't the Church resolve the problem before it got out of hand? It seems to me that the monophysites were endlessy rioting and collaborating against Constantinople. Who were the major figures invloved in this theological dispute?