Nemesius of Emesa on Human Nature: A Cosmopolitan Anthropology from Roman Syria by David Lloyd Dusenbury (review)

erence (“DFCN” should be “DDCV,” 192n16), and “Philosophical” should be “Theological” for the GOTR journal title (332), for example. Sectarians in late antiquity failed to resolve Christological controversy, but their theologies and philosophic foundations evolved. Zachhuber shines a light on the philosophic portion of their programs, even if they themselves might have found such embarrassing. He successfully traces those developments in the concept of the universal made necessary by competing theological polemics. Canvassing nearly sixty ancient authors, Zachhuber has played his cards well and laid a winning hand on the table. It is not the last hand by any means, but in my view, his is now the hand to beat. Scott Ables, Oregon State University