In Visigothic Spain (Reccared having converted a short time prior) the churches

never accepted the council;[7] when news of the later Third Council of Constanti
nople was communicated to them by Rome it was received as the fifth ecumenical c
ouncil,[8] not the sixth. Isidore of Seville, in his Chronicle and De Viris Illu
stribus, judged Justinian a tyrant and persecutor of the orthodox[9] and an admi
rer of heresy,[10] contrasting him with Facundus of Hermiane and Victor of Tunnu
na, who was considered a martyr.[11]
The unhappy story of the conflict between the council and the pope, and its lack
of immediate and obvious fruits in reconciling Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedoni
ans, should not blind us, however, to its weighty theological contribution. The
canons condemning the Three Chapters were preceded by ten dogmatic canons which
defined Chalcedonian Christology with a new precision, bringing out that God the
Word is the one subject of all the operations of Christ, divine and human. The
'two natures' defined at Chalcedon were now clearly interpreted as two sets of a
ttributes possessed by a single person, Christ God, the Second Person of the Tri
nity,[12] Later Byzantine Christology, as found in Maximus the Confessor and Joh
n of Damascus, was built upon this basis. It might have proved sufficient, moreo
ver, to bring about the reunion of Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians, had it n
ot been for the severance of connections between the two groups that resulted fr
om the Muslim conquests of the next century.