This still standard study on Nestorius and his teaching comes to the conclusion that he was not “Nestorian.” The guiding question for the investigation is: Did Nestorius mean what people have thought that he meant? The work makes full use of the sources available, including Nestorius’ own Bazaar of Heraclides, quoted in English translation. There are chapters on, among other things, the sources of our knowledge of Nestorius and his teaching, the doctrines attributed to him and his terminology, the title Theotokos, Eucharistic teachings, relationship to the position of Cyril, Flavian, and Leo, and “two persons” is shown not to be Nestorius’ teaching. A helpful appendix deals with the Syriac theological terms ithutha, ithya, kyana, parsopa, and qnoma. This volume is essential reading for all concerned with the christological debates beginning in the fourth century.