NPNF2-01 Eusebius 704

704 78 This accords with the “margin of the Geneva Edition,” and mentioned by Valesius, who gives also “in the Saviour’s commands” and “in the Father’s commands,” which latter is adopted by Heinichen.

79 (
Mt 26,52 for “all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword.” Note the characteristic inflation of style. Matthew takes eight words, the English translators twelve, Constantine sixteen, and his translator twenty-two ponderous words.

80 Val. prefers pro" (“besides”) to para (“likewise, at the same time”), and is followed by Bag.

81 Not in text. This parenthesis is the least obnoxious of various proposed paraphrases.

82 Probably refers to its destruction by Diocletian, whom Constantine accompanied. See Prolegomena, Life, Early Years.

83 The text of this passage is most dubious). Bag., following Valesius, translates: “And an actual witness of the wretched fate which has befallen these cities. Memphis lies desolate; that city which was the pride of the once mighty Pharaoh whose power Moses crushed at the Divine command.” This has been changed to accord with the text and punctuation of Heinichen. The change makes Constantine declare himself an eye-witness of the fate of Memphis alone, which is thought to accord with the facts; for while he was in fact in Egypt with Diocletian there is no evidence that he ever saw Babylon. And yet it is possible he did.

84 “Souls.”

85 “Souls.”

86 The sage commentators on this passage have thought it incumbent to explain and, as it were, apologize for the apparent tautology, “wise men or philosophers,—whichever you choose to call them” (Val. and Hein.). Colloquially speaking, there is a vast difference between being a philosopher and being a wise man. Probably this is no slip of style nor gracious option of language such as the editors impute, but some more or less clear distinction of technical terms.

87 “Spirit exhibited by these brethren in suffering martyrdom.”

88 Molz. remarks that to get any intelligent meaning out of this mass of sounding words, the translator often has to guess and translate very freely.

705 89 [Anaireqeeish" keraunwn bolai". This must be regarded as a rhetorical rather than historical allusion to the extinction of the Assyrian Empire. The critical reader will not fail to mark occasional instances of inaccuracy and looseness of statement in this chapter, and generally in the course of the oration.—Bag.] Valesius objects to this passage as follows in the language of 1711: “Neither do I well understand that. For Men, Towns, and Cities may be destroyed by Thunder-bolts, …But, truly I can’t see how a kingdom could be ruined by Thunder.”

90 Constantine evidently believed in an eternal Christ.

91 “He adjudged to perish by the self-same sentence, and shut them up in the lions’ den,” is bracketed by Valesius and the second clause omitted by Bag.

92 “Eliminated them all.” Valesius calls attention to the characteristic slight inaccuracies of our author! e.g. in the Biblical account (1) it was not the magi; (2) it was not Cambyses.

93 “Of their own selves.”

94 [Daughter of Tiresias, and priestess at Delphi. She was called Sibyl, on account of the wildness of her looks and expressions when she delivered oracles (Lempriere in voc)..—Bag.]

95 [ JIdrwsei gar cqwn, k.t.l.—Bag.]

96 [It can scarcely be necessary to observe that the acrostic, the general sense of which has been aimed at in the above translation must be regarded as the pious fiction of some writer, whose object was to recommend the truth of Christianity to heathens by an appeal to the authority of an (alleged) ancient heathen prophecy.—Bag.] The quotation is found in the edition of Alexandre, Bk. VIII. ch. 219–250. (Cf. translation in Augustin, De 104,Dei.) The translation of Bag., giving the “general sense” and reproducing the acrostic, stands unchanged. The translation of 1709, much more vigorous and suggestive of the “Dies Irae,” is as follows:

“When the Great Day of Judgment shall appear,

The melting Earth shall then dissolve with fear;

A King Immortal shall from Heav’n descend,

706 At whose Tribunal the whole world attend.

Both Just and Wicked shall, when Time grows old,

Their mighty God in flesh array’d behold;

Armies of Saints on His Right hand shall come,

Whilst Humane Souls expect their final doom.

Th’ Universe shall be a dry, Barren Strand,

And Thorns shall flourish on the scorched land;

Men shall with indignation cast away

Their Wealth and Idols in that dreadful day.

The parching Earth, and Heaven in flames shall fry,

And searching fire drain the Ocean dry:

707 All flesh which in the Grave imprison’d lay,

Shake off their Fetters, and return to Day.

Fire ’twixt Good and Bad shall diff’rence make,

And filthy Dross from purer Metal take.

Man’s secret Deeds shall all be open lay’d,

And th’ obscure Mazes of their Hearts displayed;

Gnashing their Teeth, they shall their Fate bewail:

The stars harmonious daunce, and th’ Sun shall fail.

The Orbs roll’d up, shrink into darkest night,

The Labouring Moon shall lose her borrowed light.

Mountains with Plains on the same Level lye;

708 Vallies shall gape no more, nor Hills be high.

On the proud Billows Ships shall ride no more:

And Lightning the Earth’s Face shall shrivel sore.

The crackling Rivers with fierce Fire shall burn,

Which shall their streams to solid Crystal turn.

The Heav’nly Trump shall blow a doleful sound,

And th’ world’s destruction, and its sin resound.

The yawning Earth Hell’s vast Abyss shall shew;

All Kings before God’s just Tribunal go.

Then Liquid Sulphur from the Sky shall stream,

God shall pour down Rivers of vengeful flame;

709 All men shall then the Glorious Cross descry,

That wished-for sign unto a faithful eye:

The Life of pious Souls, their chief delight;

To Sinners an Offence, a dismal sight!

Enlightening the called with its beams,

When cleansed from sin in twice six limpid streams.

His Empire shall be boundless, and that God

Shall Rule the Wicked with an Iron Rod;

This God, Immortal King, describ’d in Verse,

Our Saviour, dying, shall man’s doom Reverse.”

97 “Our men,” i.e. Christians rather than “countrymen.”

710 98 [The passage in Cicero (De Divinatione, Bk. II. ch. 54) clearly does not refer to this acrostic, and contains in itself a plain denial of prophetic truth in the Sibylline prediction (whatever it was) which the writer had in view. “Non esse autem illud carmen furentis, cum ipsum poema declaret (est enim magis artis et diligentiae, quam incitationis et motus), tum verò ca, quae akrostici" dicitur, cum deinceps ex primis versuum litteris aliquid connectitur, ut in quibusdam Cumanis, id certe magis est attenti animi, quam furentis,” &c.—Bag.]

99 This and following quotations are found in the fourth eclogue of Virgil—the Pollio. The version of Bag. is allowed to stand. If farther variety of rendering and interpretation is desired, it can be found in charming profusion in the various English translations of Virgil of which the few at hand give ample promise. Those at hand are Ogilby, Lond., 1675, p. 41–49; Warton, Lond., 1763, p. 76–82; Trapp, Lond., 1755, p. 37–46; Kennedy, Lond., 1849, p. 25–29; Wilstach, Bost., 1884, p. 154–161; Bowen, Lond., 1887, p. 24–28. Compare Henley, Observations on the Subject of the Fourth Eclogue, etc., Lond., 1788. 8vo.

100 Here is variety indeed). 1711 renders, “Last times are come Cumaea’s prophecy,”—whatever that may mean). Molz. has “Now the voice of the famed oracle of Cumae is dumb.”

101 Constantine takes large liberty with the poet here in order to make him say what he would like to have had him say. The latest translation at hand (Bowen) renders:

“Now is the world’s grand cycle begun once more from of old;

Justice the Virgin comes, and the Saturn Kingdom again.”

102 “The blessed and salutary mystery of our Saviour.”—1709. “Mystery of salvation.”—Molz.

103 [Amomum.—Bag.] “Assyrian cinnamon,” Kennedy, p. 28; “the cardamon’s spice shall grow, That from Assyria’s gardens,” Wilstach, 1, p. 157; “Syrian spices,” Trapp, 1, p. 92; “Assyria’s rich perfume,” Warton, 1, p. 78; “Assyrian roses,” Ogilby, p. 42.

104 [i.e. the Christians.—Bag.]

105 Self-control.

106 “Might not experience,” according to some, including Heinichen, who rejects in first, but accepts in text of his second edition.

711 107 [Referring, apparently, to Abraham. This passage is founded on a misconstruction of Virgil’s line by Constantine. which is followed by the Greek verse itself according to one edition.—Bag.]

108 [By a kind of play on the word amomum, he alludes to the Christians as amwmoi, or blameless persons.—Bag.]

109 “The fields shall mellow wax with golden grain.”

110 Bag. adds:

“And through the matted grass the liquid gold shall creep.”

1709 translates:

“And th’ hardened oaks with dewy honey sweat.”

While Molz. has

“Forth from the hard oak stems the lovely honey flows.”

These all approach Virgil closer than they do Constantine. With all allowance for poetic license, “pine” should hardly be translated “oak.”

111 Literally, “times and wars.”—1709.

712 112 This, bad as it is, is hardly worse than the subjective interpretation of scripture modern allegorizers, and certainly no worse than some of the Scripture interpretations of Eusebius.

113 [The reader will perceive that the foregoing verses, with but little exception, and very slight alteration, are taken from Dryden’s translation of the fourth eclogue of Virgil.—Bag.]

114 “Father” is emendation of Valesius embodied in his translation (1659), but not his text (1659). It is bracketed by Molz. “His God [and Father].”

115 “Pure force.”

116 In this form it sounds much like Pantheism, but in translation of Molz. this reads, “but determinable through the bounds of other [existences].”

117 (So Valesius conjectures it should read, but the text of Val. and Hein. read, “We needy ones owe,” &c.

118 [Maxentius (W. Lowth in loc)..—Bag.]

119 This passage clearly refers to the voluntary sufferings of the martyrs. See the note of Valesius.

120 “At a loss to invent fresh cruelties,” Bag.; “And perplexed at the labor and trouble they met with,” 1709; “And reluctantly pursuing their terrible work,” Molz.

121 Alluding to Maximin, the most bitter persecutor of the Christians, as appears from the title of this chapter.

122 [Vide Euseb). Hist. Eccles. Bk. VI. ch. 39. Gibbon (ch. 16) notices very leniently the persecution of Decius.—Bag.]

713 123 Cf. Prolegomena, Life.

124 [The derangement of Diocletian appears to have been temporary only. The causes of his abdication are not very clearly ascertained; but he seems to have meditated the step a considerable time previously. See Gibbon, ch. 13, and the note of Valesius.—Bag.]

125 Valesius and Hein., in his first edition, and Bag. read this transposed thus, “… severe damage to the state, and an effusion of blood; which, if shed,” etc. But Val. suggests, and Heinichen adopts in his second edition, that the whole sentence should be transposed as above.

126 [“He means Maxentius, as appears from what follows. How Diocletian’s army came under the command of Maxentius, it is not difficult to understand. After Diocletian’s abdication, Galerius Maximian took the command of his forces, giving part to Severus Caesar for the defence of Italy. Shortly afterwards, Maxentius having usurped the Imperial power at Rome, Galerius sent Severus against him with his forces. Maxentius, however, fraudulently and by promises corrupted and drew to his own side Severus’s army. After this, Galerius, having marched against Maxentius with a more numerous force, was himself in like manner deserted by his troops. Thus the army of Diocletian came under the power of Maxentius” (Valesius ad loc)..—Bag.]

127 i.e. the Roman. So Val. and Hein., hut Val. thinks it may perhaps rather be “to my army.”

128 Better, literally, “slackening faith.” There is somewhat of loss from the primitive and real conception of faith in the fixing of the word “wavering” as the conventional expression for weak. Faith is the steadfast current of personality towards an object, and poverty of faith is more often the abatement or slackening of that steady, insistent activity than the wavering of doubt. There is more unbelief than disbelief).

1 The conventional heading has been retained. Literally it is “Tricennial oration of Eusebius, addressed to the Emperor Constantine. Prologue to the praises addressed to Constantine.”

The translation of this oration shows, even more than that of the Life or Constantine’s Oration, a sympathy on the part of the translator with the florid style of Eusebius, and, trying as the style itself is, the success of Bag. in presenting the spirit of the original with, on the whole, very considerable accuracy of rendering has been a constant matter of surprise during the effort to revise.

2 Cf. Hom). Il. 6. 202, tr. Bryant, 6. 263–4, “shunning every haunt of human-kind.”

3 Eusebius seems to use this phrase much as the modern phrases “The final philosophy,” “The science of sciences,” “The queen of sciences,” when applied to theology.

4 “Divine light.”

714 5 Paraphrased from Is. 66,1.

6 [We must be content here (and probably in other passages of this Oration)to tolerate as rhetorical embellishment that which, regarded literally, is in every sense palpably untrue.—Bag.] The intention of the passage is probably like that of those who say now that there is no nation where, in some form, God is not worshiped).

7 [Referring possibly to Ap 1,8. “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.”—Bag.] Or, possibly, refers to Ep 4,6, as it seems to be simply some verbal suggestion.

8 [The Arianism implied in this passage, if referred to the Word as God, disappears if we regard it as spoken of Christ as the Word manifested in human nature. See the note of Valesius ad loc.—Bag.]

9 Universe.

10 This is directly from Ep 4,6: “Who is over all and through all and in all.” It is thus directly referred to the Father, and on the basis of the above note of Bag. seems to convict of Arianism, but in reality the conception of a pre-existing Word is distinctly orthodox.

11 [It is difficult to know precisely what is meant here. Possibly the name of Christian.—Bag.]

12 This is an allusion to what was afterwards known as Vampireism,—a belief of unknown antiquity and especially prevalent in various forms in the East. Rydberg (Magic of the Middle Ages, p. 207) describes the mediaeval form thus: “The vampires, according to the belief of the Middle Ages, are disembodied souls which clothe themselves again in their buried bodies steal at night into houses, and suck from the nipple of the sleeping all their blood.” (Cf. Perty, d. myst. Ersch. 1 [1872], 383. 91; Görres’ Chr. myst. Vol. 3, etc). Similar in nature was that notion of the spirits who sucked away the breath of sleeping persons, which has left its trace in the modern, superstition that cats suck away the breath of sleeping children).

13 A general statement, such as Eusebius is fond of making. The elevation of his sons was about these times, but not on them exactly. Compare Prolegomena, Life.

14 [Dalmatius and Hanniballianus.—Bag.]

15 [Da 7,18. It is surely needless to remark on so singular and vicious an application of Scripture as this, further than that it is either a culpable rhetorical flourish, or else an indication of a lamentable defect of spiritual intelligence in the most learned writer of the fourth century.—Bag.] “But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom.”—Revised Version.

715 16 [Constantius Caesar.—Bag.]

17 Compare Prolegomena, under Life.

18 “And no one knoweth who the Son is, save the Father; and who the Father is, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him.”—Lc 10,22.

19 Eusebius, in making is the Word who impresses the image of God on men, shows good philosophy and good theology).

20 There seems to be a clear hint of Philonism here, or Philonism as developed by the Neo-Platonists and the Christian Theologians. The history of the thought seems to begin in the Platonic ideas. These self-existing forms which impress themselves on the soul naturally become personalities to which the soul submits, and whose images are impressed on the soul. These personalized ideas are in the thought of Philo the thoughts or ideas of God, “powers” who do his will, like the Valkyr of the Northern mythology,—the personified thoughts or will of Odin. These objective ideas in organized whole were the Word.

The objectivity of ideas, placed in relation with “mind reading,” “thought transference,” and the like, and with the modern conceptions of the conservation of energy and transmission of force by vibrations, give an interesting suggestion of a material basis for the conception. If thought is accompanied by vibration of brain molecules, it is of course quite conceivable that that vibration be projected through any medium which can transmit vibration, whether the nerves of another person or the air. A person of supreme energy of will would make these vibrations more intense, and an Infinite personality would make tangible even perhaps to the point of that resistance which we call matter. The conception of one great central Personality issuing an organized related system of thoughts in various stages of embodiment, in one massive, constant forth-streaming of will, is most interesting. According to it, all will forms of the individual are true as they are in harmony with these norms. Where, however, the lesser wills project incongruous will forms, they are in conflict with the greater. According to it, the human soul is beaten upon by all ideas which have ever been projected, either in individual or in some combined total of force, and is formed according to what it submits itself to, whether to the lesser and mal-organizedor to the Great Norm.

21 Compare Prolegomena, Character. This peculiar self-control, it is to be remembered, was characteristic also of his father, and in a measure the product of the Neo-Platonic philosophy.

22 Literally, the “archetypal idea,”—the same phrase as that used by Philo, 1. 4 (ed. Lips., 1828,
1P 7): i.e. that incorporeal model or image of God on which the corporeal world was formed.

23 This may be true: but compare Prolegomena, Character, for his practice, at least).

24 [Alluding (says Valesius) to the crowns of gold which the people of the several provinces were accustomed to present to the Roman emperors on such occasions as the present.—Bag.] In his prologue to the Life, Eusebius calls this very oration a weaving of tricennial crowns (or garlands). These crowns had their historical origin in the triumphal crowns under the Roman system. Cf. Rich, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and Rm Ant. p. 361.

25 [It is perhaps difficult to find a better word to express the original aiwn.—Bag.]

716 26 Compare 1Tm 1,17 (marg.), “King of the ages” (“aeons,” or according to this translation “eternity”).

27 [Days, months, years, seasons, &c., are here intended. Valesius, ad loc.—Bag.]

28 Hom). Il. 8, 19.

29 [Aiwn, wsper aei wn.—Bag.]

30 From what source Eusebius draws this particular application of the Pythagorean principle is uncertain. This conception of the derivation of ten from four is found in Philo, de Mund. Opif. ch. 15, and indeed it is said (Ueberweg) that with the earliest Pythagoreans four and ten were the especially significant numbers in creation. This mixture of Neo-Pythagoreanism with Platonism and Philonism. was characteristic of the time).

31 [Mona", para to menein wnomasmenh. The analogies from number in this chapter (which the reader will probably consider puerile enough) seem to be an imitation of some of the mystical speculations of Plato.—Bag.]

32 Or Aphrodite.

33 [Megan qeon kai plousion, para kai Ploutwna, ton qanaton anhgoreuon.—Bag.]

34 On these various names, compare Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rm Biog.

35 For account of the various details of persecution mentioned, compare the Church History.

36 “alogou.”

717 37 [That is, stripping the images of those whose temples he destroyed, and apportioning the spoils among his Christian followers: See the next chapter, which is mostly a transcript of the 54th and 55th chapters of the Third Book of the Life of Constantine.Bag.]

38 “The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee that I am not as the rest of men.”

39 (He seems to disagree with the view of the heathen prophecy which his imperial hearer maintained in his Oration to the Saints.

40 For details respecting the following enumeration, compare the Life of Constantine, of which this is a résumé. This sentence and the preceding are taken almost word for word from ch. 16 of Bk. II).

41 Almost word for word from the Life, Bk. III. ch. 50.

42 [In the Life of Constantine (vide [Bk. III. ch. 41] supra), Eusebius mentions two caves only, and speaks of the churches built by Helena at Bethlehem and on the Mount of Olives. He here alludes to the magnificent church erected by Constantine at the Lord’s sepulchre, and ascribes to him those of Helena also, as having been raised at the emperor’s expense. Valesius, ad loc.—Bag.]

43 At this point, according to some (compare Special Prolegomena), one oration ends and another begins.

44 Here the author seems to speak doubly of the Word and the word).

45 (
Mt 11,28 Mt 11,

46 (Mt 11,13 Mt 11, V. , “For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” The text here has the reading eismetanoian, omitted by Tischendorf and the revisers with

B, etc., but supported by CEGKL, sab. cop., etc. It is worth noting that it is not in the Sinaitic, and if this text reading is correct it would nearly overthrow the possibility that this ms., was one of those prepared under the direction of Eusebius.

718 47 (Mt 11,12 Mt 11,

48 (Ez 18,23 Ez 18, V. , “Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, saith the Lord God: and not rather that he should return from his way and live?”

49 (1Tm 6,16 1Tm 6,

50 [This whole passage (which is defended by Valesius) appears, if rigidly interpreted, to lie under suspicion of a tinge of Arianism.—Bag.] It savors directly of Philo. His doctrine was of an ineffable God, above and separate from matter, and defiled by any contact with it. To bring him into connection with created things he introduced intermediate beings, or “powers,” the universal power including all the rest being the Logos. Compare brief account in Zeller’s Outlines of Greek Philosophy, p. 320–325; Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria (Jena, 1875), especially p. 199 sq., 219 sq., and p. 362–364, where he treats very inadequately of Eusebius’ dependence on Philo; also works of Philo and Eusebius’ Praep. and Demonst. Ev. There is a chance of viewing the Word thus as created, but if this is guarded against (as it is by him in the use of “begotten”), there is nothing intrinsically heterodox in making the Word the Creator of the world and only Revealer of the Father. The direct Philonian influence is seen in the phraseology of the following sentences).

51 [Of this somewhat obscure passage, a translator can do no more than give as nearly as possible a literal version. The intelligent reader will not fail to perceive that the author, here and in the following chapter, has trodden on very dangerous ground.—Bag.] Compare above notes on the relations of Eusebius and Philo.

52 [Referring, apparently, to John xvii. 3, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent:” a passage which has been called a stronghold of the impugners of the Deity of Christ; but which, simply considered with its context, cannot fairly be understood to indicate any inferiority of the Son to the Father; but rather appears to speak of the mission of the former as the manifestation of the grace of him who is called “the only true God” in contradistinction to the polytheism of the heathen world. In other words, the knowledge of “the only true God,” in connection with that of “Jesus Christ whom he has sent,” constitutes “eternal life”; the one being ineffectual, and indeed impossible, without the other.—Bag.] Compare 1Jn 5,20–21: “That we know him that is true and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life,” which seems to show that Jn had no idea of any subordination in essence in this matter.

53 [But see, for a refutation of this statement, Rm 11,36, and He 2,10.—Bag.] Yet the second of these references clearly refers to the Son. Eusebius, speaking of God the Father, has in mind the truth that all things were made by the Son, “and without him was not anything made that hath been made.” Jn 1,3.

54 The author is now speaking especially of the spoken or “expressed” word.

55 Compare 1Co 1,24.

56 This conception that the Divine Word stands in something the same relation with the Father that the human word (internal and external) does to the human spirit has, at least, an interesting suggestion towards the unraveling of this curious mystery, which, for lack of a better word, it is the fashion just now to call a human personality, and which certainly is made in the image and likeness of God. Unless there lurks in the idea some subtle heresy, one may venture to accept as an interesting analogy this relation of invisible self, self expressed to self (internal word), self revealed (external word), and an expression carried to the point of embodiment (incarnation).

57 “Logos” again,—here the internal word.

58 (Jn 1,1–3.

719 59 One on the scent for heresy might prick up his ears, and sound the alarm of “Gnosticism.”

60 A curious work just issued (anonymous), under the authority of the Bureau of Education, very complacently evolves the truth of existence out of the author’s pure, untrammeled consciousness,—for he has never read any works either on science or on theology,—and arrives at the condescending conclusion that there is a God; or rather, in the words of Eusebius, the author comes to “deem that world …to be itself God.”

61 [Referring (says Valesius) to St. John, whose words Eusebius had lately cited, “In the beginning was the Word,” &c., and now explains paraphrastically. The reader will decide for himself on the merits of the paraphrase.—Bag.]

62 [In reference, singularly enough, to the illustration of the lyre in the preceding chapter.—Bag.]

63 It is idle to treat as philosophically or theologically unworthy of consideration a system of thought so definitely unified, and with such Scriptural basis as the above. It may not be profound or original, but is definite and clear).

64 “Of Demeter, of Cora, of Dionysius.”

65 “Athene …Hermes.”

66 The word used here, akrateia, is the opposite of the famous philosophical word for self-control—egkrateia.

67 “Eros, Priapus, Aphrodite.”

68 It is probably that “Melkathros” and “Usous” referred to in the Praep. Evang. 1. 10 (ed. Gaisford, Oxon. 1843,
1P 77 and 84). The same passage may be found with English translation in Cory’s Ancient Fragments, Lond. 1832, p. 6–7, 13.

69 Dusaris was, it is said, equivalent to Bacchus.

720 70 All the above names, excepting those specially noted, may be found in Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Biog. and Mythol.

71 Corresponding nearly to our August. Key). Calendarium, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and R. Ant. p. 223).

72 [Leus is said to have offered his three daughters, Phasithea, Theope, and Eubule; the oracle at Delphi having declared that the relief of the city from famine could only be effected by the shedding of the blood of his daughters by one of the citizens.—Bag.]

73 [Alluding to the sacrifice of his daughter Chthonia by Erechtheus, son of Pandion; the Athenians having been promised victory, by the oracle, over the Eleusinians and their Thracian allies, on the condition of the death of a daughter of Erechtheus.—Bag.]

74 Diodorus Siculus, whose work is mentioned elsewhere (Praep. Evang. 1. 6, ed. Gaisford, p. 40) as a “historical library.”

75 Dionysius of Halicarnassus).

76 All these various conceptions of the Word are strictly Biblical: (1) The Word the only revealer of the Father, who otherwise could not be known; (2) The human body the temple of God; (3) The indwelling Word.

77 This ought to relieve Eusebius from any charge of Arianism in this relation, however “dangerous” the ground he has trodden on may be).

78 [These words (as Valesius observes) need not be too rigidly interpreted.—Bag.]

79 (
Jn 1,29).

80 [Isaiah 53,4, Isaiah 53,5, Isaiah 53,6, Isaiah 53,7. Septuagint, English translation p. 728.—Bag.] P. 889 of the Bagster ed., 1879. Though the first reasons make one feel as if the author had been in danger of slighting the atoning work of the Word, he here very clearly comes up, as usual, to the Biblical position.

721 81 Eparchies, ethnarchies, and toparchies.

82 This is a fair appeal, applicable to his present hearers. It at least was true of Constantine’s reign, that it produced a state of relative peace and prosperity).

83 [Psalm lxxi. 7, Psalm lxxi. 8; Isaiah 2,4. Septuagint.—Bag.] Psalm lxxii., English version.

84 (
Mt 28,19 Mt 28, is an interesting various reading here, where Eusebius, with B. as against Aleph, adds something; but where B. and others have oun, and D, and others have nun, Eusebius has goun ).

85 [Referring to Diocletian, and others of the persecuting emperors.—Bag.]

86 [Kuriakwn hxiwntai twnepwnuiwn. The German “Kirche,” the Scotch “Kirk,” and the English “Church” are said, probably enough, to derive their origin from this Greek word.—Bag.]

87 Compare literature on the edicts of toleration.

88 [There is nothing which need surprise us in the praises of virginity, monkery, and asceticism, in a writer of the fourth century. The intelligent Christian will surely shrink from the thought of scribing, with Eusebius, these fruitful sources of corruption to the Lord himself.—Bag.]

89 (Mt 23,38 Mt 23,

90 (Mt 24,2,—apparently a paraphrase from memory.

91 (Mt 16,18 Mt 16,

722 92 The Syriac, Peschito, and possibly the Curetonian, the old Latin (Itala), probably both the Thebaic and Memphitic Coptic versions, at least, had been made at this time.

93 [The peace which Christ, at his birth, bestowed on the Roman world (Valesius).—Bag.]

[i]Roberts, Alexander and Donaldson, James, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series: Volume I, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc). 1997.

NPNF2-01 Eusebius 704