Eusebius, EH.10.8-9: Constantine: Most Mighty Victor

 

Note: This episode concludes this series. It is Episode 126 of 126. The series began on 2/19/19.

This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: Book 10, chapter 8-9.

Notes and Commentary:

These final two chapters in the EH describe the Emperor Constantine’s final victory over his rival Licinius to unite the Roman empire and to ensure peace and security for the Christians.

Chapter 8 describes the intrigues of Licinius against Constantine and the Christian community. Eusebius notes that although Constantine acted graciously toward Licinius, who stood second in rank to him, even giving his sister in marriage to Licinius, he rejected this good will and rebelled against Constantine. In the end, however, God proved to be Constantine’s “Friend and Protector and Guardian.”

In his rebellion, the ire of Licinius was not just aimed at Constantine but also against the Christians. Eusebius notes that Licinius first drove Christians from his palace and then deprived Christian soldiers in his army of their rank.

He also passed various unjust ordinances, including a law that forbade the humane distribution of food to those who were imprisoned. He banished or arrested various men of nobility and high-esteem. Eusebius also accuses Licinius of immorality in his abuse of many married women and unwedded girls to satisfy his “unbridled lust,” calling him a “drunken old dotard.”

In the final stages of his “madness” Licinius struck against the bishops, putting some to death, and against the churches, throwing them down “from top to bottom” or shutting them up. Some of those put to death had their bodies cut to pieces with the sword and the pieces of their body were cast in the sea as “food for fishes.” Many of the men of God fled again to the fields, deserts, glens, and mountains to escape this persecution.

Chapter 9 notes how Constantine defeated Licinius. The “humane” Emperor and his son, Crispus, stretched out “the right hand of salvation” by going into battle against “the haters of God” and quickly won the victory.

Oulton explains in a footnote: “Licinius was defeated first at Adrianople, 3 July and secondly, when he had fled to Byzantium and had been forced to cross the Straits at Chrysopolis (Scutari), September 18 or 20, 324. Shortly afterwards, Constantine had him put to death” (476-477, n. 1).

The “pictures and honours” of Licinius were disgraced, and he was “cast down prostrate.”

Constantine, the “most mighty Victor,” “recovered the East” and “formed the Roman Empire, as in the days of old, into a single, united whole.” The populace had all fear taken away and celebrated the victory with “brilliant festivals,” as “all things were filled with light.” Praise was given first to God and then to Constantine and his sons.

Conclusion:

Eusebius ends the EH with this narrative of the triumph of Constantine over Licinius and with the peace of the Christians in the Roman Empire established. By AD 380, Christianity will be made the official religion of the Empire by the Edict of Thessalonica issued by the Emperor Theodosius. It continues to be debated today whether Constantine’s embrace and protection of the church was a blessing or detriment to the Christian movement.

JTR

Eusebius, EH.5.4-6: Irenaeus, the "Thundering Legion," and the bishops of Rome

This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: Book 5, chapters 4-6. Listen here.

Notes and Commentary:

These chapters cover at least three matters. First, they introduce Irenaeus of Lyons. Second, they relay a legendary anecdote about the “Thundering Legion,” and third they include Irenaeus’s listing of the bishops of Rome.

Chapter 4 introduces Irenaeus as a presbyter of Lyons who was commended by the martyrs to Eleutherus, bishop of Rome. One might assume that Irenaeus had either traveled or fled to Rome during the time of persecution. This note also reflects the importance of Rome as a Christian center among the early churches.

Chapter 5 relays a legendary anecdote that took place when Marcus Aurelius Caesar (brother of the emperor Antoninus) was in battle. The account says that some soldiers of the Melitene legion (which apparently included some Christians) offered prayer to God and a storm came which both sent lightening to push away the enemy and rain to satisfy the thirst of the Romans.

Eusebius says this account is relayed through secular historians though they do not say that “it happened through the prayers of the Christians.” Note: K. Lake says the incident is relayed by Dio Cassius and by Marcus Aurelius. Eusebius also says it was recorded by Apolinarius (who said this was the reason of these soldier being called the “Thundering Legion”) and Tertullian.

At the close of chapter 5 and continuing in chapter 6, Eusebius notes that after the martyrdom of Pothinus at age 90, Irenaeus, “a listener of Polycarp,” succeeded him as bishop at Lyons. And Ireneanus listed the bishops of Rome in book 3 of Against Heresies.

The bishops of Rome, after the apostles:

Linus

Anencletus

Clement (mention is made of his epistle to Corinth)

Everestus

Alexander

Xystus

Telesphorus (who was “martyred gloriously”)

Hyginus

Pius

Anicetus

Soter

Eleutherus

The list thus has twelve in all to this point.

Conclusion:

These chapters commend Irenaeus and also show the importance of the church at Rome, the capital of the empire in early Christianity, and the desire to trace a line within that church through the bishops to the apostles, as had also been done in other key cities in early Christianity.

JTR

Eusebius, EH:3.8: "Clear Marvels" that forecast Jerusalem's doom

Image: View of Jerusalem, 1921, by Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

Another entry is added to the series on Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: book 3, chapter 8. Listen here.

Notes and Commentary:

In the previous chapter (3.7) having discussed Christ’s prophecies of the fall of Jerusalem, Eusebius in this chapter (3.8) reviews a number of ill omens that supposedly also predicted its fall and destruction as described by Josephus.

These include:

A star that stood over the city and a comet that lasted a year;

A light that shone on the altar and temple for half an hour at the Feast of Unleavened Bread;

At the same feast, a cow that gave birth to a lamb;

The opening of a heavy, bronze gate in the temple on its own;

The appearance of a demonic phantom;

At Pentecost, the sounds of an invisible host in the air;

The “woes” of Jesus (Joshua) son of Ananias during the Feast of Booths;

And a “sacred script” that one from that country should rule the world, which Josephus took as a reference to Vespasian but Eusebius to Christ.

To modern ears these may seem like little more than superstitious fantasies, but Eusebius takes them seriously, though less so than he does the prophecies of Jesus in the Gospels.

JTR

Eusebius, EH.1.2: Christ in the OT

Image: Ruins of ancient Caesarea, Caesarea National Park, Israel

I have posted the next installment in the series through Eusebius's The Ecclesiastical History, adding book 1 chapter, 2 (EH1.2). Listen here.

My notes and commentary at the end:

Eusebius reflects on Christology, especially how Christ appeared within and was anticipated by the OT writings.

Reminder: We must be cautious in understanding Eusebius’s Christological reflections given his tendencies toward Arianism.

Nevertheless, this chapter shows the high view early Christians had for the Old Testament. He defends Christianity as having ancient roots.

He points to places in the OT where the Christ is anticipated. He notes how Christ was spoken of by Moses at creation: “let us make man in our image” (Gen 1:26).

He calls attention to theophanies, like the Lord appearing as a man to Abraham at the oak of Mamre, as an angel to Jacob, as the captain of the angelic host to Joshua, in the burning bush to Moses, and was written about as Wisdom personified by Solomon.

He traces salvation history from the fall to the time when “the Logos of God, the teacher of virtues, the minister of the Father in all good things, appeared at the beginning of the Roman Empire through man.”

This also fulfilled Daniel’s vision of the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man.

JTR

Eusebius on Diocletian persecutions and the destruction of NT manuscripts c. 303 AD

Image:  Bust of Diocletian (244-312 AD).

Though, as is often stated (and inflated) by Christian apologists, we have more fragments and portions of Greek NT manuscripts than any other work of antiquity, one of the major problems for those who hold to the “reconstructionist” view of NT text criticism is the fact that we have so few extant NT mss. earlier than the fourth century.  Yes, the number of extant papyri fragments continues to increase (127 listed the NA 28, though a good number of these are post-300 AD), many of these consist only of a verse or two and collectively they hardly cover the entirety of the NT (e.g., there is, for example, no papyri evidence to either support or deny the ending of Mark or 1 John 5:7-8). How can you “reconstruct” the text when there is so little evidence? Some modern academic NT text critics now suggest that the best which can be done is a reconstruction of the NT text as it existed in some places in the fourth century.

Why do we have so few early pre-300 AD Greek NT mss.?  Many were apparently destroyed during periods of Roman persecution which the pre-Constantinian Christians endured.

In Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (VIII.ii), he gives eyewitness testimony to persecutions during the time of the Emperor Diocletian (c. 303 AD):

All things in truth were fulfilled in our day, when we saw with our very eyes the houses of prayer cast down to the foundations from top to bottom, and the inspired and sacred Scriptures [tas entheous kai hieras graphas] committed to the flames in the midst of the market places….

It was the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian …. In which as the festival of the Saviour’s Passion [Easter] was coming on, an imperial letter was everywhere promulgated, ordering the razing of the churches to the ground and the destruction by fire of the Scriptures [tas graphas], and proclaiming that those who held high positions would lose all civil rights, while those in households, if they persisted in their profession of Christianity, would be deprived of their liberty…. (from J. E. L. Oulton, trans., Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. II, pp. 257-259).

Of course, despite the persecution, the Scriptures were providentially preserved by God's people, though many valuable early copies were undoubtedly lost. One wonders if any of the remaining autographs were burned in the marketplaces at this time. This is why the papyrus-trail to the autographa is so fragmentary.  If we had some of these early mss., would they confirm the traditional text? This lack of early mss. evidence led nineteenth century scholars like Westcott and Hort to put so much confidence in the “great" fourth century post-Constantine uncials, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. It was the earliest evidence they had.  Unfortunately, this led to their giving the greatest weight to a transmission line that had come to its terminus and had ceased to be copied, while denigrating the line that had come to be most widely used and copied after the persecution ended.

JTR