Scanned text contains errors.
ajroy re Kal toy Xptcrfot? Hierocles had advised Diocletian to begin his persecution, and had written two books, called Aoyoi <£iAaA?j0e?s, comparing our Lord's miracles to those of Apollonius of Tyana. (See Lactantius, Instit. v. 2, 3, 4.) In answering this work, Eu-sebius reviews the life of Apollonius by Philos-trattis. It was published in Greek and Latin by F. Morell (among the works of Philostratus) at Paris, 1608, and with a new translation and notes by Olearius, Leipzig, 1709.
7. Against Marcdlus (Kara Map/ceAAbv), bishop of Ancyra, in two books. Marcellus had been condemned for Sabellianism at Constantinople, A. d. 336, and this work was written by desire of the synod which passed sentence. The most important edition is by Rettberg, Getting. 1794-8.
8. De Ecclesiastica Theologia (irepl rrjs ikk\t}cti-a,(TTtKrjs 3-eoAoyfas, twv Trpos Map/cgAAoy eAeyxco*' pi§\ia y'). This is a continuation of the former work, and both were edited with a Latin version and notes by Montagu, bishop of Chichester, and appended to the Demonstratio Evangelica, Paris, 1628.
9. De Vita Constantini, four books (eis tov $iov rod fjiaftapiov KtavffravTivov j8a<nA«os \6yoi reff-crapes), a panegyric rather than a biography. They have generally been published with the Ecclesiastical History, but were edited separately by Hei-nichen, 1830.
10. Onomasticon de Locis Hebrams (rap) twv tqttik&v ovofjidrotv ev Trj deiq. ypatyfj) a description of the towns and places mentioned in Holy Scripture, arranged in alphabetical order. This is inscribed to Paulinus, bishop of Tyre, as is also the tenth book of the Ecclesiastical History. It was translated into Latin by Jerome, and published at Paris with a commentary, by Jacques Bonpere, 1659, and again at Amsterdam,'by J.Cleves, 1707.
Besides these, several epistles of Eusebius are preserved by different writers, e, g. by Socrates (i. 8) and Theodoret (i. 12); and he wrote commentaries on various parts of Scripture, many of which are not extant.
The first edition of all the works of Eusebius was published in Latin at Basle, in four volumes, ex variorum interpretatione, 1542, which reappeared at Paris in a more correct form, 1580. Since that time it has been usual to edit his works separately, and the chief of these editions have been given with the account of each work.
(See Cave, Script. Ecd. Hist. Lit. vol. i.; Fabric. JBibl. Grace, vol. vii. c. 4; Neander, Kircliengescli- ichte, vol. ii. p. 787, &c. ; Waddington, History of ' l/te Church^ ch. vi.; Jortin, Ecd. Hist. iii. The last two contain interesting discussions on the re ligious opinions of Eusebius. [G. E. L. C.]
EUSEBIUS, of dorylaeum, born at the end of the fifth century, began his public life as a layman, and held an office about the imperial court of Constantinople, which gave him the title of Agens in Rebus. One day, as Nestorius, then bishop of Constantinople, was preaching against the propriety of applying the term &eor6Kos to the Virgin Mary, and was maintaining at once the eternal generation of the divine Logos, and the human birth of the Man Jesus, a voice cried out, " No, the Eternal Word Himself submitted to the second birth.v A scene of great confusion followed, and an active opposition to the Nestorian doctrine began. There is little doubt that the voice proceeded from Euse-
bins. (See the question discussed by Neander
Kirchengescli. vol. ii. p. 1073, note.) On another occasion, he produced in church an act of accusation against Nestorius, whom he denounced as reviving the heresies of Paul of Samosata. (Leontius, contra Nestorian. et Euiycli. iii.) The interest which he took in this controversy probably induced him to alter his profession, and to enter into holy orders. He afterwards became bishop of Dorylaeum, a town in Phrygia on the .river Thymbrius (a feeder of the Sangarius), not far from the Bithynian frontier. In this office he was among the first to defend against Eutyches the doctrine of Christ's twofold nature, as he had already maintained against Nestorius the unity of His person. He first privately admonished Eutyches of his error; but, as he failed in convincing him, he first denounced him at a synod summoned by Flavius, bishop of Constantinople, and then proceeded to the council which Theodosius had summoned to meet at Ephe-sus, to declare the Catholic belief on the point mooted by Eutj^ches. The assembly met A. d. 449 under the presidency of Dioscurus, bishop of Alexandria, a partizan of Eutyches. It was disgraced by scenes of the greatest violence, which gained for it the title of ervi/oSos ArjcrrpiKrf, and besides sanctioning the monophysite doctrine, it decreed the deposition of Eusebius. But Leo the Great, bishop of Rome, interfered and prevailed upon Marcian, the successor of Theodosius, to convene another general council to revise the decrees of this disorderly assembly. It met at Chalcedon, A. d. 451, and Eusebius presented a petition at it addressed to Marcian and his colleague Valentinian. He was restored to his see, and the doctrine of Eutyches finally condemned. A Contestatio adversus Nestorium by Eusebius is extant in a Latin trans-ation amongst the works of Marius Mercator, Dart ii. p. 18. There are also a Libdlus adversus EutycJieten Synodo Constantinopolitano obtains (Con-il. vol. iv. p. 151), Libellus adversus Dioscurum Synodo Chalcedonensi oblatiis (ib. p. 380), and Epistola ad Marcianum Imperatorem (ib. p. 95), [Evagrius, Hist. Ecd. ii. 4; Cave, Hist. Lit. vol.
; Neander, /. c. and vol. ii. p. 959.) [G. E.L. C.] EUSE'BIUS of emisa, born of a noble family at Edessa in Mesopotamia at the end of the third century. He was a man of considerable learning, laving received instructions from Eusebius of Cae-sareia and other teachers of high repute. He went to Alexandria, that he might avoid ordination, and devote himself to philosophy, but afterwards removed to Antioch, became intimate with Flaccillus, its bishop, and was ordained. At this time Athti-msius was deposed from the see of Alexandria, ind Eusebius of Nicomedeia, then bishop of Constantinople, wished to instal his namesake into the
acant office. He wisely declined the questionable lonour, knowing that the Alexandrians were too warmly attached to Athanasius to tolerate any other patriarch. He accepted, however, the see of Emisa in Syria (the city from which Ekgabalus iad been chosen emperor by the soldiers) ; but on proceeding there to take possession, he was driven away by a tumultuous mob, who had heard a report of his being a sorcerer, based upon the fact ;hat he was fond of astronomical studies. He fled to Laodiceia, and lived with George, bishop of that }lace, by whose exertions he was afterwards restored to Emisa. He was a great favourite with the emperor Constantius, whom he accompanied