The history of the church from our Lords incarnation, to the twelth year of the Emperour Maricius Tiberius, or the Year of Christ 594 / as it was written in Greek, by Eusebius Pamphilius ..., Socrates Scholasticus, and Evagrius Scholasticus ... ; made English from that edition of these historians, which Valesius published at Paris in the years 1659, 1668, and 1673 ; also, The life of Constantine in four books, written by Eusibius Pamphilus, with Constantine's Oration to the convention of the saints, and Eusebius's Speech in praise of Constantine, spoken at his tricennalia ; Valesius's annotations on these authors, are done into English, and set at their proper places in the margin, as likewise a translation of his account of their lives and writings ; with two index's, the one, of the principal matters that occur in the text, the other, of those contained in the notes.

THE SECOND BOOK OF THE Ecclesiastical History OF EVAGRIUS SCHOLASTICUS Epiphaniensis, And [one] of the EX-PRAEFECTS.

CHAP. I. Concerning the Emperour Marcianus, and what signes preceded, declaring he should be Em∣perour.

WHat was transacted during the times of Theodosius [Junior,] we have comprehended in our first † Book. Come on, we will now bring Marcianus forth, that famous Emperour of the Romans; and in the first place we will relate, who and whence he was, and in what manner he arrived at the Roman Empire: and then we will declare the affairs transacted by him, in their proper places [and times.] Marcianus therefore, as 'tis related by many others, and also by a Priscus the Rhetorician, by originall extract was a Thracian, the son of a Military man. De∣siring to follow his father's course of life, he went to Philippopolis, [hoping] he might there be enrolled in the Companies of the Milice. As he was going thither, he sees the body of a man newly slain, which lay thrown upon the ground. Near to which he made a stand, (for he was eminent in respect of his other [endowments,] but most especially, on account of his humanity and compassion:) lamented what had hapned, and for a sufficient while desisted from proceeding on his journey, being desirous to perform what was fitting [to be done to the dead body.] When some persons had seen this, they gave the Magistrates of Philippopolis an account of it. Who having apprehended Marcianus, interro∣gated him concerning the murder of the man. When therefore conjectures and probabilities prevailed more than truth it self, and than the tongue of the person accused denying the Mur∣der; and when [Marcianus] was about to undergo the punishment of a Murderer; divine assistance on a sudden discovered the person that had committed the murder. Who having been punish't for that fact with the loss of his head, [thereby] preserved the head of Marcianus. Being thus unexpectedly saved, he goes to one of the companies of the Milice in that place, b it being his desire to enter himself a Souldier therein. They admired the man, and conjectu∣ring upon good grounds that he would in future become a great person and one of extraordinary worth, they received him most willingly, and enrolled him amongst themselves, not last of all, as the Military Law directs; but, in the place of a Souldier newly dead, whose name was Au∣gustus, they registred Marcianus (who was like∣wise called Augustus,) in the Muster-Roll. Thus [Marcianus by] his own name was before∣hand in possession of the denomination of our Emperours, who at such time as they put on their purple [assume] the Appellation of Au∣gusti. As if the name had refused to abide with him without the dignity; and again, as if the dignity could have required no other name for its being majestically adorned. So that, his Pro∣per, and his Appellative name was the same; both his Dignity, and likewise his Appellation, being declared by one and the same denomination. Moreover, another accident hapned, from which it might be conjectured, that Marcianus would come to be Emperour. For, having had a Mili∣tary

Command under Aspar [in the War] a∣gainst the Vandalls, it hapned that Marcianus, together with many others, was taken prisoner, (Aspar having been very much worsted by the Vandalls;) and brought into a field with the other Cap••ives; it being Geiserichus's desire to see the Prisoners. After they were gathered to∣gether, Geiserichus being seated in an high room, pleased himself with viewing the multitude of those taken Prisoners. And in regard much time was spent [there, the Prisoners] did what each of them had a mind to: (For Geiserichus had given order, that those who guarded the Captives, should loose them from their bonds.) Some of them therefore did one thing, others another. But Marcianus laid himself down on the ground, and slept in the Sun, which was hot and more scorching than usuall at that season of the year. [In which very interim] an Eagle came down from on high in the air, and raising herself by a flight with her face perpendicularly opposite to the Sun, made a shadow like a cloud over Marcianus, whereby she refreshed and cooled him. Geiserichus wondring hereat, with great foresight conjectured at what would happen; and when he had sent for Marcianus, he caused him to be dismissed from his Captivity, having first bound him in great Oaths, that after his coming to the Empire, he should inviolably keep his faith to the Vandalls, and not ••ove his Arms against them. Which in∣gagement, as c Procopius re∣lates, Marcianus did in rea∣lity keep and perform. But leaving this digression, let us return to our Subject. Marcianus was pious to∣wards God, just as to what related to his Subjects: ac∣counting those true riches (not which were hoarded up, or brought together from the Col∣lections of Tribute; but them only) which might supply the wants of the indigent, and render their estates who possest much, secure and safe. He was formidable, not for his pu∣nishing, but because ['twas feared] he was a∣bout to punish. On these accounts therefore he obtained the Empire, [which fell to him] not by an hereditary Right, but [was] the re∣ward of his vertue; as well the Senate, as all other persons of what degrees and orders soever, con∣ferring the Imperiall dignity upon him by a ge∣nerall suffrage, to which they were perswaded by Pulcheria. Whom, in regard she was Au∣gusta, Marcianus married; but knew her not as a wife, she continuing a Virgin till her death. And these things were done, before Valentinianus Em∣perour of Rome had confirmed this Election by his own consent. Notwithstanding, by reason of [Marcianus's] virtue, he afterwards made it authentick. Further, it was Marcianus's de∣sire, that [one] worship might in common be exhibited to God by all persons, (those tongues, which had been confused through im∣piety, being again piously united;) and that the Deity might be praised with one and the same Doxologie.

CHAP. II. Concerning the Synod at Chalcedon, and what was the Occasion of its being convened.

WHilest therefore the Emperours mind was taken up with these desires, there came to him, both the Responsales of Leo Bi∣shop of the Elder Rome, affirming that Dioscorus in the second Ephesine Synod, had not admitted of Leo's Letter, wherein was contained † the doctrine of the true Faith: and also those per∣sons who had been injured by the same Dio∣scorus, intreating that their Cause might be judged in a Synod of Bishops. But above all Eusebius, who had been Bishop of Dorylaeum, was most importunately urgent, saying, that by the trea∣cherous contrivances of Chrysaphius Theodosius's a Protector, he and Flavianus had been deposed, because, to Chrysaphius demanding Gold for Fla∣vianus's own ordination, Flavianus (to shame him) b had sent the sacred Vessels; and be∣cause Chrysaphius agreed with Eutyches in his erroneous and false opinions. Eusebius said more∣over, that Flavianus had been beaten, and kick't, and in a miserable manner murdered by Dioscorus. For these reasons, a Synod is convened at Chalce∣don, Couriers and Expresses being sent, and the Bishops in all places called together by the most pious Emperours Letters, first at Nicaea: (in so much that, Leo Bishop of Rome, writing to them concerning those persons he had sent to supply his own place, to wit, Paschasimus, Lu∣centius, and the rest, inscribed [his Letters thus,] To those convened at Nicaea:) but af∣terwards at Chalcedon in the Country of the Bi∣thynians. c Zacharias Rhetor, in favour to Nestorius, does indeed d affirm that he was sent for out of Exile [to this Councill.] But, that this was not so, may be conjectured from hence, that the Synod does every where Ana∣thematize Nestorius. The same is also ex∣pressly attested by Eustathius Bishop of Bery∣tus (in his Letter to Johannes a Bishop, and to another Johannes a Presbyter, concerning the matters agitated in the Synod,) in these very words: Those persons meeting again, who de∣manded Nestorius's Reliques, cryed out against the Synod, [in this sort:] for what reason are Holy men Anathematized? In so much that the Emperour, being highly incensed, commanded his Guards by force to drive them a far off. How therefore Nestorius could have been called [to this Council,] who was dead long before, I cannot tell.

CHAP. III. A description of the Great Martyr Euphemia's Church, which is in [the City] Chalcedon: and a Narrative of the Miracles performed therein.

[THe Fathers] therefore are assembled in the sacred Church of the Martyr Eu∣phemia. This Church stands in Chalcedon, a City belonging to the Province of the Bithyni∣ans. It is distant from the Bosphorus not more than two furlongs, [scituate] in a most plea∣sant place, on an eminence which rises easily and by degrees: in so much that, those who go up into the Church of the Martyr, are insen∣sible of Labour in their walk, but being got within the Temple, on a sudden they appear at a vast height. Whence casting down their eyes as 'twere from a Watch Tower, they have a pro∣spect of all the fields beneath, extended into a levell and even plain, clothed in green with grass, waving with standing corn, and beautified with the sight of all sorts of trees: [they see] woody mountains also, [the trees whereon] bend and then raise [their tops] finely to an heighth. Moreover, [they have a prospect of] severall Seas, some of which [seem] purple coloured by reason of their serenity, and do sweetly and mildly play with the Shoares; to wit, where the places are calm: but others are rough and boysterous with surges, by the very reciprocall motion of their waves forcing a shoar † sand mixt with little stones, Sea-weed, and the lightest sort of shell-fish, and then drawing them back again. Moreover, the Church it self stands right over against Constantinople. So that, the Temple is [not a little] adorned with the prospect of so great a City. The Church consists of three most spacious structures. The first is an Open Court, beautified with a large ‖ Atrium, and with Pillars on every side. After this there is another Structure, for breadth, and length, and pillars, a almost alike; differing only in this, that it has a Roof laid over it. In the Northen side where∣of at the rising Sun, there is a round Edifice built in form of a b Tholus, set round with∣in with pillars most artificially framed, which are alike as to their matter, and equall in big∣ness. c Over these [pillars,] there is an Hy∣per••on raised to a vast heighth, under the same Roof: so that, even in this Room also, they that desire it, may both supplicate the Mar∣tyr, and also be present at the sacred Mysteries. But, within the Tholus, towards the East, d there is a magnificent Tomb, where lie the most holy Reliques of the Martyr, deposited in an oblong Chest (some term it e The Macra,) most curiously made of silver. The Miracles which are at cer∣tain times performed by the holy Martyr, are manifestly known to all Christians. For, fre∣quently in their sleep she appears, either to the Bishops during their severall times of presidency over that City, or else to some persons (other∣wise eminent for [piety of] life,) who come to her [Church,] and orders them f to make their Vintage in the Temple. After this hath been made known, both to the Emperours, to the Patriarch, and also to the City; as well those who sway the Imperiall Scepter, as the Pontif's, Magistrates, and the rest of the whole multitude of the people, go immediately to the Church, with a desire to partake of the Mysteries. In the sight of all these persons therefore, the Bi∣shop of Constantinople, together with the P••••e••••s about him, goes into the sacred Edifice, where the holy Body I have mentioned is deposited. g There is a little hole in the Chest, on its left side, which is shut up and made fast by small doors. Through this hole they let down a long iron rod, after they have fastned a sponge to it, as far as the most holy Reliques; and when they have turn••d the sponge about, they draw the iron-rod up to them, [the sponge at the end whereof is] full of bloud, and bloudy clotters. Which when the people behold, immediately they adore and glorifie God.

[Further,] so great a plenty [of bloud] is extracted out thence, that both the pious Em∣perours, and also all the Priests [there] con∣vened, moreover the whole multitude which flock together at that place, in a most plentifull man∣ner do partake of it, and likewise send it over the whole world, to the Faithfull that are desirous of it. And the congealed bloud lasts [so as it is] forever, nor is the most holy bloud in any wise changed into any other colour. These miracles are performed, not at any determinate period of time, but according as the Life of the Bishop, and the gravity of his Moralls shall † de∣serve. For, 'tis reported, that when ever a per∣son of probity, and one eminent for his vir∣tues, does govern [that Church,] this miracle is performed, and that most frequently: but when there is no such Prelate, such divine signes as these do rarely happen. But I will relate ano∣ther [miracle,] which no time or season ‖ in∣terrupts: nor does it make any diff••••ence be∣tween the Faithfull and the ••nfidells; but 'tis alike shown to all persons. When any per∣son comes into that place, wherein the pretious Chest is, which contains the most holy Reliques, † he smells a fragrant scent, which transcends all the usuall savours [smelt] by men. For, this scent is neither like that ‖ which arises from Meadows, nor like that sent forth by any the most fragrant things, nor is it such a one as is made by Perfumers: but 'tis a certain strange and most excellent scent, h which of it self demon∣strates the [virtue and] power of those things that produce it.

CHAP. IV. Concerning those things which were agitated and established in the Synod; and how Dioscorus [Bishop] of Alexandria was deposed; but, Theodoret, Ibas, and some others were re∣stored.

IN this place, the Synod I have mentioned is convened, the Bishops Paschatius and Lucen∣tius, and Bonifacius the Presbyter, administring (as I have said,) the place of Leo Pontif of the Elder Rome: Anatolius presiding over the Con∣stantinopolitane [Church;] and Dioscorus be∣ing Bishop of [the Church of] the Alexan∣drians. Maximus [Bishop] of Antioch, and Juv••••••lis of Jerusalem [were there also.] To∣gether with whom were present those Prelates whom they had about them; and also those personages who held the principall places in the eminent Senate [of Constantinople.] To whom they, who filled Leo's place, said, that Dioscorus ought not to sit together with them in the Coun∣cill. For this [they affirmed] was given them in charge by their Bishop Leo, and unless it were observed, they would remove out of the Church. And when [those] of the Senate asked, what were the matters objected against Dioscorus; they returned answer, that he ought to render an account of his own judgment, who, contrary to what was fitting and just, had ac∣cepted the person of the Judge. After which words, when Dioscorus by the Senates Decree had come forth into a place in the midst; Eu∣sebius made his request, that the Supplicatory Libell, which he had presented to the Empe∣rour, might be recited; which request he wor∣ded thus: I have been injured by Dioscorus; the Faith hath been injured; Flavianus the Bi∣shop has been murdered, and together with me unjustly deposed by him: do you give order, that my supplicatory Libell may be read. Which thing when [the Judges] had discoursed of, the Libell was permitted to be read, the con∣tents whereof were these.

a To the Lovers of Christ, our most Religious and most pious Emperours, Flavius Valentinianus, and Marcianus, always Augusti; From Eusebius the meanest Bishop of Dorylaeum, who speakes in defence of himself, of the Orthodox Faith, and of Flavianus of Blessed me∣mory who was Bishop of Constantinople. [It is] the designe of your power, to make provision for all your Subjects, and to stretch forth an hand to all those who are injured: especially b to them who are reckoned amongst the Ecclesiasticks. For hereby c you worship the Deity, by whom a power hath been given you to Rule and Govern the world. In regard therefore the Faith of Christ and we have suffered many and grie∣vous things, contrary to all reason and equity, from Dio∣scorus the most reverend Bi∣shop of the great City Alexan∣dria; we address to Your piety, entreating we may have Right done Us. Now, the business is this. At a Sy∣nod lately held in the Metro∣polis of the Ephesians, (would to God that Synod had never been held, that it might not have filled the world with mischiefes and disturbance!) that Good man Dioscorus, disregarding the consideration of what is just, and [not respecting] the fear of God, (for he was of the same opinion, and enter∣tained the same Sentiments with the vain-minded and Hereticall Eutyches; but concealed it from many persons, as 'twas afterwards plainly evi∣denced from his own declaration:) † took an oc∣casion from that accusation which I had brought against Eutyches, a person of the same opinion with himself▪ and from that sentence pronounc't against the same Eutyches by Bishop Flavianus of Holy memory; [whereby] he assembled a multitude of disorderly and tumultuous persons: and having possest himself of power by money, as much as in him lay he has weakened the pious Religion of the Orthodox, and has confirmed the ill opinion of the Monk Eutyches, which long since, even from the beginning, hath been condemned by the Holy Fathers. Whereas therefore, the matters are not

small and triviall, which he hath audaciously at∣tempted, both against the Faith of Christ, and a∣gainst Us, We fall at the feet of Your [Imperial] Majesty, and humbly beseech You, to order the said most Religious Bishop Dioscorus, to give in his answer to what is objected against him by us: to wit, by having the Monuments of the Acts, which he has made against us, read before an Holy Synod. From which [Acts] we are able to demonstrate, that he is estranged from the Or∣thodox Faith, hath confirmed an Heresie full of impiety, has unjustly deposed us, and in a most grievous and injurious manner oppressed us: You sending your divine and adorable Mandates to the Holy and Oecumenicall Synod of Bishops most dear to God, to the end that it may hear the cause between us and the forementioned Dio∣scorus, and bring to the knowledge of Your Piety all that is transacted, according to that which shall please Your Immortall height. And if we shall obtain this, we will pour forth incessant prayers for your eternall Empire, most divine Em∣perours! After this, by the joynt desire of Dio∣scorus and Eusebius, the Acts of the second Ephe∣sine Synod were publickly recited. The parti∣cular declaration whereof, (it being † compre∣hended in many words, and contained ‖ within the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill;) least I should seem verbose to those who hasten to∣wards [a knowledge of] the conclusion of Transactions, I have subjoyned to this Second Book of my History; giving those persons who are desirous of an exact and particular know∣ledge of all matters, a liberty of reading these things, and of having an accurate account of all transactions imprinted on their mindes. [In the interim] I will cursorily mention the more prin∣cipall and momentous matters: to wit, that Dio∣scorus was convicted, because he had not ad∣mitted of the Letter of Leo Bishop of the El∣der Rome; and because he had effected the de∣position of Flavianus Bishop of New Rome, with∣in the space of one day; and because he had got∣ten the Bishops who were convened, to subscribe [their names] in a paper not written on, as if therein had been contained Flavianus's depo∣sition. Whereupon, those persons who were of the Senate, made this Decree. d We perceive, that a more exact scrutiny concerning the Ortho∣dox and Catholick Faith ought to be made to mor∣row, when e the Synod will be more compleat and full. But, in regard Flavianus of Pious Memory•• and the most Religious Bishop Eusebius (from a search made into the Acts and Decrees, and also from their testimony by word of mouth who presi∣ded in the Synod then convened; who have con∣fessed that they have erred, and deposed them with∣out cause, when they had in no wise erred in the Faith:) have, as 'tis evidently known, been un∣justly deposed: it appears to us (agreeable to that which is acceptable to God,) to be just, (pro∣vided it shall please our most Divine and most Pious Lord,) that Dioscorus the most Religious Bishop of Alexandria, Juvenalis the most Reli∣gious Bishop of Jerusalem, Thalassius the most Re∣ligious Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Euse∣bius the most Religious Bishop of f Ancyra, Eustathius the most Religious Bishop of Be∣rytus, and Basilius the most Religious Bishop of Seleucia in lsau••••, which [Pre∣lates] had power, and pre∣sided over the then Synod, should lye under the very same punishment, being by [the sentence of] the sacred Synod according to the Canons removed from the Episcopall dig∣nity: all things which have been consequently done being made known † to his most sacred Im∣perial Majesty. After this, Libells having been given in on the second day against Dioscorus, on account of [various] crimes, and concerning mo∣ney [forcibly by him taken,] when Dioscorus, being twice and thrice called, appeared not, by reason of [severall] excuses which he al∣ledged; they who filled the place of Leo Bi∣shop of the Elder Rome, ‖ made this declaration in these express words. g What Dioscorus who hath been Bishop of the Great City Alexandria has audaciously attempted against the Order of the Canons, and the Ecclesi∣astick Constitution; hath been made manifest, both by those things which have already been inquired into at the First Session, and also from what hath been done this day. For this person, (to omit many other things,) making use of his own authority, uncanonically admitted to communion Eutyches, (a man that embraces the same Sentiments with himself, who had been canonically deposed by his own Bishop of Holy Memory, we mean our Fa∣ther and Bishop Flavianus;) before his sit∣ting [in the Synod] at Ephesus together with the Bishops beloved by God. Now, the Apo∣stolick See has granted a pardon to those [Pre∣lates,] for what hath been involuntarily done there by them. Who also to this present continue of the same opinion with the most Holy Arch-Bi∣shop Leo, and with all the Holy and Oecumenicall Synod. On which account, he hath received them to his own communion, as being asserters of the same faith with himself. But † this man till this very time hath not desisted from boasting of these things, on account whereof he ought rather to mourn, and lay himself prostrate on the earth. Besides, he permitted not the Letter of the Blessed Pope Leo, to be read, (which had been written by him to Flavianus of Holy Memory;) and this [he did,] notwithstanding he was severall times en∣treated by those persons who had brought the Letter, to suffer it to be read; and notwithstanding he had promised with an Oath that it should be read.

The not reading of which Letter h has filled the most Holy Churches over the whole world with scandalls and detriment. Nevertheless, although such things as these have been audaciously attempted by him, yet it was our design, to have voutsafed him something of compassion i in relation to his former impious Fact, as also to the rest of the Bishops beloved by God, although they had not the same authority k of judging that he was invested with. But in regard he has out-done his former iniquity by his latter facts, (for he has au∣daciously pronounced an Excommunicaton against the most Holy and most Pious Leo Arch-Bishop of Rome the Great; and moreover, (when Libells stuft with Crimes were presented to the Holy and Great Synod against him,) having been ca∣nonically called once, twice, and thrice, by the Bishops beloved of God, he obeyed not, to wit, being prick't by his own conscience; [Lastly,] he has illegally received [to Communion] those, who had justly been deposed by severall Synods: [on these various accounts we say]) he himself hath pronounced sentence against himself, having many ways trampled under foot the Ecclesiastick Rules. Wherefore, the most Holy and most Blessed Leo Arch-Bishop of the Great and the Elder Rome, by Us and the present Synod, together with the thrice Blessed and most eminent Apostle Peter, who is the † Rock and Basis of the Catho∣lick Church, and the foundation of the Orthodox Faith, hath divested him of the Episcopall dig∣nity, and hath removed him from [the per∣formance of] every Sacerdotall Office. There∣fore, the Holy and Great Synod it self will l De∣cree those things concerning the forementioned Dio∣scorus, which shall seem agreeable to the Canons.

These things having been confirmed by the Synod, and some other business done, those [Prelates] who had been deposed with Dio∣scorus; by the entreaty of the Synod and the Emperours assent, obtained their Restoration. And some other things having been added to what was done before, they promulged a definition of the Faith, contained in these express words. m Our Lord and Saviour Je∣sus Christ, when he confirmed the knowledge of the Faith to his disciples, said; my peace I give unto you, my peace I leave with you: to the end that no person should differ from his neighbour in the † Dogmata of Pie∣ty, but that the Preaching of the Truth might be equally demonstrated to all. After these words, when they had recited the Nicene Creed, and also [that Creed] of the hundred and fifty Holy Fathers, they have added these words. That wise and salutary Creed of the divine Grace, was indeed sufficient for the knowledge and confirma∣tion of piety. For, it delivers a perfect and en∣tire Doctrine, Concerning the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and it expresses and con∣firms the Incarnation of our Lord to those who receive it with faith. But, in regard the n enemies of Truth attempt to reject and abrogate the Preaching [thereof] by their own He∣resies; and have coyned vain and new Terms; (some daring to corrupt the Myste∣ry of our Lords Dispensation which [was made]▪ upon our account, and denying the Term Theotocos [which is attributed] to the Virgin: and others intro∣ducing a confusion and mixture, foolishly imagi∣ning the nature of the flesh and of the Deity to be one, and monstrously feigning the Divine Na∣ture of the only begotten to be by confusion pas∣sible:) therefore, this present, Holy, Great, and Oecumenicall Synod, being desirous to preclude all their [ways of] fraud invented against the Truth, and to vindicate that † Doctrine which from the beginning [has continued] unshaken; hath determined, that in the first place, the ‖ Faith of the three hundred and eighteen Holy Fathers ought to remain and be preserved unattempted and inviolate: and upon their account who im∣pugne the Holy Spirit, [this Synod] confirms that Doctrine concerning the substance of the Holy Spirit, which was afterwards delive∣red by the hundred and fifty Fathers convened in the Imperiall City [Constantinople:] which Doctrine they promulged to all persons, not as if they added any thing which had been wanting before, but that they might declare their own Sentiment concerning the Holy Spirit, against those who attempted to abrogate and abolish his dominion and power: but, upon their account who dare corrupt the mysterie of the Oeconomy, and o do rave [so] impudently [as to as∣sert] him who was born of the Holy Virgin Mary to be a meer man; [this Synod] has admitted and approved of the Synodicall Letters of the Blessed Cyrillus who was Pastour of the Church of the Alexandrians; [which Letters Cyrillus sent] to Nestorius, and to the Eastern [Bishops,] and they are sufficient, both to confute Nestorius's madness, and also to explain the salutary Creed, in favour to such persons as out of a pious zeal are desirous of attaining a true notion thereof. To which Letters, in confirmation of such Sentiments as are right and true, [this Synod] has deservedly annext the Epistle of the most Blessed and most Holy Arch-Bishop Leo, President of the Great and Elder Rome, which he wrote to Arch-Bishop Fla∣vianus of Holy Memory, in order to the subversion of Eutyches's madness; p which Letter agrees with the Confession of Great Peter, and is a cer∣tain common pillar against those who embrace ill Sentiments. For, it makes a resistance against them, who attempt to divide the Mystery of the Oe∣conomy

into two Sons; and it likewise expells those from the convention of sacred persons, who auda∣ciously assert the Deity of the Only Begotten to be passible: it confutes them also who main∣tain a Mixture or Confusion in the two Natures of Christ: and it expells those who foolishly assert, that the form of a servant, which Christ took from us [men,] is of a Celestial, or of some other substance: Lastly, it Anathematizes such persons, as fabulously prate of two Natures of [our] Lord before the Union, but after the union feign [them to have been] one. Fol∣lowing therefore [the steps of] the Holy Fathers, q We confess our Lord Jesus Christ [to be] one and the same Son, and with one con∣sent We do all teach and de∣clare, that the same person is perfect in the Deity, and that the same person is perfect in the Humanity, truly God, and truly man, that the same per∣son [subsists] of a rational soul and body, that he is Con∣substantial to the Father as touching his Deity, and that he is of the same substance with us according to his Humanity, in all things like unto us, sin only excepted; that, according to his Deity he was begotten of the Father before Ages; but that, in the last days, the same per∣son, on our account and for our salvation, ac∣cording to his Humanity, was born of Mary the Virgin and Theotocos: that, one and the same Jesus Christ, the Son, the Lord, the Only Be∣gotten, is inconfusedly, immutably, indivisibly, and inseparably manifested in two Natures: that the difference of the Natures is in no wise extinguished by the Union: but rather, that the propriety of each Nature is preserved, and † meets in one person, and in one Hypostasis: not as if [he] were parted and divided into two per∣sons: but [he is] one and the same Only Be∣gotten Son, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, according as the Prophets of old, and Christ him∣self hath taught us concerning himself, and [ac∣cording as] the Creed of the Fathers hath de∣livered [it] to us. These things therefore ha∣ving with all imaginable accuracy and concinnity been constituted by us, the Holy and Oecumenical Synod has determined, that it shall not be lawfull for any person, to produce, or write, or compose, or think, or teach others, another Faith. But, whoever shall dare, either to compose, or to produce, or to teach any other Faith, or to deliver another Creed, to those who have a mind to turn from Gentilism, or Judaism, or from any other Heresie whatever, to the knowledge of the Truth; those persons, if they be Bishops, shall be divested of the Episco∣pall Dignity; if Clergymen, they shall be † degra∣ded. But if they be Monks, or Laïcks, they shall be Anathematized. When therefore this de∣termination had been read, the Emperour Mar∣cianus also [came to] Chalcedon, and was pre∣sent at the Synod; and having made a speech [to the Bishops,] he returned. Juvenalis al∣so and Maximus on certain conditions ‖ de∣termined those [differences] which were be∣tween them about [some] Provinces; and Theodoret and Ibas were restored; and some other matters were agitated, which, as I have said, [the Reader] will find recorded at the end of this Book. [Lastly,] it was decreed, that the Chair of † New Rome, ‖ in regard it was the next See to the Elder Rome, should have pre∣cedency before all other [Sees.]

CHAP. V. Concerning the Sedition which hapned at Alexan∣dria, on account of Proterius's Ordination; like∣wise, [concerning what hapned] at Jerusalem.

AFter these things, Dioscorus was banished to Gangra [a City] in Paphlagonia; and by the common Vote of the Synod, Pro∣terius obtaines the Bishoprick of Alexandria. After he had taken possession of his own See, a great and most insufferable Tumult arose, the populace fluctuating [and being divided] into different opinions. For some demanded Dio∣scorus, as it usually happens in such cases; O∣thers adhered pertinaciously to Proterius. So that, thence arose many and those deplorable calamities. 'Tis certain, Priscus the Rhetorician does relate [in his History,] that at that time he came a out of the Province of Thebaïs to Alexandria, and saw the people making an At∣tack against the Magistrates. And, that when the Souldiers would have put a stop to the Tu∣mult, the people threw stones at them, and made them run; that after this the Souldiers took re∣fuge in that which heretofore had been b Se∣rapis's Temple, where the people besieged them, and burnt them alive. That, the Emperour having notice hereof, sent two thousand new raised Souldiers thither: who having the oppor∣tunity of a fair wind, made so prosperous a Voy∣age, that they arrived at the great City Alex∣andria on the sixth day [after they had been ship't.] That after this, when the Souldiers most filthily abused the wives and daughters of the Alexandrians, facts far more horrid and nefarious than the former, were perpetrated. And at last, that the people meeting together in the Circus, entreated c Florus, who was then Commander of the Milice [throughout Egypt,]

and also Praefect of Alexandria, that he would restore to them the d allowance of Bread-corn (which he had taken from them,) and the Baths and the Shows, and whatever else they were deprived of on account of the Sedi∣tion which had been raised amongst them. And that Florus, by e his perswasion, went into the Assembly of the people, and promised to per∣form all this, and so the Sedition was ap∣peased and vanished by little and little. Nor, were affairs at the Solitude near Jerusalem, in a sedate posture. For some of the Monks, who had been present at the Synod, and had imbibed Sentiments contrary to those Constitutions there established, came into Palestine: and com∣plaining that the Faith was betrayed, made it their business to inflame and disturb all the Monks. And in regard Ju∣venalis had recovered his own See, and, being by the Seditious compelled to retract and Anathematize his own opinion, had made a journey to the Imperial City; those who embraced Sentiments contrary to the Chalcedon Synod, (as I have said a∣bove,) met together, f and in the [Church of the] Holy Resurrection ordained Theodosius Bishop, the same person who had raised great disturban∣ces in the Synod at Chalcedon, and who had given them the first account of that Synod. Con∣cerning which Theodosius, the Monks in Palestine, when they afterwads wrote to g Alcison, gave this account: viz. that having h by his own Bishop been detected of [the commission of] impious Facts, he had been expelled out of his own Monastery; that going afterwards to Alex∣andria, i he had made an attempt upon Dio∣scorus, and that, after he had been lacerated with many stripes as a Seditious person, he was set upon a Camell, in such manner as Malefactours [are u∣sually served,] and carried all over the City. k To this person came [the Inhabitants of] many Cities in the Palestines, and procured Bishops to be or∣dained over themselves by him. Amongst which number was one Petrus, by birth an Hiberian, who was entrusted with the government of the Bishop∣rick of that Town called Majuma, which is hard by the City of the Gazites. When Marcianus had re∣ceived information of these things, in the first place he commands Theodosius to be brought to Court to him. Then he sends Juvenalis, to rectifie what had been done; whom he ordered to turn out all those who had been ordained by The∣odosius. After the arrival of Juvenalis therefore, many wicked and horrid Facts were perpetrated; as well the one Faction as the other proceeding to the commission of whatever their fury sug∣gested to them. For the envious Devil, hated by God, had so mischievously contrived and mis∣interpreted the l change of one Letter, that not∣withstanding the m pronouncing of the one of these [Letters] doth therewithall wholly in∣fer the other, yet 'tis thought by most persons, that there is a vast difference between them, that the meanings of both are diametrically opposite each to the other, and that they do mu∣tually destroy one another. For, he that con∣fesses Christ IN TWO Natures, does plain∣ly affirm him [to subsist] OF TWO Na∣tures; because, whilest he confesses Christ both in the Deity and in the Humanity, he asserts him to consist n of the Deity and of the Humanity.

Again, he that affirms [Christ to subsist] of two Natures, the same person by a necessary con∣sequence does confess [him] in two Natures; because, by his affirming Christ [to subsist] of the Deity and of the Humanity, he acknow∣ledges him to consist in the Deity and in the Hu∣manity: the flesh being neither converted into the Deity, nor the Deity changed into the flesh, of which [two Natures there is] an ineffable Union. So that, by this expression OF TWO, may at the same time commodiously be under∣stood this also IN TWO, and by this ex∣pression IN TWO [may also be meant] OF TWO, the one [expression] being † not different from the o∣ther. For as much as, ‖ ac∣cording to a copious use of speaking, the Whole is known not only [to con∣sist] of, but in its parts. Yet nevertheless, men think these [expressions] to be in such a manner separated and disjoyned the one from the other, ([which Sentiments they are induced to give entertain∣ment too] either from a certain usage about their thinking concerning God, or else from their being prepossessed [with a perswasion of mind] to have it so;) that they contemn [the un∣dergoing of] all sorts of death, rather than they will give their assent to the truth. And from hence arose those [mischiefs] which I have mentioned. In this posture were these matters.

CHAP. VI. Concerning the Drought which hapned, and the Famine and the Pestilence: and how in some places the Earth in a wonder∣full manner brought forth fruits of its own accord.

ABout the same times, there hapned a great Drought in both the Phrygia's, in both the Galatia's, in Cappadocia, and in Cilicia; in so much that a scarcity of necessaries [followed,] and men made use of unwholesome and de∣structive food. Whence hapned a Pestilence also. For, because of their change of dyet, they fell sick, and their bodies swelling by reason of the excessive inflammation, they lost their eyes: they were troubled with a Cough at the same time also, and [usually] dyed on the third day. For the Pestilence, no cure could then be found out. But divine providence, the preserver of all things, bestowed on them that were left alive, a remedy against the Famine. For in that bar∣ren year, food was showered down out of the air, which they termed Manna, in the same man∣ner as ['twas heretofore showered down] on the Israelites. But, on the year following, the good-natured [Earth] brought forth ripe fruits on its own accord. Moreover, [this ca∣lamity] destroyed the Country of the Palesti∣nians, and innumerable other Provinces; [these two] mischiefs spreading themselves over the whole earth.

CHAP. VII. Concerning the Murder of Valentinianus, and the taking of Rome; and concerning those other Emperours who governed Rome [after Valen∣tinianus's death.]

WHilest these things were transacted in the Eastern parts, Aëtius † is in a mi∣serable manner murdered at the Elder Rome. Valentinianus also Emperour of the Western parts, and together with him Heraclius, [is slain] by some of Aëtius's Guards; the Plot against them being framed by Maximus (who afterwards possest himself of the Empire,) be∣cause Valentinianus had abused Maximus's wife, having by force debauch't her. Further, this Maximus, by making use of all manner of violence, compelled Eudoxia (who had been Valentinianus's wife,) to be married to him∣self. She, deservedly accounting this fact to be contumelious, and the highest indignity, took a resolution to cast every Dye (as the saying is,) [to the end she might be revenged] both for what had been done in relation to [the assassination of] her husband, and also for the reproach which had been brought upon her own Liberty. For, a woman is fierce, and of an anger implacable, if (when she uses her utmost endeavour to preserve it inviolate,) her chastity be forcibly taken from her, and espe∣cially by him who hath been her husband's Assassine. She sends therefore into † Africa, to Gizerichus, and having forthwith presented him with many Gifts, and by her Declaration put him into a good hope of what was behind, she prevails with him to make a sudden and un∣expected Invasion upon the Roman Empire, pro∣mising she would betray all to him. Which ha∣ving in this manner been performed, Rome is taken. But Gizerichus, in regard he was a Bar∣barian and of a disposition inconstant and mu∣table, kept not his promise even with her: but having burnt the City, and made plunder of all [its riches,] he took Eudoxia together with her two daughters, marched back, went away, and returned into Africa. The elder of Eu∣doxia's daughters, by name Eudocia, he mar∣ried to his own son † Hunericus. But the youn∣ger, (her name was Placidia,) together with her mother Eudoxia, he sent some time after to Byzantium, attended with an Imperial Train and a Guard, to the end he might pacifie Mar∣cianus. For he had highly incensed him, both because Rome had been burnt, and also in regard the Imperial Princesses had been so contume∣liously used. Moreover, Placidia is match't by Marcianus's order, Olybrius having married her; who was look't upon to be the eminent∣est personage amongst the [Roman] Senatours, and after the taking of Rome had betaken him∣self to Constantinople. Further, after Maximus, a Avitus reigned over the Romans eight months.

He having ended his life by the b Pestilence, c Majorianus held the Empire two years. Af∣ter Majorianus had been traecherously slain by Ricimeres, Master of the Milice, Severus possest the Empire three years.

CHAP. VIII. Concerning the doath of Marcianus, and the Em∣pire of Leo. And how, the Hereticks of Alex∣andria slew Proterius, and gave that Arch-Bi∣shoprick to Timotheus Aelurus.

MOreover, a during Severus's Governing the Romans, Marcianus changed his King∣dom, and departed to a better Inheritance, when he had Governed the Empire b seven years only, having left amongst all men a c truely royall Monument. The Alexandrians, informed of his death, with much more animosity and a greater heat of mind, renewed their rage against Prote∣rius. For, the multitude is a thing with the greatest ease imaginable blown up into a rage, and which snatches hold of the most triviall oc∣casions as fuell for Tumults. But above all others, the [populace] of Alexandria [are of this humour, which City] abounds with a nume∣rous multitude made up mostly of an obscure and d promiscuous company of Foreigners, which by an unexpected and unaccountable boldness and precipitancy, e breaks out into violence and rage. 'Tis therefore for certain reported, that any one there who [makes complaint] f of the break∣ing any thing of small value [which he carries,] may incite the City to a popular Tumult, and may lead and carry [the multitude] whither, and against whom he pleases. For the most part also they are delighted with jests and sports, as g Herodotus relates concerning Amasis. And this is the humour of the Alexandrians. Never∣theless, as to other things, they are not such a fort of persons, as that any one may despise them.

The Alexandrians therefore observing the time, when Dionysius Commander of the Milice made his Residence in the Upper Egypt, make choice of one Timotheus, surnamed Aelurus, to ascend the Archi-Episcopal-Chair; a person who here∣tofore had followed a Monastick Life, but after∣wards was enrolled amongst the number of the Presbyters of the Alexandrian Church. When they had led this person to the Great Church, called h Caesar's, they ordain him their Bishop, whilest Proterius was as yet living, and personally officiating in his Episcopal Function. Eu∣sebius Bishop of Pelusium, and Peter of Iberia [Bi∣shop] of the little Town Majuma, were present at the Ordination; as he who wrote Peter's Life, has told us, in his account of these transactions. Which writer affirms that Proterius was not murdered by the people, but by one of the Souldiers. Further, after Dionysius had made his return to the City [Alexandria] with the greatest celerity ima∣ginable, (to which he had been urged by the nefarious facts there perpetrated,) and was using his endeavours to extinguish the kindled fire of the Sedition; some of the Alexandrians, in∣cited thereto by Timotheus, (as the Contents of the Letter written to Leo [the Emperour] do declare,) murder Proterius by running their swords through his bowells, when he attempted to get away, and had fled as far as the most Holy Baptistery. And after they had tied a rope about him, [they hung him up] at that place termed The Tetrapylum, and shewed him to all persons, jeering and crying out aloud, that that was Proterius who had been killed. After this, they drag'd the body all over the City, and then burnt it. Nor did they abhor tasting of his very bowells, according to the usage of Savage-beasts; as the Supplicatory Libell (wherein all these pas∣sages are contained,) sent by all the Bishops of Egypt, and by the whole Clergy of Alexandria, to Leo, who after Marcianus's death, as hath been said, was invested with the Empire of the Romans, [doth evidence;] the Contents where∣of are conceived in these express words.

To the Pious, Christ-Lover, and by-God-de∣signed Leo, Victor, Triumphator, and Au∣gustus; The humble Address presented by all the Bishops of Your Aegyptick Dioecesis, and by the Ecclesiasticks in Your Greatest and Most Holy Church of the Alexan∣drians.

Whereas by Celestiall Grace You have been be∣stowed as a most Eximious Gift upon the World, 'tis no wonder if You cease not (Most Sacred Em∣perour!) daily, after God, from making Provision for the Publick. And after some other words. And whilest there was an uninterrupted peace a∣mongst the Orthodox Laïty, both with us, and also at the City Alexandria, [disturbances were raised] again by Timotheus, who made a sepa∣ration of himself from the Catholick Church and Faith, and cut himself off [therefrom,] soon after the holy Synod at Chalcedon, (at which time he was but a Presbyter,) together with four or five persons only, heretofore Bishops, and some few Monks, who together with him, were distem∣pered with the Hereticall errour of Apollinaris and that person. On which account ha∣ving then been canonically deposed by Proterius of divine memory, and by a Synod of [the Bi∣shops of] all Egypt, they deservedly experienced the Imperial displeasure † by Exile. And after some words interposed. And ‖ having taken his advantage of that opportunity, when the Emperour Marcianus of Sacred Memory made his departure hence to God; with impious Ex∣pressions (as if he had been subject to no Laws,) he in a most shameless manner raged against [and reproach't] the said Emperour: and im∣pudently Anathematizing the Holy and Oecume∣nicall Synod at Chalcedon, he draws after him a multitude of ‖ Mercenary and disorderly fellows, with whom he has made war, contrary to the Divine Canons, and to the Ecclesiastick Constitution, [in op∣position] to the Republick, and to the Laws; and † has violently thrust himself into the Holy Church of God, which at that time had its Pastour and Teacher, Our most Holy Father and Arch-Bishop Proterius, who then Celebrated the usuall Religious and solemn Assemblies, and poured forth his prayers to Christ the Saviour of us all, for Your Religious Empire, and for Your Christ-loving Palace. And, after the interposition of a few words. Then, after the space of one day, when (as 'twas customary) the most pious Proterius continued in the Bishops Pallace, Timotheus taking with him two Bishops who had been legally deposed, and [some] Ec∣clesiasticks, who, as we have said, had in like manner been condemned to dwell in Exile; (i as if he could have re∣ceived Ordination from two [Bishops;] not so much as one of the Orthodox Bi∣shops throughout the Egy∣ptick-Dioecesis being there, who are always wont to be present at such Ordinations of the Bishop of the Alexan∣drians:) takes possession, as he supposed, of the Archi∣episcopal Chair; audaci∣ously attempting manifestly to commit adultery upon that Church, which had its own Bridegroome, who performed the divine [offices] therein, and canonically administred his own See. And after some other words. That Bles∣sed person [Proterius] could do nothing else, than (as 'tis written,) Give place unto wrath, and make his escape to the adorable Baptistery, that he might avoid their incursion, who ran in upon him to murder him: in which † place most especially, a dread and terrour is usually infused into the minds even of Barbarians, and all other Savage and cruell persons, who are ignorant of the adorableness of that place, and of the Grace flowing therefrom. Nevertheless, these [Ruf∣fians,] who used their utmost endeavour to bring that designe to effect, which from the beginning [they had laid with] Timotheus; [these But∣chers] who would not suffer Proterius to be pre∣served even within those immaculate Rails; who revered neither the † sanctity of the place, nor the time it self; (for k it was the Festival-day of the Salutary Easter;) who dreaded not [the dignity of] the Sacerdotall Function, to

which it appertains to mediate between God and men; kill that guiltless person, and together with him commit a barbarous murder upon six others. And, after they had carried about his Body which was wounds all over, and likewise barbarously drag'd it almost throughout every place of the City, and [further] in a most lamentable man∣ner insulted over it; without any thing of com∣passion they Scourged the Corps, insensible of its stripes, l cutting it limb from limb. Nor did they abstain, according to the usage of Savage beasts, from tasting of his Entrails, whom a little before they were supposed to have as an Intercessour between God and men. [In fine,] having cast the remains of his Body into a fire, they threw the ashes thereof into the winds; [by the com∣mission of these Barbarities] far exceeding the utmost Savageness of wild-beasts: the Occasioner and crafty Contriver of all which Nefarious facts, was Timotheus.

Moreover, Zacharias giving a Narrative of these matters [in his History,] is of opinion, that most of these things were done [in such a manner as I have related them;] but says they were occasioned by Proterius's fault, who had raised most grievous Seditions at Alexandria: [he affirms likewise,] that these Facts were au∣daciously perpetrated (not by the people, but) by some of the Souldiers; which affirmation he grounds on the Letter written by Timotheus to [the Emperour] Leo. Further, in order to the punishing these enormities, Stilas is sent by the Emperour Leo.

CHAP. IX. Concerning the Emperour Leo's Circular Letters.

ALso, Leo wrote Circular Letters to the Bi∣shops throughout the whole Roman Em∣pire, and to those persons eminent for their lea∣ding a Monastick life; asking their opinion, both concerning the Synod at Chalcedon, and also a∣bout Timotheus surnamed Aelurus's Ordination: he sent to them likewise Copies of the Supplica∣tory-Libells presented to him, as well by Pro∣terius's Party, as by that of Timotheus Aelurus. The Contents of the Circular Letters [of Leo] are these.

A Copy of the most Pious Emperour Leo's Sacred Letter, sent to Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, and to the Metropoli∣tanes, and other Bishops over the whole world.

Emperour Caesar, Leo, Pius, Victor, Tri∣umphator, Maximus, always Augustus; to A∣natolius the Bishop. It was the desire and Prayer of Our Piety, that the most Holy Orthodox Churches, and also [all] the Cities of the Roman Empire, should enjoy the greatest Peace imaginable, nor that any thing should happen, which might disturb their Constitution and Tran∣quillity. But, what [disturbances] have late∣ly hapned at Alexandria, are (we are fully per∣swaded,) already made known to Your Sanctity. Nevertheless, that you may have a more perfect account concerning all things, what the Causes were of so great a Tumult and Confusion; We have transmitted to Your Piety the Copies of the Sup∣plicatory-Libells, which the most Pious Bishops and Ecclesiasticks, coming from the foresaid City [Alexandria] and from the Aegyptick Dioecesis, to the Imperial City Constantinople, have brought to Our Piety against Timotheus: and moreover, the Copies of the Supplicatory-Libells, which [some persons,] coming from Alexandria to Our Divine Court on Timotheus's account, have presented to Our Serenity: so that, Your Sanctity may ap∣parently know what hath been done by the fore∣said Timotheus, whom the populacy of Alexandria, the a Honorati, the Decuriones, and the Navi∣cularii, desire to have for their Bishop; [and that you may have an account] concerning other matters b contained in The Text of the Suppli∣catory-Libells; and moreover, concerning the Chalcedon Synod, to which [the forementioned persons] do in no wise agree, as their Suppli∣catory-Libells, here underplaced, do demonstrate. Let therefore Your Piety cause all the Orthodox and Holy Bishops, who at present are resident in this Imperial City, as likewise the most Pious Ec∣clesiasticks, forthwith to come together unto You. And having with great care treated of, and enquired into all things; (for as much as the City Alexandria hath already been disturbed, the State and repose whereof is our greatest care;) acquaint us with Your Sentiment concerning the foresaid Timotheus, and concerning the Chalce∣don Synod, without any humane fear, and with∣out affection or hatred, placing before your eyes the only fear of the Omnipotent God, in regard you well know, that you shall give an account con∣cerning this affair to the incorrupt Deity. That so, We having been perfectly informed of all things by Your Letters, may be enabled to promulge an accommodate Edict.

This was the Letter sent to Anatolius. [The Emperour] wrote Letters like this, to other Bishops also, and to those eminent persons, who (as I have said, at that time lead a life void of the furniture [of living] and remote from matter. Of which number was Symeones, the first Inventer of the Station † in a pillar, whom we have mentioned in the First [Book of our] History: amongst whom also were Baradatus and c Jacobus the Syrians.

CHAP. X. Concerning those things which the Bishops and Symeones the Stylite wrote in answer [to the Emperour Leo's Circular Letters.]

IN the first place therefore, Leo Bishop of the Elder Rome wrote in defence of the Chalce∣don Synod, and disallowed of Timotheus's Ordi∣nation, a as having been illegally performed. Which Letter of Leo's, the Emperour Leo sent to Timotheus Prelate of the Alexandrian Church, by b Diomedes the c Silentiarius, who was im∣ployed in carrying the Imperiall Mandates. To whom Timotheus returned answer, where∣in he blamed the Chalcedon Synod, and [found fault with] Leo's Letter. The Copies of these Epistles are extant d in that Collection of Letters termed the Encyclicae. But I have de∣signedly omitted the inserting them, because I would not have this present Work swell to a Greatness of bulk. The Bishops of other Cities likewise stedfastly adhered to the Sanctions [of the Synod] at Chalcedon, and † unani∣mously condemned Timotheus's Ordi∣nation. Excepting only e Amphilochius [Bishop] of Side; who wrote a Let∣ter to the Emperour, wherein he cryed out indeed against Timotheus's Or∣dination; but admitted not of the Synod at Chal∣cedon. Zacharias the Rhetorician has written concerning these very affairs, and has inserted this very Letter of Amphilochius's into his Hi∣story. Moreover, Symeones of Holy Memory, wrote two Letters concerning these matters, one to the Emperour Leo, another to Basilius Bishop of Antioch. Of which two Letters, I will insert into this my History that which he wrote to Basi∣lius, in regard 'tis very short; the Contents whereof are these.

To my most Pious and most Holy Lord, the Religious Basilius Arch-Bishop; the Sinner and mean Symeones [wisheth] health in the Lord.

It is now, My Lord, opportune to say, Blessed be God, who hath not turned away our Prayer, nor [removed] his mercy from us sinners. For, on receipt of the Letters of Your Dignity, I ad∣mired the Zeal and Piety of our Emperour most dear to God, which he hath shown, and [now] does demonstrate towards the Holy Fathers, and their most firm Faith. Nor is this Gift from us, according as the Holy Apostle saith; but from God, who through our Prayers hath given Him this propensity and singular earnest∣ness of mind. And, after some few words. Wherefore, I my self, a mean person and of slen∣der account, † the untimely birth of the Monks, have made known my Sentiment to his Impe∣rial Majesty concerning the Faith of the six hundred and thirty Holy Fathers convened at Chalcedon; who do persist in, and am grounded

upon that Faith which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit. For, if our Saviour is present a∣mongst two or three who are gathered together in his Name, how could it possibly be amongst so many, so great, and such Holy Fathers, that the Holy Spirit should not have been with them from the beginning? And, after the interposition of some words. Wherefore be strong, and behave your self valiantly in the defence of true plety; in such manner as Jesus the Son of Nave, the Servant of the Lord, [behaved himself] in de∣fence of the Israelitish people. Give, I beseech you, my Salutes to all the Pious Clergy under Your Sanctity, and to the blessed and most faithfull † Laïty.

CHAP. XI. Concerning the Banishment of Timotheus Aelurus, and the Ordination of Timotheus Salophacio∣lus; and concerning Gennadius and Acacius [Bishops] of Constantinople.

AFter these things, Timotheus is condemned to be banished, he also [as well as Dio∣scorus] being ordered to dwell at Gangra. The Alexandrians therefore † elect another Timo∣theus to succeed Proterius in that Bishoprick: this [Timotheus] some persons termed a Ba∣silicus, others [called him] Salophaciolus. A∣natolius dying [in this interim,] Gennadius succeeds in the Chair of the Imperial [City Constantinople.] And after him Acacius, who had presided over The Orphans Hospital at the Imperial City.

CHAP. XII. Concerning the Earthquake which hapned at An∣tioch, Three hundred fourty and seven years after that [which had hapned] in the times of Trajane.

[FUrther,] on the second year of Leo's Em∣pire, there hapned a great and vehement motion and shaking of the earth at Antioch; some [Facts] perpetrated with the utmost rage and fury imaginable, and which far ex∣ceeded the most superlative Ferity of Beasts, ha∣ving before-hand been committed by the popu∣lacy of that City; which [facts] were the prelude as 'twere to such mischiefs as these. Now, this most calamitous accident hapned on the five hundredth and sixth year a of Antioch's being entitled to all the priviledges and immuni∣ties of a free City, about the fourth hour of the night that preceded the fourteenth day of the month Gorpiaeus, (which month the Romans term September,) the Lords day approaching, b on the eleventh ‖ partition of the Cycle; this is related to have been the sixth [Earthquake which shaked Anioch,] three hundred c fourty and seven years having passed, from the time that that [Earthquake] had hapned [which came to pass] in Tra∣jan's Empire. For that [Earthquake in Tra∣jan's time] hapned on the hundredth d fifty ninth year of Antioch's being entitled to the priviledges and Immunities of a free City.

But this [Earthquake] in the times of Leo [hapned] on the five hundredth and sixth year, as 'tis declared by the most accurate and dili∣gent Writers. Further, this Earthquake ruined almost all the houses of the New City, the In∣habitants whereof were very numerous, nor was there any part of it empty, or wholly neglected; but 'twas extraordinary beautified and adorned by the [preceding] Emperours magnificence, who strove to out-doe one another [in that thing.] Likewise, the first and second fabrick of the Pallace fell down; but the other buil∣dings continued standing, together with the ad∣joyning Bath; which having been useless before, at such time as this calamitous accident hapned, was of necessity [made use of] for the bathing of the Citizens, the other Baths having been ruined. Moreover, the Porticus's before the Pallace fell down, and the Tetrapylum [which stood] behind them. Besides, the Towers of the Hippodrome which [were] near the Gates, and e some of the Porticus's which led to these [Towers fell.] In the old City the Porticus's and houses were wholly untouch't by the Ruine: but some small part of Trajan's, Severus's, and Adrianus's Baths, was shaken, and overturned. This Earth∣quake also ruined some [parts] of the Geitonia of [that Region] termed the f Ostracine, together with the Porticus's, as likewise that termed the g Nym∣phaeum. Every of which particulars Johannes the Rhetorician has related with a singular accuracy. This Writer therefore affirms, that a thousand Talents of Gold were by the Emperour remitted to the City out of the Tributary Function; and that, to the Citizens [were abated] the h year∣ly Tolls paid to the publick Treasury for those houses which had been destroyed by that cala∣mity: and moreover, that the i same [Empe∣rour] took care of the publick [works and] buildings.

CHAP. XIII. Concerning the Fire which [hapned] at Con∣stantinople.

a THere hapned together with these [mischiefs] a like, or rather a far more grievous [ca∣lamity] at Constantinople; this mischievous ac∣cident

began in that part of the City that lay towards the Sea, which they term the b Ox-Street. 'Tis reported, that about such time as Candles are usually lighted, a cer∣tain mischievous and exe∣crable Devill having clo••hed himself in the shape of a woman, or rather in reali∣ty a poor woman instiga∣ted by the Devill, (for 'tis reported both ways;) car∣ried a Candle into the Market, being about to buy some Salt-fish; and that the woman set down the Candle there, and went away. And, that the fire having taken hold of some Flax, raised a vast flame, and in a moment burnt † the Market-house. After which, that it easily consumed the adjoyning buildings, the fire preying all about, not only upon such [houses] as might with ease be fired, but upon Stone-buildings also; and that it conti∣nued till the fourth day; and that, having ex∣ceeded all possibility of being extinguished, all the middle of the City, from the Northern to the Southern Quarter, five furlongs in length, and fourteen in breadth, was in such a manner con∣sumed; that nothing, either of the publick or private buildings, was left [standing] within this compass, not the Pillars, nor Arches of Stone: but, that all the most hardned matter was burnt, as if it [had been straw, o••] any such combustible stuff. Further, this calami∣tous mischief raged in the Northern part, where∣in is the Haven of the City, from that termed the † Bosporos, unto the Old Temple of Apollo. In the Southern part, from Julianus's Haven to those houses which stand not far off from that Oratory termed the Church of c Concordia. And in the middle part of the City, from that termed Constantine's Forum, to that called Tau∣rus's Forum, [it left] a miserable and most deformed spectacle to [the view of] all men. For, whatever Edifices] had stood stately to behold in the City, or had been brought to a Magnificence and incomparableness of Beauty, or accommodated to publick or pri∣vate uses, were every one on a sudden transformed into mountains and hills, inaccessible and impassible, made up with all man∣ner of Rubbish, which deformed the Pristine Beauty and sight [of the City.] In so much that even the possessours themselves of the places could not discern, what any one of those for∣mer [Edifices] had been, and in what place [it had stood.]

CHAP. XIV. Concerning the universall Calamities.

a ABout the same times, when the b Scythian War was raised against the Eastern-Ro∣mans, the Country of Thracia, and the Helespont were shaken with an Earthquake; as was Io∣nia, and likewise those Islands called the Cycla∣dès: in so much that in the Islands Cnidus and Coos very many [buildings] were overturned. Further, Priscus relates, that at Constantinople and in the Country of the Bithynians, there hapned most violent storms of rain, the waters descen∣ding from heaven in the manner of Rivers, for the space of three or four days. And, that mountains were levelled into Plains, and Vil∣lages, overwhelmed with waters, perished. Moreover, that Islands arose in the Lake Boäne, (which is not far distant from Nicomedia,) from the vast quantity of dirt and filth con∣veyed into it. But these things came to pass sometime afterwards.

CHAP. XV. Concerning the Marriage of Zeno and Ariadne.

[MOreover,] Leo takes Zeno to be his Son in Law, by [giving him] his daughter Ariadne in Marriage. This person having from his Cradle been called a Aricmesius, after his Marriage assumed the name of Zeno from a certain b person so named, who had ar∣rived at great glory amongst the Isauri. But, by what means this Zeno arrived at this heighth of Honour, and on what account he was by Leo preferred before all persons, Eustathius the Syrian has declared.

CHAP. XVI. Concerning Anthemius Emperour of Rome, and those Emperours who succeeded him.

BY reason of an Embassie of the Western Ro∣mans [to Leo,] Anthemius [by him] is sent [and created] Emperour of Rome, to whom Marcianus the preceding Emperour had married his own daughter. [Not long after,] Basiliscus brother of Verina the wife of Leo [Augustus,] is sent Master of the Milice against a Gizerichus, with a choice Army of Souldiers.

All which have with great accuracy been recor∣ded by b Priscus the Rhetorician: as likewise in what manner the same [Emperour] Leo kil∣led Aspar (who had invested him with the Em∣pire, whom he circumvented by Treachery, ren∣dring him this reward, as 'twere, of his own pro∣motion;) and his Sons Ardaburius and Patri∣cius, whom some time before he had created Cae∣sar, that he might possess himself of Aspar's c fa∣vour and benevolence. But, after the murder of Anthemius, who had Reigned five years at Rome, Olybrius is proclaimed Emperour by Recimeres; and after him Glycerius is made Emperour. Whom d Nepos having expelled, during the space of five years holds the Empire, and or∣dains Glycerius e Bishop of the Romans at Salo∣nae a City of Dalmatia. Afterwards Nepos is dri∣ven from the Empire by Orestes, and after him his Son Romulus, surnamed Augustulus, is made the last Emperour of Rome, f one thousand three hundred and three years after the Reign of Romulus. After this [Augustulus,] Odöacer, rejecting the name of Emperour, and styling him∣self King, g administred the affairs of the Ro∣mans.

CHAP. XVII. Concerning the Death of Leo, and the Empire of Leo Junior, and also concerning Zeno his Fa∣ther.

AT the same time the Emperour Leo ended his Reign at Byzantium, after he had Go∣verned the Empire seventeen years, having de∣clared Leo (the son of his own daughter Ariadne and Zeno) a very young child, Emperour▪ After his death, his Father Zeno † assumes the Purple, Verina the wife of Leo giving him her assistance, as being her son in Law. The child [Leo Ju∣nior] dying not long after, Zeno continued sole possessour of the Empire. But, what was transacted by him or against him, and whatever else hapned [in his times▪] the following Book, by God's assistance, shall declare.

a The End of the Second Book,

The matters agitated at the Synod convened at Chalcedon, being reduced into an Epitome, are these.

CHAP. XVIII. An Epitome of the Acts at the Synod of Chal∣cedon, set at the end of the Second Book.

PAschasinus and Lucentius, Bishops, and Boni∣phatius, a Presbyter, filled the place of Leo Pontif of the Elder Rome. Anatolius being Pre∣late of Constantinople, and Dioscorus Bishop of the Alexandrians; Maximus also of Antioch, and Juvenalis of Jerusalem, and those Bishops about them [were there.] Together with whom were present those personages who held the principall places in the eximious Senate [of Constanti∣nople.] To whom they who filled the place of Leo said, that Dioscorus ought not to sit toge∣ther with them in the Councill. For this [they said] was given them in charge by Leo. And, unless it were done, that they would go [forth∣with] out of the Church. And when [those] of the Senate asked, what were the matters ob∣jected against Dioscorus; they made answer, that Dioscorus ought to give an account of his own judgment, who, contrary to what was fitting and just, had accepted the person of the Judge, a with∣out the permission of him who governeth the Bi∣shoprick of Rome. After which words, when Dioscorus, by the Senate's decree, was standing in a place in the midst; Eusebius Bishop of Dory∣laeum made a request, that the Supplicatory Li∣bell, which had by him been presented to the Em∣perour might be recited; which request he made in these express words: I have been injured by Dioscorus; the Faith hath been injured: Fla∣vianus▪ the Bishop has been murdered; and toge∣ther with me unjustly deposed by him. Do you give order, that my Supplicatory Libell may be read. Which thing therefore having been deba∣ted, the Libell was permitted to be read, the Con∣tents whereof were these.

From Eusebius the meanest Bishop of Dory∣laeum, who speakes in defence of himself, of the Orthodox Faith, and of Flavianus of Blessed memory who was Bishop of Constantinople. [It is] the designe of your power, to make provision for all your Subjects, and to stretch forth an hand to all those who are injured: especially to them who are recounted amongst the Ecclesiasticks. And here∣by you worship the Deity, by whom a power hath been given you to Rule and Govern the world. In regard therefore the Faith of Christ and we have suffered many and grievous things, contrary to all reason and equity, from Dioscorus the most reve∣rend Bishop of the great City Alexandria; we address to Your piety, entreating we may have Right done Us. Now, the business is this. At the Synod lately held in the Metropolis of the E∣phesians, (would to God that Synod had never been held, that it might not have filled the world with mischiefs and disturbance••) that † Good man Dioscorus, disregarding the consideration of what is just, and [not respecting] the fear of God, (for he was of the same opinion, and enter∣tained the same Sentiments with the vain-minded and Hereticall Eutyches; but concealed it from many persons, as 'twas afterwards plainly evi∣denced by his own declaration:) † took an oc∣casion from that accusation which I had brought against Eutyches a person of the same opinion with himself, and from that sentence pronounc't against the same Eutyches by Bishop Flavianus of Holy memory; [whereby] he assembled a multitude of disorderly and tumultuous persons: and having possest himself of power by money, as much as in him lay he hath weakened the pious Religion of the Orthodox, and has confirmed the ill opinion of the Monk Eutyches, which long since, even from the beginning, hath been condemned by the Holy Fathers. Whereas therefore, the matters are not small and triviall, which he has audaciously at∣tempted, both against the Faith of Christ, and a∣gainst Us, We fall at the feet of Your [Imperial] Majesty, and humbly beseech You, to order the said most Religious Bishop Dioscorus, to give in his answer to what is objected against him by us: to wit, by having the Monuments of the Acts, which he has made against us, read before the Holy Synod. From which [Acts] we are able to demonstrate, that even he himself is estranged from the Or∣thodox Faith, hath confirmed an Heresie full of impiety, has unjustly deposed us, and in a most grievous and injurious manner oppressed us: You sending your divine and adorable Mandates to the Holy and Oecumenicall Synod of Bishops most dear to God, b to the end that it may hear both us and the forementioned Diosco∣rus, and bring to the knowledge of Your Piety all that is transacted, according to that which shall please Your Immortall height. And if we shall obtain this, we will pour forth incessant prayers for your eternall Empire, most divine Em∣perours!

By the joynt request therefore of Dioscorus and Eusebius, the Acts of the Second Ephesine Synod were publickly recited: by which 'twas manifestly demonstrated, that Leo's Letter had not been read, and that, notwithstanding there had been an Interlocution once and twice concerning that matter. Wherefore, when Dioscorus was asked to declare the Cause hereof, his answer was, that he himself by an Interlocution [had given order] once and twice that that should be done; and he requested, that Juvenalis Bishop of Jeru∣salem, and Thalassius [Bishop] of the First Cae∣sarea in Cappadocia, might give a more manifest declaration of this matter. For [he said] that they had received an Authority [of presiding in the Synod] together with him. Juvenalis did indeed affirm, that when the [Emperours] Di∣vine Letter had been read in the first place, he made an Interlocution, [ordering] that c that [Letter] should be recited; but, that

afterwards no mention was made of that Epistle. But Thalassius said, that he hindred not the reading of that Letter; and that he had not so much † Authority, as that he alone could Decree, that it should ‖ be read. When therefore a fur∣ther progress was made in the reading of the Acts, and some of the Bishops found fault with some words as being false and forged; Stephanus Bi∣shop of the Ephesians was asked, what Notaries of his at that time had taken [those words] in writing; his answer was, that Julianus (after∣wards made Bishop of Lebedus,) and Crispinus were his Notaries: but, that Dioscorus's No∣taries would not permit that to be done, but took hold of their fingers whilst they were writing; in so much that they were in danger of undergoing most foul abuses. Further, the same Stephanus † deposed, that [himself and the other Bishops] had subscribed to Flavianus's deposition in one and the same day. Hereto added Acacius Bishop of Ariarathia, that all [of them] had subscribed in a paper not written on, [and that they were compelled to it] by force and necessity, having been surrounded with innumerable mischiefs, in regard Souldiers [Armed] with murdering ‖ weapons had encompassed them. Further, when another sentence was read, Theodorus Bishop of Claudiopolis said, that no body uttered those words. Moreover, upon a procedure in reading [the Acts, in this manner,] when [they came] to a certain d place wherein Eutyches had said, [that he Anathematized] those who should af∣firm that the Flesh of God and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ had descended from Hea∣ven: the Acts declared, that against these words Eusebius had said, that those were indeed con∣demned by Eutyches who should say that Christ's flesh had descended from Heaven, but that it was not added by him, whence the flesh was. The same Acts added also, that Diogenes Bishop of Cyzicum subjoyned [these words:] c de∣clare therefore, from whence? and, that notwith∣standing they were not permitted to make any fur∣ther inquiry into these things. Further, the same Acts do manifest, that Basilius Bishop of Seleucia in Isauria, spake [these words:] I adore our one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only God the Word, who after the Incarnation and Union, is known in two natures. And, that against these words the Egyptians cryed out: Let no man divide Him who is not to be parted, he ought not to call one Son two. But, that the Easterns exclaimed, Anathema to him who parts, Anathema to him who divides. 'Tis contained in the same Acts, that Euty∣ches was asked, whether he would affirm two Natures in Christ. And, that he answered, that he as∣serted Christ [to consist] of two Natures before the Union: but after the Union, [he acknow∣ledged but] one [Nature in him.] And, that Basilius said [these words;] unless you affirm two undivided and inconfused Natures after the Union, you assert a confusion and a commixture. But if you add Incarnate and Inhumanate, and do understand Incarnation and Inhumanation in such manner as Cyrillus doth, you affirm the same that we do. For, the divinity which [is] from [his] Father, is one thing; the humanity which is from [his] Mother, is another. When f they were interrogated, upon what ac∣count they had subscribed to Flavianus's deposition; the Acts declare that the Ea∣sterns cryed out, we have all sinned, we do all crave pardon. Again further, the same Acts being read on, do manifest, that the Bishops were que∣stioned, for what reason they would not permit Eusebius to come in, when he desired it. To which Dio∣scorus made answer, that Elpidius brought the Commonitory; and, that he affirmed, that the Emperour Theodosius had given order, that Eu∣sebius should not be suffered to come in. The Acts do manifest, that Juvenalis also said the same words. But Thalassius said, that he himself g had not authority. Which answers were disallowed of by the Judges. For [they said,] that this A∣pology was invalid [where a matter] of Faith is the subject of the Conference. After these things, the same Acts do declare, that Dioscorus h made a complaint in these words: what Canons are now observed, whenas Theodoret is [suffered to] come in; And, that the Senatours made answer, that Theodoret was come in as an Accuser. And when Dioscorus subjoyned, that Theodoret sate amongst the Bishops; the Senatours said again, that Eusebius and Theodoret should take the place of the Accusers, in like manner as Dioscorus had the place of the Accused allotted to him. When therefore all [the Acts] of the second Ephesine Synod had been read, and the sentence [of de∣position pronounc't] against Flavianus and Eu∣sebius, had been likewise recited, as far as that place, where i Hilarius the Deacon had said, 'Tis contradicted: the Bi∣shops of the East and those with them

exclaimed, Anathema to Dioscorus: in this very hour k Christ hath deposed Dioscorus: Flavianus hath been deposed by Dioscorus: Holy Lord, do Thou revenge him, Orthodox Emperour, do you revenge Him! Many years to Leo: many years to the l Patriarch. Then, when the following words were read, which manifested, that all the then convened Bishops had agreed to the deposition of Flavianus and Eusebius; the most Glorious Judges made an Interlocution in these express words.

We perceive, that a more exact scrutiny concerning the Orthodox and Catholick Faith ought to be made to morrow, when the Synod will be more compleat and full. But, in regard Flavianus of Pious Memory, and Eusebius the most Religious Bishop of Dorylaeum (from a search made into the Acts and Decrees, and also from their testimony by word of mouth who presi∣ded in the Synod then convened; who have con∣fessed that they have erred, and have deposed them without cause, when they had in no wise erred in re∣lation to the Faith:) have, as 'tis evidently known, been unjustly deposed: it appears to us (agreeable to that which is acceptable unto God,) to be just, (provided it shall please our most Divine and most Pious Lord,) that Dioscorus the most Religious Bishop of Alexandria, Juvenalis the most Religious Bishop of Jerusalem, Thalassius the most Religious Bishop of Caesarea, Euse∣bius the most Religious Bishop of m Ancyra, Eu∣stathius the most Religious Bishop of Berytus, and Basilius the most Religious Bishop of Seleu∣cia in Isauria, which [Prelates] had power, and presided over the then Synod, should n lye under the very same punishment, being by [the sentence of] this sacred Synod according to the Canons estranged from the Episcopall dignity: all things which have been consequently done being made known to his most sacred Imperial Ma∣jesty.

After these words, the Easterns cryed out this [is] a just judgment: but the Bishops of Illy∣ricum exclaimed, we have all sinned, let us all be vouchsafed pardon. And again; when the Ea∣sterns acclaimed, this is a just sentence: Christ hath deposed a Murderer, Christ hath reven∣ged the Martyrs: the Senators made an Inter∣locution, that every one of the Bishops conve∣ned, should by himself declare his own Faith; knowing for certain, that the most Divine Em∣perour did believe, according to that Exposition of the Faith of the three hundred and eighteen [Fathers, assembled] at Nice, and of the hun∣dred and fifty Fathers [convened] o at Con∣stantinople; also according to the Epistles of the Holy Fathers, Gregorius, Basilius, Hilarius Athanasius, Ambrosius; and according to Cy∣rill's two Letters, which were recited at the First Synod at Ephesus: for, that the most Pious Leo Bishop of the Elder Rome, had deposed Eu∣tyches according to the same Faith.

The First Session therefore having after this manner been ended, when the most Holy Bishops had come together p alone in order to another [Action,] Eusebius Bishop of Dory∣laeum presented Libells in de∣fence of himself and Flavia∣nus; wherein he accused Di∣oscorus as entertaining the same Sentiments with Euty∣ches, and because he had divested them of the Sacer∣dotall Function. He added also, that Dioscorus had in∣serted some words, which had not been spoken at the then convened Synod, into the Acts thereof; and moreover, that Dioscorus had procured that they should subscribe in blank papers. He requested fur∣ther, that all the Acts of the second Ephesine Synod might be made null by the vote of [the Prelates who] were convened, that themselves might be restored to the Sa∣cerdotall dignity, and that that nefarious opinion might be Anathematized. He re∣quested also after the reading [of his Libell,] that his Ad∣versary might be present. When this was by an Interlocution ordered to be done; Aëtius Arch-Deacon and Primicerius of the Notaries said, that he had gone to Dioscorus, as also to the others; and that Dioscorus had answered, that he was not permitted by his keepers to come to the Councill. By making another Interlocution it was ordered, that Dioscorus should be sought for before [the doors of] the Councill. And when he was not found, Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople made an Interlocution, that he ought to be sent for, and to be present in the Synod. Which having been done, the messengers sent to Dioscorus returned and said that he told them, I am under custody: let [my keepers] say, whether or no they will permit me to go [to the Councill.] And upon the mes∣sengers saying to him, that they▪ had been sent to him, not to the Magistriani; they brought word,

that Dioscorus had said, I am ready to come to the Holy and Oecumenicall Synod; but I am hindred. Whereto Himerius added, that in their return from Dioscorus, the q Assistant to the Master of the sacred Offices met them, and that in company with him the Bishops had gone again to Dioscorus, and that he had some things concerning these matters which he had taken in r Notes. Which having been read, 'twas manifested that Dioscorus had spoken these ex∣press words. Having recollected my self, and con∣sidered what is expedient [for me,] I answer thus.

In regard the most magnificent Judges who sate in the Session before this, have Decreed severall things after many Interlocutions made by every one; and I am now cited to a Second Session, to the end that the soresaid [Decrees] may be voided and made null; 'tis my request, that the most magnificent Judges and Sacred Senate, who were at the Former Session, may be present now also, in order to a re-examination of the same matters. To whom Acacius, as 'tis mani∣festly related in the said Acts, gave answer in these very words. The Holy and Great Synod have not commanded Your Sanctity therefore to be present, that those things which have been transacted before the most Magnificent Judges and the Sacred Senate might be voided and made null: but [the Synod] hath sent us, [with a command] that You should come to the Session, and that Your Sanctity should not be absent therefrom. To whom Dioscorus re∣turned this answer, (as the Acts declare;) You have told me even now, that Eusebius hath pre∣sented Libells: I make a request again, that my Cause may be examined before the Judges and Senate. Then, after other things of this nature, which are put into the Acts; those were again sent, who might perswade Dioscorus to be pre∣sent at what was transacted. Which having been done, those who had been sent returned, and said, that they had taken Dioscorus's answer in Notes, which [Notes] do manifest, that he said these words. I have already signified to Your p••ety, that I am afflicted with a distemper, and that 'tis my request, that the most Magnificent Judges also and the Sacred Senate may now likewise be present at the Judgment of those things which shall be inquired into: but in regard my distem∣per hath increased, upon that account I have made a delay. And the Acts do manifest that Cecro∣pius said unto Dioscoru••▪ that a little before he had not made the least mention concerning his sickness; and that therefore he ought to satisfie the Canons. To whom Dioscorus made this re∣turn, I have said once, that the Judges ought to be present. Then, that Ruffinus Bishop of Samo∣sata said unto Dioscorus, that the Agitations and Debates [in the Councill] were Canonicall, and that Dioscorus, if he were pre∣sent, might freely speak what he should have a mind to. And when Dio∣scorus enquired, whether Juvenalis and Tha∣lassius and Eustathius were come [to the Sy∣nod,] s he answered, that that was nothing pertinent to the business. To which words the Acts doe set forth, that Dioscorus subjoyned these, that he had requested the Christ-loving Emperour, [that he would give order] that the Judges also might be present [in the Councill,] as likewise those [Prelates] who together with him had been Judges. And, that hereto the [Synod's] Mes∣sengers said, that Eusebius had accused him only, and that all the rest ought not to be present. And, that to these words Dioscorus replied, that those other persons ought also to be present who had been judged together with him: for, that Eusebius had no private † Cause against him, but [a common one, to wit,] concerning those things on account of which all of them had been judged. And again, when the [Synod's] Messengers persisted ‖ in the same things, Dioscorus made answer, what I have said, I have said once; nor have I any thing further to say. To which words [when declared to the Synod,] Eusebius [Bishop] of Dorylaeum said, that he had [matter of accu∣sation] against Dioscorus only, and against no person else: and he desired that Dioscorus might be cited in by a third Summons. [After this] Aëtius gave information, that some persons who stiled themselves Ecclesiasticks, together with some others who were Laïcks, coming from the City Alex∣andria, had lately presented Libells against Dio∣scorus, and that those men were now standing before [the doors of] the Councill, and crying out. When therefore Theodorus, a Deacon of the Holy Church of Alexandria, had in the first place presented [Libells;] and then Ischyrio, who was a Deacon likewise; and after him Atha∣nasius a Presbyter and Cyrillus's sisters son; and lastly Sophronius; in which [Libells] they ac∣cused Dioscorus partly for Blasphemies, and partly on account of bodily [dama∣ges] and t violent exaction of moneys: a third Citation is issued out, wherein Dio∣scorus is admonished to come [to the Synod.] The Mes∣sengers therefore appointed for this business, being re∣turned, made report that Dioscorus had said [these words:] I have sufficiently informed Your Piety; nor can I add any thing else thereto. Again, when the per∣sons sent upon this account had continued to be very urgent in their perswasives to Dioscorus [that he would come,] and he having always given the same answer; Paschasinus the Bishop said [these words.] Dioscorus having now been thrice Summoned, hath not appeared, being prick't

in Conscience: and he u asked what [punishment] he deserved. Whereto when the Bishops had re∣turned answer, that he had offended against the Canons, and when Proterius Bishop of Smyrna had said, at such time as the Holy Flavianus was murdered, nothing had been agreeably and orderly done against him: they who supplied the place of Leo Bishop of the Elder Rome, † made this De∣claration in these express words.

What Dioscorus who hath been Bishop of the Great City Alexandria has audaciously attempted against the Order of the Canons, and the Ecclesi∣astick Constitution; hath been made manifest, both by those things which have already been enquired into at the First Session, and also from what hath been done this day. For this person, (to omit many other things,) making use of his own authority, uncanonically admitted to communion Eutyches, (a man that embraces the same Sentiments with himself, who had been deposed canonically by his own Bishop of Holy Memory, we mean our Fa∣ther and Arch-Bishop Flavianus;) before his sitting [in the Synod] at Ephesus together with the Bishops beloved by God. But the Apo∣stolick See has granted a pardon to those [Pre∣lates,] for what hath been involuntarily done there by them. Who also to this present continue of the same opinion with the most Holy Arch-Bi∣shop Leo, and with all the Holy and Oecumenicall Synod. On which account, he hath received them to his own communion, as being asserters of the same faith with himself. But † this man till this very time hath not desisted from boasting of these things, on account whereof he ought rather to mourn, and lay himself prostrate on the earth. Besides, he permitted not the Letter of the most Blessed Pope Leo, to be read, (which had been written by him to Flavianus of Holy Memory;) and his [he did,] notwithstanding he was severall times en∣treated by those persons who brought the Letter, to suffer it to be read; and notwithstanding he had promised with an Oath that it should be read. The not reading of which Letter has filled the most Holy Churches over the whole world with scandalls and detriment. Nevertheless, although such things as these have been audaciously at∣tempted by him, vv yet we had some thoughts concerning the vouchsafing to him something of compassion in relation to his former impious Fact, as also to the rest of the Bishops beloved by God, although they had not the same au∣thority of judging that he was invested with.

But in regard he has out-done his former ini∣quity by his latter facts, (for he has audacious∣ly pronounced an Excommunication against the most Holy and most Pious Leo Arch-Bishop of Rome the Great; and moreover, (when Libells stuft with Crimes were preferred to the Holy and Great Synod against him,) having been ca∣nonically called once, twice, and thrice, by the Bishops beloved of God, he obeyed not, to wit, being prick't by his own conscience; [Lastly,] he has illegally received [to Communion] those, who have been justly deposed by severall Synods: [on these various accounts we say]) he himself hath pronounced sentence against himself, having many ways trampled under foot the Ecclesiastick Rules. Wherefore, the most Holy and most Blessed Leo Arch-Bishop of the Greatest and the Elder Rome▪ by Us and the present Synod, together with the thrice Blessed and most eminent Apostle Peter, who is the Rock and Basis of the Catho∣lick Church, and the foundation of the Orthodox Faith, hath divested him of the Episcopall dig∣nity, and hath removed him from [the performance of] every Sacer∣dotall Office. Therefore, the Holy and Great Synod it self will Decree those things concerning the forementioned Dioscorus, which shall seem agreeable to the Canons.

When therefore these things had been confirmed by Anatolius, Maximus, and the rest of the Bishops, excepting those [Prelates] who together with Dioscorus had been deposed by the Councill; a Relation concerning these [Transactions] was by the Synod written to [the Emperour] Mar∣cianus, and by the same Synod a deposition was sent to Dioscorus, the Contents whereof were these.

Know, that by reason of Your contemning the Divine Canons, and on account of Your contu∣macy [Shown] towards this Holy and Oecu∣menicall Synod, because (besides other Crimes whereof You have been convicted,) having been the third time called by this Holy and great Synod, according to the Divine Canons to answer to those Accusations brought against You, You have not appeared; on the thirteenth day of this instant month October, You are deposed from your Bishoprick by this Holy and Oecumenicall Synod, and are estranged from every Eccle∣siastick y duty.

Then, having written concerning these things to the pious z Bishops of the most Holy Church at Alexandria, and when the a Edict against Dio∣scorus had been proposed, this Sessions was ended.

The foregoing Session having been thus en∣ded, after this [the Bishops] being again con∣vened, returned answer to the Interrogation of the Judges (who had requested that the † true Faith might be expounded,) [in this manner,] b that no∣thing further ought to be esta∣blished, the matters against Eutyches having been fully finished, and determined by the Bishop of Rome, to which [determinations] they had all given their assent. A∣gain, when all the Bishops cried out, that they all said the same things, and when the Judges by making an In∣terlocution had pronounced, that each Patriarch, having chosen one or two persons of his own Dioecesis, should come forth into the midst, to the end that the opinion of every one might be made manifest: Florentius Bishop of Sardis required a Truce, to the end that with consideration they might arrive at the Truth. And Cecropius Bishop of Se∣bastopolis spoke these words. The Faith hath been well expounded by the Three hun∣dred and eighteen Holy Fathers, and hath been confirmed by the Holy Fathers, Athanasius, Cy∣rillus, Celestinus, Hilarius, Basilius, Gregorius, and now again by the most Holy Leo. And our re∣quest is, that the [words] of the Three hundred and eighteen Holy Fathers, as also those of the most Holy Leo, may be recited. Which having been read, the whole Synod cried out, in these words; this is the Faith of the Orthodox: Thus we all believe, Pope Leo believes thus, Cyrillus believed thus, the Pope hath expounded it thus. And when there had been another Interlocution, that the Exposition of the Faith [set forth] by the Hundred and fifty Holy Fathers might be re∣cited also, that was likewise read. To which the Synod again cried out, and said: This is the Faith of [us] all: This is the Faith of the Orthodox: Thus we all believe. d After whom Aetius the Arch-Deacon said, that he had at hand the Epistle of the Divine Cyrillus to Ne∣storius, which all [the Fathers] convened at Ephesus had confirmed by their own Subscriptions; and that he had likewise another Letter of the same Cyrillus's, which had been written to Jo∣hannes [Bishop] of Antioch, and which had likewise been confirmed: and his request was, that both these Letters might be read. And after an Interlocution had been made concerning these [Letters,] they were both recited. Part of the Contents of the former Epistle run word for word thus.

Cyrillus,

to the most Pious Nestorius, [my] Fellow-Minister.

Some persons, as I understand, reproach my Reputation in the presence of Your Piety, and that frequently, taking an occasion [to do thus] most especially, at such time as those of the Ma∣gistracy are met together; and peradventure they suppose, that Your ears are even delighted [with such discourses as these.] And after some words. The Holy and Great Synod therefore hath said, † that He the only begotten Son hath been begotten of God and the Father according to Nature, very God of very God, the Light of the Light; that He, by whom the Father hath made all things, de∣scended, was Incarnate, made man, suffered, rose again the third day, ascended into the Heavens. These Expressions and Forms we also ought to follow, considering with our selves, what is meant by this [proposition,] God the Word was incarnate and was made man. For we do not affirm, that the Nature of The Word having been changed, was made Flesh: nor that it was converted into whole man, who [consists] of Soul and Body. But [We say] that rather, that when The Word had personally united to himself the Flesh enli∣vened with a rationall soul, he was ineffably and incomprehensibly made man, and he hath been stiled the Son of man, not according to will only, or good pleasure; nor yet as it were in the As∣sumption of the person only. And, that the Na∣tures [are] diverse, e which have come together into a true Unity: but, that of both [Na∣tures there is] one Christ and [one] Son; not as if the diversity of the Natures were destroyed by the Union: but rather, that the Di∣vinity and Humanity have perfected to us one Lord, and Christ, and Son, by an inef∣fable mysticall and secret con∣course to an Unity. And af∣ter some few words. But, in regard having personally united the humanity to him∣self on our account and for our salvation, he proceeded from a woman, for this rea∣son he is said to have been born according to the Flesh. For he was not at first born a common [and ordinary] man of the Holy Virgin, and after that The Word descended upon him: but having been † united from the very womb, he is said to have under∣gone a Carnall Nativity, that he might procure [to himself] the Nativity of his own Flesh. After the same manner we say he suffered, and rose again; not as if God The Word, as to his own Nature, suffered either the Stripes, or

the Transfixions of the Nails, or any other of the wounds: for the Deity is Impassible, because 'tis also Incorporeall. But, in regard that which had been made his own Body suffered, on this ac∣count he is again said to have suffered for us. For there was the Impassible [Deity] in a passible Body.

Most part of [Cyrillus's] other Letter hath been recorded in our foregoing † Book. But there is a passage in it, which Johannes [Bishop] of the Antiochians had written [in his Letter, to which passage] Cyrillus hath ‖ fully agreed: this passage runs thus. We confess the Holy Virgin to be Theotocos, because God The Word took Flesh from Her and was made man, and from that very Conception united to himself a Temple taken from Her. But we know, that those divine men do take the Evangelick and Apostolick Expressions [ut∣tered] concerning the Lord, sometimes in a common sense, as [spoken] of one person: † at oth••r whiles [they] divide them, as [uttered] concerning two Natures. And, [that they have] delivered these [Expressions as] be∣coming God, according to the divinity of Christ: but those other [as] humble and mean, agree∣able to the same persons humanity. To which words [Cyrillus] has subjoyned these. Ha∣ving read these your sacred Expressions, We find that We our selves embrace the same Sentiments. For, there is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism. We have therefore glorified God the Saviour of all [men,] rejoycing mutually, that as well the Churches amongst us, as those with you, do profess a Faith that is agreeable, both to the divinely inspired Scriptures, and also to the Tradition of our Holy Fathers.

After the Reading hereof, those of this Synod cried out in these words: We do all believe thus; Pope Leo believes thus. Anathema to him that divides, and to him who confounds. This is the Faith of Leo the Arch-Bishop. Leo be∣lieves thus; Leo and Anatolius believe thus. We all believe thus. As Cyrillus, so we believe. The eternall memory of Cyrillus. As Cyrillus's Letters f are, so are our Senti∣ments. Thus we have be∣lieved, thus we do believe: Leo the Arch-Bishop thinks thus, thus he believes, thus he hath written. Then, an Interlocution having been made, that Leo's Letter might also be read; being rendred [into Greek,] it was recited: which [Letter] is extant in the Acts [of the Councill.] After therefore the reading thereof, the Bishops exclaimed, This is the Faith of the Fathers, This is the Faith of the Apostles. We all believe thus, g we that are Orthodox do believe thus. Anathema to him who be∣lieves not thus. Peter by Leo hath uttered these words: The Apostles have taught thus: Leo hath taught pi∣ously and truly, Cyrillus has taught thus, Leo and Cyrillus have taught alike: Anathema to him who believes not thus: This is the true Faith, the Orthodox think thus, this is the Faith of the Fathers. Why were not these [words] read at Ephesus? Dioscorus hath con∣cealed these [Expressions.] It is recorded in the same Acts, that when part of the [fore-mentioned] Letter of Leo was read, the Contents whereof were these, And in order to the paying that due debt of our Nature, the divine Nature was united to a Nature passible, to the end that (for this was agree∣able to our Remedies,) He being one and the same Mediatour of God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus; might be able to die by one, and might not be able to die by the other: the Illyrician and Pa∣lestine Bishops being in doubt as to this Expression; Aetius Arch-deacon of the most Holy Church of Constantinople, produced a passage of Cyrillus's, the Contents whereof are these: Again, in re∣gard his own Body by the grace of God, ac∣cording as the Apostle Paul saith, hath tasted death h for every man, he himself is [therefore] said to have suffered death for us: not as if he had ex∣perienced death, as to what belongs to his own Nature; (For 'tis stupidity and ex∣tream madness, either to af∣firm, or think this:) but because (as I have even now said,) his Flesh tasted death. And again, as to an expression of Leo's Letter, which runs thus: For each Form acts with a com∣munion of the other, that which is proper: to wit, The Word operates that which is The Word's; and the Flesh performs that which is of the † Flesh: and the one of these shines with Miracles; but the other hath lain under injuries: the Illyrician and Palestine Bishops being in doubt, the same Aetius read a ‖ Chapter of Cyrillus, the Contents whereof were these. Of the expressions [used concerning Christ,] some are most especially agree∣able to God; again, others are agreeable to man. But a third sort possess a certain middle place, evidencing the Son of God, to be God and also at the same time Man. After this, when the foresaid Bishops doubted at another place of Leo's Epistle, which runs thus: For, although in our Lord Jesus Christ, [there is] one person of God and of man, nevertheless that is one thing whence there is in both a Community of Contume∣ly, and that is another whence there is a Commu∣nity of Glory. For from us he [has] humanity, which is less than the Father. But from the Fa∣ther he has the divinity which is equall with his Father. Theodoret, after he had well considered this matter, said, that the Blessed Cyrillus had expresly spoken thus, in these words: And being made man, and loosing nothing that was his own, i he continued what he was, and the one dwelt in the other, that is, the divine Na∣ture in man. After this, when the Illustrious Judges enquired whether there were any person who as yet doub∣ted, all answered, that no person made any further doubt. After whom, Atticus Bishop of Nicopolis requested, that a Truce of some few days might be allowed them, to the end that with a sedate mind and undisturbed understanding such things might be decreed as were pleasing to God, and to the Holy Fathers. He desired also, that Cyrillus's Letter, written to Nestorius, might be delivered [to them,] in which Cyrillus intreats Nestorius, that he would give his assent to his twelve Heads, k whereto all agreed. And when the Judges by making an In∣terlocution

[had given order,] that an inter∣vall of five days might be allowed them, wherein they might have a meeting [and confer] l with Anatolius Prelate of Costantinople: all the Bi∣shops cryed out, and said; We do believe thus: We all believe thus: as Leo, so we believe: no one of us doubts: We have all subscribed. To which [exclamations the Judges] made an Interlo∣cution in these express words. There is no ne∣cessity that you should all meet. But, in regard 'tis agreeable, that those who doubt should be con∣firmed, let the most pious Bishop Anatolius choose out of their number who have subscribed, such persons as he shall think fit to teach and inform those that doubt. Whereto those of the Synod subjoyned these Acclamations: We entreat m for the Fathers: [Let] the Fathers, who are of the same Sentiment with Leo, [be restored] to the Synod; The Fathers to the Synod: These words to the Emperour: These Supplications to The Orthodox, These Supplications to Augusta: We have all sinned: Let us all be pardoned. But the Clergy of the Constantinopolitane Church exclaimed [in these words,] They are but few who cry out: The Synod says not this. After whom, the Eastern Bishops cried out, The Egy∣gyptian to Banishment. But the Illyricians ex∣claimed: We entreat [you,] have mercy upon all. After whom the Eastern Bishops cried out, The Egyptian to Banishment. And when the Illy∣ricians had made the same request which they had made before, the Clergy of Constantinople cried out: Dioscorus to Banishment: The Egyptian to Exile: The Heretick to Banishment. Christ hath deposed Dioscorus. After whom, the Illyricians and those Bishops of their partie [exclaimed,] We have all sinned; pardon all: Dioscorus to the Synod, Dioscorus to the Churches. And when such like words as these had preceded, this Session was ended. At the Session after this, when the Senate had made an Interlocution, that the De∣crees which had already been n given forth should be recited, Constantinus the Secretary read these express words out of a Sche∣dule.

We perceive, that a more exact scrutiny concerning the Orthodox and Catholick Faith ought to be made to morrow, when the Synod will be more compleat and full. But, in regard Flavianus of Pious Memory, and the most Religious Bishop Eusebius (from a search made into the Acts and Decrees, and also from their testimony by word of mouth who presi∣ded in the Synod then convened; who have con∣fessed that they have erred, and have deposed them without cause, when they had in no wise erred in the Faith:) have, as 'tis evidently known, been unjustly deposed: it appears to us (agreeable to that which is acceptable unto God,) to be just, (provided it shall please our most Divine and most Pious Lord,) that Dioscorus the most Religious Bishop of Alexandria, Juvenalis the most Religious Bishop of Jerusalem, Thalassius the most Religious Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Eusebius the most Religious Bishop of Ancyra, Eu∣stathius the most Religious Bishop of Berytus, and Basilius the most Religious Bishop of Seleu∣cia in Isauria, which [Prelates] had power, and presided over the then Synod, should lye under the very same punishment, [and] accor∣ding to the Canons be removed from the Episco∣pall dignity: all things which have been conse∣quently done being made known † to his most sa∣cred Imperial Majesty.

Then, after the reading of some other things, the Bishops assembled were asked, whether Leo's Letter agreed with the Faith of the Three hun∣dred and eighteen Holy Fathers convened at Nice, and with that of the Hundred and fifty [Holy Fathers assembled] in the Imperiall City [Constantinople;] whereto Anatolius Pre∣late of Constantinople and all the Bishops present returned answer, that Leo's Letter agreed with the foresaid Holy Fathers: and o he subscribed to the forementioned Letter of Leo. These things having procee∣ded thus, those of the Synod cried out, We all consent, We do all approve, We all be∣lieve a like, We all think the same things, We all believe thus. [Let] the Fathers [be re∣stored] to the Synod, [Let] those who have sub∣scribed [be restored] to the Synod: Many years to the Emperour: Many years † to Augusta. The Fathers to the Synod, those of the same Faith to the Synod: many years to the Emperour: those of the same Sentiments to the Synod: many years to the Emperour. We have all subscribed to the

Faith: as Leo, so we think After this an In∣terlocution was made [by the Judges,] in these express words: We have given a Relation con∣cerning these things to our most divine and most pious Lord, and we expect the answer of his piety. But your Reverence shall render an account to God, as well concerning Dioscorus who hath been deposed by You, (his Imperiall Majesty and we being ignorant thereof,) as p concerning those [other] five persons for whom you have entreated, and concer∣ning all other matters which have been transacted in the Synod. [Hereupon they all] cried out, saying, God hath de∣posed Dioscorus: Dioscorus hath been justly deposed, Christ hath deposed Dioscorus. Then after these things, an answer being brought from Marcianus, which gave the Bishops permission to de∣termine according to their own discretion concerning the persons who had been deposed, in such manner as the Judges have declared by an Interlocution; [the Bishops] made their request, saying these express words: We entreat that they may come in. [Let] those of the same opinion [be re∣stored] to the Synod: those of the same Senti∣ments, to the Synod: those who have subscribed to Leo's Letter, to the Synod. Which persons, after an Interlocution, were admitted into the number of the Synod. And after this, the Sup∣plicatory Libells, which had been presented by the Bishops of the Aegyptick Dioecesis to the Em∣perour Marcianus, were read; wherein, besides other matters these things were contained: Our Sentiments are the same with those expositions which the Three hundred and eighteen [Holy Fathers] set forth at Nicaea, and [with those embraced by] the blessed Athanasius, and Cy∣rillus of Holy Memory: We Anathematize every Heresie, that of Arius, that of Eunomius, of Manes, of Nestorius, and that of those who assert, that the Flesh of our Lord is from heaven, and not from the Holy Theotocos, and Ever-Virgin Mary; whom [we affirm] to be like to us all, [but] without sin. Then, all [the Bishops] present in the Synod cried out, saying: Why do they not Anathematize Eutyches's opinion? Let them subscribe to Leo's Letter, and Anathe∣matize Eutyches and his Opinions: Let them give their assent to Leo's Letter: they are de∣sirous to impose upon us and be gone. Here∣to the Bishops of Egypt returned answer, that there were many Bishops in Egypt, and that 'twas impossible [for them] to represent the † per∣sons of those who were absent: and they requested, that the Synod would expect their Arch-Bishop, to the end that (according as Custome requi∣red,) they might follow his Opinion. For [they said,] that if they should do any thing before the ‖ Election of their Arch-Bishop, all persons of the whole Egyptick Dioecesis would fall up∣on them. And when they had made many en∣treaties concerning these things, and those of the Synod had vigorously resisted them; by an Inter∣locution 'twas ordered, that an intervall should be granted to the Bishops of Egypt, till such time as an Arch-Bishop could be ordained over them. And after this, were presented Sup∣plicatory Libells of some Monks, the sum of which was this, that they might in no wise be forced to subscribe † to certain Papers, q till such time as the Synod (which the Empe∣rour had ordained to be convened,) should meet, and take cognizance of those things which had been Decreed. After the recitall of these [Li∣bells,] Diogenes Bishop of Cyz••cus declared that ••arsumas, one of those persons who were come into the Councill, had murdered Flavianus: for, that he had cried out kill him. And that, although he was not named in the Libells, yet (contrary to what was right and fitting,) he had gotten entrance [into the Councill.] Whereat all the Bishops exclaimed, Bar∣sumas hath ruined all Syria, he hath brought a thousand Monks against us. And when an Interlocution had been made, that the [Monks] who were come together should expect the Synod's determi∣nation; the Monks requested, that the Libells composed by them might be read: part whereof was this, that Dioscorus and those Bishops with him might be present at the Synod. At the hearing whereof, all the Bishops ex∣claimed. Anathema to Dioscorus: Christ hath deposed Dioscorus: thrust these persons out of doors: take away the injury of the Synod: re∣move the Force of the Synod: [Relate] these words to the Emperour: remove the Injury of the Synod: take away the disgrace of the Synod. In opposition to whom the Monks cried out, re∣move the injury of the Monasteries. And when the same exclamations had been made again by the Synod, 'twas ordered by an Interlocution, that the rest of the Libells should be recited. In which 'twas affirmed, that Dioscorus's deposi∣tion had not been duely and orderly made, and that, the Faith being proposed, he ought to be admitted to the Session of the Synod. And un∣less this were done, they would shake their gar∣ments, [and recede] from the Communion of those Bishops who were convened. After the Recitall of these words, Aetius the Arch-Deacon read the Canon concerning those who separated themselves [from Communion.] And again, when the Monks were divided at the questions [put to them] by the most Holy Bishops, and afterwards, at the interrogatory of Aetius the Arch-Deacon made as from the Synod; and when some of them Anathematized Nestorius and Eu∣tyches, and others refused to do that: an Inter∣locution was made by the Judges [who decla∣red,] that the Supplicatory Libells of Faustus and the other Monks should be read; wherein they requested of the Emperour, that those Monks should not have any further Countenance shown them, who had lately appeared in opposition to Or∣thodox Sentiments: amongst whom, one Doro∣theus •• Monk had termed Eutyches Orthodox. Against him diverse questions concerning Euty∣ches's Doctrine were proposed by the Judges. After this, when the Fifth Session was begun, the Judges by an Interlocution declared, that what had been determined concerning the Faith, should be promulged. Then Asclepiades a Deacon of Constantinople, read the Determination, which they were pleased not to have inserted into the Acts. Against which [Determination] some made opposition; but more consented to it. And when Exclamations had been made on the one

side and on the other, the Judges said, that Dio∣scorus affirmed he had therefore deposed Flavia∣nus, because he asserted there were two Natures: but, that the Determination ran thus, of two Natures. To which Anatolius made answer, that Dioscorus had not been deposed on account of the Faith; but because he had excommunicated Leo, and having been thrice summoned, had not appeared. Then r the Judges desired, that the words in Leo's Letter might be inserted into the definition [of the Faith:] which having been denied by the Bishops (who said that another definition [of the Faith] could not be made, for that was compleat and perfect;) these things were related to the Emperour. And he ordered six of the Eastern Bishops, and three of the Pontick [Di∣oecesis,] and three of A∣sia, and three of Thracia, and three of Illyricum, (A∣natolius and the Deputies of the Romish See being al∣so present,) to meet in the Church [of Euphemia,] and there rightly to deter∣mine matters in relation to the Faith; or at least, that every one of them should set forth his own Faith; which if they did not, they were to know, that a Synod should be convened in the West. And being asked to declare, whether they would follow Dioscorus who asserted [Christ to consist] OF TWO [Natures,] or Leo [who affirmed] TWO [Natures] IN Christ, they cried out that they s believed [agreeable to] Leo: but, that those who made opposition were Eu∣tychianists. And when the Judges had said, that t according to Leo's Opinion [there ought] to be added [in the definition of the Faith, these words] two natures united, u inconvertible, and undivided, and inconfused in Christ; [the Bi∣shops entreated them to go into the Oratory of the Holy Euphemia's Church.] vv And when the Judges had entred into the foresaid Oratory, together with Anatolius and the Deputies of Leo, with Maximus also of Antioch, and Juvenalis of Jerusalem, and Thalassius of Caesarea in Cap∣padocia, and with the other [Bishops;] and when [some little time after] they had gone out from thence, the definition [of the Faith] was read, the Contents whereof were these: Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and so forth, which we have inserted above into our History. And when they had all cried out; This is the Faith of the Fathers, Let the Metropolitans now sub∣scribe; This is the Faith of the Apostles; We all follow this Faith; We all think thus: the ••udges made an Interlocution in these words: Those matters which have been defined by the Fathers, and which please all persons, shall be Re∣lated † to his Imperial Majesty. But, at the Sixth Session, the Emperour [Marcianus] came [to the Councill,] and made a Speech to the Bi∣shops concerning Concord. And ‖ after an Inter∣locution of the Emperour's, the definition [of the Faith] was read by Aetius Arch-Deacon of Con∣stantinople, and all subscribed to the definition. Then the Emperour asked, whether the definition were composed by the unanimous consent of them all: and they all confirmed it with joyfull accla∣mations. Again, the Emperour made two Speeches [to the Bishops,] which were followed with the joy∣full acclamations of them all. After this by the Em∣perour's perswasion the Canons were written, and x to [the City of] the Chalcedonensians were given Metropoliticall Rights and Priviledges.

And the Emperour commanded the Bishops to stay three or four days, and that every one should propose [questions] concerning what he had a mind to, in the presence of the Judges; and that all things should be ended by a convenient and fit determination▪ Thus this Convention was finished. There was y another [Session] also, wherein other Canons were made. And again, at ano∣ther Session, Juvenalis and Maximus made an agreement, and it seemed good, that the [Bishop] of Antioch should have the two Phoenicia's, and Arabia; and the [Bishop] of Jerusalem the three Palestines [Sub∣ject to his See.] And after an Interlocution of the Judges and▪ Bishops, they confirmed [this agreement.] And at the z ninth Session Theo∣doret's Cause was discussed. Who had Anathe∣matized Nestorius, in these words; Anathema to Nesto∣rius, and to him who denies the Holy Virgin Mary to be Theotocos, and to him who divides the one Only-begotten Son into two Sons: moreover, I have subscribed to the defi∣nition of the Faith, and to Leo's Epistle. After an In∣terlocution therefore made by them all, he recovered his own See. In another Session, Ibas's Cause was examined, and those things were read which had been transacted and pronounced against him; the Judges whereof were Photius Bishop of Tyre, and Eustathius Bishop of Berytus. And Sentence was deferred to the following [Session.] At the Eleventh Con∣vention, when many of the Bishops had voted Ibas to a be restored to his Bishoprick, some Bishops opposed it, and said, that his Accusers were without, and they requested that they might be ordered to come in. Those things therefore were read which had been transacted against Ibas. And when the Judges by an Interiocu∣tion had given order, that the Acts at Ephesus against Ibas should be read; the Bishops said, that all things which had been done, at the Second Ephesine Synod, were void and null; except only the ordination of Maximus [Bishop] of An∣tioch. And they made a request to the Empe∣rour concerning this matter, that by a Law he would decree, that nothing of those things [which had been done] at Ephesus after the First Synod (over which Cyrillus of Blessed memory, Pre∣late of Alexandria, had presided;) should be valid. And Ibas had his Bishoprick adjudged to him. At another Action, the Cause of Bassi∣anus Bishop of Ephesus was discussed; and 'twas Decreed, b that as well he, as Stephanus, should be deposed, and another Substituted in their room. And at another Session, the same thing was put to the Vote and confirmed. In the Thirteenth Action, the Cause between Eunomius [Bishop] of Ni∣comedia, and Anastasius Bishop of Nicaea was in∣quired into, who were at strife amongst themselves concerning their own Cities. Moreover, there was a Fourteenth Action, wherein the Cause of c Sabinianus [the Bishop] was examined. And in fine, it was determined, that the Constantino∣politane-See should have precedency immediately after that of Rome.

The End.

Notes

• Or, de∣claring his Empire.
• †

  Or, dis∣course.
• Or, he was crow∣ned with.
• a

  Instead of [Patriscus] it must be Priscus, which is the reading in the Tellerian M. S. and in Nicephorus book 15. This is the Priscus, out of whose books of History we have the Excerptae Legationes, •• Vales.
• Or, endeavouring.
• Or, par∣doned, or, forgave.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Musculus has ren∣dred it well, thus, ut in eo militiae no∣men daret, that he might list, [or, enter] himself a Souldier therein. Not that the term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 does exact∣ly import the same with no∣men dare, to list, or, enter, or, enroll. For, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 does pro∣perly signi∣fie, to desire and to sue for. So Dionys. Halicarnasseus, about the close of his 11^th book, uses this phrase, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to sue for an office. But, Appian usually words it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And so does the Old Author in Suidas, in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Now, Candidates, when they sued for an office, were wont nomen suum profiteri, to tell their name and be inrolled. Johannes Langus renders it, Militare Sacramentum di∣cere, to say the Military Oath. Which Version I disprove of. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the album militare, the Muster-Roll, wherein the names of all the Souldiers were registred. Vegetius, book 2. chap. 5. terms it Matriculam, the List of Souldiers. Evagrius uses 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this sense, hereafter in this chapter; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they registred Marcianus (who was likewise cal∣led Augustus) in the Muster-Roll. Further, the names of the Souldiers were inserted into the Muster-Roll, before they had said the Oath; as Vegetius attests in the forequoted place. Candidus Isaurus makes use of the same term, in his first book Histor▪ where his words concer∣ning Leo are these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who was of that Dacia in Illyricum; having been registred in a Military Company. Vales.
• c

  The words of Procopius, which Evagrius points to here, were heretofore extant in the first book of his Vandalicks. But now they are wanting in the Augustane E∣dition, at pag. 96. For there is a defect in the Greek Text there, after these words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales.
• Or, Glo∣rification.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, those per∣sons that were em∣ployed in the an∣swers, &c.
• †

  Or, the determina∣tion of Or∣thodoxy.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, The de∣fender of the Empe∣rours per∣son, or, his Protectour. Chrysaphius is thus ter∣med by Priscus Rhetor, in his Excerpt. Legationum. The Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle calls him Spatharius, which we may render Esquire of the Emperours body. He is termed Spatharius also in Gestis de nomine Acacii, which Jacobus Sirmondus hath set forth. Vales.
• b

  Theophanes in his Chronicon relates that Theodosius Junior, who then made his Residence at Chalcedon, by the impulse of Chrysaphius commanded Flavianus, (newly ordained Bishop of Constantinople,) that for his ordination he should send him the Eulogiae, [that is, the Loaves of Benediction, or, pieces of the Blessed bread, See Socrat. book 7. chap. 12. note (b;) and also Meur••ius's Glossary, at the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] And when Flavianus had sent white loaves, in the name of a Benediction, Chrysaphius made answer, that the Emperour demanded golden Eulogiae. In answer to which Flavianus wrote back, that he had no money which he could send, unless instead of money he should present him with the sacred Vessels of the Church. And this thing, as Theophanes says, raised a deadly grudge between Chry∣saphius and Flavianus. Vales.
• Or, by pious Let∣ters.
• c

  Zacharias Rhetor wrote an Ecclesia∣stick Hi∣story from the begin∣ning of the Emperour Marcia∣nus's Reign (as it may be con∣jectured from this place,) un∣till the Reign of Anastasius. But, he wrote not with since∣rity and modera∣tion (as an History ought to be written,) but was corrupted with favour and hatred, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with affection and partiality, as Evagrius says. Evagrius attests the same concerning him, in book 3. chap. 7. And in chap. 18. of his third book, he accuses the same Zacharias of negligence. Vales.
• d

  In the Florentine M. S. the reading of this place is more entire, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And we have rendred it accordingly. Vales. In Robert Stephens Edition, the words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, out of Exile] are wanting.
• Or, hill.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which words Va∣lesius ren∣ders thus: serenitate renidentia, shining, or, glistering by reason of their calm∣ness.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; it sig∣nifies shells, or, sand full of little stones.
• ‖

  Court, or, Courtyard.
• a

  I have mended this place from the Florentine M. S. after this man∣ner; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, almost a∣like. Ne∣vertheless, Nicephorus has followed the vulgar reading, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Tellerian M. S. I found it written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, inform of a Cupolo. or Cuppolo; as the Italians now term it. Harpocration (in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) tells us, that the place where the Prytanes (who were a sort of Magistrates amongst the Athenians) eat, was termed Tholus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (continues he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but by some 'tis termed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (that is, an Arbour) because 'tis built round, in that form, like an hat with an high round crown.
• c

  'Tis strange that Translatours should not have perceived the fault of this place: for what can the sense be of these words; Sub his columnis tabulatum est sublime, &c. vnder these pillars there is an high chamber, &c, according as Christophorson has rendred it? Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, under these] it must undoubtedly be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, over these; which is the reading in Nicephorus; his words are these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. which Langus renders thus: Super quibus porticus (ublimis eâdem sub Testudine constructa est, ••ver which [pillars] there is an high Gallery built under the same Roof. Vales.
• Or, upper-Room.
• d

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Langus and Christophor∣son render it Sacra∣rium, a Ve∣stry, or lit∣tle Chap∣pell. Mus∣culus tran∣slates it adytum, a secret place in a Church to which few have access. Which I approve not of. I have ra∣ther ren∣dred it tu∣mulum, a Tomb, or Monument. For that is the import of the term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Hesychius and Suidas do attest. But, by a Tomb, or Monument, I mean a place fen∣ced in with Barrs made lattise▪wise, in the midst whereof was that silver-chest where∣in the Reliques of the holy Martyr Euphemia were deposited. For, that it was so, is apparent from Evagrius's following words. Vales.
• e

  Instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Macra, I think it should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Arke. Truly, I do not see what sense there can be in the vul••••r reading; in regard 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifie the same; nor is it a proper name, but an adjective. 'Tis better therefore to read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Arke. Some persons, says Evagrius, term the Martyrs Che••••, Arcam, the Arke. For so the Latines term it. The Old Glosses render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, arca ••unebris, an arke, or chest, for the dead. Vales.
• f

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Translatours understood not this place. Musculus and Christophorson made it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. For Musculus renders it thus: Ut circa templum ad honorem ejus jucundentur prae∣cipit, and orders them that in honour of her they should be merry about the Temple. And Christophorson translates it thus: Jubet ut in ipso templo festum deliciis, & opiparis epulis celebrent, she order•• that in the very Church they should celebrate a feast with dainties and sumptuous banquets. But, Evagrius's following words do altogether refute this emendation. For, he adds not one word at this place, which may in any wise belong to luxury or delicious food. Nicephorus has indeed retained the vulgar reading: but has explained it ill, thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: that is, as Langus has ren∣dred it, ut miraculorum talium fructum perciperent, est cohortata, she exhorteth them, that they should freely partake of the fruit of such mi∣racles. But Nicephorus added these words of his own head; nor has he comprehended Evagrius's meaning; in regard Evagrius speaks not here of more miracles, but of one only miracle, to wit, the bloud flowing out of the Tomb of the holy Martyr. I have followed the ordinary reading, and have explained this place in the simple and obvious sense concerning the making of a Vintage. Which agrees exactly with Evagrius's following words. For the bloud, which in a most plentifull manner was press't out of the blessed Martyrs reliques, was not unlike wine, which is squeezed out of prest grapes. Besides, the Festivall day of the holy Euphemia sell on the time of Vintage, to wit, on the sixteenth of September, as we are informed from the Greek Menologie. Vales.
• g

  I am of the same opinion with Learned men, who instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, But moreover] have long since altered the reading, and made it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 There is, &c. Which emendation is confirmed by the Tel∣lerian Manuscript, and by Nicephorus. Further, Langus renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which is the term here used,) fenestellam, a little win∣dow: Christophorson translates it transennam, a Loup, or, Casement. I (as Musculus has done,) had rather render it foramen, an hole. For Sozomen terms it thus, book. 9. chap. 2. where I have made more remarkes concerning such little windows as these, which were made in the Capsae [chests wherein were laid the Re∣liques] of the Martyrs. Vales.
• Or, which things are magnifi∣cently cele∣brated.
• †

  Or, re∣quire.
• ‖

  Or, cuts in sunder.
• Or, ex∣posed, or, obvious.
• †

  Or, he is filled with.
• ‖

  Or, which is gathered.
• h

  The term [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Re∣liques] is wanting in the Kings, the Florentine, and Tellerian Manuscripts, and likewise in Robert Stephens's Edition. Nor have the Geneva-Printers done well, who from Christophorson's books put this word in here, whereas it is in no wise necessary at this place, nor is it confirmed by the testimony of any written copy. For, those various readings which are pro∣duced from Christophorson's books, are for the most part nothing else but the conjectures of learned men. This whole passage therefore ought to be written as 'tis read in the Tellerian and Florentine Manu∣scripts; to wit thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which of it self demonstrates the [virtue and] power of those things that produce it. And so Nicephorus read: for he has exprest this place of Evagrius thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which gives an indication of the power of that thing which pro∣duceth it.
• a

  This whole Pre∣face, as far as these words al∣ways Au∣gusti, is wanting in the Kings, and Flo∣rentine, and Tellerian Manu∣scripts. Christophorson was the first that put in these words, from the Acts of the Chalced•••• Councill; notwithstanding, they seem not at all necessary at this place. Vales. The said Pre∣face is wanting in Stephens's, Edition; where also, instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Eusebius, the rea∣ding is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, concer∣ning Eusebius.]
• b

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to those who perform the Priesthood,] it must without doubt be written [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to those who are reckoned amongst the Ecclesiasticks;] as the reading is in the first Action of the Chalcedon Councill, where this supplicatory Libell of Bishop▪ Eusebius to the Emperour Mar∣cianus is recorded. Vales.
• c

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is worshipped▪] I doubt not but E∣vagrius wrote, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you worship. 'Tis certain in the first Action of the Chalcedon Coun∣cill, the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, worshipping. Which though it be corrupt, nevertheless confirms our emendation. Vales.
• Or, the things un∣der the Sun.
• 'Tis Iro∣nically spoken.
• †

  Or, found.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of an holy character, or, name.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. See Socrat. book. 7. chap. 36. note (b.)
• †

  Or, for∣med, or, made up in∣to, &c.
• ‖

  Or, with∣in those things agi∣tated at Chalcedon.
• Or, de∣tected.
• d

  This is the sen∣tence, which the most mag∣nificent Judges who were present at the Chalcedon Councill, pronounc't af∣ter an hearing of the Cause: which sentence is recorded in the very same words, in the first Action of the Chalcedon Councill. pag. 152. Edit. Bin. Notwithstanding, 'tis a wonder to me, that Christophorson had not seen this, who has confused and disturbed all things at this place in such a manner, that you can extract nothing of sound sense from his version. That which disturbed him, was his seeing the Secular Magistrates in a Councill of Bishops and their pronouncing sentence as Judges. But Christophorson ought to have considered, that those Magistrates concerned not themselves in the Cause of the Faith, but le••t the Bishops a free right and power of determining concerning that matter. Indeed, at such time as the Rule of Faith was drawn up by the Bishops convened at Chalcedon, these very Magistrates, who before had often moved the Councill that the might be done, would not be present at the Session of Bishops. But in the business between Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum and Dioscorus of Alexandria, in which affair nothing was treated of concerning the Faith, but con∣cerning violence, fraud, and other crimes: in this business, I say, the Secular Magistrates had a right to pronounce sentence. Which nevertheless was not a definitive sentence, but an Interlocution only, as 'tis apparent from the Acts of the Councill. Vales.
• e

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the first Action of the Chal∣cedon Councill, the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, more perfect and compleat. In the compen••ium of the Acts of this Synod, which Evagrius has sub∣joyned at the close of this book, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The reading in the Florent. and Tellerian Manuscripts at this place is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales. In Robert Stephens, the reading is the same with that at the beginning of this note.
• f

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Bishop of Armonia▪ The same fault occurs in the Compendium of the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill, which is extant at the end of this book. Notwith∣standing, 'tis manifest, that it must be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of Ancyra, agreeable to the reading in the first Action of the Chalcedon Councill. Vales. In Robert Stephens the reading is [of Armenia.]
• Or, made strangers to.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to the divine ••eight••.
• ‖

  Or, pro∣nounced sentence.
• g

  This sentence pronounc't by the Deputies of the Apostolick See, is extant in the third Action of the Chalcedon Councill, pag. 192. Vales.
• Diosco∣rus's.
• †

  Dioscorus.
• h

  In the third Action of the Chal∣cedon-Coun∣cill, this place is o∣therwise read, to wit, thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the most Holy Churches over the whole world have been tempted, or tryed. Vales.
• i

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c] in the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill, the reading is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.] Vales.
• k

  These words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of judging, or, of judgment,] are wan∣ting in the Kings, in the Tellerian, and in the Florentine Manuscripts; and they are put into the Geneva Edition, from Christophorson's books. They occur indeed in the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill; but to me they seem not very necessary. Vales. In Rob. Stephens's Edition, they are wanting.
• Or, se∣cond.
• †

  See chap. 18. note (x.)
• Or, hath estranged him.
• l

  In the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill, the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, will Decree. Which in my judgment is right. For the future tense is in this place put for the Imperative mood. For, whereas the Legates of the Apostolick See do here speak to the Synod, they would not use the Imperative; because it seems more arrogant. They made use therefore of the future tense, as being the softer and more modest mode of expression. Notwith∣standing, The old Translatour of the Chalcedon Council has rendred it in the Imperative mood. In Nic••phorus, book 15. chap. 30. the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Vales. In Robert Stephens's Edition, and in the Greek Text here, the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, doth Decree; which perhaps is the ••ruer reading.
• m

  This definition of the Faith is contained in the Fifth Action of the Chalcedon-Synod. 'Tis ex∣tant also in Nicephorus, book 15. chap. 6. Vales.
• Jo. 14. 27.
• †

  Or, opi∣nions.
• That is, the Con∣stantino∣politane Creed▪ at the drawing up whereof there were 150 Fathers. See Socrat▪ book 5. c. 9.
• n

  The word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ene∣mies] is wanting in the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill: and the reading of this whole place is thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Those who attempt to reject and abrogate the Preaching of the Truth by their, &c. Which rea∣ding seems to me far better. Vales.
• Or, bred, or, brought forth.
• Or, stop up.
• †

  Or, Preaching.
• ‖

  That is, the Nicen•• Creed.
• Or, fight against.
• o

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, do reproach [so] im∣pudently] it must doubtless be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, do rave [so] impudently;] agreeable to the reading in the Florentine M. S. and in the Acts of the Chalcedon▪ Synod. Vales.
• p

  The rea∣ding here▪ and in Ni∣cephorus is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Which Letter agrees with the confession of the Great Pe∣ter, &c. But, the contexture of the words does necessarily require, that we should read thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. in regard it agrees &c. and so 'tis written in the Acts of the Chalcedon-Synod. Vales.
• Or, re∣sists.
• q

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Acts of the Chalcedon Synod, this place is worded otherwise, to wit, in this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, To confess our Lord Je∣sus Christ [to be] one and the same Son, with one consent we do all teach and declare. Which reading seems to me to be far the truer. Vales.
• Or, known.
• †

  Or, runs together in∣to one, &c.
• Or, e∣stranged from.
• †

  Or, ali∣enated from the Clergy.
• ‖

  Removed, or, put to flight.
• Or, re∣called.
• †

  Constan∣tinople. ••
• ‖

  Or, in re∣gard it was the second after the el∣der Rome.
• Or, was condemned to dwell at, &c.
• a

  I have restored this place from the Florentine Manu∣script; to which a∣grees Ni∣cephorus, book 15. chap. 8. Christo∣phorson had mended it very ill, thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that the Praefect of Thebaïs came at that time to Alexandria. But, the Province of Thebaïs was not governed by a Praefect; but by a President, as we are informed from the Notitia Imperii Romani. Besides, Priscus Rhetor says not, that the Governour of the Province of Thebaïs, but that he himself came then to Alexandria. Priscus had indeed been long conver∣sant in the Province Thebaïs, with Maximinus the Commander, whose Councellour and Assessour he was, when he waged war against the Nubae and Blemmyae, as himself informs us in his Excerpt, Legationum. In the Tellerian Manuscript, I found this place written thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, came by Alexandria from the Province of Thebaïs. But I should rather write it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. came to Alexandria out of the Province of Thebais. Vales. In Robert Stephens the reading here is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• b

  Nicephorus has added some passages here concerning Serapis's Temple, which are sufficiently profound, and which I remember not to have read any where else. Therefore I conjecture, that Nicephorus wrote these passages out of Priscus Rhetor's History, which then was extant entire. Vales. See Nicephorus's Eccles. Histor. book 15. chap. 8.
• c

  Of this Florus (who was Praefectus Augustalis and also Dux of Egypt,) Jordanes has made mention in his book De Successione Regnorum, where he writes thus concerning the Emperour Marcianus: Nobades Blemmyesque Aethiopia pr••olapsos, &c. He appeased the No∣bades and the Blemmyes, (who had fallen down from Aethiopia,) by Florus Procurator of the City Alexandria, and drove them from the Territories of the Romans. This Florus had succeeded Theodorus the Augustalis, as we are informed from Liberatus's Breviarium, chap. 14. Under whom Proterius is ordained Bishop, and that Sedition (which Evagrius describes here,) was raised at Alexandria, in the year of Christ 452. On account of which Sedition▪ whenas the publick [al∣lowance of] bread-corn, (which was wont to be delivered out to the Alexandrians,) the Baths also, and Shows, by the Emperour's order had been taken from the Inhabitants of Alexandria; the multitude mer to∣gether in the Cirque, and entreated Florus the Praefectus Augustalis, who was come to Alexandria a little before this, that these things might be restored to them. Therefore, this hapned on the year of Christ 453. Vales.
• d

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. To the Ci∣tizens of A∣lexandria, as well as to those of Rome and Constanti∣nople, Loaves of bread were every day delivered out; as we are infor∣med from the four∣teenth book of the The∣odosian Code, Tit. De Fru∣mento A∣lexandrino. But who had been the Begin∣ner of this thing, 'tis uncertain. Diocletian was the first [Em∣perour] who bestowed the Pa••is Castrensis [the Camp-bread] upon the Alexandrians, as the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle relates at Constantius Caesar's and Maximianus Jovius Caesar's fourth Cousu∣late; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (says he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, on this year the Panis Castrensis was given at Alexandria by Diocletian. Which passage occurs in the very same words in the Chronologicall Excerptions set forth by Scaliger at the end of Eusebius's Chronicon. Procopius (in his Anecdot. pag. 119.) says this Bread-corn was allowed by Diocletian to the poor only of the City Alexandria. Which when the Citizens of that City had in after times divided amongst themselves, they then transmitted it to their posterity. Procopius's words are these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Diocletian having been made Emperour of the Romans, Decreed, that a vast quantity of Bread-corn should every year be given by the people to the indigent Alexandrians. The people having at that time quarrelled amongst their own selves about this [Bread-corn,] transmitted it to their descendants even to this day. In which words of Procopius's there is a very great fault, which Nicolaus Alemannus (a person otherwise of incomparable Learning) perceived not. For instead of these words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the people,] it must undoubtedly be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, out of the publick stock of Corn laid up for the Emperours use.] And, a little after, instead of these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the people having at that time quarrelled amongst themselves about this Bread-corn;] it must be thus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the people having at that time privately given this [Bread-corn] amongst their own selves.] Than which emendation there is nothing more certain. Further, long before Diocletian, to wit, in the times of Dionysius Alexandrinus, the Omogerontes of the City Alexandria received Bread-corn out of the publick stock, as Dionysius Alexandrinus informs us in his Epistle to Hierax the Bishop; which Letter Eusebius records, Eccles. Hist. book 7. chap. 21; where see note (e.) There∣fore Diocletianus augmented, rather than began, this distribution of Bread-corn at Alexandria. Vales.
• e

  Translatours understood not this place, as 'tis apparent from their Versions. For they thought that the word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, his] was to be referred to Florus; when as it ought to be referred to Priscus Rhetor, out of whose History Evagrius has transcribed all these pas∣sages. For, Priscus Rhetor, in regard he was then conversant at Alexandria, gave Florus this advice, that he should go to the Cirque; in which place the Alexandrian populace were gathered together, and with great out▪ cries required Florus to come thither. Vales.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the whole society of Monks.
• f

  Christophorson has rendred this place ill, after this manner: in sancto die festo Resurrectionis, Theodosium designant Episcopum, on the Holy Festival day of the Resurrection, they choose Theodosius Bishop. Musculus renders it righter, thus, ordinarunt in Ecclesiâ Sanctae Resur∣rectionis, Theodosium illum, &c. in the Church of the Holy Resurrection, they ordained that Theodosius, &c. Concerning this Church of the Holy Resurrection I have made several remarks in my Notes on En∣sebius's Life of Constantine. [See Valesius's Letter to a friend, De Anastasi & Martyrio Hierosolymitano, which Letter he has published at pag. 304. of his notes on Eusebius.] But, concerning this Theodosius, who invaded the See of Jerusalem, consult Baronius at the year of Christ 452. Vales.
• g

  Instead of Aclison, it must without doubt be Alcison▪ a•• the reading is in Nice∣phorus. These Let∣ters of the Monks of Palestine to Alcison, are recor∣ded by E∣vagrius, book 3. chap. 31. At which place we will say more con∣cerning Alcison. Vales.
• h

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. S^r Henry Sa∣vil had made this remark at the side of his Copy, fortè 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, perhaps it should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, by. So, 'tis certain, Christo. phorson and Musculus read; and so we have rendred it. I am very confident also, that Evagrius wrote it thus. But, Transcribers of books are wont frequent∣ly to mistake in these two praepositions, as 'tis known to those persons who have read over Manuscript copies. Vales.
• i

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he had received Dioscorus. S^r Henry Savil had made a remark at the margin of his Copy, that perhaps the reading should be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he had laid hands upon,] which reading displeases me not. Nevertheless, I had rather write it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Which reading I have followed in my Ver∣sion. Nor does Nicephorus (book 15. chap. 9.) seem to have read otherwise, who has exprest this passage in Evagrius thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and had been an enemy to Dio∣scorus at Alexandria. But Musculus and Christophorson saw nothing in the rendition of this place. Vales.
• k

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. I have corrected this place by the Florentine Manuscript, in which Copy 'tis read thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, To this person came [the Inhabitants of] many Cities in the Palestines. It had been so agreed between the Bishops of Antioch and Jerusalem in the Synod of Chalcedon, that the Three Pale∣stines should be under the disposition of the Bishop of Jerusalem. Vales.
• l

  Evagrius means the Praepositions 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, [that is, in and of,] which differ one from the other in one Letter. The Catholicks confest Christ in two Natures. The Hereticks asserted, that he consisted of two Natures, but, which had grown together and were become one Nature. For, after the Union of the Word, they affirmed, that the Nature of Christ was one. Vales.
• m

  I am of the same opinion with the Learned, who instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,] have mended it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the pronoun∣cing; which is the same with the reading in Nicephorus. And so Christophorson read; who notwithstanding, in the rendition of this place, has in no wise exprest Evagrius's meaning. In the Telle∣rian Manuscript, I found it written, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the pronouncing▪ Vales.
• n

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, [confessing] is to be expunged, in regard 'tis superfluous. It occurs not in Nicephorus, and S^r Henry Savil, in his Copy, had drawn a line under it. Vales.
• Or, pas∣sing into.
• †

  Or, not relinquish't by the other.
• ‖

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which may also be rendred, according to a peculiar mode of expression: but 'tis an uncouth phrase, not often to be met with, especial∣ly in such a sense as 'tis here used.
• Or, about their opi∣nion of God.
• Or, a scarcity of showers of rain.
• The Fa∣mine and the Pesti∣lence.
• Or, pro∣ceeded on.
• †

  Or, in a miserable manner re∣moves from amongst men.
• Or, in∣exorable.
• †

  Or, Li∣bya.
• Or, his saith.
• †

  Or, On••∣richus.
• Constan∣tinople.
• a

  After Va∣lentinianus Placidus's death, and after the murder of Maximus, Avitus was pro∣claimed Emperour, first at Tolouse, and then at Orlcance, in Valen∣tinianus's eighth Consulate [which he bore] with Anthemius, in the year of Christ 455, on the sixth of the Ides of July; as 'tis re∣corded in the Old Chronicon, which Cuspinianus first published in his Fasti. On the year following, the same Avitus was Consul, as 'tis related in the Fasti which Jacobus Sirmondus has publish't under the name of Idatius: and on the same year he was deposed at Placentia, as Marius and Cassiodorus inform us in their Fasti, as likewise that Old Chronographer put forth by Cuspinianus. But, on what day, and in what month Avitus resigned the Empire, I do not find declared by the Ancients. Indeed, Sigonius (in his fourteenth book de Occi∣dentali Imperio,) writes, that Avitus resigned the Empire on the sixteenth of the Calends of June. But Sigonius quotes no Author of this thing. The words of Cuspinianus's Old Chronographer are these: Joanne & Varane Coss. captus est Imp. Avitus, &c. In the Consulate of Joannes and Varanes, the Emperour Avitus is taken at Placentia by Ricimeres master of the Milice. And his Patritius Messianus is slain, on the sixteenth of the Calends of June. From this place therefore Sigonius, induced thereto by conjectures, thought that Avitus had put off his purple, and that Messianus had been slain, on one and the same day; although the Old Chronographer affirms not that. For, that sixteenth of the Calends of June is referred to the murder of Messianus, not to Avitus's deposition. 'Tis certain, if what Evagrius relates here be true, (viz. that Avitus reigned eight months,) his deposition must necessarily fall on the month of March in the year 456. Idatius, in his Chronicon, seems to attribute three years Reign to Avitus. For, his words are these: Avitus tertio anno posteaquam à Gallis & à Got∣this factus suerat Imperator, caret Imperio, Gotthorum promisso destitu∣tus auxilio, caret & vitâ, Avitus on the third year after he had been made Emperour by the Galli and the Gotthi, wants his Empire, being disappointed of the promised assistance of the Gotthi, is deprived of his life also. But, in the Manuscript Copy, which Jacobus Sirmondus made use of, this place is read thus: Tertio anno, Avitus septimo mense posteaquam à Gallis & à Gotthis factus fuerat Imperator, &c. On the third year, Avitus on the seventh month after he had been made Emperour by the Galli and Gotthi, &c. Jacobus Sirmondus, perceiving that these two were inconsistent, omitted these two words [septimo mense, on the seventh month] in his Edition; but he had done better, if he had expunged these two [tertio anno, on the third year.] For Avitus did not reign three years, but seven or eight months only, which months were part of two Consulates. For which reason 'tis affirmed by some Writers, that he reigned two years. Cedrenus, 'tis certain, writes thus in his Chronicon. Vales.
• b

  Musculus and Chri∣stophorson read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the Pestilence. Which rea∣ding is in my judgment truer than the other, to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Famine. For, 'tis not probable, that Avitus (who after he had resigned the Empire, was made Bishop of Placentia, as Victor Tunonensis, and Marius in his Chronicon, do relate;) should have dyed by Famine. Notwithstanding, Nicephorus has retained the Vulgar reading. Vales. In Robert Stephens the reading is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Famine.]
• c

  Majorianus [or Majourinus] governed the Roman Empire four years and as many months, as the Old Chronographer publisht by Cus∣pinianus informs us▪ to whom agree Idatius and Marcellinus in his Chronicon. Severus, who succeeded him, reigned almost the same space of years, as the same writers relate. But these things hapned after the death of the Emperour Marcianus, during Leo Augustus's government of the Eastern Empire. Vales.
• a

  Evagrius is out. Marcianus Augustus dyed in the Consulate of Constantinus and Rusus, on the year of Christ 457, in the month Fe∣bruary. Majorianus was proclaimed Emperour at Ravenna in the same year, on the Calends of Aprill, that is, almost two months after Mar∣cianus's death. To whom succeeded Severus, on the year of Christ 461, in the Consulate of Severinus and Dagalaï••us, almost five years after the Emperour Marcianus's death. Further, this Severus was by ano∣ther name termed Serpentius, as Theophanes informs us in his Chronicon, pag. 97, in these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And Se∣verus, called also Serpentius, was Proclaimed. For so it must be read, as the most Learned Franciscus Combesisius has rightly conjectured. 'Tis certain, in the Alexandrian Chronicle he is so termed. For, on the fifteenth Indiction, Leo Augustus is put Consul the second time with Serpentinus. Now, 'tis manifestly known, that on this year Severus Augustus was Consul with Leo. For so Cassiodorus relates in his Fasti, and also the Old Authour publish't by Cuspini∣anus. Vales.
• b

  Marcianus reigned six years and as many months, as Marcellinus relates, and Victor Tunonensis in his Chronicon. He began his Reign in the year of Christ 450, on the eighth of the Calends of September, on the fifth Feria, as 'tis recorded in the Alexandrian Chronicle. And he dyed on the year of Christ 457. about the close of the month January, as Theodorus Lector informs us, with whom agrees the Au∣thor of the Alexandrian Chronicle. For this Authour says, that Leo, who succeeded Marcianus, was proclaimed in the month Peritius, on the seventh of the Ides of February. So Marcianus reigned six years five months and some few days. Vales.
• c

  Nicepho∣rus has in∣terlined this place after this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and having left his Em∣pire a mo∣nument to all men. Christo∣phorson followed the same sense, as 'tis appa∣rent from his rendi∣tion. For he tran∣slates it thus: Ex∣emplari ve∣rè Regio omnibus ad intuendum relicto, A truly Royall Exemplar being left [by him] to the view of all persons. Musculus has rendred it in this manner; Et memoriam sui verè Imperialem apud cunctos mortales reliquisset, And had left a truly Imperial memory of his own self amongst all mortalls. But Evagrius does not say this, but that a monument manifestly Royall was left by Marcianus amongst all men. Now, that monument can be nothing else, than either his own life religiously spent, or rather the Chalcedon Synod, which he had ordered to be convened, to take away the dissentions of the Church, and whereat he himself, agreeable to the Example of Constantine the Great, would be present. In regard there∣fore, that Synod had been convened and perfected by his labour and diligence, it may deservedly be stiled the Work and Monument of the Emperour Marcianus. Vales.
• d

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Florentine M. S. the reading is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Notwithstanding, the Rules of Grammar require that we should write 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as S^r Henry Savil had remarked at the margin of his Copy. Suidas in his Lexicon explains 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by these terms, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, promiscuous, extraneous per∣sons, such as are brought in unawares.—Nicophorus has explained this word elegantly thus▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a numerous multitude, and which comes from any place whatever. Vales.
• e

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Something seems to be wanting here, which may perhaps be supplyed, by adding a Praeposition, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, breaks out into violence and rage. Vales.
• f

  In the incomparable Florentine and Tellerian M. SS. this place is written thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nicephorus has explained this place excellently well, in this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, And they say, that every one who will make use of an obvious [light, or triviall] occasion, may quickly enrage the people [and incite them] to a Sedition. Christophorson read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. For he renders it thus: Aiunt plebtium quemque modò ipse voluerit principium dare, &c. They say that every ordinary fellow, provided he be willing to give the Onset, may inflame that City [and excite it] to a popular and civil Sedition. But I approve not of this emendation. For, what shall become of these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? I embrace therefore the reading in the Florent. aud Tellerian M. SS. viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and render the whole passage thus: 'Tis there∣fore for certain reported, that any one there who [makes complaint] of the breaking any thing of small value [to wit, a glass vessel, pot, or any such like thing, which he carries,] may incite the City to a po∣pular Tumult. Pollio (in Emilianus) confirms the same, where he speaks thus concerning the Egyptians in general: Et hoc familiare est populo Aegyptiorum, &c. And this is usual with the Egyptians, that, like furious and madmen, upon any triviall occasions they may be induced [to involve] the Publick in the greatest dangers. On account of their being past by unsaluted, by reason of their not having a place allowed them in the Baths, because their flesh and pot-herbs may have been taken from them, on account of their servile shooes, and other such like occasions as these, they have by Sedition often arrived at the highest peril of the Republick. Vales.
• g

  The passage in Herodotus, which Evagrius points at here, occurs in B. 2. of his History, pag. 157, Edit. Paul. Stephens, 1618. Vales.
• h

  The Great Church of the City Alexandria, was termed Cae∣saria, as Epiphanius informs us, in Hares. Arian, and Liberatus, in his Breviarium, cap. 18. But So∣crates (Book 7. chap. 15.) says the name of that Church was Cae∣sarium. Athanasius declares the reason of this Appellation (in his Epist. ad Solitar.) to wit, be∣cause that Church had been built in a place which heretofore was called the Caesarium, that is, the Temple of the Caesars. There had been a School in the same place also, and a pallace of the Emperour Adrian's, which in suc∣ceeding times was termed Lici∣nius's Pallace, as Epiphanius at∣tests. Vales.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they mean Eutyches; and so Va∣lesius ren∣ders it.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with exile.
• ‖

  Or, ha∣ving obser∣ved the time.
• Or, rest.
• ‖

  Or, fel∣lows that may be bought.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; the true import of which words is (if our English tongue would bear such an ex∣pression,) has swell'd himself in∣to.
• i

  I have mended this place from the Florentine M. S. in which Copy (instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and moreover, receiving ordination from two;) the reading is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. as if he could have received ordination from two [Bishops.] In the fourth Canon of the Nicene Councill, 'tis in express words established, that a Bishop is to be ordained by at least three Bishops of his own Province. The old Translatour of this Letter read as we do: whose version is extant in The third part of the Chalcedon Synod. Where his Rendition is this, tan∣quam manus impositionem susceptu∣rus a duobus, as if about to re∣ceive imposition of hands▪ from two. Vales.
• Rom. 12. 19.
• †

  Viz. the Baptistery.
• Where∣with the Baptistery was en∣compassed.
• †

  Or, re∣verence.
• k

  Liberatus (in his Bre∣viarium, chap. 15.) relates, that Pro∣terius was not mur∣dered on the Festi∣val of Ea∣ster, but three days before. For these are his words: Et ante triduum Paschae, &c. And on the third day before Ea∣ster, where∣on the Lords Sup∣per is cele∣brated, Pro∣terius of holy memo∣ry is by the multitudes themselves shut up in the Church, whither out of fear he had be taken him∣self. And there on the same day in the Baptistery, he is slain, torn in pieces, cast out, and his Corps is burnt, and his ashes are strewed into the winds. All which Liberatus has almost word for word written out of the Gesta de nomine Acacii, which we owe to Jacobus Sirmondus. Vales.
• l

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] it must undoubtedly be written thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, cutting it in pieces, or, limb from limb. Instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the reading in the Florent. M. S. is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which is a very small difference. Nicephorus confirms our Emen∣dation, at book 15. chap. 17; who has it expresly written as I had conjectured. Further, this Supplicatory-Libell of the Bishops of the Egyptick Dioecesis to the Emperour Leo, if any one has a mind to read it entire, occurs in Latine, in the third part of the Chalcedon Synod, chap. 11. Vales.
• Or, un∣der the Go∣vernment of the Ro∣mans.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Who th••se 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and who were termed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I have already shown in∣my Notes on Amm. Marcelli∣nus, pag. 14. and pag. 22••. [the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whom we render the Honorati, were those persons who bore the Civill dig∣nities us well in the Cities, as in the Pro∣vinces; the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were the Decuriones.] Gregorius Nazianzenus joyns them both together, in his 49^th Epistle to Olympius, where his words are these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is, all the Citizens, the Decuriones, and the Honorati. The same Gre∣gorius, in his 22^d Epistle to the Casarienses, joyns the same persons both together, in these words; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, all those who are of the Order of the Honorati, and of the Decuriones. The old Translatour therefore of this Letter, renders this passage truly, thus, Honorati & Curiales & Naucleri, the Honorati, the Curiales, and the Naucleri. The Naucleri were the Masters of the Vessells in the River Nyle, who conveyed the Corn and publick Pro∣visions from Egypt to Constantinople. Aurelianus seems to have in∣stituted their Body, as he himself shews in his Epistle to Arabianus, which is cited by Vopiscus. These Naucleri, or Navicularii were a so∣ciety of Sea-faring men, ordained for Transportation of Corn and pub∣lick Provisions in severall quarters of the Empire; (for there was a Body of them in the East, another in Africk, and a third at Alexandria;) they were a set number, and transported the said provisions at their own expence, succeeding by turns in the charge and burthen; to which their sons and heirs were lyable, as were also those who possest their estates after them, according to that proportion which they pos∣sessed. To this Function they were always obnoxious, so that scarcely could they be excused by any great honour obtained. They were forced to build Ships and Vessells of certain burthens; but the ma∣terialls for them were supplied by the Country. Their charge was great, and so were their priviledges, as may be seen by Various laws extant concerning them in the Theodofian Code. Vales.
• b

  I am of the same opinion with S^r Henry Savill, who at the margin of his Copy had remarkt, that in his judgment the reading should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, contained: so Christophorson read; and 'tis so in Nice∣phorus, book 15. chap. 18. Vales. In Robert Stephens the rea∣ding is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, given, or, exhibited.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; a speciall Greek term.
• Or, give a fit form.
• Or, lead an unfurni∣sh's and im∣materiall life: he means the Monks.
• †

  Or, upon.
• c

  Nicepho∣rus Callistus terms this Jacobus, Nisibenus, and adds, that mention is made, as well of him, as of Varadatus [or, Baradatus,] by Theodoret in his Historia Religiosa. Notwithstanding, Theodoret, in chap. 21. of his Historia Religiosa does not say, that Jacobus was a Nisibene; which thing Theodoret would not in any wise have omitted, if Jacobus had indeed been a Nisibene. For, whereas he notes, that this Lat∣ter Jacobus was like the former Jacobus Nisibenus, not only in name, but in manners, and dignity, (for both of them were Priests;) if he had been a Nisibene also, Theodoret would in no wise have omitted that at that place. Neither, does Theodorus▪ Lector (Collectan▪ book 1.) make this Latter Jacobus, who answered Leo Augustus's Circular Letters, a Nisibene; nor y•••• Theophanes in his Chronicon, pag. 96. There is also extant an Epistle of Theodoret's, written to this Jacobus, in which he terms him a Presbyter and a Monk. Instead of Baradatus, Theophanes stiles him Bardas, corruptly as I think. In the Third part of the Chalcedon Synod, pag. 375. amongst the Monks, to whom the Emperour Leo wrote Letters, the first named is the Monk Jacobus Nisibenus, then Symeones and Baradatus. Ephremius Bishop of Antioch makes mention of them also, in his Epistle ad Monachos 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Severianos; and in his third Oration, which he wrote to the Monks Domnus and Johannes, as it occurs in Photius. Vales.
• a

  I am of the same mind with Christo∣phorson and S^r Henry Savil; who instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and having been illegally] have mended it thus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as having been illegally performed.] 'Tis certain, in these books of Evagrius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was most frequently put instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which we, following the authority of the M. S. Copies, have mended. But at this place, in regard the Manuscript Copies differed not from the printed ones, we scrupled the altering of any thing. Vales.
• b

  The name of this Silentiarius was wanting in the ordinary Edi∣tions, and in Nicephorus. We have put it in, from the incomparable ••••orentine Manuscript; wherein 'tis plainly and expressly written thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Diomedes the Silentiarius. Con∣cerning the Silentiarii I have heretofore observed something in my Notes on Amm. Marcellinus. Vales.
• c

  Nicolaus Alemannus (in his Historicall Notes on Procopius's Hi∣storia Arcana, pag. 103, Edit. Lugd. 1623,) tells us, that the Silen∣tiarii, whom Procopius▪ (as he remarks,) sometimes terms Dome∣stici and Protectores, were Officers of the greatest honour about the Em∣perour, in regard they were of the Emperour's inmost Chamber; on which account they were also termed Cubicularii. He says further, that the out∣ward Chamber (out of which there was an immediate passage into the very Chamber of the Emperour, by reason of the silence there kept in Reverence to the Emperour,) was termed Silentium, the Silence; which the Greeks by a corrupt name called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: whence these Cu∣bicularii had the name of Silentiarii. Meursius (in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) makes two Orders of these Officers: the first was a meaner sort of Office, their business was to command the people to be silent and quies. The other Order of the Silentiarii was far more honourable; they were, says Meursius, over the Secrets of the Emperour, and are reckoned amongst the Clarissimi. See D^r Howell's account of these Officers, Part II▪ of his Hist. chap. 1. pag. 51.
• d

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Christo∣phorson un∣derstood this place very ill, as it appears from his Version: for he ren∣ders it thus: ista∣rum Epi∣stotarum Exempla∣ria extant in litteris Leonis Im∣peratoris generatim ad omnes scriptis, &c. The Copies of these Epistles are extant in the Empe∣perour Leo's Letters, which he wrote in general to all persons, &c. But Liberatus Diaconus, in his Breviarium, chap. 15. does incomparably well de∣clare, what these Encyclica [that is, Circular Letters] were, in these words. Imperator scripsit singularum civitatum Episcopis de utroque negotio, &c. The Emperour wrote to the Bishops of every City, con∣cerning each affair, consulting what ought to be done, &c. Who return answer, that the Chalcedon Synod is to be vindicated even unto bloud: but, that Timotheus was not only not to be reckoned amongst the Bishops, but to be deprived even of the Christian Appellation. And these Epistles or Relations of all the Bishops, in one body of a book, are termed Ency∣clicae▪ Further, these Encyclicae, translated almost all into Latine, are extant in the third part of the Chalcedon Synod, pag. 372, &c. of the Cologne Edition; an eximious piece of Ecclesiastick Antiquity, which I heartily wish were extant in Greek. There is mention made of these Encyclicae in Victor Tunonenfis's Chronicon. Vales.
• Or, I would not bring a greatness upon this present work.
• †

  Or, with all suf∣frages.
• e

  There is mention of this Amphilochius Bishop of Side, in Pho∣tius's Bibliotheca, chap. 52. Where the Letters of Atticu•• and Sisin∣nius Bishops of Constantinople, written to him, are recorded. The same Amphilochius was present at the Ephesine and Chalcedon Synods, as 'tis apparent from the Synodick Acts. Further, Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria, book 9, does attest, that this Amphilochius Bishop of Side, although at the beginning he had affirmed in his Letters to the Emperour Leo, that he could in no wise give his assent to the Chal∣cedon Synod, yet some little time after consented and subscri∣bed to that same Synod. Eulogius's words are related by Pho∣tius in his Bibliotheca, pag. 879; Edit. David. Hoeschel. 1611. Vales.
• The Em∣perour.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; See 1 Cor. 15. 8.
• Or, how could he [our Sa∣viour] have ••ad a place a∣mongst so many, so great, and such Holy Fathers, unless the Holy Spirit had been with them from the beginning?
• †

  Or, people.
• See chap. 5.
• †

  Or, elect Timotheus another Bi∣shop succes∣sour to Pro∣terius.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So also Nicepho∣rus writes it. But in Liberatus's Breviarium, chap. 16, this surname of Timotheus is writ∣ten far otherwise. For Liberatus's words are these: Et exilio re∣legatur Timotheus Aelurus Chersonam arctâ custodiâ, & fit pro Proterio Timotheus c••gnomento Salophaciolus sive Asbus, And Timotheus Aelurus is conveyed into banishment to Chersona under a close guard, and in Proterius's stead Timotheus, surnamed Salophaciolus, or Asbus, is made [Bishop.] But in Liberatus it must be written Albus; as Theophanes informs us in these words (See his Chronicon, pag. 96,) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, But another Timothy surnamed Albus, called also Salophaciolus, was ordained. Cedr••nus relates the same. What must we say therefore? Shall we affirm that in Evagrius it must be written Albus, instead of Basilicus? Or, does Salophaciolus import something that is royall? Indeed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Greek signifies ••ascia, which may be taken for a royall Diadem. But, nothing of certainty can be gotten out of this Surname, in regard 'tis variously written in ancient wri∣ters. Vales.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ When P••••∣vince▪ sub∣mitted themselves to the R••∣m••n Em∣pire, 'twas usual for the Empe∣rour to cause 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Edict to be drawn up, and pro∣claimed ••∣penly up∣on the place. The Tenour whereof was, first to entitle the Emperour himself to all respects of do∣minion and supremacy over that people, and then secondly to abo•••• from this by a popular insinuation of all possible sacredness and Liber∣ty of the Provincialls. A particular instance hereof, as it relates to this very City Antioch▪ is produced by M^r Jo. Gregory of Oxford (see his works pag. 156, Edit. London, 1665,) from Johannes Antiochenus's M. S. Geograph. book 9•• in these words; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And when the City Antioch had yielded it self up to the subjection of the Roman Empire, an Edict of the Liberties thereof was sent by Jullus Caesar, and publickly proclaimed at Antioch upon the twentieth of M••y 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Contents where of were these, AT ANTIOCH THE HOLY, SACRED AND FREE CITY, THE METROPOLITAN QUEEN, AND PRESIDENT OF THE EAST, CAIUS JULIUS CAESAR, &c. The Provinces usually returned the honour of these priviledges back upon the Emperour, by this way of acknowledgement. That they might keep the Em∣perour's Grace in perpetuall memory, they reckoned all their publick affairs ever after from that time; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (continues the same Johannes Antiochenus) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Therefore An∣tioch the Great, in honour of the Emperour, fixed its Aera in Caius Julius Caesar, and made this year of Grace the first. On which account, this Aera of theirs, which precedes that of our Lords Nativity fourty eight years, was peculiarly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, be∣cause at the fixing hereof, the Emperour did 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, publickly name himself to all the title of dominion; and also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, publickly entitle them to all priviledges a••d im∣munities.
• Or, l••d ••o▪
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Musculus has rendred this place very ill. But Christophorson, in regard he could not understand the meaning of these words, omit∣ted them in his version. Indeed, this place tortured me a long while and very much. Notwithstanding, at length I found the meaning of it to be this. ▪After Evagrius has set forth the time wherein the Earthquake hapned at Antioch, in the Reign of Leo Augustus, by certain Notes, to wit, of the year, month, week, day, and Indiction: in the last place he adds these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is, that that Earth∣quake had hapned without any turning of the Cycles, three hundred fourty seven years compleat after that Earthquake which had hapned in Trajan's times. For this note of time hath no Cycle. But the former notes of time assigned by Evagrius, are [notes] of the Cycles or Periods. For, an Indiction is a Cycle of fifteen years, and a week, a month, and a year, are Circles and Periods always recurring. This therefore is my Sentiment concerning the explication of this place: Nevertheless, if any one shall produce a more certain account of this passage, I will not refuse to alter my opinion. See Evagriu••, book 3. chap. 33; and note (b) there. This place may also be taken otherwise, by changing only the accent, in this manner, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That so the sense may be this. This is said to be the sixth Earthquake which shaked Antioch. No••, do I now doubt▪ but this is the true interpretation of this plate. In the Tellerian Manu∣script, I found it plainly written [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the sixth] with an asperate, and the accent in the first syllable. Vales. The reading in Robert Stephens is the same with that set at the beginning of this note. In the Greek Text of Valesius's Edition, this place is pointed and accen∣ted thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. which reading and punctation we have followed in our version.
• ‖

  Or, in∣dicti••••.
• c

  I have restored this place from the incomparable Florentine M. S. wherein 'tis plainly written thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, fourty and seaven. The reading in Nicephorus, at book 15. chap. 20. is altogether the same, Vales. And so 'tis in Robert Stephen's Edition also; notwith∣standing Valesius's saying that he restored this place.
• d

  Baronius in his Eccelesiastick Annals, at the year of Christ 111, says that Evagrius is mistaken, in affirming, that that Earthquake which came to pass at Antioch in Trajan's Reign, hapned on the year (according to the Antiochians account) 159. For, that Earthquake hapned in the Consulate of Messala and Pedo, as 'tis manifest from Dion, who asserts that the Consul Pedo perished in that Earth∣quake. Further, the Consulate of Messala and P••do fell on the year of Christ 115, as 'tis agreed amongst all Chronolo∣gers. It was then, according to the Antiochians account, the hundredth sixty third year, not the hundredth fifty ninth year, as Eva∣grius says. For, the years of the Antiochians precede Christ's Nativity fourty eight years. Moreover, concerning these years of the Antiochians, amongst the Ancients the Authour of the Alex∣andrian Chronicle has spoken best of all, in the affairs of Julius Cae∣sar•••• but, amongst the Moderns, Dionysius Petavius [gives us the best account hereof] in his books de Doctrina Temporum, and in the second part of his Rationarium, chap. 14. To which Authour nevertheless I can't give my assent in this which he affirms, viz. that the beginning of these years is deduced from the month Octo∣ber, which was the popular [or, ordinary] beginning of the year amongst the Antiochians. In my Annotations on Eusebius [See Euseb. book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine, chap. 1. note (e.)] I have, in my judgment, sufficiently demonstrated, that the Antiochians began their year from the month Dius, or Novem∣ber. Nor, is that true which Petavius writes at the same place, viz. that the Authour of the Alexandrian Chronicle seems to de∣duce the beginning of these years from the month May. For the Authour of the Alexandrian Chronicle does not say that; he affi••ms only, that the Decree of the Senate, whereby Antioch was pronounced a free City, was received by the Antiochians on the month May, and then also publickly proposed. Vales.
• Or, the City.
• e

  In the incompa∣rable Flo∣rentine Ma∣nuscript this whole place is written thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Besides, the Towers of the Hip∣podrome [or Cirque] which [were] near the gates, and some of the Porticus's which lead to those [Towers, fell.] Which doubtless is the better reading. The Gates of the Cirque were fortified with two Towers on each side. There were also some Porticus's, which led to those Towers, from the gates of the Cirque, as I suppose. In the Tellerian M. S. I found it written, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, some of the Porticus's [which led] to those [Gates.] Vales. In Robert Stephens, this whole clause is worded thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Towers of the Hippodrome from the Gate, and some of the Por∣ticus's [leading] from them.
• f

  Instead of [Ostracinia,] the reading in the Florentine and Tellerian M. SS. and in Nicephorus, is truer; which is thus, Ostra∣cine. Our Evagrius mentions this place again, at chap. 8. book 6. But what the Ostracine was, 'tis hard to say.—Geitonia is a continua∣tion of houses which received [or stood behind] the publick Por∣ticus's. Which Libanius also confirms in his Antiochicus, pag. 372. Edit. Park 1627. It was termed Ostracine, because the Potters-work∣houses were there. The Old Glosses render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, fictile, a thing made of Potters-earth. Vales.
• g

  So the Greeks termed the Temple of the Nymphs; which Libanius describes in his Antiochicus, pag. 372. Edit. ut prius. Vales.
• h

  In the version of this place, both Tran∣slatours have erred. For Mus∣culus ren∣ders it thus: Dicit etiam mille auri Talenta Civitat•• illi ab Imperatore de tributis esse remissa▪ & ex Tributis quoque constitutum esse, ut ci∣vibus illis qui eâ calamitate ad••ecti erant, aedes ipsorum simulque publica aedificia restaurarentur; He says also, that a thousand Talents of Gold were by the Emperour remitted to that City of the Tributes; and that 'twas constituted out of the Tributes also, that to those Citizens who had been affected with that calamity, their houses together with the publick Edifices should be repaired. But Christophorson translates it in this manner: Ait porro, tum Civitati de Tributis mille auri Talenta ab Im∣peratore esse condona••a, tum Civibus etiam Vectigalia qui eâ clade afflicti erant; he says further, that both to the City a thousand Talents of Gold of the Tributes were remitted by the Emperour, and also the Taxes [or, Customs] to those Citizens, who had been afflicted with that calamity. Where you see, that both Translatours referred these words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] to the Citizens; which is in no wise to be born with. For Evagrius would not have said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nicephorus therefore understood these words righter, to wit, concerning the houses of private men, the Taxes whereof the Emperour remitted to the Citizens of Antioch. Nevertheless, Nicephorus has not fully apprehended Evagrius's meaning. For thus he expresses this place of Evagrius: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is, as Langus renders it; Terrae motus istius grati••, &c. And because of this Earthquake, and on account of the houses ruined, the Emperour, 'tis reported, forgave the City a thousand Talents of Gold, the Tributes of the Annuall payments. But Evagrius, or rather Johannes the Rhetorician, says more. For he affirms, that the Emperour remitted to the Antiochians a thousand Talents of Gold of the Tributary Function; but forgave to each Citizen the Tri∣butes of those houses which had been ruined by the Earthquake. Now these Tributes may be understood in a twofold sence; Either (1.) con∣cerning the annuall Pension which by Hirers was paid to the Owners [or Lords▪] of the houses; Or (2.) concerning the money which was paid to the Fiscus [Exchequer,] because those houses had been built upon the publick Soyle. In such manner as amongst us, an annuall rent is wont to be paid by possessours of houses, as well in the City as Country, to the Lords of the Soyle. And in this latter sense I had rather take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [the Tributes] here. For this word is more frequently used to signifie Tributes, Tolls, or Cu∣stomes, which are paid to the publick. But if this term should be so taken here, as to signifie the price of houses which is usually paid by the Hirer, there would have been no liberality of the Em∣perour's in that. For he would have given nothing of his own to the Citizens, but that which was another's. Vales.
• i

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the reading undoubtedly must be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the same; adde the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Emperour. And thus Christophorson seems to have read. Further, concerning this Earthquake, Isaac Syrus had written an Elegie, as Marcellinus attests in his Chronicon, in these words: Patricio & Ricimere Coss. &c. In the Consulate of Patriclus and Ricimeres, Isaac a Presbyter of the An∣tiochian Church wrote many things in the Syrian Language, and espe∣cially against the Nestorians and Eutychians. He likewise bewailed the ruine of Antioch in an Elegie, in such manner as Ephren Diaconus did the fall of Nicomedia. Vales.
• a

  'Tis not amongst▪ Authours agreed con∣cerning the year whereon this fire hapned at Constantinople. For Theophanes and Cedrenus place it on the fifth year of Leo, in the fifteenth Indiction, Leo Augustus being the second time Consul with Severas which was the year of Christ 462. But Marcellinus Comes and the Authour of the Alexandrian Chronicle place this fire of Constantinople in the Consulate of Basiliscus and Hermenericus, that is on the year of Christ 465. Our Evagrius seems to have followed the former opinion. For the verb [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hapned together,] which he uses at this place, gives an indication of what I have said; to wit, that that Conflagration of Constantinople hapned no long time after the An∣tiochian Earthquake. Further, concerning that fire wherewith the City Constantinople was consumed in the times of Leo Augustus, Candidus Isaurus does also write, in the first book of his History, and relates that many things were usefully ordered therein by Aspar the Patritius. Vales.
• b

  He means the Portus Phosphorianus▪ which was in the fifth Region of the City, as the old description of Constanti∣no••le informs us. The Greeks te••med it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as Constantinus Porphyro∣gennetus tells us in his second book de Thema••ibus about the end, and Georgius Codinus in his book de Originibus Constantinopolitan. 57. Vales.
• Or, Salt∣meat.
• †

  Or, the houses.
• Or, wherein are the Havens of the City.
• †

  Or, Ox∣street.
• c

  The Church of Homonoea [or Con∣cord, [was in the ninth Region of the City Constanti∣nople, as the Old de∣scription of that City informs us. Why this Church had this name, we are told by Theodorus Lector in book 4. of his Eccles. History; whose words are cited by Johannes Dama••cenus in his ••^d book de Imaginibus. For, it was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [Concord,] because the hundred and fifty Fathers of the Constantinopolitane Synod in the Reign of Theodosius the Great [See Socrates's Eccles. Hist. book 5. chap. 8.] meeting therein, agreed in one opinion concerning the Consubstantiall Trinity. Vales.
• Or, called.
• a

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,] it would be better written thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, about the same times.] Vales.
• b

  Evagrius means the War which the Hunni waged against the Eastern Romans, under the command of Dengizich Son of Attila••, in the Consulate of Zeno and Marcianus, on the year of Christ 469▪ as Marcellinus Comes relates in his Chronicon. Nevertheless the Au∣thour of the Alexandrian Chronicle places that War on the fore∣go••••g year, whereon Anthemius Augustus was Consul. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. under the same Consul Ginzi••ichus Son to A••t••••as was s••ain by Anagastus Magister Militum [Master of the Milice] of Thracia: I reade Dengizichus, from Priscus R••etor, who describes this War, pag. 44, 45, of the King's Edition. Further, this Ana∣gastus Magister Militum throughout the Thracia's, who flew Dengizi∣chus King of the Hunn•• in Battle, had succeeded Arnegisclus Magister Militum. Vales.
• a

  In the most excel∣lent Flo∣rentine Manuscript, and in Ni∣cephorus, instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aric∣mesus,] 'tis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Aricmesius. Further, Ariadne married Zeno on the third year of Leo Augustus's Reign, as Theophanes relates in his Chronicon. Vales.
• b

  He means Flavius Zeno, who was Consul in the Reign of Theo∣dosius Augustus, on the year of Christ 448, and Magister Militum throughout the East. Concerning whose singular power, see what I have written in my Annotations at Priscus Rhetor's Excerpta Leg••∣tionum, pag. 207, of the Kings Edition. Vales.
• a

  Concer∣ning that vast Army, which the Emperour Leo sent against the Vandals into Africk, Theophanes, Cedrenus, and Idatius in his Chronicon, are to be consulted. Concerning the preparations of the same war Candidus Isaurus writes also, in the first book of his History; the passage where∣of, because 'tis not yet extant, I will annex here: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ that is, Candidus the Historiogra∣pher says, that Leo, termed also Macelles, who reigned after Marcianus, spent an innumerable sum of money in an Expedition against the Vandalls. For, as those have attested who furnished that money, fourty seven thou∣sand pounds of Gold were di••bursed by the Praefecti Praetorio▪ by the Comes Largitionum were spent seventeen thousand pounds of Gold, and of Silver seven hundred thousand pounds: in regard this charge was abundantly supplyed, partly by the Goods of persons proscribed, and partly by the Emperour Anthemius. This eminent passage is extant in Suidas, in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but the Authours name is corrupted. In the same place of Suidas, ••nstead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,] it must be made [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.] Further this Van∣dalick Expedition hapned on the year of Christ 468, as Baronius has rightly observed▪ which is confirmed by Cedrenus, Idatius and Mar∣cellinus. Two years after this, another Expedition against the Van∣dalls was undertaken by the Commander (dux) Heraclius, and Marsus, as Theophanes relates in h〈…〉〈…〉hronicon, who is the only person that I know of, who has made mention of this Expedition. For Pro∣copius, in his Vandalicks, has confounded this second Expedition with the former. Further, this second Expedition had an event fortunate enough. For Gizerichus▪ being put into a fear, was compelled to make a Peace with the Orientall Romans. Vales.
• b

  Priscus had at large de∣scribed this Vandalick War in the last book of his Histo∣ries, as (besides Evagrius) Theophanes informs us in his Chro∣nicon pag. 100. But the place is corrupted, which I will annex here: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, But having at last been whe••••led and allured by gifts and many riches, by Gizeri∣chus, he yielded, and was voluntarily vanquished, as Persicus the Thra∣cian has related. It must undoubtedly be written thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Priscus the Thracian has related. For Priscus the Historian has described that war, as Evagrius attests. Now, Pris∣cus was a Thracian, born at Panium a Town of Thrace, which Town is mentioned by Hicrocles. Provincia Europa sub Consulariurbes quatuor∣deci••••. Eudoxia, Heraclia, Arcadiopolis, Bisue, Panion, Orni, &c. The Province Europa under a Consularis [contains] fourteen Cities. Eudoxia, Heraclia, Arcadiopolis, Bisue, Panium, Orni, &c. Besides, Sui∣das doés also affirm, that Priscus the Writer of the Histories was a Panite. Vales.
• c

  As to my self it seemeth, I have restored this place not unhappily, after this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he might possess himself of Aspars favour and benevolence. Cedrenus confirms our emendation, at the twelfth year of Leo Augustus, in these words: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; on the same year also Patricius, Aspars son, is created Caesar by Leo, and is sent to Alexandria to draw off Aspar from the Arian opinion, and to make him faithfull and kind to the Emperour. And Theophanes ex∣presses it thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. On the same year Patricius the son of Aspar, whom the Emperour Leo had made C••sar, went to Alexan∣dria, with a design to draw off Aspar from Arianisme, and to render him faithfull and friendly to the Emperour. Vales. In Robert Ste∣phens, the reading is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he might possess himself of Aspars madness.
• d

  The preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to be expunged, which led Translatours into a mistake. For Nepos was not made Emperour on the fifth year after Glycerius's deposition, but on the same year whereon Glycerius had been rejected, (as 'tis related in the Old Fasti which Cuspini∣anus set forth;) that is, on the year of Christ 474. After this, Nepos held the Empire five years. For he was slain when Basilius was Con∣sul alone, on the year of Christ 480; as Marcellinus attests in his Chronicon, and as 'tis affirmed by the Old Authour of the Fasti, whom Cuspinianus published. From which Authour we are infor∣med, that Julius Nepos retained the name of Emperour untill his death. Vales.
• e

  'Tis false, that Glycerius from being Emperour was made Bi∣shop of Rome. Nor is it true, that he was constituted Bishop of Por∣tue, which some have affirmed, following Marcellinus as their Authour. Notwithstanding, Marcellinus does not say so. For his words are these: Leone solo Cos. Glycerius Casar Romae Imperium tenen▪ &c. Leo being Consul alone, Glycerius Caesar holding the Empire of Rome, is driven from the Empire by Nepos, son of the sister of Marcellinus heretofore Patricius; and of a Caesar is ordained a Bishop in the Port of the City Rome. But in Marcellinus the punctation is to be altered thus: Imperio expulsus Portu Urbis Romae, ex Caesare Episcopus ordina∣tus est, being driven from the Empire in the Port of the City Rome, of a Caesar is ordained a Bishop. Our emendation is confirmed by the Old Authour of the Fasti, whom I have quoted above; [whose words are these;] Domino Leone Juniore August Cos. dejectus de Imperio Glycerius in Portu Urbis Rom••, dominus Leo Junior Augustus being Consul, Glycerius is cast from his Empire in the Port of the City Rome. 'Tis certain, Jordanes, in his book de Successione Regnorum, affirms that Glycerius was made Bishop at Salona. Jordanes's words are these: Occisoque Romae Anthemio Nepotem ••i••ium Nepotiani, &c. And having killed Anthemius at Rome, he created Nepos son of Ne∣potianus (to whom he married his Neece,) Caesar at Ravenna, by Do∣mitianus his Client. Which Nepos having legally obtained the Empire, expelled Glycerius, (who had given the Kingdom to himself in a Tyran∣nick manner,) from the Empire, and made him Bishop in Salona of Dalma∣tia. At this place therefore in the Greek Te••t, the word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of the Romans] must be expunged, or rather transposed after this man∣ner; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. holds the Empire of the Romanes, and ordains Glycerius, Bi∣shop, &c. Vales.
• f

  Marcel∣linus Co∣mes's com∣putation is truer, who in his Chronicon writes thus concerning this Romulus: Basilisco & Armato Coss. &c. In the Con∣sulate of Basiliscus and Armatus, the Western Empire of the Roman Nation (which Octavianus Augustus the first of the Augusti began to hold on the seven hundreth and ninth year from the building of the City,) perished with this Augustulus, on the year of the Reign of the Emperours his predecessours DXXII. Jordanes has the same words in his book de Successione Regnorum. Now, this sum makes one thousand two hundred thirty and one years. Therefore Cedrenus must be corrected, who from Romulus the Builder of the City, to this Romulus Augu∣stulus, reckons but one thousand and eighty years. Vales.
• g

  The reading in Robert Stephens is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, attempts;] without doubt it should be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, takes in hand,] as Ni∣cephorus words it, book 15. chap. 11. In the Tellerian M. S. I found it written [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, administred,] which reading pleases me best. Vales.
• To wit, the death of Leo the Elder.
• †

  Or, In∣vests him∣self with the Purple-Robe.
• a

  Before the follo∣wing (to wit, the eighteenth) chapter, in the incomparable Floren∣tine Manuscript these words were written, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The end of the Second Book. Then, after the [seventeenth] chapter▪ these words occur: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The matters agitated at the Synod convened at Chalcedon, being reduced into an Epitome, are these. Vales.
• a

  In the fourth chapter of this book (where we have this same pas∣sage) these words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, without the permission of him who governeth the Bishop∣rick of Rome,] occur no••, neither in the Greek Text of Valesius's Edition, nor in that of Robert Stephens's; though Valesius takes notice of them in his version there. At this place they are inserted into both the now mentioned Greek Editions; and therefore we have ren∣dred them here, but (with good reason) have omitted them at the said fourth chapter. This latter answer of the Roman Legates to the Senatours, seems obscure and unintelligible.
• Or, the things un∣der the Sun.
• †

  Spoken by way of Irony.
• †

  Or, found▪
• b

  In the incompa∣rable Flo∣rentine M. S. this place is read thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to the end that it may hear both us, &c. The reading in the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill is the same. Christo∣phorson, and S^r Henry Savill at the margin of his copy, have men∣ded it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. to the end that it may hear our cause, and that of the forementioned Dioscorus. But I had rather write it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Vales. In Robert Ste∣phens the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. where also the word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is wanting.
• Or, had lead the way.
• c

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to him] doubtless the reading must be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that,] under∣stand [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the divine Letter.] Which emendation is confirmed by the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill, pag. 52, and 53. Edit. Bin. where these words occur. Gloriosissimi Judices & Am∣plissimus Senatus dixerunt, &c. The most Glorious Judges and the most noble Senate said: Let the most Blessed Bishop Juvenalis declare, why▪ when the most Reverend Bishop Dioscorus made an Interlocution for the reciting of the Letter of the most holy Romish Arch-Bishop, that Letter was not read. Juvenalis the most Reverend Bishop of Jeru∣salem said: Johannes the Presbyter and Primicerius [chief] of the Notaries said, that he had in his hands the sacred Letters of the most Religious and most pious Emperours, and I answered that the Imperial Letters must be read. Further, the very words which Juvenalis had made use of in that second Ephesine Synod, occur in the abovesaid 52. pag. where the Acts of the second Ephesine Synod are recorded. More∣over, Nicephorus confirms our Emendation, in the last chapter of his 15^th book, where he gives us a summary of the Acts of the Chal∣cedon Councill, mostly transcribed from Evagrius. I have been larger in my remarks upon these things, because Christophorson, in the Rendition of this place, hath wandred far from the truth. By the way, you may observe the fraud committed in that second Ephe∣sine Synod. For, when Hilarius the Deacon, the Legate of the Apo∣stolick See, had openly declared to the Bishops who were present, that he had Pope Leo's Letter, and had required that it might be read in the Councill: Johannes the Presbyter and Primicerius of the No∣taries, arose and said, that he had in his hands other Letters written from the Emperour to Dioscorus. Then Juvenalis commanded, that those Letters of the Emperour should be read, no mention being made of Leo's Letter. You see therefore, that the reading of Leo's Letter was designedly impeded, by the fraud of Dioscorus, who, instead of Leo's Epistle, caused the Emperour Theodosius's Letter to be read in the Synod. Further, the Tellerian M. S. does confirm our E∣mendation; in which copy I found it written as I had conjectu∣red. Vales.
• That is, of the Let∣ter of Leo Bishop of Rome.
• †

  Liberty, or, free∣dome.
• ‖

  Or, come to a rea∣ding.
• That is, would not permit Ste∣phanus's Notaries to take the Acts in writing.
• †

  Or, at∣tested.
• ‖

  Or, In∣struments.
• d

  This place, which E∣vagrius points at here, is ex∣tant in the First Acti∣on of the Chalcedon Synod, pag. 58. Vales.
• c

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he said, from whence therefore?] the reading in the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill is better, (see pag. 58;) in the Impe∣rative-mood, to wit, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, declare therefore, from whence? Vales.
• In Binius, pag. 58, the reading is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the only begotten Son of God, God the Word.
• f

  In the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill, only Basilius is said to have been questioned by the Judges and Senatours; and what answer he returned to their que∣stion, is added there also. Notwith∣standing, Nicephorus confirms the vulgar reading, which is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when they were in∣terrogated:] which if we will re∣tain, it must be said, that Basi∣lius and those who were with him, were interrogated by the Judges. Vales.
• g

  In the Rendition of this place both Transla∣tours have erred. For Musculus renders it thus: Tha∣lassius verò dixit, non habere au∣toritatem ca quae à principibus in hujusmo∣di causis judicantur, But Tha∣lassius said, that those things which are judged [or, determi∣ned] by the Princes in such causes as these, have not authority. Christophorson has followed the same sense also. Likewise Langus, Nicephorus's Translatour, hath fallen into the same mistake. But, from the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill, it is easie to confute this Rendition. For Thalassius being questioned by the Judges, makes this answer only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, all power and authority was not in me. For, although Juvenalis and Thalassius were ordered by the Emperour Theodosius to preside at the second Ephesine Synod together with Dioscorus, notwithstanding in real∣lity all the power was in Dioscorus's hands. Further, the Judges con∣demned the Answer of Dioscorus, Juvenalis, and Thalassius in these words, In a matter of ••aith this defence is not to be admitted. Vales.
• h

  I agree with Christophorson and S^r Henry Savill; who instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was sent for,] mended it thus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, made a complaint.] Which fault I found to have been frequently committed in the Manuscript copies. Vales.
• Or, ex∣pression.
• i

  This place must be corrected from the first Action of the Chalcedon Synod, pag. 142. Where, after the Sentence of condemnation pro∣nounc't by Dioscorus against Flavianus and Eusebius, when Flavianus had said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, I refuse you: Hilarius Deacon of the Church of Rome said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 'tis contradicted. Which words are written out from the Acts of the second Ephesine Synod. Vales.
• k

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So 'tis also writ∣ten in Ni∣cephorus. But in the Acts of the Chalcedon Synod 'tis written far otherwise, to wit, after this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is, in this very hour [Dioscours] hath deposed: in this very hour let him be deposed. Which reading I ap∣prove of as being the better. But, as this place of Evagrius is to be corrected from the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill, so on the other hand, the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill are to be amended from our Evagrius. For, instead of these words which follow, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Holy Lord do Thou revenge him; it must [in the Chalcedon-Acts] be written thus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Flavianus hath been deposed by Dioscorus: Holy Lord, do Thou revenge him, Orthodox Emperour &c. as it is in Evagrius and Nicephorus: and ••o the old Translatour of the Chalcedon-Councill seems to have read: for he renders it thus: Sancte domine, tu illum vindica: Catholice Imperator, Tu illum vindica, Holy Lord, do Thou revenge him: Catholick Emperour, do you revenge him. From which Version we conclude, that these words [Flavianus hath been deposed by Dioscorus] ought necessarily to precede. Otherwise, whither should these words [do Thou revenge him] be referred? Vales.
• l

  Some body may make a query here, what Patriarch is to be understood at this place. My affirmation is that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople is meant. Further, two things are remarkable here. The first is, that the orientall Bishops wish many years not to their own Patriarch, but to another. Secondly, that they term the Bi∣shop of Constantinople simple and absolutely, The Patriarch, to wit, giving him this honour on account of the prerogative of his See. For, in the Constantinopolitane Synod, the second place was assigned to the See of Constantinople. Vales.
• m

  From the Act•• of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 152. (where this Interlocu∣tion of the Judges is recorded;) Instead of Armenia, it must be made An∣cyra. Vales.
• n

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, fall from,] in the First Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 152, it is truer writ∣ten thus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, lie under.] For 'tis referred to what went be∣fore, to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the very same punishment; and the same herewith is the reading in the fourth chapter of this book, where this Interlocution of the Judges occurs entire. In the fourth Action of the Chalcedon▪ Synod, pag. 217, the reading indeed is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: but there is a word added in the foregoing [clause,] in this man∣ner, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, subjected to the same punishment. If we should retain the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, then these words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, being estranged from] which follow, would be superfluous. Indeed, these two last mentioned words are wanting in the Tellerian and Florentine M. SS. and in Nicephorus. Vales.
• Or, set forth.
• o

  In the excellent Florent. M. S. these words [at Constanti∣nople] are wanting; nor do they occur in the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill, as may be seen at pag. 152; Edit. Bin▪ Vales.
• p

  In the third Action of the Chalcedon-Synod, only the Bi∣shops met, nor were there any of the Secular Judges, or Sena∣tors, present in the Councill. For, in that Session the Faith was to be treated of: which that they should declare and set forth▪ the Bishops had before been in∣vited by the most glorious Judges. But the Bishops for a long while refused to do that, saying that the Draught of the Nicene Creed was sufficient, which had been confirmed by the Constantinopo∣litane, and first Ephesine Synod. Nevertheless, at length they had yielded to the Judges request, and promised they would do it. Fur∣ther, where the Faith is trea∣ted of the Secular Judges have nothing to do. In the Third Action therefore, wherein the Faith was to be treated of, no Secular Judges were present. It is further to be remarked, that at this place Eva∣grius hath omitted the transacti∣ons of the Second Action. Eva∣grius therefore seems to have taken the Third Action for the Second. Which is confirmed by the Acts of this very Synod, pag. 177; where that seems to be the Second Meeting, or Action, which now is the Third. Vales.
• q

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Langus and Christo∣phorson have ren∣dred it Boethus, as if that were a proper name. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the name of an Office. For the Princeps officii magistri offi∣ciorum was so termed, who was of the Schole [or, Body] of The A∣gente•• in Rebus; as we are informed from the Notitia Imperii Romani. Farther, this Assistant of the Master of the Offices, was by his proper name called Eleusinius, as 'tis recorded in the Third Action of the Chal∣cedon Synod. Vales.
• r

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Acts of the Chalcedon Councill, instead of these words, 'tis written, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which the old Translatour hath rendred thus: Et c••rta locuti sunt, quae in exceptis habeo, And they have spoken some words, which I have in my Excepta [that is, in my account taken thereof in writing.] 'Tis certain, Himerius was a Notary and a Reader, sent by the Councill (together with the Bi∣shops) to Dioscorus, that he might take those things in writing, which should be said on both sides; for that was the Office of No∣taries. The Bishops, as often as they went to a Synod, were wont to carry each, his Notary along with them, who were to take the matters transacted in the Synod in writing: to the end that, after the ending of the Synod, each Bishop might carry a copy of the Acts into his own Country. Further, I approve highly of the old Translatour's rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 excepta. Whence I am of opinion, that Origen's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ought in Latine to be termed Excepta. I know indeed, that Origen's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are by Rufinus and Jerome commonly termed Excerpta, Excerptions; but my Sentiment is, that 'tis corruptly written, in regard they ought rather to be termed Ex∣cepta. Vales.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Valesius renders it thus; Canonicum constitutum esse judi∣cium, that a Canonicall Judica∣tory was constituted.
• s

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He answered: in Robert Stephens's Edition, the reading is, Eustathius answered: In Valesius's Versi••n 'tis, respon∣dit Pergamius, Pergamius an∣swered.
• Or, had judged.
• †

  Or, busi∣ness.
• ‖

  Or, con∣cerning the same mat∣ter.
• Or, made use of out∣cries.
• t

  I am of the same opinion with Learned men, who instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] had mended it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lent exaction; by conjecture, as I think. For our Copies have no alteration here. Yet the Telle∣rian Manuscript (which I pro∣cured opportunely, whilest our Edition was in the press,) has it plainly written, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales.
• u

  Nice∣phorus has inserted some words here, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, And he asked the Bishops. Vales.
• Or, made himself obnoxious to.
• †

  Or, pronounced Sentence.
• Diosco∣rus's.
• †

  Diosco∣rus.
• vv

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The same is the rea∣ding also in Nice∣phorus. But, in the Chalcedon▪ Acts, and in the fourth chapter of this book, (where this sentence of condemnation occurs,) it is more truly written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it was our design. But, by transposing the preposi∣tions, I had rather write it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. we had considered in relation to, &c. which writing is far more ele∣gant. Vales.
• Or, se∣cond.
• These▪ Legates of the Romish-See (I sup∣pose) point at that ex∣pression u∣sed by our Saviour to Peter, re∣corded Matth. 16. 18. As a Comment on which Text take these words of Saint Cyprian, in his book de Unitate Ecclesiae, termed also Tractatus de Simplicitate Prelatorum, pag. 113. Edit. Bafil. 1558. Loquitur dominus ad Petrum, Ego tibi dico, inquit, quia tu es Petrus, & Super istam Petram aedifica∣bo Ecclesiam meam, &c. The Lord speaketh to Peter, I say unto thee, says he, that Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, &c.—And after his Resurrection he says to the same per∣son, Feed my sheep. And although he gives an equall power to all the Apostles after his Resurrection, and says, As the Father hath sent me, so also I send you, &c.—Yet that he might manifest the Unity, by his own authority he hath disposed the originall of the same Unity as beginning from One. For the rest of the Apostles were the same also, that Peter was, endowed with an equall fellowship, both of honour and power; but the originall proceeds from Unity, that the Church may be shown to be one.
• Or, e∣stranged.
• Or, removed.
• y

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is variously rendred by Translatours. For Langus renders it Consuetudinem, Custome. Musculus and Chri∣stophorson have translated it thus; & ab omni Ecclesiastico Jure esse abalienatum, and are alienated from all Ecclesiastick Right. The Old Translatour of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 214, renders it Functionem, Function; which, in my judgment, is the truer Version. In the Li∣bell of Deposition of the same Dioscorus, which the Chalcedon-Synod sent, almost in the very same words, to the Clergy men of the Alex∣andrian Church who were then at Chalcedon, instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Degree. In the sentence of condemnation pronounced a∣gainst the same Dioscorus by the Legates of the Romish See, instead of this word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Office, is made use of. Now, these words are therefore added by the Synod, that they might shew, that Dioscorus was reduced to a Laïck-communion. For he is not only said to be divested of the Episcopall dignity, but is also removed from every Ecclesiastick Office: least any one should think him to be removed from the Episcopall Act: [or, acting as a Bishop,] and thrust down into the degree of the Presbyterate. For to do that, is sacriledge, as 'tis said in the fourth Action of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 247. Vales.
• z

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It should (as it seems,) be written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Clergy of the most Holy, &c. For Dioscorus's Libell of Deposition was sent to the Clergy-men of the Alexandrian Church, who were then at Chal∣cedon, as may be seen in the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 214. Due order did require indeed, that Dioscorus's Deposition should be declared by the Synod to the Bishops of Egypt also. But the Bishops of the Chalcedon-Councill were to perform that afterwards, in their Synodick Letter. At that time they had done sufficient, in declaring Dioscorus's Deposition to the Alexandrian Ecclesiasticks who were then at Chalcedon, to wit, to El••••mosynus the Presbyter and Oeconomus [or, Steward,] and to Euthalius Arch-Deacon, and to the rest of the Clergy. 'Tis certain, Evagrius's words do sufficiently declare, that there is no mention here concerning the Bishops of Egypt. For he calls them Bishops of the Alexandrian Church: which appellation agrees not with the Bishops of Egypt. Vales.
• a

  In Nicephorus 'tis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But in the Acts of the Chalce∣don-Councill, the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Tellerian M. S. I found it written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales. And so 'tis in Robert Stephens's Edition.
• Or, con∣vention.
• †

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the true Reli∣gion.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Doubtless the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 must be expun∣ged; in regard 'tis altogether su∣perfluous at this place. Further, the place here meant by Eva∣grius, is extant in the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 159, Edit. Bin. But 'tis to be remarked, of which I have given an Advertisement before, that the Copies of the Chalcedon-Synod which Evagrius made use of, were different from those we now have. For that which is to us the Third Action, to Eva∣grius is the Second, as we have seen already. But, that which in our copies is inscribed the Second Action, is the Third to E∣vagrius; as it will be made ma∣nifest from this place, and those following. Vales.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Pr••lude, or, Cessation.
• c The place which Evagrius means here, occurs in the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 159. Also, the words of Cecro∣pius Bishop of Sebastopolis occur in the same page. Vales.
• d

  This place is al∣so extant in the Se∣cond Action of the Chal∣cedon-Sy∣nod, pag. 160. Vales.
• Or, prate against.
• †

  Or, that he hath been begotten the only be∣gotten Son of God, &c.
• e

  For the divine and humane Nature being joyned together, have constituted to us one Christ and Lord. And so that is true which Cyrillus says, viz. that two Natures diverse amongst them∣selves, have come together into a true unity: which, neverthe∣less, Christophorson understood not. Not that of two Natures one is made, in such manner as Euty∣ches asserted: But, that of two Natures one Christ hath existed. And thus Cyrillus has explained his own opinion a little after these words; whereas he saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by an inef∣fable mysticall and secret concourse to an unity. From hence it ap∣pears, that Johannes Langus, o∣therwise the Learned Translatour of Nicephorus, hath mistook here, who has rendred 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (not unity, but) union. Vales.
• Or, that by the divinity and humanity they [the Natures] have perfected, &c.
• Or, came.
• †

  Or, made one.
• Or, piercings.
• †

  Chap. 6.
• ‖

  Or, with∣all suf∣frages.
• Or, part∣ly.
• †

  Or, part∣ly.
• f

  In the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 161▪ in∣stead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, are] it is writ∣ten [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, contain.] Vales.
• g

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, We that are Orthodox do be∣lieve thus. In the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, p. 169, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Orthodox do believe thus; which reading I like bet∣ter, although Nicephorus confirms the common reading. Vales.
• Or, lay∣ing down.
• See Heb. 2. 9.
• h

  I agree with Learned men, who (instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by all) have mended it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for, or, instead of every man; so the reading is in Nice∣phorus, and in the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, pag. 170. Vales.
• The bo∣dy.
• †

  Or, body.
• ‖

  Or, Head.
• i

  In the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, this place of Cyrillus is written otherwise, thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, For he continued what he was: but 'tis altogether to be understood, that the one dwells in the other, that is the divine Na∣ture in the humane. Vales.
• Or, with men.
• Or, an Intervall.
• k

  There is an ambi∣guity in these words. For they may as well be referred to Cyrillus's twelve heads, of which he speaks just before, as to the requests of Atticus Bishop of Nicopolis; to which all the rest of the Bishops agreed, as we are informed in the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, about the end of it. Johannes Langus has followed the former sense. But the latter explication pleases me best. Vales.
• l

  I as∣sent to the Learned, who (instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 about Anatolius,) before us had mended it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with Anatolius. In Nicephorus the preposition is wanting, which nevertheless seems to me altoge∣ther necessary. Vales.
• m

  In the excellent Florentine M. S. the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for, or, concer∣ning the Fathers; which is better than 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. from the, &c. And the same with that first mentioned, is the reading in the Second Action of the Chalcedon-Councill. Further, who these Fathers should be, for whom the Bishops entreat, that they may be restored to the Synod, 'tis not difficult to guess. For they are these, Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem, Thalassius of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Eusebius, Eustathius, and Basilius; who had been deposed in the First Action together with Dioscorus, by an Interlocution of the Judges and Senatours. On account therefore of this deposition which the Bishops had ap∣proved of by their suffrages, these five Bishops, were present neither at the Second nor Third Action, as 'tis apparent from the Catalogue of the Bishops which is prefixt before those Actions. Besides, in the Third Action, when the Legates of the Apostolick See had pronounced a sentence of deposition against Dioscorus, the rest of the Bishops con∣firmed it by their own subscriptions: excepting these five, as Evagrius has truly observed above. In the Common Editions of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 212, the names even of these five Bishops occur written also: but, out of order, and after all the other Bishops. Whence it appears, that they had not subscribed at such time as the sentence was pronounc't, but a long while after, when they had been restored, and had recovered their former dignity. Moreover, it may be ma∣nifestly concluded from what is said above, that that is most true which I have already remark't, viz. that the Second Action of the Chalcedon Synod is by Evagrius taken for The Third, and The Third for The Se∣cond. But, which Copies are worthiest to be believed, whether those which Evagrius made use of, or them which we have now extant, 'tis not easie to pronounce. To me, the Copies made use of by Eva∣grius seem more certain. First, on account of their Antiquity; for doubtless they were older than those we now use. Secondly, by rea∣son of their legitimate and true order of matters transacted. For, after an accurate Examination of Dioscorus's Cause, and after the In∣terlocution of the Judges, who had pronounced him to have offended against the Canons, and that he was to be deposed; all which was done in the First Action: it remained, that Dioscorus by a Canonicall Judgment of the Bishops should be condemned. Wherefore, that Action, wherein Dioscorus was deposed by the Bishops by a Synodick Sentence, ought immediately to follow The First Action. Therefore Evagrius and Nicephorus have rightly placed it in the second place. A third reason is drawn from the Third Action it self, pag. 177. where Dioscorus is said to have answered the Legates sent to him from the Holy Synod, in this manner: Quoniam ante haec in congregatione, &c. In regard before this the most magnificent Judges sitting in the Con∣vention, have determined some things, after a large Interlocution of every one of them, but now a second meeting calls me out, in order to the nulling of what has been said before. Nevertheless, that is in the way, which occurs at the close of the Second Action, viz that the Bishops of Illyricum cried out thus, Dioscorus to the Synod, Dioscorus to the Chur∣ches. Which doubtless they would not have dared to say after Dio∣scorus's deposition to which themselves had subscribed. Therefore, the Second Action, where this Acclamation occurs, ought necessarily to precede The Third Action; in which Dioscorus was Canonically de∣posed. And this I think to be truer. Vales.
• n

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the due De∣crees;] it must undoubtedly be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Decrees which had been given forth; which is the reading in Nicephorus. And this rea∣ding is confirmed by the fourth Action of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 218, &c. Vales.
• Or, Pa∣per.
• Or, made strangers to.
• †

  Or, to the Divine heighth.
• o

  Christophorson read it in the plurall number 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they subscribed; and so the rea∣ding is in Nicephorus: which is confirmed by the Acts of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 218, &c. Vales.
• Or, of the Emperour.
• †

  Or, of Augusta; that is, Pulcheria; see chap. 1.
• p

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ concerning all those other things,] the reading in the Flo∣rentine and Tellerian M. SS. is truer, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, concerning those [other] five per∣sons; in the Fourth Action of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 232▪ the reading is the same with this last mentioned; as likewise that in Nicephorus. Vales.
• That is, Christ.
• †

  Or, per∣son.
• ‖

  Or, no∣mination.
• Or, delay.
• †

  Or, in certain pa∣pers.
• q

  There is extant a Supplica∣tory Libell, presented to the Em∣perour Marcianus by the Monks, in the Fourth Action of the Chalcedon-Synod, pag. 237. In this Libell the Monks request of the Emperour, that an Oecumenicall Synod might be convened, (which the Emperour had before given order to be as∣sembled;) which might consult the safety of all persons, and that the Monks might not be compel∣led by violence to subscribe. Those Monks, belike, did not be∣lieve that Synod to be Oecumeni∣call, at which Dioscorus and the other Bishops of Egypt were not present. They requested there∣fore, that Dioscorus might be wholly restored, as may be seen in another Libell which is reci∣ted afterwards. Vales.
• Or, he ought to partake of the Synod.
• Or, brought an Excommuni∣cation upon Leo.
• r

  As to my self it seemeth, I have restored this place very hap∣pily. For, of these three words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from this instant] I have made one, in this man∣ner, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. the Judges desired, &c. But Nicepho∣rus, perceiving this place to be cor∣rupted, by adding a word made it good in this manner; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. From this instant the Judges or∣dered, &c. Which emendation is contradicted by the Authority of the Acts, and contrary to E∣vagrius's mind. For the S••cu∣lar Judges, who by the Empe∣rour's order were present at the Synod, never Commanded that Leo's Letter should be in∣serted into the definition of the Faith; but only desired that of the Bishops: which nevertheless was denied them by the Bishops, as 'tis apparent from the Fifth Action, pag. 250. Vales.
• s

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a∣greeable to] must be under∣stood. For the Bishops did not make an∣swer that they be∣lieved Leo, according as Christophorson renders it; but, that they believed with Leo [or, as Leo did believe,] as Langus and Musculus have rightly rendred it. For thus they had acclaimed, as Leo does, so we believe; as it occurs in the fifth Action. Vales.
• t

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nicephorus has mended it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ according to Leo. But, I doubt not but Evagrius wrote 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, according to Leo's opinion. For so the Judges speak in the Fifth Action of this Councill, pag. 250. Further, before the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the verb [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, there ought] seems necessary to be added. Vales.
• u

  In the Fifth Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, 'tis written adver∣bially, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, inconvertibly, and indivisibly, and inconfusealy. Vales.
• vv

  Before these▪ some words seem to be wanting in the Greek-Text, which from, the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill may be supplied after this manner: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Bishops intreated them to go into the Oratory [of the Holy Euphemia's Church.] Further▪ the mistake of Langus and Christophor∣son is to be taken notice of here; who have rendred 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Church of the Holy Martyr Euphemia. The Synod of Chalcedon was in∣deed assembled in the Temple, or Church of Saint Euphemia. But, the Treaty, or Conference, concerning the Faith was held in the Oratory of the said Church, according as the Emperour had given order in the Allocution which is recited in the Councill, pag. 250. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to meet in the Oratory [or Quire] of the most Holy Church. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [Martyrium] is taken for the Church, as it appears from the Third Action of the Chal∣cedon-Synod, where the Bishops are said to have met in the Martyrium of the most Holy and Victorious Martyr Euphemia, And in the other Actions of that Councill, the same Bishops are said to have come to∣gether into the most holy church of the same Martyr. In regard therefore 'tis manifest, that the Oratory (wherein some few of the Bishops met only, to treat concerning the Faith, together with Ana∣tolius and the Deputies of the Romish See,) was part of Saint Euphe∣mia's Church, it remains to be inquired, what part of the Church that was. Saint Euphemia's Church consisted of three spacious Edifices; the first whereof was an Atrium, or, Court. The second, the Basilico, [or, the Church it self;] the third, the Altar built in form of a Cuppolo, as Evagrius tells us in the third chapter of this book. The Oratory therefore is the same with the Altar, which now a days we term the Choire, or, Quire. Nor has our Evagrius done right, in making use of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to signifie the Oratory; for the Emperour had not ordered the Bishops to meet in the Martyrium, but in the Oratory of the Martyr, as we have now said. Vales.
• See chap. 4.
• †

  Or, to the Divine heighth.
• ‖

  Or, by the Empe∣rour's or∣der.
• Ordained, or, Consti∣tuted.
• x

  Not a Metropoli∣ticall Right or Priviledge, but the name of a Metropolis only, was given to the City of Chalcedon: for these are the words of the Emperour Marcianus's Law; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, We have Decreed, that the City of the Chalcedonensians, wherein the Synod of the most Holy Faith was con∣vened, should have the priviledges of a Metropolis, honouring it with the name only, to wit, its proper dignity being preserved to the Metropolis of the Nicomedians. But although the Emperour in these words seems to adorn only the City it self of the Chalcedonensians, with the Title of a Metropolis, yet that priviledge belongs even to the Church of the Chalcedonensians also. From that time therefore the Bishop of Chalcedon had the honour of a Metropolitane: but, had no Metropoliti∣call Right or Priviledge, because the Emperour by this Law would have nothing diminished from the dignity of the Bishop of Nicomedia. The Bishops of this very Councill have determined [or judged] the same thing in the Cause of the Bishops of Nicomedia and Nicaea. For, whereas Nicaea by the Emperour's Rescript had obtained the honour of a Metropolis, the Judges and Bishops who were in the Councill made answer, that this honour had been given only to the City by the Emperours; nor could the Bishop of Nicaea by this Law arrogate to himself a Metropoliticall Right or Priviledge; but was only preferred before the other Bishops of the Province Bythinia: so that, he was accounted in the second place after the Metropolitane, as may be seen in the Thirteenth Action. Further, what the Metropoli∣ticall Rights and Priviledges were, we are informed from the Canons of the Nicene Councill; to wit, that the Ordinations of Provinciall Bi∣shops should not be made without the Metropolitan's consent: and that the Metropolitane Bishop should have a power of calling out the Provin∣ciall Bishops to a Councill of his own. Moreover, in the Florentine Manuscript I found it written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, although in the Chalcedon-Councill it is always written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Regularly it should be written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But the Ancients seem to have said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as 'tis apparent from many places in the Chalcedon-Councill. Vales.
• Or, what was fitting should be done.
• y

  In Nicephorus, instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, other things,] it is righter thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with the accent in the last syllable save one; understand, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Session, or Conven∣tion. I wonder, that neither Musculus nor Christophorson per∣ceived this. Vales.
• z

  Yes, in the Ninth Action, the Cause of Theodoret the Bishop was judged, as Our Copies show us. But the Copies of the Chal∣cedon Synod, which Evagrius made use of, seem to have been different from ours. For, as we have seen a little before, Eva∣grius reckons a Seventh Action, wherein other Canons were pro∣mulged. Which Action is at this day wanting in our Copies. Vales.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Tenth Action of the Chalcedon-Councill, and in Nicephorus, the Praepo∣sition is wanting. But in the Florentine Manuscript, I found it written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which is the same as if he should have said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, among, or, of the number of the Bishops▪ Vales. The reading in Robert Stephens is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• b

  The Bi∣shops De∣creed, that as well Bas∣sianus, as Stephanus, should be removed from the Bishoprick of Ephesus, and that in their place another Bishop should be made; as may be seen in the Eleventh and Twelfth Action. This place of E∣vagrius therefore is to be made good thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that as well he as Stephanus should be ejected, or, deposed, and another Substituted in their room. Vales.
• c

  Instead of Basianus, it must be made Sabinianus, from the Acts of the Chalcedon-Councill. Of this Sabinianus Bishop of the Perrenses (which is a City in the Euphratensian Province) Liberatus makes mention, in the twelfth Chapter of his Breviarium. Also, there is an Epistle of Theodoret's extant, written to this Sabinianus, which is reckoned the 126^th amongst his Epistles. Vales.
• Or, should be placed.