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.

CHAP. XIV. That after the death of Eudoxius at Constantino∣ple, the Arians Ordained Demophilus; but the Orthodox, by [the assistance of] Eustathius of Antioch, [made] Evagrius [Bishop of Constantinople.]

FUrther, the Emperour Valens departed from Constantinople, and a 1.1 hastned towards Antioch again. And being arrived at Nicomedia a City of Bithynia, he made a stop there upon this ac∣count. Eudoxius the chief Prelate of the Arian raction ended his life soon after the Emperours departure [from Constantinople,] in Valentini∣anus's and Valens's third Consulate, having been in possession of the Chair of the Constantinopo∣litane Church b 1.2 Nineteen years. Wherefore, the Arians constituted Demophilus [Bishop] in his room. But the Homoöusians, supposing that a fair opportunity was offered to them, elected one Evagrius, a person that owned the same Creed with them. And c 1.3 Eustathius (who had sometime before been Bishop of Antioch, and had formerly been recalled from exile in Jovianus's Reign,) Ordained him. This Eustathius was at that time present at Constantinople, [to which City he came] with a designe of setling and strengthening those of the Homoöusian Faith; where he continued, absconding himself.

Notes

• a 1.1

  The Em∣perour Va∣lens had gone to∣wards An∣tioch be∣fore. But, hearing of Procopius's defection—whilst he was in his jour∣ney, he was forced to come back▪ as Amm. Marcelli∣nus attests, book 26. Baronius therefore finds fault with Socra∣tes without cause. For Socrates says not, that Valens came to Antioch before, but that he went to∣wards that City; which is certainly most true. But Christophorsons Ver∣sion seems to have been the cause of Baronius's mistake; for he ren∣ders it thus: Imperator Valens denuo Antiochiam ire ma••urans, the Em∣perour Valens hastning to go to Antioch again. Vales.
• b 1.2

  Sozomen's account is truer, who makes Eudoxius to have been Bishop but eleven years. 'Tis certain, Eudoxius thrust himself into the Bishoprick of Constantinople when Eusebius and Hypatius were Consuls, which was the year of Christ 359. He died in the third Consulate of Valentinianus and Valens, in the year of our Lord 370. Wherefore▪ at this place of Socrates (in stead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nine∣teen]) it ought to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, eleven,] which is confirmed by Epiphanius Scholasticus. Wherefore, Baronius does here also unde∣servedly reprove Socrates; in regard, not Socrates himself, but the Copies of Socrates's History are here false. Concerning Eudoxius's death, consult Philostorgius, book 9. Vales.
• c 1.3

  Sozomen tells us the same story, in his Eccles. Histor. book 6. chap. 13. But Baronius, at the year of Christ 370, reproves both these Historians. For he maintains, that Eustathius Bishop of Antioch was dead long before, in Constantius's Reign. Indeed, Jerome (in his book de Scriptor. Ecclesiast.) does relate; that Eustathius died in exile, and was buried at Trajanople in Thracia, to which place he had been banished. If this be true, Eustathius must necessarily have died in Constantius's Reign. For Julianus, and after him Jovianus, re∣called all the Bishops from exile. It is indeed sca••ce credible, that Eustathius Bishop of Antioch could live to these times. For, in re∣gard he was at the Nicene Council, which was held in the year of Christ 325; we may suppose him to have been then in the forty fifth year of his age. From this year to the third Consulate of Valenti∣nianus and Valens (wherein Eustathius is said to have ordained Eva∣grius at Constantinople) there are five and fourty years. So that Eusta∣thius must necessarily have been ninety years old, if he ordained Evagrius Bishop in this year. Further, I must not omit, what I have been informed of, from Victor Tununensis's Chronicon; to wit, that Eustathius was not interred at Trajanople, as Jerome relates, but at Philippi. For these are his words: Post Consulatum tertium Longini, &c. After Longinus's third Consulate, C••lendio Bishop of Antioch got together the reliques of his predecessour Eustathius, Bishop and Confessour, from Philippi in Macedonia, and with great honour conveyed them to Antioch. Theodorus Lector says the same, in his second book Excerpt. Histor. Eccle∣siast. Baronius does ill, to place this translation of Eustathius's reliques on the year of Christ 482, in regard, as 'tis evident from Victor Tununen∣sis's Chronicon, 'twas performed in the year of our Lord 490, when Lon∣ginus II, and Faustus were Coss. But what Theodorus Lector adds at that place, to wit, that the Eustathians, who before had meetings by them∣selves, were then at length united to the Catholicks, an hundred years after Eustathius's death; is in my judgment false. For, this being sup∣posed, Eustathius would have lived to the year of Christ 390. Vales.