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. V. Concerning the Ejection of Anastasius Bishop of * 1.1 Theopolis.

MOreover, Justinus ejected Anastasius out of the Chair of Theopolis; objecting a∣gainst him, both the profuse expence of the sacred Revenue which had been made, saying it was immoderate, and not according to what was meet and necessary; and also [charging him] with † 1.2 reflecting abusively on himself. For when Anastasius was asked, why he would fling away the sacred money in so lavish a manner, he replyed openly, that it might not be taken away by Justinus that common Pest. But 'twas said that [Justinus] had therefore conceived an old Grudge against Anastasius, because when

he demanded money of him a 1.3 at his promotion to the Bishoprick, Anastasius would not give it him. Moreover, b 1.4 other matters were objected against Anastasius, by some persons who, I sup∣pose, were desirous of serving and promoting the Emperour's design.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Or, An∣tioch.
• † 1.2

  Or, Blas∣phemy a∣gainst him∣self.
• a 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nicephorus, in regard he un∣derstood not these words, omitted them, as may be seen in book 17. chap. 36. For he his exprest this place of Evagrius thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, But 'twas said that Justinus was angry with him, because he refused to give him money when he demanded it. But 'twas easie to have mended the place of Evagrius, in this manner; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because having been promoted to the Bishoprick he refused to give [Justinus] money who demanded it. And so Christophorson and Musculus seem to have read. For thus Musculus renders it; Dicitur autem Anastasio succensuise, quòd quum pecuniam pro Episcopatûs collatione exigeret, dare illam noluerit; But 'tis said that he had been angry with Anastasius, because when he exacted money for his Collation to the Bishoprick, he refused to give it. This occasion of hatred therefore against Anastasius was of a long standing, before Ju∣stinus had arrived at the Empire. Wherefore Evagrius uses the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifies an ancient and concealed Anger. 'Tis certain, whilst Justinian survived, Anastasius had been elected Bishop of An∣tioch. Now, the Grandees at Court, and those whose interest was great with the Emperour, were wont to exact money of them who were elected Patriarchs, as may be proved by the Example of Chry∣saphius the Eunuch, who demanded money of Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople; as Evagrius has related above, see book 2. chap. 2. Nevertheless, this was forbidden by the Novell Constitutions of Ju∣stinian. Vales.
• b 1.4

  Indeed, Theophanes in his Chronicon, brings another reason, on account whereof Anastasius Sinaïta was deposed from the See of An∣tioch. But, because Translatours have in no wise hit the meaning of Theophanes, I will annex his words here: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: That is, as I render it. On the same year Anastasius the Great, Bishop of Antioch▪ in regard in his answer to the Synodick Letters, he had reprehended John Bishop of Con∣stantinople who had ordained John Bishop of Alexandria, and had [at the same time reproved him] who had been ordained by him was ejected out of his Bishoprick by reason of Justinus's indignation. I reade there∣fore in Theophanes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which emendation is most certain. John Bishop of Alexandria had been ordained at Con∣stantinople by Johannes Scholasticus, on the fifth year of Justinus's Empire, in the year of Christ 570, as Baronius also relates. After his ordination, when (as 'twas usuall) he had written Synodick Letters to Anastasius Bishop of Antioch, Anastasius in his answer to those Let∣ters, had severely reproved his Ordainer Johannes; in regard, con∣trary to the Ecclesiastick Rules, he had been thrust into the place of Eutychius as then living. He had also reprehended him, who having been ordained by him, had drawn upon himself the fault and blot of his own Ordainer. The Emperour Justinus (who loved Johannes Scholasticus, as being the person by whom he had been Crowned,) taking offence at this thing, ejected Anastasius out of his See. Theo∣phanes's Latine Translatour thought, that those Synodick Letters which Anastasius had given answer to, had been written by Johannes Bishop of Constantinople; which is a mistake. For they were written by Jo∣hannes Bishop of Alexandria in the beginning of his Episcopate. Therefore, after the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Comma must be put, as Anasta∣sius Bibliothecarius has done. Further, Baronius places this Deposi∣tion of Anastasius on the year of Christ 573; which is the eighth year of Justinus's Empire. But I had rather, with Theophanes, place it on the Fifth or Sixth year of the same Justinus, in regard it hapned a little after the ordination of Johannes Bishop of Alexandria, which was performed on the year of Christ 570, as Baronius himself does attest. Vales.