Preface.

 Prolegomena.

 The Life of Eusebius.

 Chapter I

 §2.  Eusebius’ Birth and Training. His Life in Cæsarea until the Outbreak of the Persecution. 

 §3.  The Persecution of Diocletian. 

 §4.  Eusebius’ Accession to the Bishopric of Cæsarea. 

 §5.  The Outbreak of the Arian Controversy. The Attitude of Eusebius  .

 §6.  The Council of Nicæa  .

 §7.  Continuance of the Arian Controversy. Eusebius’ Relations to the Two Parties. 

 §8.  Eusebius and Marcellus  .

 §9.  The Death of Eusebius. 

 The Writings of Eusebius.

 Chapter II

 §2.  Catalogue of his Works  .

 Eusebius' Church History.

 Chapter III

 §2.  The Author’s Design  .

 §3.  Eusebius as a Historian. The Merits and Defects of his History  .

 §4.  Editions and Versions  .

 §5.  Literature  .

  Testimonies of the Ancients in Favor of Eusebius. 

 Testimonies of the Ancients Against Eusebius.

 Book I

 The Church History of Eusebius.

 Chapter II.—  Summary View of the Pre-existence and Divinity of Our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ. 

 Chapter III.—  The Name Jesus and also the Name Christ were known from the Beginning, and were honored by the Inspired Prophets. 

 Chapter IV.—  The Religion Proclaimed by Him to All Nations Was Neither New Nor Strange. 

 Chapter V.—  The Time of his Appearance among Men. 

 Chapter VI.—  About the Time of Christ, in accordance with Prophecy, the Rulers who had governed the Jewish Nation in Regular Succession from the Days

 Chapter VII.—  The Alleged Discrepancy in the Gospels in regard to the Genealogy of Christ. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Cruelty of Herod toward the Infants, and the Manner of his Death. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Times of Pilate. 

 Chapter X.—  The High Priests of the Jews under whom Christ taught. 

 Chapter XI.—  Testimonies in Regard to John the Baptist and Christ. 

 Chapter XII.—  The Disciples of our Saviour. 

 Chapter XIII.—  Narrative concerning the Prince of the Edessenes. 

 Book II

 Book II.

 Chapter I.—  The Course pursued by the Apostles after the Ascension of Christ. 

 Chapter II.—  How Tiberius was affected when informed by Pilate concerning Christ. 

 Chapter III.—  The Doctrine of Christ soon spread throughout All the World. 

 Chapter IV.—  After the Death of Tiberius, Caius appointed Agrippa King of the Jews, having punished Herod with Perpetual Exile. 

 Chapter V.—  Philo’s Embassy to Caius in Behalf of the Jews. 

 Chapter VI.—  The Misfortunes which overwhelmed the Jews after their Presumption against Christ. 

 Chapter VII.—  Pilate’s Suicide. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Famine which took Place in the Reign of Claudius. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Martyrdom of James the Apostle. 

 Chapter X.—  Agrippa, who was also called Herod, having persecuted the Apostles, immediately experienced the Divine Vengeance. 

 Chapter XI.—  The Impostor Theudas and his Followers. 

 Chapter XII.—  Helen, the Queen of the Osrhœnians. 

 Chapter XIII.—  Simon Magus. 

 Chapter XIV.—  The Preaching of the Apostle Peter in Rome. 

 Chapter XV.—  The Gospel according to Mark. 

 Chapter XVI.—  Mark first proclaimed Christianity to the Inhabitants of Egypt. 

 Chapter XVII.—  Philo’s Account of the Ascetics of Egypt. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  The Works of Philo   that have come down to us. 

 Chapter XIX.—  The Calamity which befell the Jews in Jerusalem on the Day of the Passover. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Events which took Place in Jerusalem during the Reign of Nero. 

 Chapter XXI.—  The Egyptian, who is mentioned also in the Acts of the Apostles. 

 Chapter XXII.—  Paul having been sent bound from Judea to Rome, made his Defense, and was acquitted of every Charge. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  The Martyrdom of James, who was called the Brother of the Lord. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  Annianus the First Bishop of the Church of Alexandria after Mark. 

 Chapter XXV.—  The Persecution under Nero in which Paul and Peter were honored at Rome with Martyrdom in Behalf of Religion. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  The Jews, afflicted with Innumerable Evils, commenced the Last War Against the Romans. 

 Book III

 Book III.

 Chapter II.—  The First Ruler of the Church of Rome. 

 Chapter III.—  The Epistles of the Apostles. 

 Chapter IV.—  The First Successors of the Apostles. 

 Chapter V.—  The Last Siege of the Jews after Christ. 

 Chapter VI.—  The Famine which oppressed them. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Predictions of Christ. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Signs which preceded the War. 

 Chapter IX.—  Josephus and the Works which he has left. 

 Chapter X.—  The Manner in which Josephus mentions the Divine Books. 

 Chapter XI.—  Symeon rules the Church of Jerusalem after James. 

 Chapter XII.—  Vespasian commands the Descendants of David to be sought. 

 Chapter XIII.—  Anencletus, the Second Bishop of Rome. 

 Chapter XIV.—  Abilius, the Second Bishop of Alexandria. 

 Chapter XV.—  Clement, the Third Bishop of Rome. 

 Chapter XVI.—  The Epistle of Clement. 

 Chapter XVII.—  The Persecution under Domitian. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  The Apostle John and the Apocalypse. 

 Chapter XIX.—  Domitian commands the Descendants of David to be slain. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Relatives of our Saviour. 

 Chapter XXI.—  Cerdon becomes the Third Ruler of the Church of Alexandria. 

 Chapter XXII.—  Ignatius, the Second Bishop of Antioch. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  Narrative Concerning John the Apostle. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  The Order of the Gospels. 

 Chapter XXV.—  The Divine Scriptures that are accepted and those that are not. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  Menander the Sorcerer. 

 Chapter XXVII.—  The Heresy of the Ebionites. 

 Chapter XXVIII.—  Cerinthus the Heresiarch. 

 Chapter XXIX.—  Nicolaus and the Sect named after him. 

 Chapter XXX.—  The Apostles that were Married. 

 Chapter XXXI.—  The Death of John and Philip. 

 Chapter XXXII.—  Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, suffers Martyrdom. 

 Chapter XXXIII.—  Trajan forbids the Christians to be sought after. 

 Chapter XXXIV.—  Evarestus, the Fourth Bishop of the Church of Rome. 

 Chapter XXXV.—  Justus, the Third Bishop of Jerusalem. 

 Chapter XXXVI.—  Ignatius and His Epistles. 

 Chapter XXXVII.—  The Evangelists that were still Eminent at that Time. 

 Chapter XXXVIII.—  The Epistle of Clement and the Writings falsely ascribed to him. 

 Chapter XXXIX.—  The Writings of Papias. 

 Book IV

 Book IV.

 Chapter II.—  The Calamities of the Jews during Trajan’s Reign. 

 Chapter III.—  The Apologists that wrote in Defense of the Faith during the Reign of Adrian. 

 Chapter IV.—  The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria under the Same Emperor  .

 Chapter V.—  The Bishops of Jerusalem from the Age of our Saviour to the Period under Consideration 

 Chapter VI.—  The Last Siege of the Jews under Adrian  .

 Chapter VII.—  The Persons that became at that Time Leaders of Knowledge falsely so-called  .

 Chapter VIII.—  Ecclesiastical Writers  .

 Chapter IX.—  The Epistle of Adrian, decreeing that we should not be punished without a Trial  .

 Chapter X.—  The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria during the Reign of Antoninus  .

 Chapter XI.—  The Heresiarchs of that Age  .

 Chapter XII.—  The Apology of Justin addressed to Antoninus. 

 ChapterXIII.—  The Epistle of Antoninus to the Common Assembly of Asia in Regard to our Doctrine  .

 Chapter XIV.—  The Circumstances related of Polycarp, a Friend of the Apostles  .

 Chapter XV.—  Under Verus,   Polycarp with Others suffered Martyrdom at Smyrna 

 Chapter XVI.—  Justin the Philosopher preaches the Word of Christ in Rome and suffers Martyrdom. 

 Chapter XVII.—  The Martyrs whom Justin mentions in his Own Work. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  The Works of Justin which have come down to us. 

 Chapter XIX.—  The Rulers of the Churches of Rome and Alexandria during the Reign of Verus. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Rulers of the Church of Antioch. 

 Chapter XXI.—  The Ecclesiastical Writers that flourished in Those Days. 

 Chapter XXII.—  Hegesippus and the Events which he mentions. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, and the Epistles which he wrote. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  Theophilus Bishop of Antioch. 

 Chapter XXV.—  Philip and Modestus. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  Melito and the Circumstances which he records. 

 Chapter XXVII.—  Apolinarius, Bishop of the Church of Hierapolis. 

 Chapter XXVIII.—  Musanus and His Writings. 

 Chapter XXIX.—  The Heresy of Tatian. 

 Chapter XXX.—  Bardesanes the Syrian and his Extant Works. 

 Book V

 Book V.

 Chapter I.—  The Number of those who fought for Religion in Gaul Under Verus and the Nature of their Conflicts. 

 Chapter II.—  The Martyrs, beloved of God, kindly ministered unto those who fell in the Persecution. 

 Chapter III.—  The Vision which appeared in a Dream to the Witness Attalus. 

 Chapter IV.—  Irenæus commended by the Witnesses in a Letter. 

 Chapter V.—  God sent Rain from Heaven for Marcus Aurelius Cæsar in Answer to the Prayers of our People. 

 Chapter VI.—  Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome. 

 Chapter VII.—  Even down to those Times Miracles were performed by the Faithful. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Statements of Irenæus in regard to the Divine Scriptures. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Bishops under Commodus. 

 Chapter X.—  Pantænus the Philosopher. 

 Chapter XI.—  Clement of Alexandria. 

 Chapter XII.—  The Bishops in Jerusalem. 

 Chapter XIII.—  Rhodo and his Account of the Dissension of Marcion. 

 Chapter XIV.—  The False Prophets of the Phrygians. 

 Chapter XV.—  The Schism of Blastus at Rome. 

 Chapter XVI.—  The Circumstances related of Montanus and his False Prophets. 

 Chapter XVII.—  Miltiades and His Works. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  The Manner in which Apollonius refuted the Phrygians, and the Persons   whom he Mentions. 

 Chapter XIX.—  Serapion on the Heresy of the Phrygians. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Writings of Irenæus against the Schismatics at Rome. 

 Chapter XXI.—  How Appolonius suffered Martyrdom at Rome. 

 Chapter XXII.—  The Bishops that were well known at this Time. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  The Question then agitated concerning the Passover. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  The Disagreement in Asia. 

 Chapter XXV.—  How All came to an Agreement respecting the Passover. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  The Elegant Works of Irenæus which have come down to us. 

 Chapter XXVII.—  The Works of Others that flourished at that Time. 

 Chapter XXVIII.—  Those who first advanced the Heresy of Artemon their Manner of Life, and how they dared to corrupt the Sacred Scriptures. 

 Book VI

 Book VI.

 Chapter II.—  The Training of Origen from Childhood. 

 Chapter III.—  While still very Young, he taught diligently the Word of Christ. 

 Chapter IV.—  The pupils of Origen that became Martyrs. 

 Chapter V.—  Potamiæna. 

 Chapter VI.—  Clement of Alexandria. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Writer, Judas. 

 Chapter VIII.—  Origen’s Daring Deed. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Miracles of Narcissus. 

 Chapter X.—  The Bishops of Jerusalem. 

 Chapter XI.—  Alexander. 

 Chapter XII.—  Serapion and his Extant Works. 

 Chapter XIII.—  The Writings of Clement. 

 Chapter XIV.—  The Scriptures mentioned by Him. 

 Chapter XV.—  Heraclas. 

 Chapter XVI.—  Origen’s Earnest Study of the Divine Scriptures. 

 Chapter XVII.—  The Translator Symmachus. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  Ambrose. 

 Chapter XIX.—  Circumstances Related of Origen. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Extant Works of the Writers of that Age. 

 Chapter XXI.—  The Bishops that were well known at that Time. 

 Chapter XXII.—  The Works of Hippolytus which have reached us. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  Origen’s Zeal and his Elevation to the Presbyterate. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  The Commentaries which he prepared at Alexandria. 

 Chapter XXV.—  His Review of the Canonical Scriptures. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  Heraclas becomes Bishop of Alexandria. 

 Chapter XXVII.—  How the Bishops regarded Origen. 

 Chapter XXVIII.—  The Persecution under Maximinus. 

 Chapter XXIX.—  Fabianus, who was wonderfully designated Bishop of Rome by God. 

 Chapter XXX.—  The Pupils of Origen. 

 Chapter XXXI.—  Africanus. 

 Chapter XXXII.—  The Commentaries which Origen composed in Cæsarea in Palestine. 

 Chapter XXXIII.—  The Error of Beryllus. 

 Chapter XXXIV.—  Philip Cæsar. 

 Chapter XXXV.—  Dionysius succeeds Heraclas in the Episcopate. 

 Chapter XXXVI.—  Other Works of Origen. 

 Chapter XXXVII.—  The Dissension of the Arabians. 

 Chapter XXXVIII.—  The Heresy of the Elkesites. 

 Chapter XXXIX.—  The Persecution under Decius, and the Sufferings of Origen. 

 Chapter XL.—  The Events which happened to Dionysius. 

 Chapter XLI.—  The Martyrs in Alexandria. 

 Chapter XLII.—  Others of whom Dionysius gives an Account. 

 Chapter XLIII.—  Novatus,   his Manner of Life and his Heresy. 

 Chapter XLIV.—  Dionysius’ Account of Serapion. 

 Chapter XLV.—  An Epistle of Dionysius to Novatus. 

 Chapter XLVI.—  Other Epistles of Dionysius. 

 Book VII

 Book VII.

 Chapter I.—  The Wickedness of Decius and Gallus. 

 Chapter II.—  The Bishops of Rome in those Times. 

 Chapter III.—  Cyprian, and the Bishops with him, first taught that it was necessary to purify by Baptism those converted from Heresy. 

 Chapter IV.—  The Epistles which Dionysius wrote on this Subject. 

 Chapter V.—  The Peace following the Persecution. 

 Chapter VI.—  The Heresy of Sabellius. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Abominable Error of the Heretics the Divine Vision of Dionysius and the Ecclesiastical Canon which he received. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Heterodoxy of Novatus. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Ungodly Baptism of the Heretics. 

 Chapter X.—  Valerian and the Persecution under him. 

 Chapter XI.—  The Events which happened at this Time to Dionysius and those in Egypt. 

 Chapter XII.—  The Martyrs in Cæsarea in Palestine. 

 Chapter XIII.—  The Peace under Gallienus. 

 Chapter XIV.—  The Bishops that flourished at that Time. 

 Chapter XV.—  The Martyrdom of Marinus at Cæsarea. 

 Chapter XVI.—  Story in Regard to Astyrius. 

 Chapter XVII.—  The Signs at Paneas of the Great Might of our Saviour. 

 Chapter XVIII.—  The Statue which the Woman with an Issue of Blood erected. 

 Chapter XIX.—  The Episcopal Chair of James. 

 Chapter XX.—  The Festal Epistles of Dionysius, in which he also gives a Paschal Canon. 

 Chapter XXI.—  The Occurrences at Alexandria. 

 Chapter XXII.—  The Pestilence which came upon them. 

 Chapter XXIII.—  The Reign of Gallienus. 

 Chapter XXIV.—  Nepos and his Schism. 

 Chapter XXV.—  The Apocalypse of John. 

 Chapter XXVI.—  The Epistles of Dionysius. 

 Chapter XXVII.—  Paul of Samosata, and the Heresy introduced by him at Antioch. 

 Chapter XXVIII.—  The Illustrious Bishops of that Time. 

 Chapter XXIX.—  Paul, having been refuted by Malchion, a Presbyter from the Sophists, was excommunicated. 

 Chapter XXX.—  The Epistle of the Bishops against Paul. 

 Chapter XXXI.—  The Perversive Heresy of the Manicheans which began at this Time. 

 Chapter XXXII.—  The Distinguished Ecclesiastics   of our Day, and which of them survived until the Destruction of the Churches. 

 Book VIII

 Book VIII.

 Chapter I.—  The Events which preceded the Persecution in our Times. 

 Chapter II.—  The Destruction of the Churches. 

 Chapter III.—  The Nature of the Conflicts endured in the Persecution. 

 Chapter IV.—  The Famous Martyrs of God, who filled Every Place with their Memory and won Various Crowns in behalf of Religion. 

 Chapter V.—  Those in Nicomedia. 

 Chapter VI.—  Those in the Palace. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Egyptians in Phœnicia. 

 Chapter VIII.—  Those in Egypt  .

 Chapter IX.—  Those in Thebais. 

 Chapter X.—  The Writings of Phileas the Martyr describing the Occurrences at Alexandria. 

 Chapter XI.—  Those in Phrygia. 

 Chapter XII.—  Many Others, both Men and Women, who suffered in Various Ways. 

 Chapter XIII.—  The Bishops of the Church that evinced by their Blood the Genuineness of the Religion which they preached. 

 Chapter XIV.—  The Character of the Enemies of Religion. 

 Chapter XV.—  The Events which happened to the Heathen. 

 Chapter XVI.—  The Change of Affairs for the Better. 

 Chapter XVII.—  The Revocation of the Rulers. 

 Martyrs of Palestine.

 Martyrs of Palestine.

 Chapter I.

 Chapter II.

 Chapter III.

 Chapter IV.

 Chapter V.

 Chapter VI.

 Chapter VII.

 Chapter VIII.

 Chapter IX.

 Chapter X.

 Chapter XI.

 Chapter XII.

 Chapter XIII.

 Book IX

 Book IX.

 Chapter II.—  The Subsequent Reverse. 

 Chapter III.—  The Newly Erected Statue at Antioch. 

 Chapter IV.—  The Memorials against us. 

 Chapter V.—  The Forged Acts. 

 Chapter VI.—  Those who suffered Martyrdom at this Time. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Decree against us which was engraved on Pillars. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Misfortunes which happened in Connection with these Things, in Famine, Pestilence, and War. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Victory of the God-Beloved Emperors. 

 Chapter X.—  The Overthrow of the Tyrants and the Words which they uttered before their Death. 

 Chapter XI.—  The Final Destruction of the Enemies of Religion. 

 Book X

 Book X.

 Chapter II.—  The Restoration of the Churches. 

 Chapter III.—  The Dedications in Every Place. 

 Chapter IV.—  Panegyric on the Splendor of Affairs. 

 Chapter V.—  Copies of Imperial Laws. 

  Chapter VI.   —   Copy of an Imperial Epistle in which Money is granted to the Churches. 

 Chapter VII.—  The Exemption of the Clergy. 

 Chapter VIII.—  The Subsequent Wickedness of Licinius, and his Death. 

 Chapter IX.—  The Victory of Constantine, and the Blessings which under him accrued to the Subjects of the Roman Empire. 

 Supplementary Notes and Tables.

 On Bk. III. chap. 3, § 5 (note 17, continued).

 On Bk. III. chap. 3, § 6 (note 22, continued).

 On Bk. III. chap. 24, § 17 (note 18 continued).

 On Bk. III. chap. 25, § 4 (note 18 continued).

 On Bk. III. chap. 28, § 1.

 On Bk. III. chap. 32, § 6 (note 14  a  ).

 On Bk. III. chap. 36 § 13.

 On Bk. III. chap. 39, § 1 (note 1, continued).

 On Bk. III. chap. 39, § 6.

 On Bk. III. chap. 39, § 16.

 On Bk. IV. chap. 10.

 On Bk. IV. chap. 18, § 2.

 On Bk. V. Introd. § I (note 3, continued).  The Successors of Antoninus Pius  .

 On Bk. V. chap. 1, § 27 (note 26, continued).

 On Bk. VI. chap. 2 (note 1, continued).  Origen’s Life and Writings  .

 On Bk. VI. chap. 8, § 5 (note 4).  Origen and Demetrius  .

 On Bk. VI. chap. 12, § 6.

 On Bk. VI. chap. 23, § 4 (note 6).  Origen’s Visit to Achaia  .

 On Bk. VII. chap. 25, § 11.

 On Bk. VII. chap. 26, § 1 (note 4, continued).

 On Bk. VIII. chap. 2, § 4 (note 3, continued).  The Causes of the Diocletian Persecution  .

 On Bk. X. chap. 8, § 4 (note I, a).

 Table of Roman Emperors.

 The Bishops of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, mentioned by Eusebius.

  Bishops of Alexandria. 

  Bishops of Antioch. 

  Bishops of Jerusalem. 

 Table showing the Roman Method of counting the Days of the Month.

 Table of Macedonian Months

ChapterXIII.—  The Epistle of Antoninus to the Common Assembly of Asia in Regard to our Doctrine .  136  This edict is undoubtedly spurious. It contradicts all that we know in regard to the relation of Christianity to the State during this century, and both the language and the sentiments make it impossible to call it genuine. It is probably a forgery of the second century. It is found in our two (or more properly one, as one is simply a slavish copy of the other) mss. of Justin; but this is simply accidental, as it does not belong there, but was appended to the edict of Hadrian by some late copyist. The edict is now almost universally acknowledged to be a forgery; compare Overbeck, Studien zur Gesch. der alt. Kirche, p. 93 sq. Wieseler contends for its genuineness, but no good critic follows him.

1. The Emperor Cæsar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus,  137  Eusebius gives this as an edict of Antoninus Pius, and yet its inscription assigns it to Marcus Aurelius. Overbeck concludes that Eusebius was led by internal evidence to assign the rescript to Antoninus Pius, but that he did not venture to change the inscription of the original which lay before him. This seems the only possible explanation, and as Eusebius at any rate was badly confused in regard to the names of the Antonines, the glaring discrepancy may not have meant very much to him. In our mss. of Justin Martyr, where this edict is appended to the first Apology, the superscription and text are quite different from the form given by Eusebius. The rescript is in fact assigned there by its superscription to Antoninus Pius, instead of to Marcus Aurelius. But if that was its original form, we cannot understand the later change to Marcus Aurelius, for certainly his authorship is precluded on the very face of the document; but it is easier to see how it could have been later assigned to Antonius Pius under the influence of Eusebius’ direct statement. We have no knowledge of the original Latin of this pretended edict. Rufinus evidently did not know it, for he translates the document from the Greek of Eusebius. The text of the edict as given by Eusebius differs considerably at many points from the text found in the mss. of Justin, and the variations are such as can hardly be explained as due merely to copyists’ errors or alterations. At the same time the two texts are plainly not independent of each other, and cannot be looked upon as independent translations of one Latin original. We may perhaps suppose that one text represents the original translation, the other a revision of it. Whether the revision was made by a comparison with the original, and thus more accurately represents it, we cannot tell. If, then, one is a revision of the other, the form given in the mss. of Justin is evidently the later, for its statements in more places than one are an improvement upon those of the other text in point of clearness and decisiveness. Moreover, as remarked just above, the ascription of the edict to Antoninus Pius must be later than its ascription to Marcus Aurelius. Armenicus, Pontifex Maximus, for the fifteenth time Tribune, for the third time Consul, to the Common Assembly of Asia, Greeting.

2. I know that the gods also take care that such persons do not escape detection. For they would much rather punish those who will not worship them than you would.

3. But you throw them into confusion, and while you accuse them of atheism you only confirm them in the opinion which they hold. It would indeed be more desirable for them, when accused, to appear to die for their God, than to live. Wherefore also they come off victorious when they give up their lives rather than yield obedience to your commands.

4. And in regard to the earthquakes which have been and are still taking place,  138  Numerous earthquakes took place in Asia Minor and in Rhodes during the reign of Antoninus Pius, and these, as well as famines and other occurrences of the kind which were uncomfortably frequent at this time, were always made the signal for renewed attacks upon the Christians, who were held by the people in general responsible for these misfortunes. See Julius Capitolinus’ Vita Antonini Pii, chap. 9. it is not improper to admonish you who lose heart whenever they occur, and nevertheless are accustomed to compare your conduct with theirs.  139  This sentence has caused great difficulty. Crusè translates, “But as to those earthquakes which have taken place and still continue, it is not out of place to admonish you who are cast down whenever these happen, that you compare your own deportment with theirs.” Most of the older translators and, among the moderns, Stigloher, have translated in the same way; but the Greek of the last clause will not warrant this construction. The original runs as follows:…ὑπομνῆσαι ἀθυμοῦντας μὲν ὅταν περ᾽ ὦσι, παραβ€λλοντας δὲ τὰ ὑμέτερα πρὸς τὰ ἐκείνων. Stroth inserts μή before ἀθυμοῦντας, and translates, “Was die Erdbeben betrift, die sich ereignet haben, und noch ereignen, halte ich nicht für undienlich euch zu erinnern dass ihr den vorkommenden Fall den Muth nicht sinken lasst, sondern euer Betragen einmal mit jener ihrem vergleicht.” The insertion, however, is quite unwarranted and must be rejected. Valesius renders: Cæterum de terræ motibus, qui vel facti sunt vel etiamnum fiunt, non absurdum videtur vos commonere, qui et animos abjicitis, quoties hujusmodi casus contingunt, et vestra cum illorum institutis comparatis; which makes excellent sense and might be accepted, were it not for the fact that it fails to bring out adequately the force of μέν and δέ. Heinichen discusses the passage at length (in his edition of Eusebius, Vol. III. pp. 670–674), and translates as follows: Non alienum videtur vos admonere (corripere) de terræ motibus qui vel fuerunt vel adhuc sunt, vos qui estis quidem animo abjecto, quoties illi eveniunt, nihilo autem minus vestram agendi rationem conferre soletis cum illorum. Overbeck follows Heinichen in his German Translation of the edit (ibid. p. 127 sqq.), and the translation of Closs is similar. It seems to be the only rendering which the Greek will properly admit, and I have therefore felt compelled to adopt it, though I should have preferred to interpret as Valesius does, had the original permitted.

5. They indeed become the more confident in God, while you, during the whole time, neglect, in apparent ignorance, the other gods and the worship of the Immortal, and oppress and persecute even unto death the Christians who worship him.  140  An orthodox worshiper of the Roman gods, like Antoninus Pius, can hardly have called the God of the Christians “The Immortal,” in distinction from the gods of the Romans.

6. But in regard to these persons, many of the governors of the provinces wrote also to our most divine father, to whom he wrote in reply that they should not trouble these people unless it should appear that they were attempting something affecting the Roman government.  141  Among these epistles the writer of this edict undoubtedly meant to include the rescript ostensibly addressed by Hadrian to Minucius Fundanus. See chap. 9, above. And to me also many have sent communications concerning these men, but I have replied to them in the same way that my father did.

7. But if any one still persists in bringing accusations against any of these people as such, the person who is accused shall be acquitted of the charge, even if it appear that he is one of them, but the accuser shall be punished.  142  This is the climax of the whole. Not only is the accused to be set free, but the accuser is to be held as guilty! This really goes further than Constantine. See above, chap. 9, note 4. Published in Ephesus in the Common Assembly of Asia.”

8. To these things Melito,  143  On Melito and his writings, see chap. 26, note 1. bishop of the church of Sardis, and a man well known at that time, is a witness,  144  Eusebius evidently draws this conclusion from the passage from Melito’s Apology, quoted below, in chap. 26, where Melito refers to edicts of Antoninus Pius; for had Eusebius referred to another passage, he would undoubtedly have quoted it. But according to Melito, the edicts of Antoninus were to prevent any new methods of procedure against the Christians, i.e. tumultuous proceedings in opposition to the custom established by Trajan. The edicts of which he speaks were intended, then, to perpetuate the principles of Trajan, which had been, since his time, the silent law of the empire upon the subject. The edicts cannot have been edicts of toleration (even Melito himself does not regard them so), but edicts against illegal, tumultuous proceedings, and the accusations of informers, and therefore quite in the spirit of Trajan. But as the significance of Trajan’s rescript was entirely misunderstood in the early Church (see above, Bk. III. chap. 33, note 6), so it was the common opinion that the attitude of the State toward the Church was at bottom friendly to Christianity, and therefore all edicts forbidding the introduction of new methods were regarded as favorable edicts, as in the present case by Eusebius. Again, had Melito known of such a favorable edict as this of Antoninus, he would certainly have called special and particular attention to it. Melito’s testimony, therefore, instead of being in favor of the genuineness of this edict, is really against it. as is clear from his words in the Apology which he addressed to the Emperor Verus in behalf of our doctrine.

136 This edict is undoubtedly spurious. It contradicts all that we know in regard to the relation of Christianity to the State during this century, and both the language and the sentiments make it impossible to call it genuine. It is probably a forgery of the second century. It is found in our two (or more properly one, as one is simply a slavish copy of the other) mss. of Justin; but this is simply accidental, as it does not belong there, but was appended to the edict of Hadrian by some late copyist. The edict is now almost universally acknowledged to be a forgery; compare Overbeck, Studien zur Gesch. der alt. Kirche, p. 93 sq. Wieseler contends for its genuineness, but no good critic follows him.
137 Eusebius gives this as an edict of Antoninus Pius, and yet its inscription assigns it to Marcus Aurelius. Overbeck concludes that Eusebius was led by internal evidence to assign the rescript to Antoninus Pius, but that he did not venture to change the inscription of the original which lay before him. This seems the only possible explanation, and as Eusebius at any rate was badly confused in regard to the names of the Antonines, the glaring discrepancy may not have meant very much to him. In our mss. of Justin Martyr, where this edict is appended to the first Apology, the superscription and text are quite different from the form given by Eusebius. The rescript is in fact assigned there by its superscription to Antoninus Pius, instead of to Marcus Aurelius. But if that was its original form, we cannot understand the later change to Marcus Aurelius, for certainly his authorship is precluded on the very face of the document; but it is easier to see how it could have been later assigned to Antonius Pius under the influence of Eusebius’ direct statement. We have no knowledge of the original Latin of this pretended edict. Rufinus evidently did not know it, for he translates the document from the Greek of Eusebius. The text of the edict as given by Eusebius differs considerably at many points from the text found in the mss. of Justin, and the variations are such as can hardly be explained as due merely to copyists’ errors or alterations. At the same time the two texts are plainly not independent of each other, and cannot be looked upon as independent translations of one Latin original. We may perhaps suppose that one text represents the original translation, the other a revision of it. Whether the revision was made by a comparison with the original, and thus more accurately represents it, we cannot tell. If, then, one is a revision of the other, the form given in the mss. of Justin is evidently the later, for its statements in more places than one are an improvement upon those of the other text in point of clearness and decisiveness. Moreover, as remarked just above, the ascription of the edict to Antoninus Pius must be later than its ascription to Marcus Aurelius.
138 Numerous earthquakes took place in Asia Minor and in Rhodes during the reign of Antoninus Pius, and these, as well as famines and other occurrences of the kind which were uncomfortably frequent at this time, were always made the signal for renewed attacks upon the Christians, who were held by the people in general responsible for these misfortunes. See Julius Capitolinus’ Vita Antonini Pii, chap. 9.
139 This sentence has caused great difficulty. Crusè translates, “But as to those earthquakes which have taken place and still continue, it is not out of place to admonish you who are cast down whenever these happen, that you compare your own deportment with theirs.” Most of the older translators and, among the moderns, Stigloher, have translated in the same way; but the Greek of the last clause will not warrant this construction. The original runs as follows:…ὑπομνῆσαι ἀθυμοῦντας μὲν ὅταν περ᾽ ὦσι, παραβ€λλοντας δὲ τὰ ὑμέτερα πρὸς τὰ ἐκείνων. Stroth inserts μή before ἀθυμοῦντας, and translates, “Was die Erdbeben betrift, die sich ereignet haben, und noch ereignen, halte ich nicht für undienlich euch zu erinnern dass ihr den vorkommenden Fall den Muth nicht sinken lasst, sondern euer Betragen einmal mit jener ihrem vergleicht.” The insertion, however, is quite unwarranted and must be rejected. Valesius renders: Cæterum de terræ motibus, qui vel facti sunt vel etiamnum fiunt, non absurdum videtur vos commonere, qui et animos abjicitis, quoties hujusmodi casus contingunt, et vestra cum illorum institutis comparatis; which makes excellent sense and might be accepted, were it not for the fact that it fails to bring out adequately the force of μέν and δέ. Heinichen discusses the passage at length (in his edition of Eusebius, Vol. III. pp. 670–674), and translates as follows: Non alienum videtur vos admonere (corripere) de terræ motibus qui vel fuerunt vel adhuc sunt, vos qui estis quidem animo abjecto, quoties illi eveniunt, nihilo autem minus vestram agendi rationem conferre soletis cum illorum. Overbeck follows Heinichen in his German Translation of the edit (ibid. p. 127 sqq.), and the translation of Closs is similar. It seems to be the only rendering which the Greek will properly admit, and I have therefore felt compelled to adopt it, though I should have preferred to interpret as Valesius does, had the original permitted.
140 An orthodox worshiper of the Roman gods, like Antoninus Pius, can hardly have called the God of the Christians “The Immortal,” in distinction from the gods of the Romans.
141 Among these epistles the writer of this edict undoubtedly meant to include the rescript ostensibly addressed by Hadrian to Minucius Fundanus. See chap. 9, above.
142 This is the climax of the whole. Not only is the accused to be set free, but the accuser is to be held as guilty! This really goes further than Constantine. See above, chap. 9, note 4.
143 On Melito and his writings, see chap. 26, note 1.
144 Eusebius evidently draws this conclusion from the passage from Melito’s Apology, quoted below, in chap. 26, where Melito refers to edicts of Antoninus Pius; for had Eusebius referred to another passage, he would undoubtedly have quoted it. But according to Melito, the edicts of Antoninus were to prevent any new methods of procedure against the Christians, i.e. tumultuous proceedings in opposition to the custom established by Trajan. The edicts of which he speaks were intended, then, to perpetuate the principles of Trajan, which had been, since his time, the silent law of the empire upon the subject. The edicts cannot have been edicts of toleration (even Melito himself does not regard them so), but edicts against illegal, tumultuous proceedings, and the accusations of informers, and therefore quite in the spirit of Trajan. But as the significance of Trajan’s rescript was entirely misunderstood in the early Church (see above, Bk. III. chap. 33, note 6), so it was the common opinion that the attitude of the State toward the Church was at bottom friendly to Christianity, and therefore all edicts forbidding the introduction of new methods were regarded as favorable edicts, as in the present case by Eusebius. Again, had Melito known of such a favorable edict as this of Antoninus, he would certainly have called special and particular attention to it. Melito’s testimony, therefore, instead of being in favor of the genuineness of this edict, is really against it.