EUSEBIUS (BRUNO) OF ANGERS: Bishop of Angers; d. Sept. 1, 1081. He is first met with as bishop of Angers at the synod of Reims in 1049, and for a long time had been an adherent of Berengar's doctrine of the Lord's Supper (see Berengar of Tours). As such he was regarded by Berengar himself and by his opponents Dietwin of Liege, Durand of Troarne, and Humbert. But when he recognized the strength of the opposition, he favored a compromise; at any rate he advised Berengar is 1054 to swear to the formula presented to him. Nevertheless Berengar considered him his friend many years later and requested him to silence a certain Galfrid Martini or to arrange a disputation. In his reply Eusebius not only regretted the whole controversy, but also stated that he would abide by the words of Holy Scripture, according to which the bread and wine after the consecration become the body and blood of the Lord; if one asks how this can take place the answer must be that it is not according to the order of nature but in accordance with the divine omnipotence; at any rate one must be careful not to give offense to the plain Christian. The epistle is a downright renunciation of Berengar in case he should still maintain his view. In favor of the supposition that Eusebius changed his opinion from deference to the count of Anjou, the decided opponent of Berengar and his doctrine, it can be adduced that he did not defend Berengar against the hostilities of the court, and that for a long time he sided with this violent prince. It is also possible that the fact impressed itself upon Eusebius that the religious consciousness of the time more and more opposed Berengar. Our knowledge, however, is too fragmentary to pass a very accurate sentence.S. M. DEUTSCH.
Bibliography: G. E. Lessing, Berengarius Turonensis (Werks, ed. Lachmann-Maltsahn, viii. 331 sqq., 12 vols., Leipsic, 1853-57); H. Sudendorf, Berengarius Turoneneis, pp. 92 sqq. et passim, Gotha, 1850; L. Schwabe, Studien sur Gushichte des sweiten Abendmahlstreits, Leipsic, 1887: J. Schnitzer, Berengar von Tours, 75 sqq., Munich, 1890; idem in Der Katholik, 1892, 544 sqq.; Brocking, in Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Geschichtswissenschaft, v (1891), 362 vi (1892), 232; ZKG, xii (1891), 169; Neander, Christian Church, iii. 508-517.
Becomes Prominent in the Arian Controversy (§ 1).
Works on Biblical Text Criticism
The "Chronicle" (§ 2).
The "Church History" (§ 3).
Minor Historical Works (§ 4).
Apologetic and Dogmatic Works (§ 5).
Exegetical and Miscellaneous Works (§ 6).
III. Estimate of Eusebius
His Doctrine (§ 1).
His Excellencies and Limitations (§ 2).
Eusebius of Casearea (often called
"Eusebius [the friend of] Pamphilus "; see
PAMPHILUS), bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, the
father of church history, was born about 275 or
Little is known of his youth. He be came acquainted with the presbyter Dorotheus in Antioch and probably received exegetical instruction from him. In 296 he was in Palestine and saw Constantine who visited the country with Diocletian. He was in Caesarea when Agapius was bishop and made the acquaintance of Pamphilus, who became his intimate friend. With him he pursued studies which seem to have related chiefly to the preparation of a correct text of the Bible, with the aid of Origen's Hexapla, and commentaries collected by Pamphilus. In 307 Pamphilus was thrown into prison, but Eusebius continued his intercourse and studies. The fruit of their common labors was an apology for Origen in which Pamphilus and Eusebius collaborated, which was finished by Eusebius after the death of Pamphilus and sent to the martyrs in the mines of Phaeno in Egypt. (see below, IL, § 5). After the death of Pamphilus, Eusebius seems to have gone to Tyre and later to Egypt, where apparently he first suffered persecution. The charge that he purchased his liberty by sacrificing to the gods is unfounded.1. Becomes Prominent in the Arian Controversy
Eusebius is next heard of as bishop of Caesarea. He succeeded Agapius, whose time of office is not known, but Eusebius must have become bishop soon after 313. Nothing is known about the first years of his official activity, but with the beginning of the Arian controversies he becomes prominent. Arius appealed to him as his protector, and from a letter of Eusebius to Alexander it is evident that he aided the exiled presbyter (see ARIUS). When the Council of Nicaea met in 325, Eusebius was prominent in its transactions. He was not naturally a leader or a deep thinker, but as a very learned man and well trained in history, at the same time a famous author who enjoyed the special favor of the emperor, he came to the front among the 300 members of the council. The confession which he proposed became the basis of the Nicene formula (see Nicaea, COUNCIL OF). Eusebius was variously implicated in the further development of the Arian controversies, as, for instance, in the dispute with Eustathius of Antioch (q.v.). Eustathius combated the continually growing influence of Origen and his allegorizing exegesis, seeing in his theology the roots of Arianism. Eusebius, on the other hand, was an admirer of Origen, and employed the same principles in his exegesis. Eustathius reproached Eusebius for deviating from the Nicene faith, and was charged in turn with Sabellianism. Eustathius was accused, condemned and deposed at a synod in Antioch. The people of Antioch, always prone to disturbances, rebelled against this action, while the anti-Eustathians proposed Eusebius as the new bishop, but he declined.
After Eustathius had been removed, the Eusebians proceeded against Athanasius, a much more dangerous opponent. In 334 he was summoned before a synod in Caesarea; he did not attend, however, distrusting his opponents. In the following year he was again summoned before a synod in Tyre at which Eusebius presided. Athanasius, divining the result, went to Constantinople to bring his cause before the emperor. The emperor called the bishops to his court, among them Eusebius. Athanasius was condemned and exiled at the end of 335. At the same synod, another opponent was successfully attacked. Marcellus of Ancyra (q.v.) had long opposed the Eusebians, and had only lately protested against the reinstitution of Arius. He was accused of Sabellianism and deposed in the beginning of 336. Constantine died the next year and Eusebius did not long survive him.
Of the extensive literary activity of Eusebius, a relatively large portion has been preserved. Although posterity suspected him of Arianism, Eusebius had made himself indispensable by his method of authorship; his comprehensive and careful excerpts from original sources saved his successors the painstaking labor of research. Hence much has been preserved which otherwise would have been destroyed. The literary productions of Eusebius reflect on the whole the course of his life. At first he occupied himself with works on Biblical criticism, under the influence of Pamphilus and probably of Dorotheus of the School of Antioch. Afterward the persecutions under Diocletian and Galerius directed his attention to the martyrs of his own time and the past. And this led him to the history of the whole Church and finally to the history of the world, which to him was only a preparation for ecclesiastical history. Then followed the time of the Arian controversies, and dogmatic questions came into the foreground. Christianity at last found recognition by the State; and this brought new problems-- apologies of a different sort had to be prepared. Lastly, Eusebius, the court theologian, wrote eulogies in praise of the first "Christian" emperor. To all this activity must be added numerous writings of a miscellaneous nature, addresses, letters, and the like, and exegetical works which include both commentaries and treatises on Biblical archeology and extend over the whole of his life.1. Works on Biblical Text Criticism
Pamphilus and Eusebius occupied themselves with the text criticism of the Old Testament (Septuagint) and especially of the New Testament. An edition of the Septuagint seems to have been already prepared by Origen, which, according to Jerome, was revised and circulated by Eusebius and Pamphilus. For an easier survey of the material of the four Evangelists, Eusebius divided his edition of the New Testament into paragraphs and provided it with a synoptical table so that it might be easier to find the pericopes which belong together (see BIBLE TEXT, II., § 4).2. The "Chronicle"
The two greatest historical works of Eusebius
are his "Chronicle" and his "Church History."
The former (Gk. Pantodape historia, "Universal
History ") is divided into two parts. The first
part (Gk. Chronographia, "Annals") purports to
give an epitome of universal history from the
sources, arranged according to nations. The
In his "Church History," Eusebius attempted according to his own declaration (I., i. 1) to present the history of the Church from the apostles to his own time, with special regard to the following points: (1) the successions of bishops in the principal sees; (2) the history of Christian teachers; (3) the history of heresies; (4) the history of the Jews; (5) the relations to the heathen; (6) the martyrdoms (L, i. 1-3). He grouped his material according to the reigns of the emperors, presenting it as he found it in his sources. The contents are as follows: After a detailed introduction, which treats of Jesus Christ (book i.), comes the history of the apostolic time to the capture of Jerusalem (book ii.); then the following time to Trajan (book iii.); books iv. and v. treat of the second century; book vi. of the time from Severus to Decius; book vii. extends to the outbreak of the persecution under Diocletian; book viii. treats of this persecution; book ix. brings the history to the victory over Maxentius in the West and over Maximinus in the East; book x. relates the reestablishment of the churches and the rebellion and conquest of Licinius. In its present form the work was brought to a conclusion before the death of Crispus (July, 326), and, since book x. is dedicated to Paulinus of Tyre who died before 325, at the end of 323 or in 324. This work required the most comprehensive preparatory studies, and it must have occupied him for years. His collection of martyrdoms of the older period (see below, § 4) may have been one of these preparatory studies. The authenticity of Eusebius's "Church History" is beyond dispute. Every new discovery shows anew the conscientious, careful and intelligent use of the libraries of Caesarea and Jerusalem.4. Minor Historical Works
Before he compiled his church history, Eusebius edited a collection of martyrdoms of the earlier period and a biography of Pamphilus. The martyrology has not survived as a whole, but it has been preserved almost completely in parts. It contained (1) an epistle of the congregation of Smyrna concerning the martyrdom of Polycarp; (2) the martyrdom of Pionius; (3) the martyrdoms of Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonike; (4) the martyrdoms in the congregations of Vienne and Lyons; (5) the martyrdom of Apollonius. Of the life of Pamphilus only a fragment survives. A work on the martyrs of Palestine in the time of Diocletian was composed after 311; numerous fragments are scattered in legendaries which still have to be collected. The life of Constantine was compiled after the death of the emperor and the election of his sons at Augusti (337). It is more a rhetorical eulogy on the emperor than a history, but is of great value on account of numerous documents incorporated in it.5. Apologetic and Dogmatic Works
To the class of apologetic and dogmatic works belong: (1) the "Apology for Origen," the first five books of which, according to the definite statement of Photius, were written by Pamphilus in prison, with the assistance of Eusebius. Eusebius added the sixth book after the death of Pamphilus. We possess only a translation of the first book, made by Rufinus; (2) a treatise against Hierocles (a Roman governor and Neoplatonic philosopher), in which Eusebius combated the former's glorification of Apollonius of Tyana in a work entitled "A Truth-loving Discourse " (Gk. Philalethes logos); (3) and (4) the two prominent and closely connected works commonly known by the Latin titles Praeparatio evangelica and Demonstratio evangelica, the first attempts to prove the excellence of Christianity over every pagan religion and philosophy. The Praeparatio consists of fifteen books which have been completely preserved. Eusebius considered it an introduction to Christianity for heathen. The Demonstratio comprised originally twenty books of which ten have been completely preserved and a fragment of the fifteenth. Here Eusebius treats of the person of Jesus Christ. The work was probably finished before 311; (5) another work which originated in the time of the persecution, entitled "Prophetic Extracts" (Eklogai prophetikai). It discusses in four books the Messianic texts of Holy Scripture; (6) the treatise "On Divine Manifestation" (Peri theophaneias), dating from a much later time. It treats of the incarnation of the Divine Logos, and its contents are in many cases identical with the Demonstratio evangelica. Only fragments are preserved; (7) the polemical treatise "Against Marcellus," dating from about 337; (8) a supplement to the last-named work, entitled "On the Theology of the Church," in which he defended the Nicene doctrine of the Logos against the party of Athanasius. A number of writings, belonging in this category, have been entirely lost.6. Exegetical and Miscellaneous Works.
Of the exegetical works of Eusebius nothing has
been preserved in its original form. The so-called
commentaries are based upon late manuscripts
copied from fragments of catenae. A more
comprehensive work of an exegetical
nature, preserved only in fragments, is
entitled "On the Differences of the
Gospels" and was written for the
purpose of harmonizing the contradictions
in the reports of the different
Evangelists. It was also for exegetical purposes that
Eusebius wrote his treatises on Biblical archeology,
From a dogmatic point of view, Eusebius stands entirely upon the shoulders of Origen. Like Origen, he started from the fundamental thought of the absolute sovereignty (monarchia) of God. God is the cause of all beings. But he is not merely a cause; in him everything good is included, from him all life originates, and he is the source of all virtue. He is the highest God to whom Christ is subject as the second God. God sent Christ into the world that it may partake of the blessings included in the essence of God. Christ is the only really good creature, he possesses the image of God and is a ray of the eternal light; but the figure of the ray is so limited by Eusebius that he expressly emphasizes the self-existence of Jesus. Eusebius was intent upon emphasizing the difference of the persona of the Trinity and maintaining the subordination of Jesus to God (he never calls him theos) because in all contrary attempts he suspected polytheism or Sabellianism. Jesus is a creature of God whose generation, it is true, took place before time. Jesus is in his activity the organ of God, the creator of life, the principle of every revelation of God, who in his absoluteness is enthroned above all the world. This divine Logos assumed a human body without being altered thereby in any way in his being. The relation of the Holy Spirit within the Trinity Eusebius explained similarly to that of the Son to the Father. No point of this doctrine is original with Eusebius, all is traceable to his teacher Origen. The lack of originality in his thinking shows itself in the fact that he never presented his thoughts in a system. He lacked a leading idea.2. His Excellencies and Limitations
The limitations of Eusebius are closely connected with his gifts. His time justly considered him its most learned man. A list of the sources he used for his church history would show what an amount of work had to be done to elaborate and sift the mass of material. But the learning of Eusebius can not be measured with that of Origen. Origen was a productive spirit, Eusebius a compiler. Eusebius, however, distinguished himself by his carefulness. A man like Eusebius was not without weight in the time when barbarian nations began to invade the Church in large masses. In the time which followed nobody excelled him in learning. Church historians were able to copy him, but they could not supply his place. As a writer he can not be highly estimated. His style is without grace and brilliancy, his phraseology often monotonous, and his rhetoric cumbrous.(ERWIN PREUSCHEN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The earlier works on Euaebiua are noted is Fabriciue-Harlea, BibZiotheca Graces, vii. 335 aqq., Hamburg, 1801; Haroack, Litteratur, i. 551-b88 (cf. IL,i. 70 eqq.) contains a full account of the separate writings, with some mention of editions; important prolegomena are contained in NPNF, 2d ear., vol, i. Of his works the only relatively complete edition is MPG, xix.-xxiv, (omits the writings which exist only in Syriac, the Topics sad many important fragments); the edition by G. Diadorf, 4 vols.. Leipeic, 1507-71 is practically a selection. Of the " History " the editio princepa was by Robert Stephen, Paris, 1544, and contained the Praparatio and the Demonatratio, as well as the Vita Conatantini; an edition was issued with a Lat. transl. by H. Valesius, Paris, 1659; one of the best is by F. A. Heinichen, Leipeic, 1827-28, 2d ed., 3 vole., 1888-70, the latter containing the Vita Conatantini, Panegyricua, and the Oratio ad aanctoram uetam of Constantine; E. Burton issued an edition, 2 vols., Oxford, 1838, 1845, reprinted by W. Bright, 1872, 1881 (the last a handy edition). The Migne ad. is a reprint of the text of 8chwegler, Tiibingen, 1852. The beat is the ed. still is progress under the care of a commission of the Prussian Academy, Berlin, 1902 eqq. The " History" in Syriac was edited from the M38. of W. Wright, with a collation of the Armenian version by Dr. A. Marx, Cambridge, 1898. The " History " has been translated into nearly all the European languages. The version which has been moat current is English is by C. F. Crusd, Philadelphia, 1833, often reprinted in the United States and Great Britain, and is in Bohn's Ecclesiastical Library. This is superseded by A. C. McGiffert in NPNF, 2d aer., vol. i (accompanied by full prolegomena and notes so copious that they make the volume a complete history of the Ante-Nicene period. The same volume contains the Vita Conatantini and Panegyricua translated with prolegomena by E. C. Richardson). of the Chronicoa the one edition of note is 3choene's, Berlin. 1875 (with valuable prolegomena); it was published in the Armenian version by Mai and Zohrab Milan, 1818; the Lat. version of Jerome was issued by J. J. Sbaliger, Leyden, 1806, and the Bodleian MS. was published in collotypebyJ. K. Fotheringham, Oxford, 1905; J. B. Aucher published it in Armenian, Greek and Latin, Venice, 1818; T. Gaiaford edited the Praparatio in Gk, with a Lat. version, 4 vols., Oxford, 1843, and the Demonelratio, also in Gk. and Lat., ib. 1852; the O,somaeticon was edited by F. Larsow and G. Parthey, Berlin, 1882, and by P. de Lagarde, Gottingen, 1870. An Eng tranal. of the Pra,yaratio is by E. H. Gifford, 2 vole., Oxford, 1903, and of the Theophania or Divine Manifestation of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, fromtheSyriac, by S. Lee, Cambridge, 1843.
The " Life " by Jerome is in De vir. ill., lxxxi. Consult W. Cave, Lives of the . . Fathers of the Church, ed. H. Cary, ii. 95-144, Oxford, 1840. The editions of the " History " generally contain a life and discussions of the literary and other activities of Eusebius (especially valuable is A. C. MeGiffert in NPNF, ut sup.), and the Church Histories devote considerable apace to the subject (e.g. Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 871-879). DCAB, ii. 308-348 is the fullest of the encyclopedia articles (cf. KL, iv. 1001-07); indispensable is the article by E. Schwartz in the Pauly-Wissowa, heal-Encykloptidie der dassischen Adtertunasvrissenachajl, Stuttgart, 1893 sqq.
On special phases of the subject consult: C. G. Haenell. De Eusebio Caaareenai, GSttingen, 1843; J. H. Newman, Ariana o/ the 4th Century, London, 1871· V. Hely, Euaebe de Ceaaree, Paris, 1877; A. von Gutaehmid, Unterauchungen fiber die ayrieche Epitome des euae6iachen Canones, Stuttgart, 1886; A. Halmel, Die Entatehung der Kirchengeachichte den Euaebiue, Essen, 1898; W. Lefroy, Lectures on Eccl. Hint., London, 1896.