EUSEBIUS
616
EUSEBIUS
already arisen under Marcellus, continued under Euse-
biu3. The latter maintained the attitude of the
Roman Church, adopted after the Decian persecution
(250-51), that apostates should not be forever de-
barred from ecclesiastical communion, but on the
other hand should be readmitted only after doing
proper penance (Eusebius miseros docuit sua crimina
flere). . ...
This view was opposed by a faction of Christians m Rome under the leadership of one Heraclius. Whether the latter and his partisans advocated a more rigor- ous (Xovatianist) or a more lenient interpretation of the law has not been ascertained. The latter, how- ever, is by far more probable, in the hypothesis that Heraclius was the chief of a party made up of apos- tates and their followers, who demanded immediate restoration to the body of the Church. Damasus characterizes in very strong terms the conflict which ensued {scditio, ceedes, bellum, discordia, lites). It is likely that Heraclius and liis supporters sought to compel by force their admittance to divine worship, which was resented by the faithful gathered in Rome about Eusebius. In consequence, both Eusebius and Heraclius were exiled by the Emperor Maxentius. Eusebius, in particular, was deported to Sicily, where he died soon after, lliltiades ascended the papal throne, 2 July, 311. The body of his predecessor was brought back to Rome, probably in 311, and 26 Sep- tember (according to the "Depositio Episcoporum" in the Chronographer of 354) was placed in a separate cubiculum of" the Catacomb of Callistus. His firm defense of ecclesiastical discipline and the banishment which he sufi'ered therefor caused him to be vener- ated as a martyr, and in his epitaph Pope Damasus honours Eusebius with this title. His feast is yet cele- brated on 26 September.
Liber PontificaUs, ed. Duchesne, I, 167; De Rossi, Roma solterranea, II (Rome, 1S67), 191-210; Northcote and Brownlow, Roma' soUerranm, 2d ed. (London, 1S79); Light^ FOOT. Apostolic Falhers, 2d. ed.. I, I, 297-299; Ihm, Damasi Epigrammata (Leipzig, 1S95), 25, num. IS; Acta SS., Sept., VII, 263-271; Cahisi, / lapsi e la deportaziime in Smlia del Papa S. Eiisebio (Rome, 18S6); I>angen, Geschichte der ro- mischen Kirche, I (Bonn, 1881), 380-382.
J. P. KiRSCH.
Eusebius, Chronicle of, consists of two parts: the first was probal^ily called by Eusebius the "Chrono- graph" or " Clironograpliies " ; the second he terms the "Canon", or "Canons", and also the "Chrono- logical Canons ". It is brought down to the year 225, and as Eusebius alludes to it at an earlier date in the "EclogK PropheticEe " and "Pra?paratio Evangelica" there must have been two editions. The original is lost, but both parts are preserved in an Armenian ver- sion of which two rival translations by Zolirab and Aucher, respectively, were published in 1S18. Both these editions are superseded by Schoene's. The "Canons", moreover, are preserved in St. Jerome's translation. Two SjTiac epitomes have also been published, one from a MS. in the British Miiseum, which was translated by Roediger for Schoene's edi- tion, another etlited by Siegfried and Gclzer (Eusebii Canonum Epitome ex Dionysii Telmaharensis Chro- nicopetita, Leipzig, 1884). Considerable extracts from the original were also preserved by later writers, espe- cially liy Sj-ncellus. These it has been possible to idontifysince the discovery of the Armenian version. They will be found in Schoene.
The "Clironography" is an epitome of universal history. It is divided into five parts: (1) the history of the Chaldeans, and the .\ssyrians, followeil by lists of the A.ssyrian, Median, Lvdian, and PcTsian kings; (2) Old Testament historj'; "(3) Egj-ptian hi.story; (4) Grecian liistory; (5) Roman liistory. It is, like the "Prajparatio Evangelica", full of quotations from lost authors. As an illustration of its value in one partic- ular province we may turn to the third chapter of Smith's "Chaldean Account of Genesis", entitled
"Chaldean Legends transmitted through Berosus and
other Authors". The longest and most important
extracts here given, containing, e. g. the Babylonian
story of the Creation and the Flood, owe their preser-
vation to Eusebius. The "Canons" are a series of
chronological tables with short historical notices.
The years of Abraham, beginning from the supposed
date "of his birth, form the backbone. Alongside of
these are placed the regnal years of the monarchs of
different kingdoms as they rose and fell. A single
extract will, however, serve better than any descrip-
tion to give the reader an idea of the character and
contents of the "Canons". We have sho-rni above
the value of the "Chronicle" to an Assyriologist ; our
second example will illustrate its importance for clas-
sical scholars. On almost the first page of Jebb's
edition of the newly discovered poems of Bacchylides,
the notices in the " Chronicle " concerning the poet are
discussed. There are two such notices. We give the
first with its context, as it is found in the facsimile of
the Bodleian MS. of St. Jerome's version: —
LXXVIII Olj-mp. Herodotus hi.torianun scriptor agnoscitur.
XVIII Bacchvlides et Diag-
orus" atheus XXXVI
sermone plurimo cele- brantur
MDL. XVIIII Zeuxis pictor agnosci-
tur. etc. XXXVII
From the above we learn that Bacchylides becarne renowned in the 18th year of Xerxes, King of Persia, the 36th of an Alexander, King of Macedonia, the be- ginning of the seventy-eighth Ol^Tnpiad, and the 1549th year of Abrah.i'm. In this MS. the years of Abraham are given at the commencement of every decade. Thus, in the last line, the first year (MDL) marks the opening of a new decade; while the second year (X\TI1I) shows the continuation of the reign of Xerxes.
■RTiich of the two versions of the " Clironicle " is the more trustworthy as regards dates and figures is a question that was conclusively answered in favour of the Latin version by Lightfoot in his excursus, "The Early Roman Succession". The striking differ- ences between the episcopal lists (notably the Roman) as they are found in the Armenian version, on the one hand, and in the Latin version and " The (I'hurch His- tory", on the other hand, give rise to a number of in- genious theories concerning changes made by Eusebius in a later edition of his " Chronicle ". Lightfoot anni- hilated these theories by demonstrating the corrupt state of the .\rmenian version in all that relates to fig- ures and the years to which dift'erent events are as- signed. It is important to remember this in reading books or articles in which reference is made to the "Clu-onicle", if they were written before 1890.
Best Editions. — (1) "Eusebii Chronicorum Libri duo", ed. Schoene, 2 vols., Berhn, 1866-1875; (2) the Bodleian manuscript of Jerome's version of the " Chronicle of Eusebius ", reproduced in collotype with an introduction by John Knight Fotheringham, M. A., Oxford. 1905; (3) the Syriac epitomes referred to above.
SALMON in Smith and Wace, Diet, of Christ. Biog., a. v. Euscbiux, Chrnnide of; Lightfoot, Excursus on the Early Ro- man .-^ in >:(. Clement of Rome (1890). I; Tur-neh, The Earhi / / ' .• I. The Chronicle of Eusebius in Journal of Thc'l' - . I, 181 sq.; Chapman, La Chronologic dea prcmi:r,: h'i'i episcopates de Rome in Revue Benedictine (1901), 3!iy sq.; Schoene, Die WeUchronik des Eusebius m threr BearbeUung durch Hieronymus (Berlin, 1900).
F. J. B.\ccHus.
Eusebius Bruno, Bishop of .\ngers, b. in the early part of tlic eleventh century; d. at .\ngers, 29 August. 1081. lie received his ecclesiastical training under the famous Berengarius of Tours, and in December, 1047 was made Bishop of Angers. In 1049 he took part in the synod of Reims under Leo IX (1049-54), and was among the bisliops who protested their inno- cence in regard to the prevalent evil of simony. He is best known for his relations to his master Beren-
