Duvduv

Who was this man, who supposedly was the author of the history of "the church" (whatever that's supposed to mean) until the 4th century, and who in many instances is the SOLE source for much "information" about movements and individuals.

Conveniently he tells us stories about apologists of whose writings there is not even the slightest trace.

Eusebius must surely have wondered WHO told the recipients of the "Pauline" epistles to preserve them for posterity, yet WHOLE books of apologists disappeared from the hands of loyal believers without a trace.

With all that "information" Eusebius establishes what "really" happened in history, and is expected to be believed by all succeeding generations, including modern scholars. Now, how old are the very earliest versions or manuscripts of his history, and are there differences among them? Do historians ever question the authenticity of his authorship, his existence or his claims for which he is the SOLE source?

ApostateAbe

Poe's law.

stephan huller

Little is known about the life of Eusebius. His successor at the see of Caesarea, Acacius, wrote a Life of Eusebius, but this work has been lost. Eusebius' own surviving works probably only represent a small portion of his total output. Since he was on the losing side of the long 4th-century contest between the allies and enemies of Arianism (Eusebius was an early and vocal supporter of Arius), posterity did not have much respect for Eusebius' person and was neglectful in the preservation of his writings.[1] Beyond notices in his extant writings, the major sources are the 5th-century ecclesiastical historians Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, and the 4th-century Christian author Jerome. There are assorted notices of his activities in the writings of his contemporaries Athanasius, Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia, and Alexander of Alexandria. Eusebius' pupil, Eusebius of Emesa, provides some incidental information.[2]
[edit]Early life

In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius writes of Dionysius of Alexandria as his contemporary. If this is true, Eusebius' birth must have been before Dionysius' death in autumn 264; most modern scholars date the birth to some point in the five years between 260 and 265.[3] He was presumably born in the town which he lived most of his adult life, Caesarea Maritima.[4] He was baptized and instructed in the city,[5] and lived in Palestine in 296, when Diocletian's army passed through the region (in the Life of Constantine, Eusebius recalls seeing Constantine traveling with the army).[6] Eusebius was made presbyter by Agapius of Caesarea.[5] Some, like theologian and ecclesiastical historian John Henry Newman, understand Eusebius' statement that he had heard Dorotheus of Tyre "expound the Scriptures wisely in the Church" to indicate that Eusebius was Dorotheus' pupil while the priest was resident in Antioch; others, like the scholar D. S. Wallace-Hadrill, deem the phrase too ambiguous to support the contention.[7]

By the 3rd century, Caesarea had a population of about 100,000. It had been a pagan city since Pompey had given control of the city to the gentiles during his command of the eastern provinces in the 60s BC. The gentiles retained control of the city in the three centuries since that date, despite Jewish petitions for joint governorship. Gentile government was strengthened by the city's refoundation under Herod the Great (r. 37–4 BC), when it had taken on the name of Augustus Caesar.[8] In addition to the gentile settlers, Caesarea had large Jewish and Samaritan minorities. Eusebius was probably born into the Christian contingent of the city. Caesarea's Christian community presumably had a history reaching back to apostolic times,[9] but it is a common claim that no bishops are attested for the town before about AD 190,[10] even though the Apostolic Constitutions 7.46 states that Zacchaeus was the first bishop.

Through the activities of the theologian Origen (185/6–254) and the school of his follower Pamphilus (later 3rd century – 309), Caesarea became a center of Christian learning. Origen was largely responsible for the collection of usage information regarding the texts which became the New Testament. The information used to create the late-fourth-century Easter Letter, which declared accepted Christian writings, was probably based on the Ecclesiastical History [HE] of Eusebius of Caesarea, wherein he uses the information passed on to him by Origen to create both his list at HE 3:25 and Origen’s list at HE 6:25. Eusebius got his information about what texts were accepted by the third-century churches throughout the known world, a great deal of which Origen knew of firsthand from his extensive travels, from the library and writings of Origen.[11] In fact, Origen would have possibly included in his list of “inspired writings” other texts which were kept out by the likes of Eusebius, including the Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, and 1 Clement. On his deathbed, Origen had made a bequest of his private library to the Christian community in the city.[12] Together with the books of his patron Ambrosius, Origen's library (including the original manuscripts of his works[13][notes 1]) formed the core of the collection that Pamphilus established.[15] Pamphilus also managed a school that was similar to (or perhaps a re-establishment of[16]) that of Origen.[17] Pamphilus was compared to Demetrius of Phalerum and Pisistratus, for he had gathered Bibles "from all parts of the world".[18] Like his model Origen, Pamphilus maintained close contact with his students. Eusebius, in his history of the persecutions, alludes to the fact that many of the Caesarean martyrs lived together, presumably under Pamphilus.[19]

Soon after Pamphilus settled in Caesarea (ca. 280s), he began teaching Eusebius, who was then somewhere between twenty and twenty-five.[20] Because of his close relationship with his schoolmaster, Eusebius was sometimes called Eusebius Pamphili: "Eusebius, son of Pamphilus".[notes 2] The name may also indicate that Eusebius was made Pamphilus' heir.[23] Pamphilus gave Eusebius a strong admiration for the thought of Origen.[24] Neither Pamphilus nor Eusebius knew Origen personally;[25] Pamphilus probably picked up Origenist ideas during his studies under Pierius (nicknamed "Origen Junior"[26]) in Alexandria.[27] In Caesarea, Origenist thought was continued in the generation after his death by Theotecnus, bishop of the city for much of the late 3rd century and an alumnus of Origen's school.[28]

Eusebius' Preparation for the Gospel bears witness to the literary tastes of Origen: Eusebius quotes no comedy, tragedy, or lyric poetry, but makes reference to all the works of Plato and to an extensive range of later philosophic works, largely from Middle Platonists from Philo to the late 2nd century.[29] Whatever its secular contents, the primary aim of Origen and Pamphilus' school was to promote sacred learning. The library's biblical and theological contents were more impressive: Origen's Hexapla and Tetrapla, a copy of the original Hebrew Version of the Gospel of MattitYahu, and many of Origen's own writings.[20] Marginal comments in extant manuscripts note that Pamphilus and his friends and pupils, including Eusebius, corrected and revised much of the biblical text in their library.[20] Their efforts made the hexaplaric Septuagint text increasingly popular in Syria and Palestine.[30] Soon after joining Pamphilus' school, Eusebius started helping his master expand the library's collections and broaden access to its resources. At about this time Eusebius compiled a Collection of Ancient Martyrdoms, presumably for use as a general reference tool.[20]

In the 290s, Eusebius began work on his magnum opus, the Ecclesiastical History, a narrative history of the Church and Christian community from the Apostolic Age to Eusebius' own time. At about the same time, Eusebius worked on his Chronicle, a universal calendar of events from Creation to Eusebius' own time. Eusebius completed the first editions of the Ecclesiastical History and Chronicle before 300.[31]
[edit]Bishop of Caesarea

Eusebius succeeded Agapius, as Bishop of Caesarea soon after 313 and played a prominent role at the Council of Nicaea in 325. Eusebius, a learned man and famous author, enjoyed the favour of the Emperor Constantine. Because of this he was called upon to present the creed of his own church to the 318 attendees."[32] However, the anti-Arian creed from Palestine prevailed becoming the basis for the Nicene Creed.[33]
The theological views of Arius, that taught the subordination of the Son to the Father, continued to be a problem. Eustathius of Antioch strongly opposed the growing influence of Origen's theology as the root of Arianism. Eusebius, an admirer of Origen, was reproached by Eustathius for deviating from the Nicene faith. Eusebius prevailed and Eustathius was deposed at a synod in Antioch.
However, Athanasius of Alexandria became a more powerful opponent and in 334, he was summoned before a synod in Caesarea (which he refused to attend). In the following year, he was again summoned before a synod in Tyre at which Eusebius of Caesarea presided. Athanasius, foreseeing the result, went to Constantinople to bring his cause before the Emperor. Constantine called the bishops to his court, among them Eusebius. Athanasius was condemned and exiled at the end of 335. Eusebius remained in the Emperor's favour throughout this time and more than once was exonerated with the explicit approval of the Emperor Constantine. After the Emperor's death (c.337), Eusebius wrote the Life of Constantine, an important historical work because of eye witness accounts and the use of primary sources. Eusebius died c.339. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea]

mountainman

YES. Read what you can from Arnaldo Dante Momigliano at WIKI or from here.

ApostateAbe

I don't think that is convenient for anyone. All papyrus disintegrated within the span of a few decades, and the writing disappeared along with it unless someone takes the trouble to copy it, and this needs to continue repeatedly over the centuries. By far most of the writings we know existed in the ancient world exist today merely as quotes or allusions, not as copies, and absolutely no originals.
Why do you think Eusebius would expect that someone needed to tell the churches to preserve the Pauline epistles for posterity? They copied the most useful of those epistles for evangelism. They didn't need to be told it. It was already in their interest.
Well, I think you will find historians who will doubt anything. I don't think there is any good reason to doubt that Eusebius wrote the manuscripts with his name at the header. I can't think of any good reason why someone would be willing to forge such writings in his name. They would be willing to forge writings in the names of apostles, and Eusebius was no apostle. His name does not have nearly enough antiquity. That isn't to say it is impossible. If you can think of a good reason why someone would need to forge Eusebius, go ahead and put it on the table. As you can see, other members of the forum have already done so.

Duvduv

I was asking a rhetorical question about the epistles. You suggest they would have automatically kept them for "evangelical purposes." How do you know that? Presumably there were more "letters" sent to more places that were not preserved according to the ideas of evangelical preservation. However, it seems abundantly odd that somehow they knew how to keep (supposedly) the epistles in pristine condition for generations (although unknown for 100 years), yet entire books are never retained for posterity in libraries or archives. Sounds fishy to me.....And of course so often ONLY Eusebius knows anything about them. How convenient.

ApostateAbe

The only reason that Christian writings were ever preserved is to evangelize the faith either to non-believers or to errant Christians. That is the prima facie position, because that is what the writings themselves promote, that is the intention that early Christians expressed, and that is how the writings are used today. The did not to preserve the writings of Paul believing that they would be useful to Christians in future centuries, nor did they care about what future retrospective examiners would think. The Christians in the time of Paul believed that the world as they knew it would come to a calamitous end in their own time, the whole truth would be revealed to everyone through an apocalypse, and therefore the writings of Paul would become perfectly useless. They copied only what they deemed useful for their immediate evangelical end. But I am happy to learn of your alternative explanation, if you have one. You say some of this is "convenient." Convenient for who, exactly?

mountainman

Robert M. Grant is another historian who has little if anything positive to say about Eusebius, and a great deal that is plainly negative:

Early Alexandrian Christianity by Robert M. Grant

Duvduv

Well, you mean to tell me that theologians and apologists of the faith write whole books and none of their colleagues bothers to preserve a shred, yet letters written by. One of many supposed preachers writes letters for eva gelical purposes. remain hidden for 100 years and reappear in pristine condition from various locations as if by magic?

ApostateAbe

Sort of, though I don't see what is magic about it, and the letters would be "hidden" only in retrospect, when we have only extant writings to examine. Writing was not something just anyone could do. Only 10% of the population could read, and only those who hired professional scribes could write. In that time, "writing" something typically meant hiring a scribe to write what you tell him. And it wasn't cheap, either. Paul was the most popular Christian, who claimed responsibility for bringing Christianity from the Jews to the Gentiles, and he was the only "apostle" who had the means to write. Christianity would not be expected to have the motivation or the means to preserve writings from non-apostles until their churches were large and financially well off. Arguments from silence really need to be made in light of points like these.