[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac and large chunks of Greek have been omitted]
1. This, according to our author, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. ix. is the person spoken of, Is. xiv. 12. That the king of Babylon is here primarily meant, there can be no doubt: but whether the " common enemy" of man is secondarily, may be matter of debate.
2. We now come again to certain passages in the Orat. de laudd. Constantini, identical with some in this work. Cap. xiii. pp. 531, D. 632, &c. See also Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x.
3. It must, I think, be sufficiently certain from this place, that Eusebius was no Arian. A passage, similarly strong, is to be found in his Orat. de laudd. Constantini, (cap. ii. p. mihi 501. A----D.) in these words: [Greek] "Et ille quidem unigenitus Dei Sermo, a saeculis principio carentibus, ad infinita usque et interminata saecula regnat cum Patre." See above Book i. §. 4, 30: also iii. 19, 39: iv. 8: v. 51. and, above all, Theodoriti Hist. Eccles. Lib. i. capp. xi. xii. in the latter of which a Copy of the Nicene Creed is given, as emanating from Eusebius, and this for the specific purpose of shewing, that he was no Arian. See also his Eccl. Hist. Lib. i. cap. ii. also the Introduction to this Work. See also, generally, the two Works of our author against Marcellus. In Lib. ii. Eccl. Theolog. cap. xiv. he speaks, indeed, of His having a beginning, but this is with reference to his proceeding from the Father: in other words, bis being revealed to created rational existences.
4. This argument is admirably prosecuted in the Prep. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. xiii. p. 117. seq. as it is also in the "Graecarum affectionum Curatio," by Theodoret, Sermo. I. seq.
5. See also, De laudd. Constant, cap. vii. p. 513. B. where we have a similar recension of these Deities. Our passage, however, is found ib. cap. xiii. 532. A.
6. See also the Homilia Clementina Quinta. xxii. xxiii. seq.
7. Cicero (de Natura Deorum in. 15, 16) has admirably depicted this state of things : " Piscem Syri venerantur : omne fere genus bestiarum Aegyptii consecraverunt. Jam vero in Graecia multos habent ex hominibus Deos ; Alabandum Alabandi ; Tenedii Tenem ; Leucotheam, quae fuit Ino, et ejus Palaemonem filium, cuncta Graecia; Herculem, Aesculapium, Tyndaridas ; Romulum nostri, aliosque complures, quos, quasi novos et ascriptitios cives, in coelum receptos putant...Haec igitur indocti. Quid vos philosophi? qui meliora? . . . Quare igitur plures adjungimus Deos? quanta autem est illorum multitudo? . . . singulas enim stellas numeras Deos; eosque aut belluarum nomine appellas, ut Capram, ut Nepam, ut Taurum, ut Dionem; aut rerum inanimatarum, ut Argo, ut Aram, ut Coronam. Sed, ut haec concedantur, reliqua qui tandem non modo concedi, sed omnino intelligi possunt? Cum fruges, Cererem; vinum, Liberum dicimus, genere nos quidem sermonis, utimur usitato: sed ecquem tam amentem esse putas, qui illud, quo vescatur, Deum credat esse?"
8. Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. B. See also Clemens Alexandr. Admonitio ad Gentes, p. 34. seq.
So Horace Serm. Lib. i. Sat. viii. 1. "Olim truncus eram," &c. Athenagoras Legat. pro Christ, p. 66, gives an admirable account of the first Images, and Image-makers, among the Greeks.
9. So Tertullian, Eccles. Hist, of the second and third centuries, by the Bishop of Bristol, Cambridge, 1826, p. 216. An Image among Idolaters is nothing, until consecrated and a Deity supposed to reside within it. They are then considered as Temples. ([Arabic], Pocock. spec. Hist. Arab. pp. 91, 144, seq.) or Chapels of the Deity. From the following passage of Lactantius (Lib. it. cap. xviii. p. 103,) it is obvious, that Images could not have had place in the Church:..." non est dubium, quin religio nulla sit, ubicunque simulacrum est. Nam si religio ex divinis rebus est; divini autem nihil est, nisi in coelestibus rebus; carent ergo religione simulacra, quia nihil potest esse coeleste in ea re, quae fit ex terra." ...Quicquid enim simulatur, id falsum sit necesse est: nec potest unquam vere nomen accipere, quod veritatem fuco et imitatione mentitur.
10. See sect. 63. Book I.----Gr. (Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib.) " katade/smoij; " which, as Valesius shews, ib. notes, p. 255, is a term applied to magical usages. See this note. See also the Prep. Evang. Lib. vi. cap. ix. p. 271. C.
11. Lactantius (Lib. ii. cap. xiv.) says of these, that they were originally Angels sent from Heaven to protect and govern men ; but, falling into lust through the temptations of Satan, they at length became his ministers: which has evidently been taken from the Jews. See the Targums on Gen. vi. 2. He further tells us, that the Grammarians say they are so called, as being dah&monej , i. e. knowing. Such is, I think the Boot ([?] originally Boodhi, wise ) of the East, to this day. ---- Hesiod also makes them the guardians of men, " fu&lakej qnhtw~n a0nqrw&pwn ." (Oper. et Dies. Lib. 1. 122.). This opinion prevails still in the East: and it is affirmed, that whole regions are subjected to their controul, as may be seen in the Dabistan, the Hakk olyakeen ( [Arabic] ), and many other Persic and Arabic works. Lactantius tells us, a little lower down, from Hermes Trismegistus, that piety, consisting in the knowledge of the true God, was sufficient to save men from their evil influence. Porphyry tells us (Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. x. p. 197. and Theodoret, Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford. p. 131.) that they are all evil Demons: their Chief being Sarapis, i.e. Pluto, or Hecate: and (Prep. Evang. ib,) much the same is said by Anebo the Egyptian.
12. See Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. x. : ii. cap. i. Diodor. Sicul. Lib. i. x ---- xiii. Lactant. Lib. i. cap. viii ---- xv. who prosecutes this argument at much length, and gives us even the philosophical Cicero deifying his own daughter!
13. Syr. [Syriac], Gr. Meli/kamqoj, the Phoenician Hercules according to Sanchoniathon, Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. x. p. 38. In the
Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 532. it is written Melka&qaron . The word has been greatly deformed by the Copyists in our text. See the note of Valesius to the above place, cap. xiii. p. (notes) 255.
14. [Syriac] Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533. Ou!swron . Prep. Evang. p. 35. Ou!swron .
15. Syr. [Syriac], Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533, Dou&sarij : the Dusa&rhj of the Greek and Latin writers, as noted by Bochart, and, after him, by Pococke, Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 106, and which he thinks is the Arabic [Arabic] Dhushara, or Bacchus. See also the note of Valesius ad cap. xiii. Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 255.
16. Syr. [Syriac]. Probably the 0Obo_d , Uranius of Stephen of Byzantium, as cited by Pococke Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 137, &c. and variously accounted for by him. The passage is found in "Euseb. Orat. de laudd. Constant." p. 532----3. 1Obdon. But see the note of Valesius on this place, ib. p. 255, which is full and valuable.
17. Syr. [Syriac] Gr. Za&lmocij , or Za&molcij . See Vossius de Idololatria, Lib. i. cap. xxxix. Herodot. iv. 94. and Photius. The Zalmoxis or Zamolxis, of the Getae. The Syriac does not support the conjecture ( pai~dej ) of Valesius here. In these cases, the Syriac Translator seems to have taken the termination of the Greek accusative case.
18. Syr. [Syriac]. Gr. Mo&yoj . Ovid. Metam. viii. 350. termed Ampycides, as being the son of Ampycus. It. ib. xii. 456. 528. See also Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533. Mo&yion , and the note of Valesius.
19. Syr. [Syriac]. Gr. 0Amfia&rewn . Laudd. Constant, ib. See the Odyss. O. 244. Hor. Od. iii. 16. Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 3. Ovid. Ex. Pont. Epist. Lib. in. 1. 52. &c. Euseb. laudd. Constant. 0Amfia&rewn . Valesius. note ib. 0Amfia&rew . The Trojans also, according to Athenagoras, worshipped Hector and Helen, the Lacedemonians Agamemnon, and Phylonae: and so of others. Legat pro Christianis, at its commencement, So ib. p. 60. Again, ib. p. 63, he gives us the story of the mundane egg ; which identifies this mythology, with that of the Brahmins of Hindustan. So also Theophilus ad Autolycum, Lib. ii., who refers to the "Aves" of Aristophanes as his authority: p. 116. it. Clemens Alexand, Admonitio ad Gentes. p. 35. seq.
20. The Greek text, Orat. de laudd. Constant, is defective here, as Valesius has properly remarked, and as some of the MSS. have intimated by inserting the word " lei/pei ". (p. 533. and 255 notes).
21. . . ."Quod si ita est, Coeli quoque parentes Dii habendi sunt, Aether, et Dies, eorumque fratres et sorores, qui a genealogis antiquis sic nominantur, Amor, Dolor, Metus, Labor, Invidia, Fatum, Senectus, Mors, Tenebrae, Miseria, Querela, Gratia, Fraus, Pertinacia, Parcae, Hesperides, Somnia; quos omnes Erebo et Nocte natos ferunt. Aut haec monstra probanda sunt, aut prima illa tollenda." Cic. de Nat. Deor. iii. 17."
22. "Ergo hi Dii sunt habendi, mortalibus nati matribus? (sc. Apollo, Vulcanus, Mercurius, Hercules, Aesculapius. Bacchus. &c.) Cic. ib. c. 18. Comp. Clemens. Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p. 18. seq."