[Expansions of Eusebius' HE / Fragments of Papias, Hegesippus, Pierius]
[Attribution questionable]
[Found interspersed with extracts from Eusebius in Cod. Barocc. 142, fol. 212r-216r, i.e., preceding in this ms. the material classified by Heyden as Fr. 6 and Fr. 2; Cod. Oxon. misc. 61 (Auct. E.4.18), fol. 136r-143r (unedited); nos. 3-6 also in Cod. Athous Vatopedi 286 fol. 91r-218r. — Greek text edited by C. de Boor, "Neue Fragmente des Papias, Hegesippus und Pierius in bisher unbekannten Excerpten aus der Kirchengeschichte des Philippus Sidetes," TU 5.2 (1888), pp. 169-71. — De Boor (pp. 173-4) argued that these are fragments of Philip of Side, and that the use and expansion of Eusebius observable in them is consistent with what we know of his method; but his argument for this is partly tied to his attribution of the material labeled by Heyden as Fr. 6, now more convincingly attributed to Gelasius of Caesarea. Pouderon, "Le témoignage," pp. 10-11, 62-63, and Hansen, Theodoros Anagnostes , pp. xxxvii-xxxviii, point out that at the very least De Boor's case for these fragments remains unproved. Heyden, p. 224, however, revives De Boor's appeal to the reference to John Chrysostom in no. 6 as one remaining point in favor of Philip of Side's authorship; and as another, notes the fact that Gelasius of Caesarea is not otherwise attested as providing information on the pre-Constantinian period, and thus any attempt to attribute this material to him would be problematic. — In the translations below, the italicized material is directly from Eusebius, whether verbatim or paraphrased; the normal text represents the additions made by our author to Eusebius' history.]
Africanus, in a "Letter to Aristides," has written the best treatment concerning the apparent discrepancy in the genealogy, as regards the family lines, in the evangelists Matthew and Luke . And Africanus was from the village of Emmaus in Palestine, to which Cleopas and company travelled, and which later, through Africanus' embassy, received the status of a city and was renamed Nicopolis.
Philip, the one who baptized Candace, the Ethiopian, was not an apostle, but one of the seven servers / deacons who had been appointed to serve alongside Stephen, the first martyr. And he says that Candace was the first of the Gentiles to be baptized. Philip [means] "mouth of torches"; Herodias [means] "deceived"; Herod [means] "glory of skin" —according to Pierius.
Domitian, the son of Vespasian, having demonstrated many wicked [qualities / acts] to the Romans who were governmental officials, was the second to conduct a persecution against the Christians, surpassing Nero's savagery. During this, he also banished the Apostle and Evangelist John to Patmos. But after meeting the sons of Jude (the Lord's brother), and coming to know the men's virtue, he called a halt to the persecution against us. And Hegesippus also makes reference to their names, and says that the one was called Zôkêr, and the other James. And he also gives other indispensable information.
The majority of the ancient [Christian writers] do not accept the Epistle of John, since they consider it to belong to some other John. But the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" and the [Gospel] said to be "of Peter" and [the one said to be] "of Thomas" they completely rejected, saying that these are the writings of heretics. And there are other false Gospels as well, the [Gospel] "according to the Egyptians," and [the one] "according to the Twelve," and [the one] "according to Basilides."
Clement, in the third book of the Stromata , by way of combating those who disallow marriage, asserts that Peter and Paul and Philip had wives. And in the seventh Stroma he says that Peter's wife was even made perfect through martyrdom. And Pierius too, in his first discourse of those On the Pascha , asserts strongly that Paul had a wife and dedicated her to God for the sake of the Church, renouncing his association with her.
Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, who was a hearer of John the Theologian, and a companion of Polycarp, wrote five books of the Lord's logia . In these, he enumerated the Apostles after Peter and John, Philip and Thomas and Matthew, and recorded Aristion and a second John—whom he called a "presbyter"—as disciples of the Lord; and thus, some think that the two Epistles, the short and general ones, which are in circulation under the name "John," belong to this John, because the ancient [Christian writers] only accepted the first [Epistle of John as genuine]. And some erroneously considered the Apocalypse to belong to this [John] as well; and Papias is also mistaken regarding the Millenium—as is Irenaeus, because of him. Papias in the second book says that John the Theologian and James his brother were killed by the Jews. The aforementioned Papias related, as something he had heard from the daughters of Philip, that Barsabas, who was also called Justus, when he was being put to the test by the unbelievers, drank a viper's poison in the name of Christ and was preserved unhurt. He also relates other marvellous stories, in particular the one about Menahem's mother, who was raised from the dead. Concerning those who were raised from the dead by Christ, [he relates] that they lived until Hadrian. And Chrysostom, in the 1st Homily of the second section on the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, says that both those who were raised from the dead at the time of the cross [i.e., the crucifixion of Jesus] and those [who were raised from the dead] before them—all died.
Pierius, a presbyter of Alexandria, flourished at this time, and in Pontus, Meletius the bishop—men who were amazing with respect to their learning. And Pierius, in his first discourse ... renouncing his association with her. And I also read quite a number of his other indispensable works and especially the one Concerning the Mother of God and the one On the beginning of Hosea . And Theodorus, a certain court-pleader in Alexandria, writing in epic verse, says in his 13th book that Pierius and Isidorus his brother suffered martyrdom and have a very large shrine in Alexandria. And in his discourse On the Life of the Holy Pamphilus , Pierius himself provided very much help in the divine Scripture.
[Constantine and the Council of Nicaea]
[Attribution questionable]
[The Beginning of Constantine's Reign: Relations with Barbarian Tribes]
Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.4.2-5 [p. 7, lines 7-28 Hansen]
And first he determined to call back to himself those cities that were rebelling against Roman overlordship—some by words, others by force of arms, and others by good treatment and kindness. For he decreed a lighter tax-burden for them, and gave them equal rights of commerce; he put an end to their rebelliousness and madness wisely, more by calmness than by frightening them, since he knew that the peoples of the Sauri and the Frangi and the Germani were lovers of novelty and had a strong inclination toward rebellion against their rulers, and often treated their own thoughts as law. He also subdued the Spani and the Brettani and the islands in that area, and the remaining tribes and all those who are witnesses of the setting of the sun—who, they say, know whether it is really submerged in the Ocean or goes around the water and returns back to us by another route. And he took the barbarian tribes there by force of arms, making use of a side-task to further his [primary] task. For, subduing some, making others subject to tribute, and making others friends instead of opponents and intimates instead of ancient enemies, he brought them in as allies, not causing distress or laying siege to anyone, and being eager for the salvation of others. For where God acts as one's ally, everything is rightly guided and he raises up on high the human reason. With this sort of God-loving thought, Constantine, most faithful in all things, crossed to the right-hand side of the Rhine, passed many mountains, many unnamed rivers, with a small army, conquered many barbarian peoples, brought over to his side ten tribes of Gauls and Frangi and Spani, and finally brought his army to the mountains of Italy.
[Discussion of the Plausibility of the Sign that Appeared to Constantine]
Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.5.2-7 [p. 8, line 15 - p. 9, line 20 Hansen]
This story seems to the unbelievers to be a myth and a fiction composed to flatter our opinions, but to those who have become accustomed to believe the truth, the proof of the event is manifest. For God, the "painter" of this omen, demonstrated afterwards through the outcome that the gracious gift of the writing [in the sky] was truthful. But if I am not yet persuading [you about] what I write (for I am transcribing histories of earlier [writers], because of my task [mentioned] a little earlier of collecting the useful events of that man's life), still you should not fail to believe in the subsequent events—that which, in our own generation, those who stood in battle with Constantius the son of Constantine saw with their own eyes and [thus] cured ancient unbelief with more recent sights. If those who dispute these things are Hebrews, the stories that are contained in their books and are believed are much more unbelievable than these—marching in the sea, water forming a wall, walking in the water, and God speaking in a bush, a flame giving laws, the resounding of a trumpet in the desert without an actual instrument, angels ranged together for battle and the "chief generals of the Lord's forces" fighting on behalf of the army, and "stones of hail" and missiles of fire being cast instead of the usual spears—and yet, all of us who are right-minded give assent [to these stories] without [skeptical] examination. For nothing is impossible when God wills it. If, on the other hand, those who do not accept this marvel are Greeks, I can cite many things which I do not wish to speak about—how many prophecies the oracle-mongers proclaimed for Alexander, when he was preparing to cross over for the battle at the Granicus and the contest with Darius (and yet their fictions do not have manifest proofs); and how a "daimonion"gave prior indication to Socrates the philosopher regarding the outcome of things that should not be done; and the things written about Pythagoras of Samos by that man's disciples. I will leave unmentioned the fictions of the poets, and how they related that some of the famous [heroes] in them even fought side by side with some of those who were considered gods by them, so that no one will think that I am comparing mythical events with true events, things that were never done with things that were. For the grace of Christ, ever since it bloomed among men, has been, is, and will continue to be a medicinal remedy and a source of healing, <as it has appeared> in heaven and on earth and in the sea, in plants and trees, and in clothes—those who have experienced it know this, and I will set forth [such occurrences] at the appropriate time as my history proceeds.
[Constantine and Crispus against Licinius]
Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.11.19-21 [p. 18, line 18 - p. 19, line 2] and 1.12.1 [p. 21, lines 1-9 Hansen]
1.11
(19) ... But the others, as many as agree with the true account of Eusebius Pamphili, say that both the Father, Emperor Constantine, and the son, Emperor Crispus, dividing the army, rushed out against the impious tyrant—the son, Crispus, to the region of Asia, marching with the army that was with him, while the father, Constantine, in Europe, accomplished his journey with the bodyguards [i.e., the Praetorians] around him. (20) But the God-hating one, full of all impiety and savagery, came from the East, arrogantly drawing up against them with as large an army as possible. And arriving at Nicomedia, and recognizing and knowing that the soul of God-loving Constantine revered the priests of God, and that he held them in honor at all times, he paid off the bishop of Nicomedia, Eusebius, who had long since defected to his side in opposition to the pious Emperor Constantine. [Licinius] thought that by using him and his associates he would destroy Constantine—who was hedged around by the invincible weapons of God. (21) The extraordinary Eusebius made a compact with him, being prevailed upon by promises from Licinius, his equal in impiety...
(32)... But from here I shall move on to the events of the Ecclesiastical History that lie before us .
1.12
(1) So, when Licinius rushed out from Nicomedia to Byzantium with the army that was with him, against the Emperor Constantine who was there at that time, and the contingents of soldiers on the one side were surrounding the Christ-bearing Emperor, then Licinius—that sinner—seeing this, and contemplating the fact that he was bereft of his own armies, which had deserted to the protection of the stronger side, at first was anxious to hide in Chrysopolis in Bithynia (this is the sea-port of Chalcedon)—but since he could not do this, and saw that he was now lying face-down under the feet of the Emperor Constantine, he gave himself up...