20. p. 436 n. 1 This is not to be wondered at, considering that Urphilas adopted the Arian heresy. 'Being arrived at Constantinople on this embassy,' (is Fleury,) 'he conferred with the chiefs of the Arians; and whether he hoped to succeed in his negotiation by their credit, or whether he was really convinced by their persuasions, he came over to them; and this was the reason why the Goths likewise fell into Arianism, and afterwards spread it all over the East. Till this time they had followed the apostolical doctrine which they had at first received, amid even at that time they did not wholly forsake it. For they by whom they were seduced persuaded them that the dispute between the Catholics and the Arians was only about words which did not alter the fundamental points of doctrine. Thus, in the time of Theodoret, (Eccl. Hist. b. iv. ch. 37,) the Goths did indeed confess that the Father was greater than the Son; still, however, they did not say that the Son was a creature, although they communicated with those that said so The Gospel is still extant, as translated into their language by Urphilas.' Fleury, Eccl. Hist. b. xvii. ch. 36.
21. p. 437 n. 1 Compare Theodoret, Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 23.
22. p. 437 n. 2 Philostorgius always calls him by this name. St. Gregory of Nyssa, on the other hand, calls him a Blemmyan.. It is suggested, however, by Talesius, that this name may be but another name for the Moors or Aethiopians. Some think that lie was called the 'Indian,' not because he was born there, or even of Indian extraction, but because he was sent by Constantine as ambassador to the Indians or Aethiopians.
23. p. 437 n. 3 This is certainly true of Theophilus; he was consecrated a bishop by the Arian party, who ascribed to him the gift of miracles. See below, b. iii. ch. 4.
24. p. 437 n. 4 See below, b. iii. ch. 4.
25. p. 437 n. 5 They had been banished three years before, viz. A. D. 325. Some time after this period, he was transferred from his see of Nicomedia to Constantinople.
26. p. 437 n. 6 Valesius observes that the falsehood of this statement is clear from the agreement of all other historians of the same period.
27. p. 437 n. 7 Compare Theodoret, Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 21.
28. p. 438 n. 1 Compare the extract of Philostorgius from Suidas, given at the end of this volume. Eusebius, it is to be observed, makes no mention of this Agapetus, though Suidas ascribes it erroneously to him.
29. p. 438 n. 2 A. D. 334.
30. p. 438 n. 3 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 16.
31. p. 438 n. 4 This would seem to be a mistake, as Valesius shows in the first chap ter of his Ecclesiastical Observations on Socrates and Sozomen. Theodoret (Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 19) falls into the same error with respect to Eusebius.
32. p. 439 n. 1 This is a calumny commonly uttered against Athanasius by the Arian party. Its falsehood is clearly proved by the Epistle of the synod of Alexandria, as given by him in his Second Apology. Lowth .
33. p. 439 n. 2 It is almost needless to add that this story against Athanasius rests solely on the statement of Philostorgius, and is unsupported by facts or probabilities.
34. p. 440 n. 1 In chap. 18 below, he says that Gregory died before the return of Athanasius from exile, immediately upon the death of Constantine. But on the contrary it is clear that Gregory was ordained by the synod held at Antioch, A. D. 341.
35. p. 440 n. 2 The city was built on the site of an ancient place called Drepanum, A. D. 327. Time new city was named in honour of the empress Helen, wife of Constantine. Compare Sozomen, Eccl. Hist. b. ii. ch. 2.
36. p. 441 n. 1 a)para&llakton ei0ko&na . Bull, in his Defence of the Nicene Faith, Part II. ch. 13, note 6, asserts that these words are quoted directly from the creed of Lucian. See Sozomen, Eccl. Hist. b. iii. ch. 5, note; and compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 10. Baronius in his Annals, A. D. 311 and 319, endeavours to rescue Lucian from the imputation of heresy.
37. p. 442 n. 1 Photius does well in censuring Philostorgius for this assertion, which, it need hardly be added, is a gross falsehood; for it is forbidden by the Christian religion to offer sacrifice to any created being, and much more to the statue of one. It is probable however, as Valesius observes, and as asserted by Theodoret, (Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 34,) that lamps and wax candles were lit before the statue, and that prayers were offered there for the healing of diseases.
38. p. 442 n. 2 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. b. ii. ch. 3.
39. p. 443 n. 1 On the contrary, other historians are agreed in asserting that it was Constantine who, while he was in Africa, raised a quarrel with his brother Constans, and afterwards went to war against him. Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. b. ii. ch. 5; Sozomen, Eccl. Hist. b. iii. ch. 2.
40. p. 443 n. 2 This Church of the Apostles was inferior in beauty to that of St. Sophia only in Constantinople. It was erected by Constantine the Great as a burial-place for himself and future emperors. See Du Cange, Constantinopolis Christiana, lib. iv. cap. 5, and compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. b. i. ch. 16, and Eusebius, Life of Constantine, b. iv. ch. 58.
41. p. 443 n. 3 This embassy took place A. D 356
42. p. 443 n. 4 See above b. i ch 6
43. p. 444 n. 1 This island is said to lie in the Indian Ocean, near the mouth of the Indus, and to have been known also under the name of Diva, Divu, and Devu.
44. p. 444 n. 2 e0fo&ou a0ci/wma . See below, note on the extract from Suidas concerning Auxentius, at the end of this volume. We may observe that this step of the Arian party was taken out of opposition to Athanasius and his friends, for the latter had recently sent Frumentius as bishop to the Auxumitae, as Socrates, Sozomen, and Rufinus testify. The Arians took care also to engage the secular power on their own side, by obtaining from the emperor letters to the chiefs of the Auxumitae, urging the expulsion of Frumentius from their country, as we learn from Athanasius in his Apology. Vales .