material is from A Select Library of Nicene and post-Nicene fathers
of the Christian church. Second series
by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace,
and was published 1890- 1900. It begins in the fourth century and
ends in the tenth century. I have not changed anything, except the numbering,
which was not consecutive. Because this information is circa 1890, there
are more updated translations of some of the sources. The authors
also included many later works, which I have left out.
General Literary Sources.
Taking in general chronological order, without attempting the impossibility
of fixing the exact chronological place, the first group of contemporary
sources is that of the Panegyrists (for collected editions, see Engelmann).
It was a serious mistake, now recognized, to pass them by as worthless. Like all authentic documents, they have a minimum residuum of undoubted material, which is larger or smaller according to the critical acumen of the investigator. In the case of these, however inflated or eulogistic they may be, the circumstances under which they were spoken give a considerable value.
auctoris Panegyricus Maximiano et Constantino dictus (Paneg. 307).
In Migne, Patrol. Lat. 8 (1844), 609-620. Pronounced at celebration of
marriage of Constantine and Fausta, A.D. 307. Besides having the great
value of being contemporary evidence, the author shows a certain ingenuity
in enlarging on the virtues of the young Constantine, who had few deeds
to show, and on the deeds of Maximian, who had few virtues, and has therefore
a certain discernible modicum of truth.
Compare the Monitum in Migne, Ramsay's article on Drepanius, in Smith, Dict. 1073-4, and references under Eumenius.
(310-311). (a) Panegyric (Panegyricus Constantino Augusto). In Migne, Patrol.
Lat. 8 (1884), 619-640. (b) Thanksgiving Oration (Gratiarum Actio Constantino
Augusto). In Migne, Patrol. Lat. 8 (1844), 641-654. Eumenius flourished
during the reigns of Constantius, with whom he was in high favor, and Constantine.
He was head of the school at Autun. The Panegyric was delivered at Treves,
in 310. The authorship of Eumenius has been unwarrantably questioned, on
the ground that the flattery and exaggeration of the work are not consistent
with his taste and sense; but it would seem that both his exaggeration
and his taste have been themselves exaggerated. His praise is hardly more
"outrageous" than panegyrics were wont to be, -- or are, for that matter;
and so far from being "worthless," there is a peculiar deal of interesting,
unquestionable, and primary historical evidence. Still, his taste and veracity
are not much above that of modern eulogists of living or dead emperors
and politicians. The Gratiarum Actio is the official oration of thanks
to Constantine in behalf of the citizens of Autun, on account of favors
shown them. It was pronounced at Treves in 311.
Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 92; the Prooemium, in ed. Migne, 619-622; also for editions, Ramsay, article Drepanius, in Smith, Dict. 1. 1073-4; and for literature, Chevalier. For general account of the Panegyrists, see this article on Drepanius.
Panegyricus Constantino Augusto (Paneg. 313). In Migne, Patrol. Lat.
8 (1844), 653-This is usually ascribed to Nazarius, on the ground of style.
It was spoken at Treves in 313, and relates mainly to the war with Maxentius.
Various details relating to this are of such nature and form as to suggest
again that the author is the same as that of the 321 Paneg., --Nazarius.
Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 1145; the Prooemium in ed. Migne, &c., and literature as under EUMENIUS, above.
(321) Panegyric (Panegyricus Constantino Augusto dictus). In ed. Migne,
Patrol. Lat. 8 (1844), 581-608. Nazarius is mentioned by Jerome as a distinguished
rhetorician. This oration was delivered at Rome in 321. Constantine was
not present. It is superlatively eulogistic, but like the related panegyrics
contains many historical facts of greatest value.
Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 1145, the Monitum, in Migne, and references under MENIUS. In the midst of the period which these cover comes one of the two great Christian sources, and he is followed by a considerable row of great and small Christians during the century.
(ab. 313-314). On the Deaths of the Persecutors (De M. P.). Ed. Fritsche
(Lips. 248-286; ed. Migne, Patrol. Lat. 7 (Par. 1844), 157-276; tr. in
T. & T. Clark Library, 22 (Edinb. 1871), 164-211, and in Ante-Nicene
Fathers (Buffalo and N.Y.), 300-326 [Lord Hailes translation]. There are
many editions in collected works, and about a dozen separate, and many
translations, -- in all a hundred or more editions and translations. There
has been much controversy regarding the author of this work, but there
is little doubt that it was Lactantius. Ebert (Gesch. chr. Lat. Lit. 1.
83) claims to have demonstrated the fact, and most of the later writers
agree. The work was composed after the edict of Constantine and Licinius,
and before the break between the two, i.e. 313-314. It was written thus
in the midst of things, and has the peculiar historical value of a contemporary
document, unprejudiced by later events. It is a sort of psalm of triumph,
by the passionate rejoicing of one persecuted over the Divine vengeance
which has come upon the persecutors. "In the use of the work the historian
must employ great critical discernment" (Ebert, in Herzog, 8 , 365).
But granted all his prejudice, the facts he witnesses are of first value.
Compare Ffoulkes, in Smith and Wace, 3 (1882), 613-617; Teuffel, Hist. Rom. Lit. 2 (1873), 334; Ebert, in Herzog, Encyk. 8 (1881), 364-366, and Gesch. chr. Lat. Lit. 1 (1874), 83; and for farther literature, Bibliog, Synops. in Ante-Nicene Fathers Suppl. (1887), 77-81.
(ab. 260-340). I. Ecclesiastical History. 2. Constantine. 3. Chronicle.
For 1 and 3 compare Prolegomena of Dr. McGiffert at the beginning of this volume, and for 2, Special Prolegomena, p. 466.
(fl. ab. 326). Panegyric, in Migne, Patrol. Lat. 19 (1846), 395-432;
Letter to Constantine,
do. 391-392. Optatian, Porfirius, or Porphyrius, as he is variously called, is dubiously Christian, composed this poem, or series of poems, while in exile, on the occasion of the Vicennalia of Constantine. It dates, therefore, from 325 or 326. It is a most extraordinary aggregation of acrostics, pattern poems, and every possible device of useless, mechanical variety of form, of little value, excepting as a sort of dime-museum exhibition of patience and ingenuity. It consists mainly in calling Constantine flattering names, but contains here and there an historical suggestion. It was accompanied by a letter to Constantine, and drew one from him, and a pardon as well (Hieronymus, Chron.).
Compare Wilson, article Porfirius, in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 440; article Porphyrius, in Smith, Dict. 3 (1859), 502; and for editions and literature, Engelmann.
(296-373). Apology against the Arians, and various works, ed. Migne, Patrol.
Gr. 25--28 (I857), 4 v.; translated in part in Newman, Library of the Fathers,
and in Schaff-Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (announced). The works
of Athanasius contain various letters of Constantine (see under Works)
and much of primary historical value for the latter part of Constantine's
reign. So far as it goes, the matter is almost equal to official documents
Compare Bright, in Smith & W. 1 (1877), 179-203; Schaff, Hist. of Church, 23 (1884), 884-893; and for extensive literature and editions, Chevalier and Graesse.
OF JERUSALEM (ab. 315-386). Catechetical Lectures. In Migne, Patrol Gr.
33 (1857), especially 830. English translations in Newman, Library of Fathers,
2 (1838), one ref. p. 178. Letter to Constantine II. concerning the sign
of the cross seen at Jerusalem, c 3. In Migne, Patrol. Gr. 33 (1857), 1165-1176,
ref. on 1167-1168. Two or three references only to excavation of the cross
and building of churches, &c., at Jerusalem. They take significance
only in the fact that Cyril is so near the time (the letter was 351 [?],
or not many years later), and delivered his lectures in the very church
which Constantine had built (sect. 14, 22).
Compare Schaff, Hist. of Church, 3 (1884), 923-925; Venables, in Smith & W. 1 (1877), 760-763; and literature in Chevalier Schaff, &c.; also editions in Graesse, Hoffmann, &c.
OF MILAN (ab. 340-397). Oration on the Death of Theodosius. In Migne, Patrol.
Lat. 16 (1866), portion relating to Constantine especially, 1462-1465.
Relates chiefly to the Finding of the Cross.
Compare Davies, in Smith & W. 1 (1877), 91-99; also Chevalier, Engelmann, Schoenemann, &c.
(II) HIERONYMUS (JEROME) (331--420). Chronicle. In Migne, Patrol. Lat. 27 (1866). Part relating to Constantine, 493 (497)-500. A translation and continuation of the Chronicle of Eusebius, who ends with the death of Licinius. An indispensable but aggravating authority. Compare Salmon, Eusebius, Chronicle of, in Smith & W. 2 (1880), 348-355.
(354-430). Ep. 43, ed. Migne, 33 (1865), 159- , §§ 4, 5, 20,
&c. He gives account of the various Donatist hearings, and speaks of
having read aloud from various original documents, including the petition
to Constantine, the proconsular acts, the proceedings of the court at Rome,
and the letters of Constantine. He speaks of the heating at Milan. Ep.
88, ed. Migne, Patrol. Lat. 33 (1865), 302-309. This has the text of letter
of Anulinus to Constantine and Constantine to Probianus. Eps. 76. 2; 93.
13-14, 16 (which contains account of decree of Constantine that property
of obstinate Donatists should be confiscated); 105. 9, 10 (not translated);
141. 8-10 (not translated), in ed. Migne, and tr. English ed. Schaff, contain
various matter on the Donatist acts of Constantine. Ad Donatistas post
collationem, c. 33, § 56; ed. Migne, 43 (1861), 687 (important for
dates given). Contra litt. Petil. Bk. II. ch. 92, § 205; ed. Migne,
45 (1861), 326. Tr. in Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 4 (1887),
580-581. Contr. Epist. Parmen. Bk. I. chs. 5-6,§ 10-11; ed. Migne,
43 (1861), 40-41. Augustine as a source is of primary value, because of
the otherwise unknown sources which he uses and quotes.
Compare Schaff, Hist. of Church, 3 (1884), 988-1028; Maclear, in Smith & W. Dict. 1 (1877), 216-228. For literature see Schaff, Chevalier Engelmann, and for particular literature of the Donatist portions, Hartranft, in Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 4 (1887), 369-372; and for editions, see Schoenemann, Graesse, Brunet, Engelmann, Schaff, Hartranft, &c. The equally numerous series of non-Christian writers is headed, in value at least, though not in time, by Constantine's secretary.
EUTROPIUS (4th cent.). Abridgment of Roman History, Bk. 10. Multitudes
of editions and translations; the ones used are: (Paris, 1539), 63-68;
transl. by Watson, (Bohn, 1853), 527-535. Eutropius was secretary
to Constantine, and afterwards the intimate of Julian. His testimony though
brief, is of peculiar weight from his position for knowing and from a certain
flavor of fairness. It was early remarked (Nicephorus Gregoras) that his
praise of Constantine had peculiar force, coming from a heathen and friend
of Julian. His dispraise, on the other hand, is conditioned by the fact
that he applies it only to the period after Constantine began peculiarly
to favor the Christians. He seems to be a cool, level-headed man of the
world, unsympathetic with Constantine's religion and, writing from this
standpoint, presents a just, candid, reliable account of him.
Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 126-127; Wagon, Notice, in his translation; also for multitudinous editions and translations, and relatively scanty though considerable literature, Chevalier, Engelmann, Graesse.
HISTORIAE AUGUSTAE (? 2-324). Ed. Jordan and Eyssenhardt, Berol. 1864,
2 v. Contains a few dedications to and mentions of Constantine, for which
Compare Teuffel, Hist. of Rom. Lit. tr. Wagner, 2 (Lond. 1873), 320-324.
SEXTUS AURELIUS (fl. 350-400). Caesars. In ed. Schottius, Antv. Plantin,
1579, p. 97-I67. Section on Constantine chiefly, 157-162. Epitome, Antv.
1579. Section on Constantine, p. 49-52. These works, by different author,
have been associated since the time of the above edition with the name
of Victor. The former is by him, the latter probably by a slightly later
Victor. They use the same sources with Zosimus, but supplement him (Wordsworth).
Both are interesting and important, and in Manso's judgment, final where
Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 3 (1859), 1256-1257; Thomas, article Aurelius, in Biog. Dict. (1886), 228; Manso, Leben Const. p. 215; and scanty references in Chevalier. For editions and farther literature, see Engelmann.
Atheniensis (4th cent). In Photius, Cod. 62; Ed. Bekker, p. 20; ed. Müller,
Fragm. 4 (1868), 2-3. Lived in reign of Constantine (Müller, p. 2).
Although a heathen (Photius, Cod, 62), he lauds Constantine above all his
predecessors. He wrote various works in the Ionic dialect, among, others
a "history of the deeds of Constantine the Great, in two books," composed
at the age of twenty-two. The fragments or resumé are preserved
by Photius, as above. Though brief (thee columns), it is a concise mass
Compare Smith, Did. 3. 517; also for literature, Chevalier; and for editions, the various editions of Photius in Graesse, Hofmann, Engelmann, &c.
ROMANUM CONSTANTINI MAGNI (350). In Petavius, Uranologium (1630), 112-119.
Written after 337, and in or before 355, probably in 355. It is authority
for the birthday of Constantine, Constantius, &c.
Compare Greswell, Origines Kalendariae Italicae, 4 (Oxf. 1854), 388-392.
THE APOSTATE (331-363). Caesars, Orations an Constantius and Constantinus,
et pass. Ed. Paris, 1630, p. 12-96, 422; Vol. 2, 1-54, passim. Compare
also ed. Hertlein, Lips. 1875-76, 2 v. 8vo. Editions and translations are
very numerous. (Compare arts. of Wordsworth and Graves; also Engelmann,
Graesse, &c. The orations which are panegyrical were delivered (Wordsworth)
355 and 358, and the Caesars dates from shortly after his accession (in
361). The latter is a satire which has found literary favor, the substantial
purpose of which is thought to be a suggestion that he (Julian) is much
superior to all the great emperor; but which if one were to venture a guess
at its real motive is quite as much a systematic effort to minimize by
ridicule the landed Constantine. The laudatory words of Julian himself
in his orations are quite overshadowed by the bitter sarcasms of the Caesars.
As a matter of estimate of the value of this source, there is to be remembered
the bitterness of Julian's hostility to Christianity. What to Eusebius
was a virtue would to Julian be a vice. In view of his prejudice, everything
which he concedes is of primary weight, while his ill-natured gossip carries
a presumption of slanderousness.
Compare Schaff, Hist. of Church, 2. 40-59; Wordsworth, in Smith & W. 3. 484-525; Graves, in Smith, Dict. 644-655. Compare for endless literature, Wordsworth, Chevalier, Engelmann, 1 (1880), 476-477.
(314 or 316-391 +). Orations. Ed. Morellus, Par. 1606-1627. Contain a few
allusions of more or less interest and historical value, for which, see
ed. Morellus, Index volume 2, fol.
Compare Schmitz, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 774-776; and for editions and literature, Chevalier, Engelmann, &c.
MARCELLINUS (d. ab. 395). Histories. There are many editions, for which
compare Engelmann, Graesse, and Wordsworth. Among editions are ed. Valesius
(1636) and ed. Eyssenhardt, Berol. 1871. The work was a continuation of
Tacitus, but the first thirteen hooks (including Constantine's period)
are best. He says (Bk. I5, ed. Valesius, 1636, p. 56-57) that Constantine
investigated the Manichaeans and like sects through Musonius, and gives
account of the bringing of his obelisk to Rome, perhaps by Constantine
(Bk. 17, p. 92-93; compare Parker, Twelve Egypt. Obelisks in Rome, Oxf.
1879, p. 1), and makes other mention, for which see Index to ed. Eyssenhardt,
Compare Wordsworth, in Smith & W. 1 (1879), 99-101, and for literature, Chevalier (scanty) and Engelmann, 2 (1882), 43-45 (Rich).
EUNAPIUS (Anti-Christian) (ab. 347-414). Lives of the Philosophers and
Sophists; AEdesius. Ed. Boissonade (Amsi. 1822), 19-46 passim. Eunapius
was born at Sardis about 347, and died after 414 A.D. (cf. Müller,
Fragm. 87). He was a teacher of rhetoric, and besides this work wrote a
continuation of the history of Dexippaus, extending from 270-404 A.D. Fragments
of this are preserved, but none relating to Constantine. Photius (Cod.
77) says that he calumniated the Christians, especially Constantine. With
the fragments in Müller, Fragm. 4 (1868), 11-56, is included also
(14-15) a fragment from the Vita Aedes., relating to Sopater. The death
of Sopater and the relation of Ablavius to it is given more fully in the
Vita Aedes. with various suggestive allusions. Much of his history is supposed
to be incorporated in Zosimus, and this gives importance to his name, weight
to Zosimus, and light on the hostile position of Zosimus rewards Constantine.
Cf. Photius, Cod. 77; Müller, Fragm. 4 (1868), 7-9; Mozley, in Smith & W. 2 (1880), 285-286; Schmitz, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 93; also for further literature and editions, Chevalier and Engelmann.
(4th cent.) was of Caesarea in Cappadocia; wrote the Acts of Constantine
in ten books (Suidas, s.v. <greek>bhmarkiod</greek>; cf. Zonaras,
p. 386). No portion is preserved.Wrote under Constantius, on whom he is
said (Libanius, Orat. ed. Reiske, p. 24) to have delivered a panegyric.
Cf. Müller, Fragm. 4 (1868), 3; Smith, Dict. 1 (1859), 482, &c.
An early but as yet valueless group is that of Syriac and Armenian sources on the (apocryphal) treaty of Constantine with Tiridates
(23) ZENOBIUS OF KLAG (ft. ab. 324). History, of Daron. French translation from Armenian in Langlois, Call. Hist. Arm. 1 (1867), 353-355. Like the works of the other Armenian historians, the text of this writer has suffered more or less from corruption. He has two mentions (p. 344 and 351) of Constantine, the latter being an account of the treaty with Tiridates. Compare introduction of Langlois, and literature in Chevalier.
(ab. 330). History of the Reign of Tiridates and of the Preaching of St.
Gregory the Illuminator, c. 125-127, § 163-169; in Acta SS. Boll.
Sept. VIII. 320- ; also with French translation from Armenian in Langlois
Coll. d hist. de l'Arm. p. 97-. The work extends for 226-330 A.D. The author
was secretary to Tiridates, but the work as we have it is a reduction made,
however, not long after, as it was used by Moses of Khorene. This was in
turn later (seventh century?) retouched by some Greek hagiographer. This
Greek form is extant in MSS. at Florence and Paris (cf. editions above),
and there is reason to suppose that the extant Armenian is a version from
this Greek form. But with its additions of errantly apocryphal matter,
it is hard to tell what is what, and so all considerable mention of the
relation of Constantine and Tiridates has been left out of the account
of Constantine's life. Yet we must hesitate to put it all down under the
mythical; for Tiridates certainly had intercourse with the Romans, and
the original form of this life was certainly by a competent hand, and the
matter relating to Constantine is in part soberly historical enough.
For farther information, compare Davidson on Gregorius Illuminator, in Smith & W., Dict. 2. 737-739; Introduction, Langlois, p. 99-103.
OF BYZANTIUM (320-392). Historical Library. French translation from the
Armenian in Langlois Coll. d. hist. Arm. 1. 201-310. There are mentions
of Constantine and Tiridates in Bk. 3, chaps. 10 and 21. The work is open
to some suspicions of having been tampered with, but Langlois inclines
to give it a fairly good character. If genuine, the mention of the treaty
with Tiridates would nearly establish it as historical fact.
Compare Beauvois Nouv. biog. gén. 17 (1856), 203, and Introduction of Langlois; also, literature in Chevalier.
The writers of the following centuries are for the most part Christian, uncertain or religiously unknown, excepting the very pronounced non-Christian who heads the list.
ZOSIMUS (ft. ab. 400-450). History. Ed. Bekker (Bonn, 1837), 8vo. Section
on Constantine occupying Bk. 2. 8-- , p. 72-106. The date of this writer
has been put as easy as the fourth century and as late as the end of the
fifth. It will be safe to divide extremes. He is a heathen who, on the
period of Constantine, draws from an anti-Christian and anti-Constantinian
source, and who regards the introduction of Christianity as a chief cause
of the decline of the Roman Empire (cf. various passages cited by Milligan).
He is prejudiced against Christianity with the bitter prejudice of one
who finds himself in a steadily narrowing minority, and he is occasionally
credulous. But he wrote in a clear, interesting style, without intentional
falsifications, and was quite as moderate as the Christian writer (Evagrius
3. 41) who calls Zosimus himself a "fiend of hell." His extended account
is therefore of great value among the sources, and especially as it is
probably drawn in large measure from the earlier lost work of Eunapius.
Compare Milligan, in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 1225-1227: Mason, in Smith, Dict. 3 (1859), 1334-1335; also, for literature, Chevalier and Engelmann, and for editions, Engelmann.
(27) ANONYMUS VALESIANUS (fifth century). Ed. Valesius (Paris, 1636), p. 471-476. This fragment, first published by Valesius in the above editions of Ammianus, is of the highest value for the life of Constantine. It is evidently drawn from various sources, many of which are now lost. The compiler or writer shows a judiciousness and soberness which commends his statements as peculiarly trustworthy.Compare the exhaustive examination by Ohnesorge, Der Anonymus Valesii de Constantino. Kiel, 1885. 8vo.
(28) STEPHEN OF BYZANTIUM (ab. 400). Greek Cities. Venet. Aldus, 1502, fol. H. iii. s.v. The work is a dictionary of geography, and the fact in these few lines is of first value. Compare Smith, in Smith, Dict. 3 (1859), 904-906. Chevalier Hoffmann, etc.
(b. ab. 400). Ecclesiastical History. Ed. Hussey, English translation,
London. Bohn, 1855; newly edited by Hartranft in Schaff, Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers, 2 (1890) [in press]. This history covers the period
323-423 (not 439). He draws largely from Eusebius. He has been described
Study of Eccl. Hist. p. 31) as relatively inaccurate, rhetorical and credulous. But he works from sources, though mainly from exact ones. For father discussion, compare Hartranft in volume 2 of this series.
Compare also Milligan, in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 722-723, and literature in Chevalier.
(b. ab. 408). Ecclesiastical History. Ed. Hussey, reprinted with Introduction
by Bright, Oxf. 1878. English translation London, Bohn, newly edited by
Zenos in volume 2 of this series [in press]. This history covers the period
306-439. It is written with general good judgment, but for Constantine
adds little to Eusebius of which it professes to be a continuation.
For farther description and discussion, compare Zenos, Milligan, in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 709-711, and literature in Chevalier.
(h. ab. 393?-457?). Ecclesiastical History. In Migne, Patrol. Gr. 82 (1859),
879-1280. English translation London, Bohn, 1854. The birth of Theodoret
has been placed at various dates, 386, 387, 393, &c., and the exact
time of his death (453-458) is equally uncertain. This work reaches from
324 to 429, and is generally regarded as learned and impartial. It gives
much concerning Constantine's relations to the Arian controversy and incorporates
many documents, which appear to be taken mainly from Eusebius' Life of
Constantine. A chief value is, it would seem, for the text of Eusebius.
But his very use of documents shows care and gives value.
Compare Venables, in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 904-919; Newman, Hist. Sketches, 2 (I876), 303-362; Schaff, Hist. of Church, 3 (1884), 881-882; and literature in Chevalier; also for editions, Graesse and Hoffmann.
PAULUS (ab. 417). Histories, Bk. 7, chaps. 26-28. Ed. Migne Patrol. Lat.
31 (1846), 6351174; section relying to Constantine occupies 1128-1137.
For many editions and MSS. compare Schoenemann, Bibl. Patr. Lat. 2 (1794),
481-507, and Engelmann, 2 (1882), 441-. It is said (Manso) that Orosius
adds nothing to existing material. This is only in part true. At all events,
his value as corroboratory evidence is considerable, brief as the work
Compare Phillott, in Smith & W, 4 (1887), 157-158; Ebert, Gesch. d. chr. Lat. Lit. 1 (1874), 323-330, and literature in Chevalier and Engelmann.
AQUITANUS (403--463 +). Chronicle. Ed. Migne, Patrol Lat. 51 (1861), 535-606
(8). Portion relating to Constantine, 574-576. The Chronicle extends to
444 or 455. To 326 he depends mainly on Eusebius' Chronicle, and for the
rest of our period on the continuation of Hieronymus.
Compare Phillott, in Smith & W. 3 (1882), 492-497; Teuffel, Hist. of Rom. Lit. 2 (Lond. 1873), 482-484; and for literature, editions, &c., Chevalier, Engelmann, &c.
(34) IDATIUS (468+). List Consuls (Fasti Idatiani). In Migne, Patrol. Lat. 51 (1861), 891-914; portion relating to Constantine, 907-908. Idatius lived until after 469. This work, which is net generally acknowledged to be his, although quoted under his name, ends in 468. It contains brief statements of some events under the most significant years.Compare Ramsay, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), and literature under "Idace de Lamego," in Chevalier.
(35) GELASIUS OF CYZICUS (ab. 450-). History of the Council of Nicaea. In Labbe, Concilia, 2 (1671), 103-286. There is also an abstract in Photius, Bibl. Cod. 88, ed. Migne, Patrol. Gr. 103 (1860), 293-296. Venables is probably just when he says: "His work is little more than a compilation from the ecclesiastical histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, to which he has added little but what is very doubtful or manifestly untrue." There is a little on Constantine not in those sources, but to try to fix on any of it as authoritative quite battles one. Still, it is not wholly clear that he did not use sources, as well as his own imagination, in adding to the other sources. It may be said to be "of doubtful value," as source. It is not easy to see what Venables means in saying that the third hook, as we have it, gives only three letters of Constantine.This is true; but the second book, "as we have it," gives several more. Compare Venables, in Smith & W. 2 (1880), 621-623.
(36) JACOBUS OF SARUG (452-521). Homily on the Baptism of Constantine, Ed. Frothingham, Roma, 1882. For further information consult the extended study of Frothingham.
(b. ab. 468). English translation by Walford (Lond. Bohn, 1855), 425-528.
The original work covered the period between 300 and 425. The fragments
preserved contain several interesting facts, or fictions, relating to Constantine,
some not found elsewhere. Photius and all the orthodox have always called
him untrustworthy or worse, and a very unorthodox critic (Gibbon) finds
him passionate, prejudiced and ignorant; but it seems to be agreed that
he used some sources not availed of by others.
Compare Milligan, in Smith & W. 4 (1587), 390; Dowling, Study of Eccl. Hist. p. 26-27; and literature in Chevalier.
MILESIUS (ab. 500?--). Origins of Constantinople. In Müller, Fragm.
4 (1868), 146-155; also in ed. Orelli (Lips. 1820). 59-73. Hesychius, surnamed
Illustris, of Miletus lived in the early part of the sixth century. This
work contains several allusions to the founding of the city of Constantine.
It seems to have been taken almost word for word in parts by Codinus.
Compare Venables, in Smith & W. 3 (1882), 12-13; Means, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 447-448; Miller, Fragm. 4 (1868), 143-145; also literature in Chevalier, and editions and literature in Engelmann.
(ab. 468-561 +). Tripartite History. In Opera, ed. Garetius, (1) (Rotom.
1679, fol.), b I-b 372. On Constantine, especially p. 207-243. (Same ed.
in Migne, Patrol Lat. 69 , 879-1214.) Cassiodorus was born about
468 and lived to be more than ninety-three years old. This work is an epitome
of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, and has no additional value as source.
A work on the Goths has been preserved to us only in an epitome by Jordanes.
Compare Young, in Smith & W. I (1877), 416-418, or (better for this work) Ramsay, in Smith, I (1859), 623-625; and for literature and editions, Chevalier, Engelmann, Graesse, etc.
JOANNES (LAURENTIUS) (490--550+). De Mensibus ; De Magistratibus; De Ostentis,
passim. Ed. Bekker, in Corp. Hist. Byz. (1837). Other editions of the various
works may be found noticed in Graesse, Trésor, 4 (1863), 122; Brunet,
Manuel, 3 (1862), 880; Engelmann, Bibl. scr. class. I (1880), 478-479;
Hoffmann, Lex. He was born at Philadelphia in 490, and lived some time
after 550. He was a heathen, but respects toward Christianity (Photius,
Cod. 180). He mentions Constantine ten or a dozen times; e.g. his foundation
of Constantinople (De O. 21. 5), Constantine's learning and military skill
(De mag. 3. 53), and quotes (De magister. 3. 33, ed. Bonn., p. 226), Constantine's
Compare Photius, Cod. 180; Means, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 600; Hase, Pref. and in ed. Bekker; Joubert, in Nouv. biog. gén. (Hoefer), 32 (1860), 388-391; and for farther literature, Chevalier and the article of Joubert, and Engelmann, Bibl. scr. class. 1 (1880), 479.
JORDANES (or JORNANDES) (-551 ?). History of the Goths, (De Getarum origine
et rebus gestis). In Cassiodorus, Opera, ed. Garetius, 1 (Rotom. 1679),
397-425; same ed. in Migne, Patrol. Lat. 69 (1865), 12511296. This work
on the Goths is said by its author to be an epitome of the work of Cassiodorus.
It says (p. 406-407) that Constantine employed Goths in his campaign against
Licinius, and also in the building of Constantinople. It was composed in
551 or 552 (cf. Wattenbach, Deutschland's Geschichtsq. 1 , 66).
Compare Hodgkin, in Encycl. Brit. 13 (1881), 747-749; Acland, in Smith & W. 3 (1882), 431-438 (exhaustive); and abundant literature in Chevalier, Engelmann, Wattenbach, &c.; also editions in Engelmann, "Potthast. Bibl. hist. med. rev. 1862, p. 102," &c.
(42) ANONYMOUS, QUI DIONIS CASSII HISTORIAS CONTINUAVIT (sixth century ?). 14. Licinius (18 lines); 15-Constantinus (9 lines). In MüIIer, Fragm. 4 (1868), 199; of especially Introd. in MüIIer, p. 191-192. These were first published by Ang. Mai in Script. Vet. Nov. Call. 2, 135-, 527-, and are found also in various editions of Dion Cassius; e.g. ed. Sturz. 9 (Spz. 1843). Mai strongly inclines to suspect that Johannes Antiochenus is the author. but this Müller (p. 191) argues to be impossible. They are sometimes referred to as Excerpta Vaticana. Petrus Patricius and various others have been suggested as authors, but all that is affirmed with any assurance is that the author was a Christian. This is on the ground of Diocletianus, 1 (p. 198). The fragments are very brief, but contain several little facts and turns not found elsewhere.
(43) EVAGRIUS (536?-594+). Ecclesiastical History, 3. 40-41. English translation (1709), 472-474. A violent invective against and disproval of the charges of Zosimus against Constantine and adds nothing to historical facts. Compare Milligan, in Smith & W. 2 (1880), 423-424.
CAESARIENSIS (fl. 547--565). Histories. Ed. Dindorf Bonn, 1833-1838 3 v.
Two or three slight mentions, of which the nearest to any account is the
division of the empire by Constantine, and the founding of Constantinople
(De bel. Vand, I. I). He flourished from about 547 to 565. Whether he was
Christian or heathen is uncertain. He is characterized by peculiar truthfulness
(cf. his De aedif. 1; Praf. ed. Bonn, v. 3, 170--, and Milligan).
Compare Milligian in Smith & W. 4 (1887), 487-488; Plate, in Smith, Dict. 3, 538-540; also for literature, Chevalier and Engelmann, 1. 655; and for editions, Milligan, Plate, and the various bibliographies.
PATRICIUS (fl. 550--562). Fragments. In Müller, Fragm. 4 (1868), 189.Gives
account of an embassy of Licinius to Constantine.
Compare Means, in Smith, Dict. 3 (1859), 226--227; also Chevalier and Hoffmann.
OF TOURS (ab. 573-594). History of the Franks, 1. 34. Ed. Ruinart (Paris,
1699), 27, &c. (?) History of the Seven Sleepers, do. 1272-1273, &c.
Liber miraculorum, do. 725-729. The edition of Ruinart is reprinted in
Migne, Patrol. Lat. vol. 71 (1867).In the first of these he quotes as authorities,
Eusebius and Junius; the latter are full of legendary matter. Compare Buchanan,
in Smith & W. 2 (1880), 771-776;also for editions and literature, Engelmann,
PASCHALE (ab. 630 A.D.) Ed. Dindorf, Bonn, 1832, 2 v.; section relating
to Constantine occupies vol. 1, p. 516-533. Ed. Migne, Patrol. Gr. 92 (Paris,
1865). The work is a chronicle of the world from the creation until 630.
It has been thought, but on insufficient grounds (cf. Salmon), that the
first part ended with A.D. 354 and was written about that time. It is really
a homogeneous work and written probably not long after 630 A.D. (Salmon).
It is frequently quoted, unfortunately as Alexandrian Chronicle (e.g. M'Clintock
and Strong Cycl.). The chief value is the chronological, but the author
has used good sources and presumably some not now extant. It has something
the value of a primary source of second rate.
Compare Salmon, In Smith & W. I. (1877), 509-513; Clinton Fasti. Rom. 2 (1850), 169; Ideler, Handb. d. Chron. 2 (1826), 350-351, 462-463; and for literature and editions Salmon.
(48) Anonymous Acts of Metrophanes and Alexander seventh century ?), "in which is contorted also a life of the emperor Constantine the Great." In Photius, Cod. 256; ed. Migne, Patrol Gr. 104 (1860), 105-120. A more complete recession of this anonymous piece was edited by Combefis, who regards it as the work of a contemporary, written therefore in the middle of the fourth century (cf. his Hist. Mon. p. 573, taste Fabricius). The authentic details can be traced word for word, according to Tillemont, in other historians, while impossible statements show it to be not the work of a contemporary. It seems to fall under the class of works where "What is true is not new, and what is new is not true," but it can hardly be regarded as sufficiently determined whether or no it is worthless.Compare Tillemont, Mem. 7 (1732), 657; Fabricius, Bibl. Gr. 9 (1737), 124 and 498; Acta. SS. Nov, I.
ANTIOCHENUS (ft. 61O--650). Chronological History. Fragments in Müller,
4 (1868), 535(8)-622; Fragm. 168-169, on Constantius and Galerius and 170-171a,
on Constantine, p. 602-603. This writer is to be distinguished from Johannes
Malalas, also known as Johannes Antiochenus. He flourished somewhere between
610-650 (Müller, p. 536). The sections relating to Constantine are
in the main exactly correspondent to Eutropius. It has been conjectured
(Müller, p. 1538) that Eutropius and Johannes copied from a common
Greek source; but the curious error in the section on Constantine (p. 603),
by which "commodae" is converted into a proper name, and becomes the name
of the sister whose son Constantine put to death, shows it to have been
translated from the Latin. The work of Johannes has, however, some interesting
suggestions and additions; e.g. its paraphrase of the word "dubius" in
the characterization of Constantine's conduct towards his friends.
Compare Müller, p. 535-538; Means, in Smith, Dict. 2 (1859), 587; also article of Stokes, and other literature under Malalas.
(=JOHN of Antioch)(ab. 700). Chronography, Bk. 13, 1-11. Ed. Dindorf (Bonnae,
1831); in Corp. ser. hist. Byz. (section on Constantine, p. 316-324); also
in Migne, Patrol. Gr. 97 (Par. 1865), 1-70. Earlier editions are, Oxf.
1691, 80; Venice, 1733, fol. [reprint of 1691, "quite useless"]. Lived
about 700 (Müller, Fragm. 4 , 536), or about 650 (Chevalier,
1205). He has been placed as late as ninth century (Hody), and as early
as 601 (Cave). Noting is known of his personal history. He is to be distinguished
from the John of Antioch in Müller's Fragm. who is earlier than Malalas.
He is very credulous and inaccurate and the section on Constantine is no
exception to the rule.
Compare Prolegomena of Hody and Dindorf; Stokes, in Smith & W. 3 (1882), 787-788, &c.; and farther literature in Chevalier, Rép. 1205; Hoefer, Nouv. biog. gén. 32 (1060), 1007, and the article of Stokes.
(51) PSEUDO-ISIDORE (eighth cent.?). Decretals. In Migne, Patrol. Lat. 130 (1853), 245-252. The famous "Donation of Constantion," which appears here for the first time. See under The Mythical Constantine. Compare Schaff, Hist. of Church, 4 (1885), 268-733; and for literature, Chevailer under Isidore Mercator; also the literature of the Danation.
(758-818). Chronography. Ed. Classen, Bonn. 1839-41, 2 v. Section on Constantine
occupying vol. 1, p. 10-51; also in Migne, Patrol. Gr. 108 (186). This
work "is justly regarded as one of the most important in the what series
of Byzantine historians" (Dowling, p. 69). Theophanes was friend of Georgius
Syncellus; and at his request (Proem. p. 5) took up the latter work at
the point where he left off (Diocletian), extending it to 811. He is an
authority of judgment and wright for matters relating to his own times,
and on quite a different level of historical character from Cedrenus and
Zonaras. Although of very much less value for Constantine, he shows even
here a certain historical judgment and discrimination. His book is an intelligent
work from various sources, one of which is Eusebius He says that he has
diligently examined many works, and reports nothing on his own authority,
but on the authority of ancient historiographers and "logographers" (Proem.
Compare Dowling lntrod. (Loud. 1838), 69-70; Smith, in Smith, Dict. 3. 1082-1083; Gass, in Herzog, Real Enc. 15 (1885), 536-537; Acta sanctorum Boll. March 12; and for (extensive) literature, Chevalier.
BIBLIOTHECARIUS (d. 879). Lives of the Roman Pontiffs. In Migne, Patrol.
(1852).34. S. Silvester, vol. 127, 1511-1527. Small use.
Compare Schaff, Hist. of the Church, 4 (1885), 774-776; and for literature and editions, Chevalier and Graesse.
(54) PHOTIUS (ninth cent.). Bibliotheca. In Migne, Patrol. Gr. vols. 103-104 (1860). Contains excerpts from and comments on Praxagoras, Eunapius, Gelasius, Anon. Metroph., and Eusebius which see. Compare Schaff, Hist. of Church, 4 (1885), 636-642; Means, in Smith, Diet. 3 (1859), 347-355,
(55) CONSTANTINUS PORPHYROGENITUS (c. VII.) (ft. 911-959). De thematibus. Ed. Bekker (Bonn. 1840), 1-64, in Corp. ser. hist. Byz.; and in ed. Migne, Patrol. Gr. 113 (1864), 63-140. Gives (2. 8, ed. Bonn. p. 57-58) account of division of the empire among his sons by Constantine. He also mentions in his De cer. aul. Byz. (ed. Reiske, Bonn. 1829; ed. Migne, Patrol. Gr. 112); e.g. the "cross of Constantine" several times mentioned, and gives a few facts of archaeological interest. Constantinus VII was emperor 911-959.
(56) LEO DIACONUS
(tenth century). Histories, 5. 9 and 8. 8. In ed. Hase (Bonn. 1828), p.
91 and 138. Mentions the foundation of a city, the vision of the cross,
the Scythian wars, and burial in the Church of the Apostles at Constantinople,
and characterizes him as “among emperors the one renowned in story” (8.
8). For other editions, compare Brunet, Graesse, Hoffmann, and Engelmann.
He lived from about 950 to at least 993. He was used by Scylitzes (cf.
Cedrenus) and perhaps Zonaras. “Style vicious,” and “knowledge…of ancient
history is slight” (Means).