OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI/Chapter 10

Chapter X.—The Bishops of Jerusalem.
Narcissus having departed, and no one knowing where he was, those presiding over the neighboring churches thought it best to ordain another bishop. His name was Dius. He presided but a short time, and Germanio succeeded him. He was followed by Gordius, in whose time Narcissus appeared again, as if raised from the dead. And immediately the brethren besought him to take the episcopate, as all admired him the more on account of his retirement and philosophy, and especially because of the punishment with which God had avenged him.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Of these three bishops, Dius, Germanio, and Gordius, we know nothing more than is told us here. Syncellus assigns eight years to Dius, four to Germanio, and five to Sardianus, whom he names instead of Gordius. Epiphanius reports that Dius was bishop until Severus (193 a.d.), and Gordius until Antonine (i.e. Caracalla, 211 a.d.). But no reliance is to be placed upon these figures or dates, as remarked above, Bk. V. chap. 12, note 2.
* ↑ Eusebius and Epiphanius give Τόρδιος, and Jerome, Gordius; but the Armenian has Gordianus, and Syncellus, Σαρδιανός. What became of Gordius when Narcissus reappeared we do not know. He must have died very speedily, or some compromise would have been made, as it seems, which would have rendered the appointment of Alexander as assistant bishop unnecessary.
* ↑ Literally, “as if from a resurrection” (ὥσπερ ἐξ ἀναβιώσεως).
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI/Chapter 15

Chapter XV.—Heraclas.
1. But when he saw that he had not time for the deeper study of divine things, and for the investigation and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures, and also for the instruction of those who came to him,—for coming, one after another, from morning till evening to be taught by him, they scarcely gave him time to breathe,—he divided the multitude. And from those whom he knew well, he selected Heraclas, who was a zealous student of divine things, and in other respects a very learned man, not ignorant of philosophy, and made him his associate in the work of instruction. He entrusted to him the elementary training of beginners, but reserved for himself the teaching of those who were farther advanced.

## Footnotes

* ↑ On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI
## Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
* Chapter 13
* Chapter 14
* Chapter 15
* Chapter 16
* Chapter 17
* Chapter 18
* Chapter 19
* Chapter 20
* Chapter 21
* Chapter 22
* Chapter 23
* Chapter 24
* Chapter 25
* Chapter 26
* Chapter 27
* Chapter 28
* Chapter 29
* Chapter 30
* Chapter 31
* Chapter 32
* Chapter 33
* Chapter 34
* Chapter 35
* Chapter 36
* Chapter 37
* Chapter 38
* Chapter 39
* Chapter 40
* Chapter 41
* Chapter 42
* Chapter 43
* Chapter 44
* Chapter 45
* Chapter 46
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI/Chapter 35

Chapter XXXV.—Dionysius succeeds Heraclas in the Episcopate.
In the third year of this emperor, Heraclas died, having held his office for sixteen years, and Dionysius received the episcopate of the churches of Alexandria.

## Footnotes

* ↑ On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2. The third year of Philip’s reign extended from the summer of 246 to the summer of 247, so that if Heraclas became bishop in 232, he cannot have held office fully sixteen years. The agreement, however, is so close as to occasion no difficulty.
* ↑ On Dionysius, see chap. 40, note 1.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI/Chapter 37

Chapter XXXVII.—The Dissension of the Arabians.
About the same time others arose in Arabia, putting forward a doctrine foreign to the truth. They said that during the present time the human soul dies and perishes with the body, but that at the time of the resurrection they will be renewed together. And at that time also a synod of considerable size assembled, and Origen, being again invited thither, spoke publicly on the question with such effect that the opinions of those who had formerly fallen were changed.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The exact nature of the heresy which is here described by Eusebius is somewhat difficult to determine. It is disputed whether these heretics are to be reckoned with the θνητοπσυχίται (whom John of Damascus mentions in his de Hæres. c. 90, and to whom Augustine refers, under the name of Arabici, in his de Hæres, c. 83), that is, those who taught the death of the soul with the body, or with the ὑπνοψυχίται, who taught that the soul slept between the death and the resurrection of the body. Redepenning, in a very thorough discussion of the matter (II. 105 sq.), concludes that the heresy to which Eusebius refers grew up under Jewish influence, which was very strong in Arabia, and that it did not teach the death (as Eusebius asserts), but only the slumber of the soul. He reckons them therefore with the second, not the first, class mentioned. But it seems to me that Redepenning is almost hypercritical in maintaining that it is impossible that these heretics can have taught that the soul died and afterward was raised again; for it is no more impossible that they should have taught it than that Eusebius and others should have supposed that they did. In fact, there does not seem to be adequate ground for correcting Eusebius’ statement, which describes heretics who must distinctly be classed with the θνητοπσυχίται mentioned later by John of Damascus. We do not know the date at which the synod referred to in this chapter was held. We only know that it was subsequent to the one which dealt with Beryllus, and therefore it must have been toward the close of Philip’s reign.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book VI/Chapter 4

Chapter IV.—The pupils of Origen that became Martyrs.
1. The first of these was Plutarch, who was mentioned just above. As he was led to death, the man of whom we are speaking being with him at the end of his life, came near being slain by his fellow-citizens, as if he were the cause of his death. But the providence of God preserved him at this time also.
2. After Plutarch, the second martyr among the pupils of Origen was Serenus, who gave through fire a proof of the faith which he had received.
3. The third martyr from the same school was Heraclides, and after him the fourth was Hero. The former of these was as yet a catechumen, and the latter had but recently been baptized. Both of them were beheaded. After them, the fifth from the same school proclaimed as an athlete of piety was another Serenus, who, it is reported, was beheaded, after a long endurance of tortures. And of women, Herais died while yet a catechumen, receiving baptism by fire, as Origen himself somewhere says.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See the previous chapter, §2. The martyrdom of these disciples of Origen took place under Aquila, and hence the date depends on the date of his rule, which cannot be fixed with exactness, as remarked in note 4 on the previous chapter.
* ↑ These two persons named Serenus, the first of whom was burned, the second beheaded, are known to us only from this chapter.
* ↑ Of this Heraclides, we know only what is told us in this chapter. He, with the other martyrs mentioned in this connection, is commemorated in the mediæval martyrologies, but our authentic information is limited to what Eusebius tells us here.
* ↑ Our authentic information of Hero is likewise limited to this account of Eusebius.
* ↑ Herais likewise is known to us from this chapter alone. It is interesting to note that Origen’s pupils were not confined to the male sex. His association with female catechumens, which his office of instructor entailed upon him, formed one reason for the act of self-mutilation which he committed (see chap. 8, §2).
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 42

Chapter XLII.—That the Empress Helena,Constantine’s Mother, having visited this Locality for Devotional Purposes, built these Churches.
For she, having resolved to discharge the duties of pious devotion to the God, the King of kings, and feeling it incumbent on her to render thanksgivings with prayers on behalf both of her own son, now so mighty an emperor, and of his sons, her own grandchildren, the divinely favored Cæsars, though now advanced in years, yet gifted with no common degree of wisdom, had hastened with youthful alacrity to survey this venerable land; and at the same time to visit the eastern provinces, cities, and people, with a truly imperial solicitude. As soon, then, as she had rendered due reverence to the ground which the Saviour’s feet had trodden, according to the prophetic word which says “Let us worship at the place whereon his feet have stood,” she immediately bequeathed the fruit of her piety to future generations.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Compare Wordsworth, Helena, in Smith and Wace, Dict. 2 (1880), 881 sq. That she was made empress is shown also by the coins. Cf. coins in Eckhel.
* ↑ [Ps. cxxxi. 7. Septuagint.—Bag.] Engl. Vers. Ps. cxxxii. 7, “We will worship at his footstool.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 44

Chapter XLIV.—Of Helena’s Generosity and Beneficent Acts.
For on the occasion of a circuit which she made of the eastern provinces, in the splendor of imperial authority, she bestowed abundant proofs of her liberality as well on the inhabitants of the several cities collectively, as on individuals who approached her, at the same time that she scattered largesses among the soldiery with a liberal hand. But especially abundant were the gifts she bestowed on the naked and unprotected poor. To some she gave money, to others an ample supply of clothing: she liberated some from imprisonment, or from the bitter servitude of the mines; others she delivered from unjust oppression, and others again, she restored from exile.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 4

Chapter IV.—A Farther Notice of the Controversies raised in Egypt by Arius.
In such occupations as these he employed himself with pleasure: but the effects of that envious spirit which so troubled the peace of the churches of God in Alexandria, together with the Theban and Egyptian schism, continued to cause him no little disturbance of mind. For in fact, in every city bishops were engaged in obstinate conflict with bishops, and people rising against people; and almost like the fabled Symplegades, coming into violent collision with each other. Nay, some were so far transported beyond the bounds of reason as to be guilty of reckless and outrageous conduct, and even to insult the statues of the emperor. This state of things had little power to excite his anger, but rather caused in him sorrow of spirit; for he deeply deplored the folly thus exhibited by deranged men.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The famous rocks in the Euxine which were wont to close against one another and crush all passing ships, and by which the Argo was said (Od. 12. 69) to be the only ship which ever passed in safety.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 40

Chapter XL.—Of the Number of his Offerings.
This temple, then, the emperor erected as a conspicuous monument of the Saviour’s resurrection, and embellished it throughout on an imperial scale of magnificence. He further enriched it with numberless offerings of inexpressible beauty and various materials,—gold, silver, and precious stones, the skillful and elaborate arrangement of which, in regard to their magnitude, number, and variety, we have not leisure at present to describe particularly.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Some idea of various features of this building may be gathered from the cuts and descriptions of other basilicas in Fergusson, History of Architecture, 1 (1874), 400 sq.; Lübke, Geschichte der Architektur, 1 (Lpg. 1875), 229 sq.; Langl.’s series of Bilder zur Geschichte, &c.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 37

Chapter XXXVII.—Description of the Double Porticos on Either Side, and of the Three Eastern Gates.
Besides this were two porticos on each side, with upper and lower ranges of pillars, corresponding in length with the church itself; and these also had their roofs ornamented with gold. Of these porticos, those which were exterior to the church were supported by columns of great size, while those within these rested on piles of stone beautifully adorned on the surface. Three gates, placed exactly east, were intended to receive the multitudes who entered the church.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Whether this means two series, one underground and one above (Molz. and many), or not, is fully discussed by Heinichen in a separate note (Eusebius, vol. 3, p. 520–521).
* ↑ [These inner porticos seem to have rested on massy piles, because they adjoined the sides of the church, and had to bear its roof, which was loftier than any of the rest.—Bag.] Translated by Molz. “Quadrangular supports.” “In Architecture a cubic mass of building, to serve for bearings.”—Liddell and Scott.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 38

Chapter XXXVIII.—Description of the Hemisphere, the Twelve Columns, and their Bowls.
Opposite these gates the crowning part of the whole was the hemisphere, which rose to the very summit of the church. This was encircled by twelve columns (according to the number of the apostles of our Saviour), having their capitals embellished with silver bowls of great size, which the emperor himself presented as a splendid offering to his God.

## Footnotes

* ↑ [Apparently the altar, which was of a hemispherical, or rather hemicylindrical form—Bag.] Also a much-discussed question. Compare Heinichen, vol. 3, p. 521–522.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 39

Chapter XXXIX.—Description of the Inner Court, the Arcades and Porches.
In the next place he enclosed the atrium which occupied the space leading to the entrances in front of the church. This comprehended, first the court, then the porticos on each side, and lastly the gates of the court. After these, in the midst of the open market-place, the general entrance-gates, which were of exquisite workmanship, afforded to passers-by on the outside a view of the interior which could not fail to inspire astonishment.

## Footnotes

* ↑ [In front of the larger churches there was generally a street, or open space, where a market was held on the festival of the Martyr to whom the church was dedicated. Regard was also had, in this arrangement, to architectural effect, the object being that nothing should interfere with the view of the front of the church. Vide Valesius in loc.—Bag.]
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 41

Chapter XLI.—Of the Erection of Churches in Bethlehem, and on the Mount of Olives.
In the same country he discovered other places, venerable as being the localities of two sacred caves: and these also he adorned with lavish magnificence. In the one case, he rendered due honor to that which had been the scene of the first manifestation of our Saviour’s divine presence, when he submitted to be born in mortal flesh; while in the case of the second cavern he hallowed the remembrance of his ascension to heaven from the mountain top. And while he thus nobly testified his reverence for these places, he at the same time eternized the memory of his mother, who had been the instrument of conferring so valuable a benefit on mankind.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Compare Prolegomena, p. 411.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 43

Chapter XLIII.—A Farther Notice of the Churches at Bethlehem.
For without delay she dedicated two churches to the God whom she adored, one at the grotto which had been the scene of the Saviour’s birth; the other on the mount of his ascension. For he who was “God with us” had submitted to be born even in a cave of the earth, and the place of his nativity was called Bethlehem by the Hebrews. Accordingly the pious empress honored with rare memorials the scene of her travail who bore this heavenly child, and beautified the sacred cave with all possible splendor. The emperor himself soon after testified his reverence for the spot by princely offerings, and added to his mother’s magnificence by costly presents of silver and gold, and embroidered hangings. And farther, the mother of the emperor raised a stately structure on the Mount of Olives also, in memory of his ascent to heaven who is the Saviour of mankind, erecting a sacred church and temple on the very summit of the mount. And indeed authentic history informs us that in this very cave the Saviour imparted his secret revelations to his disciples. And here also the emperor testified his reverence for the King of kings, by diverse and costly offerings. Thus did Helena Augusta, the pious mother of a pious emperor, erect over the two mystic caverns these two noble and beautiful monuments of devotion, worthy of everlasting remembrance, to the honor of God her Saviour, and as proofs of her holy zeal, receiving from her son the aid of his imperial power. Nor was it long ere this aged woman reaped the due reward of her labors. After passing the whole period of her life, even to declining age, in the greatest prosperity, and exhibiting both in word and deed abundant fruits of obedience to the divine precepts, and having enjoyed in consequence an easy and tranquil existence, with unimpaired powers of body and mind, at length she obtained from God an end befitting her pious course, and a recompense of her good deeds even in this present life.

## Footnotes

* ↑ [Literally, beneath the earth. It seems to have been characteristic of the age of Eusebius to invest the more prominent circumstances connected with the Lord’s life on earth with a degree of romance and mystery equally inconsistent with Scripture and with probability. It is obvious that Scripture furnishes no authority for the caves either of the nativity or ascension. See ch. 41, supra.—Bag.] Compare discussion by Andrews, Cave of the Nativity in his Life of our Lord (N.Y.), 77–83.
* ↑ [Alluding probably, to the discourse in Matt. xxiv., delivered by our Lord to the disciples on the Mount of Olives.—Bag.]
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book III/Chapter 36

Chapter XXXVI.—Description of the Walls, Roof, Decoration, and Gilding of the Body of the Church.
For at the side opposite to the cave, which was the eastern side, the church itself was erected; a noble work rising to a vast height, and of great extent both in length and breadth. The interior of this structure was floored with marble slabs of various colors; while the external surface of the walls, which shone with polished stones exactly fitted together, exhibited a degree of splendor in no respect inferior to that of marble. With regard to the roof, it was covered on the outside with lead, as a protection against the rains of winter. But the inner part of the roof, which was finished with sculptured panel work, extended in a series of connected compartments, like a vast sea, over the whole church; and, being overlaid throughout with the purest gold, caused the entire building to glitter as it were with rays of light.

## Footnotes

* ↑ It would seem from this description that the paneling was like that of Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome, a horizontal surface rather than the pointed roof paneled.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VI/Prefaces/Prefaces to Commentaries/Luke

Preface to Translation of Origen on St. Luke.
Addressed to Paula and Eustochium, a.d. 388.
A few days ago you told me that you had read some commentaries on Matthew and Luke, of which one was equally dull in perception and expression, the other frivolous in expression, sleepy in sense. Accordingly you requested me to translate, without regarding such rubbish, our Adamantius’ thirty-nine “homilies” on Luke, just as they are found in the original Greek; I replied that it was an irksome task and a mental torment to write, as Cicero phrases it, with another man’s heart not one’s own; but yet I will undertake it, as your requests reach no higher than this. The demand which the sainted Blesilla once made, at Rome, that I should translate into our language his twenty-five volumes on Matthew, five on Luke, and thirty-two on John is beyond my powers, my leisure, and my energy. You see what weight your influence and wishes have with me. I have laid aside for a time my books on Hebrew Questions because you think my labour will not be in vain, and turn to the translation of these commentaries, which, good or bad, are his work and not mine. I do this all the more readily because I hear on the left of me the raven—that ominous bird—croaking and mocking in all extraordinary way at the colours of all the other birds, though he himself is nothing if not a bird of gloom. And so, before he change his note, I confess that in these treatises Origen is like a boy amusing himself with the dice-box; there is a wide difference between his mature efforts and the serious studies of his old age. If my proposal meet with your approbation, if I am still able to undertake the task, and if the Lord grant me opportunity to translate them into Latin after completing the work I have now deferred, you will then be able to see—aye, and all who speak Latin will learn through you—how much good they knew not, and how much they have now begun to know. Besides this, I have arranged to send you shortly the Commentaries of Hilary, that master of eloquence, and of the blessed martyr Victorinus, on the Gospel of Matthew. Their style is different, but the grace of the Spirit which wrought in them is one. These will give you some idea of the study which our Latins also have, in former days, bestowed upon the Holy Scriptures.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Alieno stomacho.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VI/Prefaces/Prefaces to Commentaries/Philemon

Philemon.
Written for Paula and Eustochium, a.d. 387. The Preface is a defence of the genuineness of the Epistle against those who thought its subject beneath the dignity of inspiration. “There are many degrees of inspiration,” Jerome says, “though in Christ alone it is seen in its fulness.” Many of the other Epistles touch upon small affairs of life, like the cloak left at Troas. To suppose that common life is separate from God is Manichæanism. Jerome mentions that Marcion, who altered many of the Epistles, did not touch that of Philemon; and brevity in a document which has in it so much of the beauty of the Gospel is a mark of its inspiration.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VI/Prefaces/Prefaces to Commentaries/Titus

Titus.
Addressed to Paula and Eustochium, a.d. 387. The Preface speaks of the rejection of the Epistle by Marcion and Basilides, its acceptance by Tatius, but without assigning reasons. It ought, Jerome says, to be of special interest to Paula and Eustochium, as being written from Nicopolis, near Actium, where their property lay.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VI/Prefaces/Prefaces to Jerome's Early Works
## Contents

* To the Chronicle of Eusebius
* To Origen's Homilies on the Song of Songs
* To the Book on Hebrew Names
* To the Book on the Sites and Names of Hebrew Places
* To the Book of Hebrew Questions
* To the Commentary on Ecclesiastes
* To the Vulgate Version of the New Testament
* To the Four Gospels