description of that treatise ¢ypaa 5i 6Xty@r (Letter 52. 1) is quite inapplicable to the longest treatise extant among the works of Athanasius. Still less, even if the Arian History were a fragment (see above), could we suppose that the accompanying treatise formed the missing first part. We must therefore acquiesce in the conclusion that the treatise in question has perished. Accordingly we cannot be sure (although it is generally regarded as highly probable 3) that the historical portion is preserved to us in the ‘ Arian History. In any case the Letter to Monks is quite unconnected with it in its subject matter, and ends with the blessing, as the History does with the doxology, in the form of an independent document.
While admitting, therefore, the naturalness of the traditional arrangement, we may fairly treat the two as distinct, and permit the Arian History to launch the reader without preamble 77 medzas res.
As the tract is long, and various in its subject-matter, the following scheme of contents may be found useful. It will be noted that chronological order is observed in Parts I.—IV., ie. till 355, when the existing persecution of Constantius, the main theme of the History (Letter 52,§1), is reached. The history of this persecution is dealt with (Parts V.—VII.) with much more fulness, and is grouped round subjects each of which covers more or less the same period. Part VIII. deals with the more recent events in Egypt.
PART I. PRocEEDINGS OF THE ARIANS FROM THE COUNCIL OF TYRE TILL THE RETURN OF THE §§ 13. General character of their proceedings. §§ 4—7. Persecution of the orthodox bishops. § 8. Restoration of the exiles after Constantine’s death.
PART II. Srconp EXILE OF ATHANASIUS, TILL THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA (337—343).
§ 9. Renewed intrigues against Athanasius.
§ 10. Gregory intruded by Constantius as bishop.
§ 11. Athanasius at Rome. Negotiations for a Council there.
§§ 12—14. Violent proceedings of Gregory. Case of Duke Balacius.
PART III. From SArDICA TILL THE DEATH OF CONSTANS (343—350).
§ 15. The meeting of the Synod. Dismay of the Arianising bishops.
§16. Their flight from the Synod, § 17. Proceedings of the Synod.
§§ 18, 19. Continued persecution after it.
§ 20. The infamous plot of Stephen against the Sardican legates at Antioch.
§§ 21, ee Constantius changes his mind and recalls Athanasius with a solemn oath to defend him for the uture, §§ 23, 24. Letters of Constantius at this time.
§ 25. Return of Athanasius (346).
§ 26. Recantation of Valens and Ursacius.
§ 27. Peace and joy of the Church.
PART IV. FRomM THE DEATH OF CoNSTANS TO THE COUNCIL OF MILAN (351—355)- § 28. Renewed intrigues of the Arianising party.
§§ 29, 30. Valens, Ursacius, and the Emperor return to Arianism.
§§ 31, 32. Constantius again persecutes the Church.
§ 33. Wickedness of persecution. Western bishops banished by Constantius [at Milan]. § 34. How they diffused the truth wherever they went.
PART V. Lisertus (355—358).
S§ 3537. Firmness of Liberius and rage of Constantius, § 33. Concerning the eunuchs at the Court.
§§ 39, 40. Liberius rebukes the Emperor and is cruelly exiled, § 41. After two years of exile, Liberius gives way under force, PART VI. Hosrus (355—358).
§ 42. Intrigues against Hosius. § 43. Vain attempts of Constantius to gain him over. § 44. Letter of Hosius remonstrating with the Emperor, §§ 45, 46. Lapse of Hosius, his fidelity to Athanasius. v i § 47. Monstrosity of the above proceedings pr ASS aa a a a PART VII. THE ATTACKS UPON ATHANASIUS (351—356).
§ 47. Athanasius isolated by the exile of other bishops.
§ 48. Attacks upon Athanasius himself (353—356).
§§ 49, (50), 51. Hypocrisy of the Emperor’s pretended regard for his Father and Brother. §§ 52, 53. Impropriety of Imperial intervention in Church affairs.
§ 54. The Churches at Alexandria given to the Arians, § 55. Violence of Cataphronius, Prefect of Egypt.
§§ 56,57. Sack of the great church: divine judgments.
§ 58. Scenes of persecution.
§§ 59, 60. Savagery of Duke Sebastian. Martyrdom of Eutychius (356).
§§ 61—63. Cruel treatment of the poor, and of the clergy.
PART VIII. FURTHER DETAILS OF THE PERSECUTION IN EcypT (357). § 64. The Arian persecution more cruel than that of Maximian. § 65. Martyrdom of Secundus of Barka. §§ 66,67. Persecution the disgrace of the new heresy. §§ 68, 69. Constantius worse than Ahab, &c., ahd inhuman toward his own family. § 70. His fickleness, lack of character, and tyranny. § 71. Novelty of this persecution on the part of pretended Christians. § 72. Cruel exile of bishops and torture of monks and lay people. § 73. Venal appointments to fill the vacancies thus created. § 74. The predicted signs of Antichrist applied to Constantius. § 75. Arrival of George at Alexandria. §§$ 76, 77. Further marks of Antichrist in the tyranny of Constantius over the Church. §§ 78, 79. The Meletians the allies of Arianism in Egypt. § 80. Duty of separating from heretics.
§ 81. Appendix to § 48. Second protest of the Church of Alexandria against the proceedings of Syrianus (356).
PA Repe ls ARIAN PERSECUTION UNDER CONSTANTINE.
1. AND not long after they put in execution the designs for the sake of which they had had recourse to these artifices; for they no sooner had formed their plans, but they immediately admitted Arius and his fellows to communion. They set aside the repeated condemnations which had been passed upon them, and again pretended the imperial authority? in their behalf. And they were not ashamed to say in their letters, ‘since Athanasius suffered, all jealousy? has ceased, and let us henceforward receive Arius and his fellows;’ adding, in order to frighten their hearers, ‘because the Emperor has commanded it.’ Moreover, they were not ashamed to add, ‘for these men profess orthodox opinions;’ not fearing that which is written, ‘Woe unto them that call bitter sweet, that put darkness for light 3;’ for they are ready to undertake anything in support of their heresy. Now is it not hereby plainly proved to all men, that we both suffered heretofore, and that you now persecute us, not under the authority of an Ecclesiastical sentence‘, but on the ground of the Emperor’s threats, and on account of our piety towards Christ? As also they conspired in like manner against other Bishops, fabricating charges against them also; some of whom fell asleep in the place of their exile, having attained the glory of Christian confession; and others are still banished from their country, and contend still more and more manfully against their heresy, saying, ‘ Nothing shall separate us from the love of Christ 5?’
2. Arians sacrifice morality and integrity to party.
And hence also you may discern its char- DEH aN acter, and be able to condemn it more confidently. The man who is their friend and their associate in impiety, although he is open to ten thousand charges for other enormities which he has committed; although the evidence and proof against him are most clear; he is approved of by them, and straightway becomes the friend of the Emperor, obtaining an introduction by his impiety; and making very many pretences, he acquires confidence before the magistrates to do whatever he desires. But he who exposes their impiety, and honestly advocates the cause of Christ, though he is pure in all things, though he is conscious of no delinquencies, though he meets with no accuser; yet on the false pretences which they have framed against him, is immediately seized and sent into banishment under a sentence of the Emperor, as if he were guilty of the crimes which they wish to charge upon him, or as if, like Naboth, he had insulted the King; while he who advocates the cause of their heresy is sought for and immediately sent to take possession of the other’s Church; and henceforth confiscations and insults, and all kinds of cruelty are exercised against those who do not receive him. And what is the strangest of all, the man whom the people desire, and know to be blameless ®, the Emperor takes away and banishes; but him whom they neither desire, nor know, he sends to them from a distant place with soldiers and letters from himself. And henceforward a strong necessity is laid upon them, either to hate him whom they love; who has been their teacher, and their father in godliness; and to love him whom they do not desire, and to trust their children to one of whose life and conversation and character they are ignorant; or else certainly to suffer punishment, if they disobey the Emperor.
6 x Tim. iii. 2.
HISTORY. OF 2: Recklessness of their proceedings.
In this manner the impious are now proceeding, as heretofore, against the orthodox; giving proof of their malice and impiety amongst all men everywhere. For granting that they have accused Athanasius; yet what have the other Bishops done? On what grounds can they charge them? Has there been found in their case too the dead body of an Arsenius? Is there a Presbyter Macarius, or has a cup been broken amongst them? Is there a Meletian to play the hypocrite? No: but as their proceedings against the othe Bishops shew the charges which they have brought against Athanasius, in all probability, to be false; so their attacks upon Athanasius make it plain, that their accusations of the other Bishops are unfounded likewise. This heresy has come forth upon the earth like some great monster, which not only injures the innocent with its words, as with teeth7; but it has also hired external power to assist it in its designs. And strange it is that, as I said before, no accusation is brought against any of them; or if any be accused, he is not brought to trial; or if a shew of enquiry be made, he is acquitted against evidence, while the convicting party is plotted against, rather than the culprit put to shame. ‘Thus the whole party of them is full of idleness; and their spies, for Bishops ® they are not, are the vilest of them all. And if any one among them desire to become a Bishop, he is not told, ‘a Bishop must be blameless9;’ but only, ‘Take up opinions contrary to Christ, and care not for manners. This will be sufficient to obtain favour for you, and friendship with the Emperor.’ Such is the character of those who support the tenets of Arius. And they who are zealous for the truth, however holy and pure they shew themselves, are yet, as I said before, made culprits, whenever these men choose, and on whatever pretences it may seem good to them to invent. The truth of this, as I before remarked, you may clearly gather from their proceedings.
4. Arians persecute Eustathius and others.
There was one Eustathius', Bishop of Antioch, a Confessor, and sound in the Faith. This man, because he was very zealous for the truth, and hated the Arian heresy, and would not receive those who. adopted its tenets, is falsely accused before the Emperor Constantine, and a charge invented against him, that he had insulted his mother’. And immedi- 7 Vid. Dan. vii. 5, 7- 8 Cf. § 49. [The play on words cannot be rendered.] 9 x Tim. ili. 2. 1 Afol. Fug. 3, note 9. 2 If the common slander of the day concerning S. Helena was THE ARIANS, 271 ately he is driven into banishment, and a great number of Presbyters and Deacons with him. And immediately after the banishment of the Bishop, those whom he would not admit. into the clerical order on account of their impiety were not only received into the Church by them, but were even appointed the greater part of them to be Bishops, in order that they might have accomplices in their impiety. Among these was Leontius the eunuch 3, now of Antioch, and his predecessor Stephanus, George of Laodicea, and Theodosius who was of Tripolis, Eudoxius of Germanicia, and Eustathius 4, now of Sebastia.
5. Did they then stop here? No. For Eutropius 5, who was Bishop of Adrianople, a good man, and excellent in all respects, because he had often convicted Eusebius, and had advised them who came that way, not to comply with his impious dictates, suffered the same treatment as Eustathius, and was cast out of his city and his Church. Basilina® was the most active in the proceedings against him. }And Euphration of Balanea, Kymatius of Paltus, Carterius of Antaradus ™, Asclepas of Gaza, Cyrus of ‘Berocea in Syria, Diodorus of Asia, Domnion of Sirmium, and Ellanicus of Tripolis, were merely known to hate the heresy; and some of them on one pretence or another, some without any, they removed under the authority of royal letters, drove them out of their cities, and appointed others whom they knew to be impious, men, to occupy the Churches in their stead.
6. Case of Marcellus.
Of Marcellus7, the Bishop of Galatia, it is perhaps superfluous for me to speak; for all men have heard how Eusebius and his fellows, who had been first accused by him of impiety, brought a counter-accusation against him, and caused the old. man to be banished. He went up to Rome, and there made his defence, and being required by them, he offered a written declaration of his faith, of which the Council of Sardica approved. But Eusebius and his fellows made no defence, nor, when they were convicted of impiety out of their writings, were they put to shame, but rather assumed greater boldness against all. For imputed to S. Eustathius, Constantine was likely to feel it keenly. ‘Stabulariam,’ says S. Ambrose, ‘hance primo fuisse asserunt, sic cognitam Constantio.’ de Ob. Yheod. 42, Stabularia, i.e, an innkeeper; so Rahab is sometimes considered to be ‘cauponaria sive tabernaria et meretrix,’ Cornel. 4 Lap. in Jos. ii. 1. €& opedAtas yuvaikos ov cenrys ovdé Kara vosov ovvedPovons. Zosim, Hist. il. p. 78. Constantinus ex concubina Helena procreatus. Hieron, in Chron. Euseb. p.773. (ed. Vallars.) Tillemont however maintains (Emipereurs, t. 4. p. 613), and Gibbon fully admits (47s¢, ch. 14. p. 190), the legitimacy of Constantine. The latter adds, ‘ Butropius (x. 2.) expresses in a few words the real truth, and the occasion of the error, ‘‘ex obscuriori matrimonio ejus filias.””
(Cf. Soz. ti. 19.] 3 Below, § 28, note. 4 EP, Ag. 7. 5 Ap. Fug. 3. 6 Julian’s mother. 62 [The text must be corrected thus; see Afol. Fug. 3.) 7 Apol. Ar. 32.
they had an introduction to the Emperor from the women 8, and were formidable to all men.
7. Martyrdom of Paul of Constantinople.
And I suppose no one is ignorant of the case of Paul9, Bishop of Constantinople; for the more illustrious any city is, so much the more that which takes place in it 1s not concealed. A charge was fabricated against him also. For Macedonius his accuser, who has now become Bishop in his stead (I was present myself at the accusation), afterwards held communion with him, and was a Presbyter under Paul himself. And yet when Eusebius with an evil eye wished to seize upon the Bishopric of that city (he had been translated in the same manner from Berytus to Nicomedia), the charge was revived against Paul; and they did not give up their plot, but persisted in the calumny. And he was banished first into Pontus by Constantine, and a second time by Constantius he was sent bound with iron chains to Singara in Mesopotamia, and from thence transferred to Emesa, and a fourth time he was banished to Cucusus in Cappadocia, near the deserts of Mount Taurus; where, as those who were with him have declared, he died by strangulation at their harids. And yet these men who never speak the truth, though guilty of this, were not ashamed after his death to invent another story, representing that he had died from illness; although all who live in that place know the circumstances. And even Philagrius ', who was then Deputy-Governor? of those parts, and represented all their proceedings in such manner as they desired, was yet astonished at this; and being grieved perhaps that another, and not himself, had done the evil deed, he informed Serapion the Bishop, as well as many other of our friends, that Paul was shut up by them in a very confined and dark place, and left to perish of hunger; and when after six days they went in and found him still alive, they immediately set upon the man, and strangled him. ‘This was the end of his life; and they said that Philip who was Prefect was their agent in the perpetration of this murder. Divine Justice, however, did not overlook this; for not a year passed, when Philip was deprived of his office in great disgrace, so that being reduced to a private station, he became the mockery of those whom he least desired to be the witnesses of his fall. For in extreme 8 he Gopstantio, ene ceiaes sister. 9 Ap. Hug. 3. [For the presence of Ath. at el Prolegg. ii. § 5 fin.]: CPL in a7) ee t (Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. § 6(1) note 3.] 2 Vicarius, 1.e. ‘vicarius Preefecti, agens vicem Preefecti;’ Gothofred in Cod. Theod. i. tit. 6. vid. their office, &c., drawn out at length, ibid. t. 6, p. 334. - B distress of mind, groaning and trembling like Cain 3, and expecting every day that some one would destroy him, far from his country and his friends, he died, like one astounded at his misfortunes, in a manner that he least desired. Moreover these men spare not even after death those against whom they have invented charges whilst living. They are so eager to shew themselves formidable to all, that they banish the living, and shew no mercy on the dead; but alone of all the world they manifest their hatred to them that are departed, and conspire against their friends, truly inhuman as they are, and haters of that which is good, savage in temper beyond mere enemies, in behalf of their impiety, who eagerly plot the ruin of me and of all the rest, with no regard to truth, but by false charges.
8. Restoration of the Catholics.
Perceiving this to be the case, the three brothers, Constantine, Constantius, and Constans, caused all after the death of their father to return to their own country and Church; and while they wrote letters concerning the rest to their respective Churches, concerning Athanasius they wrote the following; which likewise shews the violence of the whole proceedings, and proves the murderous disposition of Eusebius and his fellows.
A copy of the Letter of Constantine Cesar to the people of the Catholic Church in the city of the Alexandrians.
I suppose that it has not escaped the knowledge of your pious minds‘, &c.
This is his letter; and what more credible witness of their conspiracy could there be than he, who knowing these circumstances has thus written of them?
PART al First ARIAN PERSECUTION UNDER CONSTANTIUS.
g. Eusebius and his fellows, however, seeing the declension of their heresy, wrote to Rome, as well as to the Emperors Constantine and Constans, to accuse? Athanasius: but when the persons who were sent by Athanasius disproved the statements which they had written, they were put to shame by the Emperors; and Julius, Bishop of Rome, wrote to say? that a Council ought to be held, wherever we should desire, in order that they might exhibit the charges which they had to make, and might also freely defend themselves concerning those things of which they too were accused. The Presbyters also who were sent by 3 Gen. iv. 12, LXX. supr. p. 241. 4 Given above, Aol. contr, Arian. § 87. t Afol. c. Ar. 3. 2 Ib. 20, them, when they saw themselves making an exposure, requested that this might be done. Whereupon these men, whose conduct is suspicious in all that they do, when they see that they are not likely to get the better in an Ecclesiastical trial, betake themselves to Constantius alone, and thenceforth bewail themselves, as to the patron of their heresy. ‘Spare,’ they say, ‘the heresy; you see that all men have withdrawn from us; and very few of us are now left. Begin to persecute, for we are being deserted even of those few, and are left destitute. Those persons whom we forced over to our side, when these men were banished, they now by their return have persuaded again to take part against us. Write letters therefore against them all, and send out Philagrius a second time3as Prefect of Egypt, for he is able to carry on a persecution favourably for us, as he has already shewn upon trial, and the more so, as he is an apostate. Send also Gregory as Bishop to Alexandria, for he too is able to strengthen our heresy.’
10. Violent Intrusion of Gregory.
Accordingly Constantius at once writes letters, and commences a persecution against all, and sends Philagrius as Prefect with one Arsacius an eunuch; he sends also Gregory with a military force. And the same consequences followed as before+. For gathering together a multitude of herdsmen and shepherds, and other dissolute youths belonging to the town, armed with swords and clubs, they attacked in a body the Church which is called the Church of Quirinus 5; and some they slew, some they trampled under foot, others they beat with stripes and cast into prison or banished. They haled away many women also, and dragged them openly into the court, and insulted them, dragging them by the hair. Some they proscribed; from some they took away their bread® for no other reason, but that they might be induced to join the Arians, and receive Gregory, who had been sent by the Emperor.
11. The Easterns decline the Council at Rome.
Athanasius, however, before these things happened®, at the first report of their proceedings, sailed to Rome, knowing the rage of the heretics, and for the purpose of having the Council held as had been determined. And Julius wrote letters to them, and sent the Presbyters Elpidius and Philoxenus, appointing a day’, that they might either come, or consider them- 6s [A misstatement, cf. supra pp. 9t, 95, note 1.] 7 mpodecpiav, Apol. Ar. 25, note 61A.D. 340).
selves as altogether suspected persons. But as soon as Eusebius and his fellows heard that the trial was to be an Ecclesiastical one, at which no Count would be present, nor soldiers stationed before the doors, and that the proceedings would not be regulated by royal order (for they have always depended upon these things to support them against the Bishops, and without them they have no boldness even to speak); they were so alarmed that they detained the Presbyters till after the appointed time, and pretended an unseemly excuse, that they were not able to come now on account of the war which was begun by the Persians *, But this was not the true cause of their delay, but the fears of their own consciences. For what have Bishops to do with war? Or if they were unable on account of the Persians to come to Rome, although it is at a distance and beyond sea, why did they like lions? go about the parts of the East and those which are near the Persians, seeking who was opposed to them, that they might falsely accuse and banish them P 12. Atany rate, when they had dismissed the Presbyters with this improbable excuse, they said to one another, ‘Since we are unable to get the advantage in an Ecclesiastical trial, let us exhibit our usual audacity.’ Accordingly they write to Philagrius, and cause him after a while to go out with Gregory into Egypt. Whereupon the Bishops are severely scourged and cast into chains?. Sarapammon, for instance, Bishop and Confessor, they drive into banishment; Potammon, Bishop and Confessor, who had lost an eye in the persecution, they beat with stripes on the neck so cruelly, that he appeared to be dead before they came to an end. In which. condition he was cast aside, and hardly after some hours, being carefully attended and fanned, | he revived, God granting him his life; but a short time after he died of the sufferings caused by the stripes, and attained in Christ to the glory of a second martyrdom. And besides these, how many monks were scourged, while Gregory sat by with Balacius the ‘Duke!’ how many Bishops were wounded! how many virgins were beaten!
13. Cruelties of Gregory at Alexandria.
After this the wretched Gregory called upon all men to have communion with him. But if thou didst demand of them communion, they were not worthy of stripes: and if thou didst scourge them as if evil persons, why didst thou ask it of them as if holy? But he had no other end in view, except to fulfil the designs of them that sent him, and to establish the heresy.|his head, and biting him on the thigh, threw Wherefore he became in his folly a murderer and an executioner, injurious, crafty, and profane; in one word, an enemy of Christ. Heso cruelly persecuted the Bishop’s aunt, that even when she died he would not suffer her to be buried2. And this would have been her lot; she would have been cast away without burial, had not they who attended on the corpse carried her out as one of their own kindred. Thus even in such things he shewed his profane temper. And again when the widows and other mendicants3 had received alms, he commanded what had been given them to be seized, and the vessels in which they carried their oil and wine to be broken, that he might not only shew impiety by robbery, but in his deeds dishonour the Lord; from whom very shortly 4 he will hear those words, ‘Inasmuch as thou hast dishonoured these, thou hast dishonoured Me 5.’
14. Profaneness of Gregory and death of Lalacius.
And many other things he did, which exceed the power of language to describe, and which whoever should hear would think to be incredible. And the reason why he acted thus was, because he had not received his ordination according to ecclesiastical rule, nor had been called to be a Bishop by apostolical tradition®; but had been sent out from court with military power and pomp, as one entrusted with a secular government. Wherefore he boasted rather to be the friend of Governors, than of Bishops and Monks. Whenever, therefore, our Father Antony wrote to him from the mountains, as godliness is an abomination to a sinner, so he abhorred the letters of the holy man. But whenever the Emperor, or a General, or other magistrate, sent him a letter, he was as much overjoyed as those in the Proverbs, of whom the Word has said indignantly, ‘Woe unto them who leave the path of uprightness; who rejoice to do evil, and delight in the frowardness of the wicked?’ And so he honoured with presents the bearers of these letters; but once when Antony wrote to him he caused Duke Balacius to spit upon the letter, and to cast it from him. But Divine Justice did not overlook this; for no long time after, when the Duke was on horseback, and on his way to the first halt 8, the horse turned 2 Cf. Afol. Const. § 27 fin.
3 dve&dSuy, vid. infr. § 60. Tillemont translates it, prisoners. pion toucon has been here followed; vid. Collect. Nov. t. 2. p. xliii.; 4 dcov ovdémw, as § 32. George was pulled to pieces by the populace, A.D. 362. This was written a.p. 358, or later. [There is the common confusion in this note between Gregory and George. Gregory had died June 26, 345.] 5 Vid. Matt. xxv. 45.
[Prolegg. ch. iv. § 4.] f Prove ii. 13,14, UXO 8 wovnv. vid. supr. 4Z. Av. 29, note 2. This halt or station which lay up the Nile was called Cereu(V. Anz. § 86), or Chereu, him off; and within three days he died.
PART 111: RESTORATION OF THE CATHOLICS ON THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA.
1s. While they were proceeding in like measures towards all, at Rome about fifty Bishops assembled!, and denounced Eusebius and his fellows as persons suspected, afraid to come, and also condemned as unworthy of credit the written statement they had sent; but us they received, and gladly embraced our communion. While these things were taking place, a report of the Council held at Rome, and of the proceedings against the Churches at Alexandria, and through all the East, came to the hearing of the Emperor Constans ’. He writes to his brother Constantius, and immediately they both determine3 that a Council shall be called, and matters be brought to a settlement, so that those who had been injured may be released from further suffering, and the injurious be no longer able to perpetrate such outrages. Accordingly there assemble at the city of Sardica both from the East and West to the number of one hundred and seventy Bishops‘, more or less; those who came from the West were Bishops only, having Hosius for their father, but those from the East brought with them instructors of youth and advocates, Count Musonianus, and Hesychius 5 the Castrensian; on whose account they came with great alacrity, thinking that everything would be again managed by their authority. For thus by means of these persons they have always shewn themselves formidable to any whom they wished to intimidate, and have prosecuted their designs against whomsoever they chose. But, when they arrived and saw that the cause was to be conducted as simply an ecclesiastical one, without the interference of the Count or of soldiers; when they saw the accusers who came from every church and city, and the evidence which was brought against them, when they saw the venerable Bishops Arius and Asterius ®, who came up in their company, withdrawing from them and siding with us, and giving an account of their cunning, and how suspicious their conduct was, and that they were fearing the consequences of a trial, lest they should be conor the land or property of Chzreas, vid. Naz. Orat. 21, 29, who says it was the place where the people met Athanasius on his return from exile on Constantius’s death. [The incident is related differently in Vzt. Ant. ubi supra: see note there.]
t Agol. Ar. 1, note i. 2 Apol. Const. 4, note 8 4 Vid. supr. pp. 127, note 10, and 147.
victed by us of being false informers, and it should be discovered by those whom they produced in the character of accusers, that they had themselves suggested all they were to say, and were the contrivers ofthe plot. Perceiving this to be the case, although they had come with great zeal, as thinking that we should be afraid to meet them, yet now when they saw our alacrity, they shut themselves up in the Palace? (for they had their abode there), and proceeded to confer with one another in the following manner: ‘We came hither for one result; and we see another; we arrived in, company with Counts, and the trial is proceeding without them. We are certainly condemned. You all know the orders that have been given. Athanasius and his fellows have the reports of the proceedings in the Mareotis®, by which he is cleared, and we are covered with disgrace. Why then do we delay? why are we so slow? Let us invent some excuse and be gone, or we shall be condemned if we remain. It is better to suffer the shame of fleeing, than the disgrace of being convicted as false accusers. If we flee, we shall find some means of defending our heresy; and even if they condemn us for our flight, still we have the Emperor as our patron, who will not suffer the people to expel us from the Churches.’
16. Secession of the Easterns at Sardica.
Thus then they reasoned with themselves: and Hosius and all the other Bishops repeatedly signified to them the alacrity of Athanasius and his fellows, saying, ‘ They are ready with their defence, and pledge themselves to prove you false accusers.’ They said also, ‘If you fear the trial, why did you come to meet us? either you ought not to have come, or now that you have come, not to flee.’ When they heard this, being still more alarmed, they had recourse to an excuse even more unseemly than that they pretended at Antioch, viz. that they betook themselves to flight because the Emperor had written to them the news of his victory over the Persians. And this excuse they were not ashamed to send by Eustathius a Presbyter of the Sardican Church. But even thus their flight did not succeed according to their wishes; for immediately the holy Council, of which the great Hosius was president, wrote to them plainly, saying, ‘Hither come forward and