Theodori integram hodie haberemus. Multa enim scitu digna in ea continebantur: Consulatus quoque quibus quidque gestum fuerat, accurate erant adscripti, ut patet ex fragmentis.Valesius.

Philostorgius lived in the fourth and fifth century. His history reached from A. D. 300. to A. D. 425. It is lost, in a great measure, and there only remains an epitome, or extracts from it, made by Photius, and a few fragments.

Philostorgius was an Eunomian: he censures the Semiarians, as well as the Consubstantialists, and defends the Arians and the Eunomians.

Narrat autem Philostorgius fere contraria omnibus Ecclesiasticis Historicis, laudibus extollens quos novit Arianismo infectos, et convicüs Orthodoxos perfundens: ita ut hoc ejus opus non tam Historia esse videatur, quam hæreticorum laudatio, cum nuda et mera vituperatione atque accusatione Catholicorum. Stylus illi comptior; et poëticis sine tædio, minimeque ingratis vocibus utitur. Tropi quoque ac verba significantia gratiam ipsi cum jucunditate conciliant. Nisi quod interdum audacius ipsis, vel nimium detortis utendo, in frigidum et importanum sermonem incidit. Ornatur ab illo varie oratio, vel ad satietatem; ita ut in obscuritatem, nec eam semper grutam, occulte trahatur auditor. Sæpe etiam sententias apte suis locis inserit.-Ipse vero scriptor mendax est, et a fabulis minime abstinent.—Miraculorum vero et vitæ gratia laudat Eusebium Nicomedice Episcopum, quem etiam Magnum nominat, et Theophilum Indum, aliosque complures, &c. Photius.

In these extracts of Philostorgius, Photius often begins a section with, Ὁ δυσσεβῆς, ὁ φιλοψευδής, The Impious Wretch, the Liar, the Enemy of God, the Dotard, &c.

says

says so and so.-But this was the way of Greek writers in all times, as Cicero observes. Sit ista in Græcorum levitate perversitas, qui maledictis insectantur eos a quibus de veritate dissentiunt. De Fin. 11.

With all his defects, his credulity, and partiality to his sect (of which he had a large share) it is to be wished that we had Philostorgius entire; for he wrote the History of his own times, and of some persons whom he knew, and with whom he had conversed. It would not be amiss to have one Arian Historian to compare with the Consubstantialists. He had picked up several miracles wrought by Arian bishops. The Homoousians rejected them with disdain, and yet boasted of miracles equally improbable.

Theodosius the first was a warm Consubstantialist, and was perpetually making absurd and severe laws against heretics; yet Philostorgius observes that he was a prosperous prince, and blessed with success in all his undertakings, and supposes that providence thus recompensed him for his zeal against Paganism, p. 539. He also speaks very handsomely of Apolli naris, Basil, and Gregory Nazianzen, and observes that of all the Consubstantialists they were the most eminent for learning, eloquence, and elegance of style, and that Athanasius compared to them was a mere child, and a superficial writer.

Apollinaris, though ranked amongst heretics for reasons mentioned above, yet joined with the Consubstantialists against Arianism.

The laws of Constantine, most of which may be found in the Theodosian Code, are remarkable on one account or other.

Several

been

Several of them are humane and charitable, and such as the spirit of Christianity would naturally suggest.

He and his successors made decrees which must have continually released multitudes from slavery. He abolished the cruel punishment of crucifixion, and of breaking the legs, and of marking the face with a hot iron.

Si quis in Ludum fuerit, vel in Metallum, pro criminum deprehensorum qualitate, damnatus, minime in ejus facie scribatur: dum et in manibus et in suris possit pœna damnationis una scriptione comprehendi: Quo fucies, qua ad similitudinem pulchritudinis cœlestis est figurata, minime maculetur. Cod. Th. L. ix. Tit. 40. p. 293, et Gothofred.

The Pagans used to stigmatize themselves (but not in the face) out of religion. See Van Dale Dissert. p. 64. and Grotius ad Apocal. xiii. p. 1205, and the Commentators on Levit. xix. 28. Soldiers were also stigmatized.

He made a law against gladiatorial shews, which however continued, till Honorius put an end to that wicked diversion, A, D. 403.

Cruenta spectacula in otio civili et domestica quiete non placent: Quapropter, qui omnino Gladiatores esse prohibemus, eos qui forte delictorum causa hanc condiționem atque sententiam mereri consueverant, metallo magis facies inservire, ut sine sanguine scelerum suorum pænas agnoscant. Cod. Th. L. xv. Tit. 12. p. 395. It would amaze one to consider how many lives had been thrown away in these combats. Credo, says Lipsius, imo scio nullum bellum tantam cladem vaslitatemque generi humano intullisse, quam hos ad volup

tatem

and in all times; for many reasons which it is needless to mention.

bequeath as

By a law addressed to the Roman people, he granted his subjects a permission to much as they would to the church. Every one knows how these donations were multiplied, and how bestowed in process of time, to the emolument of the church, and, as the canon law assures us, of the state likewise; Augmentatur numque Respublica in sustentando viros Ecclesiasticos, quorum precibus regna juvan

tur.

However that be, Hinc deinceps opes Ecclesiarum, et inter alias Romance, says Gothofred. Chron. Cod. Th. xxi.

p.

They who disinherit their children, grand-children, and near relations, for no fault, and leave their substance to pious uses and public charities, deserve to be treated as idiots and lunatics, and to have their will set aside as a Testamentum inofficiosum.

He is supposed to have given a civil jurisdiction to bishops, and to have made them receivers of appeals, and final judges in causes wherein religion was no ways concerned. See Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. iv. p. 295. and in the Notes, who thinks that this was a grievous burden upon men who were desirous of being better employed, and had things of higher importance to perform. See also Valesius on Euseb. Vit. Const. iv. 27. and Sozom. i. 9.

Synesius, who was a bishop, says, Пoniler άpelùv ¡eρωσύνη (υνάπλειν, τὸ κλώθειν ἐςὶ τὰ ἀσύγκλωσα. Epist. 67. What hath an ecclesiastic to do with politics?

i. e.

"A law of Constantine ordains that the single testimony of a bishop shall suffice, without hearing "other witnesses. This prince took a short cut: he

66

"judged

judged of causes by persons, and of persons by dig"nities." L'Esprit de Loix ii. xxix. 16.

The old Roman laws shewed no favour to natural children. Constantine, to discourage concubinage, and to encourage matrimony in persons who lived together in that way, ordered that if a man married his concubine, the children which he had by her before marriage, should become legitimate; but for natural children he made no provision, and gave them no relief. Valentinian I. afterwards permitted a father to leave a small part of his fortunes to his natural children, and Theodosius junior confirmed it. See Gothofred ad Cod. Th. L. iv. Tit. iv. p. 351. &c.

The first council of Toledo, A. D. 400. hath this canon: He who with a believing wife hath a concubine, is excommunicated: but if his concubine is in the stead of wife, and he adheres to her alone, whether she be called wife or concubine, he is not to be rejected from communion."This canon shews that there were concubines

approved by the church. According to the Ro"man laws, every woman could not be the legitimate "wife of every man: both were to be Roman citizens, and of suitable condition. A senator could not

marry a freed woman: a free man could not marry "a slave; and the cohabitation of slaves was not cal"led by the name of marriage. But a woman who "could not be taken for a wife, might be taken as a concubine, and the laws allowed it, provided the

man had only one concubine, and was not a mar"ried man. The children of such parents were nei"ther legitimate, nor bastards, but natural-children, acknowledged by the father, and capable of receiving legacies. The church meddled not with these

66

"distinctions