Eusebius
Eusebius
Eusebius (c 263 - c 339), the bishop of Caesarea, the father of church history, is a case in point. We can rely on him for significant information about the history of the early church but always cautiously. Modern objective interpretation reveals that his Life of Constantine was exaggerated and seemingly motivated by agenda. His greatest work, Church History (Historia Ecclesiae), shows clear evidence of bias as when he attributed divine vengeance as the cause of some events. But it is a gem nonetheless. Its value when it comes to understanding early church history is spectacular.
The Legend of Abgar
Legend has it that a cloth with an image of Jesus was brought to King Abgar V Ouchama of Edessa who reigned over the city state off and on between A.D. 13 and 50. We know of this legend from Eusebius of Caesarea’s early 4th century Ecclesiastical History. Therein, we learn of a now lost document (if it ever existed) that had been in Edessa’s archives. It was purportedly written by King Abgar V and delivered to Jesus by an envoy named Ananias. Abgar supposedly asked Jesus to come to Edessa to cure him of a malady. Eusebius’ history reports that the Apostle Thomas did send Thaddeus sometime after Jesus’ death and that he founded a church in Edessa.
Historians are highly critical of this account since Eusebius’s history includes, as elements of the letter, references from the Gospels, which were written later than the legendary account, as well as theological concepts, which probably developed many years after the reign of Abgar.
Justinian II and His Troubles
The image on the coin caused a great deal of trouble for Justinian. It may have contributed to his downfall. Noted art historian John Beckwith tells us:
At the same time, even after the first two centuries of the Christian era there had always been the seeds of opposition to images. When the Empress Constantia, stepsister of Constantine I and wife of the Emperor Licinius, asked Eusebius of Caesarea for an image of Christ, she was sharply snubbed. From the 4th century onwards there had always been a minority among the intellectuals and the upper classes who disapproved of the cult of icons and the superstitious practices so often attached to them. Moreover in the Byzantine Empire near the eastern frontiers strong iconoclastic tendencies had been fairly constant. There is no period between the fourth and the eighth centuries in which there is not some evidence of opposition to images within the Church. (21)
Constantine the Great
Much of what we know about Constantine, or think we know about him, comes from Eusebius of Caesarea who reported the legend of Abgar. And historians recognize that much of what Eusebius wrote about Constantine as legend, as well.
Constantine did issue an edict of tolerance for Christianity. He was not the first of the Roman emperors to do so. Galerius had done so two years earlier. But the difference was that Constantine restored confiscated property to the church. He adopted Christianity, his mother’s religion, as his own. When, exactly, and how sincerely, is something that historians debate unceasingly.
Nevertheless, he built churches. He began the process of bringing squabbling bishops together to hammer out their theological differences. In a sense he consolidated much of Christianity. He made Christianity respectable among the ruling elite; indeed he began the process of fusing Christianity with the state, laying the seeds for Christendom.
John Beckwith
At the same time, even after the first two centuries of the Christian era there had always been the seeds of opposition to images. When the Empress Constantia, stepsister of Constantine I and wife of the Emperor Li-cinius, asked Eusebius of Caesarea for an image of Christ, she was sharply snubbed. From the 4th century onwards there had always been a minority among the intellectuals and the upper classes who disapproved of the cult of icons and the superstitious practices so often attached to them. Moreover in the Byzantine Empire near the eastern frontiers strong iconoclastic tendencies had been fairly constant. There is no period between the fourth and the eighth centuries in which there is not some evidence of opposition to images within the Church.