hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
43 BC 170 170 Browse Search
44 BC 146 146 Browse Search
49 BC 140 140 Browse Search
45 BC 124 124 Browse Search
54 BC 121 121 Browse Search
46 BC 119 119 Browse Search
63 BC 109 109 Browse Search
48 BC 106 106 Browse Search
69 AD 95 95 Browse Search
59 BC 90 90 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). Search the whole document.

Found 11 total hits in 11 results.

1 2
328 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
were to be burnt, and stigmatizing the Arians with the name of Porphyrians -- (from Porphyrius, a heathen opponent of Christianity, who had nothing to do with the Arian question). The Arians at Alexandria, however, remained in a state of insurrection, and began to make common cause with the Meletians, a sect which had likewise been condemned by the council of Nicaea, for both had to regard Alexander, and his successor Athanasius, as their common enemies. Arius remained in Illyricum till A. D. 328, when Eusebius of Nicomedeia and his friends used their influence at the court of Constantine, to persuade the emperor that the creed of Arius did not in reality differ from that established by the council of Nicaea. In consequence of this Arius was recalled from his exile by very gracious letters from the emperor, and in A. D. 330, had an audience with Constantine, to whom he presented a confession of faith, which consisted almost entirely of passages of the scriptures, and apparently con
330 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
condemned by the council of Nicaea, for both had to regard Alexander, and his successor Athanasius, as their common enemies. Arius remained in Illyricum till A. D. 328, when Eusebius of Nicomedeia and his friends used their influence at the court of Constantine, to persuade the emperor that the creed of Arius did not in reality differ from that established by the council of Nicaea. In consequence of this Arius was recalled from his exile by very gracious letters from the emperor, and in A. D. 330, had an audience with Constantine, to whom he presented a confession of faith, which consisted almost entirely of passages of the scriptures, and apparently confirmed the representation which Eusebius had given of his opinions. The emperor thus deceived, granted to Arius the permission to return to Alexandria. (Socrat. H. E. 1.25; Rufin. H. E. 1.5.) On the arrival of Arius in Alexandria, A. D. 331, Athanasius, notwithstanding the threats of Eusebius and the strict orders of the emperor, re
313 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
306, Arius at first took the part of Meletius, but afterwards became reconciled to Peter, bishop of Alexandria, and the opponent of Meletius, who made Arius deacon. (Sozom. H. E. 1.15.) After this Arius again opposed Peter for his treatment of Mcletius and his followers, and was in consequence excommunicated by Peter. After the death of the latter, Achillas, his successor in the see of Alexandria, not only forgave Arius his offence and admitted him deacon again, but ordained him presbyter, A. D. 313, and gave him the charge of the church called Baucalis at Alexandria. (Epiphan. Haeres. 68. 4.) The opinion that, after the death of Achillas, Arius himself wanted to become bishop of Alexandria, and that for this reason he was hostile to Alexander, who became the successor of Achillas, is a mere conjecture, based upon the fact, that Theodoret H. E. 1.2) accuses Arius of envy against Alexander. The official position of Arius at Alexandria, by virtue of which he interpreted the Scriptures,
323 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
asius in his epitome exaggerated the statements of Arius; but we must remember that Arius in his letters was always prudent and moderate, to avoid giving offence, by not shewing how far his theory might be carried. On the whole, the controversy between Arius and Alexander presents no features of noble generosity or impartiality; each is ambitious and obstinate. Arius was as zealous in endeavouring to acquire new followers as Alexander was fierce and stubborn in his persecution. At last, in A. D. 323, Eusebius and the other bishops who were in favour of Arianism, assembled in council in Bithynia, and issued a circular to all the bishops, requesting them to continue their ecclesiastical communion with Arius. and to use their influence with Alexander on his behalf. But neither this step nor the permission granted by several bishops to Arius to resume his functions, as presbyter, so far as it could be done without encroachment upon the rights of Alexander, was calculated to restore peace;
324 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
uesting them to continue their ecclesiastical communion with Arius. and to use their influence with Alexander on his behalf. But neither this step nor the permission granted by several bishops to Arius to resume his functions, as presbyter, so far as it could be done without encroachment upon the rights of Alexander, was calculated to restore peace; on the contrary, the disputes for and against Arianism spread so much both among the laity and clergy of Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor, that in A. D. 324, the emperor Constantine thought it necessary to write a letter to Arius and Alexander in common, in which he declared the controverted point of little importance, exhorted the disputants to a speedy reconciliation, and left it to each to hold his own opinions, provided he did not disturb the outward union of the church. (Euseb. De Vit. Const. M. 2.64, &c.) This letter was carried to Alexandria, whither Arius had returned in the meantime, by Hosius, bishop of Corduba, who was also to act a
325 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
to each to hold his own opinions, provided he did not disturb the outward union of the church. (Euseb. De Vit. Const. M. 2.64, &c.) This letter was carried to Alexandria, whither Arius had returned in the meantime, by Hosius, bishop of Corduba, who was also to act as mediator. But Hosius soon adopted the views of Alexander, and his mission had no effect. The disputes became more vehement from day to day, and Constantine at last saw himself obliged to convoke a general council at Nicaea, A. D. 325, at which upwards of 300 bishops were present, principally from the eastern part of the empire, and among them Arius, Alexander, and his friend Athanasius. Each defended his own opinions; but Arius being the accused party was in a disadvantageous position, and a confession of faith, which he presented to the council, was torn to pieces in his presence. Athanasius was the most vehement opponent of Arius, and after long debates the council came to the resolution, that the Son of God was bego
321 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
om Alexander to his clergy, and by a second conference, but all had no effect. As in the meantime the number of Arius's followers was rapidly increasing, and as both the clergy and laity of Egypt, as well as several bishops of Syria and Asia Minor, were favourably disposed towards Arius, partly because his doctrines resembled those of Lucian, who had died a martyr about ten years before, and partly because they were captivated by Arius's insinuating letters addressed to them, Alexander, in A. D. 321, convened at Alexandria a synod of nearly one hundred Egyptian and Libyan bishops. The influence of Alexander, of course, prevailed at this synod: Arius was deposed, and he and his followers were excommunicated. In order to insure the proper effect of this verdict, Alexander addressed numerous letters to foreign bishops, in which he announced to them the judgment passed upon Arius, endeavoured to refute his doctrines, and urged them to adopt his own views of the case, and not to afford any
306 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
Arius （*)/Areios), or AREIUS, the celebrated heretic, is said to have been a native of Libya, and must have been born shortly after the middle of the third century after Christ. His father's name appears to have been Ammonius. In the religious disputes which broke out at Alexandria in A. D. 306, Arius at first took the part of Meletius, but afterwards became reconciled to Peter, bishop of Alexandria, and the opponent of Meletius, who made Arius deacon. (Sozom. H. E. 1.15.) After this Arius again opposed Peter for his treatment of Mcletius and his followers, and was in consequence excommunicated by Peter. After the death of the latter, Achillas, his successor in the see of Alexandria, not only forgave Arius his offence and admitted him deacon again, but ordained him presbyter, A. D. 313, and gave him the charge of the church called Baucalis at Alexandria. (Epiphan. Haeres. 68. 4.) The opinion that, after the death of Achillas, Arius himself wanted to become bishop of Alexandria, and t
331 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
e of this Arius was recalled from his exile by very gracious letters from the emperor, and in A. D. 330, had an audience with Constantine, to whom he presented a confession of faith, which consisted almost entirely of passages of the scriptures, and apparently confirmed the representation which Eusebius had given of his opinions. The emperor thus deceived, granted to Arius the permission to return to Alexandria. (Socrat. H. E. 1.25; Rufin. H. E. 1.5.) On the arrival of Arius in Alexandria, A. D. 331, Athanasius, notwithstanding the threats of Eusebius and the strict orders of the emperor, refused to receive him into the communion of the church; for new outbreaks took place at Alexandria, and the Meletians openly joined the Arians. (Athanas. Apolog. § 59.) Eusebius, who was still the main supporter of the Arian party, had secured its ascendancy in Syria, and caused the synod of Tyre, in A. D. 335, to depose Athanasius, and another synod held in the same year at Jerusalem, to revoke the
336 AD (search for this): entry arius-bio-1
or new outbreaks took place at Alexandria, and the Meletians openly joined the Arians. (Athanas. Apolog. § 59.) Eusebius, who was still the main supporter of the Arian party, had secured its ascendancy in Syria, and caused the synod of Tyre, in A. D. 335, to depose Athanasius, and another synod held in the same year at Jerusalem, to revoke the sentence of excommunication against Arius and his friends. The attempt of Arius to re-establish himself at Alexandria failed notwithstanding, and in A. D. 336, he travelled to Constantinople to have a second interview with the emperor. he again presented his confession of faith, which was apparently orthodox. Hereupon Alexander, bishop of Constantinople, who had hitherto refused recognising Arius as a member of the orthodox church, received orders from the emperor to administer to Arius, on the Sunday following, the holy communion. When the day came, Arius accompanied by Eusebius and other friends, went in a sort of triumph through the streets o
1 2