Read the _Life of Constantine the Great Emperor_ by Eusebius
Pamphili, a eulogy in four books. It contains the whole manner of
life of the man, and describes all those acts of his that have to do
with ecclesiastical history, from his earliest years till the day
when he departed this life, at the age of sixty-four. Even here the
author preserves his characteristic style, except that his language
is obliged to be somewhat more brilliant, and words are inserted here
and there that are more flowery than usual; he does not, however,
exhibit much charm and grace in explanation, which is also a defect
of his other works. A large number of passages from all the ten books
of his _Ecclesiastical History_ are scattered over this work in four
books. He says that the great Constantine was also himself baptized
in Nicomedia, having put off his baptism till that time since he
desired to receive it in the waters of Jordan. He does not state
definitely who baptized him. As to the Arian heresy, he does not make
it clear whether he still adhered to that doctrine or whether he had
changed, nor does he state whether Arius’s views were right or wrong,
although he ought to have mentioned this, seeing that a great part
of the deeds of Constantine has to do with the synod, which again
claims a detailed account of them. But he mentions that a “dispute”
(as he calls the heresy, to conceal its real nature) arose between
Arius and Alexander, and that the pious emperor was very grieved at
the “dispute,” and strove, by letters and through Hosius, bishop
of Cordova, to induce the disputants to abandon mutual strife and
such questions, and to restore friendship and harmony amongst them;
that, being unable to persuade them, he called together a synod from
all parts, and so put an end to the strife that had broken out, and
made peace. His account, however, is neither accurate nor clear.
Wherefore, as if ashamed and unwilling to make public the facts
concerning Arius and the decree of the synod against him or the
just punishment of his companions in impiety who were cast out with
him, he says nothing about this. He does not even mention the just
punishment of Arius[616] inflicted by heaven and seen by every eye.
He brings none of these things to the light, and says little about
the synod and its proceedings. For this reason, when about to speak
of the divine Eustathius,[617] he does not even mention his name, nor
the audacious and successful intrigues against him. Attributing these
also to sedition and tumult, he again refers to the calmness of the
bishops who had assembled at Antioch as the result of the emperor’s
zeal and co-operation and changed sedition and tumult into peace.
Similarly, where he speaks of the intrigues against the much-tried
Athanasius, in his desire to include these things in his history, he
says that Alexandria was again filled with sedition and disturbance,
which were calmed by the presence of the bishops, supported by the
emperor. But he does not make it clear who started the sedition, nor
its nature, nor how it was put down. He preserves almost the same
method of concealment in his narrative of the quarrels of the bishops
about dogma or their disagreements in other matters.