Life of Constantine
Eusebius focuses much of his attention in painting Constantine in an extremely Christian light, building holy sites and allegedly destroying pagan temples.
[7] As the work concludes, Eusebius give much effort to uncover a personal Constantine, taking time to describe the Emperor as a remarkable public speaker and preacher, as well as a listener.
Eusebius’ use of the panegyric style results in an extremely generous treatment of Constantine that has been noted for its less than objective aims.
Timothy Barnes notes that Eusebius clearly omits accounts and information to portray Constantine in the favorable light.
[9] Eusebius's narrative constructs Constantine as god-sent, in order to end the persecution of Christians under the Roman Empire, and ensure the correct worship of God.
[11] Eusebius often referenced his own former works, forty-one times in Life of Constantine, most notably Ecclesiastical History (Historia Ecclesiastica) and the Tricennalian Oration (Laus Constantini).
[12] These imperial letters, described or transcribed, frequently relate to religious matters concerning the treatment of pagans and Christians.
They fit well into the Eusebius’ programmatic treatment of Constantine as a devout Christian emperor but are particularly vehement in their anti-paganism, given the historical context.
[14] Similarly, Curran argues that anti-pagan pronouncements were not actually put into practice, rather reflecting the emperor's personal stance.
[21] Aware of the presence of Christians within Shapurs realm, Constantine, writing on their behalf, calls upon the king to rule over them piously or, in a veiled warning, face the same downfall as other persecutors.
Barnes accepts the letter as genuine, its content in keeping with Constantine's' own view of his career, especially in the period of reform after the defeat of Licinius.
[23] Elizabeth Fowden argues for the letters authenticity, viewing its content as in keeping with Constantine's' vision of himself as an ambassador of God on earth and his desire for a universal Christian empire.
[24] Even so, the religious content of the letter and the claims by Constantine to represent the Christians of the Persian Empire continues to divide scholarly opinion.
Eusebius however has placed it in Book IV, after Constantine's wars against the Sarmatians and Goths on the Danube, thus moving its chronology to after AD335.
[28][29] Such foreshadowing is a common motif of Book 4 and a further caution when assessing the authenticity and context of Constantine's correspondence with Shapur as presented by Eusebius.
[31] Indeed, while many accept the work as generally reliable, few modern scholars claim that the text is not without its question marks, especially in regards to the motives and biases of Eusebius.
[12] In the former case, Eusebius engages in the tarnishing of Licinius’ reputation, painting him a supporter of pagans and a truce breaker, both claims that are historically dubious.
