born here. Towards the end of the 18th century Eutin acquired some fame as the residence of a group of poets and writers, of whom the best-known were Johann Heinrich Voss, the brothers Stolberg, and Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi. In the neighbourhood is a beautiful tract of country, rich in beech forests and fjords, known as “the Holstein Switzerland,” largely frequented in summer by the Hamburgers.
Eutin was, according to tradition, founded by Count Adolf II. of Holstein. In 1155 it fell to the bishopric of Lübeck and was often the residence of the prelates of that see. After some vicissitudes of fortune during the middle ages and the Thirty Years’ War, it came into the possession of the house of Holstein, and hence to Prussia in 1866.
EUTROPIUS, Roman historian, flourished in the latter half
of the 4th century A.D. He held the office of secretary (magister
memoriae) at Constantinople, accompanied Julian on his expedition
against the Persians (363), and was alive during the reign of
Valens (364–378), to whom he dedicates his history. This work
(Breviarium historiae Romanae) is a complete compendium, in
ten books, of Roman history from the foundation of the city to
the accession of Valens. It was compiled with considerable care
from the best accessible authorities, and is written generally
with impartiality, and in a clear and simple style. Although the
Latin in some instances differs from that of the purest models,
the work was for a long time a favourite elementary school-book.
Its independent value is small, but it sometimes fills a gap left
by the more authoritative records. The Breviarium was enlarged
and continued down to the time of Justinian by Paulus Diaconus
(q.v.); the work of the latter was in turn enlarged by Landolfus
Sagax (c. 1000), and taken down to the time of the emperor
Leo the Armenian (813–820) in the Historia Miscella.
Of the Greek translations by Capito Lycius and Paeanius, the version of the latter is extant in an almost complete state. The best edition of Eutropius is by H. Droysen (1879), containing the Greek version and the enlarged editions of Paulus Diaconus and Landolfus; smaller critical editions, C. Wagener (1884), F. Rühl (1887). J. Sorn’s Der Sprachgebrauch des Historikers Eutropius (1892) contains a systematic account of the grammar and style of the author. There are numerous English school editions and translations.
EUTYCHES (c. 380–c. 456), a presbyter and archimandrite
at Constantinople, first came into notice in A.D. 431 at the
council of Ephesus, where, as a zealous adherent of Cyril (q.v.) of
Alexandria, he vehemently opposed the doctrine of the Nestorians
(q.v.). They were accused of teaching that the divine nature was
not incarnated in but only attendant on Jesus, being superadded
to his human nature after the latter was completely formed.
In opposition to this Eutyches went so far as to affirm that after
the union of the two natures, the human and the divine, Christ
had only one nature, that of the incarnate Word, and that therefore
His human body was essentially different from other human
bodies. In this he went beyond Cyril and the Alexandrine school
generally, who, although they expressed the unity of the two
natures in Christ so as almost to nullify their duality, yet took
care verbally to guard themselves against the accusation of in
any way circumscribing or modifying his real and true humanity.
It would seem, however, that Eutyches differed from the Alexandrine
school chiefly from inability to express his meaning
with proper safeguards, for equally with them he denied that
Christ’s human nature was either transmuted or absorbed into
his divine nature. The energy and imprudence of Eutyches in
asserting his opinions led to his being accused of heresy by
Domnus of Antioch and Eusebius, bishop of Dorylaeum, at a
synod presided over by Flavian at Constantinople in 448. As
his explanations were not considered satisfactory, the council
deposed him from his priestly office and excommunicated him;
but in 449, at a council held in Ephesus convened by Dioscurus
of Alexandria and overawed by the presence of a large number
of Egyptian monks, not only was Eutyches reinstated in his
office, but Eusebius, Domnus and Flavian, his chief opponents,
were deposed, and the Alexandrine doctrine of the “one nature”
received the sanction of the church. This judgment is the more
interesting as being in distinct conflict with the opinion of the
bishop of Rome—Leo—who, departing from the policy of his
predecessor Celestine, had written very strongly to Flavian in
support of the doctrine of the two natures and one person.
Meanwhile the emperor Theodosius died, and Pulcheria and
Marcian who succeeded summoned, in October 451, a council
(the fourth ecumenical) which met at Chalcedon (q.v.). There the
synod of Ephesus was declared to have been a “robber synod,”
its proceedings were annulled, and, in accordance with the rule of
Leo as opposed to the doctrines of Eutyches, it was declared
that the two natures were united in Christ, but without any
alteration, absorption or confusion. Eutyches died in exile, but
of his later life nothing is known. After his death his doctrines
obtained the support of the Empress Eudocia and made considerable
progress in Syria. In the 6th century they received a
new impulse from a monk of the name of Jacob, who united
the various divisions into which the Eutychians, or Monophysites
(q.v.), had separated into one church, which exists at
the present time under the name of the Jacobite Church, and
has numerous adherents in Armenia, Egypt and Ethiopia.
See R. L. Ottley, The Doctrine of the Incarnation, ii. 97 ff.; A. Harnack, History of Dogma, iv. passim; F. Loofs, Dogmengeschichte (4th ed., 1906), 297 f., and the art. in Herzog-Hauck, Realencyk. für prot. Theol., with a full bibliography.
EUTYCHIANUS, pope from 275 to 283. His original epitaph
was discovered in the catacombs (see Kraus, Roma sotterranea,
p. 154 et seq.), but nothing more is known of him.
EUTYCHIDES, of Sicyon in Achaea, Greek sculptor of the
latter part of the 4th century B.C., was a pupil of Lysippus.
His most noted work was a statue of Fortune, which he made
for the city of Antioch, then newly founded. The goddess, who
embodied the idea of the city, was seated on a rock, crowned with
towers, and having the river Orontes at her feet. There is a small
copy of the statue in the Vatican (see Greek Art). It was
imitated by a number of Asiatic cities; and indeed most statues
of cities since erected borrow something from the work of
Eutychides.
EUYUK, or Eyuk (the eu pronounced as in French), a small
village in Asia Minor, in the Angora vilayet, 12 m. N.N.E. of
Boghaz Keui (Pteria), built on a mound which contains some
remarkable ruins of a large building—a palace or sanctuary—anterior
to the Greek period and belonging to the same civilization
as the ruins and rock-reliefs at Pteria. These ruins consist
of a gateway and an approach enclosed by two lateral walls, 15 ft.
long, from the outer end of which two walls return outwards at
right angles, one to right and one to left. The gateway is flanked
by two huge blocks, each carved in front into the shape of a
sphinx, while on the inner face is a relief of a two-headed eagle
with wings displayed. Of the approach and its returning walls
only the lower courses remain: they consist of large blocks
adorned with a series of bas-reliefs similar in type to those
carved on the rocks of Boghaz Keui. Behind the gateway is
another vestibule leading to another portal which gives entrance
to the building, the lateral walls and abutments of the portal
being also decorated with reliefs much worn. These reliefs
belong to that pre-Greek oriental art generally called Hittite,
of which there are numerous remains in the eastern half of the
peninsula. It is now generally agreed that the scenes represented
are religious processions. On the left returning wall is a train of
priestly attendants headed by the chief priest and priestess
(the latter carrying a lituus), clad in the dress of the deities
they serve and facing an altar, behind which is an image of a bull
on a pedestal (representing the god); then comes an attendant
leading a goat and three rams for sacrifice, followed by more
priests with litui or musical instruments, after whom comes a
bull bearing on his back the sacred cista (?). On the lateral walls
of the approach we have a similar procession of attendants headed
by the chief priestess and priest, who pours a libation at the feet
of the goddess seated on her throne; while on the right returning
wall are fragments of a third procession approaching another
draped figure of the goddess on her throne (placed at the angle
opposite the bull on the pedestal), the train being again brought
up by a bull.
These are all scenes in the ritual of the indigenous naturalistic
