A pretty good rule of thumb is to regard historical writing as evidence of a kind.
Always read the source before you read other people's opinion about the source.
Eusebius' writings need to be read directly.
What some internet maven thinks Eusebius was saying is not the same thing.
It's like reading what the Watchtower says the Bible is saying.
How close is that? :)
Early Church Fathers' writings are among the most interesting writings I have read.
My eyes were really opened.
Those people were all kinds of crazy. They were highly intelligent crazy people:)
Their opinions and beliefs are often incredibly naive, imaginative and bizarre.
No wonder Christianity is a mess. Foundationally, it was a mess to begin with.
I'd stick with what people DID rather than what they thought about what things 'meant.'