(1 )Eusebius seems to have adopted this name as a token of friendship and respect for Pamphilus, bishop of Caesarea. See McGiffert, Prolegomena in Vol. I., Second Series of Post-Nicene Fathers.

(2 )Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History ends with the death of Licinius in 323. His Life of Constantine is in a sense a continuation of the History, and yet as it is very well characterized by Socrates, it is a eulogy and therefore its style and selection of facts are affected by its purpose, rendering it too inadequate as a continuation of the Ecclesiastical History; hence Socrates' constraint to review some of the events which naturally fall in Eusebius' period.

(3 )`Socrates is here in error; for Maximianus Herculius, who was otherwise called Maximian the Elder, was, by Constantine's command, slain in Gallia in 310 a.d. But Maximius Caesar, two years after, being conquered by Licinius, died at Tarsus. 0' (Valesius.) On the confusion of Maximian and Maximin, see Introd. III.

(4 )305 or 306 a.d.

(5 )panta periepwn, not to be taken literally, inasmuch as there were two other Augusti-Constantine and Maxentius; and hence though senior Augustus, he was not sole ruler. On the appointment of the Augusti under Diocletian, and meaning of the title, see Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chap. xiii.

(6 )'En tontw nika. For an extensive and satisfactory treatment of this famous passage in the life of Constantine, see Richardson, Proleffornena to the Life of Const., Vol. I., Second Series, Post-Nicene Fathers.

(7 )312 a.d.

(8 )Cf. an account of these events in Sozomen, I. 3. See also on the persecution instituted by Diocletian Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. I. pp. 143-156 Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. I. pp. 174-177; Euseb. H. E., Books VIII.-X. Lactantius, de Mortibus persec. c. 7 seq. Diocletian abdicated in 305 a.d.

(9 )'Ellhnwn: the word is used without the sense of nationality. So also in the New Testament often: Mark vii. 26; Gal. ii. 3 and Gal iii. 28, where the Syriac (Peschitto) version renders, more according to sense than according to the letter, `an Aramaean. 0'

(10 )After a victory the soldiers greeted their prince with acclamations of `Emperor! 0' `Augustus! 0' So also did the citizens on his triumphal entry into the city. So it appears Constantine was formally greeted on assuming the sole control of affairs.

(11 )Though Sabellius was the originator of one of the earliest and most plausible attempts at explanation of the mystery of the Trinity (for which see life of Sabellius in Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christian Biog., and Hodge, System. Theol. Vol. I. p. 452, 459), nothing is known of him, not even why he is called a Libyan here (also by other ancient writers, e.g. Philastrius, de Haeres. 26, and Asterius, quoted by Phot. Biblioth. Cod. 27). Some say that he was a native and resident of Libya, others that he was an ecclesiastic appointed to some position there; nor is it known whether the Libya meant is the Libyan Pentapolis or the Pentapolitan Ptolemais.

(12 )npostasi/. Through the Arian controversy this word is used in its metaphysical sense of `real nature of a thing as underlying and supporting its outward form and properties 0'; hence it is equivalent to the Latin substantia, Eng. essence and Greek onsia. Cf. below III. 7. Later it was applied to the `special or characteristic nature of a thing, 0' and so became the very opposite of onsia (the general nature); hence equivalent to person.

(13 )Eph. iv. 3.

(14 )1 Cor. xii. 26.

(15 )ec onk ontwn gegonen, lit. `came into existence from nothing. 0'

(16 )2 Cor. vi. 14.

(17 )John i. 1-3, John i. 18..

(18 )Ps. xliv. 1, according to the LXX.

(19 )7 9Ewsforon, the morning-star; taken from Ps. cix. 3. Cf. the LXX, quoted from Ps. lxxii.

(20 )Col. i. 15.

(21 )Heb. i. 3.

(22 )John xiv. 10.

(23 )John x. 30.

(24 )Mal. iii. 6.

(25 )Heb. xiii. 8.

(26 )Heb. ii. 10.

(27 )John x. 15.

(28 )Prov. xviii. 3, according to the LXX.

(29 )2 Tim. ii. 17, 2 Tim. ii. 18.

(30 )Matt. xxiv. 4.

(31 )Luke xxi. 8.

(32 )Tim. iv. 1; Tit. i. 14.

(33 )2 John 10, 11.

(34 )Valesius makes the assertion that Socrates is mistaken here, that the Melitians joined themselves to the Arians after the council of Nicaea, and were induced by Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, to cast slanderous aspersion upon Athanasius, as he himself testifies in his second apology against the Arians. It appears unlikely that the Fathers of the Nicene Council would have treated the Melitians as leniently as they did had they sided with Arius before the council.

(35 )Euseb. Life of Const. II. 64-72.

(36 )sunodoj; lit., `coming together. 0'

(37 )koinwniaj sunqhma = sumbolon thj pistewj. Cf. Eus. Life of Const II 10.

(38 )For the textual variation at this place, see Valesius, note.

(39 )sunodou koinwnian.

(40 )airesewj sunesij: lit. `understanding of heresy. 0' On the various uses of the word airesij, see Sophocles, Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byz. Periods. Here it evidently means the common creed of the whole Church looked at as a sect.

(41 )nomoj, used in analogy to the law of the Old Testament. The law here is the ethical system of Christianity.

(42 )timion, `honor. 0'

(43 )tou kreittonoj: for this use of the word, see Eus. Life of Const. II. 24 et al.; Greg. Naz. III. 1101 B; Jul. 398 A; Clem. Hom. V. 5.

(44 )Socrates' lack of theological training can be inferred from his admiration for this rather superficial letter of Constantine's; so also the rudimentary character of Constantine's views of Gospel truth and his want of appreciation for the vital nature of the question in the Arian controversy. It may be noted, however, that the statesmanship shown in the tone and recommendations of the letter is just as farsighted as the theology of it is superficial. Constantine had sought to unite the empire through the church, and now that very church threatened to disrupt the empire; and this, at the very time, when by his final victory over Licinius and the foundation of his new capital, he seemed to have realized the ideal of a reunited empire.

(45 )Cf. the parallel account in Sozom. I. 17.

(46 )In a single sentence this controversy was as to whether the Easter should be observed on a fixed day in every year or on the 14th of the lunar month Nisan of the Jews, on whatever day of the week that might happen to fall. For a fuller discussion of the controversy, see Smith's Dict. of the Bible, and the literature there referred to.

(47 )oikoumenikhn: hence this is called the first Ecumenical Council.

(48 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 7-9.

(49 )Hosius mentioned before in chap. 7.

(50 )According to Valesius, who follows Musculus, the prelate here meant was the bishop of Rome. The reason alleged is that at the time of the meeting of the council, Constantinople had not yet been made the `imperial city. 0' But considering the general indifference of Socrates to the affairs of the Western Church, and the fact that when he wrote, the imperial city was actually Constantinople, it is very probable that it is the bishop of that city he means to name here, and not the bishop of Rome.

(51 )Acts ii. 5-11.

(52 )The exact number is variously given as 250 by Eusebius (Life of Const. III. 8); 270 by Eustathius; 318 by Evagrius (H. E. III. 31); Athanasius (Ep. to the African bishops); Hilarius (Contra Constantium); Jerome (Chronicon), and Rufinus.

(53 )Young priests; lit. `followers, 0' from akolouqoj.

(54 )tw mesw tropw: besides the meaning given to these words here they may be taken (1) as describing the temperate and genial character of the men so characterized, on the assumption that mesoj = metrioj as often elsewhere, or (2) as applicable to those who occupied the middle ground in the controversy; of these, (2) is not admissible, as nothing has been said in the immediate context about the controversy, and as age is the main basis of classification in the passage (1) also is less probable than the rendering given above.

(55 )Dialectics.

(56 )eij twn omologhtwn: the term omologhthj was applied to those who during the persecutions had refused to sacrifice to idols, persisting in his profession of Christianity in spite of suffering. Cf. Clem. Strom. IV. 12; Petr. Alex. Epist. Can. 14.

(57 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 13.

(58 )The Passover, or Easter.

(59 )Macedonian = follower of Macedonius, not a native resident of Macedonia. Sabinus was the author of a collection of the acts of the Synod used by Socrates quite freely (cf. I. 9; II. 15, 17 et al.). Socrates, however, criticises for prejudice against the orthodox. Sabinus was bishop of the church of the Macedonians in Heraclea, a city in Thrace.

(60 )This is according to the reading of Valesius Hussey, and Bright. The reading, `our Lord, 0' &c., of the English translations in Bagster and Bohn's series is probably a typographical error, though strangely perpetuated down to the reprint of 1888.

(61 )omoousion, `of the same essence 0'; the word has become a historic landmark in theological debate, and one of the stock words of theological terminology.

(62 )This creed is found twelve times in eleven ancient sources, two versions being given in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon. The second version of the Council of Chalcedon contains certain additions from the creed of Constantinople; all the rest substantially agree. Cf. Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I. p. 24, and Vol. II. p. 50, 91; Walch, Antiquitates Symbolicae (1772), p. 87 seq.; Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 40-107, and other literature referred to in Schaff's Creeds, &c.

(63 )kathxhsei; the word is used of the steps preliminary to baptism, chief among which was instruction in the truth. Cf. VII. 17, and Smith's Dict. of the Bible.

(64 )prwtotokon pashj ktisewj, taken from Col. i, 15. For the uses of prwtoj instead of proteroj, see John i. 15.

(65 )maqhteusate, from Matt. xxviii. 19.

(66 )to maqhma: lit. `lesson. 0'

(67 )Through.

(68 )agrafoij: lit. `unwritten, 0' but defined by Hesychius as above.

(69 )klhrou: cf. Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. I. 5.

(70 )Sotades, a Maronite, characterized as obscene. On the doctrines of the Maronites, cf. Gibbon's Decline and Fall, Ch. XLVII. sect. 3.

(71 )It has always been the common belief of the Eastern Church that the ecumenical councils were inspired in the same sense as the writers of the Sacred Scriptures. Socrates in this respect simply reflects the opinion of the age and region.

(72 )Cf. III. 23, where the author makes further mention of Porphyry and his writings; see also Smith, Dict. Greek and Roman Biog.

(73 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 17-19.

(74 )As the Jewish Passover month was a lunar month and began on the fifth day of March and ended on the third of April, it happened sometimes that their Passover began before the equinox (the beginning of the solar year), so that they celebrated two Passovers during the same solar year. Their own year being lunar, of course they never celebrated the Passover twice in a year according to their point of view.

(75 )Valesius thinks this letter is misplaced; as it alludes to the death of Licinius as a recent event, he thinks it must have been written about 315-316 a.d., hence ten years before the Council of Nicaea. Cf. Euseb. Life of Const. II. 46.

(76 )Euseb. Life of Const. IV. 36.

(77 )dioikhsewj kaqolikon: this office was peculiar to the Eastern Church. The nearest equivalent to it in the terminology of the Western Church is that of vicar-general; but as the non-technical expression `financial agent 0' describes the official to the modern reader, it has been adopted in the present translation. Concerning the office, cf. Euseb. H. E. VII. 10. It may be also noted that the very common ecclesiastical term diocese (dioikhsij) originated during the reign of Constantine, as becomes evident from his letters. See Euseb. Life of Const. III. 36.

(78 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 30.

(79 )gnwrisma: the sepulchre near Calvary commonly known as the Saviour's is meant.

(80 )Licinius.

(81 )A temple of Venus built by Adrian, the emperor, on Mount Calvary.

(82 )basilikhn, `basilica 0'; the ancient Roman basilicas were often turned into churches. The term has become familiar in ecclesiastical architecture.

(83 )John v. 16.

(84 )qeiwn musthriwn.

(85 )Cf. IV. 28.

(86 )Sozom. I. 22.

(87 )Above, chap. 8.

(88 )Cf. Apost. Cann. 5, 17, 26, 51. In general, voluntary celibacy of the clergy was encouraged in the ancient Church.

(89 )Heb. xiii. 4.

(90 )askhthriw: lit. `place for the exercise 0' of virtue.

(91 )On the use Socrates made of Rufinus, and the question of his knowledge of Latin therein involved, see Introd. p. x.

(92 )This work of Athanasius is not now extant.

(93 )May 20, 325 a.d.

(94 )This is not in its place according to chronological order, mas. much as it occurred in 328 a.d. It appears also from the accounts of the other historians of this period that Socrates does not give the correct reason for the banishment of Eusebius and Theognis. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. I. 20; also Sozom. I. 21.

(95 )Socrates and Sozomen are both mistaken in putting the death of Alexander and ordination of Athanasius after the return of Eusebius and Theognis from exile. According to Theodoret (H. E. I. 26), Alexander died a few months after the Council of Nicaea, hence in 325 a.d., and Athanasius succeeded him at the end of the same year, or at the beginning of the next.

(96 )See, for additional features of the story not reproduced by Socrates, Rufinus, H. E. I. 14.

(97 )The Vicennalia.

(98 )These walls were superseded by the great walls built under Theodosius the Younger; see VII. 31.

(99 )`Mansion house, 0' the building in which the two chief magistrates had their headquarters.

(100 )The city was formally dedicated as the capital of the empire in 330 a.d.

(101 )Cf. II. 16, and I. 40.

(102 )The text seems somewhat doubtful here. Valesius conjectures ta te alla pleista kai touto malista, idiomatically, `this among many other things 0'; but the mss. read more obscurely, kai alla pleista.

(103 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 33; cf. also 52-55.

(104 )Isa. i. 8. opwrofulakion, `a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, 0' according to the English versions (both authorized and revised), which follows the Hebrew; in the LXX the words en sikuhratw are added.

(105 )See the Ep. of Constantine to Macarius, in chap. 9 above.

(106 )coanon, as distinguished from agalma, or andriaj, used with less reverence; the word is derived from cew, `to polish. 0'

(107 )sanij, `board. 0'

(108 )oikon eukthrion, `house of prayer. 0'

(109 )kanoni: a word of many meanings; see Sophocles' Lex. and a dissertation on the word in Westcott On the Canon Appendix A, p. 499.

(110 )tropaiw: see above, chap. 2.

(111 )Ex. xxxv.-xl.

(112 )`In this chapter Socrates has translated Rufinus (H. E. I. 9) almost word for word; and calls those topouj idiazontaj, which Rufinus has termed conventicula. Now conventicula are properly private places wherein collects or short prayers are made; and from these places churches are distinguished, which belong to the right of the public, and are not in the power of any private person. It is to be observed that there are reasons for thinking that this conversion of the Indians by Frumentius happened in the reign of Constantius and not of Constantine 0' (Valesius). See also Euseb. H. E. V. 10, attributing an earlier work to the apostles Matthew and Bartholomew; and Cave, Lives of the Apostles. The Indians mentioned in this chapter are no other than the Abyssinians. The name India is used as an equivalent of Ethiopia. The christianization of Ethiopia is attributed by the Ethiopians in their own records to Fremonatos and Sydracos. See Ludolf Hist. Eth. III. 2.

(113 )Christianity here must mean Christian instruction.

(114 )eukthria: see note 5, chap. 17 above.

(115 )These Iberians dwelt on the east shore of the Black Sea in the present region of Georgia. What their relation to the Spanish Iberians was, or why both the peoples had the same name it is not possible to know at present. It was probably not the one suggested by Socrates. For a similar identity of name in peoples living widely apart, compare the Gauls of Europe and the Galatae of Asia.

(116 )efilosofei: the ethical sense here attached to the word became very common after the time of the Stoics and their attempt to make ethics the basis and starting-point of philosophy.

(117 )Rufinus, H. E. I. 10, gives their story and adds that Bacurius was a faithful and religious person and rendered service to Theodosius in his war with Eugenius.

(118 )basiliskoj: lit. `little king. 0'

(119 )Athanasius' Life of Anthony is included in the editions of his works, such as the Benedictine (1698), that of Padua (1777). On Anthony, see also Soz. I. 3; II. 31, 34.

(120 )Cf. Eus. H. E. VII. 31. The literature of Manichaeism is voluminous and will be found in Smith, Dict. of the Bible, as well as encyclopaedias like Herzog, McClintock and Strong, &c.

(121 )pneumatoj: possibly `wind. 0'

(122 )metenswmatwsin, the converse of metempsychosis.

(123 )The more commonly known name of the town is `Carrha, 0' and the exact title of Archelaus' work as it appears in Valesius' Annotationes [ed. of 1677, see Introd. p. xvi.] is Disputatio adversus Manichaeum. It constitutes p. 197-203 of the Annotationes, and is in Latin. It has been published also in Latin by L. A. Zacagui in his collectanea monumentorum veterum Ecclesiae Graecae ac Latinae, 1698.

(124 )Euseb. Life of Const. III. 23.

(125 )Cf. ch. 5, and note.

(126 )It is not clear why Socrates joins the name of Montanus to that of Sabellius; the former was undoubtedly in accord with the common doctrine of the church as to the Trinity. Cf. Epiphan. Haer. XLVIII. and Tertullian ad. Praxeam. It was, however, frequently alleged by various writers of the age that Montanus and the Montanists held erroneous views concerning the Godhead. See Eus. H. E. V. 16.

(127 )See II. 9.

(128 )Socrates is in error here, as according to Eusebius (H. E. X. 1), immediately after the deposition of Eustathius and his own refusal of the bishopric of Antioch, Paulinus was transferred there from the see of Tyre. This was in 329 a.d., so that no vacancy of eight years intervened.

(129 )Cf. Rufinus, H. E. I. 11. The fact that the name of this presbyter is not mentioned, and Athanasius' apparent ignorance of the story, together with the untrustworthiness of Rufinus, throw suspicion on the authenticity of this account. Cf. also ch. 39, note 2.

(130 )The old English translation rendered `made 0' on the assumption that the Greek was gegenhmenon, not gegennhmenon. So also Valesius read and translated `factum 0'; but Bright without mentioning any variant reading, gives gegennhmenon, and we have ventured to translate accordingly.

(131 )Matt. xxviii. 9.

(132 )From the sentiments expressed here may be inferred the respect of the author for the church. His view on the suppression of facts which did not redound to the honor of the church does not show a very high ideal of history, but it bespeaks a laudable regard for the good name of Christianity.

(133 )This description is probably dependent on Athanasius, who says in his Apologia contra Arianos, 85, `Mareotes is a region of Alexandria. In that region there never was a bishop or a deputy bishop; but the churches of the whole region are subject to the bishop of Alexandria. Each of the presbyters has separate villages, which are numerous,-sometimes ten or more. 0' Ischyras was probably a resident of one of the obscurest of these villages; and it can be seen that what is said of his doings here could easily come to pass.

(134 )paroikia = later `parochia 0'; hence the derivatives.

(135 )Another evidence of the author's reverence for the institutions of religion. For subsequent history of Ischyras, see II. 20.

(136 )epibathria: lit. `ceremonies performed at embarkation. 0'

(137 )A full account of the circumstances narrated in this and the following chapters is given by Athanasius in his Apol. contra Arianos, 65, 71 and 72. Parallel accounts may also be found in Sozom. II. 25; Theodoret, H. E. I. 28; Rufinus, H. E. X. 17; Philostorgius, II. 11.

(138 )In Athanasius' account (Apol. c. Arian. 65) this man's name is given as 'Arxaf (Archaph), which is an Egyptian name; its assonance with the biblical 'Axaab may have made the latter a current appellation. John was no doubt his monastic name.

(139 )paragrafh, legal term; grafh = `indictment, 0' paragrafh = `demurrer, 0' so used by Isocrates, Demosthenes, &c., of the classical authors.

(140 )See above, ch. 17.

(141 )Arius, the originator of the Arian heresy, died before the council at Jerusalem; hence Valesius infers that this Arius must be another man of the same name mentioned in the encyclical of Alexander of Alexandria as a partisan of the arch-heretic. Cf. ch. 6.

(142 )This letter is contained in Athanasius' de Synod, 21, and a portion of it in Apol. contra Arian, 84.

(143 )Cf. Theodoret, H. E. I. 31. The ancient Gallia or Gaul included the modern France, Belgium, Lombardy, and Sardinia.

(144 )Joel ii. 25.

(145 )In the persecution under Decius (249 a.d.), those who yielded so far as to perform the heathen rites were branded with the title of `the lapsed 0'; and a controversy arose later on the manner in which they should be treated. One of the consequences of lapsing was disqualification for high office in the church. See Neander, Hist. of Christ. Ch. Vol. I. p. 226 seq.

(146 )Paul of Samosata, who has been surnamed in modern times the Socinus of the third century, was deposed in 269 a.d. by a council held at Antioch for unchristian character and unsound views. His peculiarity in the latter respect was his denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ. For fuller information, see Eus. H. E. VII. 30; Epiphan. Haer. LXVII.; Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. I, 602 seq.; Gieselee, Hist. of the Ch. Vol. I. 201; Smith and Wace Dict. of Christ. Biog.

(147 )See II. 20.

(148 )For a reproduction of the circumstances related in this chapter, together with a historical estimate of them based on additional evidence, see Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. II. p. 384-388.

(149 )It was the belief of many in the earlier ages of the church that baptism had a certain magical power purging away the sins previous to it, but having no force as regards those that might follow; this led many to postpone their baptism until disease or age warned them of the nearness of death; such delayed baptism was called `clinic baptism, 0' and was discouraged by the more judicious and spiritual-minded Fathers, some of whom doubted its validity and rebuked those who delayed as actuated by selfishness and desire to indulge in sin. The church, however, encouraged it in the cases of gross offenders. Cf. Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. IV. 3, and XI. 11, and Bennett, Christian Archaeology, pp. 407 and 409.

(150 )Cf. Euseb. Life of Const. IV. 63, and Rufinus, H. E. I. 11. The story is, however, doubtful, as Valesius observes. It is more likely that some one of the lay officials of the government, or, as Philostorgius says, Eusebius of Nicomedia, was entrusted with this will, and not a mere presbyter. That it was probably Eusebius of Nicomedia becomes the more probable when we consider that that bishop also probably baptized Constantine.

(151 )337 a.d. The 22d of May that year was the day of Pentecost.

(1 )Rufinus' Historia Ecclesiastica, in two books, begins with Arius and ends with Theodosius the Great. It is not very accurate, but written largely from memory. It is dedicated to Chromatius, bishop of Aquileja, and translated into Greek by Gelasius and Cyril of Jerusalem. On the edition used by Socrates, see Introd. and I. 12, note 1. Cf. also on his knowledge of Latin, II. 23, 30, and 37.

(2 )w iere tou Qeou anqrwpe Qeodwre; cf. Introd. p. x, also VI. Introd. and VII. 48.

(3 )There is some difference of opinion as to the exact year of the recall of Athanasius. Baronius and others allege that this took place in 338 a.d., the year after the death of Constantine; but Valesius maintains that Athanasius was recalled the year preceding. This he infers from the words of Athanasius (Apol. c. Arian, 61), and the title of the letter which Constantine the younger addressed to the church in Alexandria.

(4 )340 a.d.

(5 )Socrates is undoubtedly mistaken in setting the date of Alexander's death as late as 340 a.d. The council convened to examine and confute the charges against Athanasius met in 339 a.d., and the record at that date has it (see chap. 7) that Eusebius had taken possession of the see of Constantinople. Alexander must therefore have died before 339.

(6 )So called, not because there was a saint or eminent person of that name, but on the same principle as the church called Sophia. For the history of the latter church, see Dehio and Bezold, Die Kirchliche Baukuns des Abendlandes, I. p. 21.

(7 )So called in distinction from the "New Rome," or Constantinople. Cf. Canons of Council of Chalcedon, XXVIII.

(8 )The word `canon 0' here is evidently used in its general sense. There is no record of any enactment requiring the consent of the bishop of Rome to the decisions of the councils before they could be considered valid. There may have been a general understanding to that effect, having the force of an unwritten law. In any case the use of the word by Socrates is quite singular, unless we assume that he supposed there was such an enactment somewhere, as is implied by its use ordinarily.

(9 )341 a.d.

(10 )Sozom. H. E. III. 6. From the passage in Sozomen it appears that it was customary in Edessa to teach the Scriptures to boys, and that many of them thus became quite familiar with the Bible, knowing many passages by heart.

(11 )maqhmatikhn. From its use in astronomy the science of mathematics soon came to be identified with that counterfeit of astronomy,-astrology. It is so used by Sextus Empiricus (616. 20; 728. 20) and by Iamblichus, Myrt. 277. 2.

(12 )Athanas. de Synodd. 22, 23.

(13 )John i. 1.

(14 )John vi. 38.

(15 )Matt. xxviii. 19.

(16 )sunacewj: literally `congregation, 0' from sunagw; but later applied to any service held in the church. In mod. Sunacarion, `Prayer-book. 0'

(17 )So also Sozom. III. 7. But according to Valesius, both Socrates and Sozomen are here mistaken, and Eusebius sent the deputation before the council at Antioch, as is shown by the words of Athanasius in his Apol. contra Arian., 21.

(18 )See Hammond, Canons of the Church (notes on the Canons of Nicaea), for the prerogatives of the see of Rome recognized at this time.

(19 )342 a.d. This assassination of Hermogenes was evidently recorded in that portion of Am. Marcellinus' work which has been lost; at least a record of it is referred to in that author's Rerum Gestarum, XIV. x. 2 (ed. Eyssenhart).

(20 )On the gratuitous distribution of grain or bread practised under Constantine and later under Theodosius, see Cod. Theod. XIV. tit. XVI., and cf. Eunap. Aedes. par. 22.

(21 )Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. xi. 19, on the control over the appointment of bishops by the emperor at this time.

(22 )There is an error here, repeated also by Sozomen (III. 7), but corrected by Theodoret, H. E. II. 4 and 12, without the mention of the names of his predecessors. The error consists in the statement that Gregory was ejected at this time. It appears that he remained in his position until the Council of Sardica, by which he was deposed and excommunicated. He survived this council by six months.

(23 )That of Dionysius.

(24 )This is the same Gregory that is mentioned in ch. 10 as violently put into possession of the sea of Alexandria by the Arians. It is evident that they were disappointed in him.

(25 )Julius, in his letter to the Eastern bishops (Ep. I. adv. Eusebianos, 4 and 5), mentions Athanasius and Marcellus, ex-bishop of Ancyra, as with him at this time, but does not allude to Paul; from which it has been inferred that Socrates is in error here in setting the date of Paul's visit to Rome at this time, as otherwise Julius would have named him also with Athanasius and Marcellus. Sozomen, as usual, copies the mistake of Socrates; cf. Sozom. III. 15.

(26 )It appears from this that there was no recognition of any special prerogative or right belonging to the bishop of Rome as yet. The position of that bishop during these agitations in the Eastern church, when the Western church was in comparative peace, seems to be that of an arbitrator voluntarily invoked, rather than of an official judge. Cf. Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Church, Vol. II. p. 171, 172.

(27 )i.e. in his Collection of Synodical Transactions, mentioned in chap. 17.

(28 )deuteroj meta basilea; not only second in rank, but first after him in power, `his right-hand man. 0' Cf. Vergil's alter ab illo, Ecl. V. 49, and VIII. 39.

(29 )Sozom. X. 3 follows Socrates. The contents of the letter written by Julius to the Eusebians, found in Athanasius' Apologia contra Arianos, c. 20, are different from those here given by Socrates. Julius there complains of their ignoring his invitation to the synod at Rome, but says nothing of any canon such as is mentioned here. Cf. ch. 8, note 2.

(30 )See above, ch. 15.

(31 )Athanasius and Paul.

(32 )Constantine the Younger. See I. 38, end.

(33 )Eph. iii. 15.

(34 )See below, ch. 59.

(35 )This creed was called makrostixoj from its length, and the date of its promulgation must be put after the Council of Sardica, according to Hefele. See Hefele, History of the Church Councils, Vol. II. p. 85, 89, and 180 (ed. T. & T. Clark).

(36 )Moyou estia, lit. `the hearth of Mopsus, 0' son of Apollo and Manto, daughter of Tiresias, according to the Greek mythology. Mopsuestia has become famous in the history of the church through its great citizen, Theodore. Cf. Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.

(37 )This is the end of the first creed adopted at Antioch, as given in the preceding chapter; it is couched in almost identical terms in both these versions. The rest of the version here given is the addition that constitutes the characteristic of the `Lengthy Creed. 0'

(38 )sunanarxon. It has been thought advisable to retain the above uncouth rendering of this word, as also of one or two others immediately following, on the ground that the etymological precision at which they aim compensates for their non-classical ring.

(39 )sunagennhton.

(40 )anefikton.

(41 )I Cor. xi. 3.

(42 )`There has arisen in our days a certain Marcellus of Galatia, the most execrable of all heretics, who with a sacrilegious mind and impious mouth and wicked argument will needs set bounds to the perpetual, eternal, and timeless kingdom of our Lord Christ, saying that he began to reign four hundred years since, and shall end at the dissolution of the present world. 0' This is the description given of the heresy here hinted at by the synodical letter of the Oriental bishops at Sardica. On Marcellus and the various opinions concerning him, see Zahn, Marcellus von Ancyra, Gotha, 1867; also monographs on Marcellus by Rettberg (1794) and by Klose (1837 and 1859). Cf. Neander, Hist. of Chr. Ch. Vol. II. p. 394.

(43 )Cf. Tertull. Adv. Prax. i. and ii.; Epiph. Har. LVII.

(44 )Prov. viii. 22. The ancient bishops quote the LXX verbatim. The English versions (Authorized and Revised) follow the Hebrew, `The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 0'

(45 )347 a.d.

(46 )Athanasius' statement is that those who were present at the Council of Sardica, together with those who afterwards subscribed the Synodical Epistle sent to them and those who before the council had written in his behalf out of Phrygia, Asia, and Isauria, were in all about three hundred and forty. So in his Apol. contra Arianos, c. 50. In his Ep. ad Solitar. c. 15, he gives the number of those who met at Sardica as about one hundred and seventy,-no more.

(47 )Cf. I, 27.

(48 )anomoiou, `different, 0' `unlike. 0'

(49 )I. 36.

(50 )There are two works of Eusebius extant against Marcellus. The one described here is de Ecclesiastica Theologia adversus Marcellum, in three books; the other is entitled contra Marcellum, and consists of two books. As there is no mention of the latter, it is doubtful whether Socrates had ever seen them. At the end of the second book, Eusebius asserts that he had written at the request of the bishops who had excommunicated Marcellus.

(51 )Life of Const. III. 13.

(52 )Eusebius was accustomed to end his sermons with the formula `Glory be to the unborn God through his only-begotten Son, 0' &c. So also at the end of his contra Sabell. I.

(53 )1 Cor. i.; Eph. iii. 9.

(54 )De Eccl. Theol. I. 8, 9, and 10.

(55 )Prov. viii. 22.

(56 )De Eccl. Theol. III. 2.

(57 )1 Pet. ii. 13.

(58 )Amos iv. 12, Amos iv. 13 (LXX).

(59 )Eccl. i. 9.

(60 )Acts ii. 2, Acts ii. 4.

(61 )Amos iv. 13.

(62 )Psalms ii. 10 (LXX).

(63 )Eph. ii. 15.

(64 )Eph. iv. 24.

(65 )2 Cor. v. 17.

(66 )This separation was only temporary and must be distinguished from the great schism, which grew slowly and culminated with the adoption of the expression `filioque 0' into the Apostles' Creed by the Western church in the eleventh century. On the various degrees of unity and communion recognized in the ancient church, see Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. Bk. XVI. 1.

(67 )Tisoukij.

(68 )Athan. Apol. c. Arian, 51.

(69 )komitaton = Lat. comitatus; by analogy of the New Test. words khnsoj koustwdia, spekoulatwr, &c., and frequently in Byzantine Greek kombineuma soufragion, &c.

(70 )Athan. Apol. c. Arian. 52.

(71 )1 Cor. ii. 9.

(72 )Athan. Apol. c. Arian. 54.

(73 )Athan. Apol. c. Arian. 55.

(74 )tou kreitonoj; cf. I. 7, and note.

(75 )The bishop of Jerusalem was under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan bishop of Caesarea, and according to later usage and canon, had no right to call a synod without the permission of the metropolitan. Evidently usage had not yet become fixed into uniformity in this respect.

(76 )Cf. Athan, Apol. c. Arian. 57.

(77 )Cf. Apost. Cann. XXXV. `Let not a bishop dare to ordain beyond his limits, in cities and places not subject to him. 0' It follows, therefore, that the whole of Egypt was not under the bishop of Alexandria; otherwise no such charge as is here mentioned could have been made against Athanasius. That these ordinations were made in Egypt is evident from the mention of Pelusium, which Athanasius had already passed through.

(78 )I. 38.

(79 )The same account is given by Eunap. X. 9, and by Zosimus, II. 40.

(80 )Ch. 5, above.

(81 )Magnentius was governor of the provinces of Rhoetia, and assassinated Constans, as above. Cf. Zosimus, II. 43.

(82 )This whole affair is treated extensively in Zosimus, II. 43-48.

(83 )350 a.d.

(84 )Cf. Apost. Cann. XXII. and XXIII.; according to these any cleric was to be deposed if found guilty of such a crime. The Council of Nicaea also passed a canon on the subject which is as follows: `If a man has been mutilated by physicians during sickness, or by barbarians, he may remain among the clergy; but if a man in good health has mutilated himself, he must resign his post after the matter has been proved among the clergy, and in future no one who has thus acted should be ordained. But as it is evident that what has just been said only concerns those who have thus acted with intention, and have dared to mutilate themselves, those who have been made eunuchs by barbarians or by their masters will be allowed, conformably to the canon, to remain among the clergy, if in other respects they are worthy. 0' Canon I. See Hefele, Hist. of the Councils, Vol. I. p. 375, 376.

(85 )Athan. Apol. de Fuga, 6.

(86 )Tessarakosth, lit. = `forty days' fast, 0' formed by mistaken analogy to penthkost.

(87 )Suspending, i.e., all violence during the period of festivity attending the observance of Easter.

(88 )Houses are often sealed by state and municipal officials in the East, even at the present time, when their contents are to be confiscated, or for any other reason an inventory is to be made by the authorities. The sealing consists in fastening and securing the locks and bolts and attaching the impression of the official seal to some sealing-wax which is put over them. In this case the object of the sealing was apparently the confiscation of the contents.

(89 )The modern El-Onah or El-Kharjeh, situated west of the Nile, seven days' journey from Thebes, contains several small streams, and abounds in vegetation, including palm-trees, orange and citron groves, olive orchards, &c. See Smith, Dict. of Geogr.

(90 )Sozomen (IV. 4) calls him Oueteraniwn; cf. also Zosimus, II. 44, on the way in which he was elevated and soon afterwards reduced.

(91 )See I. 1, and note on the name of Eusebius Pamphilus; cf. Smith and Cheetham, Dict. of Christ. Ant. Names.

(92 )Similar to the appearance mentioned in I. 2. See note on that passage.

(93 )A disciple of Marcellus (see ch. 18). See Hilar. de Synod. 61, Cave on Photinus.

(94 )The bishops here mentioned, according to Valesius, took part not in this council, but in another held at the same place nine years later, under the consuls Eusebius and Hypatius.

(95 )351 a.d. So also Sozomen, IV. 6.

(96 )The Ludi circenses, consisting of five games, leaping, wrestling, boxing, racing, and hurling,-called in Greek pentaqlon,-with scenic representations and spectacles of wild beasts at the amphitheatre; with these the consuls entertained the people at their entrance on the consulate. Alluded to by Tacitus (Ann. I. 2) and Juvenal (Sat. X. 1). Cf. Smith, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Antiq.

(97 )There were three councils held at Sirmium: one in 351, as already indicated in note 3, ch. 29; another in 357, in which Hosius and Potamius composed their blasphemy; and one in 359. It was in this last council that that creed was drawn up which was recited in Ariminum. The confusion of Socrates on this point has been alluded; to in the Introd.

(98 )Athan. de Synod. 27.

(99 )Eph. iii. 15.

(100 )Isa. xliv. 6.

(101 )John i. 14.

(102 )Gen. i. 26.

(103 )Gen. xix. 24: `Then the Lord ...rained brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. 0'

(104 )Athanasius reads epi Sodoma, not eiz swma. If this be the true reading, we should translate `came down to Sodom, 0' &c.

(105 )Ps. cix. 1 (LXX).

(106 )John xiv. 16, John xiv. 26.

(107 )1 Cor. xi. 3.

(108 )Paul of Samosata, see I. 36, note 3.

(109 )Athan. de Synod. 28, and Hilar. de Synod. calls this creed `The blasphemy composed at Sirmium by Hosius and Potamius. 0'

(110 )John xx. 17.

(111 )Rom. iii. 29, Rom. iii. 30.

(112 )Of the same substance.

(113 )Of similar substance.

(114 )Isa. liii. 5.

(115 )John xiv. 28.

(116 )kaqolikon, `universally accepted. 0'

(117 )Matt. xxviii. 19.

(118 )`Epiphamus relates that Photinus, after he had been condemned and deposed in the synod of Sirmium, went to Constantius, and requested that be might dispute concerning the faith before judges nominated by him; and that Constantius enjoined Basilius, bishop of Ancyra, to undertake a disputation with Photinus, and gave leave that Thalassiuss, Datianus, Cerealis, and Taurus should be arbiters 0' (Valesius).

(119 )So in the Allat. ms., with the variant reading in other mss. Miltoseleukoj.

(120 )353 a.d.; but the date is given differently in Idatius' Fasti.

(121 )354 a.d.

(122 )355 a.d.

(123 )See III. 1.

(124 )So rightly in the Allat. ms.; the variant Gallian is inconsistent with the context.

(125 )I. 26.

(126 )Diogenes Laertius, Proem. XI (16), says: `Philosophers were generally divided into two classes,-the dogmatics, who spoke of things as they might be comprehended; and the ephectics, who refused to define anything, and disputed so as to make the understanding of them impossible. 0' The word `ephectic 0' is derived from the verb epexw, `to hold back, 0' and was used by the philosophers to whom it is applied as a title because they claimed to hold back their judgment, being unable to reach a conclusion. Cf. also the name `skeptic, 0' from skeptomai. See Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics, p. 525.

(127 )IV. 7.

(128 )So also Sozomen, IV. 9; but the number appears exorbitant. Valesius conjectures that the texts of Socrates and Sozomen are corrupted, and that we must read thirty instead of three hundred. The smaller number agrees exactly, with the list given in the epistle of this council to Eusebius of Vercellae; in this list thirty bishops are named as agreeing to the condemnation of Athanasius, Marcellus, and Photinus. Cf. Baronius, Annal. year 355.

(129 )Sozomen (IV. 9) agrees here also with Socrates; but Athanasius, in Epist. ad Solitar., and after him Baronius and Valesius, make Milan and not Alba, the metropolis of Italy, and Dionysius bishop of Milan, and not of Alba.

(130 )Cf. Sozomen, III. 19; IV. 15-19; Theodoret, H. E. II. 18-21; Rufin. II. 21; Philostorgius, IV. 10. Also Hefele, Hist. of the Ck. Councils, Vol. II. p. 246-271.

(131 )Ch. 39.

(132 )According to Theodoret (H. E. II. 19) Aëtius was promoted to the diaconate under Leontius at Antioch; but Leontius, on being censured by Flavian and Diodorus for ordaining one who was notorious for his blasphemous utterances, divested him of his diaconate Hence, later, Eudoxius attempted to restore him, as is here said.

(133 )Athan. de Synod. 8; but Athanasius does not say that this creed was translated from Latin, as he does whenever he produces any document put into Greek from Latin; whence it appears, according to Valesius, that this is the form drawn up in Greek by Marcus of Arethusa, and submitted to the third Sirmium council in 359, but read at Ariminum as here said (cr. ch. 30, and note). The argument is not considered conclusive by Reading as far as it regards the original language of tile creed; that it was written by Marcus of Arethusa, however, seems to be proved.

(134 )The title of the emperor in Athanasius' version is `The most pious and victorious emperor Constantius Augustus, eternal Augustus, 0' &c., which agrees with the representations of the ancients on the vainglory of Constantius. Cf. Amm. Marcellin. Rerum Gestarum, XVI. 10, 2, 3 (ed. Eyssenhardt).

(135 )359 a.d.

(136 )Job xxxviii. 17 (LXX).

(137 )John xiv. 16; John xvi. 14.

(138 )Athan. de Synod. 8.

(139 )This appeal to antiquity, as the test of truth, is very common with the earlier Fathers; cf. Eusebius' treatment of the Scriptures of the New Testament, H. E. III. 3, 24, 25, et al.

(140 )Isa. i. 2; Hos. i. 1.

(141 )Jer. i. 2.

(142 )Luke ii. 1.

(143 )Athan, de Synod, 10. The Latin original which Hilar. Fragm. 8, was adopted by Valesius in this place, and subsequently also by the English translators. We have followed the Greek of Socrates, giving the most important differences in the following four notes; viz. 15, 16, 17, and 18. How these variations originated it is impossible to tell with assurance; but it is not improbable that they may represent two drafts, of which one was originally tentative.

(144 )The Latin original here contains the following paragraph not reproduced by Socrates: `These matters having been strictly investigated and the creed drawn up in the presence of Constantine, who after being baptized, departed to God's rest in the faith of it, we regard as an abomination any infringement thereon, or any attempt to invalidate the authority of so many saints, confessors, and successors of the martyrs, who assisted at that council, and themselves preserved inviolate all the determinations of the ancient writers of the catholic church: whose faith has remained unto these times in which your piety has received from God the Father, through Jesus Christ our God and Lord, the power of ruling the world. 0'

(145 )The Latin original omits the following paragraph, ending with the words `over our portion of the world. 0'

(146 )The Latin original in Hilar. omits the name of Auxentius.

(147 )Instead of the Greek words here translated, `fill the believing with distrust and the unbelieving with cruelty, 0' the Latin original reads `verum etiam infideles ad credulitatem vetantur accedere. 0'

(148 )Cf. Theodoret, H. E. II. 20.

(149 )Cf. Theodoret, H. E. II. 16.

(150 )Hilar, Fragm. 8; Hefele, Hist. of Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 257.

(151 )From this place it plainly appears, as Valesius remarks, that the authority of the see of Constantinople was acknowledged, even before the council of Constantinople. throughout the region of the Hellespont and Bithvnia, which conclusion is also confirmed by the acts of Eudoxius, bishop of Constantinople, who made Eunomius bishop of Cyzicus. Two causes co-operated to secure this authority, viz. (1) the official establishment of the city as the capital of the empire by Constantine, and (2) the transference to it of Eusebius of Nicomedia, a most vigorous and aggressive bishop, who missed no opportunity for enlarging and consolidating the power of his see.

(152 )See above, ch. 16.

(153 )I. 13.

(154 )According to Valesius it appears incredible that the Catholics should have done what Socrates says they did. `For there is nothing more contrary to ecclesiastical discipline than to communicate with heretics either in the sacraments or in prayer. 0' Hence `Socrates was probably imposed upon by the aged Auxano, who fixed upon all the Catholics what was perhaps done by some few Christians who were less cautious. 0' But Socrates' own attitude towards the Novatians (cf. Introd. p. x.) shows that the difference between them and the Catholics (oi thj ekklhsiaj) was not universally regarded as an absolute schism forbidding communication even during such times of trial as these described here, which might certainly have drawn together parties already as near to one another as the Novatians and Catholics.

(155 )See below, ch. 42.

(156 )358 a.d.

(157 )In this calamity Cecropius, the bishop of Nicomedia, perished, and the splendid cathedral of the city was ruined; both of which misfortunes were attributed by the heathen to the wrath of their gods. See Sozom. IV. 16.

(158 )Traxeia, on account of the neighboring steep mountains. This Seleucia was the capital of Isauria.

(159 )359 a.d. See, on this double council of Ariminum and Seleucia, Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 346-371.

(160 )Cf Athan. de Synodd. 12.

(161 )See chaps. 8 and 10.

(162 )Athanas. (de Synodd. 29) gives the following portion of this creed apparently as the only declaration made by the council.

(163 )Col. i. 15.

(164 )See Chrysostom, Homilies 9 and 27, on Acts, and Hom. 1, on 2 Tim., for the belief of the ancient Church in the descent of the Holy Spirit on the ordained in and through ordination.

(165 )He was the only one, inasmuch as the General Synod of Constantinople (381 a.d.) expressly forbade all appeals from the ecclesiastical to the civil courts, attaching severe penalties to the violation of its canon on this subject. Cf. Canon 6 of Council of Constantinople. Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 364.

(166 )On the distinction between the prefect and proconsul and the different functions of each, see Smith, Diction. of Greek and Roman Ant. The statement of Socrates here that Constantius first put Constantinople under a prefect is borne out by Athanasius' mention of Donatus as proconsul of Europe, with Constantinople as chief city.

(167 )The General Synod of Chalcedon, 451 a.d., in its seventh canon forbade, under pain of anathema, the mixing of the clerical office with political and worldly matters.

(168 )The taceij here mentioned were classes of officials appointed under a sort of military law, to serve for a given length of time as agents of the presidents and governors of provinces. Cf. Justin. Cod. 12, tit. 52-59.

(169 )Cf. chap. 37.

(170 )Athanas. de Synodd. 30.

(171 )John xv. 26.

(172 )Chap. 10.

(173 )Chap. 18.

(174 )Chap. 19.

(175 )Chaps. 30, 37.

(176 )Chap. 41.

(177 )Cf. Apost. Canon, XXV.

(178 )Cf. Tertull. de Idol. IX.: Post evangelium nusquam invenies aug sophistas, aut Chaldaeos, aut Incantatores, aut Conjectores, aug magos, nisi plane punitos. See also Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. XVI. 5.

(179 )On the prescribed dress of the clergy, and the puhishment of those who did not constantly adopt it, see Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. VI. 4. 15.

(180 )1 Tim. iv. 3. Cf. Euseb. H. E. IV. 29, on the earliest forms of expression against marriage in the Christian Church; also Apost. Canon, LI. and Augustine, Haerr. XXV., XL., XLVI. See Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. XXII. 1.

(181 )On Synod of Gangra, see Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 325-339. Almost all the canons of the synod seem to be addressed against the teachings of Eustathius. The fourth canon is expressly on the celibacy of the clergy, as follows: `If any one maintains that, when a married priest offer the sacrifice, no one should take part in the service, let him be anathema. 0'

(182 )This was evidently the second consecration of the earlier church of St. Sophia (cf. I. 16, II. 6); the first consecration was celebrated in 326 a.d. Later, the structure was destroyed in a fire, in connection with a popular uprising; and the great church of St. Sophia, at present a Mohammedan mosque, was erected by Justinian, with Isidore of Miletus and Anthimius of Trailes as architects.

(183 )360 a.d.

(184 )The name has been written `Melitius 0' thus far, but is found as `Meletius 0' from this point, and through Bk. III. Cf. Euseb. H. E. VII. 32.

(185 )parashmoj; just as a counterfeit coin has the appearance of the genuine, and is meant to deceive those who do not investigate its genuineness, so the term `homoioousios 0' (omoioousioj), the author implies, was meant to deceive the popular ear by its likeness to the genuine `homoousios. 0'

(186 )See Theodoret, H. E. II. 6.

(187 )Pneumatomaxoi, lit. `active enemies of the Spirit. 0'

(188 )I. 4.

(189 )361 a.d.

(190 )'Anomoioi, because they held that the essence of the Son was `dissimilar, 0' Anomoioj, to that of the Father.

(191 )'Ecoukontioi, from the phrase ec ouk ontwn = `from [things] not existing, 0' because they asserted that the Son was made ex nikilo. The term might be put roughly in some such form as `Fromnothingians. 0'

(192 )1 Cor. xi. 12.

(193 )Written `Errenius 0' in the Allat. *ms.;

(194 )Cf. Sozom. VI. 25; Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Ch., Vol. III. p. 708 seq.; Walch, Ketzerhistorie, III. p. 119-229.

(195 )III. 16.

(196 )361 a.d.

(1 )1 December, 361 a.d. This proclamation must be distinguished from the one in Gaul (II. 47); the latter was the proclamation by the army, and occurred during the lifetime of Constantius.

(2 )Cf. I. 1.

(3 )See Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. VI. 4, end.

(4 )The `reader, 0' anagnwsthj, lector, was commonly a young man possessed of a good voice, who read the Scriptures from the pulpit or reading-desk (not the altar). Bennett, Christ. Archaeol. p. 374.

(5 )See Smith, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Antiq. See also, on sacrificing to idols as a sign of apostacy, Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. XVI. iv. 5.

(6 )See II. 7, 13, 16, &c.

(7 )It is difficult to determine in what particulars the improvements mentioned here were made. Gregory Nazianzen, Contra Julianum, I. lxxv., confesses that Julian had made reforms in the matter.

(8 )See chap. 23.

(9 )The friendly or propitious divinity of the Persian theology; hence identified with the light and life-giving sun.

(10 )The secret or innermost sanctuary of the temple, where none but priests were permitted to enter; afterwards applied to any secret place.

(11 )This George is, according to some authorities, the St. George of the legend. In its Arian form the legend represents St. George as warring against the wizard Athanasius; later, the wizard was transformed to a dragon, and George to an armed knight slaying the dragon. On other forms and features of the legend, see Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biogr., Georgius (43).

(12 )Julian, Ep. 10.

(13 )Artemius, whom the Emperor Julian afterwards beheaded for desecrating the pagan temple.

(14 )Philostorgius (VII. 10) calls this Julian `the governor of the East, who was the uncle on the maternal side of Julian the Apostate. 0' Sozomen also (V. 7 and 8) and Theodoret (H. E. III. 12, 13) furnish information regarding him, as well as Ammianus Marcellius XXIII. i. Cf. also Julian, Epist. XIII. (Spanheim, p. 382).

(15 )Theodoret, H. E. III, 4, mentions Hilarius, Astenius, and some other bishops who were at this time recalled from exile by Julian's edict, and joined Lucifer and Eusebius in these deliberations about restoring the authority of the canons and correcting abuses in the church.

(16 )Cf. II. 36.

(17 )More especially the canons of the Council of Nicaea.

(18 )II. 44.

(19 )The bishops composing the Council of Nicaea simply declared their faith in the Holy Spirit, without adding any definition; they were not met with any denial of the divinity of the Holy Spirit. This denial was first made by Macedonius, in the fourth century.

(20 )Euseb. H. E. VI. 33, says that this Beryllus denied that Christ was God before the Incarnation. He, however, gives the see of Beryllus as Bostra in Arabia, instead of Philadelphia. So also Epiphanius Scholasticus; though Nicephorus, X. 2, calls him Cyrillus, instead of Beryllus.

(21 )Valesius conjectures that Socrates is wrong here in attributing such an action to the Synod of Alexandria, as the term ousia does not occur in the Nicene Creed, and such action would therefore be in manifest contradiction to the action at Nicaea. This, however, is not probable, in view of the dominating influence of Athanasius in both. But, as the acts of the Alexandrian synod are not extant, it is impossible to verify this conjecture.

(22 )Heb. i. 3.

(23 )See Suidas, Lexicon.

(24 )The only work of Evagrius preserved to our days is his Ecclesiastical History.

(25 )IV. 23.

(26 )Athan. de Fuga. 7.

(27 )Matt. x. 23.

(28 )2 Kings xxii. 2 (LXX).

(29 )Athanas. de Fuga. 10.

(30 )Gen. xxviii.

(31 )Ex. ii. 15.

(32 )1 Sam. xix. 12.

(33 )Rather Achisch, king of Gath, 1 Sam. xxi. 10.

(34 )1 Kings xix. 3.

(35 )1 Kings xviii. 4.

(36 )Matt. xxvi. 56.

(37 )2 Cor. xi. 32, 2 Cor. xi. 33.

(38 )Num. xxxv. 11.

(39 )Matt. x. 23.

(40 )Matt. xxiv. 15-18.

(41 )John viii. 59.

(42 )Abbreviated from Athanasius.

(43 )Matt. ii. 13, Matt. ii. 22.

(44 )Matt. xii. 14, Matt. xii. 15.

(45 )John xi. 53, John xi. 54.

(46 )John viii. 58.

(47 )Matt. xiii. 13; Isa. ix. 5.

(48 )Matt. xiv. 12, Matt. xiv. 13.

(49 )John vii. 30.

(50 )John ii. 4; John iii. 6.

(51 )Matt. xxvi. 45.

(52 )Athan. de Fuga. 15.

(53 )Athan. de Fuga. 22.

(54 )V. 5.

(55 )Cf. Sozom. III. 15, and V. 12.

(56 )Sozom. V. 14; Theodoret, Hoeret. Fabul. IV.

(57 )II. 10. 39.

(58 )Chap. 1.

(59 )basilikh. On the origin and history of the term, see Bennett, Christian Archoeology, pp. 157-163. The special basilica meant here was situated, according to Valesius, in the fourth precinct, and alone called basilikh, or `cathedral 0' without qualification. The `Theodosian cathedral 0' was situated in the seventh ward.

(60 )Cf. John i. 46, and Acts ii. 7. Later the word was used by the heathen also, contemptuously, as a term of reproach.

(61 )Chap. 16.

(62 )Based, probably, on Matt. xxvi. 52, and John xviii. 11.

(63 )zwnhn apetiqento; literally, `put off their girdle, 0' as the badge of office.

(64 )The term was used first by traveling teachers of rhetoric at the time of the philosopher Socrates as descriptive of their profession; and although it later acquired an unfavorable significance, it continued to be used also as a professional name given to teachers of rhetoric, as here.

(65 )Cf. Tertull. Apol. IX. `In the bosom of Africa infants were publicly sacrificed to Saturn, even to the days of a proconsul under Tiberius, 0' &c.

(66 )Cf. Sozom. V. 18; also above, II. 46.

(67 )Chap. 21.

(68 )Col. i. 26.

(69 )Rom. i. 18-21.

(70 )On this extra-Scriptural saying attributed to Jesus Christ, see n. 54, Introd, p. xi.

(71 )1 Thess. v. 21.

(72 )Col. ii. 8.

(73 )Tit. i. 12.

(74 )Cf. Theophrastus, VII. x. and Diogenes Laertius, I. x. The latter gives a list of Epimenides' works,but makes no mention of any `Oracles. 0' Socrates must have used this term in a more general sense therefore, and meant some collection of obscure and mystical writings. He also calls Epimenides an `Initiator, 0' because, according to the testimony of Theophrastus, he was versed particularly in lustration and coruscation.

(75 )Acts xvii. 28.

(76 )Fabricius, Bibl. Groec. II. p. 451 seq.

(77 )1 Cor. xv. 33.

(78 )Menander, and not Euripides, is the only author to whom this line can be traced (see Tertull. ad Uxor. 1. 8, and Meineke, Fragm. Comic. Groee. Vol. IV. p. 132), but it may have been a popular proverb, or even originally a Composition of Euripides, which Menander simply used.

(79 )metaboleij. Cf. metabolh, used to designate all merchandising, Julius Pollux, III. 25; hence metaboleuj, a `retailer, 0' `small merchant. 0'

(80 )Hence Gregory of Nazianus calls him kausitauroj, `a burner of bulls. 0'

(81 )See Euseb. H. E. VI. 20 and 39; also Chrysostom, de S. Babyl. According to these authorities Babylas was bishop of Antioch, succeeding Sabrinus, and was beheaded in prison during the reign of Decius. His remains were transferred to a church built over against the temple of Apollo of Daphne (Sozom. V. 19) by Gallus, Julian's brother.

(82 )Ps. xcvi. 7 (LXX).

(83 )Matt. xxiv. 2, Matt. xxiv. 15.

(84 )Rom. xi. 25; 2 Cor. iii. 14.

(85 )metenswmatwsewj, lit. `exchange of bodies, 0' formed in analogy with metemyuxwsij and logically inseparable from that doctrine.

(86 )Theodoret, H. E. III. 25, gives the familiar version of the death of Julian, according to which, on perceiving the character of his wound, the dying emperor filled his hand with blood and threw it up into the air, crying, `Galilean, thou hast overcome! 0'

(87 )363 a.d.

(88 )See above, chap. 13.

(89 )So the mss. and Bright. The same reading was also before Epiphanius Scholasticus and Nicephorus; but Valesius conjecturally amends the reading touj Surouj thj arxhj into touj orouj thj arxhj, alleging that Socrates himself later mentions the loss as zhmian twn orwn. If the reading of Valesius be considered correct, then we must translate `submitting to the loss of the borders, 0' supplying `of the empire. 0' This would include the districts beyond the Tigris.

(90 )Liban. Orat. xviii. (Opera, i. Reiske).

(91 )Porphyry. See above, I. 9.

(92 )In his Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, and Apology of Socrates. See also Xenophon's Memorabilia of Socrates and Symposium.

(93 )Marcus Aurelius.

(94 )Gregor. Nazianz. Orat. V. 23.

(95 )Euripid. Fragm.

(96 )Probably Socrates means Origen's lost work, known as Stromata, which Jerome (in his Ep. ad Magnum) says was written to show the harmony of the Christian doctrines and the teachings of the philosophers. The description here given does not tally more precisely with any other work of Origen now extant.

(97 )Cyril, Contra Julian. III. (p. 93, ed. Spanheim).

(98 )Julian, Orat. VII.

(99 )Liban. Orat. XVIII. (Oper. I. 625, Reiske).

(100 )paredreuta, term applied to associates on the bench in judicatories.

(101 )Isa. vii. 9 (LXX, kai ean mh pisteushte, oude mh sunhte).

(102 )For a full account of Antinoüs and his relations to Hadrian, see Smith, Dict. of Greek and Raman Biogr. and Mythol., article Antinoüs. The story has been put into literary fiction in the historical novels Antinoüs, by George Taylor (A. Hausrath), and The Emperor, by Georg Ebers.

(103 )It is uncertain what the true reading should be here. In one of the mss. it is 'Adriaj, in another 'Andriaj; according to others 'Adrianoj, or 'Arrianoj. Valesius suggests the substitution of Loukianoj. If this be adopted, then the Alexander suggested is Lucian's Alexander of Abonoteichus. For a lucid and suggestive reproduction of this story, see Froude, Short Studies on Great Subjects, essay on Lucian.

(104 )The mss. and all the Greek texts read Zhnwn, making the name `Pasinicus Zenon, or Zeno. 0' The translation here given assumes the alteration in the process of transcription of a single letter making the original Zhlwn, which probably means the city of Zeleia, on the southeastern coast of the Euxine, famous for a victory of Mithridates over Triarius, the lieutenant of Lucullus, in 67 b.c.

(105 )This word, whose original is Cenon, is inserted by Valesius. If it were omitted, the translation would be, `which to some seems acceptable. 0'

(106 )On the present borders of Turkey and Persia.

(107 )According to Valesius Hippi.

(108 )The name of this city is variously given as Archis, Arca, Arcae, Arcas, Arcaea, Arcena. It lies at the foot of Mount Lebanon. See Joseph. Antiq. V. 1 and de Bello, XII. 13.

(109 )Themist. Orat. V. (p. 80, ed. Harduin).

(110 )Straits between Eubaea and the mainland.

(111 )364 a.d.

(1 )Cf. III. 13.

(2 )Cf. V. 3.

(3 )365 a.d.

(4 )Cf. II. 40.

(5 )Cf. II. 37. Six years previous to the point of time reached by the historian thus far; i.e. 359 a.d.

(6 )Cf. II. 40, end.

(7 )366 a.d.

(8 )Ammianus Marcellinus, Rerum Gestarum, XXVI. ix. 8-10, says that Florentius and Barchalba, after the fight at Nacolia, delivered Procopius bound to Valens, and that Procopius was immediately beheaded, and Florentius and Barchalba soon underwent the same punishment. Philostorgius also (IX.) relates that Procopius was beheaded, and that Florentius, who delivered him to Valens, was burnt.

(9 )Cf. II. 38.

(10 )II. 35, end.

(11 )Sozom. VI. 8, gives the same account; but Philostorgius (V. 3) and Theodoret (H. E. II. 37 and 39) say that Eunomius was made bishop of Cyzicus under the Emperor Constantius immediately after the Synod of Seleucia. He was banished by Valens because he favored the usurper Procopius.

(12 )sxolaioj, defined by Sophocles (Greek Lexicon of the Rom. and Byzantine Periods) as suspended. It appears, however, that among the civil and military officers in the Roman system there were some who bore the title without being concerned in the management of their offices, and that these were termed vacantes and therefore that Socrates is using the Greek equivalent of a Latin term and applying it in ecclesiastical matters as its original was applied in civil and military affairs. Cf., on the position of bishops without churches Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. ii. 14. This system of clerics without charges was abused so much that the Council of Chalcedon (Canon 6) forbade further ordination sine titulo.

(13 )See chap. 3, and on the Eunomians with their subsequent fortunes, V. 24.

(14 )Ammianus Marcellinus (Rerum Gestarum XXVI. viii. 2 seq.) says, `From the walls of Chalcedon they uttered reproaches to him and insultingly reviled him as Sabaiarius. For, sabaia is a poor drink made of wheat or barley in Illyricum (whence Valens came). 0' On the Pannonian or Illyrian origin of Valens, see IV. I. It appears also that the Pannonians were accustomed to live on poor diet in general.

(15 )Sozom. VIII. 21, mentions these baths. Am. Marcellinus (Rerum. Gestarum, XXXI. I. 4) relates that Valens built a bath out of the stones of the walls of Chalcedon. So also Themist. Orat. Decen. ad Valentem, and Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 25; the latter calls it a `subterraneous and aerial river. 0' Zonaras and Cedrenus, however, affirm that the structure built was not a bath, but an aque duct. Cf. Cedrenus, I. 543 (P. 310, B).

(16 )Cedrenus, I. 543 (P. 310, B).

(17 )Dayilej udwr.

(18 )Matt. x. 10.

(19 )Am. Marcellinus (Rerum Gestarum, XXVI. 4. 14), in speaking of Procopius, the usurper, says: `Procopius ...resorted to the Anastasian baths, named from the sister of Constantine 0'; from which it appears that either (1) there were two baths of the same name, or (2) the baths here alluded to were named after Constantine's sister and renamed on the occasion of their being repaired or altered, or (3) that Socrates is in error. From the improbabilities connected with (I) and (2) we may infer that (3) is the right view.

(20 )366 a.d.

(21 )Sozemen (VI. 10) says the same. There were two Valentin ians in the second generation; one a son of Valens, and another the son of Valentinian the Elder. According to Idatius' Fasti, it was the former that was born during the consulate of Gratian and Dagalaifus; so that Socrates was in error here, confusing perhaps the two younger Valentinians. Valesius adduces other reasons proving the same, which it is unnecessary to repeat here.

(22 )367 a.d.

(23 )See II. 43.

(24 )368 a.d.

(25 )If Socrates means to speak with precision here of the offices occupied by these men during the year which his narrative has reached he is mistaken, for Basil became bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia the year following, and Gregory was made bishop, not of Nazianzus at this time, but of Sisima. He did not, however, enter on the duties of this bishopric as he says in his letters.

(26 )Chap. 26.

(27 )See II. 35, and Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 218 seq.

(28 )See I. 5, and note.

(29 )The Patripassians were a sect of the early Church (end of second century), who asserted the identity of the Son with the Father. And, as on being confronted with the question whether it was the Father that suffered on the cross they answered in the affirmative, they were called Patripassians. Their lender was Praxeas. See Tertull. Adv. Praxeam (the whole treatise is meant to be a refutation of this heresy).

(30 )Followers of the well-known Gnostic leader of the second century. For his peculiar views, see Tertull. Adv. Marcionem; Epiphan. Haeres. XLII.; also Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog., under Marcion, and ecclesiastical histories.

(31 )Cf. II. 18 and 29.

(32 )Cf. I. 36; II. 20.

(33 )See note, I. 36.

(34 )See II. 37.

(35 )See II. 37. As it appears from V. 4, Liberius was actually deceived by the artifice.

(36 )Gen. xiv. 14.

(37 )Eunomius adopted the standpoint and also the views of Aëtius and gave them his own name. Briefly his fundamental principle was that the Son is absolutely unlike the Father in substance, and hence a creature among other creatures, a mere man.

(38 )See II. 35.

(39 )Cf. chap. 21.

(40 )Epiphanius Scholasticus reads dekaena for dekaennea; if he be followed, the incumbency of the bishopric of Constantinople by Eudoxius lasted seven years.

(41 )370 a.d.

(42 )Cf. Herodot. VII. 147.

(43 )The kind of church here meant was a memorial structure to a martyr, erected where his relics were deposited, and was called Marturion. See Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VIII. 1.

(44 )The same church which above was called a marturion from its origin, is here called eukthrioj topoj, from its use (`a place of prayer 0').

(45 )Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall, chap. 16, quotes a number of extracts from Sulpicius Severus and Ignatius, showing the honor in which martyrdom was held in the early church, and the eagerness with which it was sought. To check the excess of zeal which was thus manifested, the Council of Elvira, in 306 a.d., passed a canon (its sixtieth) to the following intent: `that if any one should overthrow idols, and should therefore be put to death, inasmuch as this is not written in the Gospel nor found done among the apostles at any time, such a one should not be received among the martyrs. 0'

(46 )Amm. Marcellinus, Rerum Gertarum, XXIX. I. 29 seq.

(47 )Sozomen, VI. 19; Theodoret, H. E. IV. 20.

(48 )371 a.d. But Jerome Chronic. II. (ninth year of Valens), makes the consecration of Athanasius' successor in 373 a.d., and hence also the death of Athanasius himself in the same year. The later date is now universally accepted.

(49 )On the growth of the monastic system, see Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. VII.; on its philosophy, briefly, Bennett, Christian Archaeol. p. 468. Socrates uses Palladius' Historia Lausiaca copiously in this chapter.

(50 )biblion apostolkon. The books of the New Testament came to be divided into the two classes of `gospels 0' and `apostolic epistles, 0' the first being called euaggelion or euaggeia and the second, apostoloj, apostoloi or biblion apostolikon. Cf. Epiph. Haer. XLII. 10. Euthal. Diacon. (Ed. Migné, Vol. LXXXV. col. 720, c.

(51 )1 Cor. vii. 10 seq.

(52 )Gal. iii. 28. What Socrates here says of Ammoun is attributed by Theodoret (H. E. IV. 12) to Pelagius, who afterwards became bishop of Laodicea.

(53 )Athanas. Vit. Anton. 60.

(54 )Cf. chap. 25.

(55 )According to the LXX.

(56 )Cf. Palladius, Hist. Lausiaca, chap. 86. But Palladius says that Evagrius was ordained by Gregory of Nyssa, not of Nazianzus. Cf. Sozomen, VI. 30.

(57 )Palladius calls this work 9Iera `Sacred [matter]. 0' Hist. Lausiaca, 86.

(58 )Cf. Coteler. Eccl. Gr. Mon. 3. 59, containing also other fragments of Evagrius.

(59 )Acts ix. 15.

(60 )Cf. Ezra iv. 10, Ezra iv. 11.

(61 )Matt. xix. 21.

(62 )Parembole is a village near Alexandria, mentioned by Athanasius in his second Apol. against the Arians, who names Macarius as its presbyter.

(63 )See above, III. 7.

(64 )Matt. xiii. 24.

(65 )Ex. xxvi. 35.

(66 )Hist. Lausiaca (Vol. XXXIV. in Migné's Patrologia Graeca).

(67 )Heb. xi. 36-38.

(68 )Heb. xi. 40.

(69 )Matt. viii. 29.

(70 )Sozom. III. 15; Theodoret, IV. 26; Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. 4; Jerom. de Script. Eccl. 109.

(71 )Mentioned by Jerome, adv. Rufinum, 1.

(72 )For full accounts of the lives of these eminent men, see Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog., and the sources and literature therein referred to.

(73 )Himerius, a native of Prusias (mod. Broussa) in Bithynia, flourished about 360 a.d. as a sophist under Julian the Apostate. He published various discourses, which, according to Photius, contained insidious attacks on Christianity. Cf. Eunapius, p. 153, under title Prohaeresius; Photius, Bibl. Cod. 165.

(74 )Prohaeresius was a native of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and taught in Athens a short time before Libanius. Cf. Eunapius, Prohaeresius, par. 129-162.

(75 )This is doubted by Valesius on the ground that Gregory in his autobiography (in verse) says that he was thirty years of age when he left Athens, where his friends wished him to stay and teach rhetoric; but if he stayed at Athens until the thirtieth year of his age, it is not likely that he Could have studied with Libanius after that time. So also Rufinus, H. E. II. 9.

(76 )Cf. chap. 7 of the present book.

(77 )Rufinus (H. E. II. 9) says this. But from Gregory's own works (Orat. VIII.) it a pears that he was not made bishop of Nazianzus but assistant to his father, and on the express condition that he should not succeed his father. He was first consecrated bishop of Sasimi by Basil the Great, from thence transferred to Constantinople, but resigned that bishopric (V. 7) and retired to Nazianzus, where he remained bishop until he chose his successor there.

(78 )Sozomen (VI. 16) says that Valens came from Antioch to Caesarea and ordered Basil to be brought before the prefect of the praetorium. This account agrees better with what both Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory or Nyssa say of this experience of Basil.

(79 )On Gregory Thaumaturgus in general, see Euseb. H. E. VI. 30.

(80 )Cf. II. 11.

(81 )On the Novatians and their schism, see Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. I. p. 450, 451; Neander, Hist. of Christ. Ch. Vol. I. p. 237-248. On Socrates' attitude toward Novatianism, see Introd. p. ix. Cf. also Euseb. H. E. VI. 43.

(82 )His right name was Novatian, although the Greek writers call him uniformly Navatus, ignoring or confusing him with another person whose name is strictly Novatus. Cf. Jerome, Scriptor. Eccles. LXX.; also Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.

(83 )This was the great Seventh Persecution, and the first which historians agree in calling strictly `general. 0' It took place in 249-251 a.d., and consisted in a systematic effort to uproot Christianity throughout the empire. Many eminent Christians were put to death during its course, and others, among whom was Origen, were tortured. Cf. Origen, Contra Celsum, III.; Gregory of Nyssa, Vita Gregori Thaumaturg. III.; Euseb. H. E. VI. 40-42.

(84 )Cf. I. 10.

(85 )1 John v. 16, 1 John v. 17.

(86 )Cf. I. 8 and note.

(87 )The accuracy of this statement is disputed by Valesius, who asserts that the Novatians wrote a book entitledThe Martyrdom of Novatian, but that this book was full of false statements and fables, and had been disproved by Eulogius, bishop of Alexandria in the sixth book of his treatise Against the Novatians. Besides in this Martyrdom of Novatian the founder of the sect was not represented as suffering martyrdom, but simply as being a `confessor. 0' Cf. I. 8, note 12.

(88 )Let it be noted that Novatian was a native of Phrygia and naturally had many followers in that province.

(89 )V. 21.

(90 )Socrates follows Rufinus here (cf. Rufin. H. E. II. 10; but Jerome, Chronicon, puts the consecration of Damasus as bishop of Rome in the third year of Valentinian's reign, i.e. in 367. Cf. also Clinton, Fasti Rom. Ann. 367.

(91 )Am. Marcellinus (Rerum Gestarum, XXVII. 3. 12, 13) says that during the disturbance one hundred and thirty-seven citizens were killed in the course of a single day.

(92 )Damusus was a Spaniard by race, native of Mantua, patron of Jerome in his biblical researches. Cf. Jerome, ad Damas. Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.

(93 )On the illegality of ordination without a church, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. 6. 8. Cf. Gregory Nazianz. Carm. de Vita.

(94 )Synchronization of the events attending the accession of Damasus and Ambrose, the former in Rome, the latter at Milan, is dependent on Rufinus. Cf. H. E. II. 11. The events of this chapter more properly fall within the time reached by Socrates, i.e. 374 a.d. (see chap. 29, note 1). Hence rightly seven years later than the events of the preceding chapter.

(95 )A Roman by race, born in 333 a.d., turned to ecclesiastical and literary pursuits in the manner described in this chapter. Cf. Sozom. VI. 24; Theodoret, H. E. IV. 6; Rufinus, H. E. II. 11.

(96 )375 a.d.

(97 )Rather Pannonia.

(98 )Baronius (Am.IV. 272) and Valesius in this passage agree in looking upon this whole story as a groundless fiction which some pretended eyewitness palmed off on Socrates. The law mentioned here is never mentioned by any other historian; no vestige of it is found in any of the codes; on the contrary, according to Bingham (Christ. Antiq. XVI. 11), bigamy and polygamy were treated with the utmost severity in the ancient Church, and the Roman law was very much against them; furthermore, Am. Marcellinus (XXX.) says that Valentinian was remarkable for his chastity, both at home and abroad, and Zosimus (IV. 19) that his second wife had been married to Magnentius previously [and hence was not a virgin as here stated] and that he married her after the death of his first wife; all of which considerations taken together render it historically certain that the story is not true.

(99 )Cf. V. 2; VI. 1.

(100 )This oration of Themistius is extant in a Latin translation by Dudithius appended to G. Remo's Themisttii Phil. orationes sex augustales, and entitled, ad Valentem, pro Libertate relligionis. The passage alluded to by Socrates is found in Dudithius as follows: `Wherefore, in regard God has removed himself at the greatest distance from our knowledge, and does not humble to the capacity of our understanding; it is a sufficient argument that he does not require one and the same law and rule of religion from all persons, but leaves every man a license and faculty concerning himself, according to his own, not another man's, liberty and choice. Whence it also happens that a greater admiration of the Deity, and a more religious veneration of his eternal majesty, is engendered in the minds of men. For it usually comes to pass that we loathe and disregard those things which are readily apparent and prostrated to every understanding. 0'

(101 )The fullest and best ancient authors on the origin and history of the Goths are Procopius of Caesarea (Historia, IV.-VIII., de Bello Italico adversus Gothos gesto), Jornandes (de Getarum [Gothorum] origine et rebus gestis), and Isidore Hispalensis (Historia Gothorum). On the conversion of the Goths to Christianity, see Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. II. p. 125-129, and Schaff; Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. III. p. 640, 641.

(102 )For a slightly differing account of the conversion of the Goths and the labors of Ulfilas, see Philostorgius, II. 5.

(103 )By selecting from the Greek and Latin alphabets such characters as appeared to him to best suit the sounds of his native language. For a similar invention of an alphabet as a consequence of the introduction of Christianity, compare the Slavonic invented by Cyril and Methodius and a great number of instances in the history of modern missions.

(104 )Cf. Deut. xxxii. 7.

(105 )376 a.d.

(106 )The name Saracen (Sarakhnoj, perhaps from the Arabic Sharkeen `Orientals 0') was used vaguely at first; the Greek writers of the first centuries gave it to the Bedouin Arabs of Eastern Arabia, while others used it to designate the Arab races of Syria and Palestine, and others the Berber of North Eastern Africa, who later conquered Spain and Sicily and invaded France. The name became very familiar in Europe during the period of the Crusades. On Saracens, consult the interesting fiftieth chapter of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

(107 )2 Tim. ii. 24.

(108 )378 a.d.

(1 )The views here expressed show a crude conception of the vital relation between church and state. The very tone of apology which tinges their expression is based on a misconception of the idea of history. But Socrates was not below his age in this respect. See Introd., p. xiii.

(2 )1 Tim. v. 24.

(3 )For the risks of this method, see IV. 31 and note.

(4 )See Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chap. 26.

(5 )Cf. IV. 36.

(6 )Cf. IV. 7.

(7 )Cf. II. 18.

(8 )Cf. I. 22.

(9 )379 a.d.

(10 )Cf. IV. I.

(11 )For an account of this deputation and their feigned subscription to the Nicene Creed, through which they prevailed upon Liberius to receive them into the communion of the church, see IV. 12.

(12 )Cf. III. 9, and IV. 2.

(13 )See above, chap. 3.

(14 )In its eighth canon the Council of Nicaea, looking forward to the reconciliation of such Novatians or Cathari as might desire to return to the Catholic Church, enjoins that `when in villages or in cities there are found only clergy of their own sect (Cathari), the oldest of these clerics shall remain among the clergy, and in their position; but if a Catholic priest or bishop be found among them, it is evident that the bishop of the Catholic Church should preserve the episcopal dignity whilst any one who has received the title of bishop from the so-called Cathari would only have a right to the hot, ors accorded to priests, unless the bishop thinks it right to let him enjoy the honor of the title. If he does not desire to do so let him give him the place of rural bishop (chorepiscopus) or priest, in order that he may appear to be altogether a part of the clergy, and that there may not be two bishops in the same city. 0' Cf. Hefele, Hist. of the Councils, Vol. I. p. 410; Bingham, Christ. Antiq. II. 13. 1 and 2.

(15 )Theodoret (H. E. V. 3) gives a different account of the way in which the dispute between Melitius and Paulinus came to an end, giving the glory to Melitius for the eirenic overture above described, and representing Paulinus as constrained to accept it against his will by the political head of the community.

(16 )Cf. III. 9; Sozom. III. 15, and V. 12.

(17 )So also Gregory Nazianz. Carmen de Vita Sua, 595. `The grace of the Spirit sent us, many shepherds and members of the flock inviting. 0' See, however, on Gregory's episcopate at Nazianzus, IV. 26 and note.

(18 )Cf. Zosimus, IV.; Sozom. VII. 4; Am. Marcellinus, XXXI. 9 and 10.

(19 )Cf.Zosimus, IV. 39, on the dangerous illness of Theodosius. On delayed baptism, called `clinic, 0' see I. 39, note 2. Evidently baptism was not thought essential to one's title to be called a Christian. Theodosius and Constantine were both considered Christians and `professed the homoousian faith, and yet they both postponed their baptism to what they believed to be the latest moments of their lives. 0'

(20 )380 a.d.

(21 )It appears from several places in Gregory's writings (cf. Somn. de Anastasia, Ad Popul. Anast. and Carmen de Vita Sua, 1709) that he himself had used the name of Anastasia in speaking of the church, so that Socrates' statement that it was so called afterwards must be taken as inaccurate. It also appears that Gregory gave the name Anastasia to the house which he used as a church, and meant to signify by the name (Anastation = Resurrection) the resurrection of the orthodox community of Constantinople. It is possible, of course, that Socrates here means that the emperors later adopted the name given by Gregory on the occasion of building a large church in place of the original chapel. See also on Gregory's stay at Constantinople Sozom. VII. 5; Philostorgius, IX. 19; Theodoret, V. 8.

(22 )Cf. Philostorgius, IX. 10 and 14, whence it appears that Demophilus was the Arian bishop who succeeded Eudoxius in Constantinople.

(23 )Matt. x. 23.

(24 )A specimen of allegorical interpretation due to the influence of Origen. See Farrar, Hist. of Interpretation, p. 183 seq. For similar cases of allegorizing, see Huet, Origeniana passim, and De la Rue, Origenis Opera, App. 240-244.

(25 )IV. 37.

(26 )The same consulate as at the end of chap. 6; i.e. 380 a.d.

(27 )Cf. parallel account in Sozom. VII. 7-9; Theodoret, H. E. V. 8. The Synod of Constantinople was the second great oecumenical or general council. Its title as an oecumenical council has not been disputed, although no Western bishop attended. Baronius, however (Annal. 381, notes 19, 20), attempts to prove, but unsuccessfully, that Pope Damasus summoned the council. For a full account of the council, see Hefele, History of the Councils, Vol. II. p. 340-374.

(28 )Sozomen adds that Cyril was previously a follower of Macedonius, and had changed his mind at this time. Cf. Sozom. VII. 7.

(29 )381 a.d.

(30 )Cf. IV. 12.

(31 )See above, chap. 7.

(32 )See Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. 2. 8 for other examples illustrating this method of electing bishops.

(33 )Canon 3 of the Synod; see Hefele, History of the Councils, Vol. II. p. 357. The canon is given by Socrates entire and in the original words. Valesius holds that the primacy conferred by this canon on the Constantinopolitan see was one of honor merely, and involved no prerogatives of patriarchal or metropolitan jurisdiction. For a full discussion of its significance, see Hefele, as above. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 confirmed the above action in the following words: `We following in all things the decision of the Holy Fathers, and acknowledging the canon of the one hundred and fifty bishops also determine and decree the same things respecting the privileges of the most holy city of Constantinople, New Rome. For the Fathers properly gave the primacy to the throne of the elder Rome. 0' Canon 28.

(34 )Canon 2. The words `patriarch, 0' however, and `patriarchate 0' are not used in the canon. According to Sophocles (Greek Lexicon) the modern sense of these words was introduced at the close of the fourth century. Valesius holds that the sixth canon of the Nicene Council had given sanction to the principle of patriarchal authority; but Beveridge is of opinion that patriarchs were first constituted by the second general council. Hefele takes substantially the same position as Valesius. See discussion of the subject in Hefele, Hist. of the Councils, Vol. I. p. 389 seq.

(35 )Cf. IV. 27. On Gregory of Nyssa, one of the most prominent of the ancient Fathers, see Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.; Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Church, Vol. III. p. 903 et seq., and sources mentioned in the work.

(36 )Constantine made an advance on his predecessors by dividing the management of the empire among four prefects of the praetorium, which they had committed to two officers of that name. These four were apportioned as follows: one to the East, a second to Illyricum, a third to Italy, and a fourth to Gaul. Each of these prefects had a number of dioceses under him, and each diocese was a combination of several provinces into one territory. In conformity with this model of civil government the church abandone gradually and naturally its metropolitan administration of the provinces and adopted the diocesan. The exact time of the change is, of course, uncertain, it having come about gradually. It is safe, however, to put it between the Nicene and Constantinopolitan councils. The Fathers in the latter of those councils seem to find it in practical operation and confirm it (Cf. Canon 2 of the councils), decreeing explicitly that it should be unlawful for clerics to perform any office or transact any business in their official character outside of the bounds of the diocese wherein they were placed, just as it was unlawful for the civil officer to intermeddle in any affair outside the limits of his civil diocese.

(37 )II. 26.

(38 )Socrates according to his custom omits all mention of events in the Western Church. Some of them are quite important; e.g. the council of Aquileia called by the Emperor Gratian. See Hefele, Hist. of Church Councils, Vol. II. p. 315 seq.

(39 )This was in 382 a.d. as appears from the Fasti of Idatius. Cf. also Zosimus, IV. 34, and Jerome, Chronicon.

(40 )383 a.d.

(41 )For a further account of Sisinnius, see VI. 22.

(42 )Referring no doubt to the Tower of Babel and the dispersion of its builders, Gen. xi. 8.

(43 )Matt. xx. 16.

(44 )Below, chap. 15.

(45 )Cf. Zosimus, IV. 35 seq.

(46 )Cf. IV. 30.

(47 )The account of Gratian's death given by Zosimus, though not inconsistent with that of Socrates, does not contain the details given by Socrates. Andragathius is simply said to have pursued Gratian, and overtaking him near the bridge to have slain him. Cf. Zosimus, IV. 35 end.

(48 )383 a.d.

(49 )384 a.d. Honorius afterwards shared the empire with Arcadius, reigning in the West from 398 to 423 a.d. But although the whole of this period comes within the time of Socrates' history, he does not mention Honorius but once again before his death.

(50 )Having been bishop of the Novatians for forty years; see chap. 21.

(51 )385 a.d.

(52 )Chap. 23.

(53 )Being in the ninety-eighth year of his age as appears from VII. 6.

(54 )Zosimus, however, says (IV. 37) that the embassy of Maximus was received by Theodosius.

(55 )Rather Aquileja as appears from Zosimus and other historians.

(56 )388 a.d.

(57 )The same account is given in substance by Zosimus, IV. 46, who also confirms the statements of Socrates concerning the end of Andragathius. Valesius, however, relying on Idatius' Fasti, asserts that Maximus was put to death on the 28th of July, not on the 27th of August.

(58 )The churches were considered recognized places of asylum. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VIII. 10 and 11.

(59 )Theodoret (H. E. V. 23) says that there was a double violation of order in the ordination of Evagrius; first in that he was ordained by his predecessor, and secondly in that he was ordained by one bishop, whereas the canon required that not less than three should take part in an episcopal ordination.

(60 )Cf. VI. 9; also chaps. 5 and 2 of this book.

(61 )In 386 a.d.

(62 )See III. 2.

(63 )Cf Introd. p. 8.

(64 )piqhkou, `the ape-god. 0'

(65 )There are several cruciform signs among the Egyptian hieroglyphics, as e.g. the simple determinative X, meaning `to cross, 0' `to multiply, 0' `to mix 0' (see Birch, Egyptian Texts, p. 99); or the syllabic , phonetically equivalent to am (see Birch, ibid. p. 101); or the cross with a ring at the head : or the still more elaborate (see Brugsh, Thesaurus Inscript. Egyptiacarum, p. 20; also Champollion, Grammaire Egyptienne, XII. p. 365, 440). To which of these Socrates refers it is impossible to say from their mere form. They occur commonly and we must infer that the discovery described in this passage is not the first bringing into light of the sign mentioned, but its occurrence in the Serapeum. The third of the above signs is usually interpreted as `life 0' either `happy 0' or `immortal, 0' which agrees with the meaning given to the cruciform sign here mentioned.

(66 )I Cor. ii. 7, 1 Cor. ii. 8; Eph. iii. 5, Eph. iii. 6;; Col. i. 26.

(67 )Acts xvii. 23.

(68 )Num. xxiv.

(69 )John xi. 51.

(70 )In the earlier periods of Roman history the government undertook to regulate the price of corn, so as to protect the poorer classes; in time of scarcity the government was to purchase the grain and sell it at a moderate price. This provision was gradually changed into a dispensation of public charity, at first by the sale of the grain below cost, and afterwards by the gratuitous distribution of the same. Some time before the reign of Aurelian, 270-275 a.d., the distribution of grain seems to have given place to the distribution of bread. Such distribution was made after the reign of Constantine at Constantinople as well as at Rome. See Smith, Dict. of the Greek and Rom. Antiq., art. Leges Frumentariae.

(71 )Originally this name was applied to all farmers-general of the public revenues. See Smith, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Antiq., art. Manceps.

(72 )Lit. = `bells. 0' Cf. Smith, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Antiq., art. Sistrum.

(73 )From a law of Constantine's (Cod. 9. 30) whose genuineness is, however, disputed, the punishment of adultery was death. The same punishment appears to have been inflicted in specific cases mentioned by Am. Marcellinus. Rerum Gestarum, XXVII. 1. 28. Whence it appears that Socrates must have been misinformed concerning the facts mentioned here.

(74 )391 a.d.

(75 )On account of which he was called the Penitentiary. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XVIII. 3.

(76 )`The sacerdotal catalogue or order, clerical order, the clergy in general. 0' See Sophocles, Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byzant. Periods.

(77 )On the discipline of the ancient church, see Bennett, Christ. Archael. p. 380 seq.

(78 )See Euseb. H. R. VI. 43.

(79 )The regulation of the earliest church was expressed as follows: `If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon be found guilty of fornication ...let him be deposed. 0' Apostol. Can. 25.

(80 )Although the plural is used here, the reference is, no doubt, to the sacrament of the Lord's supper only. The mysteries recognized by Theodorus Studites, Epist. II. 165, are six; i.e. baptism, eucharist, unction, orders, monastic tonsure, and the mystery of death or funeral ceremonies. The Greek Church of modern times enumerates seven: baptism, unction, eucharist, orders, penitence, marriage, and extreme unction.

(81 )Cf. I. I; II. I.

(82 )Eph. v. 11. Valesius rightly infers from this answer of Socrates to Eudaemon that the former was not a Novatian. For he disapproves of the abolition of the penitentiary bishop's office, whereas as a Novatian he would have been against its institution before it was established, and in favor of its abolition afterwards. The Novatians never admitted either of penitence or of the penitentiary bishop.

(83 )See chap. 23 of this book.

(84 )See chap. 10, above.

(85 )The main reason adduced for considering Socrates a Novatian is his peculiarly detailed account of the Novatian heresy, and the nearness in which he puts it to the orthodox faith. See Introd. p. ix and chap. 19 of this book, note 8; also II. 38 and VI. 21.

(86 )See above, chap. 12, note 2. This was in 384 a.d.

(87 )IV. 9 and 12 of this book.

(88 )On he irregularity of this action, see chap. 15 above, note 1. Sisinnius is again mentioned in VI. 1. 31; VII. 6 and 12.

(89 )Cf. IV. 28.

(90 )Probably the modern Angora. Valesius however, had conjecturally substituted the word Sangarum in this place, supposing that the place named was a town on the banks of the river Sangarius.

(91 )Cf. VII. 5 and 12.

(92 )Gal. iv. 21.

(93 )Gal. v. 13.

(94 )Gal. iv. 10.

(95 )Col. ii. 16, Col. ii. 17.

(96 )Heb. vii. 12.

(97 )o apostoloj <\=85_ta euaggelia, the two parts of the New Testament, speaking generally. See Sophocles' Greek Lec. of the Rom. and Byzant. Periodj under apostoloj and euaggelion.

(98 )Gal. v. I.

(99 )Matt. xxvi. 2; Mark xiv. 1; Luke xxii. 1.

(100 )tessareskaidekatitai, those who observed Easter on the fourteenth day of the lunar month (Nisan of the Jewish calendar). On the Quartodeciman controversy, see Schürer, de Centroversiis Paschalibus secundo post Christum natum Saeculo exortis; also, Salmon, Introduction to the New Testament, 3 ed. p. 252-267.

(101 )Irenaeus, Haer. III. 3, 4.

(102 )Polycarp suffered martyrdom in 156 a.d. (see Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, Part II. Vol. I. p. 629-702, containing conclusive proof of this, as well as a history of the question); whence it appears that it was under Antoninus Pius that he died. Valesius therefore infers that Socrates meant to speak of Irenaeus as suffering martyrdom under Gordian, and not of Polycarp. If this be the case, we must assume a serious corruption of the text, or an unparalleled confusion in Socrates.

(103 )Euseb. V. 24.

(104 )Josephus, Antiq. III. 10. The passage is worth quoting entire, running as follows: `In the month Xanthicus, which is called Nisan by us, and is the beginning of the year, on the fourteenth day of the moon, while the sun is in the sign of Aries (the Ram), for during this month we were freed from bondage under the Egyptians, he has also appointed that we should sacrifice each year the sacrifice which, as we went out of Egypt, they commanded us to offer, it being called the Passover. 0'

(105 )The Audiani, who averred that the Synod of Nicaea first fixed the time of Easter.

(106 )Euseb. Life of Constant. III. 19.

(107 )Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XX. v.

(108 )Baronius (Ann. 57 and 391 a.d.) finds two mistakes here: first, in the assertion that the Romans fasted three weeks only before Easter, and second, in the assertion that during those three weeks Saturdays were excepted. Cf. also Ceillier, Hist. des Auteurs Sacrés et Ecclesiast. Vol. VIII. p. 523, 524. Valesius, however, quotes Pope Leo (fourth sermon on the Lent Fast) and Venerable Beda to prove that Socrates' assertion concerning the exception of Saturday may be defended. See Quesnell, de Fejunio Sabbati; Bingham, Origin. Eccl. XXI. I. 14; also Beveridge, de Fejunio Quadragesimali.

(109 )Tessarakosth = Lent; the Latin equivalent is, of course, Quadragesima.

(110 )Gen. i. 20.

(111 )Valesius rightly conjectures that very few observed this mode of fasting during Lent, basing his opinion on the order of worship and various deprecatory expressions in ancient authors with respect to it. It may be noted that the Mohammedan Fast of Ramadan is observed on the same principle and in a similar manner. The fast begins with the dawn of the sun and continues until sunset, being complete for that space of time. With the setting of the sun, however, every person is at liberty to eat as he may please.

(112 )ounacewn. Sophocles (Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byzant. Period) gives the following senses to the word: 1. `Religious meeting 0'; 2. `Religious service 0'; 3. `Place of meeting 0'; 4. `Congregation. 0' To these we may add on the authority of Casaubon (Exercit. XVI. ad Annal. Baronii, No. 42) 5. `The celebration of the Eucharist. 0' It is in the second sense given by Sophocles that it is used here.

(113 )i.e. Saturday. Sunday is never called `the Sabbath 0' by the ancient Fathers and historians, but `the Lord's day 0' (kuriakh). Sophocles (Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byzant. Period) gives three senses to the word; viz., 1. `The Sabbath 0' [of the Jews] (so in the LXX and Jewish writers). 2. `The week. 0' 3. `Saturday. 0' Many early Christians, however, continued to observe the Jewish Sabbath along with the first day of the week. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XX. 3.

(114 )prosferontej, freely = `celebrating the Eucharist. 0' Irenaeus, Contra Haeres. XVIII. 3; Euseb. Demonstr. Evan. X. 1; Athan. Apol. Contr. Arian, 28.

(115 )`If any bishop ...does not fast on Wednesday or Friday let him be deposed. 0' So Apost. Can. 69. These two days are universally joined together by the Greek and Roman Catholic Churches.

(116 )Cf. Rom. viii. 3.

(117 )upoboleij, lit. = `prompters, 0' whose duty it was to read the Psalms which the people chanted.

(118 )On the celibacy of the clergy and its gradual growth, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. 5; Apost. Can. 51, and Council of Gangra, Can, 1 (Hefele, Hist. Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 325 seq.).

(119 )A novel on the adventures of Theagenes and Chariclea. The Heliodorus who wrote the Ethiopica was, according to Photius, Biblioth. chap. 94, a native of Phoenicia, hence not the same as the bishop of Tricca. Others ascribe the Ethiopica to Heliodorus the Sophist, who flourished under the Emperor Hadrian.

(120 )According to the Apost. Constit. (II. 57) a church should be built so as to face the east. This regulation was generally followed, but there were exceptions. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VIII. 3. 2.

(121 )i.e. the catholic or orthodox church; used perhaps in the same way as the expression `established church 0' in modern times.

(122 )Apost. Can. 64, provides that no cleric or layman shall fast on the Sabbath day (Saturday, see note 22, above), the former on pain of being deposed, the latter, of being excommunicated. It appears, however, that the Roman church observed the day as a fast, while the Greek church held it to be a feast. Socrates, however, seems to contradict the statement he had made above (see note 17) that at Rome Saturdays and Sundays were excepted from the list of fasting days in Lent. From Augustine's Epistles, 36. 31 et al., it appears that he fasted on Saturday and regarded this the regular and proper course to be pursued, and actually pursued by members of the church. Hence the present statement of Socrates must be taken as correct to the exclusion of the former.

(123 )Apost. Can. 17. `He who has been twice married after baptism ... cannot become bishop, presbyter, or deacon, or any other [cleric] included in the sacerdotal list. 0'

(124 )Acts xv. 23-39. The quotation is here from the Authorized Version. The Revised has it slightly altered. We subjoin it for comparison. `The apostles and the elder brethren unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greeting: Forasmuch as we have heard that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment; it seemed good unto us, having come to one accord, to choose out men and send them unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves also shall tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which if ye keep yourselves, it shall be well with you. Fare ye well. 0'

(125 )Gal. iv. 4.

(126 )See above, chap. 20.

(127 )Cf. Theodoret, Haetel. Fabal. IV. 4; also Sozomen (probably dependent on Socrates), VII. 17.

(128 )yaqurion, a species of cake; hence yaquropwlhj, `cake-seller. 0'

(129 )Sozomen (VII. 17) adds that Selenas was a secretary of Ulfilas and had been promoted to be his successor.

(130 )419 a.d.

(131 )Cf. IV. 7 and 13.

(132 )Apost. Can. 50 reads: `If any bishop or presbyter does not perform the one initiation with three immersions, but with one immersion only into the death of the Lord, let him be deposed. 0' Also the Second General Synod (that of Constantinople, 381) in its 7th Canon passed the following: `But the Eunomians, who only baptize with one immersion, and the Montanists, who are here called Phrygians, and the Sabellians, who teach the doctrine of the Fatherhood of the Son ...(if they wish to be joined to the Orthodox faith) we receive as heathen; on the first day we make them Christians, on the second, catechumens, &c. 0' See Hefele, Hist. of the Church Councils, Vol. II. p. 367, 368.

(133 )Epiphan. Ancoratus, 13. Photius calls the Ancoratus a synopsis of the treatise of Epiphanius on Heresies (Biblioth. 123). The subject here referred to was treated by Epiphanius in Haer. LXVI. and LXVIII.

(134 )This account of Arbogastes and Eugenius is also given by Zosimus (IV. 53-58), who adds that Arbogastes was a Frank; and also by Philortorgius (XI. 1), who says that Eugenius was a pagan.

(135 )393 a.d.

(136 )Cf. Zosimus, IV. 57.

(137 )Cf. Zosimus, IV. 58, who gives the additional item that the sun was eclipsed during this battle.

(138 )394 a.d.

(139 )395 a.d.

(140 )There is some doubt as to the length of Theodosius' life; most of the ancient historians (Sozomen, Theophanes, Cedrenus) agree with Socrates in giving it as sixty years. Am. Marcellinus Rerum Gestarum, XXIX. 6. 15, and Victor, Epit. XLVII., leave the impression that he was fifty.

(1 )Cf. V. Int.

(2 )The comic poets, e.g. Menander, Plautus, Terence.

(3 )Cf. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Rom. Empire, chap. 29.

(4 )V. 8.

(5 )See Bennett, Christian Archaeology, p. 210 seq., and Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XXII. 1 and 2, for details on the burial of the dead in the early Church.

(6 )Zosimus (V. 5) says Rufinus invited Alaric and the Goths to invade the Roman territories; Valesius reconciles Socrates' and Zosimus' statements by assuming that they are partial and supplementary to one another; Rufinus, according to him, invited both the Huns and the Goths.

(7 )V. 10, 21, et al.

(8 )Cf. V. 8.

(9 )397 a.d.

(10 )The well-known bishop of Antioch and Constantinople, who on account of his extraordinary gift of eloquence was surnamed Chrysostom, `the Golden-mouth. 0' See The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. IX. Prolegomena on the life and writings of St. John Chrysostom by Dr. Schaff. Also cf. ancient authorities: Palladius, Dialogus historicus de vita et conversatione beati Foannis Chrysostomi cum Theodoro Ecclesiae Romanaae diacono; Jerome, de Viris Illustribus, c. 129; Sozomen, VIII. 2-23; Theodoret, H. E. V. 27-36; and modern Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.; F. W. Farrar, Lives of the Fathers, Vol. II. p. 460-527, and many monograms and longer or briefer notices in the standard church histories.

(11 )Cf. Theodoret, V. 22, under this Theophilus the pagan temples of Mithras and Serapis were attacked, as related above in V. 16 and 17. For a fuller notice of Theophilus, see Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.

(12 )Cf. chap. 9 of this book.

(13 )Cf. Zosimus, V. 3, 8, 10, 17, 18, and Eunapius, Fragm. 53, 56.

(14 )398 a.d.

(15 )Sozomen (VIII. 2) also says that Chrysostom went from the school of Libanius to a private life instead of the legal profession as was expected of him, but from some utterances of Libanius, as well as from Chrysostom's own representation, de Sacerdot. I. 1. 4, it appears that he had spent some time in the practice of the law.

(16 )It is not certain who this Evagrius was. Valesius thinks he was the presbyter of that name mentioned by Jerome, de Scriptor. Eccl.

(17 )It has been supposed by some that this was the Theodore addressed in II. 1, VI. Int. and VII. 47; but not with good reason. Cf. note 4, p. xii. of Int. On Theodore of Mopsuestia, the great `Exegete 0' and theologian, see Smith & Wace; also Sieffert, Theodor. Mopsuestenus Vet. Test. Sobrie Interpret. Vindex and H. B. Swete, Theodori Episc. Mopsuestiae in Epp. B. Pauli. Commentarii.

(18 )Sozomen also attests the simplicity of Diodorus' interpretations of the Old Testament. The principle which he adopted, of seeking for a literal and historical meaning in preference to the allegorical and mystical interpretations attached to the Old Testament by Origen and the Alexandrians, became the corner-stone of the Antiochian system of interpretation as elaborated by his pupils Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret.

(19 )qewriaj lit. `speculations 0' by which are evidently meant the allegorical and subjective or contemplative explanations of the Alexandrians.

(20 )`Socrates and Kurtz (in the tenth edition of his Kirchengeschichte, I, 223) confound this Basil with Basil the Great of Cappadocia, who was eighteen years older than Chrysostom, and died in 379. Chrysostom's friend was probably (as Baronius and Montfaucon conjecture) identical with Basil, bishop of Raphanea in Syria, near Antioch, who attended the Council of Constantinople in 381. 0' Comp. Venables in Smith and Wace; Schaff in Prolegomena to Vol. IX. of The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, p. 6, note 2. The conjecture of Baronius is assented to also by Valesius.

(21 )According to Baronius, this Zeno was bishop of Tyre, but Valesius makes an ingenious objection to this view, and asserts that some other city must have been the real see of Zeno.

(22 )This treatise, commonly termed de Sacerdotio, and the Homilies are the most famous of Chrysostom's works; for a full account, as well as translation, of these works, see Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. IX.

(23 )These were women who lived in the houses of the clergy as sisters, and exercised themselves in works of piety and charity. At a very early period, however, scandal seems to have arisen from. this practice, and strong measures were repeatedly adopted by the Church for their suppression. Paul of Samosata was, according to Eusebius (H. E. VII. 30), deposed partly for keeping these sisters in his house. They were called Syneisactae (Suneisaktoi). Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XVII. 5. 20, and Council of Nicaea, Can. 3. Hefele, Hist. of Ch. Councils, Vol. I. p. 379.

(24 )These reasons are given by Palladius as follows: `He was accustomed to eat alone, as I partially know, for these reasons: first, he drank no wine ...secondly, his stomach was, on account of certain infirmities, irregular, so that often the food prepared for him was repugnant, and other food not put before him was desired. Again he at times neglected to eat, lengthening out his meal until evening, sometimes being absorbed in ecclesiastical cares and sometimes in contemplation; ...but it is a custom with table companions if we do not relish the same articles of food which they do, or laugh at insignificant make this an occasion of ill-speech. 0' Palladius, de Vita S. Foannis, 12.

(25 )Sozomen (VIII. 7) says that this law was rescinded very soon afterwards.

(26 )See also Chrysostom, Orat. in Eutropium, 1. 3 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. IX. p. 251). From these statements it appears that Zosimus is in error when he says (V. 18) that Eutropius was seized in violation of the law of sanctuary and taken out of the church. Chrysostom assigns his seizure to a time when he had left the church for some purpose or other.

(27 )ambwn, high reading-desk from which the Scriptures were recited, situated toward the middle of the church and distinguished from the altar, where the main service of worship was chanted. Bishops were accustomed to preach from the steps of the altar (cf. Bingham Christ. Antiq. VIII. 4. 5); but Chrysostom, on account of his little stature, as some say, used the `ambôn 0' as a pulpit.

(28 )399 a.d.

(29 )Cf. Vergil, Georg. I. 488, `Nec diri toties arsere cometae 0'; and Am. X. 272-274.

(30 )Cf. an account of Gaïnas and his rebellion in Zosimus, V. 18-22.

(31 )On the surname of `Scholasticus, 0' see Introd. p. ix. note 20, also Macar. Homil. 15, §24. On Eusebius Scholasticus, see Smith and Wace, Eusebius (134) Scholasticus.

(32 )438 a.d.

(33 )400 a.d.

(34 )401 a.d.

(35 )By Audius or Audaeus, the founder of the Audian heresy. Cf. Epiphan. Haer. LXX.; Walch, Histor. der Ketzereien, Vol. III. p. 300; also Iselin, Audios und die Audianer, in Fahrbücher für Protestant. Theologie, April, 1890; p. 298 seq.

(36 )On the dispute concerning Origen's views, see below, chap. 13.

(37 )There were two cities named Hermopolis in Egypt; the most important of these in the Thebaid was known as Hermopolis proper, whereas the other (the one here alluded to) was situated in lower Egypt and designated Hermopolis parva.

(38 )2 Cor. xi. 6.

(39 )Qeoforoj = `borne by God, 0' used in the sense of being `possessed by a god, 0' `inspired, 0' by aesch. Agam. 1150; but here `borne in the arms of God 0' or `carried by God, 0' and applied to Ignatius because tradition made him the very child whom the Saviour `took up in his arms, 0' and set in the midst of his disciples. Cf. Mark ix. 36; to be distinguished therefore from Qeoforoj, `bearing 0' or `carrying a god. 0'

(40 )The ancient Christians observed the Lord's day as the greatest day of the week, and also in the second place the Jewish Sabbath or Saturday. See Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XX. 2, on the Lord's day, and 3, on the Sabbath.

(41 )There has been some difference of opinion as to whether Socrates is correct in here ascribing the institution of responsive chants to Ignatius. Valesius doubts Socrates' accuracy, but other authorities are inclined to the view that Ignatius did introduce these chants, and Flavian and Diodorus, during the reign of Constantine, to whom Valesius ascribes their origin, simply developed them. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XIV. 1.

(42 )For an account of Theophilus' outrageous treatment of Isidore, see Palladius, Vita S. Foannis Chrysost. chap. 6.

(43 )See Bingham, Christ. Antiq. II. 19-18, for a statement of the functions of this office.

(44 )See above, V. 15.

(45 )Cf. Athan. de Decr. Nic. 27.

(46 )There were thirty-five bishops, besides several presbyters and laymen of some distinction in the ancient church, who bore the name of Epiphanius. The bishop here mentioned is the most illustrious of them all, being the author of the well-known treatise de Haeres. His see-that of Constantia in Cyprus-was the old `Salamis 0' of Acts xiii. 5.

(47 )It seems strange that Epiphanius should be classed with the Anthropomorphitae as Epiphanius himself repudiates their views according to the testimony of Jerome. Cf. Jerome, ad Pammachium, 2 et seq. Socrates must have been imposed upon by some Origenist, as the Origenists were accustomed to call all who condemned their views Anthropomorphitae. Cf. above, chap. 7.

(48 )The offerings of the congregations seem to have been divided usually among the officiating clergymen. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. V. 4. 1.

(49 )In another version of this eleventh chapter of the sixth book, appended at the end of the sixth book in the Greek text of Bright, instead of the sentence beginning `And thus both parties, 0' &c. is found the following more consistent statement: `Inasmuch, however, as on this account a tumult arose at Ephesus, on the ground that Heraclides was not worthy of the bishopric, it became necessary for John to remain in Ephesus for a long time. 0'

(50 )The alternative version inserts here the following sentence: `And who was very much beloved by John and had been intrusted with the whole care of the episcopal administration, on account of his piety and faithfulness and watchfulness in respect to details of every sort, and diligence in matters pertaining to the interests of the bishop. 0'

(51 )From this point to within one or two sentences of the end of the chapter the parallel version is so different at times that it will be well to insert it entire here for the purpose of comparison. It runs thus: `Not long afterward John came to Constantinople and assumed himself the churches which belonged to his jurisdiction. But between Serapion, the deacon, and Severian there had arisen a certain coolness; Serapion was opposed to Severian because the latter seemed desirous of excelling John in public speaking, and Severian was jealous of Serapion because the bishop John favored him, and the care of the bishopric had been intrusted to him. They being thus disposed toward one another, it happened that the evil of hatred was increased from the following cause. As Severian was passing by on one occasion Serapion did not render him the homage due to a bishop, but he continued sitting; whether because he had not noticed him, as he afterwards affirmed upon oath before a council, or because he cared little for him, being himself the vicegerent of a bishop, as Severian asserted, I am unable to say; God only knows. At the time, however, Severian did not tolerate the contempt; but immediately, and in anticipation of a public investigation before a council, he condemned Serapion upon oath, and not only declared him deposed from the dignity of the diaconate, but also put him out of the church. John upon learning this was very much grieved. As the matter afterwards was investigated by a council and Serapion defended himself declaring that he had not perceived [the approach of the bishop], and summoned witnesses to the fact, the common verdict of the assembled bishops was in favor of acquitting him and urging Severian to accept the apology of Serapion. The Bishop John, for his part, to satisfy Severian, suspended Serapion from the diaconate for a week; although he used him in all his affairs as his right hand, because he was very keen and diligent in ecclesiastical disputation. Severian however was not satisfied with these measures, but used all means to effect the permanent deposition of Serapion from the diaconate and his excommunication. John was extremely grieved at these words and arose from the council, leaving the adjudication of the case to the bishops present, saying to them, "Do you examine the matter in hand and render judgment according to your own conclusions; as for me I resign my part in the arbitration between them." These things having been said by John as he arose, the council likewise arose and left the case, as it stood, blaming Severian the more for not yielding to the request of the Bishop John. After this John never received Severian into a private interview; but advised him to return to his own country, communicating to him the following message: "It is not expedient, Severian," said he, "that the parish intrusted to you should remain for so long without care and bereft of a bishop; wherefore hasten and take charge of your churches, and do not neglect the gift which is in you." As he now prepared for his journey and started, the Empress Eudoxia, on being informed of the facts, 0' &c. From this point the variations are few, verbal, and unimportant.

(52 )The ancients often swore by their children, especially when they wished to entreat others most earnestly. Cf. Vergil, aeneid, VI. 364, `Per caput hoc juro, per spem surgentis Fuli. 0' The form of abjuration used by Eudoxia was probably this: `By this little child of mine, and your spiritual son, whom I brought forth and whom you received out of the sacred font, be reconciled to Severian. 0' Valesius, however, doubts the reality of this affair.

(53 )It was contrary to the canons of the church for a bishop to ordain a presbyter or a deacon in another's diocese. Cf. Apostol. Can. 35. `Let not a bishop dare to ordain beyond his own limits in cities and places not subject to him. But if he be convicted of doing so without the consent of those persons who have authority over such cities and places, let him be deposed, and those also whom he has ordained. 0' Also Can. 16 of the Council of Nicaea; `If any one should dare to steal, as it were, a person who belongs to another [bishop], and to ordain him for his own church, without permission of the bishop from whom he was withdrawn, the ordination shall be void. 0'

(54 )The views of Origen met with opposition from the very outset. During his own lifetime he was condemned at Alexandria, and after his death repeatedly until 541 a.d., and perhaps also by the fifth general council held at Constantinople in 553. For a full account of the Origenistic Controversy, see Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog. and Antiq., art. Origenistic Controversies.

(55 )`The house of entertainment for strangers. 0' Methodius' works were in the literary form of the dialogue. Cf. his Convivum decent Virginum in Migne's Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XVIII.

(56 )Athan. de Decr. Nic. 27.

(57 )See above, chap. 12 and note 1.

(58 )Hence this is called the Synod at `the Oak 0' (Synodus ad Quercum). See Hefele, History of the Chrch Councils, Vol. II. p. 430.

(59 )For a similar action of Athanasius based on the same reason, see I. 31.

(60 )See above, chap. 7.

(61 )1 Pet. v. 5; James iv. 6.

(62 )Chap. 8.

(63 )See above, chap. II.

(64 )Eccl. xii. 11.

(65 )From Prosper Aquitamus and Marcellinus' Chronicon, we learn that this was done in 403 a.d., or rather the consulship of Theodosius the younger and Rumoridius.

(66 )This discourse entitled `In decollationem Praecursoris et baptistae Foannis 0' is to be found in Migné's Patrologia Graecia, Vol. LIV. p. 485, and in Savile's edition of Chrysostom's works, Vol. VII. 545. Savile, however, places it among the spurious pieces, and considers it unworthy of the genius of Chrysostom.

(67 )Cf. II. 8.

(68 )404 a.d.

(69 )Some of these details presumably are given by Sozomen in VIII. 23 and 24.

(70 )Palladius makes mention of this case without, however, naming Cyrinus. Cf. Vit. S. Foan. Chrysostom, chap. 17 (Vol. XIII. p. 63 A. of Benedictine ed. of Chrysostom).

(71 )anonaton, lit. = `kneeless. 0'

(72 )Cf. chap. 15, above.

(73 )404 a.d.

(74 )405 a.d.

(75 )406 a.d.

(76 )Cf. VII. 2.

(77 )407 a.d.

(78 )Cf. above, chap. 3.

(79 )These words are not found in any of Chrysostom's extant homilies. There is no reason, however, for thinking that they were not uttered by him in a sermon now not in existence. Socrates' remarks on Chrysostom's attitude made here are among the considerations which have led some to think that he was a Novatian. Cf. Introd. p. x.

(80 )For further particulars on Chrysostom's life and the circumstances of his death, see authorities mentioned in chap. 2, note 3.

(81 )Cf. V. 10 and 21.

(82 )Eccl. ix. 8.

(83 )Matt. xvii. 2; Mark ix. 3; Luke ix. 29. On the clothing of the clergy, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VI. 4-18.

(84 )The canons forbade the existence of two authoritative bishops in one city. Cf. V. 5, note 3. It was supposed to be an apostolic tradition that prescribed this practice, and the faithful always resisted and condemned any attempts to consecrate a second bishop in a city. Thus `when Constantius proposed that Liberiu and Felix should sit as co-partners in the Roman see and govern the church in common, the people with one accord rejected the proposal, crying out "One God, one Christ, one bishop." The rule, however, did not apply to the case of coadjutors, where the bishop was too old or infirm to discharge his episcopal duties. 0' See Bingham, Christ. Antiq. II. 13.

(85 )408 a.d.

(86 )The Greek editions [of Stephens, Valesius, Hussey, Bright, &c.] add the alternate form of chap. 11 at this place. For purposes of convenience in comparing the two versions we have given the variants with chapter 11.

(1 )408 a.d. Cf. VI. 23. See Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. 32.

(2 )This was done, according to Cedrenus, several years later by another prefect. For this reason and because of the grammatical construction in the original, Valesius rightly conjectures that the phrase is a gloss introduced from the margin, and should be expunged from the text.

(3 )Troïlus was a sophist of distinction who taught at Constantinople under Arcadius and Honorius at the beginning of the fifth century a.d., a native of Side and author of a treatise entitled Logoi politikoi. See Suidas s.v. Trwiloj.

(4 )Cf. VI. 20.

(5 )Gal. vi. 10.

(6 )1 Cor. ix. 22.

(7 )On the limits of the secular power over ecclesiastical dignitaries, and the cases in which the clergy were amenable to the civil law as well as those in which they were not, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. V. 2.

(8 )On the supposed miraculous effects of baptism, see Tertullian, de baptismo, passim.

(9 )Cor. i. 22.

(10 )V. 21.

(11 )Cf. 1. 8, note 2, and V. 22 and notes.

(12 )Not an exact quotation. Luke xxii. 1, resembles it more than any other of the parallels.

(13 )Cf. chap. 12 below.

(14 )Cf. V. 3, 12 and 23.

(15 )407 a.d.

(16 )Cf. V. 23, note 2.

(17 )The special views of Plato which are here alluded to are probably those found in the Timaeus. Cf. Jowett, The Dialogues of Plato translated into English, Vol. II. p. 451 et seq.

(18 )Cf. VI. 13.

(19 )412 a.d. This chapter is out of chronological sequence, as appears from the fact that Alaric took Rome in 410 a.d. See chap. 10 below.

(20 )The words included in brackets are not found in the Greek; they were probably inserted into the English translation as necessary to explain the context.

(21 )Cf. chap. 11.

(22 )Cf. VI. 15.

(23 )A caste of priests who exercised great influence in Persia mentioned both in the Old and the New Testament. Cf. Smith, Dict. of the Bible, art. Magi.

(24 )420 a.d.

(25 )Chap. 18 below.

(26 )404 a.d.

(27 )414 a.d.

(28 )385 a.d.

(29 )On Alaric's career, see Zosimus, V. 5, 6; 28-51 and V. 1-13. Cf. also parallel accounts in Sozomen, IX. 4, 6-9; and Philostorgius, XII. 2, 3; and Gibbon's Decline and Fall, chap. 31.

(30 )This incident is also given by Procopius of Caesarea in Hist. Vandal. I. p. 8.

(31 )418 a.d.

(32 )Cf. V. 10.

(33 )upatikoj = consularis, consul honorarius; the title was, during the period of the republic, given to ex-consuls, but later it became a common custom, especially under the emperors, for the governors of the imperial provinces to be called consuls, and the title consularis became the established designation of those-intrusted with the administration of imperial provinces. See Smith, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Antiq.

(34 )Bikarioj transliterated from the Lat. vicarius, of which the Eng. `lieutenant 0' is an exact equivalent.

(35 )Cf. V. 21.

(36 )Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. II. 16.

(37 )The loaves which were offered by the faithful as a sacrifice were called `loaves of benediction, 0' and were used partly for the Eucharist and partly as food by the bishop and clergy.

(38 )As to how the ancient Church looked upon theatrical shows, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XVI. 11. 15, and passages there referred to.

(39 )iatrikwn logwn sofisthj, also called by other writers of the period iatrosofisthj; see Sophocles, Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byzant. Periods.

(40 )As a mode of abjuration, see VI. 11, note 5. In this case the sacred volume takes the place of the child.

(41 )Qaumasioj, `wonderful, 0' `admirable. 0'

(42 )The original here has apesbese, `quenched, 0' `extinguished, 0' but the context demands the very opposite meaning, unless indeed the outrage on Hypatia was considered the last in the series of occasions of quarrel between Orestes and Cyril, after which the difference gradually died out.

(43 )The following incident has been popularized by Charles Kingsley in his well-known novel of Hypatia, which has, however, the accessory aim of antagonizing the over-estimation of early Christianity by Dr. Pusey and his followers. The original sources for the history of Hypatia, besides the present chapter, are the letters of her pupil Synesius, and Philostorgius, VIII. 9. Cf. also Wernsdoff, de Hypatia, philosopha Alex. diss. 4, Viteb. 1748.

(44 )ostrakoij, lit. `oystershells, 0' but the word was also applied to brick tiles used on the roofs of houses.

(45 )The responsibility of Cyril in this affair has been variously estimated by different historians. Walch, Gibbon, and Milman incline to hold him guilty. J.C. Robertson ascribes him indirect responsibility, asserting that the perpetrators of the crime `were mostly officers of his church, and had unquestionably drawn encouragement from his earlier proceedings. 0' Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. I. p. 401. W. Bright says, `Cyril was no party to this hideous deed, but it was the work of men whose passions he had originally called out. Had there been no onslaught on the synagogues, there would doubtless have been no murder of Hypatia. 0' Hist. of the Church from 313 to 451, pp. 274, 275. See also Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. III. p. 943.

(46 )415 a.d.

(47 )419 a.d.

(48 )On Evagrius, see IV. 23. On the passage in his works alluded, see Evagrius, Ecclesiastical History, IV. 35, 36.

(49 )The repetition of baptism, except in cases in which there was doubt as to the validity of a first baptism, was considered a sacrilege. See Smith and Cheetham, Dict. of Christ. Antiq. art. Iteration Baptism.

(50 )Cf. I. 8.

(51 )Having reigned between 399 and 420 a.d. Cf. Clinton, Fasti Romani, year 420.

(52 )There had been peace between the Persian and the Roman powers since 381. Cf. Pagi, Ant. 420, note 14.

(53 )Mentioned in Theophanes' Chronographia, p. 74.

(54 )Much, of course, depends, in estimating the rate of speed here recorded, on the exact distance between Constantinople and the rather indefinite limits of the Persian empire. But even if the minimum of 500 miles be taken as a basis, the speed seems almost incredible.

(55 )A Persian body-guard called 'Aqanatoi, `Immortals, 0' existed during the period of the invasion of Greece by the Persians (cf. Herodotus, VII. 31). The organization and discipline of the later body must have been, of course, very different.

(56 )422 a.d.

(57 )Endokia, `Benevolence. 0'

(58 )The Chronicon Paschale gives a different account of Eudocia. It says that her father's name was Heraclitus. When he died her brothers Gesius and Valerian refused to give her her share of the inheritance. She came to Constantinople to plead for her rights through Pulcheria, the sister of Theodosius, and impressed the latter so favorably that Pulcheria persuaded Theodosius to make her his wife (cf. Chronic. Pasch. year 420). Her brothers on hearing of her elevation to the throne fled to Greece, but she sent for them and persuaded Theodosius to appoint them to high offices, on the ground that she was indebted to them for her good fortune (cf. Chronic. Pasch. year 421). Besides her ode commemorating the victory of the imperial forces over the Persians, several other works of hers are mentioned, viz. paraphrases of the Pentateuch, Joshua, and Judges into Greek hexameters, a version of the prophecies of Zachariah and Daniel, and a poem in three books on St. Cyprian and St. Justina; to these Zonaras adds that she completed the Centones Homerici of Patricius. Her later years were clouded by a misunderstanding between her husband and herself, which is variously given by the contemporaneous historians and altogether passed over by Socrates. Cf. Evagrius, H. E. I. 20, 22, and Zonaras Ann. XIII.

(59 )On the observance of these two days of the week as fast days in the early Church see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. XXI. 3.

(60 )filadelfoj = `lover of his brothers, 0' but applied to him by the rhetorical figure of antiphrasis because he killed his brothers. This Ptolemy Philadelphus reigned in Egypt from 285 to 247 b.c. and is famous for having the Old Testament translated from Hebrew into Greek, according to the common tradition, by seventy learned men, whence the translation has been known as the Septuagint.

(61 )Cf. III. 19.

(62 )Persons who fought with wild beasts in the games of the circus. They were of two classes: (1) professionals, those who fought for pay, and (2) criminals, allowed to use arms in defending themselves against the wild beasts to which they had been condemned. It is one of the first class that is here meant.

(63 )An altogether unknown and doubtful diocese.

(64 )423 a.d.

(65 )So also Zosimus, V. 40.

(66 )See above, chap. 18.

(67 )Cf. I. 39, and II. 1.

(68 )The adherents of Chrysostom. See VI. 3.

(69 )He effected this restoration by having the name John enrolled in the diptychs or registers of those whose names should be included in the prayers of the liturgy.

(70 )xrusinouj, with stathraj probably to be supplied; if so the value of these gold pieces was about $5.00, or ¢1 0s. 9d.

(71 )See above, chaps. 5 and 12.

(72 )farmakea = `poisoner. 0'

(73 )qerapeiaj: the word occurs in three senses, viz. (1) healing, (2) service, (3) worship. Probably, and as the sentence following seems to indicate, the last of these was the one meant to be emphasized; this is also borne out by the plural number used. If the first sense were the one for which the word was chosen, it must have been because of its being in complete contrast to the previous name. The place retains the name thus given it to this day and constitutes one of the suburbs of Constantinople.

(74 )Silver City.

(75 )Golden City.

(76 )Cf. Xenophon, Anab. VI. 6. 38.

(77 )Cf. Xenophon, Hellenica, I. 1, 22. The event mentioned took place in 411 b.c.

(78 )Cf. IV. 1-6.

(79 )1 Tim. iii. 1.

(80 )1 John v. 17.

(81 )The Catholic Church was more severe in its discipline regarding the clergy than the laity, but it does not appear that excommunication was in any case absolute and reinstatement impossible. See on this point the liberal views of Chrysostom, VI. 21. Cf. also Bennett, Christ. Archaeology, p. 383.

(82 )425 a.d.

(83 )This was Valentinian III. See chap. 24 above for his relationship to the reigning Theodosius.

(84 )2 Cor. viii. 3.

(85 )426 a.d.

(86 )See Introd. p. 12. Photius, Biblioth. chap. 35, mentions Philip's attack on Sisinnius and assigns the reason for it as jealousy, because Philip and Sisinnius both being of the same rank in the clergy, the latter was made archbishop of Constantinople.

(87 )This was a heavy, redundant, and turgid style deprecated by rhetoricians of the better class from the time of Cicero onwards. Cf. Cicero, Brut. XIII. 51; Quinctilian, Instit. Orat. XII. 10, and Jerome, ad Rustic. (125. 6).

(88 )upoqesij = lit. `subject 0' or `substance 0'; the contents, or as later, called the argument, or summary of contents.

(89 )The Council in its 6th Canon declared that no one should be ordained bishop without the consent of his metropolitan; but that the bishop of Constantinople was the metropolitan of the Cyzicenes does not appear unless the decree of the (Canon 3d) Council of Constantinople making the latter a patriarchate is to be understood as rendering the see of Cyzicus subordinate to that of Constantinople, as an individual church is to the metropolitan. Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. II. 16. 12.

(90 )427 a.d.

(91 )ephluda, perhaps in a contemptuous sense = `an imported fellow. 0'

(92 )Founder of Nestorianism (Nestorian church and heresy). For details on Nestorianism, see Assemani, Bibliotheca Oriental. tom. IV., said to be the most exhaustive work on the subject, ancient and modern alike, being a volume of 950 pp. and occupied with Nestorianism alone. `It collects information from all quarters, especially from the Oriental writers, concerning the history, ritual, organization, schools, and missions. 0' (Stokes, in Smith and Wace.) The peculiar characteristic of the Nestorian Christology will appear in the sequel of Socrates' account. Other accessible sources of information on Nestorianism and Nestorius will be found in the standard ecclesiastical histories. Cf. Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Church, Vol. II. p. 446-524; Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Church, Vol. III. p. 714-734; Kurtz, Church Hist. Vol. I. p. 334; also Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Rom. Empire, chap. 47.

(93 )A city in Cilicia, on the western border of Syria.

(94 )428 a.d.

(95 )`What the bishops and especially the prelates of the greater churches said in their first sermon to the people was very carefully observed among the early Christians. For from that sermon a conjecture was made as to the faith, doctrine, and temper of every bishop. Hence the people were wont to take particular notice, and remember their sayings. A remark of this nature occurs above, Bk. II. chap. 43, concerning the first sermon of Eudoxius, bishop of Constantinople. And Theodoret and Epiphanius declare the same concerning the first sermon of Melitius to the people. 0'-Valesius.

(96 )Below, chap. 36.

(97 )Octar, mentioned as an uncle (father's brother) of Attila by Jornandes, Historia Getarum, chap. 35.

(98 )430 a.d.

(99 )By a slight change in the Greek text Valesius renders this phrase `but caused others also to imitate him, 0' alleging that the conduct of Anthony of Germa was in imitation of Nestorius; but the emendation seems unnecessary. Socrates means that Nestorius made himself odious in other ways, perhaps through other persons such as Anthony, &c.

(100 )Qeotokon, i.e. `Mother of God. 0' See Neander, Hist. of Christ. Church, Vol. II. p. 449.

(101 )anqrwpoj, `human being. 0'

(102 )2 Cor. v. 16.

(103 )Heb. vi. 1.

(104 )mormolukion, `hobgoblin, 0' `bugbear. 0'

(105 )1 John iv. 2, John iv. 3. The findings of modern textual criticism are at variance with Socrates' opinion that the original in the epistle of John was luei (separates). Westcott and Hort admit luei into their margin, but evidently in order to have it translated as the Revised Version has it (also in the margin) `annulleth, 0' taking away all the force of the passage as used here.

(106 )Of what nature was this mutilation? Some authorities omitted it altogether (see Tischendorf, Novum. Test. ed. Octav. Maj., on the passage); others changed luei into mh omologh.

(107 )Cf. Euseb. Life of Const. III. 43.

(108 )Cf. Origen, Com. in Rom. I. 1. 5.

(109 )upostasin; see I. chap. 5, note 2.

(110 )Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VIII. 11.

(111 )This was the third of the Ecumenical or General Synods; it was convened in 431 and dealt with the Nestorian controversy. Cf. Hefele, Hist. of the Councils of the Ch. Vol. III. p. 1; also Evagrius, H. E. I. 2, 3, 4.

(112 )After his deposition Nestorius was banished to the Oasis, as above stated. This Oasis was `a miserable place exposed to the wild nomad tribes; all around were shifting sands, forming a pathless solitude. He ...employed himself in writing a defense of the opinions for which he had lost all. The Blemmyes at length invaded the Oasis, and took Nestorius, among others, captive; then, by what he calls a most unexpected act of compassion, released him, and bade him hurry away. He thought it best to proceed to Panopolis in the Thebaid, and voluntarily reported himself to the governor, who, unmoved by his pathetic entreaty that the imperial authorities would not be less merciful than the barbarians, ordered some soldiers to convey him to Elephantine. The journey under such circumstances exhausted the old man; a fall severely hurt his hand and side; and before he could reach Elephantine, a mandate came for his return to Panopolis. Two more compulsory changes of abode were added to sufferings which remind us perforce of the last days of S. John Chrysostom; and then the unhappy Nestorius was no more. The exact year of his death cannot be ascertained. 0'-W. Bright, Hist. of the Church from a.d. 313 to 451, p. 371, 372.

(113 )431 a.d.

(114 )The canon referred to is probably the fifteenth of Nicaea, as follows: `On account of the numerous troubles and divisions which have taken place, it has been thought good that bishop, priest, or deacon should remove from one city to another. If any one should venture, even after this ordinance of the holy and great Synod, to act contrary to this present rule, and should follow the old custom, the translation shall be null, and he shall return to the church to which he had been ordained bishop or priest. 0' Cf. also Apostol. Can. 14 and 15, and the twenty-first of the Council of Antioch given by Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 72.

(115 )2 Cor. xi. 6.

(116 )Cf. Euseb. H. E. VI. 11.

(117 )The canon here quoted is the eighteenth of the Council of Antioch (see Hefele, Hist. of the Ch. Councils, Vol. II. p. 71); whereas the canon of that council bearing on that subject is the twenty-first, as noted in chap. 35, note 1.

(118 )In what way these canons against the translation of bishops were understood and observed by the early church is discussed by Bingham, Christ. Antiq. VI. 4. 6.

(119 )Another indication that the patriarchal functions of the bishop of Constantinople were at this time exercised and recognized. The Council of Chalcedon somewhat later (in 451 a.d.) formally ordered in its twenty-eighth canon that the metropolitans of the Thracian Pontic, and Asian dioceses should be ordained by the bishop of Constantinople, their election being first secured by the clergy and lairy of the dioceses, and referred to the patriarch afterwards.

(120 )plathn, a sort of raft; the word is incorrectly spelled plath according to Sophocles (Greek Lexic., &c.), and should be plwth.

(121 )431 a.d.

(122 )Nothing further is heard of this strange affair.

(123 )alastwr. Aeschylus and Sophocles apply this word to the Furies.

(124 )Rebuilt and rededicated, according to the Chronicon of Marcellinus, under the consuls Maximus and Paterius, i.e. 443 a.d. and ten years after the fire.

(125 )433 a.d.

(126 )434 a.d.

(127 )See above, chap. 28. This was about the year 427 a.d.

(128 )See chap. 22, above.

(129 )Num. xii. 3.

(130 )See above, chap. 23.

(131 )Who these barbarians were it is impossible to find out precisely, and that not because no mention is made of barbarian inroads on the imperial territories, but because so many are mentioned by the chronographers and the historians of the Goths (Jornandes, Prosper Aquitanus, Marcellinus, &c.) that it is impossible to identify this with any of them to the exclusion of the rest. Rougas also appears in these historians as Rouas (in Priscus), Roas (in Jornandes), Rugilas (in Prosper Aquitanus), and is said to be related to Attila; but nothing certain can be drawn from the accounts.

(132 )Ezek. xxxviii. 2, Ezek. xxxviii. 22, Ezek. xxxviii. 23. Ambrose has also used this prophecy, applying it to the Goths, and exhorted Gratian to make war against them. Cf. Ambrose, de Fide, 2. 16. The quotation here is from the LXX.

(133 )436 a.d.

(134 )438 a.d.

(135 )As above, 438 a.d.

(136 )This seems hardly probable when compared with the opening sentence of the chapter, and so Valesius with Christophorson anti others change it into August. The emendation suggested in the Greek is not a difficult one; it simply adds between au- and tou of the word autou (above translated `the same 0'), the syllable gouj-making it thus, augoustou mhnoj, `month of August. 0' The emendation, or something equivalent to it, must be accepted, otherwise we are compelled to place the death of Paul and the ordination of Marcian together with the intervening events on the same day.

(137 )On this visit of the empress to Jerusalem, see Evagrius, H. E. I. 20-23. During this visit for some reason or other-variously stated by the authors of the period-an alienation occurred between the emperor and Eudocia. See above, chap. 21, note 2.

(138 )439 a.d.

(139 )Evidently a round number, as he begun with the year 305 (cf. I. 1), and the exact number of years included in the history cannot be more than 135.

(140 )439 a.d.

(1 )This marks the proposed limits, a.d. 323 to a.d. 439, but he did not carry the narrative further than a.d. 425.

(1 )Cf. Eus. H. E. i. 4.

(2 )Cf. Gen. xviii.

(3 )Cf. Gen. xlix. 10.

(4 )Isa. vii. 14, foretells that "a virgin shall conceive and bear a son"; but he does not declare, in words, the perpetual virginity of the mother of God. The Roman Catholic Church, however, infers the doctrine from certain types in the Old Testament: such as that of "the hush which burnt with fire, and was not consumed" (Ex. iii. 2).

(5 )See Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 33; xx. 9, 1.

(6 )More probably Clemens Alexandrinus than, as Valesius suggests, Clemens Romanus.

(7 )See the Life of Eusebius, prefixed to his Eccles. Hist. in this series.

(8 )These books are not now extant.

(9 )It is scarcely fair with Valesius to infer from this passage that Sozomen was a monk himself.

(10 )Who this Romanus was is uncertain, as his name does not occur in the catalogue of bishops of Antioch, according to Hieronymus' edition of the Chronicon, nor in Nicephorus. In one index at the end of a codex of Eusebius' History, in Florence, his name occurs as the twenty-second, in order, and between Philagonius and Eustathius. Theodoret, H. E. i. 3, gives the succession Vitalis, Philagonius.

(11 )Cf. Soc. i. 23, 24.

(12 )For a narrative of the treatment of the Christians by Licinius, and the war between Constantine and Licinius on their account, see Soc; i. 3, 4.

(13 )With this chapter, cf. the parallel account in Soc. i. 2.

(14 )Cf. Eus. V. C. i. 28.

(15 )Cf. Eus. V. C. i. 29.

(16 )id. i. 32.

(17 )That is, for the unbaptized and catechumens; the baptized were called the "initiated" (oi memuhmenoi).

(18 )Eus. V. C. i. 30, 31.

(19 )Or Sosipater of Apamea. Cf. Eunap. V. S. (Aedesius).

(20 )The earlier church historians, except Philost. H. E. ii. 4, are silent as to the cause of his death, while the pagan authorities speak freely, but variously; later Christian writers take their statements from the pagans. Cf. Eutrop. Brev. hist. Rom. x. 6.

(21 )One of the battles in which Licinius was routed by Constantine, a.d. 314. Eutrop. Brev. hist. Rom. x. 5.

(22 )Cf. Soc. i. 3, 4, and especially various parts of Eus. V. C.

(23 )Iliad, viii. 102.

(24 )gramma dhmosion. The decree is given at full length in Eus. V. C. ii. 24-42; and the other legislative chapters of Bks. ii. and iv. Cf. Eus. H. E. x. 5-7; Soc. 1. 18.

(25 )Musthriwn, that is to say, the sacraments of the church.

(26 )Eus. V. C. iv. 18, 19.

(27 )He probably alludes to the law of Constantine, "de raptu virginum vel viduarum." See Codex Theodos. ix. 24.

(28 )The Lex Papia Poppaea. For its origin under Augustus, see Tacit. Ann. iii. 25; Eus. V. C. iv. 26.

(29 )Constantine makes mention of this law in his Epistle to the bishops of Numidia, in Baronius, A. E. a.d. 316; n. lxiv.; Eus. H. E. x. 7; Cod. Theod. i. 27, de episcopali definitione, 1; xvi. 2, de episcopes ecclesus et clericis, 2.

(30 )Cod. Theod. iv. 7, de manumissionibus inecclesia, 1.

(31 )For a further account of Hosius, cf. Soc. i. 7, 13; ii. 20, 29, 31; iii. 7.

(32 )Amphion and Lespus are mentioned as bishops of Cilicia in Athan. Ep. ad Episc. Aeg. et Lib.; another Amphion occurs in Athan. Ap. cant. Arian, 7, as bishop in Nicomedia.

(33 )Ruf. H. E. i. 4; Soc. i. 8, 11; Theodoret, H. E. i. 7.

(34 )Ruf. H. E. i. 5; Soc. i. 8, 12. Ruf. gives the first two stories; Soc. copies and gives credit; Soz. appends three more, and gives credit to himself only throughout. Ruf. had already said, "sed et multa alia ejus feruntur gesta mirabilia, quae etiam nunc ore omnium celebrantur."

(35 )This Triphyllius is mentioned by Hieron. de vir. illust. i. 92, as the author of a commentary on the Song of Solomon, which his biographer had read; and of many other works which had not come into his hands.

(36 )Berytus in Phoenicia was celebrated for its school of law, in which, among others, Gregory Thaumaturgus is said to have studied. Biographers, imitating Valesius, have imagined that Sozomen studied there.

(37 )Matt. ix. 6.

(38 )thj tessarakosthj enstashj. While it was Lent and probably Holy Week. See Tertull. de Pat. 13, and de Fejun. 14.

(39 )Tit. i. 15.

(40 )On the origin and growth of the monastic system, see Soc. iv. 23, and cf. Gibbon, Decl. & Fall, ch. 37, and Bingham's Christian Antiq. Bk. vii.; articles in Herz. R. E. Bk. iv.; D. C. A. Vol. ii.; Ad Harnack: Das Mönchthum, seine Ideale und seine Geschichte.

(41 )The verb filosofein is constantly used by the early Christian historians to signify the practice of asceticism.

(42 )Valesius would prefer to read "The Platonist."

(43 )Cf. Eus. H. E. ii. 17, where he attributes to the Christians what is said by Philo concerning the Therapeutae, as these ascetics were called.

(44 )Cf. Soc. i. 21, and his reference to the life attributed to Athanasius.

(45 )There were two cities of this name, Heraclea the greater and Heraclea the less.

(46 )Ruf. H. M. 31; Pall. H. L. 27.

(47 )Ruf. H. M. 30; Pall. H. L. 12; Soc. iv. 23.

(48 )Soc. i. 13, who gives his authority as Auxanon, a Novatian.

(49 )Eus. H. E. vii. 8; Soc. i. 10; iv. 28, &c.

(50 )Eus. V. C. parts of ii. & iii.; Ruf. H. E. i. 1-6; Soc. i. 5-13; Philost. H. E. i. 3-9.

(51 )No one else suggests an early connection of Arius with the Melitians.

(52 )A doubtful and unsupported assertion. All other testimony makes Alexander steadfast and exact in his definition.

(53 )There are variations in names, offices, numbers in attendance, and course of debate in the early as well as later accounts of the controversy.

(54 )Soz. only outlines the letter, given completely in Eus. V. C. ii. 64-72; of which Soc. quotes the greater part. i. 7.

(55 )Eus. V. C. iii. 5; Soc. i. 8.

(56 )They were called Quartodecimanians. Euseb. H. E. v. 24; Soc. v. 22.

(57 )Eus. V. C. iii. 6.

(58 )Eus. V. C. iii. 7-11; Soc. i. 8; Ruf. H. E. i. 2. The variations and additions of Theodoret are very noteworthy. H. E. i. 7.

(59 )Mistake for Silvester. Cf. ii. 20.

(60 )Ruf. H. E. i. 2; Soc. i. 8. Soz. here makes, as usual, a free use of the speech as reported by Rufinus.

(61 )Ruf. H. E. i. 3; Soc. i. 8. Soz. gives a free rendering of Ruf.

(62 )Suidas says he was a philosopher, and the father of Julian, called the Theurgist. He was the author of a work concerning demons, in four books. The son, who flourished under Marcus Aurelius, was so skilled in the magic art, that he called down rain from heaven, when the Roman soldiers were perishing from thirst. Arnuphis, an Egyptian philosopher, was said to have wrought a similar miracle. Suidas, s. v.

(63 )Eus. V. C. iii. 10-12.

(64 )Theodoret, H. E. i. 7, places this oration in the mouth of Eustathius, bishop of Antioch. The variations in the speech as recorded by Sozomen, show his classic view of reporting. Theodoret's report of Constantine's address is equally divergent.

(65 )Eus. V. C. iii. 13, 14; Soc. i. 8.

(66 )mustai kai mustagwgoi, as applied to the Christian mysteries. The principle here adduced is different from that which ruled with Ruf. H. E. i. 6; Soc. i. 8.

(67 )There are variations in the earlier writers as to the number and names of the excommunicated and banished.

(68 )Eusebius' attempt at straddling amounts to prevarication here, and later; Soc. i. 8 copied by the later historians.

(69 )Cf. Soc. i. 9; both borrowed their criticism from Athan. Orcont. Arian. i. 4, etc.

(70 )Eus. V. C. iii. 14-24; Soc. i. 8, 9.

(71 )Soc. i. 10, who derived it from Auxanon, a presbyter, who accompanied Acesius to Nice. Cf. i. 13.

(72 )Eus. H. E. vi. 43-46.

(73 )1 John v. 16.

(74 )Socrates' statement of the source of his information is passed over, as well as his criticism of prejudiced historians. The comment substituted by Soz. is, nevertheless, a partially correct interpretation.

(75 )Soc. i. 11. Cf. the perverted text of the Canones Nicaeni, in Ruf. H. E. i. 6.

(76 )Soc. i. 11.

(77 )Lycus (Lycopolis) is not named in the letter of the Synod which says simply that he should reside in his own city. Soz. took the fact from Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 71, where Melitius, in the brief to Alexander, calls himself bishop of Lycus. This is a proof of our historian's use of the same documents to amplify the statements of Socrates.

(78 )Soc. i. 9, for text of the letter.

(79 )The best text reads Melitius, not Meletius, so Athanas. and Soc.; usually the books write Meletius and Meletians. We follow the reading.

(80 )This feast, called Vicennalia, is mentioned in Eus. V. C. iii. 15, 16.

(1 )Eus. V. C. iii. 25-40; Soc. i. 9, Letter to Macarius, bishop of Jerusalem.

(2 )Ruf H. E. i. 7, 8; Soc. H. E. I. 17; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 33, 34, another story of the identification. Soz. furnishes an additional story about the discovery, which he, however, confutes.

(3 )Zech. xiv. 20. (LXX).

(4 )Sib. Or. vi. 26.

(5 )Eus. V. C. iii. 41, 47; Soc. i. 17.

(6 )Helenopolis in Palestine not mentioned by Soc. i. 17, 18. Was the site of this city at the convent of Mt. Carmel or at St. Helena's towers, near the Scala Tyriorum? For the Bithynian city, cf. Procopius, de Aedificiis v. 2; cf. also Philost. ii. 12; Eus. Chronicon (Hieron.), under a.d. 331.

(7 )Eus. V. C. iii. 50-58; iv. 58; Soc. i. 18; Zos. ii. 30-32.

(8 )agoreuonti. This shows that Sozomen was an advocate in the law courts at the very time of his writing this history.

(9 )Eus. V. C. iii. 51-53; Soc. i. 18. As a native of Palestine, Soz. here adds local details.

(10 )Eutropia, the mother of Fausta.

(11 )Eus. V. C. iii. 54-58; iv. 38; Soc. i. 18; Zos. ii. 31.

(12 )i.e. "sent down from Jupiter." Such were the Palladium of Troy, the Ancile at Rome, and "the image" of Diana, "which fell down from Jupiter," mentioned in Acts xix. 35.

(13 )Irenaeus adv. Haeres i. 3 (ed. Harvey); Philost. ii. 5, 6.

(14 )politeian amempton efilosofoun. The Christian life, and especially the monastic, was regarded as the true philosophy.

(15 )By the Iberians we are to understand, not the people of Spain (for they had a church among them as early as the time of Irenaeus; see adv. Haeres. i. 3, ed. Harvey), but the people of that name in Asia. Cf. Soc. i. 20, who says these Iberians migrated from Spain.

(16 )Ruf. H. E. i. 10; Soc. i. 20; Soz. takes directly from Ruf.

(17 )This paragraph is regarded by Valesius as spurious.

(18 )The source of this chapter certainly is not Moses Chorenensis. Tiridates III. reigned a.d.286-342. At first a persecutor, through Gregory the Illuminator he became a Christian. Yet parts of Armenia were Christianized much earlier. Dionysius bishop of Alexandria wrote a letter on Repentance to the Armenians in the reign of Gallus. Eus. H. E. vi. 46. Cf. Agathangelas, History of Tiridates the Great, and the preaching of Gregory the Illuminator.

(19 )Here follows in the Greek text a repetition, word for word, of the first two lines of this chapter, which seem to be superfluous, if we do not reject the paragraph above.

(20 )Soz. is wrong in attributing the conversion of Persia to Armenia.

(21 )The source for chaps. 9-14 must be some early translation of Acta Persarum, which the Syrians, especially those of Edessa, made; cf. chap. 14. Soz. is independent. The persecution began under Shapur II. a.d. 343.

(22 )The attempt to fix the date as Pagi, Ap. 21, 349, has no historical warrant; see Pagi, under 343 iii.

(23 )Assemanus, Bibl. Orient. t. i. 189, speaks of Azades as the eunuch of Artascirus, ruler of Adiabene, who was a cousin of Sapor.

(24 )Am. Marcell. 20. 7, 1, Zabdiceni; 25. 7, 9, Zabdicena.

(25 )The Embassy is spoken of in Eus. V. C. iv. 8; the letter of Constantine to Shapur, iv. 9-13. But Soz. is mistaken about its date; for it was written before Sapor had commenced his persecution of the Christians. As usual, Soz. quotes briefly, and with no regard and with to the language and little to the thought. Theodoret, H. E. i. 25 (24), is accurate. For further relations of Constantine with Persia, cf. Eus. V. C. iv. 56, 57.

(26 )Cf. Soc. i. 14. The variations of text are slight. Is the original from Sabinus' h sunagwgh twn sunodikwn5

(27 )The facts (as we learn from the Epistle of Eusebius of Caesarea, which is given by Soc. i. 8, and Theodoret, H. E. i. 12) are as follows: The bishops, who demurred to the term omoousion, as defined in the Nicene symbol, proposed another alleged older Antiochan form to the Synod. But the Nicene Fathers rejected it, and refused to depart from their own definition. Eusebius Pamphilus and his party then signed the Catholic and Orthodox creed, for fear of the emperor and other motives.

(28 )About five months after the council of Nicaea, according to a statement of Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 59.

(29 )This quotation is first made by Soz., and is found nowhere else.

(30 )See the refutation of the calumny in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 6, where the acts of the vindicatory synod are given, 3 sqq. Cf. Philost. ii. 11, gives a different account from the Arian point of view; probably the whole story is from Sabinus.

(31 )Ruf. H. E. i. 14. Cf. Soc. i. 15, who credits Ruf. with the story.

(32 )From the Life of Antony, attributed to Athanasius, which Evagrius, a presbyter of Antioch, translated into Latin. Ruf. H. E. i. 8, Hieron. de vir. illust. 87, 88, 125.

(33 )Source here is Soc. i. 23, but abridged.

(34 )See chap. 22.

(35 )Soc. again the source, but abridged; the matter is entirely the fruit of his own research, as Soc. states in this chapter (chap. i. 23). Cf. Eus. V. C. iii. 23.

(36 )Eus. V. C. iii. 59-62; Soc. i. 24; Philost. ii. 7. Soz. has additional details, especially of names. Very likely, therefore, Soc. and Soz. have drawn from the same source.

(37 )Marcus is not mentioned by Soc. or Theodoret, only by the Latins. The order is correct, whereas in i. 17 Julius is mistakenly made to do duty for Silvester.

(38 )This whole chapter is from an unknown source, and shows familiarity with Palestinian history.

(39 )This chapter is also unique with Soz., both as to the Melitians and Eusebius. The Melitian opposition is evident from Soc. i. 27.

(40 )Soz. has taken this from the Epistle of Constantine to the Nico-medians against Eusebius and Theognis. This is preserved by Theodoret, H. E. i. 20. Theodoret gives the full text; he and Soz. both obtained it from some such collection as that of Sabinus.

(41 )Cf. Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 7 (in the letter of the Alexandrian Synod).

(42 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 6; Soc. i. 27; Theod. H. E. i. 26, 27. Soz. works independently from the same sources.

(43 )Soc. i. 27, Alypius; Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 60, where a part of the Epistle of the emperor Constantine is given, and in this Apis and Macarius are mentioned; here is an instance how Soz. corrects Soc.

(44 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 63; Ruf. H. E. i. 15-17; Soc. i. 27. Independent workers of the same and other material.

(45 )He was bishop of the city of Hypselitae, according to the caption of his letter to Athan. See Apol. cont. Arian. 69.

(46 )Athan. calls him Pinnes, presbyter of a mansio (not monastery) of Ptemencyrceus. See his letter to John in the Apol. cont. Arian. 67. How did Soz. change this name to Patrines?

(47 )Ruf. i. 9, who gathered the facts from Edesius himself. Cf. Soc. i. 19. Soz. substitutes the scientific order of Plato, Empedocles, and Democritus for that of Metrodorus. The story is briefly reported by Theodoret, H. E. i. 23.

(48 )Athan. Apol. ad Const. 29-31. Frumentius was called the Abba Salama of Aucoumij (Axum). Cf. Historia Ethiopica, Ludolf; Nic. Call. repeats this story of Rufinus in his H. E. i. 37, with which compare the narrative in xvii. 32.

(49 )Eus. V. C. iv. 41, 42; the letter in 42 has a late addition in Theodoret, H. E. i. 29 (27); Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 8-12, 71-83; Ruf. H. E. i. 16, 17; Soc. i. 27-32.

(50 )In the brief by Melitius, Achilles and Hermaeon are given as bishops respectively of Cusae and Cynus (Cynopolis) Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 71.

(51 )Ruf. H. E. i. 17.

(52 )Mention is made of a bishop of this name in the Epistle of Arsenius to Athanasius, which is preserved in the Apol. cont. Arian. 69.

(53 )This is in Ruf. H. E. i. 17. He also signs the first letter of the Egyptian bishops at Tyre to Dionysius; Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 79; he presumably subscribed to the second. Ibid.

(54 )Eus. V. C. iv. 43-47; Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 84; Soc. i. 33. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. i. 31 (29). Soz.'s account is better than that of either Soc. or Theodoret.

(55 )a.d. 335.

(56 )Sept. 13.

(57 )Ruf. H. E. i. 11; Soc. i. 25, 26, 33.

(58 )This letter of the emperor is in Soc. i. 25.

(59 )Soc. i. 26, verbal variations. Both probably from Sabinus.

(60 )Ruf. H. E, i. 11; Soc. i. 33. For the letter of the Synod, cf. Athan. de Synodis, 21; a part is also given in Apol. cont. Arian. 84.

(61 )This letter is given in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 86; Soc. 1. 33-35.

(62 )Ruf. H. E. i. 12, 13; Soc. i. 37, 38; Athan. Ep. ad Serapion, and ad Episcop. Aegypt. et Lib. 19. Soz. follows Athan. and Ruf. Athan. says he derived his statements from Macarius, a presbyter, an eye-witness of some of the events narrated in this chapter and the next.

(63 )Cf. Athan. Ep. ad Episc. Aegypt. et Lib. 18, 19; cf. Athan. Ep. ad Serapion, which treats of the death of Arius.

(64 )This chapter has no parallel in the present sources.

(65 )This chapter, outside of the law of Constantine against the heretics (Eus. V. C. iii. 64), consists of Soz.'s reflections on the state of the heresies.

(66 )Sozomen speaks with favor of the Novatians, though not with the earnestness of Socrates.

(67 )Soc. i. 36. Soz. has more detail as to Asterius, and better order; both probably took from the same source. Compare the attitude of Athan. toward Marcellus.

(68 )Hil. Fragm. ii. 22, gives the title of this work as de Subjectione Domini Christi. Eus. Pamp. wrote a refutation of this book.

(69 )Eus. V. C. iv. 61-75; Ruf. H. E. i. 11; Soc. i. 38-40; cf. Philost. ii. 16, 17. Cf. Eutrop. Brev. hist. Rom. x. 7, 8.

(1 )This section is manifestly an abridgment of Soc. ii. 2.

(2 )This Eusebius was a eunuch, who was now made chief chamberlain, and became a disciple of the alleged presbyter.

(3 )This chapter follows the order of Soc. ii. 2-5. Cf. Philost. ii. 18.

(4 )This letter is translated in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 87; the original was in Latin, and Athan. probably translated it.

(5 )Soc. ii. 4.

(6 )Soc. ii. 5.

(7 )The mention of Aquileia, which is omitted by Socrates, shows consultation with another source. The statement of the agents in his death is different also.

(8 )Cf. Soc. ii. 6. While the order of events is the same, Soz. had a different source, for he makes additions. Cf. Athan. Hist. Arian. 7.

(9 )An endemic Synod.

(10 )adiaforoj bioj, literally "an indifferent life." St. Nilus, St. Basil, and others of the Christian Fathers use this phrase as opposed to an ascetic life.

(11 )He had been originally accused by his presbyter Macedonius. The accusation, according to Theodoret, after his restoration was sedition (H. E. ii. 5), the crime usually imputed to the homoousians. Cf. Athan. Hist. Arian.

(12 )He had been originally accused by his presbyter Macedonius. The accusation, according to Theodoret, after his restoration was sedition (H. E. ii. 5), the crime usually imputed to the homoousians. Cf. Athan. Hist. Arian.

(13 )Soc. ii. 6, 7.

(14 )Soc. ii. 7.

(15 )Soc. ii. 8-10. Soz. with independent matter borrows from the same sources as Soc., one of which is Athan. de Synodis, 22-25.

(16 )Also called Flaccillus. Soc. ii. 8.

(17 )Cf. Soc. ii. 10.

(18 )Athan. de Synodis, 22.

(19 )This creed is given in Athan. de Synodis, 23. Cf. Soc. ii. 10; here only in a suggestion and criticism.

(20 )Theophronius' statement is passed over, and the final creed is here given in summary. Athan. de Synodis, 24, 25.

(21 )This person was a presbyter of Antioch. Cf. vi. 12; Philost. ii. 12-14; Eus. H. E. ix. 6.

(22 )He is also called Dianoeus.

(23 )From his life by George, bishop of Laodicea. Cf. Soc. ii. 9.

(24 )Soc. also quotes him (ii. 9), and says he wrote an Encomium of Eusebius Emesenus, ii. 24.

(25 )Soc. ii. 8..

(26 )Soc. ii. 8.

(27 )Soc. ii. 10.

(28 )Athan. Ep. Encyc. 2-7; Apol. cont. Arian. 30; Hist. Arian. 10-14, 57, 74: Soc. ii. 11.

(29 )Soc. ii. 11-14; Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 22.

(30 )Cf. Am. Marcel. xiv. 10. 2.

(31 )Soc. ii. 14. Cf. Philost. iii. 3.

(32 )Apol. cont. Arian. 20-35; Soc. ii. 15. Soz. is more extended than Soc.

(33 )From Sabinus? Cf. Soc. ii. 15.

(34 )Soc. ii. 16, 17; Athan. Hist. Arian. 7; and Apol. de fuga sua, 3, 6-8. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 5.

(35 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 3-19.

(36 )Id. 20-35, 36; Soc. ii. 17, 18. Soz. gives more points. Soc. accuses Sabinus of omitting the Julian letters.

(37 )Athan. de Synodis, 25, and given in full by Soc. ii. 18.

(38 )Athan. de Synodis, 26, in ten heads, and given by Soc. ii. 19, and with like introduction.

(39 )For the whole section, Soc. ii. 19, 20; Athan. de Synodis, 26. Cf. Hil. Frag. ii. and iii.; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36.

(40 )Soc. ii. 20, but Soz. has other details.

(41 )He was bishop of Naïssus in Moesia Superior.

(42 )This section concerning the Synod of the Eastern bishops is probably from Sabinus. Cf. Hil. Frag. iii.

(43 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 36-50; Hil. Frag. ii. and iii.; Soc. ii. 20, 22. Cf. Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36. Soz. used the same source as Soc., but independently.

(44 )This letter is in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 44-49; and cf. Theod. H. E. ii. 8; Hil. Frag. ii.

(45 )This epistle is nowhere extant. Gúldenpenning suggests Sabinus as the source, but hardly from the statement which Socrates makes as to Sabinian partiality.

(46 )a.d. 347-8. But a.d. 344 is probably the true date.

(47 )So Soc.; but Theodoret says 250, ii. 7.

(48 )Soc. ii. 22. The rest of the chapter is marked by an independent survey of the division.

(49 )This chapter is made up from a great variety of sources, as well as personal observation. Prominent among these are Ruf. H. M. and H. E.; Pall. H. L.; Syrian biographies; Ephraim Syrus, Vita Juliani; Athan. Vita Antonii; Timotheus' collection of monastic biography, mentioned in Soz. vi. 29; Hieron. de vir. illust.; Evagrius Ponticus, Gnosticus; Philippus of Side, Historia Christiana; Sulp. Sev. de Vita Martini.

(50 )See the Collection of Regulae and Precepts, as translated by Hieron. ii. p. 66 sqq.

(51 )According to Hieronymus, Vita Hilaronis, 2, Hilarion was born in the village of Thabatha, which is about five miles from Gaza; Thebasa, according to Niceph. ix. 15.

(52 )See below, chap. 16, and vi. 34.

(53 )Soc. ii. 43.

(54 )Sulp. Sev. Vita Martini.

(55 )Ruf H. E. ii. 7; i. 30, 31; Soc. iv. 25; iii. 10; ii. 35; Hieron. de vir. illust. c. cix.

(56 )He alludes to the treatises of Hilary against the Arians and Auxentius, and against Constantius.

(57 )That, namely, of the Luciferians. Cf. Soc. iii. 9.

(58 )Cf. Soc. ii. 35; Philost. iii. 15-20; supplementa from Phot. cod. 40; fragmenta from Suidas, s.v.

(59 )See below, vi. 34. This chapter is independent. Theod. iv. 29 has Soz. before him, and possibly also the same original. Cf. Hieron. de vir. illust. cxv.

(60 )Cf. Euseb. H. E. iv. 30.

(61 )This chapter is an independent view, and also groups the laws under Constantius. Cf. Cod. Theod.

(62 )dhmosion oikethn einai. The early interpreters understood these words as referring to the Jewish offender, and not to the slave. But the law itself is extant in Cod. Theod. xvi. 91, 2, and is entitled Ne Christianum Mancipium Judaeus habeat. The second law begins: Si aliquis Judaeorum, mancipium sectae alterius seu nationis crediderit comparandum, mancipium fisco protenus vindicetur.

(63 )An independent survey of the imperial and clerical views.

(64 )An independent chapter on the true cause of division and the origin of the council of Ariminum. Cf. Athan. Ep. de Synodis.

(65 )Cf. Soc. ii. 37.

(66 )kat' ousian anomoion is the right correction of Valesius.

(67 )A mistake for Constantius.

(68 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 51-56; Hist. Arian. 15, 16; Ruf. i. 19; Soc. ii. 22, 23, who gives texts from Athanasius of the second letter of Constans (in part); those of Constantius to Athanasius; and Julius to the Alexandrians. Philost. iii. 13.

(69 )Here he uses Athan. Historia Arian. 28; Apol. de fuga sua, 26. Theodoret, too, in his sketch of Leontius, H. E. ii. 24, quotes briefly from Athan. Cf. Philost. iii. 13.

(70 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 54-56; Hist. Arian. 23; these are given in Soc. ii. 23; and for the Synod of Jerusalem, ii. 24; Ruf. i. 19.

(71 )From Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 57, where also the names of the subscribers are given.

(72 )From Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 58; Soc. ii. 24, only an allusion; Hil. Fragm. ii. 20; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36.

(73 )Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 58; Hil. Fragm. ii. 20.

(74 )Soc. ii. 23.

(1 )According to Soz. a.d. 351, really a.d. 350.

(2 )Ruf. H. E. i. 19; Soc. ii. 25, 26. Soz. here condenses Soc. Cf. Athan. Apol. ad. Imp. Constantium.

(3 )Zos. ii. 41-53; Am. Marcel. xv. 1, 2; Petrus Patricius, Historia, 14; Eutrop. Brev. Hist. Rom. x. 9-11.

(4 )Soc. ii. 26, 27; Athan. Hist. Arian. 7; Apol de fuga sua, 3; cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 5.

(5 )See preceding references; Athan. is decided.

(6 )An independent chapter.

(7 )Niceph. Coll. H. E. ix. 30 adds that they were the notaries of Paul; hence the caption. The memory of these martyrs is celebrated in the Greek Church under the name of the Notaries, on the 25th of October.

(8 )Eutrop. Brev. Hist. Rom. x. 11, 12; Zos. ii. 44, 45; Athan. Apol. de fuga sua, 6, 7; Ep. ad Episc. aeg. et Lib. 7; Soc. ii. 25-29; Ruf. H. E. i. 19; Philost. iii. 22, 25.

(9 )The letter here alluded to by Sozomen was addressed by Cyril of Jerusalem to Constantius, and is extant among his works. c. 1165, M. P. G. 33; cf. Soc. ii. 28; Philost. iii. 26; Hieron. Chron. Eus. s. a.d. 357.

(10 )Athan. de Synodis, 8, 9; Soc. ii. 29-31, 37: Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36, 37.

(11 )Soc. ii. 30, text.

(12 )Soc. ii. 30, Latin text translated into Greek.

(13 )Athan. de Synodis, 8; Soc. ii. 37, text translated into Greek.

(14 )Soc. ii. 32-34; cf. Philost. iii. 26-28; iv. 1; Orosius, vii. 29; language and order like Soz.; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 38; Am. Marcel. xiv. 1, 7-9, 11; Zos. ii. 45-55; utrop. Brev. hist. Rom. x. 12, 13.

(15 )a.d. 353.

(16 )Soc. ii. 33, 34.

(17 )a.d. 353.

(18 )Independent chapter.

(19 )Sozomen is mistaken in saying twenty-five years; he was bishop from a.d. 337-352, fifteen years; this error is due to his earlier con fusion of Julius and Silvester.

(20 )See above, iii. 20.

(21 )Sozomen is the only historian who makes mention of this Synod at Antioch in Syria; probably from Sabinus.

(22 )Ruf. H. E. i. 19, 20; Athan. Hist. Arian. 31-46, and probably the lost letter of consecration addressed to the nuns; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 14, 15; Soc. ii. 36; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 39.

(23 )Or, as Rufinus and Sulpicius Severus call him, Rhodanius. Socrates omits Rhodanius and Lucifer, and does not mention Hilary. Sozomen evidently used Rufinus. Rhodanius was bishop of Toulouse. Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 39.

(24 )The general was Syrianus; Hilary was notary to the Emperor Constantius, and was sent by him to expel Athanasius from Alexandria. On the whole passage, see Athan. Apol. ad Const. imp. 19-25; Apol. de fuga sua, 24.

(25 )Ruf. H. E. i. 18, 33, 34; Soc. ii. 45; iii. 14; Sozomen groups these stories without regard to time; see next chapter; he has some independent material.

(26 )Soc. iii. 14.

(27 )Athan. Hist. Arian. 31-46; Ruf. H. E. i. 21; Soc. ii. 36; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 39: cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 16, dialogue between the emperor and Liberius; Am. Marcel. xv. 7.

(28 )The dialogue is preserved in Theodoret, H. E. ii. 16. Cf. Hil. Fragm. v., vi.

(29 )He means the Arian bishops. It is like the terms Athanasius employs.

(30 )One would have expected from Liberius "the same," ie. omoj instead of omoioj.

(31 )iii. 15, and references there; Athan. de Synodis, 8, 38; Soc. ii. 35, 36; cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 24.

(32 )So also says Socrates. But Epiphanius asserts that he was ordained by George of Alexandria in Taurus. Adv. haeres. iii. 1, 38 (haeres. lxxiii.).

(33 )Otherwise called Germinius. He was afterwards promoted to the bishopric of Sirmium, according to Athan. Hist. Arian. 74; cf. de Synodis, 1, 8.

(34 )See, above, chap. vi. near the end.

(35 )Athanasius also excuses the lapse of Hosius on the ground that he acted under compulsion.

(36 )Not the individual letter of Eudoxius, according to some readings, but of the Synod of Antioch.

(37 )Philost. iv. 4-6, 8; x. 12; and fragment in Suidas s. Eudoxius; Athan. Hist. Arian. 4, 5; Hil. de Synod. 8, 9, 90; Soc. ii. 37, 40; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 25, 26.

(38 )Independent document. Cf. Theodoret, ii. 26, who alludes to the first part of this letter, then apparently mixes another one by Constantius with it.

(39 )Athan. Hist. Arian. 35-41; Epistles of Liberius, M. P. L. 8; Hil. Fragm. iv.-vi.; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 17; Ruf. i. 22; Philost. iv. 3; Soc. ii. 37; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 39. Many independent details.

(40 )The fourth Sirmium council, a.d. 358.

(41 )Philost. iv. 10, 11; Athan. de Synodis, 2-7; Soc. ii. 37, 39; cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 18, 26. Soz.'s facts are more voluminous, and the grouping independent.

(42 )Cf. Am. Marcell. xvii. 7; Idatius under 358 in Descriptio Consulum.

(43 )A story from tradition by Soz.

(44 )Athan. de Synodis, 8-11; Soc. ii. 37; Ruf. i. 21; Philost. H. E. iv. 10; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 18.

(45 )a.d. 359.

(46 )This speech is quoted directly in Soc. ii. 37.

(47 )Athan. de Synodis, 3; quoted by Soc. ii. 37.

(48 )The emperor had requested ten; cf. also ii. 23.

(49 )Athan. de Synodis, c. 10; Hil. Fragm. viii., Latin form; Soc. ii. 37; Theod. ii 19.

(50 )In addition to the references in 18, Athan. Synodis, 55; Ep. ad. Afros episcopos, 3, 4. Documents reproduced in Soc. ii. 37.

(51 )The reply of the bishops to Constantius, also reproduced in Theodoret, H. E. ii. 20, from Athan. de Synodis, 55. Soz. presents the best general grouping of the facts.

(52 )Soc. ii. 38, from which the most of this chapter is derived; a few details in addition are given by Soz. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 26.

(53 )Soc. ii. 38; order and detail from Socrates.

(54 )Soz. alludes to the original acts of the Synod at the end, and Soc. ii. 39, to Sabinus' collection. Sabinus probably reported the exact originals. Athan. de Synodis, 12, 13; Hil. contra Constantium, 12; Philost. iv. 11; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 42. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 26; Athan. de Synodis, 29.

(55 )The author of the first formulary of Sirmium is here given by Soz. Soc. stated it, ii. 30.

(56 )See above, 16.

(57 )Given by Soc. ii. 40.

(58 )Mistake for Annianus, as given in 24.

(59 )Soc. refers anxious readers to the collection by Sabinus, ii. 39.

(60 )A few hints in Philost. iv. 12; Soc. ii. 41. Cf. Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 43-45; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 27. But the main part is independent.

(61 )Cf. iv. 18; twenty. Philost. tells us that Acacius prepared the minutes of this Synod.

(62 )Concerning this Honoratus see the Descriptio Consulum of Idatius.

(63 )The acts of this Synod of Constantinople were written by Acacius. Cf. Philost. iv. 12. Further, cf. Philost. iv. 12, v. 1; Athan. de Synodis, 30, the formulary; Soc. ii. 41 (with the revised formulary), 42, 43; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 27, 28. Soz. enlarges on the depositions, giving us much new material; Theodoret gives a letter against Aetius (from Sabinus?).

(64 )Further mention is made of this Hermogenes by Am. Marcell. xix. 12, 6; xxi. 6, 9.

(65 )Cf. iv. 22.

(66 )See references to previous chapter.

(67 )See the abrogation of the time-limit through a Synod convened by Eudoxius. Philost. vii. 6.

(68 )Soc. ii. 43; Ruf. H. E. i. 21. Soz. has independent details.

(69 )Cf. with Ruf. H. E. i. 21.

(70 )Soc. ii. 45; Ruf. H. E. ii. 25; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 6. Soz. independent.

(71 )Cf. Philost. iv. 9.

(72 )After a.d. 395. Yet according to vii. 2, the Macedonians took advantage of the Gratian law and repossessed the churches from which Valens had ejected them.

(73 )Soc. ii. 44. The order is the same in Soz., but with many new details. Philost. v. 1, 5; Ruf. H. E. i. 24. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 31.

(74 )Soc. ii. 45. Soz. and he are much alike, but yet each has independent statements; both evidently draw from the same source. Athan. de Synodis, 31; Ruf. H. E. i. 25.

(75 )1 Cor. xi. 12.

(76 )Soc. ii. 45. Soz. has some order, but varying points.

(77 )Namely, Artemius, who was afterwards martyred under Julian. Am. Marcel. xxii. 11. 3-8.

(78 )Soc. iv. 25. Epiphanius (adv. Hoeres, ii. 3, 10; Hoeres, lxvi.), places another Cyril after Herennius. Soc. calls Erennius, Arrenius.

(1 )Soc. ii. 47, and iii. 1; Ruf. H. E. i. 26; Orosius, vii. 29, 30; Philost. vi. 5, 6. Soz. has much that is independent. Cf. Eunapius, Zos., and Am. Marcel. under the reigns of Constantius and Julian. Eutrop. Brev. Hist. Rom. x. 14, 15.

(2 )Soc. iii. 1. Much the same order is followed by Soz., but with the addition of many details. Greg. Naz. adv. Julianum, i. and ii. Invectiva; Eunapius, Excerpt, i. 1, 2; Excerpt, ii. 1-24; Zos. ii. 45; iii. 2-29, 34. Am. Marcel. xv.-xxiv. Theodoret, H. E. iii. 2, 3, follows Soz. succinctly.

(3 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Julianum, i. 54.

(4 )Greg. Naz. cont. Julianum, 1 inv. 55.

(5 )Under Aurelian, a.d. 274. The Greeks celebrate him Sept. 2; Latins, Aug. 17. He is said by Greg. Naz. (Orat. 44, 12), and by Basil (Hom. 23, on St. Mammas) to have been a shepherd and also a martyr. The miraculous story here jrelated is given also by Greg. Naz. in his First Oration against Julian, 25, though he does not mention the martyr's name.

(6 )See Eunap. V. S. vita Maximi; Julian wrote four letters to him, Op. Ep. 15, 16, 38, 39; to be distinguished from another teacher of Julian, Maximus of Epirus.

(7 )Sozomen is mistaken here, as Constantia was married to Gallus Caesar, the brother of Julian. Soc. iii. 1, and Am. Marcel. xv. 8, 18, give Helena as the name of Julian's wife.

(8 )As Eunapius, Exc. ii. 3.

(9 )An independent chapter; cf. Theodoret, H. E. iii. 6, 7.

(10 )The record is unique with Soz. Cf. the allusion in Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Julianum, 1. 92; and Am. Marcel. xx. 9. 1, 2 (Mazaca).

(11 )Am. Marcel. in quotation above; and Philost. ix. 12, who says that the original name of Caesarea was Mazaca, from Mosoch, afterwards changed into Mazaca by inflection.

(12 )To Tuxceion was the Byzantine term for the temple of the city genius. this one is mentioned by Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Julianum, i. 92, as Tuxh; similarly in Or. xviii. 34.

(13 )Concerning this Maris, see Soc. iii. 12.

(14 )Soc. iii. 11; Philost. vi. 7, vii. 4.

(15 )Eus. V. C. ii. 30-42.

(16 )Juliani Op. Ep. 31, a letter from him to Aetius.

(17 )Pallad. H. I. 136; cf. Soc. iii. 4; cf. Chronicon proevium to Festal letters, under a.d. 360.

(18 )Soc. iii. 2-4. Cf. Philost. vii. 2; Am. Marcel. xxii. 11. 3-11; Athan. Ep. ad. Episc. 7; Hist. Arian. 51, 72, 75, etc.; Juliani Op. Epp. 8, 9, 10, 36, 45, 55.

(19 )Text given by Soc. iii. 3; cf. Juliani Op. Ep. 10.

(20 )Philost. vii. 10, variations; Theodoret, iii. 12, 13. Cf. Am. Marcel. xxiii. 1. 4-6.

(21 )Felix and Elpidius, officials whom Philost. and Theodoret assert to have been punished.

(22 )Soz. alone reports this, probably from local martyrology or from Bishop Zeno.

(23 )Hieron. Vita Hilarionis (divergent on some points).

(24 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Julianum, i. 86, 87.

(25 )Eus. V. C. iii. 58.

(26 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Julianum, i. 88-90.

(27 )He means Sallustius, who was at this time praefectus praetorio Orientis, to be distinguished from another Sallustius, who was praefectus praetorio Galliae.

(28 )Most likely this was the same Mark, bishop of Arethusa, mentioned in iii. 10; iv. 6, 12, 16, 22.

(29 )For the Phrygians, Soc. iii. 15.

(30 )Independent with Soz.

(31 )Basil, M. Ep. c.; Greg. Naz. Ep. lviii.

(32 )Athan. Hist. Arian. 33; Apol. de fuga sua, 4. The whole of the Tomus ad Antioch.; Soc. iii. 5-8; Ruf. H. E. i. 27-30; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 4, 5.

(33 )Soc. iii. 6.

(34 )Soc. gives a considerable extract, iii. 8, from Athan. Apol. de fuga sua.

(35 )Ruf. H. E. i. 30, 31; Soc. iii. 9, 10. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iii 4, 5; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 45.

(36 )Soc. iii. 10, who says his source is Sabinus, en th sunagwgh rwn su/odikwn.

(37 )Soc. iii. 10, gives a direct extract; Soz. leaves out some words purposely.

(38 )Soc. iii. 13, 14; Ruf. H.E. i. 32-34; all remotely; much new material in this chapter. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iii. 9; Athan. Ep. Heart., under 363.

(39 )The edict of Julian, in Juliani Op. Ep. xxvi.

(40 )Juliani Op. Ep. lii. Julianus Bostrenis.

(41 )He probably means that of Alaphion.

(42 )He means Salamines, Phuscon, Malachion, and Crispion, whom he mentions below, vi. 32.

(43 )Independent with Soz.

(44 )Juliani Op. Ep. xlix.

(45 )Odyss. xiv. 56.

(46 )Odyss. x. 74.

(47 )Soc. iii. 13; Ruf. H. E. i. 32; Greg. Naz. cont. Jul. i. 66, 80, 84; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 16, 17.

(48 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Jul. i. 66.

(49 )Id. 80, 81.

(50 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Jul. i. 82-84; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 17; the variations.

(51 )Juliani Op. Ep. xlii.; Soc. iii. 13.

(52 )Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Jul. i. 101-124; Ruf. H. E. i. 32; Theodoret. H. E. iii. 8.

(53 )The question about the nature of Christian culture has Socrates on the side of the humanities, iii. 16, where there is an extended argument in defense of a return to the study of Greek literature. Sozomen is somewhat on the fence, but inclining towards the opposite view.

(54 )Apolinarius (Apollinaris), bishop of Hierapolis, also wrote a treatise with the same name. See Euseb. H. E. iv. 27, and Phot. Bibl., Cod. 145.

(55 )Ep. 77., formerly falsely ascribed to Julian.

(56 )Soc. iii. 17, 18; Ruf. H. E. i. 35; Philost. vii. 8; Theodoret, iii. 10; Am. Marcel. xxii. 14. 1-3.

(57 )Ruf. H. E. i. 36; Soc. iii. 19; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 11; Am. Marcel. xxii. 13.

(58 )Rufinus saw Theodore at Antioch, and asked him this question, Ruf. i. 36; and Soc. shows the source from which he borrowed the story by affirming that Rufinus, author of an ecclesiastical history in Latin, had this interview with Theodore.

(59 )Am. Marcel. xxii. 13. 1-3.

(60 )Philost. vii. 3, who was eyewitness.

(61 )Eus H. E. vii. 18.

(62 )Luke xxiv. 13.

(63 )Ch. xix. 1.

(64 )Ruf. H. E. i. 37-39; Philost. vii. 14; Soc. iii. 20; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 20; Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Jul. ii. 3, 4; and particularly Am. Marcel. xxiii. 1. 1-3.

(65 )Juliani Op. Ep. xxv., ad Judoeorum nationem.

(1 )Philost. vii. 15; Eutrop. Brev. hist. rom. x. 16; Eunap. Fr. ii. 15-19; Am. Marcel. xxiii. and xxiv.; Ruf. i. 36; Soc. iii. 21; Greg. Naz. Or. cont. Jul. ii. 8-15; Zos. iii. 12-30; Orosius, vii. 30.

(2 )Libanii Op. vol. ii. p. 614, ed. Reisk. Cf. Soc. iii. 22, 23; a summary and refutation of Libanius.

(3 )Independent chapter. Cf. Ephr. Syr. Carmina adv. Julianum, ed. Overbeck.

(4 )Theodoret, H. E. iii. 23 (a pedagogue).

(5 )Cf. version by Philost. vii. 15.

(6 )A mistake; it occurred under Valentian and Valens. Am. Marcel. xxvi. 10. 15-19. Idatius: Descr. Consulum, under a.d. 385 (July 21).

(7 )Soc. iii. 22; Ruf. H. E. ii. 1; Philost. viii. 1, 5. Cf. Theodoret, iv. 1, 2, 4; Eutrop. Brev. hist. rom. x. 17, 18; Zos. iii. 30-35; Am. Marcel. xxv. 5. 4-10.

(8 )This is Sallustius, the prefectus praetorio of the Oriens, who bore the name Secundus.

(9 )This constitution of Jovian is extant in Cod. Theod. ix. 25; de raptu, vel matrimonio sanctimonialium virginum vel viduarum, 2.

(10 )Soc. iii. 24, 25: Philost. viii. 5; Theodoret, H. E. iv. 2, 4.

(11 )From Sabinus, according to Soc. iv. 25, who also gives the text.

(12 )A largely independent chapter. Cf. Soc. iii. 24: Philost. viii. 6.

(13 )This may have a connection with Theodoret, iv. 2, 3; Athanas. Ep. ad Jovianum imp., where several petitions and interlocutions of the Arians with Jovian against Athanasius are given.

(14 )The accusations made by the Arians, Lucius and Bernicianus. See preceding reference to Ep. ad Fovianum, 4.

(15 )Philost. viii. 8; Soc. iii. 26; iv. 1; Ruf. ii. 1, 2. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 5, 6; Eudox. Brev. hist. rom. x. 18; Zos. iii. 35, 36; Am. Marcel. xxv. 10, 12-17; Jovian, xxvi. 1-4, accession of Valentinian and choice of Valens.

(16 )Philost. vii. 7; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 16.

(17 )Soc. iv. 2, 4. Soz. is much fuller; probably from Sabinus.

(18 )Soc. iv. 5-7; Philost. ix. 5; Eunap. Fr. i. 5; ii. 28; Am. Marcel. xxvi. 5nd;10; Zos. iv. 4-8.

(19 )Soc. iv. 9, the source.

(20 )According to Am. Marcel. xxvi. 6, 14, the Anastasian baths were so called after a sister of Constantine. But Soz. supposes that there were baths in his day named after the sisters, not the one, but both. Soc. says only Anastasia. Cf. Idatius, Desc. Coss. s. a.d. 375. His cons. thermae Carosianae dedicatae sunt agente praefecto V. C. Vendalonis Magno.

(21 )Valesius remarks that the title of this chapter is incorrect, and that it was the Macedonians, and not the orthodox Christians, who sent the embassy to Rome.

(22 )Soc. iv. 10, 11, 12, from whom Soz. seems to have compressed.

(23 )Soc. iv. 12. Soz. has only half of the document with a number of variations.

(24 )A curious blunder.

(25 )Soc. iv. 12, 13, 20. Soz. has much more acts and details. Sabinus is probably a chief source, though not the only one. Soc. iv. 12, at end.

(26 )Text reads ana thn 'Asian; it is wrong to substitute dusin.

(27 )Obviously an error in the text, for Constantius. See below, where the name is given correctly.

(28 )Cf. Chronicon, prefacing the Festal letters of Athan. from a.d. 365 on.

(29 )Soc. iv. 13-15; Philost. ix. 4-10.

(30 )Soc. iv. 16. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 24.

(31 )Independent chapter.

(32 )Concerning this difference, see Greg. Naz. Or. xliii. 27-37, in praise of Basil.

(33 )Greg. Naz. Or. xliii. 44-57; Greg. Nyss. contra Eunomium, ii. 290-295; Ruf. ii. 9; Soc. iv. 26. Cf. Theodoret, iv. 19.

(34 )Chrysostom, de Sacerdotio, i. 1-7.

(35 )Soc. iv. 26; Ruf. ii. 9. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 30.

(36 )He had been coadjutor bishop during his father's lifetime.

(37 )Ruf. ii. 5; Soc. iv. 17, 18. Soz. resembles Soc. in both incidents. Soc. resembles Ruf. in the Edessa story; neither mention the prefect's name, as does Soz. Philost. ix. 11; Theodoret, H. E. iv. 17.

(38 )Ruf. ii. 3; Soc. iv. 20-22. In c. 22 he mentions a letter of Peter to the churches, giving an account of the persecutions; and that Sabinus records none of these things. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 20-22. In c. 22 a part of Peter's letter is given. Hieron. de vir. illust. lxxxvii.; Greg. Naz. Or. xxi. in laudem Magni Athanasii episcopi Alexandrini.

(39 )Ruf. ii. 3, 4; Soc. iv. 22, 24; Theodoret, H. E. iv. 21, 22; Chronicon proevium to the Vestal letters, from a.d. 367 to 373, and Chronicon acephalum, 15-19; Greg. Naz. Or. xxv. 11-14, xxxiv. 3; Cod. Theod. xvi. 1, 2; Poemata, 12, de seipso et de episcopis.

(40 )In iii. 14; Pallad. H. L. xix., xx.

(41 )This is an independent chapter. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 35.

(42 )Sozomen repeats this below, in vii. 19, where he recounts the various local customs prevailing in the ecclesiastical system.

(43 )This chapter seems curiously out of place after the history of the Macedonians and that of the Synod of Alexandria. Cf. Soc. ii. 45, iii. 7.

(44 )Athan. Epp. i., iii., iv., ad Serapionem, contra illos qui blasphemant et dicunt spiritum sanctum rem creatam esse.

(45 )Bas. adv. Eunomium, iii., v.; Lib. de Spiritu Sancto.

(46 )Greg. Naz. Or. xxxi., xxxiv., xli.

(47 )For Ursicius.

(48 )a.d. 366, Sept. 24.

(49 )Soc. iv. 29; Ruf. H. E. ii. 10. Soz. omits the name of the prefect.

(50 )Cf. Am. Marcel. xxvii. 3. 12-15.

(51 )This epistle is first given by Soz.; it is repeated in Theodoret, H. E. ii. 22. The Synod was held a.d. 369.

(52 )All these prefatory details are unique with Soz.

(53 )He was bishop of Aquileia. Theodoret calls him Valerianus.

(54 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 11; Soc. iv. 28, 30. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 6, 7.

(55 )a.d. 374, December.

(56 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 20; Soc. ii. 46, iii. 16. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 3, 4. Soz. has much independent material.

(57 )Held a.d. 377 (Rade), 374 (Hefele). The letters of Damasus "Illud sane miramur," "non nobis quidquam," refer to this subject.

(58 )Athan. Tomus ad Antioch. 7, 8; Ep. ad Epicetum; De incarnatione Domini nostri Jesu Christi contra Apollinarium.

(59 )Philost. many sections, especially from vi. to x. 4; he says in iii. 21, that he had written an encomium of Eunomius. Soc. iv. 7, 13, v. 24. The many opinions gathered up by Soz. were probably contributed by Sabinus. There is more original judgment in this chapter than in any other. Cf. the great treatises of Basil and Greg. Nyssa against Eunomius.

(60 )Greg. Naz. Ep. ccii., quoted in part.

(61 )John iii. 13.

(62 )1 Cor. xv. 47.

(63 )Ammon in the text.

(64 )This chapter is probably built on Timothy, bishop of Alexandria's collection; see next chapter. Cf. Ruf. H. M., with whose order it agrees better than with the series in Palladius, H. L.; cf. Ruf. H. E. ii. 8.

(65 )Here we learn that Timothy furnished the storehouse for this monastic biography. The stories of this chapter are probably also borrowed from him, at least in part. There is a more conspicuous divergence from Palladius and Rufinus.

(66 )Ruf. H. M. 22; the place was thus named from the number of cells located there.

(67 )See another story of Pior in Soc. iv. 23.

(68 )This chapter may have its basis in the collection of Timothy. Cf. Palladius, H. L., for some of the biographies.

(69 )Cf. viii. 12 sqq.

(70 )Cf. also Soc. iv, 23.

(71 )PGM. xl.

(72 )See above, note on c. 29. For Nitria and Cellia, see Ruf. H. M. 21, 22; Pallad. H. L. 69.

(73 )This is independent.

(74 )This chapter is probably derived from local Palestinian biographies familiar to him as a native.

(75 )Hesychius, Hieron. Vit. Hil.

(76 )See in books vii. 27 and viii. 14.

(77 )Again, presumably, from Syrian biographies. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 28, has but one identical name; and the same is true of his Historia Religiosa. Battheus, Halas, and Heliodorus are repeated in the following chapter.

(78 )Cf. Basil, Ep. cclv.

(79 )From Syrian biographies.

(80 )See above, iii. 14, 16.

(81 )Basil, Ep. cclxvii.

(82 )Philost. ix. 15; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 32, 33; Am. Marcel. xxix. 1. 29-44; Zos. iv. 13; Soc. iv. 19.

(83 )Soc. iv. 31, 32; Ruf. H. E. ii. 12; Philost. ix. 16.

(84 )Am. Marcel. xxx. 6, 1-4; Zos. iv. 17; Orosius, vii. 32.

(85 )The extant oration, xii., on this theme was addressed to Valens at an earlier date.

(86 )Soc. iv. 32-35; Philost. ii. 5, ix. 16, 17. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 37; Eunap. Fr. i. 5, 6, ii. 34; Am. Marcel. parts of xxvii., xxx., xxxi.; Zos. iv. 10 sqq.

(87 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 6; Soc. iv. 36. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 23; yet Soz. has original detail in the story of Mania, and appends the story of Zocomus.

(88 )Otherwise called Mavia.

(89 )See above, vi. 19, 20.

(90 )Soc. iv. 37, 38; Eunap. Fr. i. 6; Am. Marcel. xxxi. 11. 1-5; Zos. iv. 22-24.

(91 )Philost. ix. 17; Soc. iv. 38; Ruf. H. E. ii. 13. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. iv. 31-36; Eunap. Fr. i. 6; ii. 40, 41; Am. Marcel. xxxi. 11-14; Zos. iv. 24. Soz. has wrought with some other material as well.

(1 )Soc. v. 1, 2; Ruf. H. E. ii. 13. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 1, 2; Eunap. Fragm. i. 6.

(2 )Cod. Theod. xvi, v. 388. 5-16; the legislation from a.d. 379-388.

(3 )Soc. v. 2-4; Philost. ix. 17; Ruf. H. E. ii. 14. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 5-7. Soz. has other material: Zos. iv. 24. Cf. Eunap. Fragm. ii. 42, for an opposite view of Theodosius.

(4 )Soc. v. 5; Ruf. H. E. ii. 21; Theodoret, H. E. v. 3.

(5 )Soc. v. 6; Philost. ix. 19. Independent points by Soz. Cf. Zos. iv. 25-27; cf. Eunap. Fragm. i. 7, ii. 43-46.

(6 )The same testimony is given by Basil, in his letter to Valerianus, bishop of Illyria, Ep. xci., and in the letter to the Neo-Caesareans, Ep. cciv.

(7 )This is also plain from the acts of the council of Aquileia, a.d. 381; Hard. vol. 1.

(8 )Cod. Theod. xvi., under "Fide Catholica," 2.

(9 )Soc. v. 6; Philost. ix. 19; Theodoret, H. E. v. 8; Marcellinus Comes, Chronicon, s. a.d. 380.

(10 )Matt. x. 23.

(11 )Independent chapter. Cf. Philost. ix. 13, 14.

(12 )She was the first, and not the second, wife of Theodosius, and the mother of Arcadius and Honorius. Her funeral panegyric was delivered by Gregory of Nyssa (vol. iii. 877), as well as that of her daughter Pulcheria, (id. 863). Cf. Philost. x. 7 (Placidia).

(13 )Theodoret, H. E. v. 16, refers this incident to Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium and Nicephorus follows him, xii. 9.

(14 )Cod. Theod. xvi. iv. De his, qui super religione contendunt, 2.

(15 )Soc. v. 7, 8; cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 7, 8; Ruf. H. E. ii. 19; Marcell. Chron. s. a.d. 381.

(16 )Soc. v. 8; cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 8; Marcell. s. a.d. 381. Soz. is entirely independent.

(17 )Soc. v. 8; cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 8, 9. The latter chapter gives the text of the letter of this Synod to the Synod of Rome. Soz. is here independent.

(18 )Cod. Theod. xvi. 3.

(19 )Most of this chapter is independent with Soz.

(20 )Soc. v. 9. Soz. is independent.

(21 )Soc. v. 9; cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 23.

(22 )Ambrose, and other bishops of Italy, convened in an undesignated Synod, condemned Nectarius, both for his part in this procedure and also as improperly ordained. Hard. i. c. 844.

(23 )Soc. v. 10, from whom Soz. borrows his facts.

(24 )Cod. Theod. xvi. 5, 15.

(25 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 14-16; Philost. x. 5, 7; Soc. v. 11. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 12, 13; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 48; Zos. iv. 42, 43.

(26 )In Ruf. H. E. ii. 16, Benevolus.

(27 )Soc. v. 12-14, 21, is the main source for Soz. Cf. Ruf. H. E. ii. 17; Philost. x. 8, 9, 11; Theodoret, H. E. v. 15; Zos. iv. 45-47.

(28 )Soc. v. 15-17; Ruf. ii. H. E. ii. 21-24; Theodoret, H. E. v. 21-23; many independent points in Soz.

(29 )Cod. Theod. xvi. 10, 11.

(30 )The opinion of St. Augustine (Ep. 158, ad Marcell.) is here quoted by Valesius: "lest the sufferings of the servants of God, which ought to be held in esteem in the Church, be defiled by the blood of their enemies." See, also, below, the death of Marcellus of Apamea.

(31 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 29; Soc. v. 17.

(32 )Soc. v. 19; yet Soz.'s account and setting is different.

(33 )The Western Church preserved the earlier discipline.

(34 )Cod. Theod. xvi. 2.27.

(35 )1 Tim. v. 9. Cf. change in Justinian, Novell. 123. 13.

(36 )Soc. v. 20, 23, 24; Philost. x. 6. Soz. has some independent points.

(37 )Matt. xxiv. 36.

(38 )He held the consulate with Monaxius, a.d. 419.

(39 )Soc. v. 21, 22. Soz. has independent material.

(40 )Pazoukwmh; Soc. en Pazw kwmh.

(41 )Eus. H. E. vii. 32. Extracts from the canons of Anatolius.

(42 )Soc. v. 22. Soz. has much new matter of his own.

(43 )Eus. H. E. iv. 14 (from Irenaeus). Not Victor, but Anicetus; the conflict of Victor was with Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus. Eus. H. E. v. 24.

(44 )Nicephorus (xii. 34) declares that this custom lasted down to his own day; and that it was practiced also on the 1st of January, as well as at Easter.

(45 )Independent chapter. Cf. Ruf. H. E. ii. 19; Theodoret, H. E. v. 21; Zos. iv. 28, 29.

(46 )Cod. Theod. xvi. 10, 12.

(47 )An independent chapter. Cf. Philost. vii. 4; Theodoret, H. E. iii. 7; Marcell. Chron. a.d. 453; Ruf. H. E. ii. 28.

(48 )Ruf. H. E. ii. 31-33, the source; Philost. xi. 1, 2; Theodoret, H. E. v. 24; Soc. v. 25; Zos. iv. 53, 54; Oros. vii. 35.

(49 )Soz. is again independent. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 20; Chrysost. Homiliae, xxi., de Statuis ad populum Antiochenum habitae.

(50 )Soz. has his account from an independent source. Cf. Ruf. H. E. ii. 33; Philost. xi. 2; Soc. v. 25; Theodoret, H. E. v. 24; Zos. iv. 55-58; Olymp. Fr. 19.

(51 )An independent chapter. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 17, 18; Ruf. H. E. ii. 18; Ambrose, Epp. Cl. i. 51.

(52 )Not extant.

(53 )An independent chapter from a Greek life of Donatus, which was probably incorporated in Anastasius' translation. A Greek biography of Theotimus was not unlikely the basis of the account of the bishop of Tomi.

(54 )Also Euoria.

(55 )Independent chapter, Cf. life by alleged Polybius.

(56 )Also independent.

(57 )Acacius, Soc. vi. 18; and Theodoret, H. E. v. 4, 8.

(58 )Cf. v. 9.

(59 )First part independent.

(60 )Or simply Bera.

(61 )Soc. v. 26; Ruf. H. E. ii. 34; Theodoret, H. E. v. 25; Philost. xi. 2; Zos. iv. 59. For a different view of the private life of Theodosius, see Eunap. Fragm. ii. 42, 49; Philost. xi. 2; Zos. iv. 33, 44.

(62 )a.d. 395. Idat. Descr. Coss.; Marcel. Com. chron.

(1 )Soc. v. 26; vi. 1, 22; Philost. xi. 3; Theodoret, H. E. v. 26.

(2 )Claudianus, in Rufinum, lib. ii.; Hieron. Ep. lxxvii. ad Oceanum, de morte Fabiolae, 8; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 52.

(3 )i.e. Nov. 27, 395 a.d.

(4 )Soc. vi. 22. Soz. is careful to omit the joke on John Chrysostom.

(5 )Pallad. Dialog. de vita Chrys. 5, 6; Soc. vi. 2, 3; Theodoret, H. E. v. 27. Soz. works his material for the most part independently.

(6 )Some of the disciples of Libanius, who had the habit of attending the public instructions of John in the church, were converted by him to the faith of Christ.

(7 )Chrys. ad Theodorum lapsum, xlvii. 1. Migne.

(8 )Soc. also attests to the presence of Theophilus at the ordination of John. vi. 2; Pallad. Dialog. 5.

(9 )Soc. vi. 4. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 28; Pallad. Dialog. 5.

(10 )Soc. vi. 3; Theodoret, H. E. v. 23.

(11 )Chrys. Homilia cum Saturninus et Aurelianus acti essent in exsilium, iii. 413; Soc. vi. 6. He advises the curious to read the Gainia, a poem by Eusebius the Scholastic; and the verses on the same theme by the poet Ammonius. Philost. xi. 8; Theodoret, H. E. v. 32, 33; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 62-65, iii. 17; Zos. v. 7-22.

(12 )Flavita was consul with Vincentius, a.d. 401. See under Marcell. Com. chron.

(13 )Arcadius and Honorius, each in their fifth consulate. Theodosius junior was made Caesar a.d. 402.

(14 )Independent chapter.

(15 )Soc. vi. 11; Pallad. Dialog. 13-20. Soz. has material of his own.

(16 )Independent chapter. Cf. Soc. vi. 5; Philost. xi. 4-6; Chrys. Homilia in Eutropium eunuchum patricium; homilia de capto Eutropio et de divitiarum vanitate; Claudianus in Eutropium, i. ii.; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 53-56; Fragm. iii. 16; Fragm. iv. 20-23; Fragm. v. 3; Zos. v. 3, 8-18.

(17 )Soc. vi. 8.

(18 )Soc. vi. 4, 11: Pallad. Dialog. Pallad. H. L. cxliv.; Epp. xvii. ad Olympiadem. Soz. has independent material concerning Olympias and Isaac.

(19 )Soc. vi. 11; Pallad. Dialog.

(20 )A number of the homilies still attributed to Chrysostom, as well as those now acknowledged not to be his, were from the eloquent Severian.

(21 )Chrys. Homilia de recipiendo Severiano; and Sermo ipsius Severiam de pace, iii. 421-423.

(22 )Soc. vi. 7.

(23 )This epistle is no longer extant; it is alluded to by Cassianus in his Collatio, x. 2; Opp. i. p. 821, 822.

(24 )Soc. vi. 7, 9; Pallad, Dialog. 6. Soz. has different order and some new opinions.

(25 )Pallad. Dialog. 7; Soc. vi. 7, 9. Soz.'s has independent matter.

(26 )Mainly after Soc. vi. 10, 12, 14; Pallad. Dialog. 8.

(27 )Independent chapter. Cf. Soc. vi. 14.

(28 )See above, vi. 32.

(29 )Soc. vi. 15; Pallad. Dialog. 3, 8-10; also Chrysostom's letter to Innocent, ibid. 2, Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 34.

(30 )References in preceding chapter. Soz. has independent material.

(31 )Soc. vi. 16; Pallad. Dialog. ibid., and Chrysostom's Ep. ad Innocentem; Chrys. Sermones antequam iret in Exsilium; Sermo cum iret in Exsilium; orationes et sermones post Reditum ab Exsilio, iii. 427-448. Soz., while guided by the order of Soc., works the material in a different form. Cf. Zos. v. 25.

(32 )Soc. vi. 17; Pallad. ibid.; and Chrys. Ep. ad Inn. Soz. has independent material.

(33 )Soc. vi. 18; Pallad. Dialog. 9-12; Chrys. Ep. ad Inn. ibid. 2.

(34 )Soc. vi. 18; Pallad. ibid. Soz. has much distinctive material.

(35 )Soc. vi. 18; Pallad. ibid. and Chrys. Ep. ad Inn.; Theodoret, H. E. v. 34. Soz. has distinct material. Cf. Zos. v. 24.

(36 )Soc. vi. 19; Pallad. Dialog. 11-20. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 34. Soz. has much separate material.

(37 )Pallad. Dialog., ibid. Soz. has an independent chapter in large part.

(38 )Cf. Claudianus in primum consulatum Fl. Stilichonis, i., ii.; de secundo consulatu Fl. Stilichonis; de bello Getico; de sexto consulatu Honorii Augusti panegyris, 57-v. 38; Olymp. beginning with Fragm. 2; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 72.

(39 )Independent chapter; cf. Pallad. Dialog. 1-3.

(40 )Innocent I., a.d. 402-417.

(41 )The reckless historical sense of the West has a strong proof here.

(42 )Soc. vi. 19, 20, vii. 2; Pallad. Dialog. ibid. Soz. has new facts, and a sobered judgment of Atticus.

(43 )Pallad. Dialog. ibid.; Soc. vi. 21; Theodoret, H. E. v. 34. Soz. has new material. Cf. Chrys. Epp. in exil., vol. iii. 2 PGM.

(1 )Soc. vi. 23; Philost. xii. 7; Theodoret, H. E. v. 36. Soz. is independent. Cf. Zos. v. 31; Olymp. Fragm. 1 and 2.

(2 )This chapter is independent.

(3 )Cf. Acta Sanct. Boll. under March 10, where the names acts, orations of Basil, and Soz.'s story of the invention are given. Basil, Oratio in laudem ss. Quadraginta Martyrum, vii. 749.

(4 )This chapter is independent. For an opposite estimate, see Eunap. Fragm. ii. 70, 71, and the allegations in Suidas, s.v.

(5 )Independent; cf. Poems of Claudianus, as above; Olymp. Fragm. 2-11; Zos. v. 4-38; Philost. xii. 1-3.

(6 )His name was Longinianus. Zos. v. 32.

(7 )Independent chapter; cf. Zos. v. 22.

(8 )Independent; cf. Olymp. Fragm. 3-10; Zos. v. 37-40; Soc. vii. 10.

(9 )Independent chapter; cf. Olymp. Fragm. 3; Zos. v. 41-51.

(10 )Independent chapter; cf. Olymp. Fragm. 3. 13; Zos. vi. 6-13; Soc. vii. 10; Philost. xii. 3.

(11 )Independent chapter. Soc. vii. 10; Philost. xii. 3; Oros. vii. 39.

(12 )He is called Sigesarus by Olympiodorus, Fragm. 26, who speaks of him as having endeavored in vain to rescue the sons of Ataulph, the king of the Goths, from death.

(13 )Independent narrative. Oros. vii. 39.

(14 )Independent chapter. Olymp. Fragm. 12; Zos. vi. 1-5; Oros. vii. 39.

(15 )Independent chapter. Olymp. Fragm. 10, 15, 29, 30; Zos. vi. 4; Oros. vii. 40-42.

(16 )Independent chapter. Cf. Olymp. Fragm. 16; Zos. vi. 5; Oros. vii. 42.

(17 )Independent chapter. Cf. Olymp. Fragm. 16.

(18 )Independent chapter. Cf. Philost. xii. 6; Olymp. Fragm. 17-19.

(19 )Independent chapter. Cf. Philost. xii. 4-13; Olymp. Fragm. 34, 39, 40.

(20 )He recounts the discovery of Zechariah only, while all the language here, and that of the beginning of the next chapter, indicates his intention to describe both. Could the work then have been concluded?