(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.
(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.
(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 properties0'; 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 agent0' 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.
(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.
(102 )The text seems somewhat doubtful here. Valesius conjectures ta te alla pleista kai touto malista, idiomatically, `this among many other things0'; but the mss. read more obscurely, kai alla pleista.
(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.
(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 Constantine0' (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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 `made0' on the assumption that the Greek was gegenhmenon, not gegennhmenon. So also Valesius read and translated `factum0'; but Bright without mentioning any variant reading, gives gegennhmenon, and we have ventured to translate accordingly.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 lapsed0'; 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(8 )The word `canon0' 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.
(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.
(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.
(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).
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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.
(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.
(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 `filioque0' 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 arbiters0' (Valesius).
(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 `ephectic0' 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.
(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.
(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).
(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'
(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'
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 `homoioousios0' (omoioousioj), the author implies, was meant to deceive the popular ear by its likeness to the genuine `homoousios.0'
(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'
(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).
(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.
(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.
(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 `cathedral0' without qualification. The `Theodosian cathedral0' was situated in the seventh ward.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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).
(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 Constantine0'; 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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 `gospels0' 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(106 )The name Saracen (Sarakhnoj, perhaps from the Arabic Sharkeen `Orientals0') 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 ...do 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 `patriarchate0' 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 mix0' (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 `life0' either `happy0' or `immortal,0' which agrees with the meaning given to the cruciform sign here mentioned.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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.
(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 meeting0'; 2. `Religious service0'; 3. `Place of meeting0'; 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 Sabbath0' by the ancient Fathers and historians, but `the Lord's day0' (kuriakh). Sophocles (Greek Lex. of the Rom. and Byzant. Period) gives three senses to the word; viz., 1. `The Sabbath0' [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.
(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.
(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.
(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'
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 `Exegete0' 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.
(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.
(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 witticisms...to make this an occasion of ill-speech.0' Palladius, de Vita S. Foannis, 12.
(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 `ambôn0' as a pulpit.
(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.
(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.
(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 God0' 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, `bearing0' 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.
(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 `Salamis0' 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.
(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.
(66 )This discourse entitled `In decollationem Praecursoris et baptistae Foannis0' 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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).
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 ...no 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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 same0'), 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.
(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).
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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?).
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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).
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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?