A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

$54 SOCRATES. SOCRATES.
Younger, A. D. 439, to which period his Ecclesias- When, however, Valesius adduces as positive evitical History extends (H. E. vii. 48). In fact, he dence of his adherence to the " Catholic" church,
probably survived that date several years, as he that he repeatedly mentions it without qualificapublished a second edition of his history (H. E. tion as " the church," and classes the Novatians
ii. 1), and had opportunity between the first and with other sectaries, he employs arguments as little
second editions to procure access to several addi- valid as those which, just before, he had refuted.
tional documents, to weigh their testimony, and to Socrates, though a Novatian, might speak thus in a
re-write the first and second books. Photius, in conventional sense, just as Protestants of the prehis brief notice of Socrates and his history (Biblioth. sent day often speak of " Catholics," or "Catholic
Cod. 28), and Nicephorus Callisti (H. E. i. 1) in church," Dissenters of " the church" or " the
a still briefer notice, do not speak of his profession church of England," and persons of reputedly
of a scholasticus or pleader; from which some have heterodox views of " Orthodoxy " or " the Orthoinferred (e. g. Hamberger, apud Fabric. Biblioth. dox:" such terms, when once custom has deterGraec. vol. vii. p. 423, note g.; comp. Ceillier, Auteurs milled their application, being used as conventional
Sacres, vol. xiii. p. 669), that the title of his work is and convenient without regard to the essential
inaccurate in giving him that designation: but we justness and propriety of their application. The
think that no such inference can be justly drawn question of the Novatianism of Socrates must be
from the omission of so unimportant a circumstance regarded as undetermined; but the preponderance
in notices so brief as those of Photius and Nice- of the various arguments is in favour of his conphorus. The general impartiality of Socrates may nection with the " Catholic church."
be taken as an indication that he was not an eccle- The'EKKXcXqla(o7r Ho'T'opla, fIis/oria Ecclesiastica,
siastic; while his literary habits and his balancing of Socrates extends from the reign of Constantine
of evidence (e. g. II. E. ii. 1) are in harmony with the Great to that of the younger Theodosius, A. D.
the forensic pursuits in which the title scholasticus 439, and comprehends the events of a hundred
shows him to have been engaged. and forty years, according to the writer's own
Another much disputed point is, what were his statement (H. E. vii. 48), or more accurately of a
religious opinions, or, to state the question more hundred and thirty-three years, in one of the most
accurately, did he belong to the church claiming to eventful periods of the history of the Church, when
be " Catholic," and which comprehended the bulk the doctrines of orthodoxy were developed and
of the Homoiusian or orthodox community, or defined in a succession of creeds, each step in the
to the smaller and "schismatical" body of the process being occasioned or accompanied and foltcaOapoi, "Puritans" or Novatians. From the lowed by commotions which shook the whole
general accordance of the Novatians with " the Christian community and rent it into sects, some
Church " in religious belief and ecclesiastical con- of which have long since passed away, while others
stitution, the only difference between the two have continued to exist. Three general councils,
bodies being the sterner temper and stricter dis- the first Nicene, the first Constantinopolitan, and
cipline of the dissenting community [NovATIA- the first Ephesian are recorded in the history, and
NUs], it is difficult to trace any decisive indications two others, the second Ephesian, j Apo-rpnc-~, and
in the writings of Socrates to which body he the Chalcedonian, were held at no great interval from
gave his adherence. The testimony of Nicephorus the period at which it ends. The interest and importCallisti (H. E. i. 1) would be decisive, had it been ance of the period may be further inferred from the
the testimony of a contemporary, and more im- fact that we have three histories of it by contempopartial in tone. He speaks of him as "Socrates rary writers (Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret)
the pure (=aOapo's, i. e. Puritan) in designation, but which have come down to us in a complete form,
not also in principle." To the testimony of Nice- and which furnished materials for the Historia Triphorus we may oppose the silence of earlier writers, partita of Cassiodorus [CASSIODOR US; EPIPHANIUS,
as Cassiodorus (De divinis Lection. c. 17, and Ps-aejst. No. 1 ], and that we have fragments of another (that
J'istoriae Tsipartitae), Liberatus (Bre2viar. c. 2), of Philostorgius) written about the same period. Of
Theodore Anagnostes or Lector (Epistola Histor. these histories that of Socrates is perhaps the most
Eccles. praefixa), Evagrius (H. E. i. 1), some one impartial. In fact he appears to have been a man
or other of whom would have probably mentioned of less bigotry than most of his contemporaries,
his being a Novatian, had he really belonged to and the very difficulty of determining fiom internal
that sect. (See the Veterum Testi07onia collected by evidence some points of his religious belief, may be
Valesius, and prefixed to his edition of Socrates.) considered as arguing his comparative liberality.
It is argued that he has carefully recorded the suc- His history is divided into seven books. Comcession of the Novatian bishops of Constantinople; mencing with a brief account of the accession and
has, spoken of these prelates in the highest terms, conversion of Constantine thle Great, and the civil
and has even recorded (11. E. vii. 17) a miracle war of Constantine and Licinius, the author passes
which occurred to Paul, one of them; and that he to the history of the Arian controversy, which he
appears to have taken a peculiar interest in the traces firom its rise to the banishment of Athasect, and to have recorded various incidents respect- nasius, the recal and death of Arius, and the death,
ing them with a particularity which would hardly soon after, of Constantine himself, A. D. 306-337
be expected except from a member of their body. (Lib. i.). He then carries on the history of the
But these things, as Valesius justly contends, may contentions of the Arian or Eusebian and Hobe accounted for by his avowed purpose of record- midousian parties during the reign of Constaning events occurring in Constantinople more mi- tius II. A. D. 337-360 (Lib. ii.). The struggle
nutely, because he was a native and resident of of heathenism with Christianity under Julian, and
that city (H. E. v. 24), and by sympathy with the triumph of Christianity under Jovian (A. D.
the stricter morality of the Novatians, or by some 360-364), then follow (Lib. iii.). The renewed
family connection or intimate friendship with some struggle of the Arians and Homnousians under
of their members (comp. Socrat. HI. E. i. 13). Valens, A. D. 364-378 (Lib. iv.): the triumph