[See page image]

Page 494

Socrates is sometimes in accord with Idatius, some

times with the Chronicon paschale, and occasionally

with Marcellinus Comes. It is surprising that all

the Olympiads are incorrectly stated by two

years; (7) the list of the bishops of Conatanti

nople, Alexandria, Antioch, and probably also of

Rome and Jerusalem. For Constantinople, the

bishops of the Arian and Novatian parties are also

noted. Jeep believes that other sources have been

used, for instance, Philostorgios, Eunapius, Auxa

non, and the letters of Constantine. Hamack and

Geppert conjecture the use of biographies of the

emperors. This is not proven and seems especially

improbable for the time of Constantine, since Soc

rates expressly states in the preface to book V. that

he was unable to obtain data concerning the polit

ical events of that time and observes that hence

forth he would write what he himself saw or what

he had been able to learn from eye-witnesses. The

composition of the " History " is not seldom me

chanical. Socrates often cites Eusebius and Atha

nasius literally (ii. 37) and it not infrequently hap

pens that he copies his sources almost word for

word. Yet criticism of the sources is not lacking,

as in the fact that recognition of the untrustworthi

ness of Rufinus induced Socrates to rewrite his work.

Socrates was one of the most celebrated men of

his time, and could fully appreciate Hellenic dis

cipline, of which he says that Christ

Author's and his disciples looked upon it as

Limitations neither harmful nor divine, therefore

and Rela- every individual should be allowed to

tionships. take the stand he pleases, either for or

against it. Moreover, although the

Holy Scriptures reveal divine dogmas to us and re

vive our piety-the real life and faith-nevertheless,

they do not give training in logic, by the aid of

which we must meet the adversaries of the truth;

this, however, is essential, since the enemy is best

combated with his own weapons. Socrates did not

possess real learning; he relates simply, rarely cut

ting the thread of his descriptions by reflections, as,

for instance, in III., vii., xvi. He had also little

interest in mere theology. For him, the principal

factor in Christianity was the doctrine of the Trin

ity, but he did not feel the need of conceiving this

distinctly and intelligently and of formulating it.

He essentially agrees with his citation from Eva

grius' Monachicum (III., vii. 23): " We must bow

down in silence before the unutterable." This in

difference of Socrates to theology, perhaps also an

inborn mildness of temperament, determined his

attitude toward the ecclesiastical disputes of his

time; he was opposed to the use of force against

heretics (VIL, xli., cf. xxix.). He does not judge

harshly even the Arians, although he regarded them

as notorious heretics (I., viii. 1-2). His attitude

toward the Novatians was especially friendly; he

reproaches Celestine with having persecuted the

Roman Novatians (VII., xi.), and considers seri

ously whether the hard fate that befell John Chrys

ostom was not a punishment for his having des

troyed Novatian churches (VI., xix. 7). He often

alludes to the Novatians specifically (I., x., II.,

xxxviii.; etc.), and is remarkably well informed

regarding their history. These facts have been ex-

plained by the assertion that Socrates himself was a Novatian, but this is incorrect, at least for the time when he wrote his " History." In V., xx. 1, he speaks of the Novatians in the same way as of the Arians, the Macedonians, and the Eunomians. The personal relations of Socrates with Auxanon, who had been present at the Nicene council and lived up to the time of the younger Theodosius (i. 13; cf. i. 10; Auxanon, whether of the same faith or not, could therefore give valuable information), and, on the other hand, the importance of the Novatian communities in Constantinople, explain his interest in this sect. It is self-evident, in spite of his good will, that no great work could be expected from a writer like Socrates. He was well qualified to relate personal experiences, but was not able to write history. This was the judgment of Valesius and it is confirmed by the later commentators. His reports are not reliable, and, in cases not a few, wrong. However, the later books, especially the sixth and seventh, contain much valuable information.

(G. LoEscacxic.)

BIHwoanAPHr: Other editions than those mentioned in the text are by G. Rending, Cambridge, 1720, reproduced in MPG, 1xvii.; R. Hussey, Oxford, 1853, reproduced by W. Bright, ib. 1878. Eng. travels. are in Bohn's Rcclosiadical Library, London, 1851, and in NPNP, 2 ser., Vol. ii.

On the life of Socrates consult the introductions to the editions as given in the text and above; Fabricius-Harles, B>bliotheca Graca, vii. 423 sqq., Hamburg, 1801; Ceillier, Auteure sacr6a, viii. 514-525; Bardenhewer, Patrolopie, pp. 332-333, Eng. travel., St. Louis. 1908; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 880881; DCB, iv. 709-711; %L, xi. 473476. On his work consult the essay of Jeep mentioned in the text, and the introductions in the editions of the text; F. A. Holshausen, De Jontibus, quibue Socrates, Sozomenue, ac Theodordus in acribenda hidoria sacra uei aunt. Gottingen, 1825; J. G. Dowling, introduction to the Critical Study of Ecclesiastical Hiet., pp. 34 sqq., London, 1838; H. M. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 97, Cambridge, 1882; Batiffol, Quodionea Philoetorpiana, Paris, 1891; Rauschen, in Jahrbuch der chriatlichen %irche, 1897, pp. 2 aqq.; F. Geppert, Die Quellen des %irchenhiaWrikera Socrates Scholwticua, Leipsic, 1898.

SOCRATES: Greek philosopher and teacher; b. in Peeania (on the east of Mt. Hymettus, near the modern Liopesi, 8 m. se. of Athens) 469 B.C.; d. at Athens in May or June, 399. As a youth he was a sculptor, but he later devoted his manhood, even till old age, to the assiduous practise of bringing to birth the thoughts and characters of his youthful countrymen, humorously likening his occupation to that of a midwife. In three battles--at Potidaea, at Defium, and at Amphipofis-he proved himself a brave and efficient citizen-soldier. At the age of sixty, as a senator-the only instance in which he accepted office-he showed his moral and political heroism by withstanding alone the excited passions, and for the time thwarting the perverse and vindictive purpose, of the people in their popular assembly. He also in 406 opposed the illegal disposition of the trial of eight generals by a single vote. At the age of seventy he was accused of corrupting the youth, and not worshiping the gods of his country, tried before the popular dicastery, condemned by a small majority of votes, and sentenced to death by drinking hemlock.

The philosophy of Socrates is not so much a system of doctrines as a spirit of inquiry and a method