INTRODUCTION. xiv

Christian writers before Origen are known to him and mentioned by him—such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Apollinaris the Elder, Serapion, and others—but he does not seem to have used their works as sources, probably because they shed no light on the subject at hand, as his period was entirely different from theirs. Besides these writers, Socrates also used public documents, pastoral and episcopal letters, decrees, acts, and other records not previously incorporated into written works. Some of these the author used but did not quote in full (in extenso) due to their length.²² Among the sources he might have used but did not are Dexippus, Eunapius (Chronicle History), Olympiodorus (Historical Speeches), and especially his contemporary, Zosimus (New History). Whether these were unknown to him, or he deemed their information unnecessary or untrustworthy, cannot be determined. It is sufficient to say that for the period and geographical scope he covers, his array of facts is sufficiently large and purposeful. His use of these facts also shows him to be as thorough a historian as one could expect, given the time and environment in which he flourished. Throughout his work, there is an evident attempt at precision. He marks the succession of bishops and the years in which each event took place using the consulships and Olympiads A four-year period used for dating in the ancient Greek world of Roman and Greek history. He conducted painstaking investigations on various topics, such as local differences in the observance of Easter, the performance of baptism and marriage, fasting, church assemblies, and other ecclesiastical customs.²³ His accuracy has been questioned from the time of Photius ²⁴ to our own days. It cannot be denied that there are a number of errors in the History. He confused Maximian and Maximin.²⁵ He ascribes three "Creeds" to the first Council of Sirmium, whereas these belonged to other councils. In general, he is confused regarding the individuals to whom he ascribes the authorship of the Sirmian creeds.²⁶ Similar confusion and lack of trustworthiness are noticed in his version of the sufferings of Paul of Constantinople and the life of Athanasius. He wrongly stated the number of those who dissented from the decision of the Council of Nicaea as five; the letter of the Council only mentions two: Theonas and Secundus. The exile of Eusebius and Theognis is ascribed to a later period and a different cause by Jerome and Philostorgius, and it is generally conceded that Socrates' information was erroneous on this subject as well. He is incorrect on several particulars in the lives of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus, as he is in assigning the night attack on the church of St. Theonas to the usurpation of Gregory, the Arian bishop of Alexandria.²⁷

The chronology of Socrates is generally accurate to about the beginning of the sixth book, or the year 398. A number of errors appear after that. But even before that date, the dates for the Council of Sardica (347) and the death of Athanasius (373, for which Socrates gives 371) are incorrect. St. Polycarp’s martyrdom is also placed about one hundred years out of its proper time.²⁸ Valens’ stay at Antioch and his persecution of the orthodox are placed too early.²⁹ The Olympiads are also given incorrectly.³⁰

Socrates is generally ignorant of the affairs of the Western Church. He gives a cursory account of Ambrose but says nothing of the great Augustine or the Donatist controversy, despite its significance and the extreme probability that he knew of it, as Pelagius and Celestius, who traveled in the East at this time, could not have failed to acquaint the Eastern Church with its details. In speaking of the Arian council of Antioch in 341, he seems to think that the Roman bishop had a sort of veto power over the decisions of Occidental (Western) councils. However, the only legitimate inference from the language of the bishop's claim is that he believed he had a right to be invited to attend along with the other bishops of Italy.³¹