SOZOPOLIS
166
SOZUSA
books VII and VIII the reigns of Gratian, Valentinian
II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius (375-408). Book IX
deals with the reign of Theodosius the Younger
(408-39). As the work of Socrates appeared at the
same time as that of Sozomen and dealt with the
game subject and the same period, an important
question arises as to the relation, if any, which existed
between the two authors. There can be no doubt
that the work of Socrates antedated that of Sozomen,
and that the latter made use of the work of his pred-
ecessor. The extent of this dependence cannot be
accurately determined. At most it would appear that,
while Sozomen used the work of Socrates as a guide,
as well in regard to materials as to order, and while at
times he did not hesitate to use it as a secondary source,
he was, nevertheless, neither an indiscriminate bor-
rower nor a plagiarist. In some matters, however, as
in regard to the Novatians, Sozomen is entirely de-
pendent on Socrates. The ninth book, which Sozomen
ex^pressly declared would terminate at the year 439,
is manifestly incomplete. There is no reason to think
that portion of it has been lost. It is more likely that,
because of advancing age or some other cause, he
was unable to carry the work to the date he had set
before himself. Internal evidence points to the fact
that Sozomen undertook to write his history about
443, and that what he succeeded in doing was accom-
pUshed in a comparatively short time
The work of Sozomen suffers in many ways by comparison with that of Socrates. Though the style is reputed to be better, the construction of the work is inferior, and the author's grasp of the significance of historical movements is less sure. Nevertheless, Sozomen made a painstaking effort to be acquainted with all the sourcesof information on the subjects which he touched, and he had a passionate desire for the tnith. He was filled with a profound conviction of the Provi- dential purpose of Christianity, and of its mission, un- der Divine guidance, for the regulation of the affairs of mankind. In doctrinal matters he aimed constantly at being in thorough accord with the Catholic party, and was a consistent opponent of heresy in all its forms. But, while he maintained a constant attitude of hos- tility to Arianism, Gnosticism, Montanism, ApoUina- rianism, etc., he never assailed the leaders of these heresies or allowed himself to indulge in bitter personal attacks. "Let it not be accounted strange", he says, "if I have bestowed commendations upon the leaders or enthusiasts of the above-mentioned heresies. I admire their eloquence and their impressiveness in discourse. I leave their doctrines to be judged by those whose right it is" (III, xv).
The work of Sozomen is interesting and valuable for many reasons. In the first place he pays more attention than any of the older historians to the missionary activity of the Christians, and to him we are indebted for much precious information about the introduction of Christianity among the Armenians, the Saracens, the Goths, and other peoples. The history is especially rich in information regarding the rise and spread of monasticism. His account of the labours of the early founders of monasteries and monastic communities, though sympathetic, cannot be said to be overdrawn. The history as a whole is fairly comprehensive, and though his treatment of affairs in the Western Church is not full, his pages abound in facts not available I'lsewliere and in docu- mentary references of tin- highest importance. In hisattitude towanls the Church, in histreatment of the Scriptures, and in his views of the hierarchy and ecclesiastical order antl dignity, he is always animated by feelings of submission and respect. There are many faults and shortcomings in his work. Of many of these he himself was conscious, but it was not in his power to correct them. Frequently it was hard for him to know the truth because of the mass of divergent evidence with which he had to deal, fre-
quently there was not enough evidence, but in every
case he aimed at ex])ressing the truth and at making
his work serve some useful purpose in the defence or
elucidation of Christian ideas. The work of Sozomen
was printed at Paris in 1544. There are later edi-
tions by Christophorson and Ictrus (Cologne, 1612)
and by Valesius (Paris. 1668). The text of Valesius
was reprinted by Hussey (O.xford, 1860), and by
Migne (P. G., LXVII). There is an excellent Engh.sh
translation by Hartranft, with a learned though some-
what diffuse introduction, in the "Nicene and Post-
Nicene Fathers", II (New York, 1890).
Jeep, Quetlenuntersuchungen 2. d, gricrh. Kirchenhistorikem (1884) ; Batiffol, Sozomeiie et Sabinos in Byzantinische Zeitschr., VII (1898). 265 sqq. PATRICK J. HeALY.
Sozopolis, titular see in the Balkans, suffragan of .4drianopolis. The town, at first called Antheia, was founded in Thrace on the shore of the Pontus Euxinus, principally on a little island, by Anaximander (b. 610-609 B.C.) atthe head of Milesian colonists. The name was soon changed to ApoUonia. on account of a temple to Apollo in the town, containing a statue of the god 30 cubits high, transported later to Rome by LucuUus and placed in the Capitol. The coins, which begin in the fourth century B.C., bear the name ApoUonia and the image of Apollo; the imperial coins, which continue to the first half of the third century a.d., and the "Tabula Peutingcr" also con- tain the name ApoUonia; but the "Periplus Ponti Euxini", 85, and the "Notitise episcopatuum " have only the new name Sozopolis. In 1328 Can- tacuzene (ed. Bonn, I, 326) speaks of it as a large and populous town. The islet on which it stood is now connected with the mainland by a narrow tongue of land. Sozopolis, in Turkish Sizebolou, in Bul- garian Sozopol, is in the Department of Bourgas, Bulgaria. Its 3000 inhabitants, almost exclusively Greeks, lived by fishing and agriculture. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, I, 1181) knows only eight of its bishops: Athanasius (431); Peter (680); Euthymius (787); Ignatius (869); Theodosius (1357); Joan- nicius, who became Patriarch of Constantinople (1524); Philotheus (1564); Joasaph (1721). This list might be easily lengthened, the see still existing among the Greeks. From being suffragan to Adrian- opolis it became in the fourteenth century a metrop- olis without suffragan sees; it disappeared perhaps temporarily with the Turkish conquest, but reap- peared later; in 1808 it was united to the See of Agathopolis and has remained so. The titular resides at Agathopolis, now Akhtcbolou, in the vilayet of Adrianopolis, in Turkey. Its relations to the new Bulgarian kingdom are not yet settled. Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii tevi, I, 194) men- tions four Latin bishops of the fourteenth century.
Smith. Did. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v. ApoUonia: Pacly A.\D Vv'isso'KK.heal-Encydopddie, a. v. ApoUonia; Tomaschek, ZuT Kunde der Hdmus-Halbinsel (Vienna, 1887), 23; Boutyras. Diet, of Hist, and Geog. (Greek), VII, 1148.
S. PETRIoilS.
Sozusa, a titular see of Palestina Prima, suffragan of Caesarea. The town, at first called .\pollonia, is mentioned by Pliny, "Hist, nat.", V, 14, and Ptolemy, V, XV, 2, between Csesarea and Joppa, and by other geographers. According to Josephus, "Ant. jud.", XIII, XV, 4, it belongeil at first to the Phoenicians. From .\ppianus. "Hist.rom. Syr.", 57, it seems to have been founded by a King Seleucus, whose name it was given, but the history of this maritime city and the date of its establishment, are entirelv unknown. The Roman proconsul, Gabinius, found it ruined in 57 B.C. and had it rebuilt (Josephus, "Bel. jud.", I, viii, 4). On the arrival of the Crusaders it was called Arsur or .\zuffium, and was protected by strong walls; Godfrey de Bouillon attemnted to capture it, but failed for want of ships (William of Tyre, IX, x). King Baldwin I took it in 1102, after a, siege by land
