Sozomen wrote two works on church history, of which only the second is extant. His first work covered the history of the Church, from the
Ascension of
Jesus to the defeat of
Licinius in 323, in twelve books. His sources for it included
Eusebius of Caesarea, the
Clementine homilies,
Hegesippus, and
Sextus Julius Africanus. Sozomen's second work continues approximately where his first work left off. He wrote it in Constantinople, around the years 440 to 443 and dedicated it to Emperor
Theodosius II. The work is structured into nine books, roughly arranged along the reigns of
Roman Emperors: • Book I: from the conversion of
Constantine I until the
Council of Nicea (312–325) • Book II: from the Council of Nicea to Constantine's death (325–337) • Book III: from the death of Constantine I to the death of
Constans I (337–350) • Book IV: from the death of Constans I to the death of
Constantius II (350–361) • Book V: from the death of Constantius II to the death of
Julian the Apostate (361–363) • Book VI: from the death of Julian to the death of
Valens (363–378) • Book VII: from the death of Valens to the death of
Theodosius I (378–395) • Book VIII: from the death of Theodosius I to the death of
Arcadius (395–408). • Book IX: from the death of Arcadius to the accession of
Valentinian III (408–425). Book IX is incomplete. In his dedication of the work, he states that he intended cover up to the 17th consulate of
Theodosius II, that is, to 439. The extant history ends about 425. Scholars disagree on why the end is missing.
Albert Guldenpenning supposed that Sozomen himself suppressed the end of his work because in it he mentioned the Empress
Aelia Eudocia, who later fell into disgrace through her supposed adultery. However, it appears that
Nicephorus,
Theophanes, and
Theodorus Lector actually read the end of Sozomen's work, according to their own histories later. Therefore, most scholars believe that the work actually came down to that year and that consequently it has reached us only in a damaged condition.
Other writings According to historian and scholar of Islam
Michael Cook, Sozomen wrote that a group of "
Saracens" (Arabs) in Palestine had adopted Jewish laws and customs after coming into contact with Jews and may have been (according to Cook) the forerunners of Islam and Muslims.
Sources Sozomen borrowed heavily from other sources for his work. The source for about three fourths of his material was the writings of
Socrates Scholasticus. The literary relationship of those writers appears everywhere. Valesius asserted that Sozomen read Socrates, and
Robert Hussey and Guldenpenning have proved this. For example, Socrates, in I.x, relates an anecdote which he had heard, and says that neither Eusebius nor any other author reports it, yet this anecdote is found in Sozomen, I.xxii, the similarity of diction showing that the text of Socrates was the source. The extent of this dependence cannot be accurately determined. Sozomen used the work of Socrates as a guide to sources and order. In some matters, such as in regard to the Novatians, Sozomen is entirely dependent on Socrates. But Sozomen did not simply copy Socrates. He went back to the principal sources used by Socrates and other sources, often including more from them than Socrates did. He used the writings of Eusebius, the first major Church historian. The
Vita Constantini of Eusebius is expressly cited in the description of the vision of Constantine. Sozomen appears also to have consulted the
Historia Athanasii and also the works of
Athanasius including the
Vita Antonii. He completes the statements of Socrates from the
Apologia contra Arianos, lix, sqq., and copies Athanasius'
Adv. episcopos Aegypti, xviii-xix.
Rufinus is frequently used. Instructive in this respect is a comparison of Sozomen, Socrates, and Rufinus on the childhood of Athanasius. Rufinus is the original; Socrates expressly states that he follows Rufinus, while Sozomen knows Socrates' version, but is not satisfied with it and follows Rufinus more closely. The ecclesiastical records used by Sozomen are principally taken from
Sabinus, to whom he continually refers. In this way he uses records of the synods from that of
Tyre (335) to that of
Antioch in
Caria (367). For the period from Theodosius I, Sozomen stopped following the work of Socrates and followed
Olympiodorus of Thebes, who was probably Sozomen's only secular source. A comparison with
Zosimus, who also made use of Olympiodorus, seems to show that the whole ninth book of Sozomen, is mostly an abridged extract from Olympiodorus. Sozomen used many other authorities. These include sources relating to Christianity in Persia, monastic histories, the
Vita Martini of
Sulpicius Severus, the works of Hilarius,
logoi of
Eustathius of Antioch, the letter of
Cyril of Jerusalem to Constantius concerning the miraculous vision of the cross, and
Palladius. He also used oral tradition, adding some of the most distinctive value to his work.
Publication The first printed (though untranslated) version of Sozomen, which was based on the
Codex Regius of 1444, was that of
Robert Estienne at
Paris in 1544. The first translated edition to be published was that of Christophorson, which appeared in
Latin in
Geneva in 1612. A noteworthy edition was done by
Valesius (Cambridge, 1720), who used, besides the text of Stephens, a
Codex Fucetianus (now at Paris, 1445), "Readings" of Savilius, and the indirect traditions of
Theodorus Lector and of
Cassiodorus-
Epiphanius.
Hussey's posthumous edition (largely prepared for the press by John Barrow, who wrote the preface) is important, since in it the archetype of the
Codex Regius, the
Codex Baroccianus 142, is collated for the first time. But this manuscript was written by various hands and at various times and therefore is not equally authoritative in all its parts. There is an excellent English translation published in 1846 (London, Samuel Bagster and Sons), translator unnamed, later reprinted and credited to
Chester David Hartranft (1839-1914), with a learned though somewhat diffuse introduction, in the
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, II (published New York, 1890). (This text is available online at the
Christian Classics Ethereal Library.) == Notes ==