information; but as Auxanon lived till after the accession of Theodosius the Younger in 408 a.d., it is impossible to draw any conclusion from this fact. So again Socrates mentions the patriarchate of Chrysostom in Constantinople (398–403) as if he had received his information at second hand,10 and thus implies that he was perhaps too young to be an interested eye- witness of the events of that period. But how young he was we cannot infer from this fact; and so cannot take the patriarchate of Chrysostom as a starting-point for our chronology of Socrates’ life. Still another item that might have served as a datum in the case, had it been definitely associated with a known event in Socrates’ career, is his mention of a dispute between the Eunomians and Macedonians which took place in Constantinople in 394.11 If he were an eye-witness of this quarrel, he must have been old enough to take an interest in it, hence about fourteen or fifteen years of age. But this conclusion, even though it coincides exactly with the date found previously (379), is not at all certain, as he does not state that he was an eye-witness; and if the reasoning is correct, then he was not too young to be inter- ested in the events of Chrysostom’s patriarchate which occurred a little later. Thus, on the whole, while it is extremely probable that Valesius is right in setting the date of Socrates’ birth in 379, this event may have taken place several years later. Nothing further is known of Socrates’ early life and education except that he studied under Ammonius and Helladius, as already noted. Valesius has conjectured from the mention xi of Troïlus, the famous rhetorician,12 that Socrates must have received instruction from this teacher also, but with no sufficient foundation.13 Socrates always remained a resident of Constantinople, and was evidently proud of his native city, and fond of alluding to its history as well as its actual condition. He relates how the Emperor Constantine enlarged it and gave it its present name in place of the former heathen name it bore (Byzantium).14 He speaks of its populousness, and at the same time of its ability to support its many inhabitants from its abundant resources.15 He looks on its public structures very much as the ancient Israelite did on the ‘towers and battlements’ of Jerusalem. He mentions especially the walls built by Theodosius the Younger, the Forums 10 VI. 3, and ὥςφασι. 11 V. 24. 12 VII. 1 and 2. See note on VII. 1. Socrates speaks of Troilus as a native of Side in Pamphilia, and mentions Eusebius and Silvanus and Alabius (both the latter bishops) as distinguished pupils of Troilus, and finally adds that Anthemius, who during the minority of Theodosius acted as regent, was dependent on the influence of Troilus; in which connection he further adds that Troilus was not inferior to Anthemius in political sagacity. 13 Professor Milligan, in Smith & Wace’s Dictionary of Biography, even says that Socrates assisted Troilus, but adduces no proof for the statement. 14 I. 16. 15 IV. 16, end; VII. 37. 7 Life of Socrates.