xvii with the other bishops of Italy.91 So, again, on the duration of the fast preceding Easter among the western churches, he makes the mistaken statement that it was three weeks, and that Saturdays and Sundays were excepted. Finally, the credence which Socrates gives to stories of miracles and portents must be noted as a blemish in his history. On the other hand, he was certainly not more credulous than his contemporaries in this respect; many of them, if we are to judge from Sozomen as an illustration, were much more so. The age was not accustomed to sifting accounts critically with a view to the elimination of the untrue. Socrates shows in this respect the historical instinct in the matter of distinguishing between various degrees of probability and credibility, but does not seem to exercise this instinct in dealing with accounts of the prodigious. To offset these faults we must take account, on the other hand, of the persistent and successful attempt of our historian at impartiality. Of all the Christian writers of his day he is the fairest towards those who differed from the creed of his church. No one else has done justice to Julian,92 or to the various heretical sects of the day, as Socrates has. To avoid even the appearance of partiality, he makes a rule for himself not to speak in terms of praise of any living person;93 and it must be said that he faithfully observes this rule, making but one exception in favor of the emperor Theodosius the Younger.94 Of this prince he gives a eulo- gistic picture, altogether different from the representations universally found in the other historians of the age.95 His independence of judgment is more signally manifested in his estimates of ecclesiastics, especially the more prominent ones,96 bordering at times on unjust severity. ‘In short,’ says Harnack, summing up his estimate of Socrates, ‘the rule to be applied to Socrates is that his learning and knowledge can be trusted only a little, but his good will and straightforwardness a great deal. Considering the circumstances under which he wrote and the miseries of the times, it can only be matter for congratulation that such a man should have been our informant and that his work has been preserved to us.’97 Socrates’ style is characterized by simplicity and perspicuity. From the very start he in- forms us that he is about to make a new departure in this respect.98 Eusebius’ language was 91 II. 8 and 17. 92 III. 1, 12, 14, 21, 23. 93 VI. Int. 94 VII. 22. 95 Cf. Sozomen, IX. 1, and Gibbon, IV. 163. 96 Cf. attitude towards Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, above alluded to; also his censure of pride and contention among members of the clergy. See V. Int. 15, 23; VI. 6; VII. 11, 29. 97 In Encycl. Britan. 98 I. 1, οὐ φράσεως ὄγκου φροντίζοντες ; so in III. 1, μηδεὶς ἐπιζητείτω κόμπον φράσεως; and VI. Int., ῎Ισθι δὲ ἡμᾶς μὴ ἐσπουδακέναι περὶ τὴν φράσιν, where he adds that if he had attempted a different style, he might have failed of his purpose of writing a popular history. 18 Socrates' Ecclesiastical History.