Listed 100 (total found 121) sub titles with search on: Biographies for wider area of: "IZMIR Province TURKEY" .
KOLOFON (Ancient city) TURKEY
Margites, the hero of a comic epic poem, which most of the ancients regarded as
a work of Homer. The inhabitants of Colophon, where the Margites must have been
written (see the first lines of the poem in Lindemann's Lyra, vol. i. p. 82; Schol.
ad Aristoph. Av. 914) believed that Homer was a native of the place (Herod. Vit.
Hom. 8), and showed the spot in which he had composed the Margites (Hesiod. et
Hom. Certain. in Goettling's edit. of Hes. p. 241). The poem was considered to
be a Homeric production by Plato and Aristotle (Plat. Alcib. ii. p. 147, c.; Aristot.
Etthic. Nicom. vi. 7, Magn. Moral. ad Eudem. v. 7), and was highly esteemed by
Callimachus, and its hero Margites as early as the time of Demosthenes had become
proverbial for his extraordinary stupidity. (Harpocrat. s. v. Margites; Phot.
Lex. p. 241, ed. Porson; Plut. Demosth. 23; Aeschin. adv. Ctesiph. p. 297.) Suidas
does not mention the Margites among the works of Homer, but states that it was
the production of the Carian Pigres, a brother of queen Artemisia, who was at
the same time the author of the Batrachomyomachia. (Suid. s.v. Pigres; Plut. de
Malign. Herod. 43.) The poem, which was composed in hexameters, mixed, though
not in any regular succession, with Iambic trimeters (Hephaest. Enchir. p. 16;
Mar. Victorin. p. 2524, ed. Putsch.), is lost, but it seems to have enjoyed great
popularity, and to have been one of the most successful productions of the Homerids
at Colophon. The time at which the Margites was written is uncertain, though it
must undoubtedly have been at the time when epic poetry was most flourishing at
Colophon, that is, about or before B. C. 700. It is, however, not impossible that
afterwards Pigres may have remodelled the poem, and introduced the Iambic trimeters,
in order to heighten the conic effect of the poem. The character of the hero,
which was highly comic and ludicrous, was that of a conceited but ignorant person,
who on all occasions exhibited his ignorance: the gods had not made him fit even
for digging or ploughing, or any other ordinary craft. His parents were very wealthy;
and the poet undoubtedly intended to represent some ludicrous personage of Colophon.
The work seems to have been neither a parody nor a satire; but the author with
the most naive humour represented the follies and absurdities of Margites in the
most ludicrous light, and with no other object than to excite laughter. (Falbe,
de Margite Homerico, 1798; Lindemann, Die Lyra, vol. i. p. 79, &c.; Welcker, der
Ep. Cycl. p. 184, &c.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
PERGAMOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Glycon. Of Pergamus, a celebrated athlete, on whom Antipater of Thessalonica wrote an epitaph. (Brunck, Anal. vol. ii., No. 68; Anth. Palat. x. 124; Horat. Ep. i. 1, 30.)
129 - 199
Galenus, Claudius, (Klaudios Galenos), commonly called Galen, a very celebrated
physician, whose works have had a longer and more extensive influence on the different
branches of medical science than those of any other individual either in ancient
or modern times.
I. Personal History of Galen.
Little is told us of the personal history of Galen by any ancient author, but
this deficiency is abundantly supplied by his own writings, in which are to be
found such numerous anecdotes of himself and his contemporaries as to form altogether
a tolerably circumstantial account of his life. He was a native of Pergamus in
Mysia, and it can be proved from various passages in his works that he was born
about the autumn of A. D. 130. His father's name was Nicon (Suid. s. v. Galenos),
who was, as Suidas tells us, an architect and geometrician, and whom Galen praises
several times, not only for his knowledge of astronomy, grammar, arithmetic, and
various other branches of philosophy, but also for his patience, justice, benevolence,
and other virtues. His mother, on the other hand, was a passionate and scolding
woman, who would sometimes even bite her maids, and used to quarrel with her husband
"more than Xantippe with Socrates". He received his first instruction
from his father, and in his fifteenth year, A. D. 144-5, began to learn logic
and to study philosophy under a pupil of Philopator the Stoic, under Caius the
Platonist, (or, more probably, one of his pupils,) under a pupil of Aspasius the
Peripatetic, and also under an Epicurean. In his seventeenth year, A. D. 146-7,
his father, who had hitherto destined him to be a philosopher, altered his intentions,
and, in consequence of a dream, chose for him the profession of Medicine. No expense
was spared in his education, and the names of several of his medical tutors have
been preserved. His first tutors were probably Aeschrion, and Stratonicus, in
his own country. In his twentieth year, A. D. 149-50, he lost his father, and
it was probably about the same time that he went to Smyrna for the purpose of
studying under Pelops the physician, and Albinus the Platonic philosopher, as
he says he was still a youth (meirakion). He also went to Corinth to attend the
lectures of Numesianus, and to Alexandria for those of Heraclianus; and studied
under Aelianus Meccius, and Iphicianus. It was perhaps at this time that he visited
various other countries, of which mention is made in his works, as e. g. Cilicia,
Phoenicia, Palestine, Scyros, Crete, and Cyprus. He returned to Pergamus from
Alexandria, when he had just entered on his twenty-ninth year, A. D. 158, and
was immediately appointed by the high-priest of the city physician to the school
of gladiators, an office which he filled with great reputation and success.
In his thirty-fourth year, A. D. 163-4, Galen quitted his native country
on account of some popular commotions, and went to Rome for the first time. Here
he stayed about four years, and gained such reputation from his skill in anatomy
and medicine that he got acquainted with some of the principal persons at Rome,
and was to have been recommended to the emperor, but that he declined that honour.
It was during his first visit to Rome that he wrote his work De Hippocratis et
Platonis Decretis. the first edition of his work De Anatomicis Administrationibus,
and some of his other treatises; and excited so much envy and ill-will among the
physicians there by his constant and successful disputing, lecturing, writing,
and practising, that he was actually afraid of being poisoned by them. A full
account of his first visit to Rome, and of some of his most remarkable cures,
is given in the early chapters of his work De Praenotione ad Epigenem, where he
mentions that he was at last called, not only paradoxologos, "the wonder
speaker", but also paradoxopoios, " the wonder-worker". It is often
stated that Galen fled from Rome in order to avoid the danger of a very severe
pestilence, which had first broken out in the parts about Antioch, A. D. 166,
and, after ravaging various parts of the empire, at last reached the capital;
but he does not appear to be justly open to this charge, which the whole of his
life and character would incline us to disbelieve. He had been for some time wishing
to leave Rome as soon as the tumults at Pergamus should be at an end, and evaded
the proposed introduction to the emperor M. Aurelius for fear lest his return
to Asia should be thereby hindered. This resolution may have been somewhat hastened
by the breaking out of the pestilence at Rome, A. D. 167, and accordingly he left
the city privately, and set sail at Brundusium. He reached his native country
in his thirtyeighth year, A. D. 167-8 and resumed his ordinary course of life;
but had scarcely done so, when there arrived a summons from the emperors M. Aurelius
and L. Verus to attend them at Aquileia in Venetia, the chief bulwark of Italy
on its north-eastern frontier, whither they had both gone in person to make preparations
for the war with the northern tribes, and where they intended to pass the winter.
He travelled through Thrace and Macedonia, performing part of the journey on foot,
and reached Aquileia towards the end of the year 169, shortly before the pestilence
broke out in the camp with redoubled violence. The two emperors, with their court
and a few of the soldiers, set off precipitately towards Rome, and while they
were on their way Verus died of apoplexy, between Concordia and Altinum in the
Venetian territory, in the month of December. Galen followed M. Aurelius to Rome,
and, upon the emperor's return, after the apotheosis of L. Verus, to conduct the
war on the Danube, with difficulty obtained permission to be left behind at Rome,
alleging that such was the will of Aesculapius. Whether he really had a dream
to this effect, which he believed to have come from Aesculapius, or whether he
merely invented such a story as an excuse for not sharing in the dangers and hardships
of the campaign, it is impossible to determine; it is, however, certain that he
more than once mentions his receiving (what he conceived to be) divine communications
during sleep, in cases where no self-interested motive can be discovered. The
emperor about this time lost his son, Annius Verus Caesar, and accordingly on
his departure from Rome, he committed to the medical care of Galen his son L.
Aurelius Conmmodus, who was then nine years of age, and who afterwards succeeded
his father as emperor. It was probably in the same year, A. D. 170, that Galen,
on the death of Demetrius, was commissioned by M. Aurelius to prepare for him
the celebrated compound medicine called Theriaca, of which the emperor was accustomed
to take a small quantity daily; and about thirty years afterwards he was employed
to make up the same medicine for the emperor Septimus Severus.
How long Galen stayed at Rome is not known, but it was probably for
some years, during which time he employed himself, as before, in lecturing, writing,
and practising, with great success. He finished during this visit at Rome two
of his principal treatises, which he had begun when he was at Rome before, viz.
that De Usu Partium Corporis Humani, and that De Hippocratis et Platonis Decretis;
and among other instances which he records of his medical skill, he gives an account
of his attending the emperor M. Aurelius, and his two sons, Commodus and Sextus.
Of the events of the rest of his life few particulars are known. On his way back
to Pergamus, he visited the island of Lemnos for the second time (having been
disappointed on a former occasion), for the purpose of learning the mode of preparing
a celebrated medicine called "Terra Lemnia", or "Terra Sigillata";
of which he gives a full account. It does not appear certain that he visited Rome
again, and one of his Arabic biographers expressly says he was there only twice;
but it certainly seems more natural to suppose that he was at Rome about the end
of the second century, when he was employed to compound Theriaca for the emperor
Severus. The place of his death is not mentioned by any Greek author, but Abu-l-faraj
states that he died in Sicily (Hist. Dynast.). The age at which he died and the
date is also somewhat uncertain. Suidas says he died at the age of seventy, which
statement is generally followed, and, as he was born in the autumn of the year
130, places his death in the year 200 or 201. He certainly was alive about the
year 199, as he mentions his preparing Theriaca for the emperor Severus about
that date, and his work De Antidotis, in which the account is given (i. 13. vol.
xiv.), was probably written in or before that year, when Caracalla was associated
with his father in the empire, as Galen speaks of only one emperor as reigning
at the time it was composed. If, however, the work De Theriaca ad Pisonem be genuine,
which seems to be at least as probable as the contrary supposition, he must have
lived some years later; which would agree with the statements of his Arabic biographers,
one of whom says he lived more than eighty years (apud Casiri, l. c.), while Abu-l-faraj
says that he died at the age of eighty-eight. Some European authorities place
his death at about the same age, and John Tzetzes says that he lived under the
emperor Caracalla (Chiliad. xii. hist. 397); so that, upon the whole, there seems
to be quite sufficient reason for not implicitly receiving the statement of Suidas.
Galen's personal character, as it appears in his works, places him
among the brightest ornaments of the heathen world. Perhaps his chief faults were
too high an opinion of his own merits, and too much bitterness and contempt for
some of his adversaries -for each of which failings the circumstances of the times
afforded great, if not sufficient, excuse. He was also one of the most learned
and accomplished men of his age, as is proved not only by his extant writings,
but also by the long list of his works on various branches of philosophy which
are now lost. All this may make us the more regret that he was so little brought
into contact with Christianity, of which he appears to have known nothing more
than might be learned from the popular conversation of the day during a time of
persecution: yet in one of his lost works, of which a fragment is quoted by his
Arabian biographers (Abu-l-faraj, Casiri, l.c.), he speaks of the Christians in
higher terms, and praises their temperance and chastity, their blameless lives,
and love of virtue, in which they equalled or surpassed the philosophers of the
age. A few absurd errors and fables are connected with his name, which may be
seen in Ackermmann's Hist. Liter., but which, as they are neither so amusing in
themselves, nor so interesting in a literary point of view as those which concern
Hippocrates, need not be here mentioned. If Galen suffered during his lifetime
from the jealousy and misrepresentation of his medical contemporaries, his worth
seems to have been soon acknowledged after his death; medals were struck in his
honour by his native city, Pergamus, and in the course of a few centuries he began
to ba called Daumasios Simplie. (Comment. in Aristot. "Phys. Auscult."
iv. 3., ed. Ald.), "Medicorum dissertissimus atque doctissinus", (S.
Hieron. Comment. in Aoms, c. 5. vol. vi.), and even Deiotatos. (Alex. Trall. De
Med. v. 4., ed. Lutet. Par.)
II. General History of Galen's Writings, Commentators, Bibliography, &c;
The works that are still extant under the name of Galen, as enumerated
by Choulant, in the second edition of his Handbuch der Bucherkunde fur die Aeltere
Medicin, consist of eighty-three treatises acknowledged to be genuine; nineteen
whose genuineness has, with more or less reason, been doubted; forty-five undoubtedly
spurious; nineteen fragments; and fifteen commetaries on different works of Hippocrates:
and more than fifty short pieces and fragments (many or most of which are probably
spurious) are enumerated as still lying unpublished in different European libraries.
(Ackermann, Histor. Liter.) Almost all these treat of some branch of medical science,
and many of them were composed at the request of his friends, and without any
view to publication. Besides these, however, Galen wrote a great number of works,
of which nothing but the titles have been preserved; so that altogether the number
of his distinct treatises cannot have been less than five hundred. Some of these
are very short, and he frequently repeats whole passages, with hardly any variation,
in different works; but still, when the number of his writings is considered,
their intrinsic excellence, and the variety of the subjects of which he treated
(extending not only to every branch of medical science, but also to ethics, logic,
grammar, and other departments of philosophy), he has always been justly ranked
among the greatest authors that have ever lived. His style is elegant, but diffuse
and prolix, and he abounds in allusions and quotations from the ancient Greek
poets, philosophers, and historians.
At the time when Galen began to devote himself to the study of medicine,
the profession was divided into several sects, which were constantly disputing
with each other. The Dogmatici and Empirici had for several centuries been opposed
to each other; in the first century B. had arisen the sect of the Methodici; and
shortly before Galen's own time had been founded those of the Eclectici, Pneumatici,
and Episynthetici. Galen himself, "nullius addicts jurare in verba magistri",
attached himself exclusively to none of these sects, but chose from the tenets
of each what he believed to be good and true, and called those persons slaves
who designated themselves as followers of Hippocrates, Praxagoras, or any other
man. However, "in his general principles", says Dr. Bostock, "he
may be considered as belonging to the Dogmatic sect, for his method was to reduce
all his knowledge, as acquired by the observation of facts, to general theoretical
principles. These principles he indeed professed to deduce from experience and
observation, and we have abundant proofs of his diligence in collecting experience,
and his accuracy in making observations; but still, in a certain sense at least,
he regards individual facts and the detail of experience as of little value, unconnected
with the principles which be had down as the basis of all medical reasoning. In
this fundamental point, therefore, the method pursued by Galen appears to have
been directly the reverse of that which we now consider as the correct method
of scientific investigation; and yet, such is the force of natural genius, that
in most instances he attained the ultimate object in view, although by an indirect
path. He was an admirer of Hippocrates, and always speaks of him with the most
profound respect, professing to act upon his principles, and to do little more
than to expound his doctrines, and support them by new facts and observations.
Yet, in reality, we have few writers whose works, both as to substance and manner,
are more different from each other than those of Hippocrates and Galen, the simplicity
of the former being strongly contrasted with the abstruseness and refinement of
the latter" (Hist. of Med.).
After Galen's time we hear but little of the old medical sects, which
in fact seem to have been all merged in his followers and imitators. To the compilers
among the Greeks and Romans of large medical works, like AΓ«tius and Oribasius,
his writings formed the basis of their labours; while, as soon as they had been
translated into Arabic, in the ninth century after Christ, chiefly by Honain Ben
Ishak, they were at once adopted throughout the East as the standard of medical
perfection. It was probably in a great measure from the influence exercised even
in Europe by the Arabic medical writers during the middle ages that Galen's popularity
was derived; for, though his opinions were universally adopted, yet his writings
appear to have been but little read, when compared with those of Avicenna and
Mesue. Of the value of what was done by the Arabic writers towards the explanation
and illustration of Galen's works, it is impossible to judge; as, though numerous
translations, commentaries, and abridgements are still extant in different European
libraries, none of then have ever been published. If, however, a new and critical
edition of Galen's works should ever be undertaken, these ought certainly to be
examined, and would probably be found to be of much value; especially as some
of his writings (as is specified below), of which the Greek text is lost, are
still extant in an Arabic translation. Of the immense number of European writers
who have employed themselves in editing, translating, or illustrating Galen's
works, a complete list, up to about the middle of the sixteenth century, was made
by Conrad Gesner, and prefixed to the edition of Basil. 1561: of those enumerated
by him, and of those who have lived since, perhaps the following may be most deserving
of mention : Jo. Bapt. Opizo, Andr. Lacuna, Ant. Musa Brassavolus, Aug. Gadaldinus,
Conr. Gesner, Hier. Gemusaeus,Jac. Sylvius,Janus Cornarius, Nic. Rheginus, Jo.
Bapt. Montanus, John Caius, Jo. Guinterius (Andernacus), Thomas Linacre, Theod.
Goulston, Casp. Hofmann, Ren. Chartier, Alb. Haller, and C. G. Koehn.
Galen's works were first published in a Latin translation, Venet.
1490, fol. 2 vols. ap. Philipp. Pintium de Caneto; it is printed in black letter,
and is said to be scarce. The next Latin edition that deserves to be noticed is
that published by the Juntas, Venet. 1541, fol., which was reprinted, with additions
and improvements, eight (or nine) times within one hundred years. Of these editions,
the most valuable are said to be those of the years 1586 (or 1597), 1600, 1609,
and 1625, in five vols., with the works divided by J. Bapt. Montanus into classes,
according to their subject-matter, and with the copious Index Rerum of Ant. Musa
Brassavolus. Another excellent Latin edition was published by Froben, Basil. 1542,
fol., and reprinted in 1549 and 1561. It contains all Galen's works, in eight
vols., divided into eight classes, and a ninth vol., consisting of the Indices.
The reprint of 1561 is considered the most valuable, on account of Conrad Gesner's
Prolegomena. The last Latin edition is that published by Vine. Valgrisius, Venet.
1562, fol. in five vols., edited by Jo. Bapt. Rasarius. Altogether (according
to Choulant), a Latin version of all Galen's works was published once in the fifteenth
century, twenty (or twenty-two) times in the sixteenth, and not once since.
The Greek text has been published four times; twice alone, and twice
with a Latin translation. The first edition was the Aldine, published Venet. 1525,
fol., in five vols., edited by Jo. Bapt. Opizo with great care, though containing
numerous errors and omissions, as might be expected in so large a work. It is
a handsome book, rather scarce, and much valued; and contains the Greek text,
without translation, notes, or indices. The next Greek edition was published in
1538, Basil. ap. Andr. Cratandum, fol., in five vols., edited by L. Camerarius,
L. Fuchs, and H. Gemusaeus. The text in this edition (which, like the preceding,
contains neither Latin translation, notes, nor indices) is improved by the collation
of Greek MSS. and the examination of the Latin versions : the only additional
work of Galen's published in this edition is a Latin translation of the treatise
De Ossibus. It is a handsome book, and frequently to be met with.
A very useful and neat edition, in thirteen vols. fol., was printed
at Paris, and bears the date of 1679. It contains the whole of the works of Hippocrates
and Galen, mixed up together, and divided into thirteen classes, according to
the subject-matter. This vast work was undertaken by Rene Chartier (Renatus Charterius),
a French physician, who published in 1633 (when he had already passed his sixtieth
year) a programme, entitled, Index Operum Galeni quae Latinis duntaxat Typis in
Lucem edita sunt, &c., begging the loan of such Greek MSS. as he had not an opportunity
of examining in the public libraries of Paris. The first volume appeared in 1639;
but Chartier, after impoverishing himself, died in 1654, before the work was completed
: the last four volumes were published after his death, at the expense of his
son-in-law, and the whole work was at length finished in 1679, forty years after
it had been commenced. This edition is in every respect superior to those that
had preceded it, and in some points to that which has followed it. It contains
a Latin translation, and a few notes, and various readings : the text is divided
into chapters, and is much improved by the collation of MSS.; it contains several
treatises in Greek and Latin not included in the preceding editions (especially
De Humoribus, De Ossibus, De Septimestri Partu, De Fasciis, De Clysteribus), several
others, much enlarged by the insertion of omitted passages (especially De Usu
Partium, Definitiones Medicae, De Comate secundum Hippocraten, De Praenotione),
and a large collection of fragments of Galen's lost works, extracted from various
Greek and Latin writers. It is, however, very far from what it might and ought
to have been, and its critical merits are very lightly esteemed. M. Villiers published
a criticism on this edition, entitled, "Lettre sur l'Edition Grecque et Latine
des Oeuvres d'Hippocrate et de Galene", Paris, 1776, 4to.
The latest and most commodious edition is that of C. G. Koehn, who
with extraordinary boldness, at the age of sixty-four, and at a time when the
old medical authors were more neglected than they are at present, ventured to
put forth a specimen and a prospectus of a work so vast, that any one in the prime
of life, and strength, and leisure, might well shrink from the undertaking. As
this seems to be the most proper place for giving an account of Koehn's collection,
it may be stated that he designed to publish no less than a complete edition of
all the Greek medical authors whose writings are still extant; a work far too
extensive for any single man to have undertaken, and which (as might have been
expected) still remains unfinished. Koehn, however, not only found a publisher
rich and liberal enough to undertake the risk and expense of such a work, but
actually lived to see his collection comprehend the entire works of Galen, Hippocrates,
Aretaeus, and Dioscorides, in twentyeight thick 8vo. volumes, consisting each
of about eight hundred pages, and of which all but three were edited by himself.
But while it is thankfully acknowledged that Koehn did good service to the ancient
medical writers by republishing their works in a commodious form, yet at the same
tine it must be confessed that the real critical merits of his Collection as a
whole are very small. In 1818 he published Galen's little work De Optimo Docendi
Genere, Lips. 8vo., Greek and Latin, as a specimen of his projected design, and
in 1821 the first volume of his works appeared. The edition consists of twenty
8vo. volumes (divided into twenty-two parts), of which the last contains an Index,
made by F. W. Assmann, and was published in 1833. The first volume contains Ackermann's
Notitia Literaria Galeni, extracted from the fifth volume of the new edition of
Fabricius's Bibliotheca Graeca, and somewhat improved and enlarged by Koehn. For
the correction of the Greek text little or nothing has been done except in the
case of a few particular treatises, and all Chartier's notes and various readings
are omitted. Koehn has likewise left out many of the spurious works contained
in Chartier's edition, as also the Fragments, and those books which are extant
only in Latin ; but, on the other hand, he has published for the first time the
Greek text of the treatise De Musculorum Dissectione, the Synopsis Librorum de
Pulsibus, and the commentary on Hippocrates De Humoribus. Upon the whole, the
writings of Galen are still in a very corrupt and unsatisfactory state, and it
is universally acknowledged that a new and critical edition is much wanted.
The project of a new edition of Galen's works has been entertained
by several persons, particularly by Caspar Hofmann and Theodore Gouistone in the
seventeenth century. The latter prepared several of Galen's smaller works for
the press, which were published in one volume 4to. Lond. 1640, after his death,
by Thom. Gataker. Hofmann made very extensive preparations for his task, and published
a copious and valuable commentary on the treatise De Usu Partium. His MS. notes,
amounting to twenty-seven volumes in folio, are said to have come into the possession
of Dr. Askew; they do not, however, appear in the catalogue of his sale, nor has
the writer been able to discover whether they are still in existence; for while
the continental physicians universally believe them to be still somewhere in England,
no one in this country to whom he has applied knows any thing about them.
Galen's extant works have been classified in various ways. In the
old edition of his Bibliotheca Graeca, Fabricius enumerated them in alphabetical
order, which perhaps for convenience of reference is as useful a mode as any.
Ackermann in the new edition of Fabricius has mentioned them, as far as possible,
in chronological order; which is much less practically useful than the alphabetical
arrangement (inasmuch as the difficulty of finding the account of any particular
treatise is very much increased), but which, if it could be ascertained completely
and certainly, would be a far more natural and interesting one. In most of the
editions of his works, the treatises are arranged in classes according to the
subject-matter, which, upon the whole, seems to be the mode most suitable for
the present work. The number and contents of the different classes vary (as night
be expected) according to the judgment of different editors, and the classification
which the writer has adopted does not exactly agree with any of the preceding
ones. The treatises in each class will, as far as possible, be arranged chronologically,
thus combining, in some degree, the advantage of Ackermann's arrangement ; while
the number of works contained in each class will not generally be so great as
to occasion much inconvenience froom their not being enumerated alphabetically.
As Koehn's edition of Galen (which is likely to be the one most in use for many
years to come) extends to twenty-one volumes, it has been thought useful to mention
in which of these each treatise is to be found:
I. Works on Anatomy and Physiology.
II.
Works on Dietetics and Hygiene.
III.Works
on Pathology.
IV.
Works on Diagnostics and Semeiology.
V.
Works on Pharmacy and Materia Medica.
VI.
Works on Therapeutics, including Surgery.
VII.
Commentaries on Hippocrates, &c.
VII.
Philosophical and Miscellaneous Works.
No one has ever set before the medical profession a higher standard of perfection
than Galen, and few, if any, have more nearly approached it in their own person.
He evidently appears from his works to have been a most accomplished and learned
man, and one of his short essays (§ 107) is written to inculcate the necessity
of a physician's being acquainted with other branches of knowledge besides merely
medicine. Of his numerous philosophical writings the greater part are lost; but
his celebrity in logic and metaphysics appears to have been great among the ancients,
as he is mentioned in company with Plato and Aristotle by his contemporary, Alexander
Aphrodisiensis (Comment. in Aristot. "Topica," viii. 1). Alexander is said by
the Arabic historians to have been personally acquainted with Galen, and to have
nicknamed him Mule's Head, on account of "the strength of his head in argument
and disputation". Galen had profoundly studied the logic of the Stoics and of
Aristotle: he wrote a Commentary on the whole of the Organon (except perhaps the
Topica), and his other works on Logic amounted to about thirty, of which only
one short essay remains, viz. De Sophismatibus penes Dictionem, whose genuineness
has been considered doubtful. His logical works appear to have been well known
to the Arabic authors, and to have been translated into that language; and it
is from Averroes that we learn that the fourth figure of a syllogism was ascribed
to Galen; a tradition which is found in no Greek writer, but which, in the absence
of any contradictory testimony, has been generally followed, and has caused the
figure to be called by his name. It is, however, rejected by Averroes, as less
natural than the others; and M. Saint Hilaire (De la Logique d'Aristote) considers
that it may possibly have been Galen who gave to this form the name of the fourth
figure, but that, considered as an annex to the first (of which it is merely a
clumsy and inverted form), it had long been known in the Peripatetic School, and
was probably received from Aristotle himself.
In Philosophy, as in Medicine, he does not appear to have addicted
himself to any particular school, but to have studied the doctrines of each; though
neither is he to be called an eclectic in the same sense as were Plotinus, Porphyry,
lamblichus, and others. IIe was most attached to the Peripatetic School, to which
he often accommodates the maxims of the Old Academy. He was far removed from the
Neo-Platonists, and with the followers of the New Academy, the Stoics, and the
Epicureans he carried on frequent controversies. He did not agree with those advocates
of universal scepticism who asserted that no such thing as certainty could be
attained in any science, but was content to suspend his judgment on those matters
which were not capable of observation, as, for instance, the nature of the human
soul, respecting which he confessed he was still in doubt, and had not even been
able to attain to a probable opinion. The fullest account of Galen's philosophical
opinions is given by Kurt Sprengel in his Beitrage zur Geschichte der Medicin,
who thinks he has not hitherto been placed in the rank he deserves to hold: and
to this the reader is referred for further particulars.
A list of the fragments, short spurious works, and lost and unpublished
writings of Galen, are given in Kiihn's edition.
Respecting Galen's personal history, see Phil. Labbei, Eloylium Chrootooicum
(Galeni; and, Vita Galeni ex propriis Operibus collecta, Paris, 1660, 8vo.; Ren.
Chartier's Life, prefixed to his edition of Galen; Dan. Le Clere, Hist. de la
Medecine; J. A. Fabricii Biblioth. Graeca. In the new edition the article was
revised and rewritten by J. C. G. Ackermann; and this, with some additions by
the editor, is prefixed by Kuhn to his edition of (Galen. Kurt Sprengel, Geschichte
der Arzneyhunde, translated into French by Jourdan.
His writings and opinions are discussed by Jac. Brucker, in his Hist.
Crit. Philosopl.; Alb. von Haller, in his Biblioth. Botan., Biblioth. Chirurg.,
and Biblioth. Medic. Pract.; Le Clerc and Sprengel, in their Histories of Medicine;
Sprengel, in his Beitrage zur Geschichte dcr Medicin.
Some of the most useful works for those who are studying Galen's own writings,
are: Andr. Lacunae Epitome Galeni, Basil. 1551, fol., and several times reprinted.;
Ant. Musa Brassavoli Index, in Opera Galeni, forming one of the volumes of the
Juntine editions of Galen (a most valuable work, though unnecessarily prolix);
Conr. Gesneri Prolegomenna to Froben's third edition of Galen's works.
The Commentaries on separate works, or on different classes of his
works, are too numerous to be here mentioned. The most complete bibliographical
information respecting Galen will be found in Haller's Bibliothecae, Ackermann's
Historia Literaria, and Choulant's Handb. der Bucherkunde fur die Aeltere Medicin,
and his Biblioth. Medico-Historica.
Some other physicians that are said to have borne the name of Galen,
and who are mentioned by Fabricius (Biblioth. Graec. vol. xiii. p. 166, ed. vet.),
seem to be of doubtful authority.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Galen. If the work of Hippocrates can be taken as representing the foundation
of Greek medicine, then the work of Galen, who lived six centuries later, is the
apex of that tradition. Galen crystallised all the best work of the Greek medical
schools which had preceded his own time. It is essentially in the form of Galenism
that Greek medicine was transmitted to the Renaissance scholars.
Galen hailed from Pergamon, an ancient center of civilization, containing,
among other cultural institutions, a library second in importance only to Alexandria
itself.
Galen’s training was eclectic and although his chief work was in biology
and medicine, he was also known as a philosopher and philologist. Training in
philosophy is, in Galen’s view, not merely a pleasant addition to, but an essential
part of the training of a doctor. His treatise entitled That the best Doctor
is also a Philosopher gives to us a rather surprising ethical reason for
the doctor to study philosophy. The profit motive, says Galen, is incompatible
with a serious devotion to the art. The doctor must learn to despise money. Galen
frequently accuses his colleagues of avarice and it is to defend the profession
against this charge that he plays down the motive of financial gain in becoming
a doctor.
Galen’s first professional appointment was as surgeon to the gladiators
in Pergamon. In his tenure as surgeon he undoubtedly gained much experience and
practical knowledge in anatomy from the combat wounds he was compelled to treat.
After four years he immigrated to Rome
where he attained a brilliant reputation as a practitioner and a public demonstrator
of anatomy. Among his patients were the emperors Marcus Aurelius, Lucius Verus,
Commodus and Septimius Severus.
GALENISM
Galen, for all his mistakes, remained the unchallenged authority
for over a thousand years. After he died in 203 CE, serious anatomical and physiological
research ground to a halt, because everything there was to be said on the subject
had been said by Galen, who, it is reported, kept at least 20 scribes on staff
to write down his every dictum.
Although he was not a Christian, Galen’s writings reflect a belief
in only one god, and he declared that the body was an instrument of the soul.
This made him most acceptable to the fathers of the church and to Arab and Hebrew
scholars. Galen’s mistakes perpetuated fundamental errors for nearly fifteen hundred
years until Vesalius, the sixteenth century anatomist, although he regarded his
predecessor with esteem, began to dispel Galen’s authority.
GALEN ON THE SOUL
The fundamental principle of life, in Galenic physiology,
was pneuma (air, breath), which took three forms and had three types of action:
animal spirit (pneuma physicon) in the brain, center of sensory perceptions and
movement; vital spirit (pneuma zoticon) centering on the heart regulated flow
of blood and body temperature; natural spirit (pneuma physicon) residing in the
liver, center of nutrition and metabolism.
Galen studied the anatomy of the respiratory system, and of the heart,
arteries and veins. But he did not discover the circulation of the blood throughout
the body, and believed that blood passed from one side of the heart to the other
through invisible pores in the dividing wall. Galen was convinced that the venous
and arterial systems were each sealed and separate from each other. William Harvey,
discoverer of the circulation of the blood, wondered how Galen, having got so
close to the answer, did not himself arrive at the concept of the circulation.
GALEN'S PHYSIOLOGY
Galen's genius was evident in experiments conducted on animals
for physiological purposes. The work On the use of the parts of the human
body comprised seventeen books concerned with this topic. To study the function
of the kidneys in producing urine, he tied the ureters and observed the swelling
of the kidneys. To study the function of the nerves he cut them, and thereby showed
paralysis of the shoulder muscles after division of nerves in the neck and loss
of voice after interruption of the recurrent laryngeal nerve.
Because his knowledge was derived for the most part from animal (principally
the Barbary ape) rather than human dissection, Galen made many mistakes, especially
concerning the internal organs. For example, he incorrectly assumed that the rete
mirabile, a plexus of blood vessels at the base of the brain of ungulate animals,
was also present in humans. In spite of Galen's mistakes and misconceptions, the
wealth of accurate detail in his writings is astonishing.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the University of Virginia Historical Collections URL below, which contains images.
Wars against Antigonus, transmits kingdom of Pergamus to Attalus I.
Eumenes I., king, or rather ruler, of Pergamus. He was the son of Eumenes, brother of Philetaerus, and succeeded his uncle in the government of Pergamus (B. C. 263), over which he reigned for two-and-twenty years. Soon after his accession lie obtained a victory near Sardis over Antiochus Soter, and was thus enabled to establish his dominion over the provinces in the neighbourhood of his capital; but no further particulars of his reign are recorded. (Strab. xiii.; Clinton, F. H. iii. According to Athenaeus (x.), his death was occasioned by a fit of drunkenness. He was succeeded by his cousin Attalus, also a nephew of Philetaerus. It appears to be to this Eumenes (though styled by mistake king of Bithynia) that Justin (xxvii. 3) ascribes, without doubt erroneously, the great victory over the Gauls, which was in fact gained by his successor Attalus.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Son of Attalus, king of Pergamus, defeats Gauls, called `son of a bull' and `bull-horned' in oracles, ally of Athens, Athenian tribe called after him, his offerings on Acropolis, his chamber at Pergamus.
Attalus I. (Attalos), son of Attalus, the brother of Philetaerus, and Antiochis,
daughter of Achaeus (not the cousin of Antiochus the Great). He succeeded his
cousin, Eumenes I., in B. C. 241. He was the first of the Asiatic princes who
ventured to make head against the Gauls, over whom he gained a decisive victory.
After this success, he assumed the title of king (Strab. xiii; Paus. i. 8.1, x.
15.3; Liv. xxxviii. 16; Polyb. xviii. 24), and dedicated a sculptured representation
of his victory in the Acropolis at Athens (Paus. i. 25.2). He took advantage of
the disputes in the family of the Seleucidae, and in B. C. 229 conquered Antiochus
Hierax in several battles. Before the accession of Seleucus Ceraunus (B. C. 226),
he had made himself master of the whole of Asia Minor west of mount Taurus. Seleucus
immediately attacked him, and by B. C. 221 Achaeus had reduced his dominions to
the limits of Pergamus itself (Polyb. iv. 48).
On the breaking out of the war between the Rhodians and Byzantines
(B. C. 220), Attalus took part with the latter, who had done their utmost to bring
about a peace between him and Achaeus (Polyb. iv. 49), but he was unable to render
them any effective assistance. In B. C. 218, with the aid of a body of Gaulish
mercenaries, he recovered several cities in Aeolis and the neighbouring districts,
but was stopped in the midst of his successes by an eclipse of the sun, which
so alarmed the Gauls, that they refused to proceed (Polyb. v. 77, 78). In B. C.
216, he entered into an alliance with Antiochus the Great against Achaeus (v.
107). In B. C. 211, he joined the alliance of the Romans and Aetolians against
Philip and the Achaeans (Liv. xxvi. 24). In 209, he was made praetor of the Aetolians
conjointly with Pyrrhias, and in the following year joined Sulpicius with a fleet.
After wintering at Aegina, in 207 he overran Peparethus, assisted in the capture
of Oreus, and took Opus. While engaged in collecting tribute in the neighbourhood
of this town, he narrowly escaped falling into Philip's hands; and hearing that
Prusias, king of Bithynia, had invaded Pergamus, he returned to Asia (Liv. xxvii.
29, 30, 33, xxviii. 3-7; Polyb. x. 41, 42).
In B. C. 205, in obedience to an injunction of the Sibylline books,
the Romans sent an embassy to Asia to bring away the Idaean Mother from Pessinus
in Phrygia. Attains received them graciously and assisted them in procuring the
black stone which was the symbol of the goddess (Liv. xxix. 10, 11). At the general
peace brought about in 204, Prusias and Attalus were included, the former as the
ally of Philip, the latter as the ally of the Romans (xxix. 12). On the breaking
out of hostilities between Philip and the Rhodians, Attalus took part with the
latter; and in B. C. 201, Philip invaded and ravaged his territories, but was
unable to take the city of Pergamus. A sea-fight ensued, off Chios, between the
fleet of Philip and the combined fleets of Attalus and the Rhodians, in which
Philip was in fact defeated with considerable loss, though he found a pretext
for claiming a victory, because Attalus, having incautiously pursued a Macedonian
vessel too far, was compelled to abandon his own, and make his escape by land.
After another ineffectual attempt upon Pergamus, Philip retired (Polyb. xvi. 1-8;
Liv. xxxii. 33).
In 200, Attalus, at the invitation of the Athenians, crossed over
to Athens, where the most flattering honours were paid him. A new tribe was created
and named Attalis after him. At Athens he met a Roman embassy, and war was formally
declared against Philip (Polyb. xvi. 25, 26; Liv. xxxi. 14, 15; Paus. i. 5. 5,
8.1). In the same year, Attalus made some ineffectual attempts; to relieve Abydos,
which was besieged by Philip (Polyb. xvi. 25, 30-34). In the campaign of 199,
he joined the Romans with a fleet and troops. Their combined forces took Oreus
in Euboea (Liv. xxxi. 44-47). Attalus then returned to Asia to repel the aggressions
of Antiochus III., who had taken the opportunity of his absence to attack Pergamus,
but was induced to desist by the remonstrances of the Romans (Liv. xxxi. 45-47,
xxxii. 8, 27).
In 198, Attalus again joined the Romans, and, after the campaign,
wintered in Aegina. In the spring of 197, he attended an assembly held at Thebes
for the purpose of detaching the Boeotians from the cause of Philip, and in the
midst of his speech was struck with apoplexy. He was conveyed to Pergamus, and
died the same year, in the seventy-second year of his age, after a reign of forty-four
years (Liv. xxxii. 16, 19, 23, 24, 33, xxxiii. 2, 21; Polyb. xvii. 2, 8, 16, xviii.
24, xxii. 2, &c.). As a ruler, his conduct was marked by wisdom and justice; he
was a faithful ally, a generous friend, and an affectionate husband and father.
He encouraged the arts and sciences (Diog. Laert. iv. 8; Athen. xv.; Plin. H.
N. viii. 74, xxxiv. 19.24, xxxv. 49). By his wife, Apollonias or Apollonis, he
had four sons: Eumenes, who succeeded him, Attalus, Philetaerus, and Athenaeus.
This is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Eumenes II., king of Pergamus, son of Attalus I., whom he succeeded on the throne
B. C. 197. (Clinton, F. H. iii. p. 403.) He inherited from his predecessor the
friendship and alliance of the Romans, which he took the utmost pains to cultivate,
and was included by them in the treaty of peace concluded with Philip, king of
Macedonia, in 196, by which he obtained possession of the towns of Oreus and Eretria
in Euboea. (Liv. xxxiii. 30, 34.) In the following year he sent a fleet to the
assistance of Flamininus in the war against Nabis. (Liv. xxxiv. 26.) His alliance
was in vain courted by his powerful neighbour, Antiochus III., who offered him
one of his daughters in marriage. (Appian, Syr. 5.) Eumenes plainly saw that it
was his interest to adhere to the Romans in the approaching contest; and far from
seeking to avert this, he used all his endeavours to urge on the Romans to engage
in it. When hostilities had actually commenced, he was active in the service of
his allies, both by sending his fleet to support that of the Romans under Livius
and Aemilius, and facilitating the important passage of the Hellespont. In the
decisive battle of Magnesia (B. C. 190), he commanded in person the troops which
he furnished as auxiliaries to the Roman army, and appears to have rendered valuable
services. (Liv. xxxv. 13, xxxvi. 43-45, xxxvii, 14, 18, 33, 37, 41; Appian, Syr.
22, 25, 31, 33, 38, 43; Justin, xxxi. 8.) Immediately on the conclusion of peace,
lie hastened to Rome, to put forward in person his claims to reward : his pretensions
were favourably received by the senate, who granted him the possession of Mysia,
Lydia, both Phrygias, and Lycaonia, as well as of Lysimachia, and the Thracian
Chersonese. By this means Eumenes found himself raised at once from a state of
comparative insignificance to be the sovereign of a powerful monarchy. (Liv. xxxvii.
45, 52-55, xxxviii. 39; Polyb. xxii. 1-4, 7, 27; Appian, Syr. 44.) About the same
time, lie married the daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia, and procured
from the Romans favourable terms for that monarch. (Liv. xxxviii. 39.) This alliance
was the occasion of involving him in a war with Pharnaces, king of Pontus, who
had invaded Cappadocia, but which was ultimately terminated by the intervention
of Rome. (Polyb. xxv. 2, 4, 5, 6, xxvi. 4.) He was also engaged in hostilities
with Prusias, king of Bithynia, which gave the Romans a pretext for interfering,
not only to protect Eumenes, but to compel Prusias to give up Hannibal, who had
taken refuge at his court. (Liv. xxxix. 46, 51; Justin. xxxii. 4; Corn. Nep. Hann.
10.)
During all this period, Eumnenes enjoyed the highest favour at Rome,
and certainly was not backward in availing himself of it. He was continually sending
embassies thither, partly to cultivate the good understanding with the senate
in which he now found himself, but frequently also to complain of the conduct
of his neighbours, especially of the Macedonian kings, Philip and his successor,
Perseus. In 172, to give more weight to his remonstrances, he a second time visited
Rome in person, where lie was received with the utmost distinction. On his return
from thence, he visited Delphi, where he narrowly escaped a design against his
life formed by the emissaries of Perseus. (Liv. xlii. 11-16; Diod. Exc. Leg.,
Exc. Vales. p. 577; Appian, Mac. Exc. 9, pp. 519-526, ed. Schweigh.) But though
he was thus apparently on terms of the bitterest hostility with. the Macedonian
monarch, his conduct during the war that followed was not such as to give satisfaction
to the Romans; and he was suspected of corresponding secretly with Perseus, a
charge which, accordinig to Polybius, was not altogether unfounded; but his designs
extended only to the obtaining from that prince a sum of money for procuring him
a peace on favourable terms. (Polyb. Fragm. Vatican.; Liv. xliv. 13, 24, 25; Appian,
Mac. Exc. 16.) His overtures were, however, rejected by Perseus, and after the
victory of the Romans (B. C. 167), he hastened to send his brother Attalus to
the senate with his congratulations. They did not choose to take any public notice
of what had passed, and dismissed Attalus with fair words; but when Eumenes, probably
alarmed at finding his schemes discovered, determined to proceed to Rome in person,
the senate passed a decree to forbid it, and finding that he was already arrived
at Brundusium, ordered him to quit Italy without delay. (Polyb. xxx. 17, Fragm.
Vatic.; Liv. Epit. xlvi.) Henceforward lie was constantly regarded with suspicion
by the Roman senate, and though his brother Attalus, whom he sent to Rome again
in B. C. 160, was received with marked favour, this seems to have been for the
very purpose of exciting him against Eumenes, who had sent him, and inducing him
to set up for himself. (Polyb. xxxii. 5.) The last years of the reign of Eumenes
seem to have been disturbed by frequent hostilities on the part of Prusias, king
of Bithynia, and the Gauls of Galatia; but he had the good-fortune or dexterity
to avoid coming to an open rupture either with Rome or his brother Attalus. (Polyb.
xxxi. 9, xxxii. 5; Diod. xxxi. Exc. Vales.) His death, which is not mentioned
by any ancient writer, must have taken place in B. C. 159, after a reign of 39
years. (Strab. xiii.; Clinton, F. H. iii.)
According to Polybius (xxxii. 23), Eumenes was a man of a feeble bodily
constitution, but of great vigour and power of mind, which is indeed sufficiently
evinced by tile history of his reign: his policy was indeed crafty and temporizing,
but indicative of much sagacity; and he raised his kingdom from a petty state
to one of the highest consideration. All the arts of peace were assiduously protected
by him: Pergamus itself became under his rule a great and flourishing city, which
he adorned with splendid buildings, and in which he founded that celebrated library
which rose to be a rival even to that of Alexandria. (Strab. xiii.) It would be
unjust to Eumenes not to add the circumstance mentioned by Polybius in his praise,
that he continued throughout his life on the best terms with all his three brothers,
who cheerfully lent their services to support him in his power. One of these,
Attalus, was his immediate successor, his son Attalus being yet an infant. (Polyb.
xxxii. 23; Strab. xiii.) A detailed account of the reign of Eumenes will be found
in Van Cappelle, Commentatio de Regibus et Antiquitatibus Pergamenis, Amstel.
1842.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Attalus II. (Attalos), surnamed Philadelphus, was the second son of Attalus I.,
and was born in B. C. 200 (Lucian, Macrob. 12; Strab. xiii.). Before his accession
to the crown, we frequently find him employed by his brother Eumenes in military
operations. In B. C. 190, during the absence of Eumenes, he resisted an invasion
of Seleucus, the son of Antiochus, and was afterwards present at the battle of
Mount Sipylus (Liv. xxxvii. 18, 43). In B. C. 189, he accompanied the consul Cn.
Manlius Vulso in his expedition into Galatia (Liv. xxxviii. 12; Polyb. xxii. 22).
In 182, he served his brother in his war with Pharnaces (Polyb. xxv. 4, 6). In
171, with Eumenes and Athenaeus, he joined the consul P. Licinius Crassus in Greece
(Liv. xlii. 55, 58, 65). He was several times sent to Rome as ambassador: in B.
C. 192, to announce that Antiochus had crossed the Hellespont (Liv. xxxv. 23);
in 181, during the war between Eumenes and Pharnaces (Polyb. xxv. 6); in 167,
to congratulate the Romans on their victory over Perseus. Eumenes being in ill-favour
at Rome at this time, Attalus was encouraged with hopes of getting the kingdom
for himself; but was induced, by the remonstrances of a physician named Stratius,
to abandon his designs (Liv. xlv. 19, 20; Polyb. xxx. 1-3). In 164 and 160, he
was again sent to Rome (Polyb. xxxi. 9, xxxii. 3, 5).
Attalus succeeded his brother Eumenes in B. C. 159. His first undertaking
was the restoration of Ariarathes to his kingdom (Polyb. xxxii. 23). In 156, he
was attacked by Prusias, and found himself compelled to call in the assistance
of the Romans and his allies, Ariarathes and Mithridates. In B. C. 154, Prusias
was compelled by the threats of the Romans to grant peace, and indemnify Attalus
for the losses he had sustained (Polyb. iii. 5, xxxii. 25, &c., xxxiii. 1, 6,
10, 11; Appian, Mithr. 3, &c.; Diod. xxxi. Exc.). In 152, he sent some troops
to aid Alexander Balas in usurping the throne of Syria (Porphyr. ap. Euseb.; Justin.
xxxv. 1), and in 149 he assisted Nicomedes against his father Prusias. He was
also engaged in hostilities with, and conquered, Diegylis, a Thracian prince,
the father-in-law of Prusias (Diod. xxxiii. Exc.; Strab. xiii.), and sent some
auxiliary troops to the Romans, which assisted them in expelling the pseudo-Philip
and in taking Corinth (Strab. l. c.; Paus. vii. 16.8). During the latter part
of his life, he resigned himself to the guidance of his minister, Philopoemen
(Plut. Mor.). He founded Philadelphia in Lydia (Steph. Byz. s.v.) and Attaleia
in Pamphylia (Strab. xiv.). He encouraged the arts and sciences, and was himself
the inventor of a kind of embroidery (Plin. H. N. vii. 39, xxxv. 36.19, viii.
74; Athen. viii., xiv.). He died B. C. 138, aged eighty-two.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Attalus III. (Attalos), Surnamed Philometor, was the son of Eumenes II. and Stratonice, daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia. While yet a boy, he was brought to Rome (B. C. 152), and presented to the senate at the same time with Alexander Balas. He succeeded his uncle Attalus II. B. C. 138. He is known to us chiefly for the extravagance of his conduct and the murder of his relations and friends. At last, seized with remorse, he abandoned all public business, and devoted himself to sculpture, statuary, and gardening, on which he wrote a work. He died B. C. 133 of a fever, with which he was seized in consequence of exposing himself to the sun's rays while engaged in erecting a monument to his mother. In his will, he made the Romans his heirs (Strab. xiii.; Polyb. xxxiii. 16; Justin. xxxvi. 14; Diod. xxxiv. Exc.; Varro, R. R. Praef.; Columell. i. 1.8; Plin. H. N. xviii. 5; Liv. Epit. 58; Plut. Tib. Gracch. 14; Vell. Pat. ii. 4; Florus, ii. 20; Appian. Mithr. 62, Bell. Civ. v. 4). His kingdom was claimed by Aristonicus.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Aristonicus, a natural son of Eumenes II. of Pergamus, who was succeeded by Attalus III. When the latter died in B. C. 133, and made over his kingdom to the Romans, Aristonicus claimed his father's kingdom as his lawful inheritance. The towns, for fear of the Romans, refused to recognise him, but he compelled them by force of arms; and at last there seemed no doubt of his ultimate success. In B. C. 131, the consul P. Licinius Crassus, who received Asia as his province, marched against him; but he was more intent upon making booty than on combating his enemy, and in an ill-organized battle which was fought about the end of the year, his army was defeated, and he himself made prisoner by Aristonicus. In the year following, B. C. 130, the consul M. Perperna, who succeeded Crassus, acted with more energy, and in the very first engagement conquered Aristonicus and took him prisoner. After the death of Perperna, M. Aquillius completed the conquest of the kingdom of Pergamus, B. C. 129. Aristcnuicus was carried to Rome to adorn the triumph of Aquillius, and was then beheaded. (Justin, xxxvi. 4; Liv. Epit. 59; Vell. Pat. ii. 4; Flor. ii. 20; Oros. v. 10; Sail. Hist. 4; Appian, Mithrid. 12, 62, de Bell. Civ. i. 17; Val. Max. iii. 4.5; Diod. Fragm. lib. 34; Cic. de Leg. Agr. ii. 33, Philip.xi. 8)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Heracles or Hercules (Herakles), a son of Alexander the Great by Barsine, the daughter of the Persian Artabazus, and widow of the Rhodian Memnon. Though clearly illegitimate, his claims to the throne were put forth in the course of the discussions that arose on the death of Alexander (B. C. 323), according to one account by Nearchus, to another by Meleager. (Curt. x. 6.11; Justin. xi. 10, xiii. 2.) But the proposal was received with general disapprobation, and the young prince, who was at the time at Pergamus, where he had been brought up by Barsine, continued to reside there, under his mother's care, apparently forgotten by all the rival candidates for empire, until the year 310, when he was dragged forth from his retirement, and his claim to the sovereignty once more advanced by Polysperchon. The assassination of Roxana and her son by Cassander in the preceding year (B. C. 311) had left Hercules the only surviving representative of the royal house of Macedonia, and Polysperchon skilfully availed himself of this circumstance to gather round his standard all those hostile to Cassander, or who clung to the last remaining shadow of hereditary right. By these means he assembled an army of 20,000 foot and 1000 horse, with which he advanced towards Macedonia. Cassander met him at Trarmpyae, in the district of Stymphaea, but, alarmed at the disposition which he perceived in his own troops to espouse the cause of a son of Alexander, he would not risk a battle, and entered into secret negotiations with Polysperchon, by which he succeeded in inducing him to put the unhappy youth to death. Polysperchon, accordingly, invited the young prince to a banquet, which he at first declined, as if apprehensive of his fate, but was ultimately induced to accept the invitation, and was strangled immediately after the feast, B. C. 309. (Diod. xx. 20, 28; Justin. xv. 2; Plut. de fals. Pud. 4.; Paus. ix. 7.2; Lycophron. Alex. v. 800-804; and Tzetz. ad loc.) According to Diodorus, he was about seventeen years old when sent for by Polysperchon from Pergamus, and consequently about eighteen at the time of his death: the statement of Justin that lie was only fourteen is certainly erroneous. (See Droysen, Hellenism. vol. i. )
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ERYTHRES (Ancient city) TURKEY
Diognetus. A general of the Erythrean forces which aided Miletus in a war with
the Naxians. Being entrusted with the command of a fort for the annoyance of Naxos,
he fell in love with Polycrita, a Naxian prisoner, and married her. Through her
means the Naxians became masters of the fort in question. At the capture of it
she saved her husband's life, but died herself of joy at the honours heaped on
her by her countrymen. There are other editions of the story, varying slightly
in the details. (Plut. de Mul. Virt. s. v. Polukrite; Polyaen. viii. 36 ; Parthen.
Erot. 9.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
TEOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Andron of Teos, the author of a Periplous (Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. ii. 354), who is probably the same person as the one referred to by Strabo (ix.), Stephanus of Byzantium, and others. He may also have been the same as the author of the Peri Sungeneion (Harpocrat. s. v. Phorbanteion; Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. ii. 946).
KYMI (Ancient city) TURKEY
405 - 330
Of Cymae in Aeolis, a celebrated Greek historian, a contemporary
of Philip and Alexander, flourished about B.C. 340. He wrote a universal history
(Historiai), in thirty books, the first that was attempted in Greece. It covers
a period of 750 years, from the return of the Heraclidae to B.C. 341. Of this
history Diodorus Siculus made an extensive use. The work, however, has perished,
with the exception of a few fragments.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Ephorus, (Ephoros). Of Cumae, a celebrated Greek historian, was, according to
Suidas, to whom we are indebted for our information respecting his life, a son
either of Demophilus or Antiochus; but as Plutarch (Ei ap. Delph.) mentions only
the former name, and as Ephorus's son was called Demophilus (Athen. vi.), we must
believe that the father of Ephorus was called Demophilus. Ephorus was a contemporary
of Theopompus, and lived about B. C. 408, a date which Marx, one of his editors,
strangely mistakes for the time at which Ephorus was born. Ephorus must have survived
the accession of Alexander the Great, for Clemens of Alexandria (Strom. i.) states
that Ephorus reckoned 735 years from the return of the Heracleidae down to B.
C. 333, or the year in which Alexander went to Asia. The best period of his life
must therefore have fallen in the reign of Philip. Ephorus was a pupil of Isocrates
in rhetoric, at the time when that rhetorician had opened his school in the island
of Chios; but not being very much gifted by nature, like most of his countrymen,
he was found unfit for entering upon life when he returned home, and his father
therefore sent him to school a second time. (Plut. Vit. X Orat.) In order not
to disappoint his father again, Ephorus now zealously devoted himself to the study
of oratory, and his efforts were crowned with success, for he and Theopompus were
the most distinguished among the pupils of Isocrates (Menand. Rhet. Diaires. apodeikt.
ed. Aldus), and from Seneca (de Tranq. Anim. 6) it might almost appear, that Ephorus
began the career of a public orator. Isocrates, however, dissuaded him from that
course, for he well knew that oratory was not the field on which Ephorus could
win laurels, and he exhorted him to devote himself to the study and composition
of history. As Ephorus was of a more quiet and contemplative disposition than
Theopompus, Isocrates advised the former to write the early history of Greece,
and the latter to take up the later and more turbulent periods of history. (Suidas;
Cic. de Orat. iii. 9; Phot. Bibl. Cod. 176, 260.) Plutarch (de Stoic. Repugn.
10) relates that Ephorus was among those who were accused of having conspired
against the life of king Alexander, but that he successfully refuted the charge
when he was summoned before the king.
The above is all that is known respecting the life of Ephorus. The
most celebrated of all his works, none of which have come down to us, was--1.
A History (Historiai) in thirty books. It began with the return of the Heracleidae,
or, according to Suidas, with the Trojan times, and brought the history down to
the siege of Perinthus in B. C. 341. It treated of the history of the barbarians
as well as of that of the Greeks, and was thus the first attempt at writing a
universal history that was ever made in Greece. It embraced a period of 750 years,
and each of the thirty books contained a compact portion of the history, which
formed a complete whole by itself. Each also contained a special preface and might
bear a separate title, which either Ephorus himself or some later grammarian seems
actually to have given to each book, for we know that the fourth book was called
Europe. (Diod. iv. 1, v. 1, xvi. 14, 26; Polyb. v. 33, iv. 3; Strab. vii. ; Clem.
Alex. Strom. i.) Ephorus himself did not live to complete his work. and it was
finished by his son Demophilus. Diyllus began his history at the point at which
the work of Ephorus left off. As the work is unfortunately lost, and we possess
only isolated fragments of it, it is not possible in all cases to determine the
exact contents of each book; but the two collectors and editors of the fragments
of Ephorus have done so, as far as it is feasible. Among the other works of Ephorus
we may mention--2. Peri heurematon, or on inventions, in two books. (Suidas; Athen.
iv., viii., xiv. ; Strab. xiii.) 3. Suntagma epichorion. (Plut. de Vit. et Poes.
Homer. 2.) This work, however, seems to have been nothing but a chapter of the
fifth book of the historiai. 4. Peri lexeos. (Theon, Progymn. 2, 22; comp. Cic.
Orat. 57.) This work, too, like a few others which are mentioned as separate productions,
may have been only a portion of the History. Suidas mentions some more works,
such as Peri agathon kai kakon, and Paradoxon ton hekastachou Biblia, of which,
however, nothing at all is known, and it is not impossible that they may have
been excerpta or abridgments of certain portions of the History, which were made
by late compilers and published tinder his name.
As for the character of Ephorus as an historian, we have ample evidence
that, in accordance with the simplicity and sincerity of his character, he desired
to give a faithful account of the events he had to relate. He shewed his good
sense in not attempting to write a history of the period previous to the return
of the Heracleidae; but the history of the subsequent time is still greatly intermixed
with fables and mythical traditions; and it must be acknowledged that his attempts
to restore a genuine history by divesting the traditions from what he considered
mythical or fabulous, were in most cases highly unsuccessful, and sometimes even
absurd and puerile. He exercised a sort of criticism which is anything but that
of a real historian (Strab. xii.), and in some instances he forced his authorities
to suit his own views. For the early times he seems to have preferred the logographers
to the epic poets, though the latter, too, were not neglected. Even the later
portions of his history, where Ephorus had such guides as Herodotus, Thucydides,
and Xenophon, contained such discrepancies from his great predecessors, and on
points on which they were entitled to credit, that Ephorus, to say the least,
cannot be regarded as a sound and sate guide in the study of history. The severest
critic of Ephorus was Timaeus, who never neglected an opportunity of pointing
out his inaccuracies; several authors also wrote separate books against Ephorus,
such as Alexinus, the pupil of Eubulides (Diog. Laert. ii. 106, 110), and Strato
the Peripatetic. (Diog. Laert. v. 59.) Porphyrius (ap. Euseb. Praep. Evang. x.
2) charges Ephorus with constant plagiarisns; but this accusation is undoubtedly
very much exaggerated, for we not only find no traces of plagiarism in the fragments
extant, but we frequently find Ephorus disputing the statements of his predecessors.
(Joseph. c. Apion. i. 3.) Polybius (xii. 25) praises him for his knowledge of
maritime warfare, but adds that he was utterly ignorant of the mode of warfare
on land; Strabo (viii.) acknowledges his merits, by saying that he separated the
historical from the geographical portions of his work; and, in regard to the latter,
he did not confine himself to mere lists of names, but he introduced investigations
concerning the origin of nations, their constitutions and manners, and many of
the geographical fragments which have come down to us contain lively and beautiful
descriptions. (Polyb. ix. 1; Strab. ix., x.) As regards the style of Ephorus,
it is such as might be expected from a disciple of Isocrates : it is clear, lucid,
and elaborately polished, but at the same time diffuse and deficient in power
and energy, so that Ephorus is by no means equal to his master. (Polyb. xii. 28;
Dionys. de Comp. Verb. 26 ; Demetr. Peri hermen. ; Dion Chrysost. Orat. xviii.,
ed. Morel.; Plut. Pericl. 28; Philostr. Vit. Soph. i. 17; Cic. Orat. 51; Phot.
Bibl. Cod. 176.) The fragments of the works of Ephorus, the number of which might
probably be much increased if Diodorus had always mentioned his authorities, were
first collected by Meier Marx, Carlsruhe, 1815, 8vo., who afterwards published
some additions in Friedemann and Seebode's Miscellan. Crit. ii. 4. They are also
contained in C. and Th. Muller's Fragm. Historicor. Graec., Paris, 1841, 3vo.
Both editors have prefixed to their editions critical dissertations on the life
and writings of Ephorus.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Ephorus, a man indisputably noteworthy, a disciple of Isocrates the orator, and the author of the Historyand of the work on Inventions, was from this city; and so was Hesiod the poet, still earlier than Ephorus, for Hesiod himself states that his father Dius left Aeolian Cyme and migrated to Boeotia:And he settled near Helicon in a wretched village, Ascre, which is bad in winter, oppressive in summer, and pleasant at no time. (Perseus Project - Strabo, Geography 13.3.6)
Among historians Demophilus, the son of the chronicler Ephorus, who treated in his work the history of what is known as the Sacred War, which had been passed over by his father, began his account with the capture of the shrine at Delphi and the pillaging of the oracle by Philomelus the Phocian. (Perseus Project - Diodorus Siculus, Library 16.14.3)
Demophilus, (Demophilos). The son of Ephorus, was an historian in the time of
Alexander the Great. He continued his father's history by adding to it the history
of the Sacred War from the taking of Delphi and the plunder of its temple by Philomelus
the Phocian, B. C. 357. (Diod. xvi. 14; Suid. s. v. Ephippos, where Ephoros should
be read for Ephippos; Athen. vi.; Schol. Hom. Il. xiii. 301; Vossius, de Hist.
Graec., ed. Westermann.)
Ephorus. Of Cumae, called the Younger, was likewise an historian, but he is mentioned only by Suidas, according to whom he wrote a history of Galienus in twenty-seven books, a work on Corinth, one on the Alenadae, and a few others. The name Galienus in this account, it should be observed, is only a correction of Volaterranus, for the common reading in Suidas is Galenou. (Comp. Marx, Ephor. Fragm.)
MYRINA (Ancient city) TURKEY
536 - 582
Agathias, the son of Mamnonius, a rhetorician, was born, as it seems, in 536 or
537 A. D., at Myrina, a town at the mouth of the river Pythicus in Aeolia, and
received his education in Alexandria, where he studied literature. In 554 he went
to Constantinople, where his father then most probably resided, and studied for
several years the Roman law. He afterward exercised with great success the profession
of an advocate, though only for the sake of a livelihood, his favourite occupation
being the study of ancient poetry; and he paid particular attention to history.
His profession of a lawyer was the cause of his surname Scholastikos (Suidas,
s. v. Agathias), which word signified an advocate in the time of Agathias. Niebuh
believes, that he died during the reign of Tiberius Thrax, a short time before
the death of this emperor and the accession of Mauritius in 582, at the age of
only 44 or 45 years. Agathias, who was a Christian (Epigr. 3, 5, and especially
4), enjoyed during his life the esteem of several great and distinguished men
of his time, such as Theodorus the decurio, Paulus Silentiarius, Eutychianus the
younger, and Macedonius the ex consul. He shewed them his gratitude by dedicat
ing to them several of his literary productions, and he paid particular homage
to Paulus Silentiarius, the son of Cyrus Florus, who was descended from an old
and illustrious family.
Agathias is the author of the following works :
1. Daphniaka, a collection of small love poems, divided into nine books; the poems
are written in hexametres. Nothing is extant of this collection, which the author
calls a juvenile essay.
2. Kuklos, an anthology containing poems of early writers and of several of his
contemporaries, chiefly of such as were his protectors, among whom were Paulus
Silentiarius and Macedonius. This collection was divided into seven books, but
nothing of it is extant except the introduction, which was written by Agathias
himself. However, 108 epigrams, which were in circulation either before he collected
his Knklos, or which he composed at a later period, have come down to us. The
last seven and several others of these epigrams are generally attributed to other
writers, such as Paulus Silentiarius, &c. The epigrams are contained in the
Anthologia Graeca, and in the editions of the historical work of Agathias. Joseph
Scaliger, Janus Douza, and Bonaventura Vulcanius, have translated the greater
part of them into Latin. The epigrams were written and published after the Daphniaka.
3. Agathiou Scholastikou Murinaiou Historion E. "Agathiae Scholastici Myrinensis
Historiarum Libri V". This is his principal work. It contains the history
from 553-558 A. D., a short period, but remarkable for the important events with
which it is filled up. The first book contains the conquest of Italy by Narses
over the Goths, and the first contests between the Greeks and the Franks; the
second book contains the continuation of these contests, the description of the
great earthquake of 554, and the beginning of the war between the Greeks and the
Persians; the third and the fourth books contain the continuation of this war
until the first peace in 536; the fifth book relates the second great earthquake
of 557, the rebuilding of St. Sophia by Justinian, the plague, the exploits of
Belisarius over the Huns and other barbarians in 558, and it finishes abruptly
with the 25th chapter.
Agathias, after having related that he had abandoned his poetical occupation for
more serious studies, tells us that several distinguished men had suggested to
him the idea of writing the history of his time, and he adds, that he had undertaken
the task especially on the advice of Eutychianus. However, he calls Eutychianus
the ornament of the family of the Flori, a family to which Eutychianus did not
belong at all. It is thcrefore probable that, instead of Eutychianus, we must
read Paulus Silentiarius: Niebuhr is of this opinion. Agathias is not a great
historian; he wants historical and geographical knowledge, principally with regard
to Italy, though he knows the East better. He seldom penetrates into the real
causes of those great events which form the subjects of his book: his history
is the work of a man of business, who adorns his style with poetical reminiscences.
But he is honest and impartial, and in all those things which he is able to understand
he shews himself a man of good sense. His style is often bombastic; he praises
himself; in his Greek the Ionic dialect prevails, but it is the Ionic of his time,
degenerated from its classical purity into a sort of mixture of all the other
Greek dialects. Nothwithstanding these deficiences the work of Agathias is of
high value, because it contains a great number of important facts concerning one
of the most eventful periods of Roman history.
Editions: Agathiou Scholastikou peri tes Basileias Ioustinianou, tomoi
E., ed. Bonaventura Vulcanius, with a Latin translation, Lugduni, 1594. The Parisian
edition, which is contained in the " Corpus Script. Byzant." was published
in 1660; it contains many errors and conjectural innovations, which have been
reprinted and augmented by the editors of the Venetian edition. Another edition
was published at Basel (in 1576?). A Latin translation by Christophorus Persona
was separately published at Rome, 1516, fol., and afterwards at Augsburg, 1519,
4to.; at Basel, 1531, fol., and at Leyden, 1594, 8vo. The best edition is that
of Niebuhr, Bonn. 1828, 8vo., which forms the third volume of the " Corpus
Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae." It contains the Latin translation and the
notes of Bonaventura Vulcanius. The Epigrams form an appendix of this edition
of Niebuhr, who has carefully corrected the errors, and removed the innovations
of the Parisian edition.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Sep 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
PERGAMOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Artemon, of Pergamus, a Greek rhetorician, who wrote a history of Sicily, which is now lost, but is often mentioned by the grammarians. (Schol. ad Pind. Pyth i. 1, 32, iii. 48; Ol. ii. 16, v. 1; Isth. ii. Argum.; Schol. ad Lycophr. 177.)
Charax, of Pergamus, an historian and priest, who wrote two large works, the one, in forty books, called Hellenika, the other named Chronika, of which the sixteenth book is quoted by Stephanus Byzantinus (s. v. Oreos). In the former he mentions Augutstus Caesar and Nero, which is our only authority for his date. Suidas quotes an epigram, beginning
eimi Charax hiereus gerares apo Pergamou akres,
which gives his country and profession. He is frequently referred to by Stephanus Byzantinus. He is mentioned by Euagrius (Hist. Eccl. v. extr.) among those historians who mixed fable with history, and this is confirmed by the anonymous writer of the " De Rebus Incredibilibus" (cc. 15, 16).
KOLOFON (Ancient city) TURKEY
Hermotimus. A native of Colophon, a learned geometer mentioned by Proclus. (Comment. ad Euclid, lib. i., ed. Basil.) He was one of the immediate predecessors of Euclid, and the discoverer of several geometrical propositions.
PITANI (Ancient city) TURKEY
Autolycus of Pitane (fl. 300 BC)
Life
One of the most eminent of the ancient Greek scientists, Autolycus was born in Pitane, in Aeolis (Asia Minor). He is cited by Diogenes Laertius and Simplicius. Two of his surviving works (extant in Greek, Latin and Arabic) are the oldest known treatises on astronomy. One of the three biggest craters on the moon (above the "Apennines" north of the centre of the moon) has been named "Autolycus" in his honour.
Work
Autolycus wrote two treatises on mathematical astronomy:
"On the movement of the sphere": 1 book, extant. Describes a sphere constructed by the author to revolve about its axis. Upon it he marked two poles, the parallels of latitude and the meridians. The book includes 12 questions on spherical astronomy, and discusses the aspect of the heavens and the position of the different celestial circles, in connection with geographical latitude. Euclid consulted this work in writing his "Phaenomena".
"On the Rising and Setting of Stars": 2 books, extant. The first book contains 13 propositions on astronomical questions, while the second discusses the division of the circle of the zodiac into twelve equal parts. These works are considered the oldest fully preserved mathematical texts in Greek.
This text is based on the Greek book "Ancient Greek Scientists", Athens, 1995 and is cited Nov 2005 from The Technology Museum of Thessaloniki URL below.
Autolycus, a mathematician, who is said to have been a native of Pitane in Aeolis,
and the first instructor of the philosopher Arcesilaus (Diog. Laert. iv. 29).
From this, it would follow, that he lived about the middle of the fourth century
B. C., and was contemporary with Aristotle. We know nothing more of his history.He
wrote two astronomical treatises, which are still extant, and are the most ancient
existing specimens of the Greek mathematics. The first is on the Motion
of the Sphere (peri kinoumenes sphairas). It contains twelve propositions concerning
a sphere which with its principal circles is supposed to revolve uniformly about
a fixed diameter, whilst a fixed great circle (the horizon) always divides it
into two hemispheres (the visible and invisible). Most of them are still explicitly
or implicitly included amongst the elements of astronomy, and they are such as
would naturally result from the first systematic application of geometrical reasoning
to the apparent motion of the heavens. This treatise may be considered as introductory
to the second, which is on the risings and settings of the fixed stars, peri epitolon
kai duseon in two books. Autolycus first defines the true risings and settings,
and then the apparent. The former happen when the sun and a star are actually
in the horizon together ; and they cannot be observed, because the sun's light
makes the star invisible. The latter happen when the star is in the horizon, and
the sun just so far below it that the star is visible, and there are in general
four such phaenomena in the year in the case of any particular star; namely, its
first visible rising in the morning, its last visible rising in the evening, its
first visible setting in the morning, and last visible setting in the evening.
In a favourable climate, the precise day of each of these occurrences might be
observed, and such observations must have constituted the chief business of practical
astronomy in its infancy; they were, moreover, of some real use. because these
phaenomena afforded a means of defining the seasons of the year. A star when rising
or setting is visible according to its brilliance, if the sun be from 10 to 18
degrees below the horizon. Autolycus supposes 15 degrees, but reckons them along
the ecliptic instead of a vertical circle; and he proceeds to establish certain
general propositions concerning the intervals between these apparent risings and
settings, taking account of the star's position with respect to the ecliptic and
equator. It was impossible, without trigonometry, to determine beforehand the
absolute time at which any one of them would happen; but one having been observed,
the rest might be roughly predicted, for the same star, by the help of these propositions.
The demonstrations, and even the enunciations, are in some cases not easily understood
without a globe; but the figures used by Autolycus are simple. There is nothing
in either treatise to shew that he had the least conception of spherical trigonometry.
There are three Greek manuscripts of each treatise in the Bodleian
and Savilian libraries at Oxford. The propositions without the demonstrations
were printed in Greek and Latin by Dasypodius in his "Sphaericae Doctrinae Propositiones,"
Argent. 1572. Both the works were translated into Latin from a Greek MS. by Jos.
Auria, Rom. 1587 and 1588; and a translation of the first by Maurolycus, from
an Arabic version, is given, without the name of Autolycus, at the " Universae
Geometriae, etc. Synopsis" of Mersennus, Paris, 1645.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
360 - 290
Autolycus of Pitane (fl. 300 BC). Mathematician, Astronomer, Geographer
Life
One of the most eminent of the ancient Greek scientists, Autolycus was born in Pitane, in Aeolis (Asia Minor). He is cited by Diogenes Laertius and Simplicius. Two of his surviving works (extant in Greek, Latin and Arabic) are the oldest known treatises on astronomy. One of the three biggest craters on the moon (above the "Apennines" north of the centre of the moon) has been named "Autolycus" in his honour.
Work
Autolycus wrote two treatises on mathematical astronomy:
"On the movement of the sphere": 1 book, extant. Describes a sphere constructed by the author to revolve about its axis. Upon it he marked two poles, the parallels of latitude and the meridians. The book includes 12 questions on spherical astronomy, and discusses the aspect of the heavens and the position of the different celestial circles, in connection with geographical latitude. Euclid consulted this work in writing his "Phaenomena".
"On the Rising and Setting of Stars": 2 books, extant. The first book contains 13 propositions on astronomical questions, while the second discusses the division of the circle of the zodiac into twelve equal parts. These works are considered the oldest fully preserved mathematical texts in Greek.
SMYRNI (Ancient city) TURKEY
70 - 135
Of Smyrna. A Platonist living in the first half of the second
century A.D. He was the author of a work of great value in connection with ancient
Greek arithmetic: on the principles of mathematics, music, and astronomy required
for the study of Plato.
Theon : Various WebPages
KLAZOMENES (Ancient city) TURKEY
Mechanic from the city of Clazomenae in Ionia, who built siege machines and lived in the 5th c. B.C.
TEOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Athenodorus, of Teos, a player on the cithara, was one of the performers who assisted at the festivities celebrated at Susa in B. C. 324, on the occasion of the marriage of Alexander with Statira. There was also a tragedian of the same name, whose services were called into requisition on the same occasion. (Athen. xii.)
EGIROESSA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Alcidamas (Alkidamas), a Greek rhetorician, was a native of Elaea in Aeolis, in Asia Minor.
He was a pupil of Gorgias, and resided at Athens between the years B. C. 432 and
411. Here he gave instructions in eloquence, according to Eudocia, as the successor
of his master, and was the last of that sophistical school, with which the only
object of eloquencc was to please the hearers by the pomp and brilliancy of words.
That the works of Alcidamas bore the strongest marks of this character of his
school is stated by Aristotle (Rhet. iii. 3.8), who censures his pompous diction
and extravagant use of poetical epithets and phrases, and by Dionysius (De Isaeo,
19), who calls his style vulgar and inflated. He is said to have been an opponent
of Isocrates, but whether this statement refers to real personal enmity, or whether
it is merely an inference from the fact, that Alcidamas condemned the practice
of writing orations for the purpose of delivering them, is uncertain. The ancients
mention several works of Alcidamas such as an Eulogy on Death, in which he enumerated
the evils of human life, and of which Cicero seems to speak with great praise
(Tusc. i. 48); a shew-speech, called logos Messeniakos (Aristot. Rhet. i. 13.5);
a work on music (Suidas, s. v. Alkidamas); and some scientific works, viz. one
on rhetoric (techne rhetorike, Plut. Demosth. 5), and another called logos phusikos
(Diog. Laert. viii. 56); but all of them are now lost. Tzetzes (Chil. xi. 752)
had still before him several orations of Alcidamas, but we now possess only two
declamations which go under his name. 1. Odusseus, e kata Palamedous prodosias,
in which Odysseus is made to accuse Palamedes of treachery to the cause of the
Greeks during the siege of Troy. 2. peri sophiston, in which the author sets forth
the advantages of delivering extempore speeches over those which have previously
been written out. These two orations, the second of which is the better one, both
in form and thought, bear scarcely any traces of the faults which Aristotle and
Dionysius censure in the works of Alcidamas; their fault is rather being frigid
and insipid. It has therefore been maintained by several critics, that these orations
are not the works of Alcidamas ; and with regard to the first of them, the supposition
is supported by strong probability; the second may have been written by Alcidamas
with a view to counteract the influence of Isocrates. The first edition of them
is that in the collection of Greek orators published by Aldus, Venice, 1513.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
FOKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Hermocrates. A rhetorician, a native of Phocaea. He was the grandson of the sophist Attalus, and studied under Claudius Rufinus of Smyrna. He died at the age of twenty-five, or twenty-eight, according to other accounts. Philostratus (Vit. Sophist. ii. 25) pronounces him one of the most distinguished rhetoricians of his age. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. vi.)
PERGAMOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Apollodorus of Pergamus, a Greek rhetorician, was the author of a school of rhetoric called after him Apollodoreios
hairesis, which was subsequently opposed by the school established bv Theodorus
of Gadara (Theodoreios hairesis). In his advanced age Apollodorus taught rhetoric
at Apollonia, and here young Octavianus (Augustus) was one of his pupils and became
his friend (Strab. xiii.; Sueton. Aug. 89). Strabo ascribes to him scientific
works (technas) on rhetoric, but Quintilian (iii. 1.18, conmp.1) on the authority
of Apollodorus himself declares only one of the works ascribed to him as genuine,
and this he calls Ars (techne) edita ad Matium, in which the author treated on
oratory only in so far as speaking in the courts of justice was concerned. Apollodorus
himself wrote little, and his whole theory could be gathered only from the works
of his disciples, C. Valgius and Atticus (Comp. Quintil. ii. 11.2, 15.12, iv.
1.50; Tacit. De clar. Orat. 19; Seneca, Controv. i. 2, ii. 9; Sext. Emapir. Adv.
Math. ii. 79). Lucian (Macrob. 23) states, that Apollodorus died at the age of
eighty-two.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Callicrates, a Greek orator who seems to have lived about the time of Demosthenes, and to whom tile tables of Pergamus ascribed the oration kata Demosthenous paranomon, which was usually considered the work of Deinarchus. (Dionys. Deinarch. 11.) But no work of Callicrates was known even as early as the time of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.
Dionysius, of Pergamus, surnamed Atticus, a rhetorician, who is characterized
by Strabo (xiii.) as a clever sophist, an historian, and logographer, that is,
a writer of orations. He was a pupil of Apollodorus, the rhetorician, who is mentioned
among the teachers of Augustus. (Comp. Senec. Controv. i. 1.) Weiske (ad Longin.)
considers him to be the author of the work peri hupsous commonly attributed to
Longinus; but there is very little, if anything, to support this view. (Westermann,
Gesch. d. Griech. Beredts.)
Isidorus of Pergamus, a rhetorician, of whom nothing more is known than the mention of him by Diogenes Laertius (vii. 34), and a single quotation from him by Rutilius Lupus. (De Fig. Sent. et Eloc. ii. 16.)
Demetrius, of Smyrna, a Greek rhetorician of uncertain date. (Diog. Laert. v. 84.)
Evodianus, (Euodianos), a Greek sophist of Smyrna, who lived during the latter half of the second century after Christ. He was a pupil of Aristocles, and according to others of Polemon also. He was invited to Rome, and raised there to the chair of professor of eloquence. For a time lie was appointed to superintend or instruct the actors, (tous amphi ton Dionuson technitas), which office lie is said to have managed with great wisdom. He distinguished himself as an orator and especially in panegyric oratory. He had a son who died before him at Rome, and with whom he desired to be buried after his death. No specimens of his oratory have come down to us. (Philostr. Vit. Soph. ii. 16; Eudoc.; Osann, Inscript. Syllog.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Heracleides. A Greek rhetorician of Lycia, who lived in the second century of our era. He was a disciple of Herodes Atticus, and taught rhetoric at Smyrna with great success, so that the town was greatly benefited by him, on account of the great conflux of students from all parts of Asia Minor. He owed his success not so much to his talent as to his indefatigable industry; and once, when he had composed an enkomion ponou, and showed it to his rival Ptolemaeus, the latter struck out the p in po/nou, and, returning it to Heracleides, said, "There, you may read your own encomium" (enkomion oon). He died at the age of eighty, leaving a country-house in the neighbourhood of Smyrna, which he had built with the money he had earned, and which he called Rhetorica. He also published a purified edition of the orations of Nicetes, forgetting, as his biographer says, that he was putting the armour of a pigmy on a colossus. (Philostr. Vit. Soph. ii. 26, comp. i. 19.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
L. Cestius Pius, a native of Smyrna, taught rhetoric at Rome a few years before the commencement of the Christian era. He was chiefly celebrated on account of the declamations which he was wont to deliver in places of public resort in reply to the orations of Cicero; but neither Seneca nor Quintilian speaks of him with any respect. No fragment of his works has been preserved. (Hieronym. ap. Chron. Euseb. ad Ol.cxci.; Senec. Controv. iii. praef., Suasor. vii.; Quintil. x. 5.20)
KOLOFON (Ancient city) TURKEY
Apelles. The most celebrated of Grecian painters, born, most probably,
at Colophon in Ionia, though some ancient writers call him a Coan and others an
Ephesian. He was the contempora ry of Alexander the Great (B.C. 336-323), who
entertained so high an opinion of him that he was the only person whom Alexander
would permit to paint his portrait. We are not told when or where he died. Throughout
his life Apelles laboured to improve himself, especially in drawing, which he
never spent a day without practising. Hence the proverb, Nulla dies sine linea
(temeron oudemian grammen egagon). Of his portraits, the most celebrated was that
of Alexander wielding a thunderbolt; but the most admired of all his pictures
was the "Aphrodite Anadyomene," or Aphrodite rising out of the sea.
The goddess was wringing her hair, and the falling drops of water formed a transparent
silver veil around her form. The original was Campaspe, a mistress of Alexander.
For the painting of Alexander a sum of twenty talents (about $21,600) was paid,
and the painting itself was hung in the temple of Diana of Ephesus. He painted
also a horse; and, finding that his rivals in the art, who contested the palm
with him on this occasion, were about to prevail through unfair means, he caused
his own piece and those of the rest to be shown to some horses, and these animals,
fairer critics in this case than men had proved to be, neighed at his painting
alone. Apelles used to say of his contemporaries that they possessed, as artists,
all the requisite qualities except one--namely, grace, and that this was his alone.
On one occasion, when contemplating a picture by Protogenes, a work of immense
labour, and in which exactness of detail had been carried to excess, he remarked,
"Protogenes equals or surpasses me in all things but one--the knowing when
to remove his hand from a painting." Apelles was also, as is supposed, the
inventor of what artists call glazing. Such, at least, was the opinion of Sir
Joshua Reynolds and others. The ingredients probably employed by him for this
purpose are given by Jahn, in his Malerei der Alten, p. 150. Apelles was accustomed,
when he had completed any one of his pieces, to expose it to the view of passengers,
and to hide himself behind it in order to hear the remarks of the spectators.
On one of these occasions a shoemaker censured the painter for having given one
of the slippers of a figure a less number of ties by one than it ought to have
had. The next day the shoemaker, emboldened by the success of his previous criticism,
began to find fault with a leg, when Apelles indignantly put forth his head, and
desired him to confine his decisions to the slipper, "ne supra crepidam iudicaret."
Hence arose another common saying, Ne sutor ultra crepidam.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
(Apelles), We now enter definitely upon the new phase of Hellenistic life in Greece, and among the many painters of this epoch one stands unquestionably at the head, Apelles, son of Pytheas of Colophon. His father was apparently not a painter, for he was sent to receive his first instruction from Ephorus of Ephesus; at a later age, when he was already beginning to be famous, he went to Sicyon, attracted there by the fame of the teaching of Pamphilus. Under Philip of Macedon he took up his residence at Pella, and continued as court painter under Alexander; when Alexander started on his Asiatic campaigns, he returned again to Ephesus. After this we hear of him at various times in Rhodes, where he is brought into contact with Protogenes; at Alexandria, at the court of Ptolemy Soter; and possibly at Cos. The numerous anecdotes and sayings attributed to him, such as manum de tabula, nulla dies sine linea, ne sutor ultra crepidam, must be considered merely as indications of his extensive popularity rather than as detailed evidence of his style. We cannot with certainty connect any picture by him with the material that has come down to us, so that we are left to the scraps of art criticism in ancient authors for an estimate of his style. As might be expected, by far the majority of his works seem to have been in the sphere of portraiture. Pliny says that it is useless to try and enumerate the many portraits by him of Alexander and Philip: besides these we hear of a Cleitos putting on his helmet; an Archelaus in a family group; an Antigonus arranged in profile, so that his defective eye was not seen; besides many others, principally of people connected with the Macedonian court. Perhaps most characteristic of him were the series of personifications of abstract ideas of the mind, represented generally as female figures in action. Such a picture was the Calumnia, which he painted at the court of Ptolemy in Alexandria, in punishment of his detractors there, and of which we have a detailed description in Lucian. To the same category may be referred the pictures of Charis and of Tyche; and the allegorical personifications of the phenomena of nature, as Bronte (thunder), Astrape (lightning), and the thunderbolt, Keraunobolia. His mythological pieces are comparatively few; by far the most important was doubtless the Aphrodite Anadyomene painted for the people of Cos: she was seen rising from the water, a type which may be compared with numerous marbles which have come down to us. Augustus carried the picture to Rome, remitting to the Coans a hundred talents of the tribute due, as compensation; by the time of Nero it had suffered so much that it had to be restored, a work which was carried out by a certain Dorotheus. As we should expect from an artist whose bent lay in portraiture, his talent lay less in large or elaborate compositions than in refinement and the complete study of nature. The stories that we are told of him seem to point to a great dexterity and lightness of touch, with the charm and grace of manner which was the natural outcome of his period.
This extract is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Apelles, the most celebrated of Grecian painters, was born, most probably, at
Colophon in Ionia (Suidas, s. v.), though Pliny (xxxv. 36.10) and Ovid (Art. Am.
iii. 401; Pont. iv. 1. 29) call him a Coan. The account of Strabo (xiv.) and Lucian
(De Calumn. lix.2, 6), that he was an Ephesian, may be explained from the statements
of Suidas, that he was made a citizen at Ephesus, and that he studied painting
there under Ephorus. He afterwards studied under Pamphilus of Amphipolis, to whom
he paid the fee of a talent for a ten-years' course of instruction (Suidas, s.
v.; Plin. xxxv. 36.8). At a later period, when he had already gained a high reputation,
he went to Sicyon, and again paid a talent for admission into the school of Melanthius,
whom he assisted in his portrait of the tyrant Aristratus (Plut. Arat. 13). By
this course of study he acquired the scientific accuracy of the Sicyonian school,
as well as the elegance of the Ionic.
The best part of the life of Apelles was probably spent at the court
of Philip and Alexander the Great; for Pliny speaks of the great number of his
portraits of both those princes (xxxv. 36.16), and states that he was the only
person whom Alexander would permit to take his portrait (vii. 38; see also Cic.
ad Fam. v. 12.13; Hor. Ep. ii. 1. 239; Valer. Max. viii. 11.2, ext.; Arrian, Anab.
i. 16.7). Apelles enjoyed the friendship of Alexander, who used to visit him in
his studio. In one of these visits, when the king's conversation was exposing
his ignorance of art, Apelles politely advised him to be silent, as the boys who
were grinding the colours were laughing at him (Plin. xxxv. 36.12). Plutarch relates
this speech as having been made to Megabyzus (De Tranq. Anim. 12). Aelian tells
the anecdote of Zeuxis and Megabyzus (Var. Hist. ii. 2). Pliny also tells us that
Apelles, having been commissioned by Alexander to paint his favourite concubine,
Campaspe (Pankaote Aelian, Var. Hist. xii. 34), naked, fell in love with her,
upon which Alexander gave her to him as a present; and according to some she was
the model of the painter's best picture, the Venus Anadyomene. From all the information
we have of the connexion of Apelles with Alexander, we may safely conclude that
the former accompanied the latter into Asia. After Alexander's death he appears
to have travelled through the western parts of Asia. To this period we may probably
refer his visit to Rhodes and his intercourse with Protogenes. Being driven by
a storm to Alexandria, after the assumption of the regal title by Ptolemy, whose
favour he had not gained while he was with Alexander, his rivals laid a plot to
ruin him, which he defeated by an ingenious use of his skill in drawing (Plin.
xxxv. 36.13). Lucian relates that Apelles was accused by his rival Antiphilus
of having had a share in the conspiracy of Theodotus at Tyre, and that when Ptolemy
discovered the falsehood of the charge, he presented Apelles with a hundred talents,
and gave Antiphilus to him as a slave: Apelles commemorated the event in an allegorical
picture (De Calumn. lix.2-6). Lucian's words imply that he had seen this picture,
but he may have been mistaken in ascribing it to Apelles. He seems also to speak
of Apelles as if he had been living at Ptolemy's court before this event occurred.
If, therefore, Pliny and Lucian are both to be believed, we may conclude, from
comparing their tales, that Apelles, having been accidentally driven to Alexandria,
overcame the dislike which Ptolemy bore to him, and remained in Egypt during the
latter part of his life, enjoying the favour of that king, in spite of the schemes
of his rivals to disgrace him. The account of his life cannot be carried further;
we are not told when or where he died; but from the above facts his date can be
fixed, since he practised his art before the death of Philip (B. C. 336), and
after the assumption of the regal title by Ptolemy (B. C. 306). As the result
of a minute examination of all the facts, Tolken (Amalth. iii. pp. 117-119) places
him between 352 and 308 B. C. According to Pliny, he flonrished about the 112th
Olympiad, B. C. 332.
Many anecdotes are preserved of Apelles and his contemporaries, which
throw an interesting light both on his personal and his professional character.
He was ready to acknowledge that in some points he was excelled by other artists,
as by Amphion in grouping and by Asclepiadorus in perspective (Plin. xxxv. 36.10).
He first caused the merits of Protogenes to be understood. Coming to Rhodes, and
finding that the works of Protogenes were scarcely valued at all by his country-men,
he offered him fifty talents for a single picture, and spread the report that
he meant to sell the picture again as his own (Plin. ib.13). In speaking of the
great artists who were his contemporaries, he ascribed to them every possible
excellence except one, namely, grace, which he claimed for himself alone (Ib.10).
Throughout his whole life, Apelles laboured to improve himself, especially
in drawing, which he never spent a day without practising (Plin. ib.12; hence
the proverb Nulla dies sine linca). The tale of his contest with Protogenes affords
an example both of the skill to which Apelles attained in this portion of his
art, and cf the importance attached to it in all the great schools of Greece.
Apelles had sailed to Rhodes, eager to meet Protogenes. Upon landing,
he went straight to that artist's studio. Protogenes was absent, but a large panel
ready to be painted on hung in the studio. Apelles seized the pencil, and drew
an excessively thin coloured line on the panel, by which Protogenes, on his return,
at once guessed who had been his visitor, and in his turn drew a still thinner
line of a different colour upon or within the former (according to the reading
of the recent editions of Pliny, in ilia ipsa). When Apelles returnend and saw
the lines, ashamed to be defeated, says Pliny, "tertio colore lineas secuit, nullum
relinquens amplius subtilitati locum" (Ib.11). The most natural explanation of
this difficult passage seems to be, that down the middle of the first line of
Apelles, Protogenes drew another so as to divide it into two parallel halves,
and that Apelles again divided the line of Protogenes in the same manner. Pliny
speaks of the three lines as visum effugientes. The panel was preserved, and carried
to Rome, where it remained, exciting more wonder than all the other works of art
in the palace of the Caesars, till it was destroyed by fire with that building.
Of the means which Apelles took to ensure accuracy, the following
example is given. He used to expose his finished pictures to view in a public
place, while he hid himself behind the picture to hear the criticisms of the passers-by.
A cobbler detected a fault in the shoes of a figure: the next day he found that
the fault was corrected, and was proceeding to criticise the leg, when Apelles
rushed from behind the picture, and commanded the cobbler to keep to the shoes
(Plin. Ib.12: hence the proverb, Ne supra crepidam sutor: see also Val. Max. viii.
12, ext.3; Lucian tells the tale of Phidias). Marvellous tales are told of the
extreme accuracy of his likenesses of men and horses (Plin. xxxv. 36.14, 17; Lucian,
de Calumn.; Aelian, V. H. ii. 3). With all his diligence, however, Apelles knew
when to cease correcting. He said that he excelled Protogenes in this one point,
that the latter did not know when to leave a picture alone, and he laid down the
maxim, Nocere saepe nimiam diligentiam (Plin. 10; Cic. Orat. 22; Quintil. x. 4).
Apelles is stated to have made great improvements in the mechanical
part of his art. The assertion of Pliny, that he used only four colours, is incorrect
(see Colores).
He painted with the pencil, but we are not told whether he used the cestrum. His
principal discovery was that of covering the picture with a very thin black varnish
(atramentum), which, besides preserving the picture, made the tints clearer and
subdued the more brilliant colours (Plin. l. c.18). The process was, in all probability,
the same as that now called glazing or toning, the object of which is to attain
the excellence of colouring "which does not proceed from fine colours, but true
colours; from breaking down these fine colours, which would appear too raw, to
a deeptoned brightness". From the fact mentioned by Pliny, that this varnishing
could be discovered only on close inspection, Sir J. Reynolds thought that it
was like that of Correggio. That he painted on moveable panels is evident from
the frequent mention of tabulae with reference to his pictures. Pliny expressly
says, that he did not paint on walls (xxxv. 37).
A list of the works of Apelles is given by Pliny (xxxv. 36). They
are for the most part single figures, or groups of a very few figures. Of his
portraits the most celebrated was that of Alexander wielding a thunderbolt, which
was known as ho keraunophoros, and which gave occasion to the saying, that of
two Alexanders, the one, the son of Philip, was invincible, the other, he of Apelles,
inimitable (Plut. Fort. Alex. 2, 3). In this picture, the thunderbolt and the
hand which held it appeared to stand out of the panel; and, to aid this effect,
the artist did not scruple to represent Alexander's complexion as dark, though
it was really light (Plut. Alex. 4). The price of this picture was twenty talents.
Another of his portraits, that of Antigonus, has been celebrated for its concealment
of the loss of the king's eye, by representing his face in profile. He also painted
a portrait of himself. Among his allegorical pictures was one representing Castor
and Pollux, with Victory and Alexander the Great, how grouped we are not told;
and another in which the figure of War, with his hands tied behind his back, followed
the triumphal car of Alexander. "He also painted", says Pliny, "things which cannot
be painted, thunders and lightnings, which they call Bronte, Astrape, and Ceramobolia".
These were clearly allegorical figures. Several of his subjects were taken from
the heroic mythology. But of all his pictures the most admired was the "Venus
Anadyomene" (he anaduomene Aphrodite), or Venus rising out of the sea. The goddess
was wringing her hair, and the falling drops of water formed a transparent silver
veil around her form. This picture, which is said to have cost 100 talents, was
painted for the temple of Aesculapius at Cos, and afterwards placed by Augustus
in the temple which he dedicated to Julius Caesar. The lower part being injured,
no one could be found to repair it. As it continued to decay, Nero had a copy
of it made by Dorotheus (Plin.; Strab. xiv.). Apelles commenced another picture
of Venus for the Coans, which he intended should surpass the Venus Anadyomene.
At his death, he had finished only the head, the upper part of the breast, and
the outline of the figure; but Pliny says, that it was more admired than his former
finished picture. No one could be found to complete the work (Plin. xxxv. l. c.,
and 40.41; Cic. ad Fam. i. 9.4, de Off. iii. 2).
By the general consent of ancient authors, Apelles stands first among
Greek painters. To the undiscriminating admiration of Pliny, who seems to have
regarded a portrait of a horse, so true that other horses neighed at it, as an
achievement of art as admirable as the Venus Anadyomene itself, we may add the
unmeasured praise which Cicero, Varro, Columella, Ovid, and other writers give
to the works of Apelles, and especially to the Venus Anadyomene (Cic. Brut. 18,
de Orat. iii. 7; Varro, L. L. ix. 12; Colum. R. R. Praef.31; Ovid. Art. Am. iii.
401; Pont. iv. 1. 29; Propert. iii. 7. 11; Auson. Ep. 106; Anthol. Planud. iv.
178-182). Statius (Silv. i. 1. 100) and Martial (xi. 9) call painting by the name
of " Ars Apellea". Sir Joshua Reynolds says of the Greek painters, and evidently
with an especial reference to Apelles, "if we had the good fortune to possess
what the ancients themselves esteemed their masterpieces, I have no doubt but
we should find their figures as correctly drawn as the Laocoon, and probably coloured
like Titian" (Notes on Du Fresnoy, note 37); and, though the point has been disputed,
such is the general judgment of the best modern authorities. It need scarcely
be said, that not one of the pictures of Apelles remains to decide the question
by.
In order to understand what was the excellence which was peculiar
to Apelles, we must refer to the state of the art of painting in his time (see
Pictura). After the essential forms of Polygnotus had been elevated
to dramatic effect and ideal expression by Apollodorus and Zeuxis, and enlivened
with the varied character and feeling which the school of Eupompus drew forth
from direct observation of nature, Apelles perceived that something still was
wanting, something which the refinements attained by his contemporaries in grouping,
perspective, accuracy, and finish, did not supply -something which he boasted,
and succeeding ages confirmed the boast, that he alone achieved- namely, the quality
called charis, venustas, grace (Plin. xxxv. 36.10; Quintil. xii. 10; Plut. Demet.
22; Aelian, V. H. xii. 41); that is, not only beauty, sublimity, and pathos, but
beauty, sublimity, and pathos, each in its proper measure ; the expending of power
enough to produce the desired effect, and no more; the absence of all exaggeration,
as well as of any sensible deficiency; the most natural and pleasing mode of impressing
the subject on the spectator's mind, without displaying the means by which the
impression is produced. In fact, the meaning which Fuseli attaches to the word
seems to be that in which it was used by Apelles: " By grace I mean that artless
balance of motion and repose sprung from character, founded on propriety, which
neither falls short of the demands nor overleaps the modesty of nature. Applied
to execution, it means that dexterous power which hides the means by which it
was attained, the difficulties it has conquered" (Lect. 1). In the same Lecture
Fuseli gives the following estimate of the character of Apelles as an artist :
"The name of Apelles in Pliny is the synonyme of unrivalled and unattainable excellence,
but the enumeration of his works points out the modification which we ought to
apply to that superiority; it neither comprises exclusive sublimity of invention,
the most acute discrimination of character, the widest sphere of comprehension,
the most judicious and best balanced composition, nor the deepest pathos of expression:
his great prerogative consisted more in the unison than in the extent of his powers;
he knew better what he could do, what ought to be done, at what point he could
arrive, and what lay beyond his reach, than any other artist. Grace of conception
and refinement of taste were his elements, and went hand in hand with grace of
execution and taste in finish; powerful and seldom possessed singly, irresistible
when united: that he built both on the firm basis of the former system, not on
its subversion, his well-known contest of lines with Protogenes, not a legendary
tale, but a well attested fact, irrefragably proves : .... the corollaries we
may adduce from the contest are obviously these, that the schools of Greece recognized
all one elemental principle: that acuteness and fidelity of eye and obedience
of hand form precision ; precision, proportion; proportion, beauty: that it is
the `little more or less', imperceptible to vulgar eyes, which constitutes grace,
and establishes the superiority of one artist above another: that the knowledge
ledge of the degrees of things, or taste, presupposes a perfect knowledge of the
things themselves : that colour, grace, and taste, are ornaments, not substitutes,
of form, expression, and character; and, when they usurp that title, degenerate
into splendid faults. Such were the principles on which Apelles formed his Venus,
or rather the personification of Female Grace -the wonder of art, the despair
of artists". That this view of the Venus is right, is proved, if proof were needed,
by the words of Pliny (xxxv. 36.10), "Deesse iis unam Venerem dicebat, quam Graeci
Charita vocant", except that there is no reason for calling the Venus "the personification
of Female Grace"; it was rather Grace personified in a female form.
Apelles wrote on painting, but his works are entirely lost.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Dionysius. Of Colophon, a painter, contemporary with Polygnotus of Thasos, whose works he imitated in their accuracy, expression (pathos), manner (ethos), in the treatment of the form, in the delicacy of the drapery, and in every other respect except in grandeur. (Aelian. V. H. iv. 3.) Plutarch (Timol. 36) speaks of his works as having strength and tone, but as forced and laboured. Aristotle (Poet. 2) says that Polygnotus painted the likenesses of men better than the originals, Pauson made them worse, and Dionysius just like them (homoious). It seems from this that the pictures of Dionysius were deficient in the ideal. It was no doubt for this reason that Dionysius was called Anthropographus, like Demetrius. It is true that Pliny, from whom we learn the fact, gives a different reason, namely, that Dionysius was so called because he painted only men, and not landscapes (xxxv. 10. s. 37); but this is only one case out of many in which Pliny's ignorance of art has caused him to give a false interpretation of a true fact.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
EGES (Ancient city) TURKEY
Alexander of Aegae (Alexandros Aigaios), a peripatetic philosopher, who flourished at Rome in the first century, and a disciple of the celebrated mathematician Sosigenes, whose calculations were used by Julius Caesar for his correction of the year. He was tutor to the emperor Nero. (Suidas, s. v. Alexandros Aigaios; Suet. Tib. 57.) Two treatises on the writings of Aristotle are attributed to him by some, but are assigned by others to Alexander Aphrodisiensis. I. On the Meteorology of Aristotle, edited in Greek by F. Asulanus, Ven. 1527, in Latin by Alex. Piecolomini, 1540, fol. II. A commentary on the Metaphysics. The Greek has never been published, but there is a Latin version by Sepulveda, Rom. 1527.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Criton (Kriton), of Aegae, a Pythagorean philosopher, a fragment of whose work, peri pronoias kai agathes tuches, is preserved by Stobaeus. (Serm. 3)
KLAZOMENES (Ancient city) TURKEY
Anaxagoras. A Greek philosopher, of Clazomenae in Asia Minor, born about
B.C. 500. Sprung from a noble family, but wishing to devote himself entirely to
science, he gave up his property to his kinsmen, and removed to Athens, where
he lived in intimacy with the most distinguished men--above all with Pericles.
Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War he was charged by the political
opponents of Pericles with impiety, i.e. with denying the gods recognized by the
State; and, though acquitted through his friend's influence, he felt compelled
to emigrate to Lampsacus, where he died soon after, aged seventy-two. He not only
had the honour of giving philosophy a home at Athens, where it went on flourishing
for quite a thousand years, but he was the first philosopher who, by the side
of the material principle, introduced a spiritual, which gives the other life
and form. He laid down his doctrine in a work "On Nature" in the Ionic
dialect, of which only fragments are preserved. Like Parmenides, he denied the
existence of birth or death; the two processes were rather to be described as
a mingling and unmingling. The ultimate elements of combination are indivisible,
imperishable primordia of infinite number, and differing in shape, colour, and
taste, called by himself "seeds of things," and by later writers (from
an expression of Aristotle) homoiomereia, i. e. particles of like kind with each
other and with the whole that is made up of them. At first these lay mingled without
order; but the divine spirit--nous, pure, passionless reason--set the unarranged
matter into motion, and thereby created out of chaos an orderly world. This movement,
proceeding from the centre, works on forever, penetrating farther and farther
the infinite mass. But the application of the spiritual principle was rather indicated
than fully carried out by Anaxagoras: he himself commonly explains phenomena by
physical causes, and only when he cannot find these, falls back on the action
of divine reason.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Anaxagoras, a Greek philosopher, was born at Clazomenae in Ionia about the year
B. C. 499. His father, Hegesibulus, left him in the possession of considerable
property, but as he intended to devote his life to higher ends, he gave it up
to his relatives as something which ought not to engage his attention. He is said
to have gone to Athens at the age of twenty, during the contest of the Greeks
with Persia, and to have lived and taught in that city for a period of thirty
years. He became here the intimate friend and teacher of the most eminent men
of the time, such as Euripides and Pericles; but while he thus gained the friendship
and admiration of the most enlightened Athenians, the majority, uneasy at being
disturbed in their hereditary superstitions, soon found reasons for complaint.
The principal cause of hostility towards him must, however, be looked for in the
following circumstance. As he was a friend of Pericles, the party which was dissatisfied
with his administration seized upon the disposition of the people towards the
philosopher as a favourable opportunity for striking a blow at the great statesman.
Anaxagoras, therefore, was accused of impiety. His trial and its results are matters
of the greatest uncertainty on account of the different statements of the ancients
themselves (Diog. Laert. ii. 12, &c.; Plut. Pericl. 32, Nicias, 23). It seems
probable, however, that Anaxagoras was accused twice, once on the ground of impiety,
and a second time on that of partiality to Persia. In the first case it was only
owing to the influence and eloquence of Pericles that he was not put to death;
but he was sentenced to pay a fine of five talents and to quit Athens. The philosopher
now went to Lampsacus, and it seems to have been during his absence that the second
charge of medismos was brought against him, in consequence of which he was condemned
to death. He is said to have received the intelligence of his sentence with a
smile, and to have died at Lampsacus at the age of seventy-two. The inhabitants
of this place honoured Anaxagoras not only during his lifetime, but after his
death also. (Diog. Laert. ii. c. 3; Dict. of Ant. s. v. Anaxagoreia.)
Diogenes Laertius, Cicero, and other writers, call Anaxagoras a disciple
of Anaximenes; but this statement is not only connected with some chronological
difficulties, but is not quite in accordance with the accounts of other writers.
Thus much, however, is certain, that Anaxagoras struck into a new path, and was
dissatisfied with the systems of his predecessors, the Ionic philosophers. It
is he who laid the foundation of the Attic philosophy, and who stated the problem
which his successors laboured to solve. The Ionic philosophers had endeavoured
to explain nature and its various phenomena by regarding matter in its different
forms and modifications as the cause of all things. Anaxagoras, on the other hand,
conceived the necessity of seeking a higher cause, independent of matter, and
this cause he considered to be nous, that is, mind, thought, or intelligence.
This nous, however, is not the creator of the world, but merely that which originally
arranged the world and gave motion to it; for, according to the axiom that out
of nothing nothing can come, he supposed the existence of matter from all eternity,
though, before the nous was exercised upon it, it was in a chaotic confusion.
In this original chaos there was an infinite number of homogeneous parts (homoiomere)
as well as heterogeneous ones. The nous united the former and separated from them
what was heterogeneous, and out of this process arose the things we see in this
world. This union and separation, however, were made in such a manner, that each
thing contains in itself parts of other things or heterogeneous elements, and
is what it is, only on account of the preponderance of certain homogeneous parts
which constitute its character. The nous, which thus regulated and formed the
material world, is itself also cognoscent, and consequently the principle of all
cognition: it alone can see truth and the essence of things, while our senses
are imperfect and often lead us into error. Anaxagoras explained his dualistic
system in a work which is now lost, and we know it only from such fragments as
are quoted from it by later writers, as Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch, Diogenes Laertius,
Cicero, and others.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Hylozoism (Gr., hyle, matter + zoe, life)
The doctrine according to which all matter possesses life.
There is a certain hylozoism which is only a childish, inexperienced
way of looking on nature. We are naturally inclined to interpret other existences
after what we know of ourselves, and so it is that children give life and soul
to everything. The result of this personification of nature in primitive races
has also been called animism. It is a poetical view of the world. We should therefore
not be surprised that the first school of philosophers in Greece, the Ionians,
conceived of the universe as animated throughout and full of gods: empsychon kai
daimonon plere (Diog. Laer., I, 27). With the progress of thought a more scientific
view of nature prevailed. First obscurely by Anaxagoras, then
clearly by Plato and Aristotle, matter and mind were separated and their mutual
relations delineated. Hylozoism in its primitive form disappeared. But, with the
second successor of Aristotle, Strato of Lampsacus, another kind of hylozoism,
clearly materialistic, came into existence. Strato, while repudiating the mechanicism
of the Atomists, nevertheless, in common with them, held bodies to be the only
reality and explained life as a property of matter. In the Stoic doctrine also
bodies alone are a reality. Bodies are made up of two principles, a passive principle,
matter, and an active principle, form; but form itself is corporeal. It is warm
vapour (pneuma), or fire, yet fire distinct from the element of this name; it
is primitive fashioning fire (pyr technikon), God. In order to form the world
a part of it changed itself into the elements, fire, air, water, earth, and constituted
the body of the world, while another part retained its original shape, and in
that shape confronts the first as form or soul. This was pure materialism.
But a wave of religious mysticism and pantheism was preparing to sweep
from the East over the Graeco-Roman world and dislodge matter from the throne
it had usurped. Under this influence the later Peripatetics, the Neo-Pythagoreans
and especially the Neo-Platonic school of Alexandria, while accepting the Stoic
concept of the world-soul, reversed the relative importance of its terms, considered
the soul as a spiritual principle emanating from God, and gave matter the inferior
rank, if not as altogether evil, at least as most imperfect. Indeed matter was
hardly a reality at all; the activities and perfections of material beings proceeded
from a distinct principle, the soul. The universe was an immense organism. Everything
was animated; and, though life was in itself distinct from matter, it was in fact
imparted to all material beings. This was Pantheistic hylozoism. It survived in
the medieval Jewish and Arabian philosophy, and reappeared in Christian countries
with the nature philosophers of the Renaissance, Paracelsus, Cardanus, Giordano
Bruno, etc. But at the Renaissance it did not come alone. For, under the influence
of the enthusiastic return to the study of nature, of the revival of classic literatures
with their mythology full of gods and goddesses, and of the sensualism which then
invaded morals, the two other forms of hylozoism, the naive and the materialistic,
reappeared also, and the three were combined in different proportions by the several
writers. In a less degree, even such thinkers as Richard Cudworth and Henry More,
the Cambridge Platonists, yielded to it, when they devised their hypothesis of
a "plastic nature", or a sort of inferior soul, which caused the processes of
life in organic beings and directed in a purpose-like manner the activity of physical
nature.
After Descartes's bold attempt to resolve into motion the operations
of physical life, which deprived the word life of much of its meaning and put
matter in sharp contrast with the higher life of thought, the concept life was
for a while set aside, and speculation for the most part dealt with matter as
opposed to mind. Yet, in a different form, it was the same problem over again,
viz, the determination of the limits of matter and of its relation to spirit.
To this problem Spinoza offered a solution, which, combining materialistic with
pantheistic hylozoism, held the balance even between matter and mind by reducing
both to the rank of mere attributes of the one infinite substance. Leibniz, resolving
matter into spirit, looked on bodies as aggregates of simple unextended substances
or monads, endowed with elementary perception and will. On the contrary, a group
of French writers in the eighteenth century, Diderot, Cabanis, Robinet, etc.,
adhered to a dynamico-materialistic view of the world which recalls that of Strato.
In the nineteenth century the progress of the biological sciences
again called attention to physical life. Descartes's mechanicism was generally
discarded. On the other hand, the craving of reason for unity, which has here
characteristically embodied itself in the theory of evolution, tends to consider
the world of life?and the world of mind as well?as a mere extension of the world
of matter. But then life must be conceived as fundamentally contained in all matter,
as one of its essential properties. Thus has hylozoism been revived by some thinkers
as a postulate of science. Literally taken, it would be materialism, and in that
sense is indefatigably advocated by E. Hackel, who identifies mind with organization
and life, and life with energy, which he makes a property of the atoms. Matter
is for him the only reality. He, moreover, imagines ether to be the primitive
substance, a part of which, as was the case with the primitive fire of the Stoics,
transformed itself through condensation into inert mass, while another part of
it subsists as ether and constitutes the active principle, spirit. Very few thinkers,
however, would commit themselves to such a doctrine. But many scientists use it
as a postulate without ever inquiring into its meta-physical implications. Those
who have inquired have commonly agreed that at least mental life can by no means
be resolved into matter. Consequently they have modified the concept matter itself,
and described matter and mind, after the view already set forth by Spinoza, as
two manifestations, or two aspects, of one and the same reality. This reality
may be declared different in itself from both matter and mind, and unknowable
(H. Spencer); or it may be declared identical with both matter and mind, which
are respectively its outer and inner sides (Fechner, Lotze, Wundt, etc.). In either
case, hylozoism has passed into psycho-physical parallelism with tendencies towards
either materialism or idealism.
From what has been said, then, it follows that it would be an error to see in
hylozoism a mere doctrine of physical life; for instance, the affirmation of spontaneous
generation. Physical life may, in the abstract, be separated from mental life
and treated independently of it. But in reality the separation does not hold,
and hylozoism has always extended its conclusions to mental life as well. Even
naive hylozoism did not stop at granting life to nature, it also endowed nature
with soul. Pantheistic hylozoism started with the very concept of mental life.
These two forms no longer count in science. On the latter, since it is of pantheistic
origin; see PANTHEISM,
GOD, EMANATIONISM.
Scientific hylozoism is a protest against a mechanical view of the
world. But, like mechanicism, it pretends to apply the same pattern to all beings
alike, to make of them all one uniform series. Its outcome is monism, materialistic,
idealistic, or parallelistic, according as the series is conceived after the pattern
of matter, or of mind, or of some reality combining both. It therefore falls under
the criticisms proper to these forms of monism. As a matter of fact, life is not
found in all beings; some are destitute of it, and, among those in which it is
found, plants possess merely vegetal life, while animals have also the powers
of sense, and man the powers of sense and reason. In an age which boasts of trusting
experience alone, it is surprising that this fact should be so readily overlooked.
True, we crave for unity and continuity in our knowledge and its object; but unity
should not be procured at the cost of evident diversity. Or rather, since this
craving for unity is nothing else than the voice of reason, it ought indeed to
be satisfied; but they err who seek in the world itself this perfect unity which
is to be found only in its Cause, God. (See also MATTER,
LIFE, SOUL,
TELEOLOGY, MONISM,
MATERIALISM.)
John M. Redon, ed.
Transcribed by: Douglas J. Potter
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Hermotimus, (Hermotimos), of Clazomenae, called by Lucian a Pythagorean, had the
reputation, according to Aristotle, of being the first to suggest the idea which
Anaxagorasis commonly said to have originated: that mind (nous) was the cause
of all things. Accordingly, Sextus Empiricus places him with Hesiod, Parmenides,
and Empedocles, as belonging to that class of philosophers who held a dualistic
theory of a material and an active principle being together the origin of the
universe.
Other notices that remain of him represent him, like Epimenides and
Aristaeus, as a mysterious person, gifted with a supernatural power, by which
his soul, apart from the body, wandered from place to place, bringing tidings
of distant events in incredibly short spaces of time. At length his enemies burned
his body, in the absence of the soul, which put an end to his wanderings. The
story is told in Pliny and Lucian. (Plin. H. N. vii. 42; Lucian, Eucom. Musc.
7; Arist. Metaph. i. 3; Sext. Empir. adv. Math. ix., ad Phys. i. 7; Diog. Laert.
viii. 5; Denzinger, De Hermotim. Clazomen. Commentatio, Leodii, 1825.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
KOLOFON (Ancient city) TURKEY
570 - 470
Xenophanes was a Greek poet and philosopher from Ionia
(Asia Minor). He traveled
to Italy and settled at Elea
in southern Italy.
Only fragments of his writings survived but one gathers that Xenophanes
was opposed to the mystical tendencies of Pythagoras. He anticipated the philosophy
of Parmenides when he said that “all is one and the one is God”.
But as regards the gods he was an emphatic free thinker. He said that
if “oxen, lions, and horses had hands wherewith they could paint images,
they would fashion gods after their own shapes .. the Ethiopians make their gods
black; the Thracians say theirs have blue eyes and red hair.”
This text is cited July 2003 from the Hyperhistory Online URL below.
Poet, philosopher and religious reformer from Asia
Minor.
After working as a travelling poet, Xenophanes founded the Eleatic
school in the Phoenician colony Elea
in southern Italy.
One of his best known pupils was the philosopher Parmenides. Xenophanes
disagreed with polytheism and thought that the Olympic gods had far too human
characters. Therefore he wanted to replace them with a single, unifying all-powerful
God. He also thought the idea of reincarnation was absurd, and disagreed with
athleticism and luxurious living sice it prevented people from achieving wisdom.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the In2Greece URL below.
570 - 475
Presocratic philosopher. He criticized the militarism and anthropomorphism
of traditional Greek morality and religion, arguing that fundamental truth about
the world is difficult to achieve. His opposition to conventional notions earned
him the respect of later, more completely skeptical thinkers.
Parmenides and Zeno studied with Xenophanes in Sicily
before establishing their own school at Elea.
This extract is cited Sept 2003 from the Philosophy Pages URL below.
PERGAMOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Aristocles, of Pergamus, a sophist and rhetorician, who lived in the time of the emperors Trajan and Hadrian. He spent the early part of his life upon the study of the Peripatetic philosophy, and during this period he completely neglected his outward appearance. But afterwards he was seized by the desire of becoming a rhetorician, and went to Rome, where he enrolled himself among the pupils of Herodes Atticus. After his return to Pergamus, he made a complete change in his mode of life, and appears to have enjoyed a great reputation as a teacher of rhetoric. His declamations are praised for their perspicuity and for the purity of the Attic Greek; but they were wanting in passion and animation, and resembled philosophical discussions. Suidas ascribes to him a work on rhetoric (techne rhetorike), letters, declamations, &c. (Philostr. Vit. Soph. ii. 3; Suidas, s. v. Aristokles; Eudoc.)
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Aedesius (Aidesios), a Cappadocian, called a Platonic or perhaps more correctly an Eclectic philosopher, who lived in the fourth century, the friend and most distinguished disciple of lamblichus. After the death of his master the school of Syria was dispersed, and Aedesius fearing the real or fancied hostility of the Christian emperor Constantine to philosophy, took refuge in divination. An oracle in hexameter verse represented a pastoral life as his only retreat, but his disciples, perhaps calming his fears by a metaphorical interpretation, compelled him to resume his instructions. He settled at Pergamus, where he numbered among his pupils the emperor Julian. After the accession of the latter to the imperial purple he invited Aedesius to continue his instructions, but the declining strength of the sage being unequal to the task, two of his most learned disciples, Chrysanthes and Eusebius, were by his own desire appointed to supply his place. (Eunap. Vit. Aedes.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Hegesinous, (Egesinous), of Pergamum, an Academic philosopher, the successor of Evander and the immediate predecessor of Carneades in the chair of the academy. He flourished about B. C. 185. (Diog. Laert. iv. 60; Cic. Acad. ii. 6.)
PITANI (Ancient city) TURKEY
Megalophanes: Teacher of Philopoemen. Ecdelus: Disciple of Arcesilaus and teacher of Philopoemen.
Arcesilaus, (Arkesilaos). A philosopher, born at Pitane, in
Aeolis, the founder of what was termed the Middle Academy. The period of his birth
is usually given as B.C. 316. Arcesilaus at first applied himself to rhetoric,
but subsequently passed to the study of philosophy, in which he had for teachers,
first Theophrastus, then Crantor the Academician, and probably also Polemo. Besides
the instructors above named, Arcesilaus is also said to have diligently attended
the lectures of the Eretrian Menedamus, the Megarian Diodorus, and the sceptic
Pyrrho. His love for the quibbling of these individuals has been referred to as
the source of his scepticism and his skill in refuting philosophical principles.
At the same time it is on all hands admitted that of philosophers Plato was his
favourite. He seems to have been sincerely of opinion that his view of things
did not differ from the true spirit of the Platonic doctrine; nay, more, that
it was perfectly in agreement with those older philosophical teachings, from which,
according to the opinion of many, Plato had drawn his own doctrines--namely, those
of Socrates, Parmenides, and Heraclitus.
Upon the death of Crantor, the school in the Academy was transferred
by a certain Socratides to Arcesilaus, who here introduced the old Socratic method
of teaching in dialogues, although it was rather a corruption than an imitation
of the genuine Socratic mode. Arcesilaus does not appear to have committed his
opinions to writing; at least the ancients were not acquainted with any work which
could confidently be ascribed to him. Now, as his disciple Lacydes also abstained
from writing, the ancients themselves appear to have derived their knowledge of
his opinions only from the works of his opponents, of whom Chrysippus was the
most eminent. Such a course must naturally be both defective and uncertain, and
accordingly we have little that we can confidently advance with respect to his
doctrines. According to these statements the results of his opinions would be
a perfect scepticism, expressed in the formula that he knew nothing, not even
that which Socrates had ever maintained that he knew --namely, his own ignorance.
This expression of his opinion implicitly ascribes to Arcesilaus a full consciousness
that he differed in a most important point from the doctrine of Socrates and Plato.
But, as the ancients do not appear to have ascribed any such conviction to Arcesilaus,
it seems to be a more probable opinion which imputes to him a desire to restore
the genuine Platonic dogma, and to purify it from all those precise and positive
determinations which his successors had appended to it. Indeed, one statement
expressly declares that the subject of his lecture to his most accomplished scholars
was the doctrine of Plato (Cic. l. c.); and he would therefore appear to have
adopted this formula with a view to meet more easily the objections of the dogmatists.
Now if we thus attach Arcesilaus to Plato, we must suppose him to have been in
the same case with many others, and unable to discover in the writings of Plato
any fixed and determinate principles of science. The ambiguous manner in which
almost every view is therein advanced, and the results of one investigation admitted
only conditionally to other inquiries, may perhaps have led him to regard the
speculations of Plato in the light of mere shrewd and intelligent conjectures.
Accordingly, we are told that Arcesilaus denied the certainty not only of intellectual,
but also of sensuous knowledge.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
316 - 241
From Pitane came Arcesilaus, of the Academy, a fellow student with Zeno of Citium under Polemon.
Arcesilaus (Arkesilaos) or Arcesilas, the founder of the new Academy, flourished
towards the close of the third century before Christ. (Comp. Strab.i.p.15.) He
wasthe son of Seuthesor Scythes (Diog. Laert.. iv. 18), and born at Pitane in
Aeolis. His early education was entrusted to Autolycus, a mathematician, with
whom he migrated to Sardis. Afterwards, at the wish of his elder brother and guardian,
Moireas, he came to Athens to study rhetoric; but becoming the disciple first
of Theophrastus and afterwards of Crantor, he found his inclination led to philosophical
pursuits. Not content, however, with any single school, he left his early masters
and studied under sceptical and dialectic philosophers; and the line of Ariston
upon him, Prosthe Platon, opithen Purrhon, messos Diodoros, described the course
of his early education, as well as the discordant character of some of his later
views. He was not without reputation as a poet, and Diogenes Laertius (iv. 30)
has preserved two epigrams of his, one of which is addressed to Attalus, king
of Pergamus, and records his admiration of Homer and Pindar, of whose works he
was an enthusiastic reader. Several of his puns and witticisms have been preserved
in his life by the same writer, which give the idea of an accomplished man of
the world rather than a grave philosopher. Many traits of character are also recorded
of him, some of them of a pleasing nature. The greatness of his personal character
is shewn by the imitation of his peculiarities, into which his admirers are said
insensibly to have fallen. His oratory is described as of an attractive and persuasive
kind, the effect of it being enhanced by the frankness of his demeanour. Although
his means were not large, his resources being chiefly derived from king Eumenes,
many tales were told of his unassuming generosity. But it must be admitted, that
there was another side to the picture, and his enemies accused him of the grossest
profligacy -a charge which he only answered by citing the example of Aristippus-
and it must be confessed, that the accusation is slightly confirmed by the circumstance
that he died in the 76th year of his age from a fit of excessive drunkenness;
on which event an epigram has been preserved by Diogenes.
It was on the death of Crantor that Arcesilaus succeeded to the chair
of the Academy, in the history of which he makes so important an era. As, however,
he committed nothing to writing, his opinions were imperfectly known to his contemporaries,
and can now only be gathered from the confused statements of his opponents. There
seems to have been a gradual decline of philosophy since the time of Plato and
Aristotle : the same subjects had been again and again discussed, until no room
was left for original thought--a deficiency which was but poorly compensated by
the extravagant paradox or overdrawn subtlety of the later schools. Whether we
attribute the scepticism of the Academy to a reaction from the dogmatism of the
Stoics, or whether it was the natural result of extending to intellectual truth
the distrust with which Plato viewed the information of sense, it would seem that
in the time of Arcesilaus the whole of philosophy was absorbed in the single question
of the grounds of human knowledge. What were the peculiar views of Arcesilaus
on this question, it is not easy to collect. On the one hand, he is said to have
restored the doctrines of Plato in an uncorrupted form; while, on the other hand,
according to Cicero (Acad. i. 12), he summed up his opinions in the formula, "that
he knew nothing, not even his own ignorance."There are two ways of reconciling
the difficulty: either we may suppose him to have thrown out such aporiai as an
exercise for the ingenuity of his pupils, as Sextus Empiricus (Pyrrh. Hypotyp.
i. 234), who disclaims him as a Sceptic, would have us believe; or he may have
really doubted the esoteric meaning of Plato, and have supposed himself to have
been stripping his works of the figments of the Dogmatists, while he was in fact
taking from them all certain principles whatever (Cic. de Orat. iii. 18). A curious
result of the confusion which pervaded the New Academy was the return to some
of the doctrines of the elder Ionic school, which they attempted to harmonize
with Plato and their own views (Euseb. Pr. Ev. xiv. 5, 6). Arcesilaus is also
said to have restored the Socratic method of teaching in dialogues; although it
is probable that he did not confine himself strictly to the erotetic method, perhaps
the supposed identity of his doctrines with those of Plato may have originated
in the outward form in which they were conveyed.
The Stoics were the chief opponents of Arcesilaus; he attacked their
doctrine of a convincing conception (kataleptike phantasia) as understood to be
a mean between science and opinion--a mean which he asserted could not exist,
and was merely the interpolation of a name (Cic. Acad. ii. 24). It involved in
fact a contradiction in terms, as the very idea of phantasia implied the possibility
of false as well as true conceptions of the same object.
It is a question of some importance, in what the scepticism of the
New Academy was distinguished from that of the followers of Pyrrhon. Admitting
the formula of Arcesilaus, "that he knew nothing, not even his own ignorance",
to be an exposition of his real sentiments, it was impossible in one sense that
scepticism could proceed further : but the New Academy does not seem to have doubted
the existence of truth in itself, only our capacities for obtaining it. It differed
also from the principles of the pure sceptic in the practical tendency of its
doctrines : while the object of the one was the attainment of perfect equanimity
(epoche), the other seems rather to have retired from the barren field of speculation
to practical life, and to have acknowledged some vestiges of a moral law within,
at best but a probable guide, the possession of which, however, formed the real
distinction between the sage and the fool. Slight as the difference may appear
between the speculative statements of the two schools, a comparison of the lives
of their founders and their respective successors leads us to the conclusion,
that a practical moderation was the characteristic of the New Academy, to which
the Sceptics were wholly strangers. (Sex. Empiricus, adv. Math. ii. 158, Pyrrh.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
SMYRNI (Ancient city) TURKEY
Albinus (Albinos), a Platonic philosopher, who lived at Smyrna and was a contemporary
of Galen. A short tract by him, entitled Eisagoge eiss tous Platonos Dralogous,
has come down to us, and is published in the second volume of the first edition
of Fabricius; but omitted in the reprint by Harles, because it is to be found
prefixed to Etwall's edition of three dialogues of Plato, Oxon. 1771; and to Fischer's
four dialogues of Plato, Lips. 1783. It contains hardly anything of importance.
After explaining the nature of the Dialogue, which he compares to a Drama, the
writer goes on to divide the Dialogues of Plato into four classes, logikous, eklegktikou/s,
Fusikous, ethikous, and mentions another division of them into Tetralogies, according
to their subjects. He advises that the Alcibiades, Phaedo, Republic, and Timaeus,
should be read in a series.
The authorities respecting Albinus have been collected by Fabricius. He is said
to have written a work on the arrangement of the writings of Plato. Another Albinus
is mentioned by Boethius and Cassiodorus, who wrote in Latin some works on music
and geometry.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Diogenes. Of Smyrna, an Eleatic philosopher, who was a disciple of Metrodorus and Protagoras. (Clem. Alex. Strom. i.)
Attalus, a Sophist in the second century of the Christian era, the son of Polemon, and grandfather
of the Sophist Hermocrates (Philostr. Vit. Soph. ii. 25.2). His name occurs on
the coins of Smyrna, which are figured in Olearius's edition of Philostratus.
They contain the inscription ATTADOS SOPHIS. TAIS PATRISI SMUR. DAOK., which is
interpreted, "Attalus, the Sophist, to his native cities Smyrna and Laodicea".
The latter is conjectured to have been the place of his birth, the former to have
adopted him as a citizen.
Alexamenus (Alexamenos), of Teos, was, according to Aristotle, in his work upon poets (peri toieton), the first person who wrote dialogues in the Socratic style before the time of Plato. (Athen. xi. p. 505, b. c.; Diog. Laert. iii. 48.)
Apellicon (Apellikon). A Peripatetic philosopher, born at Teos in Asia Minor,
and one of those to whom we owe the preservation of many of the works of Aristotle.
The latter, on his deathbed, confided his works to Theophrastus, his favourite
pupil and Theophrastus, by his will, left them to Neleus, who had them conveyed
to Scepsis, in Troas, his native city. After the death of Neleus, his heirs, illiterate
persons, fearing lest they might fall into the hands of the king of Pergamus,
who was enriching in every way his newly-established library, concealed the writings
of Aristotle in a cave, where they remained for more than 130 years, and suffered
greatly from worms and dampness. At the end of this period Apellicon purchased
them for a high price. His wish was to arrange them in proper order, and to fill
up the lacunae that were now of frequent occurrence in the manuscripts, in consequence
of their neglected state. Being, however, but little versed in philosophy, and
possessing still less judgment, he acquitted himself ill in this difficult task,
and published the works of the Stagirite full of faults. Subsequently the library
of Apellicon fell, among the spoils of Athens, into the hands of Sulla , and was
carried to Rome, where the grammarian Tyrannion had access to them. From him copies
were obtained by Andronicus of Rhodes, which served for the basis of his arrangement
of the works of Aristotle.
Ritter thinks that too much has been made of this story. On its authority
it has even been pretended that the works of Aristotle have reached us in a more
broken and ill-arranged shape than any other productions of antiquity. He thinks
that the story arose out of some laudatory commendations of the edition of Aristotle
by Andronicus, and that it is probable, not to say certain, that there were other
editions, of the respective merits of which it was possible to make a comparison.
At any rate, according to him, the acroamatic works of Aristotle have not reached
us solely from the library of Neleus, and consequently it was not necessary to
have recourse merely to the restoration by Apellicon, either to complete or retain
the lacunae resulting from the deterioration of the manuscripts. See Aristoteles.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Apellicon (Apellikon), a native of Teos, was a Peripatetic philosopher and a great
collector of books. In addition to the number which his immense wealth enabled
him to purchase, he stole several out of the archives of different Greek cities.
His practices having been discovered at Athens, he was obliged to fly from the
city to save his life. He afterwards returned during the tyranny of Aristion,
who patronized him, as a member of the same philosophic sect with himself, and
gave him the command of the expedition against Delos, which, though at first successful,
was ruined by the carelessness of Apellicon, who was surprised by the Romans under
Orobius, and with difficulty escaped, having lost his whole army (Athen. v.).
His library was carried to Rome by Sulla (B. C. 84). Apellicon had died just before
(Strab. xiii.).
Apellicon's library contained the autographs of Aristotle's works,
which had been given by that philosopher, on his death-bed, to Theophrastus, and
by him to Neleus, who carried them to Scepsis, in Troas, where they remained,
having been hidden and much injured in a cave, till they were purchased by Apellicon,
who published a very faulty edition of them. Upon the arrival of the MSS. at Rome,
they were examined by the grammarian Tyrannion, who furnished copies of them to
Andronicus of Rhodes, upon which the latter founded his edition of Aristotle.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
EGIROESSA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Diodorus. Of Elaea, is quoted as the author of elegies by Parthenius (Erot. 15), who relates from him a story about Daphne.
Duris Elaites (Douris Elaites), that is, of Elaea in Aeolis, the author of an epigram in the Greek Anthology (ii. 59, Brunck and Jacobs) on the inundation of Ephesus, which happened in the time of Lysimachus, about 322 B. C. It is probable, from the nature of the event, that the poet lived near the time when it took place. Nothing more is known of him. He is a different person from Duris of Samos. (Jacobs, xiii. p. 889.) Diogenes Laertius (i. 38) mentions a Duris who wrote on painting, whom Vossius (de Hist. Graec., ed. Westermann) supposes to be the same who is mentioned by Pliny (xxxiii. Ind.), and in another passage of Diogenes (ii. 19).
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
KLAROS (Ancient sanctuary) TURKEY
Antimachus (Antimachos). A Greek poet and critic of Colophon, an elder contemporary
of Plato, about B.C. 400. By his two principal works -the long mythical epic called
Thebais ( Quint.x. 1) and a cycle of elegies named after his loved and lost Lyde,
and telling of famous lovers parted by death- he became the founder of learned
poetry, precursor and prototype of the Alexandrians, who, on account of his learning,
assigned him the next place to Homer among epic poets (See Canon Alexandrinus).
In striving to impart strength and dignity to language by avoiding all that was
common, his style became rigid and artificial, and naturally ran into bombast.
But we possess only fragments of his works. As a scholar, he is remarkable for
having set on foot a critical revision of the Homeric poems. See Homerus.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Antimachus (Antimachos). Of Claros, a son of Hipparchus, was a Greek epic and
elegiac poet (Cic. Brut. 51; Ov. Trist. i. 6. 1). He is usually called a Colophonian,
probably only because Claros belonged to the dominion of Colophon. He flourished
during the latter period of the Peloponnesian war (Diod. xiii. 108). The statement
of Suidas that he was a disciple of Panyasis would make him belong to an, earlier
date, but the fact that he is mentioned in connexion with Lysander and Plato the
philosopher sufficiently indicates the age to which he belonged (Plut. Lysand.
18; Proclus, ad Plat. Tim. i.). Plutarch relates that at the Lysandria -for thus
the Samians called their great festival of the Heraea, to honour Lysander- Antimachus
entered upon a poetical contest with one Niceratus of Heracleia. The latter obtained
the prize from Lysander himself, and Antimachus, disheartened by his failure,
destroyed his own poem. Plato, then a young man, happened to be present, and consoled
the unsuccessful poet by saying, that ignorance, like blindness, was a misfortune
to those who laboured under it. The meeting between Antimachus and Plato is related
differently by Cicero, who also places it manifestly at a different time and probably
also at a different place; for, according to him, Antimachus once read to a numerous
audience his voluminous poem (Thebais), and his hearers were so wearied with it,
that all gradually left the place with the exception of Plato, whereupon the poet
said, "I shall nevertheless continue to read, for one Plato is worth more than
all the thousands of other hearers". Now an anecdote similar to the one related
by Cicero is recorded of Antagoras the Rhodian, and this repetition of the same
occurrence, together with other improbabilities, have led Welcker to reject the
two anecdotes altogether as inventions, made either to show the uninteresting
character of those epics, or to insinuate that, although they did not suit the
taste of the multitude, they were duly appreciated by men of learning and intelligence.
The only other circumstance of the life of Antimachus that we know
is, his love for Lyde, who was either his mistress or his wife. He followed her
to Lydia; but she appears to have died soon after, and the poet returned to Colophon
and sought consolation in the composition of an elegy called Lyde, which was very
celebrated in antiquity (Athen. xiii.). This elegy, which was very long, consisted
of accounts of the misfortunes of all the mythical heroes who, like the poet,
had become unfortunate through the early death of their beloved (Plut. Consol.
ad Apollon.). It thus contained vast stores of mythical and antiquarian information,
and it was chiefly for this and not for any higher or poetical reason, that Agatharchides
made an abridgment of it.
The principal work of Antimachus was his epic poem called Thebais,
which Cicero designates as magnum illud volumen. Porphyrius (ad Horat. ad Pison.
146) says, that Antimachus had spun out his poem so much, that in the 24th book
(volumen) his Seven Heroes had not yet arrived at Thebes. Now as in the remaining
part of the work the poet had not only to describe the war of the Seven, but also
probably treated of the war of the Epigoni (Schol. ad Aristoph. Pax. 1268), the
length of the poem must have been immense. It was, like the elegy Lyde, full of
mythological lore, and all that had any connexion with the subject of the poem
was incorporated in it. It was, of course, difficult to control such a mass, and
hence we find it stated by Quintilian (x. 1.53; comp. Dionys. Hal. De verb. Compos.
22), that Antimachus was unsuccessful in his descriptions of passion, that his
works were not graceful, and were deficient in arrangement. His style also had
not the simple and easy flow of the Homeric poems. He borrowed expressions and
phrases from the tragic writers, and frequently introduced Doric forms (Schol.
ad Nicand. Theriac. 3). Antimachus was thus one of the forerunners of the poets
of the Alexandrine school, who wrote more for the learned and a select number
of readers than for the public at large. The Alexandrine grammarians assigned
to him the second place among the epic poets, and the emperor Hadrian preferred
his works even to those of Homer (Dion. Cass. lxix. 4; Spartian. Hadrian. 5).
There are some other works which are ascribed to Antimachus, such as a work entitled
Artemis (Steph. Byz. s. v. Kotulaion), a second called Delta (Athen. vii. p. 300),
a third called Iachine (Etymol. M. s. v. Aboletor), and perhaps also a Centauromachia
(Natal. Com. vii. 4); but as in all these cases Antimachus is mentioned without
any descriptive epithet, it cannot be ascertained whether he is the Clarian poet,
for there are two other poets of the same name. Suidas says that Antimachus of
Claros was also a grammarian, and there is a tradition that he made a recension
of the text of the Homeric poems. The numerous fragments of Antimachus have been
collected by C. A. G. Schellenberg, Halle, 1786. Some additional fragments are
contained in H. G. Stoll, Animadv. in Antimachi Fragm. Gotting. 1841.
This extract is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
KOLOFON (Ancient city) TURKEY
Editor’s Information:
Biography, reports and essays on Homer can be found at his birthplace the island of Ios, one of the places that claim the honour of his origin and where is his tomb. There are also other places among the claimants, which are mentioned in an epigram (Gell. III, 11), including the island of Ios: the island of Chios, Smyrna, Rhodes, Colophon, Salamis in Cyprus, Argos, Athens, Cyme in Aeolis, Pylos and Ithaca.
Pindar speaks also of a certain Polymnastus as one of the famous musicians: Thou knowest the voice, common to all, of Polymnastus the Colophonian.
A Greek poet, born at Colophon, in Asia, about B.C. 150. He was an hereditary priest of Apollo, as well as a physician, and lived a great deal in Aetolia as well as later in Pergamum. He wrote numerous works, such as those on agriculture, of which considerable fragments are still preserved, and on mythological metamorphoses (used by the Roman poet Ovid). Two of his poems, written in a dull and bombastic manner, are still extant: the Theriaka, on remedies against the wounds inflicted by venomous animals; and the Alexipharmaka, on poisons taken in food and drink, with their antidotes. These poems are edited by Schneider, and revised by Keil (1856).
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited August 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
This file forms part of A Hellenistic Bibliography, a bibliography on post-classical Greek poetry and its influence, accessible through the website of the department of Classics of the University of Leiden.
The file contains 105 titles on Nicander of Colophon; it has two sections:
All titles (listed by year/author)
Essentials (editions, etc.)
Compiled and maintained by Martijn Cuypers
Email: m.p.cuypers@let.leidenuniv.nl
Additions and corrections will be gratefully received.
Last updated: 3 july 2002
Elegiac poet.
Hermesianax, (Ermesianax). Of Colophon, a distinguished elegiac poet, the friend and disciple of Philetas, lived in the time of Philip and Alexander the Great, and seems to have died before the destruction of Colophon by Lysimachus, B. C. 302. (Paus. i. 9.8.) His chief work was an elegiac poem, in three books, addressed to his mistress, Leontium, whose name formed the title of the poem, like the Cynthia of Propertius. A great part of the third book is quoted by Athenaeus (xiii.). The poem is also quoted by Pausanias (vii. 17.5, viii. 12.1, ix. 35.1), by Parthenius (Erot. 5, 22), and by Antonins Liberalis (Metam. 39). We learn from another quotation in Pausanias, that Hermesianax wrote an elegy on the Centaur Eurytion (vii. 18.1). It is somewhat doubtful whether the Hermesianax who is mentioned by the scholiast on Nicander (Theriaca, 3), and who wrote a poem entitled Persika, was the same or a younger poet. The fragment of Hermesianax has been edited separately by Ruhnken (Append. ad Epist. Crit. ii., Opusc.), by Weston, Lond. 1784, 8vo., by C. D. Ilgen (Opusc. Var. Philol. vol. i., Erford, 1797, 8vo.), by Rigler and Axt, Colon. 1828, 16mo., by Hermann (Opusc. Acad. vol. iv.), by Bach (Philet. et Phanoc. Relig. Hal. 1829, 8vo.), by J. Bailey, with a critical epistle by G. Burgess, Lond. 1839, 8vo., and by Schneidewin (Delect. Poes. Eleg.). Comp. Bergk, De Hermesianactis Elegia, Marburgi, 1845.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
This file forms part of A Hellenistic Bibliography, a bibliography on post-classical Greek poetry and its influence, accessible through the website of the department of Classics of the University of Leiden.
The file contains ca. 70 titles on Hermesianax, arranged by year/author.
Compiled and maintained by Martijn Cuypers
Email: m.p.cuypers@let.leidenuniv.nl
Additions and corrections will be gratefully received.
Last updated: 3 july 2002
KYMI (Ancient city) TURKEY
Of Cyme: author of ode on Opis and Hecaerge, tomb of.
This city Hesiod himself has satirized in verses which allude to his father, because at an earlier time his father changed his abode to this place from the Aeolian Cyme, saying: And he settled near Helicon in a wretched village, Ascre, which is bad in winter, oppressive in summer, and pleasant at no time. (Perseus Project - Strabo, Geography 9.2.25)
But it is not agreed that Homer was from Cyme, for many peoples lay claim to him. (Perseus Project - Strabo, Geography 13.3.6)
Editor's Information: Biography, reports and essays on Homer can be found at Ios island, one of the places that claim the honour of his origin and where is his tomb. Chios and Smyrna are among the claimants.
Editor’s Information:
Biography, reports and essays on Homer can be found at his birthplace the island of Ios, one of the places that claim the honour of his origin and where is his tomb. There are also other places among the claimants, which are mentioned in an epigram (Gell. III, 11), including the island of Ios: the island of Chios, Smyrna, Rhodes, Colophon, Salamis in Cyprus, Argos, Athens, Cyme in Aeolis, Pylos and Ithaca.
Perseus Project Index. Total results on 4/7/2001: 17 for Melanopus, 1 for Melanopos.
PERGAMOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Arrianus (Arrianos), a Greek poet who, according to Suidas (s. v.), made a Greek translation in hexameter verse of Virgil's Georgies, and wrote an epic poem on the exploits of Alexander the Great (Alexandrias), in twenty-four rhapsodies, and a poem on Attalus of Pergamus. This last statement is, as some critics think, not without difficulties, for, it is said, it is not clear how a poet, who lived after the time of Virgil, could write a poem on Attalus of Pergamus, unless it was some of the later descendants of the family of the Attali. But it might as well be said, that no man can write a poem upon another unless he be his contemporary. It is, however, not improbable that Suidas may have confounded two poets of the same name, or the two poets Adrianus and Arrianus, the former of whom is known to have written an Alexandrias.
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
