Listed 100 (total found 154) sub titles with search on: Biographies for wider area of: "SICILY Island ITALY" .
GELA (Ancient city) SICILY
Apollodorus of Gela in Sicily, was, according to Suidas and Eudocia, a contemporary of Menander, and accordingly lived between the years B. C. 340 and 290. Suidas and Eudocia attribute to him seven comedies, of which they give the titles. But while Suidas (s. v. Apollodoros) ascribes them to Apollodorus of Gela, he assigns one of these same comedies in another passage (s. v. spoudazo) to the Carystian. Other writers too frequently confound the two comic poets.
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Deinolochus, (Deinolochos,) a comic poet of Syracuse or Agrigentum, was, according to some, the son, according to others, the disciple, of Epicharimus. He lived about B. C. 488, and wrote fourteen plays in the Doric dialect, about which we only know, from a few titles, that some of them were on mythological subjects. (Suid. s. v.; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. ii.; Grysar, de Doriens. Com. i.)
AKRAGAS (Ancient city) SICILY
As nearly all the ancient aqueducts now remaining are of Roman
construction, it has been generally imagined that works of this description were
entirely unknown to the Greeks. This, however, is an error, since some are mentioned
by Pausanias. The Greeks, in fact, at a very early period, had some powers of
hydraulic engineering, as is shown by the drainage tunnels of the lake Copa is,
and the similar works of Phaeax at Agrigentum; (...)
This extract is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Damoxenus, (Damoxenos). A boxer of Syracuse, excluded from the
Nemean Games for killing his opponent in a pugilistic encounter. The name of the
latter was Creugas; and the two competitors, after having consumed the entire
day in boxing, agreed each to receive from the other a blow without flinching.
Creugas first struck Damoxenus on the head, and then Damoxenus, with his fingers
unfairly stretched out, struck Creugas on the side; and such, observes Pausanias,
was the hardness of his nails and the violence of the blow that his hand pierced
the side, seized on the bowels, and, drawing them outward, caused instant death
to Creugas. A fine piece of sculpture has come down to us with this for its subject.
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
YKARA (Ancient city) SICILY
Celebrated Grecian hetaera, daughter of Timandra, probably born
at Hyccara in Sicily. According to some accounts she was brought to Corinth when
seven years old, having been taken prisoner in the Athenian expedition to Sicily,
and bought by a Corinthian. This story, however, involves numerous difficulties,
and seems to have arisen from a confusion between this Lais and the other woman
of the same name. She was a contemporary and rival of Phryne. She became enamoured
of a Thessalian named Hippolochus, or Hippostratus, and accompanied him to Thessaly,
where, it is said, some Thessalian women, jealous of her beauty, enticed her into
a temple of Aphrodite, and there stoned her to death.
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
AKRAGAS (Ancient city) SICILY
Acron (Akron), an eminent physician of Agrigentum, the son of Xenon. His exact
date is not known; but, as he is mentioned as being contemporary with Empedocles,
who died about the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, he must have lived in the
fifth century before Christ. From Sicily he went to Athens, and there opened a
philosophical school (esophisteuen). It is said that he was in that city during
the great plague (B. C. 430), and that large fires for the purpose of purifying
the air were kindled in the streets by his direction, which proved of great service
to several of the sick (Plut. De Is. et Osir. 80; Oribas. Synops. vi. 24; Aetius,
tetrab. ii. serm. i. 94; Paul Aegin. ii. 35). It should however be borne in mind
that there is no mention of this in Thucydides (ii. 49, &c.), and, if it is true
that Empedocles or Simonides (who died B. C. 467) wrote the epitaph on Acron,
it may be doubted whether he was in Athens at the time of the plague. Upon his
return to Agrigentum he was anxious to erect a family tomb, and applied to the
senate for a spot of ground for that purpose on account of his eminence as a physician.
Empedocles however resisted this application as being contrary to the principle
of equality, and proposed to inscribe on his tomb the following sarcastic epitaph
(tothastikon), which it is quite impossible to translate so as to preserve the
paronomasia of the original:
Akron ietron Akron Akragantinon patros akrou Kruptei
kremnos hakros patridos akrotates.
The second line was sometimes read thus:
Akrotates koruphes tumbos akros katechei.
Some persons attributed the whole epigram to Simonides (Suid. s. v. Akron; Eudoc.
Violar., ap. Villoison, Anecd. Gr. i. 49; Diog. Laert. viii. 65). The sect of
the Empirici, in order to boast of a greater antiquity than the Dogmatici (founded
by Thessalus, the son, and Polybus, the son-in-law of Hippocrates, about B. C.
400), claimed Acron as their founder (Pseudo-Gal. Introd. 4. vol. xiv.), though
they did not really exist before the third century B. C. Pliny falls into this
anachronism (H. N. xxix. 4). None of Acron's works are now extant, though he wrote
several in the Doric dialect on Medical and Physical subjects, of which the titles
are preserved by Suidas and Eudocia.
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
MESSINA (Ancient city) SICILY
Heius, (Heeios), the name of an ancient and noble family at Messana in Sicily. They were probably hereditary clients of the Claudii. (Cic. in Verr. iv. 3; comp. c. 17.)
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Agatharchus (Agatharchos), a Syracusan, who was placed by the Syracusans over a fleet of twelve ships in B. C. 413, to visit their allies and harass the Athenians. He was afterwards, in the same year, one of the Syracusan commanders in the decisive battle fought in the harbour of Syracuse. (Thuc. vii. 25, 70; Diod. xiii. 13.)
Antander (Antandros), brother of Agathocles, king of Syracuse, was a commander of the troops sent by the Syracusans to the relief of Cro tona when besieged by the Brutii in B. C. 317. During his brother's absence in Africa (B. C. 310), he was left together with Erymnon in command of Syracuse, and wished to surrender it to Hamilcar. He appears, however, to have still retained, or at least regained, the confidence of Agathocles, for he is mentioned afterwards as the instrument of his [p. 183] brother's cruelty. (Diod. xix. 3, xx. 16, 72.) Antander was the author of an historical work, which Diodorus quotes. (Exc. xxi. 12)
Cissidas (Kissidas), a Syracusan, commanded the body of auxiliaries which Dionysius I. sent, for the second time, to the aid of Sparta. (S. C. 367.) He assisted Archidamus in his successful attack on Caryae, and in his expedition against Arcadia in the same year. But during the campaign in Arcadia he left him, as the period fixed for his stay by Dionysius had now expired. On his march towards Laconia he was intercepted by a body of Messenians, and was obliged to send to Archidamus for assistance. The prince having joined him with his forces, they changed their route, but were again intercepted by the combined troops of the Arcadians and Argives. The result was, the defeat of the latter in that which has been called the "Tearless Battle" (Xen. Hell. vii. 1.28-32).
Demarchus, (Demarchos), son of Pidocus, a Syracusan. He was one of the generals sent out to replace Hermocrates and his colleagues in the command of the Syracusan auxiliaries in Greece, when those generals were banished. (Thuc. viii. 85; Xen. Hell. i. 1.30.) After his return he appears to have taken a leading part in public affairs, and became one of the most powerful opponents of the rising power of Dionysius. He was in consequence put to death at the instigation of the latter, at the same time with Daphnaeus, shortly after Dionysius had been appointed general autocrator. (Diod. xiii. 96.)
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 Syracusan, son of Lysimachus, was one of the three generals appointed by the Syracusans, after the first defeat they suffered from the Athenians on their arrival in Sicily, B. C. 415. His colleagues were Hermocrates and Sicanus, and they were invested with full powers, the late defeat being justly ascribed by Hermocrates to the too great number of the generals, and their want of sufficient control over their troops. (Thuc. vi. 73; Diod. xiii. 4.) They were deposed from their command in the following summer, on account of their failure in preventing the progress of the Athenian works. Of the three generals appointed in their place, one was also named Heracleides. (Thuc. vi. 103.)
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
Hermocrates, (Hermokrates). Son of Hermon, a Syracusan, and one of the most eminent
citizens of that state at the time of the Athenian invasion. We have no account
of his early life or rise, but his family must have been illustrious, for, according
to Timaeus (ap. Longin. iv. 3; comp. also Plut. Nic. 1), it claimed descent from
the god Hermes, and it is evident that he was a person of consideration and influence
in the state as early as B. C. 424, as he was one of the deputies sent by the
Syracusans to the general congress of the Greek cities of Sicily, held at Gela
in the summer of that year. Thucydides, who puts a long speech into his mouth
on that occasion, ascribes mainly to his influence the resolution adopted by the
assembled deputies to terminate the troubles of Sicily by a general peace. (Thuc.
iv. 58, 65; Timaeus, ap. Polyb. xii. Frag. Vat. 22.) In 415, when the news of
the impending invasion from Athens came to be generally rife, though still discredited
by many, Hermocrates again came forward to urge the truth of the rumour, and the
necessity of immediate preparations for defence. (Thuc. vi. 32-35.) It does not
appear that he at this time held any public situation or command; but in the following
winter, after the first defeat of the Syracusans by the Athenians, he represented
this disaster as owing to the too great number as well as insufficient authority
of their generals, and thus induced them to appoint himself, together with Heracleides
and Sicanus, to be commanders-inchief, with full powers. (Thuc. vi. 72, 73; Plut.
Nic. 16; Diod. xiii. 4; who, however, places their appointment too early.) He
was soon after sent to Camarina, to counteract the influence of the Athenian envoys,
and gain the Camarinaeans to the alliance of Syracuse, but he only succeeded in
inducing them to remain neutral. (Thuc. vi. 75, 88.) According to Thucydides,
Hermocrates had already given proofs of valour and ability in war, before his
elevation to the command; but his first proceedings as a general were unsuccessful:
his great object was to prevent the Athenians from making themselves masters of
the heights of Epipolae, above the town, but they landed suddenly from Catana,
carried the Epipolae by surprise, and commenced their lines of circumvallation.
The Syracusans next, by the advice of Hermocrates, began to construct a cross
wall, to interrupt the Athenian lines; but they were foiled in this project too:
the Athenians attacked their counterwork, and destroyed it, while they themselves
were repulsed in all their attacks upon the Athenian lines. Dispirited by their
ill success, they laid the blame upon their generals, whom they deposed, and appointed
three others in their stead. (Thuc. vi. 96-103.) The arrival of Gylippus soon
after superseded the new generals, and gave a fresh turn to affairs; but Hermocrates,
though now in a private situation, was not less active in the service of his country:
we hear of his heading a chosen band of warriors in resisting the great night
attack on the Epipolae, immediately after the arrival of Demosthenes (Diod. xiii.
11): he is also mentioned as joining with Gylippus in urging the Syracusans to
try their fortune again by sea, as well as by land: and when, after the final
defeat and destruction of their fleets, the Athenian generals were preparing to
retreat by land, it was Hermocrates who anticipated their purpose, and finding
it impossible to induce his countrymen to march forth at once and occupy the passes,
nevertheless succeeded, by an ingenious stratagem, in causing the Athenians themselves
to defer their departure for two days, a delay which proved fatal to the whole
army. (Thuc. vii. 21, 73; Diod. xiii. 18; Plut. Nic. 26.) Thucydides makes no
mention of the part taken by Hermocrates in regard to the Athenian prisoners,
but both Diodorus and Plutarch represent him as exerting all his influence with
his countrymen, though unsuccessfully, to save the lives of Nicias and Demosthenes.
According to a statement of Timaeus, preserved by the latter author, when he found
all his efforts fruitless, he gave a private intimation to the two generals that
they might anticipate the ignominy of a public execution by a voluntary death.
(Diod. xiii. 19; Plut. Nic. 28.)
After the destruction of the Athenian armament in Sicily, Hermocrates
employed all his influence with his countrymen to induce them to support with
vigour their allies the Lacedaemonians in the war in Greece itself. But he only
succeeded in prevailing upon them to send a squadron of twenty triremes (to which
the Selinuntians added two more); and with this small force he himself, with two
colleagues in the command, joined the Lacedaemonian fleet under Astyochus, before
the close of the summer of 412. (Thuc. viii. 26; Diodorus, however, raises the
number of the ships to thirty-five, xiii. 34.) But, trifling as this succour appears,
the Syracusan squadron bore an important part in many of the subsequent operations,
and particularly in the action off Cynossema, in which it formed the right wing
of the Lacedaemonian fleet; and though unable to prevent the defeat of its allies,
escaped with the loss of only one ship. (Thuc. viii. 104-106; Diod. xiii. 39.)
It is probably of this action that Polybius was thinking, when he states (Frag.
Vat. xii. 23) that Hermocrates was present at the battle of Aegos Potamoi, which
is clearly erroneous. During these services Hermocrates, we are told, conciliated
in the highest degree the favour both of the allies and of his own troops; and
acquired such popularity with the latter, that when (in 409 B. C.) news arrived
that he as well as his colleagues had been sentenced to banishment by a decree
of the Syracusan people, and new commanders appointed to replace them, the officers
and crews of the squadron not only insisted on their retaining the command until
the actual arrival of their successors, but many of them offered their services
to Hermocrates to effect his restoration to his country. He however urged the
duty of obedience to the laws; and, after handing over the squadron to the new
generals, repaired to Lacedaemon to counteract the intrigues of Tissaphernes,
to whom he had given personal offence. From thence he returned to Asia, to the
court of Pharnabazus, who furnished him with money to build ships and raise mercenary
troops, for the purpose of effecting his return to Syracuse. (Xen. Hell. i. 1.27-31;
Thuc. viii. 85; Diod. xiii. 63.) With a force of five triremes and 1000 soldiers,
he sailed to Messana, and from thence in conjunction with the refugees from Himera,
and, with the co-operation of his own party in Syracuse, attempted to bring about
a revolution in that city. But failing in that scheme, he hastened to Selinus,
at this time still in ruins, after its destruction by tile Carthaginians, rebuilt
a part of the city, and collected thither its refugees from all parts of Sicily.
He thus converted it into a stroughold, from whence he carried on hostilities
against the Carthaginian allies, laid waste the territories of Motya and Panormus,
and defeated the Panormitans in a battle. By these means he acquired great fame
and popularity, which were still increased when in the following year (B. C. 407)
he repaired to Himera, and finding that the bones of the Syracusans who had been
slain in battle against the Carthaginians two years before still lay there unburied,
caused them to be gathered up, and removed with all due funeral honours to Syracuse.
But, though the revulsion of feeling thus excited led to the banishment of Diocles,
and other leaders of the opposite party yet the sentence of exile against Hermocrates
still remained unreversed. Not long afterwards he appreached Syracuse with a considerable
force, and was admitted by some of his friends into the city ; but was followed
in the first instance only by a band, which the Syracusans no sooner discovered
than they took up arms, and attacked and slew him, together with the greater part
of his followers, before his troops could come to their assistance. (Diod. xiii.
63, 75.) The character of Hermocrates is one of the brightest and purest in the
history of Syracuse; and the ancient republics present few more striking instances
of moderation and wisdom, combined with the most steady patriotism; while his
abilities, both as a statesman and a warrior, were such as to earn for him the
praise of being ranked in after ages as on a level in these respects with Timoleon
and Pyrrhus. (Polyb. Frag. Vat. xii. 22.) We do not learn that Hermocrates left
a son; his daughter was married, after his death, to the tyrant Dionysius. (Diod.
xiii. 96; Plut. Dion. 3.)
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
Hipparinus, (Hipparinos). A Syracusan, father of Dion. He is mentioned by Aristotle (Pol. v. 6) as a man of large fortune, and one of the chief citizens of Syracuse, who, having squandered his own property in luxury and extravagance, lent his support to Dionysius in obtaining the sovereignty of his native city. According to Plutarch (Dion, 3), he was associated with Dionysius in the command as general autocrator, a statement which is understood by Mitford (Hist. of Greece, ch. xxix. sect. 5), as referring to the time when Dionysius obtained the virtual sovereignty under that title, in the spring of B. C. 405. It is more probable that it relates to the appointment of the ten generals in the preceding year, and that Hipparinus, as well as Dionysius, was one of these. We hear no more of him from this time, but from the tyrant having married his daughter Aristomache, as well as from the position assumed by his son Dion, it is clear that he must have continued to hold a high place in the favour of Dionysius as long as he lived.
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
SIKELIA (Ancient Hellenic lands) ITALY
Ducetius, (Douketios), a chief of the Sicelians, or Sicels, the native tribes
in the interior of Sicily. He is styled king of the Sicelians by Diodorus (xi.
78), and is said to have been of illustrious descent. After the expulsion of the
family of Gelon from Syracuse (B. C. 466), Ducetius succeeded in uniting all the
Sicelians of the interior into one nation, and in order to give them a common
centre founded the city of Palice in the plain below Menaenum. (Diod. xi. 88.)
He had previously made war on the Catanaeans, and expelled from that city the
new colonists who had been sent there by Hiero, who thereupon took possession
of Inessa, the name of which they changed to Aetna; but Ducetius subsequently
reduced this city also. (Diod. xi. 76, 91.) An attack upon a small place in the
territory of Agrigentum involved him in hostilities not only with the Agrigentines,
but the Syracusans also, who defeated him in a great battle. The consequence of
this was that he was deserted by all his followers, and fearing to be betrayed
into the hands of the enemy, he took the daring resolution of repairing at once
to Syracuse as a suppliant, and placing himself at their mercy. The Syracusans
spared his life, but sent him into an honourable exile at Corinth. (Diod. xi.
91, 92.) Here however he did not remain long, but having assembled a considerable
band of colonists, returned to Sicily, and founded the city of Calacte on the
north coast of the island. He was designing again to assert his supremacy over
all the Sicelian tribes when his projects were interrupted by his death, about
440, B. C. (Diod. xii. 8, 29; Wesseling, ad loc.)
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
TAVROMENION (Ancient city) SICILY
Andromachus. Ruler of Tauromenium in the middle of the fourth century B. C., and the father of the historian Timaeus, is said to have been by far the best of the rulers of Sicily at that time. He assisted Timoleon in his expedition against Dionysius, B. C. 344. (Diod. xvi. 7, 68; Plut. Timol. 10.) Respecting the statement of Diodorus that he founded Tauromenium, see Wesseling, ad Diod. xiv. 59.
AGYRION (Ancient city) SICILY
Perseus Encyclopedia
Diodorus, (Diodoros). An historian, surnamed Siculus, because
born at Agyrium in Sicily, and the contemporary of Iulius Caesar and Augustus.
Our principal data for the events of his life are derived from his own work. In
early life he travelled into Asia, Africa, and Europe, and on his return established
himself at Rome, where he published a general history, in forty books, under the
title of Bibliotheke Historike, or Historical Library. To this labour he devoted
thirty years of his life. The history comprehended a period of 1138 years, besides
the time preceding the Trojan War, and was carried down to the end of Caesar's
Gallic war. His work was written after the death of Caesar. The first six books
were devoted to the fabulous history anterior to the war of Troy, and of these
the three former to the antiquities of barbarian States, the three latter to the
archaeology of the Greeks. But the historian, though treating of the fabulous
history of the barbarians in the first three books, enters into an account of
their manners and usages, and carries down the history of these nations to a point
of time posterior to the Trojan War. Thus, in the first book he gives a sketch
of Egyptian history from the reign of Menes to Amasis. In the eleven following
books he details the different events which happened between the Trojan War and
the death of Alexander the Great; while the remaining twenty-three books contain
the history of the world down to the Gallic War and the conquest of Britain. We
have only a small part remaining of this vast compilation--namely, the first five
books; then from the eleventh to the twentieth, both inclusive; and, finally,
fragments of the other books from the sixth to the tenth inclusive, and also of
the last twenty. These rescued portions we owe to Eusebius; to John Malalas, Georgius
Syncellus, and other writers of the Lower Empire, who have cited them in the course
of their own works; but, above all, to the authors of the "Extracts respecting
Embassies" and of the "Extracts respecting Virtues and Vices."We
are indebted also for a part of them to the patriarch Photius, who has inserted
in his Myriobiblon extracts from several of the books, from the thirtyfirst to
the thirty-third, and from the thirty-sixth to the thirty-eighth and fortieth.
Important additions have also been made from MSS. in the Vatican Library.
A great advantage possessed by Diodorus over most of the ancient
historians is his indicating the order of time, though it must be acknowledged
at the same time that his chronology offers occasional difficulties and often
needs educing. Diodorus, who wrote at Rome, and at a period when the dominion
of that city extended over the greater part of the civilized world, arranges his
narrative in accordance with the Roman calendar and consular fasti; but he frequently
adds the names of the Athenian archons who were contemporaneous.
With regard to the historical value of the work itself and
the merits of the author, the most varying opinions have been entertained by modern
writers. The principal fault of Diodorus seems to have been the too great extent
of his work. It was not possible for any man living in the time of Augustus to
write an unexceptionable universal history. It is not, then, a matter of surprise
that Diodorus, who does not appear to have been a man of superior abilities, should
have fallen into a number of particular errors and should have placed too much
reliance on authorities sometimes far from trustworthy. Wherever he speaks from
his own observation he may, perhaps, generally be relied upon; but when he is
compiling from the writings of others he has shown little judgment in the selection.
The literary style of Diodorus, though not very pure or elegant, is sufficiently
perspicuous and presents but few difficulties, except where the MSS. are defective,
as is frequently the case.
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
Diodorus. The Sicilian, usually called Diodorus Siculus, was a contemporary of
Caesar and Augustus. (Suid. s. v. Diodoros; Euseb. Chron. ad Ann. 1967.) He was
born in the town of Agyrium in Sicily, where he became acquainted with the Latin
language through the great intercourse between the Romans and Sicilians. Respecting
his life we know no more than what he himself tells us (i. 4). He seems to have
made it the business of his life to write an universal history from the earliest
down to his own time. With this object in view, he travelled over a great part
of Europe and Asia to gain a more accurate knowledge of nations and countries
than he could obtain from previous historians and geographers. For a long time
he lived at Rome, and there also he made large collections of materials for his
work by studying the ancient documents. He states, that he spent thirty years
upon his work, which period probably includes the time he spent in travelling
and collecting materials. As it embraced the history of all ages and countries,
and thus supplied the place, as it were, of a whole library, he called it Bibliotheke,
or, as Eusebius (Praep. Evang. i. 6) says, Bibliotheke historike. The time at
which he wrote his history may be determined pretty accurately from internal evidence
: he not only mentions Caesar's invasion of Britain and his crossing the Rhine,
but also his death and apotheosis (i. 4, iv. 19, v. 21, 25) : he further states
(i. 44, comp. 83), that he was in Egypt in 01.190, that is, B. C. 20; and Scaliger
(Animadu. ad Euscb.) has made it highly probable that Diodorus wrote his work
after the year B. C. 8, when Augustus corrected the calendar and introduced the
intercalation every fourth year.
The whole work of Diodorus consisted of forty books, and embraced
the period from the earliest mythical ages down to the beginning of J. Caesar's
Gallic wars. Diodorus himself further mentions, that the work was divided into
three great sections. The first, which consisted of the first six books, contains
the history of the mythical times previous to the Trojan war. The first books
of this section treat of the mythuses of foreign countries, and the latter books
of those of the Greeks. The second section consisted of eleven books, which contained
the history from the Trojan war down to the death of Alexander the Great; and
the third section, which contained the remaining 23 books, treated of the history
from the death of Alexander down to the beginning of Caesar's Gallic wars. Of
this great work considerable portions are now lost. The first five books, which
contain the early history of the Eastern nations, the Egyptians, Aethiopians,
and Greeks, are extant entire; the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth books
are lost; but from the eleventh down to the twentieth the work is complete again,
and contains the history from the second Persian war, B. C. 480, down to the year
B. C. 302. The remaining portion of the work is lost, with the exception of a
considerable number of fragments and the Excerpta, which are preserved partly
in Photius (Bibl. Cod. 244), who gives extracts from books 31, 32, 33, 36, 37,
38, and 40, and partly in the Eclogae made at the command of Constantine Porphyrogenitus,
from which they have successively been published by H. Stephens, Fulv. Ursinus,
Valesius, and A. Mai. (Collect. Nova Script. ii.) The work of Diodorus is constructed
upon the plan of annals, and the events of each year are placed by the side of
one another without any internal connexion. In composing his Bibliotheca, Diodorus
made use, independent of his own observations, of all sources which were accessible
to him; and had he exercised any criticism or judgment, or rather had he possessed
any critical powers, his work might have been of incalculable value to the student
of history. But Diodorus did nothing but collect that which he found in his different
authorities : he thus jumbled together history, mythus, and fiction; he frequently
misunderstood or mutilated his authorities, and not seldom contradicts in one
passage what he has stated in another. The absence of criticism is manifest throughout
the work, which is in fact devoid of all the higher requisites of a history. But
notwithstanding all these drawbacks, the extant portion of this great compilation
is to us of the highest importance, on account of the great mass of materials
which are there collected from a number of writers whose works have perished.
Diodorus frequently mentions his authorities, and in most cases he has undoubtedly
preserved the substance of his predecessors. (See Heyne, de Fontibus et Auctorib.
Hist. Diodori, in the Commentat. Societ. Gotting. vols. v. and vii., and reprinted
in the Bipont edition of Diodorus, vol. i., which also contains a minute account
of the plan of the history by J. N. Eyring) The style of Diodorus is on the whole
clear and lucid, but not always equal, which may be owing to the different character
of the works he used or abridged. His diction holds the middle between the archaic
or refined Attic, and the vulgar Greek which was spoken in his time. (Phot. Bibl.
Cod. 70.)
The work of Diodorus was first published in Latin translations of
separate parts, until Vinc. Opsopaeus published the Greek text of books 16-20,
Basel, 1539, 4to., which was followed by H. Stephens's edition of books 1-5 and
11-20, with the excerpta of Photius, Paris, 1559, fol. The next important edition
is that of N. Rhodomannus (Hanover, 1604, fol.), which contains a Latin translation.
The great edition of P. Wesseling, with an extensive and very valuable commentary,
as well as the Eclogae of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, as far as they were then
known, appeared at Amsterdam, 1746, 2 vols. fol. This edition was reprinted, with
some additions, at Bipont (1793, &c.) in 11 vols. 8vo. The best modern edition
is that of L. Dindorf, Leipzig, 1828, 6 vols. 8vo. The new fragments discovered
and published by A. Mai were edited, with many improvements, in a separate volume
by L. Dindorf, Leipzig, 1828, 8vo. Wesseling's edition and the Bipont reprint
of it contain 65 Latin letters attributed to Diodorus. They had first been published
in Italian in Pietro Carrera's Storia di Catana, 1639, fol., and were then printed
in a Latin version by Abraham Preiger in Burmann's Thesaur. Antig. Sicil. vol.
x. and in the old edition of Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. xiv. p. 229, &c. The Greek original
of these letters has never been seen by any one, and there can be little doubt
but that these letters are a forgery made after the revival of letters. (Fabr.
Bibl. Gr. iv.)
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
Diodorus: Perseus Project index
Editor's Information
The e-texts of the works by Diodorus are found in Greece (ancient country) under the category Ancient Greek Writings.
Diodorus Siculus: Various WebPages
Diodorus Siculus was born on Sicily
and was a contemporary of Julius Caesar, Marc Anthony, Cleopatra and Augustus.
Diodorus wrote the Historical Library, Bibliotheca Historica,
which was a history of the world in 40 books. This work has only partly survived,
for example his description of Alexander the Great's giant funeral procession.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the In2Greece URL below.
MESSINA (Ancient city) SICILY
Evemerus, or Eumerus (Euemeros), a Sicilian author of the time of Alexander the
Great and his immediate successors. Most writers call him a native of Messene
in Sicily (Plut. de Is. et Os. 23; Lactant. de Fals. Relig. i. 11; Etym. M. s.
v. Brotos), while Arnobius (iv. 15) calls him an Agrigentine, and others mention
either Tegea in Arcadia or the island of Cos as his native place. (Athen. xv.).
His mind was trained in the philosophical school of the Cyrenaics, who had before
his time become notorious for their scepticism in matters connected with the popular
religion, and one of whom, Theodorus, is frequently called an atheist by the ancients.
The influence of this school upon Evemerus seems to have been very great, for
he subsequently became the founder of a peculiar method of interpreting the legends
and mythi of the popular religion, which has often and not unjustly been compared
with the rationalism of some modern theologians in Germany. About B. C. 316 we
find Evemerus at the court of Cassander in Macedonia, with whom he was connected
by friendship, and who, according to Eusebius (Praep. Evany. ii. 2), senthim out
on an exploring expedition. Evemerus is said to have sailed down the Red Sea and
round the southern coasts of Asia to a very great distance, until lie came to
an island called Panchaea. After his return from this voyage lie wrote a work
entitled Hiera Anagraphe, which consisted of at least nine books. The title of
this "Sacred History," as we may term it, was taken from the anagraphai,
or the inscriptions on columns and walls, which existed in great numbers in the
temples of Greece, and Evemerus chose it because lie pretended to have derived
his information from public documents of that kind, which he had discovered in
his travels, especially in the island of Panchaea. The work contained accounts
of the several gods, whom Evemerus represented as having originally been men who
had distinguished themselves either as warriors, kings, inventors, or benefactors
of man, and who after their death were worshipped as gods by the grateful people.
Zeus, for example, was, according to him, a king of Crete, who had been a great
conqueror; and he asserted that he had seen in the temple of Zeus Triphyiius a
column with an inscription detailing all the exploits of the kings Uranus, Cronus,
and Zeus. (Euseb. l. c; Sext. Empir. ix. 17.) This book, which seems to have been
written in a popular style, must have been very attractive; for all the fables
of mythology were dressed up in it as so many true and historical narratives;
and many of the subsequent historians, such as the uncritical Diodorius (see Fragm.
lib. vi.) adopted his mode of dealing with myths, or at least followed in his
track, as we find to be the case with Polybius and Dionysius. Traces of such a
method of treating mythology occur, it is true, even in Herodotus and Thucvdides;
but Evemerus was the first who carried it out systematically, and after his time
it found numerous admirers. In the work of Diodorus and other historians and mythographers,
we meet with innumerable stories which have all the appearance of being nothing
but Evemeristic interpretations of ancient myths, though they are frequently taken
by modern critics for genuine legends. Evemerus was much attacked and treated
within contempt, and Eratosthenes called him a Bergaean, that is, as great a liar
as Antiphanes of Berga (Polyb. xxxiii. 12, xxxiv. 5; Strab. i., ii., vii.); but
the ridicule with which he is treated refers almost entirely to his pretending
to have visited the island of Panchaea, a sort of Thule of the southern ocean;
whereas his method of treating mythology is passed over unnoticed, and is even
adopted. His method, in fact, became so firmly rooted, that even down to the end
of the last century there were writers who acquiesced in it. The pious believers
among the ancients, on the other hand, called Evemerus an atheist. (Plut. de Place.
Philos. i. 7; Aelian, V. H. ii. 31; Theophil. ad Autolyc. iii. 6.) The great popularity
of the work is attested by the circumstance that Eunius made a Latin translation
of it. (Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 42; Lactant. de Fals. Relig. i. 11; Varro, de Re
Rust. i. 48.) The Christian writers often refer to Evemerus as their most useful
ally to prove that the pagan mythology was nothing but a heap of fables invented
by mortal men. (Hieron. Columna, Prolegom. in Evemerum, in his Q. Ennii quae supersunt
Fragm. p. 482, &c., ed. Naples, 1590; Sevin, in the Mem. de l'Acad. des Inscript.
viii.; Fourmont, ibid. xv.; Foucher, ibid. xxxiv., xxxv.; Lobeck, Aglaoph. i.)
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
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Perseus Encyclopedia
Philistus, (Philistos). A Greek historian of Syracuse, born about B.C. 435. He encouraged the elder Dionysius, by advice and assistance, in securing and maintaining the position of despot in his native State; but was himself banished by Dionysius in 386, and lived a long while at Adria in Epirus, busied with historical studies. Recalled by Dionysius the younger, he counteracted the salutary influence of Dion and Plato at that tyrant's court, and brought about the banishment of both. As commander of the fleet against Dion and the revolted Syracusans, he lost a naval battle, and in consequence either committed suicide or was cruelly murdered by the angry populace (356). He left an historical work, begun in his exile, called Sicelica (Sikelika), a history of Sicily in thirteen books. Books i.-vii. dealt with the events of the earliest times to the capture of Agrigentum by the Carthaginians in 406; viii.-xi., with the rule of the elder Dionysius; xii. and xiii., with that of the younger. The last portion, which remained incomplete owing to his death, was finished by his countryman Athanas. Only unimportant fragments of this have survived. According to the judgment of the ancients, he imitated Thucydides somewhat unsuccessfully, and betrayed in his work the one-sided attitude natural to his political views.
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
Antiochus (Antiochos), of Syaracuse, a son of Xenophanes, is called by Dionysius
of Halicarnassus (Ant. Rom. i. 12) a very ancient historian. He lived about the
year B. C. 423, and was thus a contemporary of Thucydides and the Peloponnesian
war (Joseph. c. Apion. i. 3). Respecting his life nothing is known, but his historical
works were held in very high esteem by the ancients on account of their accuracy
(Dionys. i. 73). His two works were:
1. A history of Sicily, in nine books, from the reign of king Cocalus, i. e. from
the earliest times down to the year B. C. 424 or 425 (Diod. xii. 71). It is referred
to by Pausanias (x. 11.3), Clemens of Alexandria (Protrept.), and Theodoret.
2. A history of Italy, which is very frequently referred to by Strabo, by Dionysius
(comp. Steph. Byz. s. v. Brettios; Hesych. s. v. Chonren). The fragments of Antiochus
are contained in C. et T. Muller, Fragm. Histor. Graec. Paris, 1841.
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
Callias, of Syracuse, a Greek historian who wrote a great work on the history
of Sicily. He lived, as Josephus (c. Apion. i. 3) expresses it, long after Philistus,
but earlier than Timaeus. From the nature of his work it is clear that he was
a contemporary of Agathocles, whom, however, the historian survived, as he mentioned
the death of the tyrant. This work is sometimes called tad teri Agathoklea, or
peri Agathoklea historiai, and sometimes also by Roman writers "Historia de Rebus
Siculis". (Athen. xii.; Aelian, Hist. An. xvi. 28; Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. iii.
41; Macrob. Sat. v. 19; Dionys. i. 42; Fest. s. v. Romam). It embraced the history
of Sicily during the reign of Agathocles, from B. C. 317 to 289, and consisted
of twenty-two books (Diod. xxi. Exc. 12.). The very few fragments which we possess
of the work do not enable us to form an opinion upon it, but Diodorus (xxi. Exc.)
states, that Callias was corrupted by Agathocles with rich bribes; that he sacrificed
the truth of history to base gain; and that he went even so far in distorting
the truth as to convert the crimes and the violation of the laws human and divine,
of which Agathocles was guilty, into praiseworthy actions (Comp. Suid. s. v. Kallias).
There is another Callias of Syracuse, a contemporary of Demosthenes,
who occupied himself with oratory, but who is mentioned only by Plutarch. (Dem.
5, Vit. X Orat.)
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
GELA (Ancient city) SICILY
Gelon. A native of Gela in Sicily, who rose from the station
of a private citizen to be supreme ruler of Gela and Syracuse. He was descended
from an ancient family, which originally came from Telos, an island off the coast
of Caria, and settled at Gela, when it was first colonized by the Rhodians. During
the time that Hippocrates reigned at Gela (B.C. 498-491), Gelon was appointed
commander of the cavalry, and greatly distinguished himself in the various wars
which Hippocrates carried on against the Grecian cities in Sicily. On the death
of Hippocrates, who fell in battle against the Siculi, Gelon seized the supreme
power (B.C. 491). Soon afterwards a more splendid prize fell in his way. The nobles
and landholders (gamoroi) of Syracuse, who had been driven from the city by an
insurrection of their slaves, supported by the rest of the people, applied to
Gelon for assistance. This crafty leader, gladly availing himself of the opportunity
of extending his dominions, marched to Syracuse, into which he was admitted by
the popular party (B.C. 485), who had not the means of resisting so formidable
an opponent. Having thus become master of Syracuse, he appointed his brother Hiero
governor of Gela, and exerted all his endeavours to promote the prosperity of
his new acquisition. In order to increase the population of Syracuse, he destroyed
Camarina, and removed all its inhabitants, together with a great number of the
citizens of Gela, to his favourite city. By his various conquests and his great
abilities, he became a very powerful monarch; and therefore, when the Greeks expected
the invasion of Xerxes, ambassadors were sent by them to Syracuse, to secure,
if possible, his assistance in the war. Gelon promised to send to their aid two
hundred triremes, twenty thousand heavyarmed troops, two thousand cavalry, and
six thousand light-armed troops, provided the supreme command were given to him.
This offer being indignantly rejected by the Lacedaemonian and Athenian ambassadors,
Gelon sent, according to Herodotus, an individual named Cadmus to Delphi, with
great treasures, and with orders to present them to Xerxes if he proved victorious
in the coming war. This statement, however, was denied by the Syracusans, who
said that Gelon would have assisted the Greeks, if he had not been prevented by
an invasion of the Carthaginians, with a force amounting to three hundred thousand
men, under the command of Hamilcar. This great army was entirely defeated near
Himera by Gelon and Theron, monarch of Agrigentum, on the same day, according
to Herodotus, on which the battle of Salamis was fought. An account of this expedition
is also given by Diodorus Siculus, who states that the battle between Gelon and
the Carthaginians was fought on the same day as that at Thermopylae. There seems,
indeed, to have been a regular understanding between Xerxes and the Carthaginians,
in accordance with which the latter were to attack the Greeks in Sicily, while
the Persian monarch was to move down upon Attica and the Peloponnesus.
Gelon appears to have used with moderation the power which he had
acquired by violence, and to have endeared himself to the Syracusans by his just
government, and by the encouragement he gave to commerce and the fine arts. Plutarch
states that the Syracusans would not allow his statues to be destroyed together
with those of the other tyrants, when Timoleon became master of the city ( Timol.).
He died B.C. 478, and was succeeded by his brother Hiero.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Dec 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
CATANI (Ancient city) SICILY
Charondas, a celebrated legislator, born at Catana in Sicily, where
he flourished about B.C. 650. We have very few details of his life. Aristotle
merely informs us that he was of the bourgeois class of citizens, and that he
framed laws for the people of Catana, as well as for other communities which,
like them, were descended from Chalcis in Euboea. Aelian adds that he was subsequently
driven into exile from Catana, and took refuge in Rhegium, where he succeeded
in introducing his laws. Some authors inform us that he compiled his laws for
the Thurians; but he lived, in fact, a long time before the foundation of Thurium,
since his laws were abrogated in part by Anaxilaus, tyrant of Rhegium, who died
B.C. 476. The laws of Charondas were, like those of many of the ancient legislators,
in verse, and formed part of the instruction of the young. Their fame reached
even to Athens, where they were sung or chanted at repasts. The preamble of
these laws, as preserved to us by Stobaeus, is thought, so far, at least, as
regards the form of expression, not to be genuine; and Heyne supposes it to
have been taken from some Pythagorean treatise on the laws of Charondas.
The manner of this legislator's death is deserving of mention.
He had made a law that no man should be allowed to come armed into the assembly
of the people. The penalty for infringement was death. He became the victim
of his own law; for, having returned from pursuing some robbers, he entered
the city, and presented himself before the assembly of the people without reflecting
that he carried a sword by his side. Some one thereupon remarked to him, "You
are violating your own law." His reply was, "On the contrary, by Zeus,
I will establish it"; and he slew himself on the spot.
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
Charondas, a lawgiver of Catana, who legislated for his own and the other cities of Chalcidian origin in Sicily and Italy (Aristot. Polit. ii. 10). Now, these were Zancle, Naxos, Leontini, Euboea, Mylae, Himera, Callipolis, and Rhegium. He must have lived before the time of Anaxilaus, tyrant of Rhegium, i. e. before B. C. 494, for the Rhegians used the laws of Charondas till they were abolished by Anaxilaus, who, after a reign of eighteen years, died B. C. 476. These facts sufficiently refute the common account of Charondas, as given by Diodorus (xii. 12): viz. that after Thurii was founded by the people of the ruined city of Sybaris, the colonists chose Charondas, "the best of their fellow-citizens", to draw up a code of laws for their use. For Thurii, as we have seen, is not included among the Chalcidian cities, and the date of its foundation is B. C. 443. It is also demonstrated by Bentley (Phalaris), that the laws which Diodorus gives as those drawn up by Charondas for the Thurians were in reality not his. For Aristotle (Polit. iv. 12) tells us, that his laws were adapted to an aristocracy, whereas in Diodorus we constantly find him ordering appeals to the demos, and the constitution of Thurii is expressly called politeuma demokratikon. Again, we learn from a happy correction made by Bentley in a corrupt passage of the Politics (ii. 12), that the only peculiarity in the laws of Charondas was that he first introduced the power of prosecuting false witnesses (episkepsis). But it is quite certain that this was in force at Athens long before the existence of Thurii, and therefore that Charondas, as its author, also lived before the foundation of that city. Lastly, we are told by Diogenes Laertius, that Protagoras was the lawgiver of Thurii. Diodorus ends the account of his pseudo-Charondas by the story, that he one day forgot to lay aside his sword before he appeared in the assembly, thereby violating one of his own laws. On being reminded of this by a citizen, he exclaimed, ma Di alla kurion poieso, and immediately stabbed himself. This anecdote is also told of Diocles of Syracuse, and of Zaleucus, though Valerius Maximus (vi.5) agrees with Diodorus in attributing it to Charondas. The story that Charondas was a Pythagorean, is probably an instance of the practice which arose in later times of calling every distinguished lawgiver a disciple of Pythagoras, which title was even conferred on Numa Pompilius (Comp. Iamblich. Vit. Pythag. c. 7). Among several pretended laws of Charondas preserved by Stobaeus, there is one probably authentic, since it is found in a fragment of Theophrastus (Stob. Serm. 48). This enacts, that all buying and selling is to be transacted with ready money, and that the government is to provide no remedy for those who lose their money by giving credit. The same ordinance will be found in Plato's Laws. The laws of Charondas were probably in verse (Athen. xiv.).
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
IMERA (Ancient city) SICILY
Helianax, brother of Stesichorus, who, according to Suidas (s. v.), was a lawgiver, probably in one of the states of Sicily
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Diocles, (Diokles), a Syracusan, celebrated for his code of laws. No mention of
his name occurs in Thucydides, but according to Diodorus he was the proposer of
the decree for putting to death the Athenian generals Demosthenes and Nicias.
(Diod. xiii. 19.) He is called by Diodorus upon this occasion the most eminent
of the demagogues at Syracuse, and appears to have been at this time the leader
of the popular or democratic party, in opposition to Hermocrates. The next year
(B. C. 412), if the chronology of Diodorus be correct, a democratic revolution
took place, and Diocles was appointed with several others to frame and establish
a new code of laws. In this he took so prominent a part, that he threw his colleagues
quite into the shade, and the code was ever after known as that of Diocles. We
know nothing of its details, but it is praised by Diodorus for its conciseness
of style, and the care with which it distinguished different offences and assigned
to each its peculiar penalty. The best proof of its merit is, that it continued
to be followed as a civil code not only at Syracuse, but in many others of the
Sicilian cities, until the island was subjected to the Roman law. (Diod. xiii.
35.)
The banishment of Hermocrates and his party (B. C. 410; see Xen.
Hell. i. 1.27) must have left Diocles undisputed leader of the commonwealth. The
next year he commanded the forces sent by Syracuse and the other cities of Sicily
to the relief of Himera, besieged by Hannibal, the son of Gisco. He was, however,
unable to avert its fate, and withdrew from the city, carrying off as many as
possible of the inhabitants, but in such haste that he did not stay to bury those
of his troops who had fallen in battle. (Diod. xiii. 59-61.) This circumstance
probably gave rise to discontent at Syracuse, which was increased when Hermocrates,
having returned to Sicily and obtained some successes against the Carthaginians,
sent back the bones of those who had perished at Himera with the highest honours.
The revulsion of feeling thus excited led to the banishment of Diocles, B. C.
408. (Diod. xiii. 63, 75.) It does not appear whether he was afterwards recalled,
and we are at a loss to connect with the subsequent revolutions of Syracuse the
strange story told by Diodorus, that he stabbed himself with his own sword, to
shew his respect for one of his laws, which he had thoughtlessly infringed by
coming armed into the place of assembly. (Diod. xiii. 33.) A story almost precisely
similar is, however, told by the same author (xii. 19) of Charondas, which renders
it at least very doubtful as regarduig Diocles. Yet it is probable that he must
have died about this time, as we find no mention of his name in the civil dissensions
which led to the elevation of Dionysius. (Hubmann, Diokles Gesetzgeber der Syrakusier,
Amberg, 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
Archimedes. A remarkable mathematician and inventor, born at Syracuse in B.C. 287. After spending a long time in travel and study he returned to his native city, and there introduced a great number of inventions, among them the endless screw, first used by him in launching large ships; and the so-called Archimedean screw (cochlea), used in draining the fields after the annual inundation of the Nile. During the siege of Syracuse by the Romans (215-212), he invented the catapults which long kept the enemy at bay, being adapted for use at both short and long range. He is said to have set fire to the Roman ships by means of powerful burning-glasses--a story which Buffon in 1777 showed by experiment to be not at all absurd, and which Ball regards as not improbable. He first established the truth that a body plunged in fluid loses as much of its weight as is equal to the weight of an equal volume of the fluid. When Syracuse finally fell, he was slain by the Roman soldiers, who were tempted by the bright metal of his instruments, which they took for gold. Cicero, when quaestor in Sicily (B.C. 75), discovered the tomb of Archimedes.
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
Archimedes. Born in Syracuse and educated in Alexandria,
Archimedes was one of the most important mathematicians and inventors of the ancient
world. He is best known for his phrase “eureka” (I have found it).
The story goes that king Hieron of Syracusae suspected that the crown
he had ordered from a goldsmith was not of pure gold. He then asked the genius
Archimedes to find a way to measure the crown. The solution came to him when he
stepped into his bath and saw the water overflowing. By measuring the water that
runs over when an object is put into it, one can measure the objects' weight,
he concluded. According to the legend, Archimedes ran naked through the streets
shouting the famous phrase.
Archimedes also invented the method to measure the surface and volume
of a globe, and made the final determination of pi. He defined the principle of
the lever, and in Egypt he
invented the hydraulic screw for raising the water from a lower to a higher level.
When the Romans conquered Sicily,
he gave them many inventions used for the defence of Syracuse, for example the
catapult and maybe a system of mirrors focusing the sunrays on boats and igniting
them.
Archimedes was killed by a Roman soldier who was offended when the
scientist asked him not to disturb the diagrams he was drawing in the sand.
Surviving works are Floating Bodies, The Sand Reckoner,
Measurement of the Circle, Spirals and Sphere and Cylinder.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the In2Greece URL below.
Archimedes, of Syracuse, the most famous of ancient mathematicians, was born B.
C. 287, if the statement of Tzetzes, which makes him 75 years old at his death,
be correct.
Of his family little is known. Plutarch calls him a relation of king
Hiero; but Cicero (Tusc. Disp. v. 23), contrasting him apparently not with Dionysius
(as Torelli suggests in order to avoid the contradiction), but with Plato and
Archytas, says, " humilem homunculum a pulvere et radio excitabo". At any rate,
his actual condition in life does not seem to have been elevated (Silius Ital.
xiv. 343), though he was certainly a friend, if not a kinsman, of Hiero. A modern
tradition makes him an ancestor of the Syracusan virgin martyr St. Lucy (Rivaltus,
in vit. Archim. Mazzuchelli). In the early part of his life he travelled into
Egypt, where he is said, on the authority of Proclus, to have studied under Conon
the Samian, a mathematician and astronomer (mentioned by Virg. Eel. iii. 40),
who lived under the Ptolemies, Philadelphus and Euergetes, and for whom he testifies
his respect and esteem in several places of his works (See the introductions to
the Quadratura Paraboles and the De Helicibus). After visiting other countries,
he returned to Syracuse (Diod. v. 37). Livy (xxiv. 34) calls him a distinguished
astronomer, "unicus spectator coeli siderumque"; a description of which the truth
is made sufficiently probable by his treatment of the astronomical questions occurring
in the Arenarius (See also Macrob. Somn. Scip. ii. 3). He was popularly best known
as the inventor of several ingenious machines; but Plutarch (Marcell. c. 14),
who, it should be observed, confounds the application of geometry to mechanics
with the solution of geometrical problems by mechanical means, represents him
as despising these contrivances, and only condescending to withdraw himself from
the abstractions of pure geometry at the request of Hiero. Certain it is, however,
that Archimedes did cultivate not only pure geometry, but also the mathematical
theory of several branches of physics, in a truly scientific spirit, and with
a success which placed him very far in advance of the age in which he lived. His
theory of the lever was the foundation of statics till the discovery of the composition
of forces in the time of Newton, and no essential addition was made to the principles
of the equilibrum of fluids and floating bodies, established by him in his treatise
" De Insidentibus", till the publication of Stevin's researches on the pressure
of fluids in 1608.
He constructed for Hiero various engines of war, which, many years
afterwards, were so far effectual in the defence of Syracuse against Marcellus,
as to convert the siege into a blockade, and delay the taking of the city for
a considerable time (Plut. Marcell. 15-18; Liv. xxiv. 34; Polyb. viii. 5-9). The
accounts of the performances of these engines are evidently exaggerated; and the
story of the burning of the Roman ships by the reflected rays of the sun, though
very current in later times, is probably a fiction, since neither Polybius, Livy,
nor Plutarch gives the least hint of it. The earliest writers who speak of it
are Galen (De Temper. iii. 2) and his contemporary Lucian (Hippias, c. 2), who
(in the second century) merely allude to it as a thing well known. Zonaras (about
A. D. 1100) mentions it in relating the use of a similar apparatus, contrived
by a certain Proclus, when Byzantium was besieged in the reign of Anastasius;
and gives Dion as his authority, without referring to the particular passage.
The extant works of Dion contain no allusion to it. Tzetzes (about 1150) gives
an account of the principal inventions of Archimedes (Chil. ii. 103-156), and
amongst them of this burning machine, which, he says, set the Roman ships on fire
when they came within a bow-shot of the walls; and consisted of a large hexagonal
mirror with smaller ones disposed round it, each of the latter being a polygon
of 24 sides. The subject has been a good deal discussed in modern times, particularly
by Cavalieri (in cap. 29 of a tract entitled " Del Specchio Ustorio," Bologna,
1650), and by Buffon, who has left an elaborate dissertation upon it in his introduction
to the history of minerals (Oeuvres). The latter author actually succeeded in
igniting wood at a distance of 150 feet, by means of a combination of 148 plane
mirrors. The question is also examined in vol. ii. of Pevrard's Archimedes; and
a prize essay upon it by Capelle is translated from the Dutch in Gilbert's " Annalen
der Physik". The most probable conclusion seems to be, that Archimedes had on
some occasion set fire to a ship or ships by means of a burning mirror, and that
later writers falsely connected the circumstance with the siege of Syracuse.
The following additional instances of Archimedes' skill in the application
of science have been collected from various authors by Rivaltus (who edited his
works in 1615) and others.
He detected the mixture of silver in a crown which Hiero had ordered
to be made of gold, and determined the proportions of the two metals, by a method
suggested to him by the overflowing of the water when he stepped into a bath.
When the thought struck him he is said to have been so much pleased that, forgetting
to put on his clothes, he ran home shouting heureka, heureka. The particulars
of the calculation are not preserved, but it probably depended upon a direct comparison
of the weights of certain volumes of silver and gold with the weight and volume
of the crown; the volumes being measured, at least in the case of the crown, by
the quantity of water displaced when the mass was immersed. It is not likely that
Archimedes was at this time acquainted with the theorems demonstrated in his hydrostatical
treatise concerning the loss of weight of bodies immersed in water, since he would
hardly have evinced such lively gratification at the obvious discovery that they
might be applied to the problem of the crown ; his delight must rather have arisen
from his now first catching sight of a line of investigation which led immediately
to the solution of the problem in question, and ultimately to the important theorems
referred to (Vitruv. ix. 3.; Proclus. Comm. in lib. i. Eucl. ii. 3).
He superintended the building of a ship of extraordinary size for
Hiero, of which a description is given in Athenaeus, where he is also said to
have moved it to the sea by the help of a screw. According to Proclus, this ship
was intended by Hiero as a present to Ptolemy; it may possibly have been the occasion
of Archimedes' visit to Egypt.
He invented a machine called, from its form, Cochlea, and now known
as the water-screw of Archimedes, for pumping the water out of the hold of this
vessel; it is said to have been also used in Egypt by the inhabitants of the Delta
in irrigating their lands (Diod. i. 34; Vitruv. x. 11). An investigation of the
mathematical theory of the water screw is given in Ersch and Gruber. The Arabian
historian Abulpharagius attributes to Archimedes the raising of the dykes and
bridges used as defences against the overflowing of the Nile (Pope-Blount, Censura).
Tzetzes and Oribasius (de Mach. xxvi.) speak of his Trispast, a machine for moving
large weights; probably a combination of pulleys, or wheels and axles. A hydraulic
organ (a musical instrument) is mentioned by Tertullian (de Anima, cap. 14), but
Pliny (vii. 37) attributes it to Ctesibius. An apparatus called loculus, apparently
somewhat resembling the Chinese puzzle, is also attributed to Archimedes. His
most celebrated performance was the construction of a spbere: a kind of orrery,
representing the movements of the heavenly bodies, of which we have no particular
description. (Claudian, Epigr. xxi. in Sphaeram Archimedis; Cic. Nat. Deor. ii.
35, Tutsc. Disp. i. 25; Sext. Empir. adv. Math. ix. 115 ; Lactant. Div. Inst.
ii. 5; Ov. Fast. vi. 277).
When Syracuse was taken, Archimedes was killed by the Roman soldiers,
ignorant or careless who he might be. The accounts of his death vary in some particulars,
but mostly agree in describing him as intent upon a mathematical problem at the
time. He was deeply regretted by Marcellus, who directed his burial, and befriended
his surviving relations (Liv. xxv. 31; Valer. Max. viii. 7. Β§ 7; Plut. Marcell.
19; Cic. de fin. v. 19). Upon his tomb was placed the figure of a sphere inscribed
in a cylinder, in accordance with his known wish, and in commemoration of the
discovery which he most valued. When Cicero was quaestor in Sicily (B. C. 75)
he found this tomb near one of the gates of the city, almost hid amongst briars,
and forgotten by the Syracusans (Tusc. Disp. v. 23).
Of the general character of Archimedes we have no direct account.
But his apparently disinterested devotion to his friend and admirer Hiero, in
whose service he was ever ready to exercise his ingenuity upon objects which his
own taste would not have led him to choose (for there is doubtless some truth
in what Plutarch says on this point); the affectionate regret which he expresses
for his deceased master Conon, in writing to his surviving friend Dositheus (to
whom most of his works are addressed); and the unaffected simplicity with which
he announces his own discoveries, seem to afford probable grounds for a favourable
estimate of it. That his intellect was of the very highest order is unquestionable.
He possessed, in a degree never exceeded unless by Newton, the inventive genius
which discovers new provinces of inquiry, and finds new points of view for old
and familiar objects; the clearness of conception which is essential to the resolution
of complex phaenomena into their constituent elements; and the power and habit
of intense and persevering thought, without which other intellectual gifts are
comparatively fruitless (See the introd. to the treatise "De Con. et Sphaer").
It maybe noticed that he resembled other great thinkers, in his habit of complete
abstraction from outward things, when reflecting on subjects which made considerable
demands on his mental powers. At such times he would forget to eat his meals,
and require compulsion to take him to the bath. Compare the stories of Newton
sitting great part of the day half dressed on his bed, while composing the Principia;
and of Socrates standing a whole day and night, thinking, on the same spot (Plat.
Symp.). The success of Archimedes in conquering difficulties seems to have made
the expression problema Archimedeiun proverbial (See Cic. ad Att. xiii. 28, pro
Cluent. 32).
The following works of Archimedes have come down to us:
A treatise on Equiponderants and Centres of Gravity, in which the theory of the
equilibrium of the straight lever is demonstrated, both for commensurable and
incommensurable weights; and various properties of the centres of gravity of plane
surfaces bounded by three or four straight lines, or by a straight line and a
parabola, are established.
The Quadrature of the Parabola, in which it is proved, that the area
cut off from a parabola by any chord is equal to two-thirds of the parallelogram
of which one side is the chord in question, and the opposite side a tangent to
the parabola. This was the first real example of the quadrature of a curvilinear
space; that is, of the discovery of a rectilinear figure equal to an area not
bounded entirely by straight lines.
A treatise on the Sphere and Cylinder, in which various propositions
relative to the surfaces and volumes of the sphere, cylinder, and cone, were demonstrated
for the first time. Many of them are now familiarly known; for example, those
which establish the ratio (2/3) between the volumes, and also between the surfaces,
of the sphere and circumscribing cylinder; and the ratio (1/4) between the area
of a great circle and the surface of the sphere. They are easily demonstrable
by the modern analytical methods, but the original discovery and geometrical proof
of them required the genius of Archimedes. Moreover, the legitimacy of the modern
applications of analysis to questions concerning curved lines and surfaces, can
only be proved by a kind of geometrical reasoning, of which Archimedes gave the
first example.
The book on the Dimension of the Circle consists of three propositions.
1st. Every circle is equal to a right-angled triangle of which the sides containing
the right angle are equal respectively to its radius and circumference. 2nd. The
ratio of the area of the circle to the square of its diameter is nearly that of
11 to 14. 3rd. The circumference of the circle is greater than three times its
diameter by a quantity greater than 10/71 of the diameter but less than 1/7 of
the same. The last two propositions are established by comparing the circumference
of the circle with the perimeters of the inscribed and circumscribed polygons
of 96 sides.
The treatise on Spirals contains demonstrations of the principal properties
of the curve, now known as the Spiral of Archimedes, which is generated by the
uniform motion of a point along a straight line revolving uniformly in one plane
about one of its extremities. It appears from the introductory epistle to Dositheus
that Archimedes had not been able to put these theorems in a satisfactory form
without long-continued and repeated trials; and that Conon, to whom he had sent
them as problems along with various others, had died without accomplishing their
solution.
The book on Conoids and Spheroids relates chiefly to the volumes cut off by planes
from the solids so called; those namely which arc generated by the rotation of
the Conic Sections about their principal axes. Like the work last described, it
was the result of laborious, and at first unsuccessful, attempts.
The Arenarius (ho Psammites) is a short tract addressed to Gelo, the
eldest son of Hiero, in which Archimedes proves, that it is possible to assign
a number greater than that of the grains of sand which would fill the sphere of
the fixed stars. This singular investigation was suggested by an opinion which
some persons had expressed, that the sands on the shores of Sicily were either
infinite, or at least would exceed any numbers which could be assigned for them;
and the success with which the difficulties caused by the awkward and imperfect
notation of the ancient Greek arithmetic are eluded by a device identical in principle
with the modern method of logarithms, affords one of the most striking instances
of the great mathema tician's genius. Having briefly discussed the opinions of
Aristarchus upon the constitution and extent of the Universe [ARISTARCHUS], and
described his own method of determilling the apparent diameter of the sun, and
the magnitude of the pupil of the eye, he is led to assume that the diameter of
the sphere of the fixed stars may be taken as not exceeding 100 million of millions
of stadia; and that a sphere, one daktulos in diameter, cannot contain more than
640 millions of grains of sand; then, taking the stadinm, in round numbers, as
not greater than 10,000 daktuloi, he shews that the number of grains in question
could not be so great as 1000 myriads multiplied by the eighth term of a geometrical
progression of which the first term was unity and the common ratio a myriad of
myriads; a number which in our notation would be expressed by unity with 63 ciphers
annexed.
The two books On Floating Bodies (Peri ton Ochoumenon) contain demonstrations
of the laws which determine the position of bodies immersed in water; and particularly
of segments of spheres and parabolic conoids. They are extant only in the Latin
version of Commandine, with the exception of a fragment Peri ton Hudati ephistamenon
in Ang. Mai's Collection.
The treatise entitled Lemmata is a collection of 15 propositions in
plane geometry. It is derived from an Arabic MS. and its genuineness has been
doubted.
Eutocius of Ascalon, about A. D. 600, wrote a commentary on the Treatises
on the Sphere and Cylinder, on the Dimension of the Circle, and on Centres of
Gravity. All the works above mentioned, together with tllis Commentary, were found
on the taking of Constantinople, and brought first into Italy and then into Germany.
They were printed at Basle in 1544, in Greek and Latin, by Hervagius. Of the subsequent
editions by far the best is that of Torelli, "Archim. quae supers. omnia, cum
Eutocii Ascalonitae commentariis. Ex recens. Joseph. Torelli, Veronensis". Oxon.
1792. It was founded upon the Basle edition, except in the case of the Arenarius,
the text of which is taken from that of Dr. Wallis, who published this treatise
and the Dimensio Circuli, with a translation and notes, at Oxford, in 1679.
The Arenarius, having been little meddled with by the ancient commentators,
retains the Doric dialect, in which Archimedes, like his countryman Theocritus,
wrote (See Wallis, Op. vol. iii. Tzetzes says, elege de kai doristi, phonei Surakousiha,
Pa Bo, kai charistioni tan gan kineso pasan). A French translation of the works
of Archimedes, with notes, was published by F. Peyrard, Paris, 1808, land an English
translation of the Arenarius by G. Anderson, London, 1784.
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
Epicydes. A Syracusan, surnamed Sindon, one of the lieutenants of the preceding, who were left by him in command of Syracuse when he retired to Agrigentum: he was put to death by the Roman party, together with his colleagues. (Liv. xxv. 28.)
Heracleides. A Syracusan, son of Aristogenes, was one of the commanders of the Syracusan squadron sent to co-operate with the Lacedaemonians and their allies. He joined Tissaphernes at Ephesus just in time to take part in the defeat of the Athenians under Thrasyllus, B. C. 409. (Xen. Hell. i. 2. § 8, &c.)
Heracleides. A Syracusan, who held the chief command of the mercenary forces under the younger Dionysius. (Diod. xvi. 6; Plut. Dion, 32.) We have little information as to the causes which led to his exile from Syracuse, but it may be inferred, from an expression of Plutarch (Dion, 12), that he was suspected of conspiring with Dion and others to overthrow the tyrant: and it seems clear that he must have fled from Syracuse either at the same time with Dion and Megacles, or shortly afterwards. Having joined the other exiles in the Peloponnesus, he co-operated with Dion in his prepaations for the overthrow of Dionysius, and the liberation of Syracuse, but did not accompany him when he actually sailed, having remained beind in the Peloponnesus in order to assemble a larger force both of ships and soldiers. According to Diodorus, his departure was for some time retarded by adverse weather; but Plutarch (whose account is throughout unfavourable to Heracleides) ascribes the delay to his jealousy of Dion. It is certain, however, that he eventually joined the latter at Syracuse, with a force of 20 triremes and 1,500 heavy-armed troops. He was received with acclamations by the Syracusans, who immediately proclaimed him commander-in-chief of their naval forces, an appointment which was resented by Dion as an infringement of the supreme authority already entrusted to himself; but the people having revoked their decree, he himself reinstated Heracleides of his own authority. (Diod. xvi. 6, 16; Plut. Dion, 32, 33.) Dionysius was at this time shut up in the island citadel of Ortygia, and mainly dependent for his supplies upon the command of the sea. Philistus now approached to his relief with a fleet of 60 triremes, but he was encountered by Heracleides with a force about equal to his own; and after an obstinate combat, totally defeated. Philistus himself fell into the hands of the Syracusans, by whom he was put to death; and Dionysius, now almost despairing of success, soon after quitted Syracuse, leaving Apollocrates in charge of the citadel (B. C. 356). The distinguished part which Heracleides had borne in these successes led him to contest with Dion thee position of leader in those that remained to be achieved, and his pretensions were supported by a large party among the Syracusans themselves, who are said to have entertained less jealousy of his seeking to possess himself of the sovereign power than they felt in regard to Dion. (Diod. xvi. 17; Plut. Dion, 43.) Unfortunately our knowledge of the subsequent intrigues and dissensions between the two leaders is almost wholly derived from Plutarch; and his manifest partiality to Dion renders his statements concerning his rival liable to much suspicion. Heracleidess a at first triumphant; twenty-five generals, of whom he was one, were appointed to take tile command, and Dion retired in disgust, accompanied by the mercenary troops in his pay, to Leontini. But the mismanagement of the new generals, and the advantages gained by Hypsius, who had arrived in the citadel with a large reinforcement, soon compelled tile Syracusans to have recourse once more to Dion. Heracleides had been disabled by a wound; but he not only joined in sending messages to Dion, imploring his assistance, but inmediately on his arrival placed himself in his power, and sued for forgiveness. This was readily granted by Dion, who was reinstated in his position of general autocrator, on the proposal of Heracleides himself, and in return bestowed upon the latter once more the sole command by sea. Yet the reconciliation was fir from sincere: Heracleides, if we may believe the accounts of his enemies, withdrew, with the fleet under his command, to Messana, and even entered into negotiations with Dionysius: but he was again induced to submit to Dion, who (contrary, it is said, to the advice of all his friends) spared his life, and restored him to favour. But when the departure of Apollocrates had left Dion sole master of Syracase (B. C. 354), he no longer hesitated to remove his rival, whom he justly regarded as the chief obstaele to his ambitios designs; designs; and under pretence that Heraelei des was again intriguing against him, he caused him to be put to death in his own house by a band of armed men. But the popularity of Heracleides was so great, and the grief and indignation of the Syracusans, on learning his death, broke forth with so much violence, that Dion was compelled to honour him with a splendid funeral, and to make a public oration in extenuation of his crime. (Plut. Dion, 35-53; Diod. xvi. 16-20; Corn. Nep. Dion, 5, 6.)
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
SIKELIA (Ancient Hellenic lands) ITALY
Aristoteles, of Sicily, a rhetorician who wrote against the Panegyricus of Isocrates. (Diog. Laert. v. 35.) Some modern critics attribute to him, on very insufficient grounds, the technon sunagoge, which is printed among the works of Aristotle.
Licymnius. Of Sicily, a rhetorician, the pupil of Gorgias, and the teacher of Polus, and the authority of a work on rhetoric, entitled techne. He is mentioned by Plato (Phaedr. p. 267; comp. the scholia and Heindorf's note), and is quoted by Aristotle (Rhet. iii. 2, 13) and by Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Lys. p. 82, 36; De Thuc. Idiom. p. 133, 31, 148,. 1; Dem. 179, 31, ed. Sylburg. et alib.). Dionysius frequently mentions the characteristics of his style, which was smooth and elegant, but somewhat affected, abounding in exactly balanced antitheses. In grammar he gave much attention to the classification of nouns.
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
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Lysias (Lusias). One of the ten Athenian orators. He was born
at Athens, B.C. 458 or 459. His father, Cephalus, was a native of Syracuse, who
settled at Athens during the time of Pericles. Cephalus was a person of considerable
wealth, and lived on intimate terms with Pericles and Socrates; and his house
is the supposed scene of the celebrated dialogues related in Plato's Republic.
Lysias, at the age of fifteen, went to Thurii in Italy, with his brother Polemarchus,
at the first foundation of the colony. Here he remained for thirty-two years;
but, in consequence of his supporting the Athenian interests, he was obliged to
leave Italy after the failure of the Athenian expedition to Sicily. He returned
to Athens, B.C. 411, and carried on, in partnership with his brother Polemarchus,
an extensive manufactory of shields, in which they employed as many as 120 slaves.
Their wealth excited the cupidity of the Thirty Tyrants; their house was attacked
one evening by an armed force while Lysias was entertaining a few friends at supper;
their property was seized, and Polemarchus was taken to prison, where he was shortly
after executed (B.C. 404). Lysias, by bribing some of the soldiers, escaped to
the Piraeus, and sailed thence to Megara. He has given us a graphic account of
his escape in his oration against Eratosthenes, who had been one of the Thirty
Tyrants. Lysias actively assisted Thrasybulus in his enterprise against the Thirty;
he supplied him with a large sum of money from his own resources and those of
his friends, and hired a considerable body of soldiers at his own expense. In
return for these services Thrasybulus proposed a decree by which the rights of
citizenship should be conferred upon Lysias; but, in consequence of some informality,
this decree was never carried into effect. He was, however, allowed the peculiar
privileges which were sometimes granted to resident aliens (namely, isoteleia).
Lysias appears to have died about B.C. 378.
The author of the Life of Lysias, attributed to Plutarch, mentions
425 orations of his, 230 of which were considered to be genuine. There remain
only 34, which are all forensic, and remarkable for the method which reigns in
them. The purity, the perspicuity, the grace and simplicity which characterize
the orations of Lysias, would have raised him to the highest rank in the art had
they been coupled with the force and energy of Demosthenes. His style is elegant
without being overornate, and is regarded as a model of the "plain"
style. In the art of narration, Dionysius of Halicarnassus considers him superior
to all orators in being distinct, probable, and persuasive; but, at the same time,
admits that his composition is better adapted to private litigation than to important
causes. The text of his harangues, as we now have it, is extremely corrupt. His
masterpiece is the funeral oration in honour of those Athenians who, having been
sent to the aid of the Corinthians under the command of Iphicrates, perished in
battle. Lysias is said to have delivered only one of the orations which he wrote--that
against Eratosthenes.
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
Lysias (Lusias), an Attic orator, was born at Athens in B. C. 458; he was the
son of Cephalus, who was a native of Syracuse, and had taken up his abode at Athens,
on the invitation of Pericles (Dionys. Lys. 1; Plut. Vit. X. Orat.; Phot. Bibl.
Cod. 262; Suid. s. v. Lusias; Lys. c. Eratosth. 4; Cic. Brut. 16). When he was
little more than fifteen years old, in B. C. 443, Lysias and his two (some say
three) brothers joined the Athenians who went as colonists to Thurii in Italy.
He there completed his education under the instruction of two Syracusans, Tisias
and Nicias, and afterwards enjoyed great esteem among the Thurians, and even seems
to have taken part in the administration of the young republic. From a passage
of Aristotle (ap. Cic. Brut. 12), we learn that he devoted some time to the teaching
of rhetoric, though it is uncertain whether he entered upon this profession while
yet at Thurii, or did not commence till after his return to Athens, where we know
that Isaeus was one of his pupils.
In B. C. 411, when he had attained the age of fortyseven, after the
defeat of the Athenians in Sicily, all persons, both in Sicily and in the south
of Italy, who were suspected of favouring the cause of the Athenians, were exposed
to persecutions; and Lysias, together with 300 others, was expelled by the Spartan
party from Thurii, as a partisan of the Athenians. He now returned to Athens;
but there too great misfortunes awaited him, for during the rule of the Thirty
Tyrants, after the battle of Aegospotami, he was looked upon as an enemy of the
government, his large property was confiseated, and he was thrown into prison,
with a view to be put to death. But he escaped from Athens, and took refuge at
Megara (Plut. Phot. ll.). His attachment to Athens, however, was so great, that
when Thrasybulus, at the head of the patriots, marched from Phyle to liberate
their country, Lysias joyfully sacrificed all that yet remained of his fortune,
for he sent the patriots 2000 drachmas and 200 shields, and engaged a band of
302 mercenaries. Thrasybulus procured him the Athenian franchise, as a reward
for his generosity; but Archinus afterwards induced the people to declare it void,
because it had been conferred without a probuleuma; and Lysias henceforth lived
at Athens as an isoteles, occupying himself, as it appears, solely with writing
judicial speeches for others, and died in B. C. 378, at the age of eighty (Dionys.
Lys. 12.)
Lysias was one of the most fertile writers of orations that Athens
ever produced, for there were in antiquity no less than 425 orations which were
current under his name, though the ancient critics were of opinion that only 230
of them were genuine productions of Lysias (Dionys. Lys. 17; Plut. l; Phot. l;
Cic. Brut. 16). Of these orations 35 only are extant, and even among these some
are incomplete, and others are probably spurious. Of 53 others we possess only
a few fragments. Most of these orations, only one of which (that against Eratosthenes,
B. C. 403) he delivered himself in court, were composed after his return from
Thurii to Athens. There are, however, some among them which probably belong to
an earlier period of his life, when Lysias treated his art more from a theoretical
point of view, and they must therefore be regarded as rhetorical exercises. But
from the commencement of the speech against Eratosthenes we must conclude that
his real career as a writer of orations began about B. C. 403. Among the lost
works of Lysias we may mention a manual of rhetoric (techne rhetorike), probably
one of his early productions, which, however, is lost.
How highly the orations of Lysias were valued in antiquity may be
inferred from the great number of persons that wrote commentaries upon them, such
as Caecilius Calactinus, Zosimus of Gaza, Zeno of Cittium, Harpocration, Paullus
Germinus, and others. All the works of these critics have perished. The only criticism
of any importance upon Lysias that has come down to us is that of Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, in his Peri ton archaion rhetoron hupomnematismoi, the ton archaion
krisis, and in his account of Lysias, to which we may add the remarks of Photius.
According to the judgment of Dionysius, and the accidental remarks of others,
which are borne out by a careful examination of the orations still extant, the
diction of Lysias is perfectly pure, and may be looked upon as the best canon
of the Attic idiom; his language is natural and simple, but at the same time noble
and dignified (Dionys. Lys. 2, 3, Demosth. 13; Cic. Brut. 32; Quintil. xii. 10.21,
comp. ix. 4.17); it is always clear and lucid; the copiousness of his style does
not injure its precision; nor can his rhetorical embellishments be considered
as impairing the charming simplicity of his style (Dionys. Lys. 4). His delineations
of character are always striking and true to life (Dionys. Lys. 7; Quintil. iii.
8.51; Phot. l.).
But what characterises his orations above those of all other ancients,
is the indescribable gracefulness and elegance which pervade all of them, without
in the least impairing their power and energy; and this gracefulness was considered
as so peculiar a feature in all Lysias' productions, that Dionysius thought it
a fit criterion by which the genuine works of Lysias might be distinguished from
the spurious works that went by his name (Dionys. Lys. 10, 3, Demosth. 13, Dinarch.
7; comp. Cic Brat. 9, 16; Quintil. ix. 4.17, xii. 10.24). The manner in which
Lysias treats his subjects is equally deserving of high praise (Dionys. Lys. 15-19;
Hermogen. De Form. Orat. ii.). It is, therefore, no matter of surprise to hear
that among the many orations he wrote for others, two only are said to have been
unsuccessful.
The extant orations of Lysias are contained in the collections of
Aldus, H. Stephens, Reiske, Dukas, Bekker, and Baiter and Sauppe. Among the separate
editions, we mention those of J. Taylor (London, 1739, 4to. with a full critical
apparatus and emendations by Markland), C. Foertsch (Leipzig, 1829, 8vo.), J.
Franz (Munich, 1831, 8vo., in which the orations are arranged in their chronological
order); compare J. Franz, Dissertatio de Lysia Oratore Attico Graece script, Norimbergae,
1828, 8vo.; L. Hoelscher, De Lysiae Oratoris Vita et Dictione, Berlin, 1837, 8vo.,
and De Vita et Scriptis Lysiae Oratoris Commentatio, Berlin, 1837, 8vo.; Westermann,
Gesch. der Griecch. Beredtsam-keit, 46, 47, and Beilage, iii. pp. 278--288.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited July 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Lysias: Life
Lysias a non-citizen born in Athens, perhaps 459 B.C.
Lysias, though he passed most of his years at Athens, did not possess
the citizenship, and, except in the impeachment of Eratosthenes, appears to have
had no personal contact with the affairs of the city. Yet, as in literary style
he is the representative of Atticism, so in his fortunes he is closely associated
with the Athenian democracy. He suffered with it in its two greatest calamities--the
overthrow in Sicily and the tyranny of the Thirty; he took part in its restoration;
and afterwards, in his speeches for the law-courts, he became perhaps the best,
because the soberest, exponent of its spirit--the most graceful and most versatile
interpreter of ordinary Athenian life.
Kephalos, the father of Lysias, was a Syracusan, who settled at Athens
as a resident alien on the invitation of Perikles (Lys. in Eratosth.4). Such an
invitation would scarcely have carried much weight before Perikles had begun to
be a leading citizen, i.e. before about 460 B. C.; and the story which represented
Kephalos as having been driven from Syracuse when the democracy was overthrown
by Gelon (485 B. C.) is therefore not very probable.
Lysias was born at Athens after his father had come to live there.
The year of his birth cannot be determined. Dionysios assumes the same year as
the pseudo-Plutarch 459 B. C.; but admits, what the latter does not, that it is
a mere assumption. And the ground upon which the assumption rested is evident.
Lysias was known to have gone to Thurii when he was fifteen. Thurii was founded
444 B. C.: it was inferred, then, that Lysias was born in 459 B. C. But there
is nothing to prove that Lysias went to Thurii in the year of its foundation.
The date 459 B. C. must be regarded, therefore, as a mere guess. It is the guess,
however, which had the approval of the ancients; and it is confirmed by this circumstance
-that Lysias was reported to have died at about eighty , and that, in fact, his
genuine works, so far as they are extant, cease at about 380 B. C.4 In the absence
of certainty, then, it seems probable that the date 459 is not far wrong.
This is not, however, the prevalent modern view. Lysias was said to
have gone to Italy after his father's death; and this fact is the criterion for
the date of his birth on which C. F. Hermann and Baur rely, as the ancient writers
relied on the foundation-year of Thurii. Kephalos is introduced in Plato's Republic,
of which the scene is laid (C. F. Hermann thinks) in 430 B. C. Lysias, then, it
is agreed, cannot have gone to Thurii before 429, or have been born before 444.
Blass justly objects to a dialogue of Plato being used as an authority for a date
of this kind; but he himself arrives at the same conclusion on another ground--
viz. because Kephalos cannot have come to Athens earlier than 460, and had lived
there (as his son says, Lys. in Eratosth. § 4) thirty years. Again, Lysias was
certainly older than Isokrates, who was born in 436. The birth of Lysias must
therefore be put (Blass thinks) between 444 and 436.
This view depends altogether on the statement that Lysias remained
at Athens till his father's death -a statement vouched for only by the Plutarchic
biographer, who is surely untrustworthy on such a point. Further, it assumes both
the date and the literal biographical accuracy of the Republic; or else -what
is at least doubtful- that Kephalos could not have come to Athens before 460.
Lastly, it makes it difficult to accept the well-accredited account of Lysias
having reached, or passed, the age of eighty; since all traces of his industry,
hitherto constant, cease when, at this rate, he would have been no more than sixty-six.
The question must be left uncertain. But the modern hypothesis that Lysias was
born between 444 and 436 B. C. does not seem, at least, more probable than the
ancient hypothesis that he was born about 459.
Besides Lysias, Kephalos had two other sons, Polemarchos and Euthydemos
-Polemarchos being the eldest of the three; and a daughter, afterwards married
to Brachyllos. The hospitable disposition of Kephalos is marked in the opening
of the Republic, of which the scene is laid at the house of his eldest son. He
complains that Sokrates does not come often now to see them at the Peiraeus, and
begs that in future he will come to them without ceremony, as to intimate friends.
It is easy to believe that, in the lifetime of Perikles, the house of the wealthy
Sicilian whom his friendship had brought to Athens was an intellectual centre,
the scene of many such gatherings as Plato imagined at the house of Polemarchos;
and that Lysias really grew up, as Dionysios says, in the society of the most
distinguished Athenians.
Lysias at Thurii.
At the age of fifteen -his father, according to one account, being
dead- Lysias went to Thurii, accompanied certainly by his eldest brother Polemarchos;
perhaps also by Euthydemos. At Thurii, where he passed his youth and early manhood,
he is said to have studied rhetoric under Tisias of Syracuse, himself the pupil
of Korax, reputed founder of the art. If, as is likely, Tisias was born about
485 B. C. and did not go to Athens till about 418, there is nothing impossible
in this account. At any rate it is probable that Lysias had lessons from some
teacher of the Sicilian school, a school the trammels of which his maturer genius
so thoroughly shook off. The overthrow of the Athenian arms in Sicily brought
into power an anti-Athenian faction at Thurii. Lysias and his brother, with three
hundred persons accused of 'Atticising', were driven out, and fled to Athens in
412 B. C. A tradition, idle, indeed, but picturesque, connected the Athenian disaster
in Sicily with the last days of Lysias in southern Italy. To him was ascribed
a speech, possessed by the ancients, in which the captive general Nikias implored
the mercy of his Sicilian conquerors
His life at Athens from 412 to 405 B C.
The next seven years at Athens -from 412 to 405- seem to have been
years of peace and prosperity for the brothers. They were the owners of three
houses, one in the town, in which Polemarchos lived; another in the Peiraeus,
occupied by Lysias; and, adjoining the latter, a shield-manufactory, employing
a hundred and twenty slaves. Informers - who were especially dangerous to rich
foreigners- did not vex them; they had many friends; and, in the liberal discharge
of public services, were patterns to all resident-aliens. The possession of house
property shows that they belonged -as their father Kephalos had doubtless belonged-
to that privileged class of resident-aliens who paid no special tax as such, and
who, as being on a par in respect of taxes with citizens, were called isoteleis.
If Lysias continued his rhetorical studies during this quiet time, he probably
had not yet begun to write speeches for the law-courts. A rich man, as he then
was, had no motive for taking to a despised drudgery; and the only extant speech
ascribed to him which refers to a date earlier than 403 -that for Polystratos-
is probably spurious. Cicero, quoting Aristotle, says that Lysias once kept a
rhetorical school, but gave it up because Theodoros surpassed him in technical
subtlety. If this story is worth anything, there is perhaps one reason for referring
it to the years 412-405; it certainly imputes to Lysias the impatience of a wealthy
amateur. At any rate the ornamental pieces enumerated in the lists of his works
-the encomia, the letters, the show-speeches- may have belonged in part to this
period of his life. After 403 he wrote for the lawcourts as a profession, and
wrote with an industry which can have left little time for the rhetoric of display.
The Anarchy.
Soon after the Thirty had taken power in the spring of 404, two of
them, Theognis and Peison, proposed that measures should be adopted against the
resident-aliens; nominally, because that class was disaffected--really, because
it was rich. Ten resident-aliens were chosen out for attack, two poor men being
included for the sake of appearances. Lysias and Polemarchos were on the list.
When Theognis and Peison, with their attendants, came to the house of Lysias in
the Peiraeus, they found him entertaining a party of friends. The guests were
driven off, and their host was left in the charge of Peison, while Theognis and
his companions went to the shield-manufactory close by to take an inventory of
the slaves. Lysias, left alone with Peison, asked if he would take a sum of money
to save him. 'Yes', said Peison, 'if it is a large sum'. They agreed on a talent;
and Lysias went to bring it from the room where he kept his money-box. Peison,
catching sight of the box, called up two servants, and told them to take its whole
contents. Thus robbed of more than thrice the amount bargained for, Lysias begged
to be left at least enough to take him out of the country. Peison replied that
he might consider himself lucky if he got off with his life. They were then going
to leave the house, when they met at the door two other emissaries of the Thirty.
Finding that Peison was now going to the house of Polemarchos in the town, these
men relieved him of Lysias, whom they took to the house of one Damnippos. Theognis
was there already with some other prisoners. As Lysias knew Damnippos, he took
him aside, and asked him to assist his escape. Damnippos thought that it would
be best to speak directly to Theognis, who, he was sure, would do anything for
money. While Theognis and Damnippos were talking in the front-hall, Lysias slipped
through the door, which chanced to be open, leading from the first court of the
house to the second. He had still two doors to pass through -luckily they were
both unlocked. He escaped to the house of Archeneos, the master of a merchantship,
close by, and sent him up to Athens to learn what had become of Polemarchos. Archeneos
came back with the news that Polemarchos had been met in the street by Eratosthenes,
one of the Thirty, and taken straight to prison. The same night Lysias took boat
to Megara.
Polemarchos received the usual message of the Thirty -to drink the hemlock. Although
the property of which the brothers had been despoiled was so valuable -including
almost the whole stock of the shield-manufactory, gold and silver plate, furniture,
and a large sum of money- the decencies of burial were refused to Polemarchos.
He was laid out in the prison on a common stretcher, -one friend gave a cloth
to throw over the body, another a cushion for the head, and so forth. A pair of
gold earrings were taken from the ears of his widow.
Lysias aids the Exiles.
During the ten or twelve months of the exile -from the spring of 404
to the spring of 403- Lysias seems to have been active in the democratic cause.
According to his biographer -whose facts were probably taken from Lysias himself-
he presented the army of the patriots with two hundred shields, and with a sum
of two thousand drachmas; gained for it, with the help of one Hermon, upwards
of three hundred recruits; and induced his friend Thrasydaeos of Elis to contribute
no less than two talents. Immediately upon the return from the Peiraeus to the
city in the spring of 403, Thrasybulos proposed that the citizenship should be
conferred upon Lysias; and the proposal was carried in the ekklesia. In one respect,
however, it was informal. No measure could, in strictness, come before the popular
assembly which was not introduced by a preliminary resolution (probouleuma) of
the Senate. But at the moment when this decree was passed, the Senate had not
yet been reconstituted after the anarchy4 ; and the probouleuma had therefore
been wanting. On this ground Archinos, a colleague of Thrasybulos, arraigned the
decree (under the Graphe Paranomon) as unconstitutional, and it was annulled.
The whole story has been doubted; but it is difficult to reject it when the Plutarchic
biographer expressly refers to the speech made by Lysias in connection with the
protest of Archinos. Whether this speech was or was not identical with that of
Lysias On his own Services cannot be decided; but the latter must at least have
been made upon this occasion.
The professional life of Lysias.
Stripped of a great part of his fortune by the Thirty Tyrants, and
further straitened, probably, by his generosity to the exiles, Lysias seems now
to have settled down to hard work at Athens. His activity as a writer of speeches
for the law-courts falls--as far as we know--between the years 403 and 380 B.
C. That it must have been great and constant is shown by the fact that Dionysios
speaks of him as having written 'not fewer than two hundred forensic speeches'.
No other of the Attic orators was credited with so many as a hundred compositions
of all kinds. First in time and first, too, in importance among the extant orations
of Lysias is that Against Eratosthenes, in whom he saw not only one of the Thirty
Tyrants but the murderer of his brother Polemarchos. It was probably in 403 that
Eratosthenes was impeached. The speech of Lysias, memorable as a display of eloquence,
valuable, too, as a sufferer's picture of a dreadful time, has this further interest,
that it is the only forensic speech known to have been spoken by Lysias himself,
and that it marks his only personal contact with the politics of Athens.
Lysias had probably been a professional speech-writer for about four
years when Sokrates was brought to trial in 399. According to the popular account,
Lysias wrote a defence for Sokrates to speak in court, but Sokrates declined to
use it. In the story itself there is nothing improbable; Kephalos and his son
Lysias had been the intimate friends of Sokrates. But it may be suspected that
the story arose from a confusion. At some time later than 392 B. C. the sophist
Polykrates published an epideictic Accusation of Sokrates, and, in reply to it,
Lysias wrote a speech In Defence of Sokrates. This was extant in antiquity; and
some one who had heard of it, but who knew nothing of the circumstances under
which it was written, probably invented the story that it had been offered to,
and declined by, the philosopher. The self-denial of Sokrates would be complete
when, after rejecting the aid of money, he had rejected the aid of the best contemporary
rhetoric.
Lysias is named in the ordinary text of his own speech On the Property
of Aristophanes as taking part in an embassy to Dionysios the elder of Syracuse,
an embassy of which the date cannot be put below 389 B. C. But there can be little
doubt as to the correctness of the emendation which removes his name from that
passage. There is better reason for believing another story in which the name
of Lysias is associated with that of the elder Dionysios. We have good authority
for the statement that the Olympiakos, of which a large fragment remains, was
spoken by Lysias in person at the Olympic festival of 388 B.C., to which Dionysios
had sent a splendid embassy. In that speech Lysias pointed out that two great
enemies -the despot of Syracuse in the west, the king of Persia in the east- threatened
Greece; and urged union among Greeks with all the eagerness and with more than
the sagacity of Isokrates.
Chronological limit of his known work.
As has already been noticed, the indisputably genuine works of Lysias, so far
as they are known, cease about 380 B.C. The latest, the speech for Pherenikos
of which a fragment remains, belongs to 381 or 380. Of the two speeches for Iphikrates,
also represented by fragments only, one belonged to 371, the other to 354; but
Dionysios pronounced both spurious, partly on the external ground that Lysias
could not then have been living; partly -which, for us, is the important point-
on the internal evidence of style. It seems probable that Lysias died in, or soon
after, 380 B.C., at the age of about eighty.
Character of Lysias.
The character, as well as the capacity, of Lysias must be judged from
the indirect evidence of his own writings. Circumstances kept him out of political
life, in which his versatility and shrewdness would probably have held and improved
the position which great powers of speech must soon have won. The part which he
took during the troubles under the Thirty proved him a generous friend to Athens,
as the Olympiakos shows him to have been a wise citizen of Greece; but his destiny
was not that of a man of action. It is not likely that he regretted this much,
though he must have felt his exclusion from the Athenian franchise as the refusal
of a reward to which he had claims. His real strength -as far as can be judged
now- lay in his singular literary tact. A fine perception of character in all
sorts of men, and a faculty for dramatising it, aided by a sense of humour always
under control; a certain pervading gracefulness and flexibility of mind; rhetorical
skill, masterly in a sense hardly dreamed of at that day, since it could conceal
itself -these were his most distinctive qualities and powers. His liberal discharge
of public services, and his generosity to the exiles in 404, accord with the disposition
which is suggested by the fragments of his letters. He was a man of warm nature,
impulsive, hospitable, attached to his friends; fond of pleasure, and freely indulging
in it; but, like Sophokles at the Chian supper-party described by Ion, carrying
into social life the same intellectual quality which marks his best work -the
grace and the temperate brightness of a thoroughly Athenian mind.
Lysias: Style
Lysias a literary artist
An appreciation of Lysias is, in one sense, easy for modern criticism.
He was a literary artist, and his work bears the stamp of consummate literary
skill. The reader may fail to realise the circumstances under which a particular
speech was delivered, the force with which it appeals to emotion or to reason,
the degree in which it was likely to prove persuasive or convincing. But he cannot
fail to be aware that he is reading admirable prose. The merit of Lysias as a
writer is secure of recognition. It is his oratorical power which runs some danger
of being too lightly valued, unless attention is paid to the conditions under
which it was exerted. The speech Against Eratosthenes, indeed, in which he expresses
the passionate feeling of his own mind, would alone suffice to prove him in the
modern sense eloquent. But a large majority of his other speeches are so comparatively
tame, so poor in the qualities of the higher eloquence, that his oratorical reputation,
to be understood, needs to be closely interpreted by the scope of his oratory.
Although on a few occasions he himself came forward as a speaker,
the business of his life was to write for others. All sorts of men were among
his clients; all kinds of causes in turn occupied him. Now he lent his services
to the impeachment of an official charged with defrauding the Athenian treasury,
or to the prosecution of some adherent of the Thirty, accused of having slandered
away the lives of Athenian citizens; now he supplied the words in which a pauper
begged that his obol a day from the State might not be stopped, or helped one
of the parties to a drunken brawl to demand satisfaction for a black eye. The
elderly citizen who appeals against the calumny of an informer to his past services
as trierarch or choregus; the young man checked on the threshold of public life
by some enemy's protest at his dokimasia for his first office,--in turn borrow
their eloquence from Lysias. If he had been content to adopt the standard which
he found existing in his profession, he would have written in nearly the same
style for all these various ages and conditions. He would have treated all these
different cases upon a uniform technical system, merely seeking, in every case
alike, to obtain the most powerful effect and the highest degree of ornament by
applying certain fixed rules. Lysias was a discoverer when he perceived that a
purveyor of words for others, if he would serve his customers in the best way,
must give the words the air of being their own. He saw that the monotonous intensity
of the fashionable rhetoric -often ludicrously unsuited to the mouth into which
it was put- was fatal to real impressiveness; and, instead of lending to all speakers
the same false brilliancy, he determined to give to each the vigour of nature.
It was the desire of treating appropriately every case entrusted to him, and of
making each client speak as an intelligent person, without professional aid, might
be expected to speak in certain circumstances, which chiefly determined the style
of Lysias.
Lysias the representative of the Plain Style.
This style, imitated by many, but marked in Lysias by an original
excellence, made him for antiquity the representative of a class of orators. It
was in the latter part of the fourth century B. C. that Greek critics began regularly
to distinguish three styles of rhetorical composition, the grand, the plain and
the middle. The grand style aims constantly at rising above the common idiom;
it seeks ornament of every kind, and rejects nothing as too artificial if it is
striking. The plain style may, like the first, employ the utmost efforts of art,
but the art is concealed; and, instead of avoiding, it imitates the language of
ordinary life. The 'middle' style explains itself by its name. Theophrastos appears
to have been the first writer on Rhetoric who attempted such a classification;
there is, at least, no hint of it in Aristotle or in the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum.
Vague as the classification necessarily is, it was frequently modified according
to the taste of individual teachers. The two extremes -the grand and the plain
styles -were recognised by all; but some discerned two, some three shades between
them; while others thought it needless to distinguish anything intermediate. On
the whole, however, the tripartite division kept its ground down to Roman times.
It was adopted, with variations of detail, by Cicero, Dionysios and Quintilian.
The characteristics of the 'plain' style -with which we are most concerned at
present- are only sketched by Dionysios; but they are more precisely given by
Cicero. There is a difference, indeed, between the points of view of the two critics.
Dionysios treats the three styles historically; Cicero treats them theoretically.
The 'middle' style of Cicero differs, therefore, from the 'middle' style of Dionysios
in being an ideal. But Cicero's description of the 'plain' style, at least, would
probably have been accepted in the main by Dionysios; and it is clear that for
Cicero, as for Dionysios, Lysias was the canon of that style. According to Cicero,
the chief marks of the 'genus tenue' are these:
1. In regard to composition--a free structure of clauses and sentences, not straining
after a rhythmical period.
Originality of Lysias.
With certain exceptions, which will be noticed in their place, Lysias
has these characteristics, and is the best representative of the plain style,
whether viewed historically or in the abstract. That style gradually came to be
used by almost all writers for the ekklesia or the law-courts; but it was Lysias,
says Dionysios, who 'perfected' it, and 'brought it to the summit of the excellence
proper to it'. In order that the originality of Lysias may not be underrated,
attention must be given to the precise meaning of this statement. It appears to
speak of him merely as having succeeded better than others in a style used by
nearly all writers of speeches for the law-courts. But what was, in fact, common
to him and them was this only -the avoidance of decidedly poetical ornament and
the employment of sober prose. This is all that the ?plain? style, as opposed
to the 'elaborate', necessarily means. That which he had, and which no other had
in the same degree, was the art of so writing this prose that it should be in
character with the person who spoke it. Their style was monotonously plain; his
was plain too, but it was more, it was variously natural. Dionysios shows elsewhere
that he appreciated to the full the originality of Lysias; but he has hardly brought
it out with sufficient clearness in the passage which has just been noticed. Lysias
may, in a general sense, be regarded as the perfecter of a style already practised
by many others; but it is closer to the truth to call him the founder of a new
one, and of one in which he was never rivalled.
It does not, perhaps, strike the modern mind as very remarkable that
a man whose business was to write speeches for other people should have conceived
the idea of making the speech appropriate to the person. In order to understand
why this conception was, at the time, a proof of genius, it is necessary to remember
how rhetoric was then viewed. Prose composition in its infancy was a craft, a
close profession, just as much as poetry. Beside the sacred band of ?wise? poets
stood the small group of experts skilled to fashion artistic prose. When a man
wished for help in a law-suit he applied, as a matter of course, if he could afford
it, to one of these; and it was equally a matter of course that the speech supplied
to him should bear the same stamp as others turned out by the same machine. There
was no pretence of its being the work of the speaker, and no expectation, therefore,
that it should reflect his nature; a certain rhetorical colour, certain recognized
forms of argument and appeal, were alone looked for. The idea of writing for a
client so that he should have in court the whole advantage of professional aid,
and, in addition to this, the advantage of appearing to have dispensed with it,
was not only novel but daring. This is what Lysias first undertook to do, and
did admirably.
Had his style been florid before it became plain?
His dramatic purpose -if it may be so called- decided the special
characteristics of his style. But, even without this purpose, an instinctive dislike
of exaggeration would of itself have given his style some general characteristics,
sufficient to distinguish it from that of any of his contemporaries. On this account
we must dissent from a view advanced by K. O. Muller in his History of Greek Literature.
Lysias had, he thinks, two distinct styles at two different periods of his life;
the earlier, 'forced and artificial'; the later, plain. Muller recognises the
former in the speech in the Phaedros, and in the Epitaphios. The turning-point
was, he conceives, the impeachment of Eratosthenes, when ?a real feeling of pain
and anger? in the mind of Lysias gave 'a more lively and natural flow both to
his spirits and to his speech'. 'This occasion' -Muller adds- 'convinced Lysias
what style of oratory was both the most suited to his own character and also least
likely to fail in producing an effect upon the judges'. Ingenious as the theory
is, we have no belief in the fact of any such abrupt transition as it supposes.
That temperate mastery with which Lysias cultivated the 'plain' style is doubly
a marvel if it was only a sudden practical experience which weaned him from his
first love for a forced and artificial rhetoric. Converts are not proverbial for
discretion; and the exquisite judgment shown by Lysias after his supposed reformation
ought to have prevented its necessity. Like all his contemporaries he must, unquestionably,
have had his earliest training in the florid Sicilian school; but there is nothing
to show that its precepts ever took a strong hold upon him; and there is overwhelming
reason to believe that a genius of the bent of his must very early have thrown
off such pedantic trammels. It is true that the speech in the Phaedros- assuming
its genuineness- is more stiffly composed than any of his presumably later writings:
but, on the other hand, it is, as Muller allows, entirely free from the ornaments
of Gorgias. As for the Epitaphios, its spuriousness is now a generally recognised
fact.
Special characteristics of his style.
Plainness and an easy versatility are, then, the general characteristics
of Lysias. We propose now to consider in detail his special characteristics; speaking
first of his style in the narrower sense, his composition and diction; next of
his method of handling subject-matter.
His Composition.
Cicero, as we have seen, counts among the marks of the 'plain' style
a free structure of sentences and clauses, not straining after a rhythmical period
(Orator 77, quoted above). Dionysios, speaking of ethopoiia in Lysias, says that
he composes 'quite simply and plainly, aware that ethos is best expressed, not
in rhythmical periods, but in the lax (or easy) style' (en tei dialelumenei lexei).
In another place, however, he praises Lysias for a vigour, essential in contests,
?which packs thoughts closely and brings them out roundly? (strongulos) -that
is, in terse periods. Both remarks are just. Nothing more strikingly distinguishes
Lysias from his predecessors and from nearly all his successors than the degree
in which the structure of his sentences varies according to his subject. His speeches
may in this respect be classified under three heads. First, those which are of
a distinctly public character; in which the composition is thoroughly rhythmical,
and which abound with artistic periods, single or combined. Secondly, those speeches
which, from the nature of their subjects, blend the private with the public character;
which show not only fewer combinations or groups of periods, but a less careful
formation of single periods. Thirdly, the essentially private speeches; which
differ from the second class, not in the mould of such periods as occur, but in
the larger mixture with these of sentences or clauses not periodic. Further, in
each of these three classes, a greater freedom of composition distinguishes the
narrative from the argument. The narrative parts of the properly public speeches
are usually thrown into what may be called the historical as opposed to the oratorical
period; that is, the sentences are more loosely knit and are drawn out to a greater
length. According as the speech has more of a private character, these freer periods
are more and more relaxed into a simple series (lexis eiromene) of longer or shorter
clauses. Yet, while there are so many shades in the composition of Lysias, the
colour of the whole is individual. Isokrates develops period out of period in
long, luxuriant sequence; Demosthenes intersperses the most finished and most
vigorous periods with less formally built sentences which relieve them; Lysias
binds his periods, by twos or threes at the most, into groups always moderate
in size but often monotonous in form; excelling Isokrates in compactness, but
yielding to Demosthenes in life.
His Diction--its purity.
The diction of Lysias is distinguished in the first place by its purity.
This is a quality upon which no modern could have pronounced authoritatively,
but for which the ancient Greek critic vouches. In the Augustan age the reaction
from florid Asianism to Atticism had set in strongly, and especial attention was
paid by Greek grammarians to the marks of a pure Attic style. Dionysios may be
taken as a competent judge. He pronounces Lysias to be 'perfectly pure in expression,
the best canon of Attic speech, -not of the old used by Plato and Thucydides',
but of that which was in vogue in his own time. This may be seen, he adds, by
a comparison with the writings of Andokides, Kritias and many others. Two ideas
are included under the ?purity? praised here; abstinence from words either obsolete
(glossai) or novel, or too decidedly poetical; and abstinence from constructions
foreign to the idiom of the day -an excellence defined elsewhere as 'accuracy
of dialect'. Lysias is not rigidly pure in these respects. The only instance of
an old-fashioned syntax, indeed, which has been noticed in him, is the occasional
use of te as a copula; nor does he use such pedantic words as were meant by 'glossae';
but rare or poetical words and phrases occur in many places. The praise of purity
must be taken in a general and relative sense. Of those who came after Lysias,
Isokrates most nearly approached him in this quality; but Isaeos is also commended
for it.
Simplicity.
Next, in contrast with the Sicilian school of rhetoric, Lysias is
characterised by a general avoidance of ornamental figures. Such figures as occur
are mostly of the kind which men use in daily life without rhetorical consciousness,
-hyperbole, metaphor, prosopopoiia and the like. As a rule, he expresses his meaning
by ordinary words employed in their normal sense. His panegyrical speeches and
his letters are said to have presented a few exceptions to this rule; but all
his business-works, as Dionysios calls them -his speeches for the ekklesia and
for the law-courts- are stamped with this simplicity. He seems, as his critic
says, to speak like the ordinary man, while he is in fact the most consummate
of artists, -a prose poet who knows how to give an unobtrusive distinction to
common language, and to bring out of it a quiet and peculiar music. Isokrates
had the same command of familiar words, but he was not content to seek effect
by artistic harmonies of these. His ambition was to be ornate; and hence one of
the differences remarked by Dionysios: Isokrates is sometimes vulgar; Lysias never
is. There is one kind of ornament, however, which Lysias uses largely, and in
respect to which he deserts the character of the plain style. He delights in the
artistic parallelism (or opposition) of clauses. This may be effected: (1) by
simple correspondence of clauses in length (isokolon); (2) by correspondence of
word with word in meaning (antitheton proper); (3) by correspondence of word with
word in sound (paromoion). Examples are very numerous both in the public and in
the private speeches. This love of antithesis -shown on a larger scale in the
terse periodic composition- is the one thing which sometimes blemishes the ethos
in Lysias.
Clearness and conciseness.
Closely connected with this simplicity is his clearness. Lysias is
clear in a twofold sense; in thought, and in expression. Figurative language is
often a source of confusion of thought; and the habitual avoidance of figures
by Lysias is one reason why he not only speaks but thinks clearly. In regard to
this clearness of expression Dionysios has an excellent remark. This quality might,
he observes, result merely from 'deficiency of power', i.e. poverty of language
and of fancy which constrained the speaker to be simple. In the case of Lysias
it does, in fact, result from wealth of the right words. He uses only plain words;
but he has enough of these to express with propriety the most complex idea. The
combination of clearness with conciseness is Conciseness. achieved by Lysias because
he has his language thoroughly under command; his words are the disciplined servants
of his thoughts. Isokrates is clear; but he is not also concise. In the union
of these two excellences, Isaeos perhaps stands next to Lysias. There are, indeed,
exceptions to the conciseness of Lysias, as there are exceptions to the purity
and the plainness of his diction. Instances occur in which terms nearly synonymous
are accumulated, either for the sake of emphasis or merely for the sake of symmetry;
but such instances are not frequent.
Vividness.
Vividness, enargeia -'the power of bringing under the senses what
is narrated' -is an attribute of the style of Lysias. The dullest hearer cannot
fail to have before his eyes the scene described, and to fancy himself actually
in presence of the persons introduced as speaking. Lysias derives this graphic
force from two things; -judicious use of detail, and perception of character.
A good example of it is his description, in the speech Against Eratosthenes, of
his own arrest by Theognis and Peison. Dionysios ascribes vividness, as well as
clearness, to Isokrates also; but there is perhaps only one passage in the extant
work of Isokrates which strictly justifies this praise. A description may be brilliant
without being in the least degree graphic. The former quality depends chiefly
on the glow of the describer's imagination; the latter depends on his truthfulness
and skill in grouping around the main incident its lesser circumstances. A lifelike
picture demands the union of fine colouring and correct drawing. Isokrates was
a brilliant colourist; but he was seldom, like Lysias, an accurate draughtsman.
Ethopoiia.
From this trait we pass naturally to another which has just been mentioned
as one of its sources -the faculty of seizing and portraying character. Of all
the gifts of Lysias this is the most distinctive, and is the one which had greatest
influence upon his style. It is a talent which does not admit of definition or
analysis; it can be understood only by studying its results. It is shown, as Dionysios
says, in three things -thought, diction, and composition; that is, the ideas,
the words, and the style in which the words are put together, always suit the
person to whom they are ascribed. There is hardly one of the extant speeches of
Lysias upon which this peculiar power has not left its mark. Many of them, otherwise
poor in interest, have a permanent artistic value as describing, with a few quiet
touches, this or that type of man. For instance, the Defence which is the subject
of the Twenty-first Oration is interesting solely because it embodies to the life
that proud consciousness of merit with which a citizen who had deserved well of
the State might confront a calumny. In the speech on the Sacred Olive, if the
nameless accused is not a person for us, he is at least a character -the man who
shrinks from public prominence of any kind, but who at the same time has a shy
pride in discharging splendidly all his public duties. The injured husband, again,
who has taken upon Eratosthenes the extreme vengeance sanctioned by the law, is
the subject of an indirect portrait, in which homeliness is combined with the
moral dignity of a citizen standing upon his rights (De caed. Eratosth. (Or. I.)
§§ 5 ff., 47--50). The steady Athenian householder of the old type, and the adventurous
patriot of the new, are sketched in the speech On the Property of Aristophanes.
The accuser of Diogeiton, unwilling to prosecute a relative, but resolved to have
a shameful wrong redressed; -Diogeiton's mother, pleading with him for her sons;
-are pictures all the more effective because they have been produced without apparent
effort. But of all such delineations -and, as Dionysios says, no character in
Lysias is inartistically drawn or lifeless- perhaps the cleverest and certainly
the most attractive is that of Mantitheos, the brilliant young Athenian who is
vindicating his past life before the Senate. Nowhere is the ethical art of Lysias
more ably shown than in the ingenuous words of apology with which, as by an afterthought,
Mantitheos concludes his frank and highspirited defence:
'I have understood, Senators, that some people are annoyed with me for this too
-that I presumed, though rather young, to speak in the Assembly. It was about
my own affairs that I was first compelled to speak in public; after that, however,
I do suspect myself of having been more ambitiously inclined than I need have
been -partly through thinking of my family, who have never ceased to be statesmen-
partly because I saw that you (to tell the truth) respect none but such men; so
that, seeing this to be your opinion, who would not be invited to act and speak
in behalf of the State? And besides - why should you be vexed with such men? The
judgment upon them rests with none but yourselves'
The 'propriety' and 'charm' of Lysias.
The 'propriety' which has always been praised in Lysias depends mainly
on this discernment of what suits the character of each speaker; but it includes
more - it has respect also to the hearers and to the subject, and generally to
all the circumstances of the case. The judge, the ekklesiast, the listener in
the crowd at a festival are not addressed in the same vein; different excellences
of style characterise the opening, the narrative, the argument, the final appeal.
It remains to say a few words on the peculiar and crowning
excellence of Lysias in the province of expression -his famous but inexplicable
'charm'. It is noticeable that while his Roman critics merely praise his elegance
and polish, regarding it as a simple result of his art, the finer sense of his
Greek critic apprehends a certain nameless grace or charm, which cannot be directly
traced to art,--which cannot be analysed or accounted for: it is something peculiar
to him, of which all that can be said is that it is there. What, asks Dionysios,
is the freshness of a beautiful face? What is fine harmony in the movements and
windings of music? What is rhythm in the measurement of times? As these things
baffle definition, so does the charm of Lysias. It cannot be taken to pieces by
reasoning; it must be seized by a cultivated instinct. It is the final criterion
of his genuine work:
'When I am puzzled about one of the speeches ascribed to him, and when it is hard
for me to find the truth by other marks, I have recourse to this excellence, as
to the last piece on the board. Then, if the Graces of Speech seem to me to make
the writing fair, I count it to be of the soul of Lysias; and I care not to look
further into it. But if the stamp of the language has no winningness, no loveliness,
I am chagrined, and suspect that after all the speech is not by Lysias; and I
do no more violence to my instinct, even though in all else the speech seems to
me clever and well-finished; believing that to write well, in special styles other
than this, is given to many men; but that to write winningly, gracefully, with
loveliness, is the gift of Lysias'.
A modern reader would be sanguine if he hoped to analyse the distinctive
charm of Lysias more closely than Dionysios found himself able to do. He may be
content if study by degrees gives him a dim apprehension of something which he
believes that he could use, as Dionysios used the qualities detected by his 'instinct',
in deciding between the genuine and the false. Evidently the same cause which
in great measure disqualifies a modern for estimating the 'purity'? of the language
of Lysias also disqualifies him for estimating its charm. This charm may be supposed
to have consisted partly in a certain felicity of expression, -Lysias having a
knack of using the word which, for some undefinable reason, was felt to be curiously
right; partly in a certain essential urbanity, the reflection of a nature at once
genial and refined. The first quality is evidently beyond the sure appreciation
of a modern ear: the second less so, yet scarcely to be estimated with nicety,
since here too shades of expression are concerned. At best a student of Lysias
may hope to attain a tolerably true perception of what he could not have written:
but hardly the faculty of rejoicing that he wrote just as he did.
His treatment of subject, matter.
Having now noticed the leading characteristics of Lysias in regard
to form of language, we will consider some of his characteristics in the other
great department of his art -the treatment of the subject-matter. In this the
ancient critics distinguished two chief elements, Invention and Arrangement.
By 'invention' was meant the faculty of discovering the arguments
available in any given circumstances; the art, in short, of making the most of
a case. Sokrates, criticising the speech in the Phaedros, is made to express contempt
for the inventive power of Lysias. Arguments, however, which would not pass with
a dialectician, might do very well for a jury. If Plato found Lysias barren of
logical resource, Dionysios emphatically praises his fertile cleverness in discovering
every weapon of controversy which the facts of a case could yield to the most
penetrating search. The latter part of the speech against Agoratos may be taken
as a good example of this exhaustive ingenuity. It is a fault, indeed, that there
the speaker attempts to make too many small points in succession; and one, at
least, of these is a curious instance of overdone subtlety.
In regard to arrangement, Lysias is distinguished from all other Greek
orators by a uniform simplicity. His speeches consist usually of four parts, which
follow each other in a regular order: proem, narrative, proof, epilogue. In some
cases, the nature of the subject renders a narrative, in the proper sense, unnecessary;
in others, the narrative is at the same time the proof; in a few, the proem is
almost or entirely dispensed with. But in no case is there anything more elaborate
than this fourfold partition, -and in no case is the sequence of the parts altered.
This simple arrangement, contrasting with the manifold subdivisions which Plato
notices as used by the rhetoricians of his day, is usually said to have been first
made by Isokrates. This may be true in the sense that it was he who first stated
it theoretically. In practice, however, it had already been employed by Lysias;
and more strictly than by Isokrates himself. The difference between their systems,
according to Dionysios, is precisely this: Lysias uses always the same simple
framework, never interpolating, subdividing or defining; Isokrates knows how to
break the uniformity by transpositions of his own devising, or by novel episodes.
The same difference, in a stronger form, separates Lysias here from his imitator
in much else, Isaeos. Every kind of artifice is used by Isaeos in shifting, subdividing,
recombining the four rudimentary elements of the speech according to the special
conditions of the case. It was this versatile tact in disposing his forces -this
generalship, as Dionysios in one place calls it- which chiefly procured for Isaeos
the reputation of unequalled adroitness in fighting a bad cause. Lysias had consummate
literary skill and much acuteness; but his weapons were better than his plan of
campaign; he was not a subtle tactician. 'In arranging what he has invented he
is commonplace, frank, guileless'; while Isaeos 'plays all manner of ruses upon
his adversary', Lysias 'uses no sort of knavery'. Invention and selection are
admirable in him: arrangement is best studied in his successors.
This text is cited July 2005 from Perseus Project URL bellow, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Lysias: Parts of the oration
If we turn from his general plan to his execution of its several parts,
Lysias will be found to shew very different degrees of merit in proem, narrative,
proof and epilogue.
Proem
His proem, or opening, is always excellent, always gracefully and
accurately appropriate to the matter in hand. This inexhaustible fertility of
resource calls forth the special commendation of Dionysios. 'The power shown in
his proems will appear especially marvellous if it is considered that, though
he wrote not fewer than 200 forensic speeches, there is not one in which he is
found to have used a preface which is not plausible, or which is not closely connected
with the case. Indeed, he has not twice hit upon the same syllogisms, or twice
drifted into the same thoughts. Yet even those who have written little are found
to have had this mischance, -that, I mean, of repeating commonplaces; to say nothing
of the fact that nearly all of them borrow the prefatory remarks of others, and
think no shame of doing so'. The opening of the speech against Diogeiton may be
cited as an example of a difficult case introduced with singular delicacy and
tact.
Narrative.
The same kind of cleverness which never fails to make a good beginning
finds a more important scope in the next stage of the speech. In narrative Lysias
is masterly. His statements of facts are distinguished by conciseness, clearness
and charm, and by a power of producing conviction without apparent effort to convince.
If these qualities mark almost equally some of the narratives in the private orations
of Demosthenes, it is yet Lysias and not Demosthenes to whom Dionysios points
as the canon of excellence in this kind. He goes so far as to say that he believes
the rules for narrative given in the current rhetorical treatises to have been
derived from study of models supplied by Lysias.
Proof.
In the third province -that of proof- this supremacy is not maintained.
Rhetorical proofs are of three kinds: (1) direct logical proofs which appeal to
the reason; and indirect moral proofs which appeal (2) to the moral sense, and
(3) to the feelings.
In the first sort Lysias is strong both by acuteness in discovering,
and by judgment in selecting, arguments. In the second he is effective also; and
succeeds, even when he has few facts to go upon, in making characters seem attractive
or the reverse by incidental touches. In the third he is comparatively weak; he
cannot heighten the force of a plea, represent a wrong, or invoke compassion,
with sufficient spirit and intensity.
Epilogue.
Hence in the fourth and last department, the epilogue, he shows, indeed,
the neatness which suits recapitulation, but not the power which ought to elevate
an appeal. The nature of his progress through a speech is well described by an
image which his Greek critic employs. Like a soft southern breeze, his facile
inspiration wafts him smoothly through the first and second stages of his voyage;
at the third it droops; in the last it dies.
General qualities resulting from character
The manner in which Lysias handles his subject-matter has now been
spoken of so far as concerns its technical aspect. But, besides these characteristics
of the artist which may be discovered in particular parts, there are certain general
qualities, resulting from the character of the man, which colour the whole; and
a word must now be said of these.
The tact of Lysias.
Foremost among such qualities is tact. One of its special manifestations
is quick sympathy with the character of the speaker; another is perception of
the style in which a certain subject should be treated or a certain class of hearers
addressed. Both these have already been noticed. But, above and beyond these,
there is a certain sureness in the whole conduct of a case, a certain remoteness
from liability to blunder, which is the most general indication of the tact of
Lysias. Among his genuine extant speeches there is only one which perhaps in some
degree offers an exception to the rule; -the speech against Evandros. In the case
of the speech against Andokides, the conspicuous absence of a fine discretion
is one of the most conclusive proofs that Lysias was not the author. In relation
to treatment, this tact is precisely what the 'charm' praised by Dionysios is
in relation to language; it is that quality, the presence or absence of which
is the best general criterion of what Lysias did or did not write.
His humour.
A quality which the last almost implies is humour; and this Lysias
certainly had. The description of an incorrigible borrower, in the fragment of
the lost speech against the Sokratic Aeschines, shows this humour tending to broad
farce, and illustrates what Demetrius means by the 'somewhat comic graces' of
Lysias. But, as a rule, it is seen only in sudden touches, which amuse chiefly
because they surprise; as in the speech for Mantitheos, and most of all in that
for the Invalid.
Sarcasm.
Really powerful sarcasm must come from earnest feeling; and Lysias,
though intellectual acuteness gave him command of irony, was weak in sarcasm for
the same reason that he was not great in pathos. There is, properly speaking,
only one extant speech -that against Nikomachos- in which sarcasm is a principal
weapon. Here he is moderately successful, but not in the best way; for, just as
in his attack upon Aeschines, vehemence, tending to coarseness, takes the place
of moral indignation.
Defects of Lysias as an orator.
The language, the method, the genius of Lysias have now been considered
in reference to their chief positive characteristics. But no attempt to estimate
what Lysias was would be true or complete if it failed to point out what he was
not. However high the rank which he may claim as a literary artist, he cannot,
as an orator, take the highest. The defects which exclude him from it are chiefly
two; and these are to a certain extent the defects of his qualities. As he excelled
in analysis of character and in elegance, so he was, as a rule, deficient in pathos
and in fire.The limits of pathos in Lysias.
It would be untrue to say that Lysias never appeals to the feelings
with effect, and unfair to assume that he lacked the power of appealing to them
with force. But the bent of his mind was critical; his artistic instinct shrank
from exaggeration of every sort; and, instead of giving fervent expression to
his own sense of what was pitiable or terrible in any set of circumstances, it
was his manner merely to draw a suggestive picture of the circumstances themselves.
This self-restraint will be best understood by comparing a passage of Lysias with
a similar passage of Andokides. The speech On the Mysteries describes the scene
in the prison when mothers, sisters, wives came to visit the victims of the informer
Diokleides. A like scene is described in the speech Against Agoratos, when the
persons whom he had denounced took farewell in prison of their kinswomen. But
the two orators take different means of producing a tragic effect. 'There were
cries and lamentations', says Andokides, 'weeping and wailing for the miseries
of the hour'. Lysias simply remarks that the wife who came to see her husband
had already put on mourning. For hearers of a certain class the pathos of facts
is more eloquent than an express appeal; but the speaker who is content to rely
upon it renounces the hope of being found pathetic by the multitude. It was only
now and then that, without going beyond the limits which his own taste imposed,
Lysias could expect to stir general sympathy. In the defence which he wrote for
the nephews of Nikias, the last survivors of a house made desolate by violent
deaths and now threatened with spoliation, he found such an opportunity. He used
it well, because, though declamation would have been easy, he abstained from everything
rhetorical and hollow. The few words in which the defendant speaks of his claim
to the protection of the court are plain and dignified:
'Judges, I have no one to put up to plead for us; for of our kinsmen some have
died in war, after showing themselves brave men, in the effort to make Athens
great; some, in the cause of the democracy and of your freedom, have died by the
hemlock of the Thirty; and so the merits of our kinsmen, and the misfortunes of
the State, have become the causes of our friendlessness. It befits you to think
of these things and to help us with good will, considering that under a democracy
those deserve to be welltreated at your hands who, under an oligarchy, had their
share of the troubles'.
The eloquence of Lysias rarely passionate.
After inquiring how far Lysias fails in pathos, it remains to speak
of the other principal defect noticed above. How far, and in what sense, does
he want fire? By ?fire? is meant here the passion of a speaker stirred with great
ideas. Dionysios says (in effect) that, besides pathos, Lysias wants two other
things, grandeur and spirit. He has not -we are told- the intensity or the force
of Demosthenes; he touches, but does not pierce, the heart; he charms, but fails
to astonish or to appal. This is true; but it should be remembered that in a great
majority of the causes with which he had to deal the attempt at sublimity would
have been ridiculous. It may be granted that, had Lysias been called upon to plead
for Olynthos or to denounce Philip, he would not have approached even distantly
the lofty vehemence of Demosthenes. The absence of passion cannot properly be
regarded as a defect in his extant speeches; but they at least suggest that under
no circumstances could he have excelled in passionate eloquence. They indicate
a power which sufficed to elaborate them, rather than a power which gave them
their special qualities out of an affluence of resource. Two speeches, however,
must be named, one of which shows (in what remains of it) the inspiration of a
great idea, the other, the inspiration of an ardent feeling. These are the Olympiakos
and the speech Against Eratosthenes. If in each of these Lysias has shown himself
worthy of his subject, the inference in his favour should be strengthened by the
fact that, so far as we know, these are the noblest subjects which he treated.
In the Olympiakos he is enforcing the necessity of union among Greeks
and calling upon Sparta to take the lead:
'It befits us, then, to desist from war among ourselves and to cleave, with a
single purpose, to the public weal, ashamed for the past and apprehensive for
the future; it befits us to imitate our forefathers, who, when the barbarians
coveted the land of others, inflicted upon them the loss of their own; and who,
after driving out the tyrants, established liberty for all men alike. But I wonder
most of all at the Lacedaemonians, and at the policy which can induce them to
view passively the conflagration of Greece. They are the leaders of the Greeks,
as they deserve to be, both for their inborn gallantry and for their warlike science;
they alone dwell exempt from ravage, though unsheltered by walls; unvexed by faction;
strangers to defeat; with usages which never vary; thus warranting the hope that
the freedom which they have achieved is immortal, and that, having proved themselves
in past perils the deliverers of Greece, they are now thoughtful for her future'.
In the speech Against Eratosthenes, he concludes the impeachment with an appeal
to the two parties who had alike suffered from the Thirty Tyrants; -the Townsmen,
or those who had remained at Athens under the oligarchy; and the democratic exiles
who had held the Peiraeus:
'I wish, before I go down, to recall a few things to the recollection of both
parties, the party of the Town and the party of the Peiraeus; in order that, in
passing sentence, you may have before you as warnings the calamities which have
come upon you through these men.
'And you, first, of the Town -reflect that under their iron rule you were forced
to wage with brothers, with sons, with citizens a war of such a sort that, having
been vanquished, you are the equals of the conquerors, whereas, had you conquered,
you would have been the slaves of the Tyrants. They would have gained wealth for
their own houses from the administration; you have impoverished yours in the war
with one another; for they did not deign that you should thrive along with them,
though they forced you to become odious in their company; such being their consummate
arrogance that, instead of seeking to win your loyalty by giving you partnership
in their prizes, they fancied themselves friendly if they allowed you a share
of their dishonours. Now, therefore, that you are in security, take vengeance
to the utmost of your power both for yourselves and for the men of the Peiraeus;
reflecting that these men, villains that they are, were your masters, but that
now good men are your fellow-citizens, -your fellow-soldiers against the enemy,
your fellow-counsellors in the interest of the State; remembering, too, those
allies whom these men posted on the acropolis as sentinels over their despotism
and your servitude. To you -though much more might be said- I say thus much only.
'But you of the Peiraeus -think, in the first place, of your arms- think how,
after fighting many a battle on foreign soil, you were stripped of those arms,
not by the enemy, but by these men in time of peace; think, next, how you were
warned by public criers from the city bequeathed to you by your fathers, and how
your surrender was demanded of the cities in which you were exiles. Resent these
things as you resented them in banishment; and recollect, at the same time, the
other evils that you have suffered at their hands; -how some were snatched out
of the marketplace or from temples and put to a violent death; how others were
torn from children, parents, or wife, and forced to become their own murderers,
nor allowed the common decencies of burial, by men who believed their own empire
to be surer than the vengeance from on high.
'And you, the remnant who escaped death, after perils in many places, after wanderings
to many cities and expulsion from all, beggared of the necessaries of life, parted
from children, left in a fatherland which was hostile or in the land of strangers,
came through many obstacles to the Peiraeus. Dangers many and great confronted
you; but you proved yourselves brave men; you freed some, you restored others
to their country.
'Had you been unfortunate and missed those aims, you yourselves would now be exiles,
in fear of suffering what you suffered before. Owing to the character of these
men, neither temples nor altars, which even in the sight of evil-doers have a
protecting virtue, would have availed you against wrong; - while those of your
children who are here would have been enduring the outrages of these men, and
those who are in a foreign land, in the absence of all succour, would, for the
smallest debt, have been enslaved.
'I do not wish, however, to speak of what might have been, seeing that what these
men have done is beyond my power to tell; and indeed it is a task not for one
accuser, or for two, but for a host.
'Yet is my indignation perfect for the temples which these men bartered away or
defiled by entering them; for the city which they humbled; for the arsenals which
they dismantled; for the dead, whom you, since you could not rescue them alive,
must vindicate in their death. And I think that they are listening to us, and
will be aware of you when you give your verdict, deeming that such as absolve
these men have passed sentence upon them, and that such as exact retribution from
these have taken vengeance in their names.
'I will cease accusing. You have heard -seen- suffered: you have them: judge'.
Place of Lysias in the history of Rhetoric.
On reviewing the general position of Lysias among the Attic orators,
it will be seen to result mainly from his discovery, made at a time when Rhetoric
had not yet outlived the crudest taste for finery, that the most complete art
is that which hides itself. Aided not only by a delicate mastery of language but
by a peculiar gift for reading and expressing character, he created a style of
which the chief mark was various naturalness. It was long before the art of speaking
reached, in general practice, that sober maturity which his precocious tact had
given to it in a limited field; it was long before his successors freed themselves
to any great extent -few wholly freed themselves- from the well-worn allurements
which he had decisively rejected when they were freshest. But at least no one
of those who came after dared to neglect the lesson taught by Lysias; the attempt
to be natural, however artificially or rarely, was henceforward a new element
in the task which professors of eloquence conceived to be set before them. Lysias
remains, for all aftertimes, the master of the plain style.
This supremacy in a definite province is allowed to him by the general
voice of antiquity through the centuries in which its culture was finest; the
praise becoming, however, less discriminating as the instinct which directed it
became less sure.
Plato's satire upon Lysias -for not having seen that the writing of love-letters
is a branch of Dialectic- is joined to a notice of the clearness, compactness,
finished polish of his language; and it would perhaps be unfair to Plato to assume
that in the one place where he seems at all just to Lysias he meant to be altogether
ironical. Isaeos was a careful student of Lysias. If Aristotle seldom quoted him,
if Theophrastos appears to have missed and Demetrics to have underrated his peculiar
merits, one of the first orators of their generation, Deinarchos, often took him
for a model. When the taste for Attic simplicity, lost during two centuries in
the schools of Asia, revived at Rome, Lysias was recognised as its truest representative.
Though most of his Roman imitators appear to have become feeble in seeking to
be plain, one of them, Licinius Calvus, is allowed at least the praise of elegance.
Cicero's criticism of Lysias is not close; it does not analyse with any exactness
the special qualities of his style; but the general appreciation which it shows
is just. For Cicero, Lysias is the model, not of a plain style merely, but of
Attic refinement; he has also the highest degree of vigour; and though grandeur
was seldom possible in the treatment of such subjects as he chose, some passages
of his speeches have elevation. Yet, while Demosthenes could use the simplicity
of Lysias, it is doubtful (Cicero thinks) whether Lysias could ever have risen
to the height of Demosthenes; Lysias is 'almost' a second Demosthenes, or, what
is the same thing, 'almost' a perfect orator; but his mastery is limited to a
province. The Augustan age produced by far the best and fullest of known ancient
criticisms upon Lysias, that of Dionysios. The verdict of Caecilius has perished
with his work on the Ten Orators; but the remark preserved from it, that Lysias
was abler in the invention than in the arrangement of arguments, shows discernment.
This quality marks in a less degree the judgments of subsequent writers. Quintilian
only commends Lysias in general terms for plain elegance of language and mastery
of clear exposition; Hermogenes especially praises, not his winningness, but his
hidden force, classing him, with Isaeos and Hypereides, next to Demosthenes in
political eloquence. Photios goes wide of the mark; he praises Lysias for those
things in which he was relatively weak, pathos and sublime intensity; and disputes
the just observation of Caecilius that Lysias excelled in invention rather than
in arrangement.
Lysias and his Successors.
A few words will be enough to mark the broad differences between Lysias
and those three of his successors who may best be compared with him, - Isaeos,
Isokrates and Demosthenes. Isokrates, like Lysias, has purity of diction and accuracy
of idiom; command of plain language (though he is seldom content with it); power
of describing, though not of dramatizing, character; propriety and persuasiveness.
But while Lysias hides his art in order to be more winning, Isokrates aims openly
at the highest artificial ornament, and escapes being frivolous or frigid only
by the greatness of most of his subjects and the earnestness with which he treats
them. Isaeos, a direct student of Lysias, resembles him most in his diction, which
is not only, like that of Isokrates, clear and pure, but concise also; further,
he strives, like his master, to conceal his art, but never quite succeeds in this.
The excellence of Demosthenes comprises that of Lysias, since, while the latter
is natural by art, the former is so by the necessary sincerity of genius; but
Demosthenes is not, like Lysias, plain; nor has he the same delicate charm; grandeur
and irresistible power take its place.
Lastly, it should be remembered that it is not only as an orator but also, and
even more, as a writer that Lysias is important; that, great as were his services
to the theory and practice of eloquence, he did greater service still to the Greek
language. He brought the everyday idiom into a closer relation than it had ever
before had with the literary idiom, and set the first example of perfect elegance
joined to plainness; deserving the praise that, as in fineness of ethical portraiture
he is the Sophokles, in delicate control of thoroughly idiomatic speech he is
the Euripides of Attic prose.
Lysias:
Epideictic and deliberative speeches
Extant and lost works
Epideictic
Speeches
Oratory at the Panhellenic festivals.
The
Olympiakos.
The Olympiakos compared with the Panegyrikos.
The
Epitaphios.
Character and authorship of the Epitaphios.
Deliberative
Speech
Oration
XXXIV, a Plea for the Constitution.
Lysias:
Forensic Speeches in Public Causes
Principle of distinction between 'public' and 'private' law-speeches.
A. Speeches in public causes.
B. Speeches in private causes.
Causes
relating to offences directly against the state
1. For
Polystratos, Orration XX
2. Defence
on a Charge of Taking Bribes, Oration XXI
3. Against
Ergokles, Oration XXVIII
4. Against
Epikrates, Oration XXVII
5. Against
Nikomachos, Oration XXX
6. Against
the Corndealers, Oration XXII
Indictment
for proposing an unconstitutional measure
On
the Confiscation of the Property of the Brother of Nikias, Oration XVIII
Claims
for moneys withheld from the state.
1. For
the Soldier, Oration IX
2. On
the Property of Aristophanes, Oration XIX
3. Against
Philokrates, Oration XXIX
Causes relating to a scrutiny (dokimasia) before the senate; especially
of officials designate.
1. Against
Evandros, Oration XXVI
2. For
Mantitheos, Oration XVI
3.
Against Philon, Oration XXXI
4. Defence
on a Charge of seeking to abolish the Democracy, Oration XXV
5. For
the Invalid, Oration XXIV
Causes
relating to military offences (lipotaxiou--astrateias)
1. Against
Alkibiades, on a Charge of Desertion, Oration XIV
2. Against
Alkibiades, on a Charge of Failure to Serve, Oration XV
Causes
relating to murder or intent to murder
1. Against
Eratosthenes, Oration XII
2. Against
Agoratos, Oration XIII
3. On
the Death of Eratosthenes, Oration I
4. Defence
Against Simon, Oration III
5. On
Wounding with Intent, Oration IV
Causes
relating to impiety (graphai asebeias, hierosulias k.t.l.).
1. Against
Andokides, Oration VI
2. For
Kallias, Oration V
3. On
the Sacred Olive, Oration VII
Lysias:
Forensic Speeches in Private Causes; Miscellaneous Writings; Fragments
1. Action for defamation (dike kakegorias), Against Theomnestos, Oration
X & Oration
XI
2. Action by a ward against a guardian (dike epitropes), Against
Diogeiton, Oration XXXII
3. Trial of a claim to property (diadikasia), On
the Property of Eraton, Oration XVII
4. Answer to a special plea (pros paragraphen), Against
Pankleon, Oration XXIII
Miscellaneous Writings.
To
his Companions: a Complaint of Slanders. Oration VIII
The Erotikos in the Phaedros.
Fragments.
1. Against Kinesias.
2. Against Tisis.
3. For Pherenikos.
4. Against the Sons of Hippokrates.
5. Against Archebiades.
6. Against Aeschines.
Letters.
This text is cited July 2005 from Perseus Project URL bellow, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Editor's Information
The e-texts of the works by Lysias are found in Greece (ancient country) under the category Ancient Greek Writings.
Corax (Korax), a Sicilian, who, after the expulsion of Thrasybulus from Syracuse (B. C. 467), by his oratorical powers acquired so much influence over the citizens, that for a considerable time he was the leading man in the commonwealth. The great increase of litigation consequent on the confusion produced by the expulsion of the tyrants and the claims of those whom they had deprived of their property, gave a new impulse to the practice of forensic eloquence. Corax applied himself to the study of its principles, opened a school of rhetoric, and wrote a treatise (entitled Techne) embodying such rules of the art as he had discovered. He is commonly mentioned, with his pupil Tisias, as the founder of the art of rhetoric; he was at any rate the earliest writer on the subject. His work has entirely perished. It has been conjectured (by Garnier, Mem. de l'Institut. de France, Classe d'Histoire), though upon very slight and insufficient grounds, that the treatise entitled Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, found amongst the works of Aristotle, is the supposed lost work of Corax (Cic. Brut. 12, de Orat. i. 20, iii. 21; Aristot. Rhet. ii. 24; Quintil. iii. 1)
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
IMERA (Ancient city) SICILY
Demophilus. Of Himera, a painter, who flourished about B. C. 424, was said by some to have been the teacher of Zeuxis. (Plin. xxxv. 9. s. 36.2)
AKRAGAS (Ancient city) SICILY
490 - 430
(Empedokles). A native of Agrigentum in Sicily, who flourished
about B.C. 450. He was distinguished not only as a philosopher, but also for his
knowledge of natural history and medicine, and as a poet and statesman. After
the death of his father Meto, who was a wealthy citizen of Agrigentum, he acquired
great weight among his fellow-citizens by espousing the popular party and favouring
democratic measures. [p. 591] His consequence in the State became
at length so great that he ventured to assume several of the distinctions of royalty,
particularly a purple robe, a golden girdle, a Delphic crown, and a train of attendants.
The skill which he possessed in medicine and natural philosophy enabled him to
perform many wonders, which he passed upon the superstitious and credulous multitude
for miracles. He pretended to drive away noxious winds from his country and thereby
put a stop to epidemic diseases. He is said to have checked, by the power of music,
the madness of a young man who was threatening his enemy with instant death; to
have restored a woman to life who had lain breathless thirty days; and to have
done many other things, equally astonishing, after the manner of Pythagoras. On
account of all this he was an object of universal admiration. Besides medical
skill Empedocles possessed poetical talents. The fragments of his verses are scattered
throughout the ancient writers; and Fabricius is of opinion that he was the real
author of those ancient fragments which bear the name of the "Golden Verses
of Pythagoras," and may be found printed at the end of Gottling's edition
of Hesiod. His principal works were a didactic poem on Nature (Peri Phuseos),
and another entitled Katharmoi, which seems to have recommended virtuous conduct
as a means of averting disease. Gorgias of Leontini, the well-known orator, known
as "the Nihilist," was his pupil, whence it may seem reasonable to infer
that Empedocles was no inconsiderable master of the art of eloquence. According
to the common account he threw himself into the burning crater of Aetna, in order
that the manner of his death might not be known, and that he might afterwards
pass for a god; but the secret was discovered by means of one of his brazen sandals,
which was thrown out from the mountain in a subsequent eruption of the volcano.
This story is rejected, however, as fictitious by Strabo and other writers. According
to Aristotle he died at sixty years of age.
His views in philosophy are variously given. By some he is
called a Pythagorean, in consequence of a resemblance of doctrine in a few unessential
points. But the principles of his theory evidently show that he belongs to the
Eleatic School. Empedocles taught that originally All was one, a God eternal and
at rest; a sphere and a mixture (sphairos, migma), without a vacuum, in which
the elements of things were held together in undistinguishable confusion by love
(philia), the primal force which unites the like to like. In a portion of this
whole, however, or, as he expresses it, in the members of the Deity, strife (neikos),
the force which binds like to unlike, prevailed, and gave the elements a tendency
to separate themselves, whereby the first became perceptible as such, although
the separation was not so complete but that each contained portions of the others.
Hence arose the multiplicity of things. By the vivifying counteraction of love,
organic life was produced, not, however, so perfect and so full of design as it
now appears; but, at first, single limbs, then irregular combinations, till ultimately
they received their present adjustments and perfection. But, as the forces of
love and hate are constantly acting upon each other for generation or destruction,
the present condition of things cannot persist forever, and the world which, properly,
is not the All, but only the ordered part of it, will again be reduced to a chaotic
unity, out of which a new system will be formed, and so on forever. There is no
real destruction of anything, but only a change of combinations.
Of the elements (which he seems to have been the first to describe
as four distinct species of matter), fire, as the rarest and most powerful, he
held to be the chief, and, consequently, the soul of all sentient and intellectual
beings which issue from the central fire, or soul of the world. The soul migrates
through animal and vegetable bodies in atonement for some guilt committed in its
unembodied state when it is a daemon, of which he supposed that an infinite number
existed. The seat of a daemon, when in a human body, is the blood. Closely connected
with this view of the objects of knowledge was his theory of human knowledge.
In the impure separation of the elements it is only the predominant one that the
senses can apprehend; and, consequently, though man can know all the elements
of the whole singly, he is unable to see them in their perfect unity, wherein
consists their truth. Empedocles therefore rejects the testimony of the senses,
and maintains that pure intellect alone can arrive at a knowledge of the truth.
This is the attribute of the Deity, for man cannot overlook the work of love in
all its extent; and the true unity is open only to itself. Hence he was led to
distinguish between the world as presented to our senses (kosmos aisthetos) and
its type, the intellectual world (kosmos noetos). Lucretius, who praises Empedocles
highly even while criticising his philosophy, appears to have taken him as a model.
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
Editor's Information
The e-texts of the works by Embedocles are found in Greece (ancient country) under the category Ancient Greek Writings.
Empedocles, (Empedokles), of Acragas (Agrigentum), in Sicily, flourished about
Olymp. 84, or B. C. 444. (Diog. Laert. viii. 74; comp. 51, 52; Simon Karsten,
Empedoclis Agrigent. Carmin. Reliquiae.) His youth probably fell in the time of
the glorious rule of Theron, from Ol. 73 to 01. 77; and although he was descended
from an ancient and wealthy family (Diog. Laert. viii. 51), Empedocles with enthusiasm
joined the revolution--as his father, Meton, had probably done before--in which
Thrasydaeus, the son and successor of Theron, was expelled, and which became the
watchword for the other Greek towns to shake off the yoke of their monarchs. (Diog.
Laert. viii. 72.) His zeal in the establishment of political equality is said
to have been manifested by his magnanimous support of the poor (ibid. 73), by
his inexorable severity in persecuting the overbearing conduct of the aristocrats
(Timaeus, ap. Diog. L. viii. 64, comp. 65, 66), and in his declining the sovereignty
which was offered to him. (Aristot. ap. Diog. viii. 63; compare, however, Timaeus,
ibid. 66, 76 ) His brilliant oratory (Satyr ap. Diog. viii. 58; Timaeus, ibid.
67), his penetrating knowledge of nature and of circumstances, and the reputation
of his marvellous powers, which he had acquired by curing diseases, by his successful
exertions in removing marshy districts, averting epidemics and obnoxious winds
(Diog. Laert. viii. 60, 70, 69; Plut de Curios. Princ., adv. Col.; Plin. H. N.
xxxvi. 27, and others), spread a lustre around his name, which induced Timaeus
and other historians to mention him more frequently. Although he himself may have
been innocent of the name of "averter" or "controller of storms"
(kolusanemas, alexanemas) and of a magician (goes), which were given to him (Karsten,
l. c.), still he must have attributed to himself miraculous powers, if in the
beginning of his Kathapmoi he said of himself--he may, however, have been speaking
in the name of some assistant daemon--" An immortal god, and no longer a mortal
man, I wander among you, honoured by all, adorned with priestly diadems and blooming
wreaths; to whatever illustrious towns I go, I am praised by men and women, and
accompanied by thousands, who thirst for deliverance, sone being desirous to know
the future. others remedies for diseases," &c. (Karsten, v. 392, &c.; compare
the accounts of the ostentation and haughtiness of Empedocles.) In like manner
he promises remedies against the power of evil and of old age; he pretends to
teach men how to break the vehemence of the unwearied winds, and how to call them
forth again; how to obtain from dark rainy clouds useful drought, and tree-feeding
rivers from the drought of summer (ibid. v. 425, &c.),-- promises and pretensions,
perhaps, expressive of his confidence in the infant science, which had only commenced
its development, rather than in his own personal capability. With equal pride
he celebrates the wisdom of the man-the ancient historians themselves did not
know whether he meant Pythagoras or Parmenides--who, possessed of the richest
mental and intellectual treasures, easily perceived everything in all nature,
whenever with the full energy of his mind he attempted to do so (Ibid. v. 440,
&c.) The time was one of a varied and lively mental movement, and Empedocles was
acquainted or connected by friendship with the physicians Acron and Pausanias
(Diog. Laert. viii. 60, 61, 65, 69; Plut. de Is. et Os.; Plin H. N. xxix. 3; Suid
s. v.; comp. Fragm. v. 54, 433, &c.), with Pythagoreans, and it is said with Parmenides
and Anaxagoras also (Diog. Laert. viii. 55, 56, &c.); and persons being carried
away by that movement, believed themselves to be the nearer the goal the less
clearly they perceived the way that led to it, and they regarded a perfect power
over nature as the necessary consequence of a perfect knowledge of it.
Timaeus and Dicaearchus had spoken of the journey of Empedocles to
Peloponnesus, and of the admiration which was paid to him there (Diog. Laert.
viii. 71, 67; Athen. xiv.); others mentioned his stay at Athens, and in the newlyfounded
colony of Thurii, B. C. 446 (Suid s. v. Akron; Diog. Laert. viii. 52); but it
was only untrustworthy historians that made him travel in the east as far as the
Magi. (Plin H. N. xxx. 1, &c.) His death is said to have been marvellous, like
his life : a tradition, which is traced to Heracleides Ponticus, a writer fond
of wonderful things, represented him as having been removed from the earth, like
a divine being; another said that he had perished in the flames of mount Aetna.
(Diog. Laert. viii. 67, 69, 70, 71; Hor ad Pison. 464, &c.) But it is attested
by the authority of Aristotle, that he died at the age of sixty, and the statements
of later writers, who extend his life further, cannot be set up against such a
testimony. (Apollon ap. Diog. Laert. viii. 52, comp. 74, 73.) Among the disciples
of Empedocles none is mentioned except Gorgias, the sophist and rhetorician, whose
connexion with our philosopher seems to be alluded to even by Plato. (Diog. Laert.
viii. 58; Karsten, p. 56,&c.) Among the works attributed to Empedocles, and which
were all metrical compositions, we can form an opinion only on his Kaqarmoi/ and
his didactic poem on Nature, and on the latter work only from the considerable
fragments still extant. It consisted of 2000 hexameter verses, and was addressed
to the above-mentioned Pausanias,--its division into three books was probably
made by later grammarians. Diog. Laert. viii. 77 : Karston.) The Katharmoi, a
poem said to have consisted of 3000 verses, seems to have recommended particularly
a good moral conduct as the means of averting epidemics and other evils. (See
the fragments in Karsten, p. 144, vers. 403, &c.; comp. Aristot. Eth. Nic. vii.
5; Eudem. vi. 3.) Empedocles was undoubtedly acquainted with the didactic poems
of Xenophanes and Parmenides (Hermiipp. and Theophrast ap. Dioq. Laert. viii.
55, 56)--allusions to the latter can be pointed out in the fragments,--but he
seems to have surpassed them in the animation and richness of his style, and in
the clearness of his descriptions and diction; so that Aristotle, though, on the
one hand, he acknowledged only the metre as a point of comparison between the
poems of Emnpedocles and the epics of Homer, yet, on the other hand, had characterised
Empedocles as Homeric and powerful in his diction (Poet. 1, ap. Diog. Laert. viii.
57.) Lucretius, the greatest of all didactic poets, speaks of him with enthusiasm,
and evidently marks him as his model. (See especially Lucret. i. 727, &c.) We
are indebted for the first comprehensive collection of the fragments of Empedocles,
and of a careful collection of the testimonies of the ancients concerning his
doctrines, to Fr. W Sturz (Empedocles Agrigentinus, Lipsine, 1805), and lately
Simon Karsten has greatly distinguished himself for what he has done for the criticism
and explanation of the text, as well as for the light he has thrown on separate
doctrines. (Philosophorum Graecorum veterum reliquiae, vol. ii., containing Empedoclis
Agrigentini Carmin. Reliquiae, Amstelodami, 1838.)
Acquainted as Empedocles was with the theories of the Eleatics and
the Pythagoreans, he did not adopt the fundamental principles either of the one
or the other schools, although he agreed with the latter in his belief in the
migration of souls (Fragm. vers. 1, &c., 380, &c., 350-53, 410, &c.; comp. Karsten),
in the attempt to reduce the relations of mixture to numbers, and in a few other
points. (Karsten; compare, however, Ed. Zeller, die Philosophie ther Griech.,
Tubingen, 1844.) With the Eleatics he agreed in thinking that it was impossible
to conceive anything arising out of nothing (Fragm. vers. 81, &c., 119, &c., 345,
&c.; comp. Parmenid. Fragm., ed. Karsten, vers. 47, 50, 60, &, 66, 68, 75), and
it is not impossible that he may have borrowed from them also the distinction
between knowledge obtained through the senses, and knowledge obtained through
reason (Fragm. 49, &c., 108; Parmenid Fragm. 49, 108.) Aristotle with justice
mentions him among tire Ionic physiologists, and he places him in very close relation
to the atomistic philosophers and to Anaxagoras. (Metaphys. i. 3, 4, 7, Phys.
i. 4, de General. et Corr. i. 8, de Caelo, iii. 7.) All three, like the whole
Ionic physiology, endeavoured to point out that which formed the basis of all
changes, and to explain the latter by means of the former; but they could not,
like Heracleitus, consider the coming into existence and motion as the existence
of things, and rest and tranquillity as the nonexistence, because they had derived
from the Eleatics the conviction that an existence could just as little pass over
into a non-existence, as, vice versa, the latter into the former. In order, nevertheless,
to establish the reality of changes, and consequently the world and its phaenomena,
against the deductions of the Eleatics, they were obliged to reduce that which
appears to us as a coming into existence to a process of mixture and separation
of unalterable substances; but for the same reason they were obliged to give up
both, the Heracleitean supposition of one original fundamental power, and the
earlier Ionic hypothesis of one original substance which produced all changes
out of itself and again absorbed them. The supposition of an original plurality
of unalterable elementary substances was absolutely necessary. And thus we find
in the extant fragments of the didactic poem of Empedocles, the genuineness of
which is attested beyond all doubt by the authority of Aristotle and other ancient
writers, the most unequivocal statement, made with an evident regard to the argumentation
of Parmenides, that a coming into existence from a non-existence, as well as a
complete death and annihilation, are things impossible; what we call coming into
existence and death is only mixture and separation of what was mixed, and the
expressions of coming into existence and destruction or annihilation are justified
only by our being obliged to submit to the usus loquendi. (Fragm. 77, &c., 345,
&c.) The original and unalterable substances were termed by Empedocles the roots
of things (tessara ton panton rizomata, Fragm. vers. 55, &c., 74, &c.) and it
was he who first established the number of four elements, which were afterwards
recognized for many centuries, and which before Empedocles had been pointed out
one by one, partly as fundamental substances, and partly as transition stages
of things coming into existence. (Aristot Metaphys. i. 4, 7, de Generat. et Corr.
ii. 1; comp. Ch. A. Brandis, Handbuch d. Gesch. der Griech. Rom. Philos. i.) The
mythical names Zeus, Hera, Nestis, and Aidoneus, alternate with the common terms
of fire, air, water, and earth; and it is of little importance for the accurate
understanding of his theory, whether the life-giving Hera was meant to signify
the air and Aidoneus the earth, or Aidoneus the air and Hera the earth, although
the former is more probable than the latter (Fragm. 55, &c., 74, &c.; comp. Brandis,
l. c.) As, however, the elementary substances were simple, eternal, and unalterable
(Karsten), and as change or alteration was merely the consequence of their mixture
and separation, it was also necessary to conceive them as motionless, and consequently
to suppose the existence of moving powers--the necessary condition of mixture
and separation--as distinct from the substances, and equally original and eternal.
But in this manner the dynamic explanations which the earlier physiologists, and
especially Heracleitus, had given of nature, was changed into a mechanical one.
In order here again to avoid the supposition of an actual coming into existence,
Empedocles assumed two opposite directions of the moving power, the attractive
and repulsive, the uniting and separating, that is, love and hate (Neikos, Deris,
Kotos-- Philie, Philotes, Harmonie, Storpse), as equally original and elementary
(Fragm. 88, &c., 138, &c., 167, &c.; Aristot Metaphys. i. 4; Karsten); whereas
with Heracleitus they were only different manifestations of one and the same fundamental
power. But is it to be supposed that those two powers were from the beginning
equally active ? and is the state of mixture, i. e. the world and its phaenomena,
an original one, or was it preceded by a state in which the pure elementary substances
and the two moving powers co-existed in a condition of repose and inertness? Empedocles
decided in favour of the latter supposition (Fragm. vers. 88, &c., 59, &c.; comp.
Plat Soph.; Aristot de Coel. i. 10, Phys. Auscult. i. 4, viii. 1), which agreed
with ancient legends and traditions. This he probably did especially in order
to keep still more distinctly asunder existences and things coming into existence;
and he conceived the original co-existence of the pure elementary substances and
of the two powers in the form cf a sphere (dphairos; comp. Karsten), which was
to indicate its perfect independence and self-sufficieney. As, however, these
elementary substances were to exist together in their purity, without mixture
and separation, it was necessary to suppose that the uniting power of love predominated
in the sphere (Aristot Metaphys. B. i. 4, A. 21, de Generat. et Corr. i. 1), and
that the separating power of hate was in a state of limited activity. or, as Empedocles
expresses it, guarded the extreme ends of the sphere (Fragm. vers. 58, comp. 167,
&c.) When the destructive hate rises into activity, the bond which keeps the pure
elementary substances together in the sphere is dissolved (vers. 66, &c.); they
separate in order partly to unite again by the power of love: and this is the
origin of our world of phaenomena. But that the elementary substances might not
be completely absorbed by this world and lose their purity, Empedocles assumed
a periodical change of the sphere and formation of the world (Fraym. vers. 88,
&c., 167, &c.); but perhaps also, like the earlier Ionians, a perpetual continuance
of pure fundamental substances, to which the parts of the world, which are tired
of change, return and prepare the formation of the sphere for the next period
of the world. (H. Ritter in Wolf's Analect. ii., Gesch. der Philos. i.; but comp.
Zeller, l. c.) The sphere being the embodiment of pure existence was with him
also the embodiment or representative of the deity, either conceiving the deity
as a collectivity, or mainly as the uniting power of love (Fragm. vers. 70; comp.
Aristot de Generat. et Corr. ii. 6, Metphys. B. 4, de Anim. i. 5.) But as existence
is not to be confined to the sphere, but must rather he at the foundation of the
whole visible world, so the deity also must be active in it. But Empedocles was
little able to determine the how of this divine activity in its distinction from
and connexion with the activity of the moving powers: he, too, like the Eleatics
(Xenophan Fragmn. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, ed. Karsten), strove to purify and liberate the
notion of the deity: " not provided with limbs, He, a holy, infinite spirit, passes
through the world with rapid thoughts," is the sublime expression of Empedocles
(Fragm. vers. 359, &c., comp. 317.) Along with this, however, he speaks of the
eternal power of Necessity as an ancient decree of the gods, and it is not clear
whether the necessary succession of cause and effect, or an unconditional predestination,
is to be understood by it; or, lastly, whether Empedocles did not rather leave
the notion of Necessity and its relation to the deity in that mysterious darkness
in which we find it in the works of most philosophers of antiquity.
We perceive the world of phaenomena or changes through the medium
of our senses, but not so its eternal cause; and although Empedocles traced both
sensuous perception and thought to one and the same cause, his six original beings
(Aristot de Anim. iii. 3, Metaphys. i. 57; Fragm. 32,&c., 315, &c., 313, 318,
&c.), still he clearly distinguished the latter as a higher state of development
from the former; he complains of the small extent of our knowledge obtainable
through our body (Fragm. 32, &c.), and advises us not to trust to our eves or
ears, or any other part of our body, but to see in thought of what kind each thing
is by itself (Fragm. 49, &c., comp. 108, 356, &c.) but he attributes the thinking
cognition to the deity alone (Fragm. 32, &c., 41, &c., 354, 362, &c.) We are,
however, by no means justified in supposing that Empedocles, like the Eleatics,
considered that which is perceptible through the senses, i. e. the world and its
phenomena, to be a mere phantom, and the unity of the divine sphere, that is,
the world of love, which is arrived at only by thought, to be the sole existence.
(H. Litter in Wolf's Analect. i., Gesch. der Philos. i.; Brandis, in the Rheinisch.
Museum, iii.; comp. Zeller, l. c.)
Further investigations concerning Empedocles's derivation of the different
kinds of sensuous perception, and of the mutual influence of things upon one another
in general, from the coincidence of effluxes and corresponding pores, as well
as the examination of the fragments of his cosmologic and physiologic doctrines,
must be left to a history of Greek philosophy.
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
(Polos). A rhetorician of Agrigentum, introduced by Plato as a speaker in the Gorgias.
LEONTINI (Ancient city) SICILY
485 - 380
Son of Charmantides, a Leontinian, famous rhetorician, his statue at Olympia, his statue at Delphi.
Gorgias, of Leontini, a Chalcidian colony in Sicily, was somewhat older than the
orator Antiphon (born in B. C. 480 or 479), and lived to such an advanced age
(some say 105, and others 109 years), that he survived Socrates, though probably
only a short time. (Quintil. iii.9; comp. Xenoph. Anab. ii. 6.16; H. Ed. Foss,
de Gorgia Leontino, Halle, 1828; J. Geel, Histor. Crit. Sophistarum, in the Nova
Acta Literaria Societatis Rheno-Trajeetinae, ii.) The accounts which we have of
personal collisions between Gorgias and Plato, and of the opinion which Gorgias
is said to have expressed respecting Plato's dialogue Gorgias (Athen. xi.), are
doubtful. We have no particular information respecting the early life and circumstances
of Gorgias, but we are told that at an advanced age, in B. C. 427, he was sent
by his fellow-citizens as ambassador to Athens, for the purpose of soliciting
its protection against the threatening power of Syracuse. (Diod. xii. 53; Plat.
Hipp. Maj.; Timaeus, ap. Dionys. Hal. Jud. Lys. 3.) He seems to have returned
to Leontini only for a short time, and to have spent the remaining years of his
vigorous old age in the towns of Greece Proper, especially at Athens and the Thessalian
Larissa, enjoying honour everywhere as an orator and teacher of rhetoric. (Diod.
l. c.; Plut. de Socrat. Daem. 8 ; Dionys. l. c.; Plut. Hipp. Maj., Gorg., Meno,
Protag.; comp. Foss) Suvern (Ueber Aristoph. Vogel, in the Memoirs of the Royal
Acad. of Berlin) endeavored to prove that Gorgias and his brother Herodicus, a
physician of some note, settled at Athens, but there is not sufficient evidence
for this opinion. As Gorgias did not go as ambassador to Athens till after the
death of Pericles, and as we have no trace of an earlier journey, we must reiect
the statement that the great Athenian statesman and the historian Thucydides were
among his disciples. (Philostr. Vit. Soph., Epist. 13; comp. Dionys. Hal. Epist.
ad Pomp. 2, Jud. de Thuc. 24.) But his Sicilian oratory, in which he is said to
have excelled Tisias, who was at Athens at the same time with him, perhaps as
ambassador from Syracuse (Paus. vi. 7.8; Plat. Phaedr.), must have exercised a
considerable influence even upon eminent men of the time, such as Agathon, the
tragic poet, and the rhetorician Isocrates. (Plat. Symp.; Dionys. Hal. de Isocrat.
1, de Compos. Verb. 23; Isocrat. Panath. i., ed. Lange.) Besides Polus, who is
described in such lively colours in the Gorgias of Plato, Alcibiades, Critias,
Alcidamas, Aeschines, and Antisthenes, are called either pupils or imitators of
Gorgias. (Philostr.; Dionys. de Isaeo, 19; Diog. Laert. ii. 63, vi. 1.)
In his earlier years Gorgias was attracted, though not convinced,
by the conclusions to which the Eleatics had come: but he neither attempted to
refute them, nor did he endeavour to reconcile the reality of the various and
varying phaenomena of the world with the supposition of a simple, eternal, and
unchangeable existence, as Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and the atomists had done.
On the contrary, he made use of the conclusions of the Eleatics, for the purpose
of proving that there was nothing which had any existence or reality; and in doing
this he paid so much attention to externals, and kept so evidently appearance
alone in view, instead of truth, that he was justly reckoned among the sophists.
His work, On Nature, or On that which is not, in which he developed his views,
and which is said to have been written in B. C. 444 (Olympiod. in Plat. Gorg.,
ed. Routh.), seems to have been lost at an early time (it is doubtful whether
Galen, who quotes it, Opera, vol. i., ed. Gesner, actually read it); but we possess
sufficient extracts from it, to form a definite idea of its nature. The work de
Xenoph. Gorgia et Melisso, ascribed to Aristotle or Theophrastus, contains a faithful
and accurate account of it, though the text is unfortunately very corrupt: Sextus
Empiricus (adv. Math. vii. 65, &c.) is more superficial, but clearer. The book
of Gorgias was divided into three sections: in the first he endeavoured to show
that nothing had any real existence ; in the second, that if there was a real
existence, it was beyond man's power to ascertain it; and in the third, that existence
could not be communicated, even supposing that it was real and ascertainable.
The first section, of which we have a much more precise and accurate account in
the Aristotelian work than in Sextus Empiricus, shows on the one hand that things
neither are nor are not, because otherwise being and not being would be identical;
and on the other hand, that if there were existence, it could neither have come
to be nor not come to be, and neither be one nor many. The first of these inferences
arises from an ambiguity in the use of the term of existence; the second from
the fact of Gorgias adopting the conclusion of Melissus, which is manifestly wrong,
and according to which existence not having come to be is infinite, and--applying
Zeno's argument against the reality of space--as an infinite has no existence.
Gorgias further makes bad use of another argument of Zeno, inasmuch as he conceives
the unit as having no magnitude, and hence as incorporeal, that is, according
to the materialistic views, as not existing at all, although with regard to variety,
he observes that it presupposes the existence of units. The second section concludes
that, if existence were ascertainable or cognizable, everything which is ascertained
or thought must be real ; but, he continues, things which are ascertainable through
the medium of our senses do not exist, because they are conceived, but exist even
when they are not conceived. The third section urges the fact, that it is not
existence which is communicated, butt only words, and that words are intelligible
only by their reference to corresponding perceptions ; but even then intelligible
only approximatively, since no two persons ever perfectly agreed in their perceptions
or sentiments, nay, not even one and the same person agreed with himself at different
times. (Comp. Foss)
However little such a mode of arguing might stand the test of a sound
dialectical examination, yet it could not but direct attention to the insufficiency
of the abstractions of the Eleatics, and call forth more careful investigations
concerning the nature and forms of our knowledge and cognition, and thus contribute
towards the removal of the later scepticism, the germs of which were contained
in the views entertained by Gorgias himself. He himself seems soon to have renounced
this sophistical schematism, and to have turned his attention entirely to rhetorical
and practical pursuits. Plato at least notices only one of those argumentations,
and does not even speak of that one in the animated description which he gives
of the peculiarities of Gorgias in the dialogue bearing his name, but in the Eathydemus.
Isocrates (Helen. Laudat.), however, mentions the book itself.
Gorgias, as described by Plato, avoids general definitions, even of
virtue and morality, and confines himself to enumerating and characterising the
particular modes in which they appear, according to the differences of age, sex,
&c., and that not without a due appreciation of real facts, as is clear from an
expression of Aristotle, in which he recognises this merit. (Plat. Meno; comp.
Aristot. Polit. i. 9.13.) Gorgias further expressly declared, that he did not
profess to impart virtue--as Protagoras and other sophists did--but only the power
of speaking or eloquence (Plat. Meno, Gorg., Phileb.), and he preferred the name
of a rhetorician to that of a sophist (Plat. Gorg.); but on the supposition that
oratory comprehended and was the master of all our other powers and faculties.
The ancients themselves were uncertain whether they should call him an orator
or a sophist. (Cic. de Invent, i. 5; Lucian, Macrob. 23.)
In his explanations of the phaenomena of nature, though without attaching
any importance to physics, Gorgias seems to have followed in the footsteps of
Empedocles, whose disciple he is called, though in all probability not correctly.
(Diog. Laert. viii. 58; Plat. Meno, Gorg.; comp. Dionys. de Isocrat. 1.)
The eloquence of Gorgias, and probably that of his Sicilian contemporary
Tisias also, was chiefly calculated to tickle the ear by antitheses, by combinations
of words of similar sound, by the Symmetry of its parts and similar artifices
(Diod. xii. 53; Cic. Orat. 49, 52; Dionys. Hal. passim), and to dazzle by metaphors,
hypallagae, allegories, repetitions, apostrophes, and the like (Suidas; Dionys.
Hal. passim); by novel images, poetical circumlocutions, and high-sounding expressions,
and sometimes also by a strain of irony. (Aristot. Rhet. iii. 17, 8; Xenoph. Symp.
2; Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1, 3, 14; Philostr.; Dionys. de Lys. 3.) He lastly tried
to charm his hearers by a symmetrical arrangement of his periods. (Demetr. de
Elocut. 15.) But as these artifices, in the application of which he is said to
have often shown real grandeur, earnestness, and elegance (megaluprepeian kai
semnoteta kai kallilogian, Dionys. de Admir. vi Demosth. 4), were made use of
too profusely, and, for the purpose of giving undue prominence to poor thoughts,
his orations did not excite the feelings of his hearers (Aristot. Rhet. iii. 3,
17; Longin. de Sublim. iii. 12; Hermog. de Ideis, i. 6, ii. 9; Dionys. passim),
and at all events could produce only a momentary impression. This was the case
with his oration addressed to the assembled Greeks at Olympia, exhorting them
to union against their common enemy (Aristot. Rhlet. iii. 14; Philostr.), and
with the funeral oration which he wrote at Athens, though he probably did not
deliver it in public. (Philostr.; and the fragment preserved by the Schol. on
Hermogenes, in Geel and Foss) Besides these and similar show-speeches of which
we know no more than the titles, Gorgias wrote loci communes probably as rhetorical
exercises, to show how subjects might be looked at from opposite points of view.
(Cic. Brut. 12.) The same work seems to be referred to under the title Onomasticon.
(Pollux,ix. 1.) We have besides mention of a work on dissimilar and homogeneous
words (Dionys. de Comp. Verb., ed. Reiske), and another on rhetoric (Apollod.
ap. Diog. Laert. viii. 58, Cic. Brut. 12; Quintil. iii. 1.3; Suidas), unless one
of the beforementioned works is to be understood by this title.
Respecting the genuineness of the two declamations which have come
down to us under the name of Gorgias, viz. the Apology of Palamedes, and the Encomium
on Helena, which is maintained by Reiske, Geel, and Schonborn (Dissertat. de Authentia
Declamationum, quae Gorgiae Leontini nomine extant, Breslau, 1826), and doubted
by Foss and others, it is difficult to give any decisive opinion, since the characteristic
peculiarities of the oratory of Gorgias, which appear in these declamations, especially
in the former, might very well have been imitated by a skilful rhetorician of
later times.
The works of Gorgias did not even contain the elements of a scientific
theory of oratory, any more than his oral instructions; he confined himself to
teaching his pupils a variety of rhetorical artifices, and made them learn by
heart certain formulas relative to them (Aristot. Elench. Soph. ii. 9), although
there is no doubt that his lectures here and there contained remarks which were
very much to the point. (Aristot. Rhet. iii. 18; comp. Cic. de Orat. ii. 59.)
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
Gorgias. Rhetorician and Sophist from Leontini, Sicily,
Gorgias was ambassador in Athens
for a short period of time, and later settled in Athens
to teach rhetorics.
He played an important part in the development of the Attic prose,
and Plato used him in his dialogue by the name Gorgias. Socrates there says that
Gorgias beautiful speaking only is flattery, but treated him with respect nevertheless.
Gorgias introduced cadence into prose and uses commonplaces in arguments. Plato
uses him as title character in Gorgias.
Gorgias was a nihilist and expressed his philosophy in the following
way: nothing exists, if anything does exists it cannot be known, if anything exists
and can be known, it cannot be communicated.
He was very productive, but only part of a funerary speech has survived
to this day. He wrote The Encomium of Helen and The Apology of Palamedes.
He died in Thessaly
at the age of 105.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the In2Greece URL below.
MESSINA (Ancient city) SICILY
Aristocles of Messene, a Peripatetic philosopher, whose age is uncertain, some
placing him three centuries before and others two centuries after Christ. But
if the statement is correct, that he was the teacher of Alexander Aphrodisias
(Cyrill. c. Jul. ii.), he must have lived about the beginning of the third century
after Christ. According to Suidas (s. v.) and Eudocia, he wrote several works:
1. Poteron spoudaioteros Omeros e Platon. 2. Technai rhetorikai. 3. A work on
the god Serapis. 4. A work on Ethics, in ten books: and 5. A work on Philosophy,
likewise in ten books. The last of these works appears to have been a history
of philosophy, in which he treated of the philosophers, their schools, and doctrines.
Several fragments of it are preserved in Eusebius (Praep. Evang. xiv. 17-21, xv.
2, 14; Comp. Theodoret. Therap. Serm. 8, and Suidas, who also mentions some other
works of his).
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
Dicaearchus, (Dikaiarchos). A celebrated Peripatetic philosopher, geographer, and historian, and a contemporary of Aristotle and Theophrastus. He was the son of one Pheidias, and born at Messana in Sicily, though he passed the greater part of his life in Greece Proper, and especially in Peloponnesus. He was a disciple of Aristotle (Cic. de Leg. iii. 6), and a friend of Theophrastus, to whom he dedicated some of his writings. Most of Aristotle's disciples are mentioned also among those of Plato, but as this is not the case with Dicaearchus, Osann (Beitrage zur Griech. u. Rom. Lit. ii.) justly infers that Dicaearchus was one of Aristotle's younger disciples. From some allusions which we meet with in the fragments of his works, we must conclude that he survived the year B. C. 296, and that he died about B. C. 285. Dicaearchus was highly esteemed by the ancients as a philosopher and as a man of most extensive information upon a great variety of things. (Cic. Tusc. i. 18, de Off. ii. 5; Varro, de Re Rust. i. 2.) His works, which were very numerous, are frequently referred to, and many fragments of them are still extant, which shew that their loss is one of the most severe in Greek literature. His works were partly geographical, partly political or historical, and partly philosophical; but it is difficult to draw up an accurate list of them, since many which are quoted as distinct works appear to have been only sections of greater ones. The fragments extant, moreover, do not always enable us to form a clear notion of the works to which they once belonged. Among his geographical works may be mentioned--1. On the heights of mountains. (Plin. H. N ii. 65; Geminus, Elem. Astron. 14.) Suidas (s. v. Dikaiarchos) mentions katametreseis ton en Peloponnesoi oron, but the quotations in Pliny and Geminus shew that Dicaearchus's measurements of heights were not confined to Peloponnesus, and Suidas therefore probably quotes only a section of the whole work. 2. Ges periodos (Lydus, de Mens., ed. Bekker). This work was probably the text written in explanation of the geographical maps which Dicaearchus had constructed and given to Theophrastus, and which seem to have comprised the whole world, as far as it was then known. (Cic. ad Att. vi. 2; comp. Diog. Laert. v. 51.) 3. Anagraphe tes Ellados. A work of this title, dedicated to Theophrastus, and consisting of 150 iambic verses, is stll extant under the name of Dicaearchus; but its form and spirit are both unworthy of Dicaearchus, and it is in all probability the production of a much later writer, who made a metrical paraphrase of that portion of the Ges periodos which referred to Greece. Buttmann is the only modern critic who has endeavoured to claim the work for Dicaearchus in his "de Dicaearcho ejusque operibus quae inscribuntur Bios Ellados et Anagraphe tes Hellados," Naumburg, 1832, 4to. But his attempt is not very successful, and has been ably refuted by Osann. (Allgem. Schulzeitung for 1833, No. 140, &c.) 4. Bios tes Hellados, was the most important among the works of Dicaearchus, and contained an account of the geographical position, the history, and the moral and religious condition of Greece. It contained, in short, all the information necessary to obtain a full knowledge of the Greeks, their life, and their manners. It was probably subdivided into sections; so that when we read of works of Dicaearchus peri mousikes, peri mousikon agonon, peri Dionusiakon agonon, and the like, we have probably to consider them only as portions of the great work, Bios tes Hellados. It is impossible to make out the plan of the work in detail with any accuracy : the attempt, however, has been made by Marx. (Crenzer's Meletem. iii. 4) We know that the work consisted of three books, of which the first contained the history and a geographical description of Greece, so as to form a sort of introduction to the whole work. The second gave an account of the condition of the several Greek states; and the third, of the private and domestic life, the theatres, games, religion, &c. of the Greeks. Of the second book a considerable fragment is still extant; but in its present form it cannot be considered the work of Dicaearchus himself, but it is a portion of an abridgment which some one made of the Bios tes Hellados. To this class of writings we may also refer--5. He eis Trophoniou katabasis, a work which consisted of several books, and, as we may infer from the fragments quoted from it, contained an account of the degenerate and licentious proceedings of the priests in the cave of Trophonius. (Cic. ad Alt. vi. 2, xiii. 31; Athen. xiii., xiv.) The geographical works of Dicaearchus were, according to Strabo (ii.), censured in many respects by Polybius; and Strabo himself (iii.) is dissatisfied with his descriptions of western and northern Europe, which countries Dicaearchus had never visited. Of a political nature was--6. Tripolitikos (Athen. iv.; Cic. ad Att. xiii. 32), a work which has been the subject of much dispute. Passow, in a programme (Breslau, 1829), endeavoured to establish the opinion that it was a reply to Anaxiimenes's Trikaranos or Tripolitikos, in which the Lacedaemonians, Athenians, and Thebans, had been calumniated. Buttmann thought it to have been a comparison of the constitutions of Pellene (Pallene), Corinth, and Athens (comp. Cic. ad Att. ii. 2), and that Dicaearchus inflicted severe censure upon those states for their corrupt morals and their vicious constitutions. A third opinion is maintained by Osann (l. c.), who taking his stand on a passage in Photius (Bibl. Cod. 37) where an eidos Dikaiarchikon of a state is mentioned as a combination of the three forms of government, the democratical, aristocratical, and monarchical, infers that Dicaearchus in his Tripolitikos, explained the nature of that mixed constitution, and illustrated it by the example of Sparta. This opinion is greatly supported by the contents of the fragments. Osann goes even so far as to think that the discussion on politics in the sixti book of Polybius is based upon the Tripolitikos of Dicaearchus. Cicero intended to make use of this work, which seems to have been written in the form of a dialogue, for his treatise de Gloria. (Ad Att. xiii. 30.) Among his philosophical works may be mentioned--7. Lesbiakoi, in three books, which derived its name from the fact that the scene of the philosophical dialogue was laid at Mytilene in Lesbos. In it Dicaearchus endeavored to prove that the soul was mortal. (Cic. Tusc. i. 31.) Cicero (ad Att. xiii. 12) when speaking of a work pepi psuches, probably means the Lesbiakoi. Another philosophical work,--8. Korinthiakoi, which likewise consisted of three books, was a sort of supplement to the former. (Cic. Tusc. i. 10.) It is probably the same work as the one which Cicero. in another passage (de Off. ii. 5), calls "de Interitu Hominum." Some other works, such as Politeia Spartiaton (Suid.), Olumpikos agon or logos (Athen. xiv. p. 620), Panathenaikos (Schol. ad Aristoph. Vesp. 564), and several others, seem to have been merely chapters of the Bios tes Hellados. A work peri tes en Ilioi Dnsias (Athen. xiii.) seems to have referred to the sacrifice which Alexander the Great performed at Ilium. The work Phaidron perisson has no foundation except a false reading in Cicero (ad Att. xiii. 39), which has been corrected by Petersen in his Phaedri Epicurei Fragm. p. 11. There are lastly some other works which are of a grammatical nature, and are usually believed to have been the productions of our philosopher, viz. Peri Alkaiou (Athen. xi., xv.), and hupotheseis ton Euripidou kai Sophokleons muthon (Sext. Empir. adv. Geometr.), but may have been the works of Dicaearchus, a grammarian of Lacedaemon, who, according to Suidas, was a disciple of Aristarchus, and seems to be alluded to in Apollonius. (De Pronom.) A valuable dissertation on the writings of Dicaearchus is contained in Osann (l. c.), and the fragments have been collected and accompanied by a very interesting discussion by Maximil. Fuhr, Dicaearchi Messenii quae supersunt composite, edita et illustrate, Darmstadt, 1841, 4to.
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
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
Diophantus. Of Syracuse, a Pythagorean philosopher, who seems to have been an author, for his opinion on the origin of the world is adduced by Theodoretus. (Therap. iv.)
Hicetas, (Hiketas), one of the earlier Pythagoreans, and a native of Syracuse. Cicero, on the authority of Theophrastus (A.Quaest. ii. 39), tells us that he conceived the heavenly bodies to be stationary, while the earth was the only moving body in the universe, revolving round an axis with great swiftness. Diogenes Laertius also (viii. 85) says that some ascribed this doctrine to him, while others attributed it to Philolaus. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. i.)
AKRAGAS (Ancient city) SICILY
In this passage Aristophanes has specially in view Carcinus of Agrigentum,
his son, Zenocles, with his three brothers and a grandson and namesake of the
former, "a whole potful of tragic crabs," as they have been termed. Zenocles,
whom the comedian calls an execrable poet and was never tired of ridiculing, gained
the first prize with one of his trilogies, when in competition with Euripides.
But Aelian accounts for this by saying that "the jury were either intellectually
incapable of a proper decision or else they were bribed." Carcinus the younger
received a prize for only one out of his one hundred and sixty plays, many of
them composed at the court of Dionysus II. Miletus, the accuser of Socrates, composed
a Oedipean trilogy which has been preserved from oblivion only in the jests of
the comic writers.
In the period which followed the Peloponnesian war, along with the
continual decay of political and religious life, tragedy sank more and more into
mere rhetorical display. The school of Ioscrates produced the orators and tragedians,
Theodectes and Aphareus. Theodectes won the prize eight times, on one occasion
with his tragedy, Mausolus, in the contest which the queen Artemisia had instituted
in honor of her dead husband. On the same occasion he was defeated in rhetoric
by Theopompus. Mausolus was especially adapted for recitations, and, from what
Suidas says, it appears that the whole contest was one of declamation. A good
idea of these dramas for reading and recitation, with their accompaniment of cold,
rhetorical pathos and their strong leaning toward the horrible, may be gained
by the plays of Seneca. Of the fifty tragedies of Theodectes we have the names
of about ten and a few unimportant fragments; among them were an Ajax, Oedipus,
Orestes and Philoctetes. Stobaeus makes the following pessimistic quotation from
an unknown tragedy of his:
"All human beings grow old, and to an end
Comes every birth of time, save only one,
Save only wickedness; but that, methinks
Fast as the race of mortals doth increase,
Increaseth equally from day to day."
Aphareus, the son of Hippias the sophist, and the adopted son of Isocrates,
left behind him thirty-seven tragedies, and had been successful in winning four
victories.
Alfred Bates, ed.
This text is cited July 2003 from the TheatreHistory URL below.
Aristolochus (Aristolochos), a tragic poet, who is not mentioned anywhere except in the collection of the Epistles attributed to Phalaris (Epist. 18, ed. Lennep.), where the tyrant is made to speak of him with indignation for venturing to compete with him in writing tragedies. But with the genuineness of those epistles the existence of Aristolochus must fall to the ground, and Bentley (Phalaris) has shewn, that if Aristolochus were a real personage, this tragic writer must have lived before tragedy was known.
GELA (Ancient city) SICILY
Archestratus (Archestratos). A poet of Gela, in Sicily, who flourished about
B.C. 318, and composed the humorous didatic poem Hedupatheia (Good Cheer), supposed
to describe a gastronomic tour round the then known world, with playful echoes
of Homer and the dogmatic philosophers. The numerous fragments display much talent
and wit. It was imitated in Latin by Ennius.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Dec 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Archestratus (Archestratos), of Gela or Syracuse (Athen. i.), but more usually described as a native of Gela, appears to have lived about the time of the younger Dionysius. He travelled through various countries in order to become accurately acquainted with every thing which could be used for tht table; and gave the results of his rescarches in an Epic poem en the Art of Coolkery, which was celebrated in antiquity, and is constantly referred to by Athenaeus. In no part of the Hellenic world was the art of good living carried to such an extent as in Sicily (the Siculae dapes, Hor. Carrm. iii. 1. 18, became proverbial); and Terpsion, who is described as a teacher of Archestratus, had already written a work on the Art of Cookery (Athen. viii.). The work of Archestratus is cited by the ancients under five different titles: Gastrologia, Gastronomia, Opsopoiia, Deipnologia, and Hedupatheia. Ennius wrote an imitation or translation of this poem under the title of Carmina Hedypathelica or Hedypathica (Apul. Apol). Archestratus delivered his precepts in the style and with the gravity of the old gnomic poets, whence he is called in joke the Hesiod or Theognis of gluttons, and his work is referred to as the " Golden Verses," like those of Pythagoras (Athen. vii.). His description of the various natural objects used for the table was so accurate, that Aristotle made use of his work in giving an account of the natural history of fishes. The extant fragments have been collected and explained by Schneider, in his edition of Aristotle's Natural History, and also by Domenico Scina, under the title of " Iframmenti della Gastronomia di Archestrato raccolti e volgarizzati", Palermo, 1823..
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
IMERA (Ancient city) SICILY
632 - 552
Stesichorus, (Stesichoros). A celebrated Greek poet of Himera in Sicily, contemporary
with Sappho, Alcaeus, Pittacus, and Phalaris. He is said to have been born B.C.
632, to have flourished about 608, and to have died in 552 at the age of eighty.
Of the events of his life we have only a few obscure accounts. As with other
great poets, his birth is fabled to have been attended by an omen; a nightingale
sat upon the babe's lips, and sang a sweet strain. He is said to have been carefully
educated at Catana, and afterwards to have enjoyed the friendship of Phalaris,
the tyrant of Agrigentum. Many writers relate the fable of his being miraculously
struck with blindness after writing an attack upon Helen, and recovering his
sight when he had composed a Palinodia or recantation. He is said to have been
buried at Catana by a gate of the city, which was called after him the Stesichorean
Gate.
Stesichorus was one of the nine-chiefs of lyric poetry recognized
by the ancients. He stands, with Alcman, at the head of one branch of the lyric
art, the choral poetry of the Dorians. He was the first to break the monotony
of the strophe and antistrophe by the introduction of the epode, and his metres
were much more varied, and the structure of his strophes more elaborate, than
those of Alcman. His odes contained all the essential elements of the perfect
choral poetry of Pindar and the tragedians. The subjects of his poems were chiefly
heroic; and he transferred the subjects of the old epic poetry to the lyric
form, dropping, of course, the continuous narrative, and dwelling on isolated
adventures of his heroes. He also composed poems on other subjects, and fables,
among the latter the wellknown one of the horse, the stag, and the man. His
extant remains may be classified under the following heads: (1) mythical poems;
(2) hymns, encomia, epithalamia, paeans; (3) erotic poems, and scolia; (4) a
pastoral poem, entitled Daphnis; (5) fables; (6) elegies. The dialect of Stesichorus
was Dorian, with an intermixture of the epic.
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
Stesichorus. Lyric poet, probably from Himera on Sicily,
who lived during the first half of the 6th century BC. The name Stesichorus actually
means “Chorus Master”, so it might have been a title and not a name.
His real name might have been Tisias.
Stesichorus was very creative and prolific, and is considered the
first literary celebrity in Greece.
He influenced many poets with his long, narrative poems with mythological themes.
Not much of his work has survived, but we know that he wrote in the Doric dialect,
and that he was inspired by Homer. He wrote “The Wooden Horse”, “The
Capture of Troy”, “Homecoming”
and “Oresteia”. The latter surely inspired Aeschylus.
These poems were accompanied by a chorus or maybe a solo singer and
a flute. He is traditionally credited with inventing the triad: three stanza metrical
groupings, which were later used in verses and Athenian stage dramas: strophe:
turn, antistrophe: counterturn, and epodos: after song.
Stesichorus also wrote two poems about Helen of Troy:
one true and one false. According to the false one, Helen was never in Troy,
but a phantom of her was sent there by the gods. According to an anecdote, Stesichorus
was struck blind after he had written the first, traditional version, and did
not regain his sight until he had completed the second one.
This text is cited Sept 2003 from the In2Greece URL below.
MESSINA (Ancient city) SICILY
Botrys, (Botrus), a native of Messana in Sicily, was the inventor of the lascivious poems called Paignia. (Athen. vii.; Polyb. xii. 13; Suidas, s. v. Demochares.)
Etruscus, (Etrouskos), of Messene, the author of a single epigram in the Greek Anthology. (Brunck, Anal. vol.ii; Jacobs, vol.iii.) Nothing more is known of him. Martial (vi. 83, vii. 39) mentions an Etruscus who was banished by Domitian. (Jacobs, Anth. Graec. vol. xiii.)
SELINOUS (Ancient city) SICILY
Aristoxenus (Aristoxenos), of Selinus in Sicily, a Greek poet, who is said to
have been the first who wrote in anapaestic metres. Respecting the time at which
he lived, it is expressly stated that he was older than Epicharnus, from about
B. C. 540 to 445 (Schol. ad Aristoph. Plut. 487; Hephaestion, Enchirid.). Eusebius
(Chron.) places him in Ol. 29 (B. C. 664), but this statement requires some explanation.
If he was born in that year, he cannot have been a Selinuntian, as Selinus was
not founded till about B. C. 628. But Aristoxenus may perhaps have been among
the first settlers at Selinus, and thus have come to be regarded as a Selinuntian.
SIKELIA (Ancient Hellenic lands) ITALY
Constantinus Siculus (Konstantinos ho Sikelos), is the author of an epigram in the Greek Anthology on the chair (Thronos) from which he taught, which is followed in the Vatican MS. by the reply of Theophanes. Since each poet's name has the title makarion added to it, it would appear that they were both dead before the time when the Palatine Anthology was compiled, that is, the beginninig of the tenth century. From the subject of the above-mentioned epigram it is inferred, that Constantine was a rhetorician or philosopher. There is extant in MS. an anacreontic poemi by Constantine, a philosopher of Sicily.
Diomus (Diomos), a Sicilian shepherd, who is said to have invented bucolic poetry, and was mentioned as such in two poems of Epicharmus. (Athen. xiv.)
SYRACUSSES (Ancient city) SICILY
He was probably a descendant of Achaeus of Eretria.
Antiphon. A tragic poet, whom Plutarch (Vit. X. Orat.), Philostratus (Vit. Soph. i. 15.3), and others, confound with the Attic orator Antiphon, who was put to death at Athens in B. C. 411. Now Antiphon the tragic poet lived at Syracuse, at the court of the elder Dionysius, who did not assume the tyranny till the year B. C. 406, that is, five years after the death of the Attic orator. The poet Antiphon is said to have written dramas in conjunction with the tyrant, who is not known to have shewn his passion for writing poetry until the latter period of his life. These circumstances alone, if there were not many others, would shew that the orator and the poet were two different persons, and that the latter must have survived the former many years. The poet was put to death by the tyrant, according to some accounts, for having used a sarcastic expression in regard to tyranny, or, according to others, for having imprudently censured the tyrant's compositions (Plut., Philostr. ll. cc.; Aristot. Rhet. ii. 6). We still know the titles of five of Antiphon's tragedies: viz. Meleager, Andromache, Medeia, Jason, and Philoctetes.
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
Archimelus (Archimelos), the author of an epigram on the great ship of Hiero, which appears to have been built about 220 B. C. (Athen. v.). To this epigram Brunck (Analect. ii. p. 64) added another, on an imitator of Euripides, the title of which, however, in the Vatican MS. is Archimedous, which there is no good reason for altering, although we have no other mention of a poet named Archimedes.
Citerius, Sidonius, the author of an epigram on three shepherds, which has no poetical merits, and
is only remarkable for its quaintness. It is printed in Wernsdorff's Poetae Latini
Minores, and in the Anthologia Latina. Its author appears to be the same as the
Citerius, one of the professors at Bourdeaux, and the friend of Ausonius, commemorated
in a poem of the latter (Prof Burdig. xiii.). We learn from Ausonius that Citerius
was born at Syracuse, in Sicily, and was a grammarian and a poet. In his hyperbolical
panegyric, Ausonius compares him to Aristarchus and Zenodotus, and says that his
poems, written at an early age, were superior to those of Simonides. Citerius
afterwards settled at Bourdeaux, married a rich and noble wife, but died without
leaving any children.
325 - 267
Theocritus (Theokritos). The most famous of the Greek bucolic poets was a native of Syracuse, the son of Praxagoras and Philinna. He visited Alexandria towards the end of the reign of Ptolemy Soter, where he received the instruction of Philetas and Asclepiades, and began to distinguish himself as a poet. Other accounts make him a native of Cos, which would bring him more directly into connection with Philetas (Suidas, s. v. Theokritos). His first efforts obtained for him the patronage of Ptolemy Philadelphus, who was associated in the kingdom with his father, Ptolemy Soter, in B.C. 285, and in whose praise, therefore, the poet wrote the fourteenth, fifteenth, and seventeenth Idyls. At Alexandria he became acquainted with the poet Aratus, to whom he addressed his sixth Idyl. Theocritus afterwards returned to Syracuse, and lived there under Hiero II. It appears from the sixteenth Idyl that Theocritus was dissatisfied, both with the want of liberality on the part of Hiero in rewarding him for his poems, and with the political state of his native country. It may therefore be supposed that he devoted the latter part of his life almost entirely to the contemplation of those scenes of nature and of country life on his representations of which his fame chiefly rests.
Theocritus was the creator of bucolic poetry in Greek, and, through imitators, such as Vergil, in Roman literature. The bucolic Idyls of Theocritus are of a dramatic and mimetic character. They are pictures of the ordinary life of the common people of Sicily; whence their name eide, eidullia. The pastoral poems and romances of later times are a totally different sort of composition from the bucolics of Theocritus, who knows nothing of the affected sentiment which has been ascribed to the imaginary shepherds of a fictitious Arcadia. He merely exhibits simple and faithful pictures of the common life of the Sicilian people, in a thoroughly objective, although truly poetical, spirit. Dramatic simplicity and truth are impressed upon the scenes exhibited in his poems, into the colouring of which he has thrown much of the natural comedy which is always seen in the common life of a free people. In his dramatic dialogue he is influenced by the mimes of Sophron, as may be seen especially in the fifteenth Idyl (Adoniazusae). The poems of Theocritus of this class may be compared with those of Herondas, who belonged, like Theocritus, to the literary school of Philetas of Cos. In genius, however, Theocritus was greatly the superior. The collection which has come down to us under the name of Theocritus consists of thirty poems, called by the general title of Idyls, a fragment of a few lines from a poem entitled Berenice, and twentytwo epigrams in the Greek Anthology. But these Idyls are not all bucolic, and were not all written by Theocritus. Those of which the genuineness is the most doubtful are the twelfth, twenty-third, twenty-sixth, twenty-seventh, and twenty-ninth; and Idyls xiii., xvi., xvii., xxii., xxiv., and xxvi. are in Epic style, and have more of Epic dialect, especially Idyl xvi. It is likely that these poems on Epic subjects were written early in the poet's life, and, as court poems, had some of the artificial and imitative character of the Alexandrians. In general the dialect of Theocritus is Doric, but two of the Idyls are in the Aeolic.
There are numerous manuscripts of Theocritus, especially in the Laurentian Library at Florence, in the Vatican, and at Paris; but none antedate the thirteenth century.
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
Theocritus, Theokritos: Perseus project index
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 the titles of 145 publications on Theocritus from the period 1998-2003, listed by year/author.
Prof. Kohnken is now publishing a comprehensive Theocritus bibliography for 1950-1998 in Lustrum. His bibliography lists titles by Idyll (presently 1-27) and by subject (editions, translations, commentaries, textual criticism, reception, etc.), and provides helpful comments on the contents and merit of each title. See:
Kohnken, Adolf (unter Mitarbeit von Robert Kirstein).’Theokrit 1950-1994 (1996): 1. Teil.’ Lustrum 37, 1995 [1998], 203-307.
Kohnken, Adolf (Unter mitarbeit von Anja Bettenworth & Robert Kirstein). ‘Theokrit 1950-1998: 2. Teil.’ Lustrum 41, 1999, 9-63 & 197-204. ‘Addenda zu Theokrit 1. Teil.’ Lustrum 41, 1999, 65-73.
Compiled and maintained by Martijn Cuypers
Email: m.p.cuypers@let.leidenuniv.nl
Additions and corrections will be gratefully received.
Last updated: April 23, 2003
nbsp; (Moschos). A Greek bucolic poet, who lived in Syracuse about
B.C. 150. Four longer and four shorter poems have been handed down as [p. 1056]
his; they show the greatest elegance of expression without the truth to nature
and the dramatic power of his model, Theocritus. His lament for Bion is marked
by melody and genuine pathos.
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. 45 titles on Moschus, arranged by year of publication.
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
Daphnaeus, (Daphnaios), a Syracusan, one of the leaders of the popular party in that city after the death of Diocles. He was appointed to command the troops sent by the Syracuans, together with their Sicilian and Italian allies, to the relief of Agrigentum, when it was besieged by the Carthaginians, B. C. 406. He at first defeated the force despatched by Himilco to oppose his advance, but was unable to avert the fall of Agrigentum, and consequently shared in the unpopularity caused by that event, and was deposed, together with the other generals, on the motion of Dionysins. As soon as the latter had established himself in the supreme command, he summoned an assembly of the people, and procured the execution of Daphnaeus together with his late colleague, Demarchus. According to Aristotle, the great wealth of Daphnaeus had made him an object of jealousy with the lower populace. (Diod. xiii. 86, 87, 92, 96; Arist. Pol. v. 5.)
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
Hannibal. Son of Gisco (Zonar. viii. 10), and commander of the Carthaginian forces at Agrigentum, when it was besieged by the Romans during the first Punic war, B. C. 262. It seems not improbable that this may be the same person with the preceding, but we have no evidence by which to decide the fact, and the name of Hannibal appears to have been so common at Carthage, that it can by no means be assumed. Hannibal had a considerable army under his command, yet he did not venture to face the Romans in the field, and shut himself up within the walls of Agrigentum. The Roman consuls, L. Postumius Megellus and Q. Mamilius Vitulus, established their armies in two separate fortified camps, which they united by lines of intrenchment, and thus proceeded to blockade the city. Hannibal was soon reduced to great distress, for want of provisions, but held out, in hopes of being relieved by Hanno, who had advanced as far as Heraclea to his support. But the operations of the latter were unsuccessful, and when he at length ventured on a decisive effort, He was completely defeated. Hereupon Hannibal, who had himself made an unsuccessful attack upon the Roman camp, during their engagement with Hanno, determined to abandon the town, and succeeded, under cover of the night, in forcing his way through the enemy's lines, and making good his retreat with what troops remained to him in safety to Panormus. Agrigentum itself was immediately afterwards stormed and piundered by the Romans. (Polyb. i. 17-19; Zonar. viii. 10; Ores. iv. 7.) Hannibal's attention was henceforth directed principally to carrying on the contest by sea : with a fleet of sixty ships, he ravaged the coasts of Italy, which were then almost defenceless; and the next year (B. C. 260), on learning that the consul, Cn. Cornelius Scipio Asina, had put to sea with a squadron of seventeen ships, he dispatched Boodes, with twenty gullies, to meet him at Lipara, where the latter succeeded by a stratagem in capturing Scipio, with his whole squadron. After this success, Hannibal put to sea in person, with fifty ships, for the purpose of again ravaging the coasts of Italy, but, falling in unexpectedly with the whole Roman fleet, lie lost many of his ships, and with difficulty made his escape to Sicily with the remainder. Here, however, he joined the rest of his fleet, and C. Duilius, having taken the command of that of the Romans, almost immediately brought on a general action off Mylae. Hannibal, well knowing the inexperience land want of skill of the Romans in naval warfare, and having apparently a superior force, had anticipated an easy victory, but the valour of the Romans, together with the strange contrivance of the corvi, or boarding bridges, gained them the advantage; the Carthaginians were totally defeated, and not less than fifty of their ships sunk, destroyed, or taken. Hannibal himself was obliged to abandon his own ship (a vessel of seven banks of oars, which had formerly belonged to Pyrrhus), and make his escape in a small boat. He hastened to Carthage, where, it is said, he contrived by an ingenious stratagem to escape the punishlment so often inflicted by the Carthaginians on their unsuccessful generals. (Polyb. i. 21-23; Zonar. viii. 10, 11; Oros. iv. 7; Diod. Exc. Vatic. xxiii. 2; Dion Cass. Frag. Vat. 62; Polyaen. vi. 16.5.) He was, nevertheless, deprived of his command, but was soon after (apparently the very next year, 259) again sent out, with a considerable fleet, to the defence of Sardinia, which had been attacked by the Romans under L. Scipio. Here he was gain unfortunate, and, having lost many of his ships, was seized by his own mutinous troops, and put to death. (Polyb. i. 24; Oros. iv. 8; Zonar. viii. 12. Tiere is some discrepancy between these accounts, and it is not clear whether he perished in the year of Scipio's operations in Sardinia, or in the following consulship of Sulpicius Paterculus, B. C. 258.)
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
Hanno. A general sent from Carthage to carry on the war in Sicily after the fill of Syracuse, B. C. 211. He established his head-quarters at Agrigentum, where he was associated with Epicydes and Mutines. But his jealousy of the successes obtained by the latter led to the most unfortunate results. He took the opportunity of a temporary absence of Mutines to give battle to Marcellus; but the Numidian cavalry refused to fight in the absence of their leader, and the consequence was, that Hanno was defeated, with heavy loss. Marcellus, however, did not form the siege of Agrigentum, and Hanno thus remained master of that city, while Mutines, with his indefatigable cavalry, gave him the command of all the neighboring country. But his jealousy of that leader still containing, he was at length induced to take the imprudent step of depriving hint of his command. Mutines hereupon made overtures to the Roman general Laevinus, and betrayed the city of Agrigentum into his hands, Hanno and Epicydes with difficulty making their escape by sea to Carthage. This blow put a final termination to the war in Sicily, B. C. 210. (Liv. xxv. 40, 41, xxvi. 40; Zonar. ix. 7.)
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
Leptines. One of the generals of Agathocles, who, during the absence of that monarch in Africa, defeated Xenodocus, the governor of Agrigentum, in a pitched battle, and with great slaughter. (Diod. xx. 56.) When Agathocles, after repairing for a short time to Sicily, returned once more to Africa, B. C. 307, he again left Leptines in command during his absence, who obtained a second victory over Xenodocus. (Id. xx. 61, 62.)
Among the Acragantini of that time perhaps the richest man was Tellias, who had in his mansion a considerable number of guest-chambers and used to station servants before his gates with orders to invite every stranger to be his guest. There were also many other Acragantini who did something of this kind, mingling with others in an old-fashioned and friendly manner; consequently also Empedocles speaks of them as "Havens of mercy for strangers, unacquainted with evil."
Indeed once when five hundred cavalry from Gela arrived there during a wintry storm, as Timaeus says in his Fifteenth Book, Tellias entertained all of them by himself and provided them all forthwith from his own stores with outer and under garments. And Polycleitus in his Histories describes the wine-cellar in the house as still existing and as he had himself seen it when in Acragas as a soldier; there were in it, he states, three hundred great casks hewn out of the very rock, each of them with a capacity of one hundred amphoras, and beside them was a wine-vat, plastered with stucco and with a capacity of one thousand amphoras, from which the wine flowed into the casks. And we are told that Tellias was quite plain in appearance but wonderful in character. So once when he had been dispatched on an embassy to the people of Centoripa and came forward to speak before the Assembly, the multitude broke into unseemly laughter as they saw how much he fell short of their expectation. But he, interrupting them, said, "Don't be surprised, for it is the practice of the Acragantini to send to famous cities their most handsome citizens, but to insignificant and most paltry cities men of their sort."
This extract is from: Diodorus Siculus, Library (ed. C. H. Oldfather, 1989). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains comments & interesting hyperlinks.
Gellias, a citizen of Agrigentum, celebrated for his great wealth and magnificent style of living, as well as for his unbounded hospitality. He flourished just before the destruction of Agrigentum by the Carthaginians under Hannibal, the son of Giscon (B. C. 406). On that occasion he fled for refuge to the temple of Athena; but when he saw that no sanctuary could afford protection against the impiety of the enemy, he set fire to the temple and perished in the flames. (Diod. xiii. 83, 90; Athen. i. ; Val. Max. iv. 8.) The name is written Tellias in most of the MSS. of Athenaeus, and the error (if it be one) must be of ancient date, as the name is thus quoted both by Suidas and Eustathius. (Suid. s. v. Athenaios and Tellias ; Eustath. ad Od.)
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
EGADI (Island complex) SICILY
Hanno, Commander of the Carthaginian fleet, which was defeated by Lutatius Catulus
off the Aegates, B. C. 241. There are no means of determining whether lie may
not be the same with some one of those already mentioned; but it is certainly
a mistake to confound him with Hanno
the Great, which has been done by several authors. The particulars of the
action off the Aegates are so fully given under the article Catulus, that it is
unnecessary to repeat them here. Accordining to Zonaras (viii. 17), Hanno himself,
with those ships which escaped destruction, hed directly to Carthage, where he
met with the same fate that so often awaited their unsuccessful generals at the
hands of the Carthaginians, and was crucified by order of the senate.
ENNA (Ancient city) SICILY
Eunus, (Eunous), the leader of the Sicilian slaves in the servile war which broke
out in 130 B. C. He was a native of Apamea in Syria, and had become the slave
of Antigenes, a wealthy citizen of Enna in Sicily. He first attracted attention
by pretending to the gift of prophecy, and by interpreting dreams; to the effect
of which lie added by appearing to breathe flames from his mouth, and other similar
juggleries. (Diod. Exc. Photii. xxxiv.) He had by these means obtained a great
reputation among the ignorant population, when he was consulted by the slaves
of one Damophilus (a citizen of Enna, of immense wealth, but who had treated his
unfortunate slaves with excessive cruelty) concerning a plot they had formed against
their master. Eunus not only in promised them success, but himself joined in their
enterprise. Having assembled in all to the number of about 400 men, they suddenly
attacked Enna, and being joined by their fellow-slaves within the town, quickly
made themselves masters of it. Great excesses were committed, and almost all the
freemen put to death; but Eunus interfered to save some who had previously shewn
him kindness ; and the daughter of Damophilus, who had always shewn much gentleness
of disposition and opposed the cruelties of her father and mother, was kindly
treated by the slaves, and escorted in safety to Catana. (Diodor. l. c. Exc. Vales.
xxxiv.) Eunus had, while yet a slave, prophesied that he should become a king;
and after the capture of Enna, being chosen by his fellow-slaves as their leader,
he hastened to assume the royal diadem and the title of king Antiochus. Sicily
was at this time swarming with numbers of slaves, a great proportion of them Syrians,
who flocked to the standard of their countryman and fellow-bondsman. A separate
insurrection broke out in the south of the island, headed by Cleon, a Cilician,
who assembled a band of 5000 armed slaves, with which lie ravaged the whole territory
of Agrigentum ; but he soon joined Eunus, and, to the surprise of all men, submitted
to act under him as his lieutenant. (Diodor. l. c.; Liv. Epit. lib. lvi.) The
revolt now became general, and the Romans were forced to adopt vigorous measures
against the insurgents; but the praetors who first led armies against them were
totally defeated. Several others successively met with the same fate; and in the
year 134 B. C. it was thought necessary to send the consul C. Fulvius Flaccus
to subdue tile insurrection. What he effected we know not, but it is evident that
he did not succeed in his object, as the next year Calpurnius Piso was employed
on the same service, who defeated the servile army in a great battle near Messana.
This success was [p. 96] followed up the next year by the consul P. Rupilius,
who successively reduced Tauromenium and Enna, the two great strongholds of the
insurgents. On the surrender of Enna, Eunus fled with a few followers, and took
refuge in rocky and inaccessible places, but was soon discovered in a cave and
carried before Rupilius. His life was spared by the consul, probably with the
intention of carrying him to Rome; but he died in prison at Morgantia, of the
disease called morbus pedicularis. (Florus, iii. 20; Orosius, v. 6; Diod. Exc.
Photii, lib. xxxiv., Exc. Vales. ib. ; Plut. Sull. 36; Strab. vi.) If we may believe
Diodorus, Eunus was a man of no talents or energy, not possessing even personal
courage, and owed his elevation solely to the arts by which lie worked on the
superstition of the multitude; but when we consider how long he maintained his
influence over them, and the great successes they obtained under his rule, this
appears most improbable. Some anecdotes are also related of him, which display
a generosity and elevation of character wholly at variance with such a supposition.
(Diod. Exc. Photii, Exc. Vaticana, lxxxiv., ed. Dindorf.)
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
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
