gtp logo

Location information

Listed 27 sub titles with search on: Biographies  for wider area of: "BURSA Province TURKEY" .

Biographies (27)

Ancient comedy playwrites


KIOS (Ancient city) TURKEY

Stefanus, son of Antiphanes



Hipparchus of Rhodes

NIKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
, , 190 - 120
   Hipparchus, (Hipparchos). A Greek mathematician, the founder of scientific astronomy. He was born at Nicaea in Bithynia about B.C. 160, lived chiefly at Rhodes and Alexandria, and died about B.C. 120. He discovered the precession of the equinoxes, settled more accurately the length of the solar year, as also of the revolution of the moon, and the magnitude and distances of the heavenly bodies. He placed mathematical geography on a firmer basis, by teaching the application of the latitude and longitude of the stars to marking the position of places on the surface of the earth. He is also regarded as having invented trigonometry. In plane trigonometry he constructed a table of chords of arcs, which is practically the same as one of natural sines; and in spherical trigonometry he had some methods of solving triangles. Of his numerous writings we possess only his commentary on the Phaenomena of Eudoxus and Aratus and a catalogue of 1026 fixed stars.

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


Hipparchus, (Hipparchos). We must give a few words to the explanation of our reason for deferring all such account of Hipparchus as his fame requires to another article. The first and greatest of Greek astronomers has left no work of his own which would entitle him to that character: it is entirely to Ptolemy that our knowledge of him is due. In this respect, the parallel is very close between him and two others of his race, each one of the three being the first of his order in point of time. Aesop and Menander would only have been known to us by report or by slight fragments, if it had not been for Phaedrus and Terence: it would have been the same with Hipparchus if it had not been for Ptolemy. Had it happened that Hipparchus had had two names, by the second of which Ptolemy, and Ptolemy only, had referred to him, we should have had no positive method of identifying the great astronomer with the writer of the commentary on Aratus. And if by any collateral evidence a doubt had been raised whether the two were not the same, it would probably have been urged with success that it was impossible the author of so comparatively slight a production could have been the sagacious mathematician and diligent observer who, by uniting those two characters for the first time, raised astronomy to that rank among the applications of arithmetic and geometry which it has always since preserved. This is the praise to which the Hipparchus of the Syntaxis is entitled; and as this can only be gathered from Ptolemy, it will be convenient to refer the most important part of the account of the former to the life of the latter; giving, in this place, only as much as can be gathered from other sources. And such a course is rendered more desirable by the circumstance that the boundary between the discoveries of Hipparchus and those of Ptolemy himself is in several points a question which can only be settled from the writings of the latter, if at all.
  Strabo, Suidas, &c., state that Hipparchus was of Nicaea, in Bithynia; and Ptolemy (De Adpar. Inerrant. sub fin.), in a list in which he has expressly pointed out the localities in which astronomers made their observations, calls him a Bithynian. But the same Ptolemy (Syntax. lib. v., ed. Halma) states that Hipparchus himself has noted his own observation of the sun and moon, made at Rhodes in the 197th year after the death of Alexander. Hence some have made the Rhodian and the Bithynian to be two different persons, without any reasonable foundation. There is a passage in the Syntaxais (lib. iii., ed. Halma), from which Delambre (Astron. Anc. Disc. Prel. xxiv. and vol. ii.) found it difficult to avoid inferring that Ptolemy asserted Hipparchus to have also observed at Alexandria, which had been previously asserted, on the same ground, by Weidler and others. But he afterwards remembered that Ptolemy always supposes Rhodes and Alexandria to be in the same longitude, and therefore compares times of observation at the two places without reduction.
  As to the time at which Hipparchus lived, Suidas places him at from B. C. 160 to B. C. 145, but without naming these epochs as those of his birth and death. Of his life and opinions, independently of the astronomical details in the Syntaxis, we know nothing more than is contained in a passage of Pliny (H.N. ii. 26), who states that the attention of Hipparchus (1) was first directed to the construction of a catalogue of stars by the appearance of a new star, and a moving one (perhaps a comet of unusually star-like appearance). Hence he dared, rem Dco improbam, to number the stars, and assign their places and magnitudes, that his successors might detect new appearances, disappearances, motion, or change of magnitude, coelo in haereditate canctis relicto. Bayle has a curious mistake in the interpretation of a part of this passage. He tells us that Hipparchus thought the souls of men to be of celestial origin, for which he cites Pliny as follows: " Idem Hipparchus nunquam satis laudatus, ut quo nemo magis approbaverit cognationem cum homine siderunli, animasque nostras partem esse coeli." This means, of course, that Pliny thought that no one had done more than Hipparchus to show the heavenly origin of the human mind.
  The following are a list of writings attributed to Hipparchus:--1. Peri ton haplanon anagraphai, mentioned by Ptolemy (lib. vii.). A work was added, under the name of Hipparchus, by P. Victor, to his edition of the comment on Aratus, presently mentioned, under the title ekthesis asterismon, which is nothing more than an extract from the seventh book of the Syntaxis. Suidas and Eudocia mention a work with the following title, peri tes ton aplanon suntaxeos kai tou katasterigmou kai eis tous aristous (asterismous ?), which may be the same as the above. 2. Peri megethon kai apostematon, mentioned by Pappus and Theon. Kepler had a manuscript, which Fabricius seems to imply was this work, and which was to have been published by Hansch, but which did not appear. 3. De duodecim Signorum Adscensione, mentioned by Pappus. 4. Peri tes kata platos meniaias tes selenes kineseos, mentioned by Suidas and Eudocia. 5. Peri meniaiou chronou, mentioned by Galen. 6. Peri eniausiou megethous, mentioned by Ptolemy. 7. Peri tes metaptoseos ton tropikon kai isemerinon semeion, mentioned by Ptolemy. 8. Ton Aratou kai Eudoxou phainomenon exegeseon biblia g. This is the comment alluded to in Aratus. It has always been received as the undoubted work of Hipparchus, though beyond all question it must have been written before any of his great discoveries had been made. Nevertheless, it may be said of this criticism, that it is far superior to any thing which had then been written on astronomy, or which was written before the time of Ptolemy by any but Hipparchus himself. Delambre has given a minute account of its contents (Astron. Anc. vol. i.): he remarks that the places of the stars, as known to Hipparchus when he wrote it, are not quite so good as those of his subsequent catalogue, which can be recovered from the Syntaxis; this is equivalent to saying that they are much better than those of his predecessors. The comparison of Eudoxus and Aratus, which runs throughout this work, constitutes the best knowledge we have of the former. We cannot but suppose that the fact of this being the only remaining work of Hipparchus must arise from the Syntaxis containing the substance of all the rest: this one, of course, would live as a criticism on a work so well known as that of Aratus. It has been twice published: once by P. Victor, Florence, 1567, folio, and again by Petavius in his Uranologion, Paris, 1630, folio. 9. Pros ton Eratosthenen kai ta en tei Geographiai autou lechthenta, a criticism censured by Strabo, and approved by Pliny. 10. Biblion peri ton dia barous kato pheromenon, cited by Simplicius. 11. Achilles Tatius says that Hipparchus and others wrote peri ekleipseon heliou kata ta hepta klimata, from which we cannot infer that this is the title of a work. (Ptolem. Syntaxis; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iv; Petavius, Uranologion; Weidler, Hist. Astron. ; Delambre, Hist. de l'Astronom. anc. vol. i., Discours. prelimin.; Bailly, Hist. de l'Astronom. modern vol. i.; Montucla, Hist. de Mathemat. vol. i. Gartz in Ersch and Gruber's Encyclop. s. v.; Marcoz, Astronomie solaire d'Hipparque soumise a une critique rigoreuse et ensuite rendue a sa nerite primordiale, Paris, 1828.)
(1) It was a similar circumstance which gave as remarkable an impulse to the astronomical career of Tycho Brahe, whose merits, as far as practical astronomy is concerned, much resemble those of Hipparchus. It is frequently stated that both were originally led to astronomy by the sight of new stars, which is certainly not true of the former, nor have we any reason to infer it from what Pliny says of the latter.

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

Hipparchus, Greek astronomer, mathematician and geographer, born: 190 B.C., Nicaea, died: 120 B.C., probably the island of Rhodes. The exact dates of his life are not known for sure, but he is believed to have observed from 162 to 126 B.C.
  Most of what is known about Hipparchus is from Strabo's Geography, from Pliny Natural sciences and from Ptolemy's Almagest. He probably studied in Alexandria. His main original works are lost. His only preserved work is the Commentary on Aratus, a commentary on a poem by Aratus which describes the constellations and the stars which comprise them. This work contains many measurements of stellar positions.
  For his accession he holds the place of originator and father of scientific astronomy. He is believed to be the greatest Greek astronomer observer and he is at the same time entitled the greatest astronomer of ancient times. Hipparchus had ranked stars after their brightness in six magnitude classes, what we, as magnitudes, still use today since Ptolemy. He arranged value of 1 to 20 brightest stars, to weaker ones value of 2 and so forth to the stars with a class of 6, which can be barely seen. Hipparchus had made a lot of astronomical instruments, which were used for a long time with naked-eye observations. About 150 B.C. he made the first astrolabe, which was improved in the 3rd century by Arab astronomers and brought by them in Europe in 10th century. With astrolabe Hipparchus was able to measure among the first the geographical latitude and time. Gnomon was changed during his time. They put it in a metallic hemisphere, which was devided inside in concentric circles and it used as a portable instrument, named scaphion, for determination of geographical coordinates from measured solar altitudes.
  Hipparchus had proposed to determine the geographical longitudes of several cities at solar eclipses. It is thought that Hipparchus compiled the first catalog of stars, and also compiled the first trigonometry tables. Theorem in plane geometry called Ptolemy's theorem was developed by Hipparchus. Hipparchus is perhaps most famous for having been the first to measure the precession of the equinoxes. Hipparchus had used almost the basic astronomical instruments gnomon, atrolabe, armiral sphere and so.
  Hipparchus fully measured the length of winter and spring to be 184 1/2 days, summer and autumn 180 1/2 days. In his geocentrical view, which he preferred, he explained this fact with the adoption the Earth is not in the centre of Sun's orbit around it, but it lies eccentrically for 1/24 r. With his estimation of the length of seasons he tried to determine, as of today, linear eccentricity of Earth's orbit.
  After that he lived from 141 B.C. to 126 B.C. mostly on the island of Rhodes, again in Alexandria and in Syracuse and around 130 B.C. in Babylon made a lot of precise and lasting observations. In his star map Hipparchus drew position of every star on the basis of its celestial latitude, and its celestial longitude. This system was also transferred to maps for Earth. Hipparchus described the motion of the Sun and obtained a value for the eccentricity. Hipparchus also studied the motion of the moon and obtained more accurate measurements of some periods of the motion than existed previously, and undertook to find the distances and sizes of the sun and moon.

This extract is cited July 2003 from the Malaspina Great Books URL below, which contains image.


Asclepiades Bithynus

KIOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
, , 129 - 40
Asclepiades Bithynus, a very celebrated physician of Bithynia, who acquired a considerable degree of popularity at Rome at the beginning of the first century B. C., which he maintained through life, and in a certain degree transmitted to his successors. It is said that he first came to Rome as a teacher of rhetoric (Plin. H. N. xxvi. 7), and that it was in consequence of iris not being successful in this profession, that he turned his attention to that the study of medicine. From what we learn of his [p. 382] history and of his practice, it would appear that he may be fairly characterized as a man of natural talents, acquainted with human nature (or rather with human weakness), possessed of considerable shrewdness and address, but with little science or professional skill. He began (upon the plan which is so generally found successful by those who are conscious of their own ignorance) by vilifying the principles and practice of his predecessors, and by asserting that he had discovered a more compendious and effective mode of treating diseases than had been before known to the world. As he was ignorant of anatomy and pathology, he decried the labours of those who sought to investigate the structure of the body, or to watch the phenomena of disease, and he is said to have directed his attacks more particularly against the writings of Hippocrates. It appears, however, that he had the discretion to refrain from the use of very active and powerful remedies, and to trust principally to the efficacy of diet, exercise, bathing, and other circumstances of this nature. A part of the great popularity which he enjoyed depended upon his prescribing the liberal use of wine to his patients (Plin. H. N. vii. 37, xxiii. 22), and upon his not only attending in all cases, with great assiduity, to everything which contributed to their comfort, but also upon his flattering their prejudices and indulging their inclinations. By the due application of these means, and from the state of the people among whom he practised, we may, without much difficulty, account for the great eminence at which he arrived, and we cannot fail to recognise in Asclepiades the prototype of more than one popular physician of modern times. Justice, however, obliges us to admit, that he seems to have possessed a considerable share of acuteness and discernment, which on some occasions he employed with advantage. It is probable that to him we are indebted, in the first instance, for the arrangement of diseases into the two great classes of Acute and Chronic (Cael. Aurel. De Morb. Chron. iii. 8), a division which has a real foundation in nature, and which still forms an important feature in the most improved modern nosology. In his philosophical principles Asclepiades is said to have been a follower of Epicurus, and to have adopted his doctrine of atoms and pores, on which he attempted to build a new theory of disease, by supposing that all morbid action might be reduced into obstruction of the pores and irregular distribution of the atoms. This theory he accommodated to his division of diseases, the acute being supposed to depend essentially upon a constriction of the pores, or an obstruction of them by a superfluity of atoms; the chronic, upon a relaxation of the pores or a deficiency of the atoms. Nothing remains of his writings but a few fragments, which have been collected and published by Gumpert in the little work mentioned above. There is a poem containing directions respecting health (hugieina parangelmata) which is ascribed to Asclepiades of Bithynia, but a writer in the Rheinisches Museeum has shewn, that this poem could not have been written before the seventh century after Christ.
  The age at which Asclepiades died and the date of his death are unknown; but it is said that he laid a wager with Fortune, engaging to forfeit his character as a physician if he should ever suffer from any disease himself. Pliny, who tells the anecdote (H. N. vii. 37), adds, that he won his wager, for that he reached a great age and died at last from an accident.

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

Gallus, Aelius

Gallus, Aelius, an ancient writer on pharmacy, frequently quoted by Galen. He is probably the person sometimes called simply Aelius (Gal. De Compos. Medicam. sec. Loc. iv. 7), sometimes Gallus (ibid. iii. 1, iv. 8), and sometimes by both names (De Antid. ii. 1). In one passage (De Compos. Medicam. sec. Gen. vi. 6) Talios Ailios is apparently a mistake for Gallos Ailios. He is quoted by Asclepiades Pharmacion (apud Gal. De Compos. Medicam. sec. Loc. iv. 7.), and Andromachus (apud. Gal. ibid. iii. 1), and must have lived in the first century after Christ, as he is said to have prepared an antidote for one of the emperors, which was also used by Charmis, who lived in the reign of Nero, A. D. 54-68 (Gal. De Antid. ii. 1). Haller (Biblioth. Medic. Pract. and Biblioth. Botan.) supposes that there were two physicians of the name of Aelius Gallus; but this conjecture, in the writer's opinion, is not proved to be correct, nor does it seem to be required.
  Besides this Gallus, there is another physician of the name, M. Gallus, who is sometimes said to have had the cognomen Asclepiades; but this appears to be a mistake, as, in the only passage where he is mentioned (Gal. De Compos. Medicam. sec. Loc. viii. 5), instead of Gallou Markou tou Asklepiadou, we should probably read Gallou Markou tou Asklepiadeiou, i. e. the follower of Asclepiades of Bithynia.


Dio Cassius

NIKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
   Cocceianus, son of Cassius Apronianus, a Roman senator, born A.D. 155, at Nicaea, in Bithynia. His true name was Cassius, but he assumed the other two names, as being descended on the mother's side from Dion Chrysostom. Thus, though he was on his mother's side of Greek descent, and though, in his writings, he adopted the prevailing language--Greek--of his native province, he must be considered as a Roman. Dio Cassius passed the greater part of his life in public employments. He was a senator under Commodus and governor of Smyrna after the death of Septimius Severus; and afterwards consul, as also proconsul in Africa and Pannonia. Alexander Severus entertained the highest esteem for him, and made him consul for the second time, with himself, though the Praetorian Guards, irritated against him on account of his severity, had demanded his life. When advanced in years (about A.D. 229), he returned to his native country. Dio published a Roman history, in eighty books, the fruit of his researches and labours for the space of twenty-two years. It embraced a period of 983 years, extending from the arrival of Aeneas in Italy, and the subsequent founding of Rome, to A.D. 229. Down to the time of Iulius Caesar, he only gives a summary of events; after this, he enters somewhat more into details; and from the time of Commodus he is very circumstantial in relating what passed under his own eyes. We have fragments remaining of the first thirty-six books: but there is a considerable portion of the thirtyfifth book, on the war of Lucullus against Mithridates, and of the thirty-sixth, on the war with the pirates and the expedition of Pompey against the king of Pontus. The books that follow, to the fifty-fourth inclusive, are nearly all entire: they comprehend a period from B.C. 65 to B.C. 12, or from the eastern campaign of Pompey and the death of Mithridates to the death of Agrippa. The fifty-fifth book has a considerable gap in it. The fifty-sixth to the sixtieth, both included, which comprehend the period from A.D. 9 to A.D. 54, are complete, and contain the events from the defeat of Varus in Germany to the death of Claudius. Of the following twenty books we have only fragments and the meagre abridgment of Xiphilinus. The eightieth or last book comprehends the period from A.D. 222 to A.D. 229, in the reign of Alexander Severus. The abridgment of Xiphilinus, as now extant, commences with the thirty-fifth and continues to the end of the eightieth book. It is a very indifferent performance, and was made by order of the emperor Michael VII., Parapinaces. The abbreviator, Xiphilinus, was a monk of the eleventh century.
    The fragments of the first thirty-six books, as now collected, are of four kinds: (a) Fragmenta Valesiana, such as were dispersed throughout various writers, scholiasts, grammarians, lexicographers, etc., and were collected by Henri de Valois. (b) Fragmenta Peiresciana, comprising large extracts, found in the section entitled "Of Virtues and Vices," in the great collection or portative library compiled by order of Constantine VII., Porphyrogenitus. The manuscript of this belonged to Peiresc. (c) The fragments of the first thirty-four books, preserved in the second section of the same work of Constantine's, entitled "Of Embassies." These are known under the name of Fragmenta Ursiniana, because the manuscript containing them was found in Sicily by Fulvio Orsini. (d) Excerpta Vaticana, by Mai, which contain fragments of books i.-xxxv. and lxi.-lxxx. To these are added the fragments of an unknown continuator of Dio, which go down to the time of Constantine. Other fragments from Dio belonging chiefly to the first thirtyfive books were found by Mai in two Vatican MSS., which contain a collection made by Maximus Planudes. The annals of Zonaras also contain numerous extracts from Dion.
    Dio has taken Thucydides for his model; but the imitator is comparable with his original neither in arrangement and the distribution of materials nor in soundness of view and just and accurate reasoning. His style is generally clear, where there appears to be no corruption of the text, though full of Latinisms. His diligence is unquestionable, and, from his opportunities, he was well acquainted with the circumstances of the Empire during the period for which he is a contemporary authority; and, indeed, we may assign a high value to his history of the whole period from the time of Augustus to his own age. Nor is his work without value for the earlier periods of Roman history, in which, though he has fallen into errors, like all the Greek and Roman writers who have handled the same obscure subject, he still enables us to correct some erroneous statements of Livy and Dionysius.

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

Dion Cassius Cocceianus, the celebrated historian of Rome. He probably derived the gentile name of Cassius from one of his ancestors, who, on receiving the Roman franchise, had been adopted into the Cassia gens; for his father, Cassius Apronianus, had already borne it. He appears to have adopted the cognomen of Cocceianus from Dion Chrysostomus Cocceianus, the orator, who, according to Reimarus, was his grandfather on his mother's side. Dion Cassius Cocceianus, or as he is more commonly called Dion Cassius, was born, about A. D. 155, at Nicaea in Bithynia. He was educated with great care, and was trained in the rhetorical schools of the time, and in the study of the classical writers of ancient Greece. After the completion of his literary studies, he appears to have accompanied his father to Cilicia, of which he had the administration, and after his father's death, about A. D. 180, he went to Rome; so that he arrived there either in the last year of the reign of M. Aurelius, or in the first of that of Commodus. He had then attained the senatorial age of twentyfive, and was raised to the rank of a Roman senator ; but he did not obtain any honours under Commodus, except the aedileship and quaestorship, and it was not till A. D. 193, in the reign of Pertinax, that he gained the office of praetor. During the thirteen years of the reign of Commodus, Dion Cassius remained at Rome, and devoted his time partly to pleading in the courts of justice, and thus assisting his friends, and partly in collecting materials for a history of Commodus, of whose actions he was a constant eye-witness. After the fall of this emperor, Dion, with the other senators, voted for the elevation of Pertinax, A. D. 193, who was his friend, and who immediately promoted him to the praetorship, which however he did not enter upon till the year following, the first of the reign of Septimius Severus. During the short reign of Pertinax Dion Cassius enjoyed the emperor's friendship, and conducted himself on all occasions as nn upright and virtuous man. The accession of Septimius Severus raised great hopes in Dion of being further promoted; but these hopes were not realized, notwithstanding the favour which Severus shewed him in the beginning of his reign. Soon after the accession of Severus, Dion wrote a work on the dreams and prodigies which had announced the elevation of this emperor, and which he presented to Severus, who thanked him for it in a long epistle. The night after he had received this epistle, Dion was called upon in a dream to write the history of his own time, which induced him to work out the materials he had already collected for a history of Commodus. A similar dream or vision afterwards led him to write the history of Septimius Severus and Caracalla. When the history of Commodus was completed, Dion read it to the emperor, who received it with so much approbation. that Dion was encouraged to write a history of Rome from the earliest times, and to insert in it what he had already written about the reign of Commodus. The next ten years, therefore, were spent in making the preparatory studies and collecting materials, and twelve years more, during the greater part of which he lived in quiet retirement at Capua, were employed in composing the work. It was his intention to carry the history as far down as possible, and to add an account of the reigns of the emperors succeeding Severus, so far as he might witness them. Reimarus conceives that Dion began collecting his materials in A. D. 201, and that after the death of Severus, in A. D. 211, he commenced the composition of his work, which would thus have been completed in A. D. 222.
  The reason why Severus did not promote Dion is probably owing to the emperor's change of opinion respecting Commodus; for, during the latter part of his reign, he admired Commodus as much as he had before detested him; and what Dion had written about him could not be satisfactory to an admirer of the tyrant. Dion thus remained in Italy for many years, without any new dignity being conferred upon him. In the reign of Caracalla it became customary for a select number of senators to accompany the emperor in his expeditions and travels, and Dion was one of them. He bitterly complains of having been compelled in consequence to spend immense sums of money, and not only to witness the tyrant's disgraceful conduct, but to some extent to be an accomplice in it. In the company of the emperor, Dion thus visited Nicomedeia; but he does not appear to have gone any further; for of the subsequent events in Asia and Egypt he does not speak as an eye-witness, but only appeals to reports. Macrinus, however, appears to have again called him to Asia, and to have entrusted to him the administration of the free cities of Pergamus and Smyrna, which had shortly before revolted. Dion went to this post about A. D. 218, and seems to have remained there for about three years, on account of the various points which had to be settled. At the expiration of his office, however, he did not return to Rome, but went to Nicaea in Bithynia. On his arrival there he was taken ill, but notwithstanding was raised, during his absence, to the consulship, either A. D. 219 or 220. After this he obtained the proconsulship of Africa, which, however, cannot have been earlier than A. D. 224. After his return to Italy, he was sent, in A. D. 226, as legate to Dalmatia, and the year after to Pannonia. In the latter province he restored strict discipline among the troops; and on his return to Rome, the praetorians began to fear lest he should use his influence for the purpose of interfering with their conduct likewise, and in order to prevent this, they demanded of the emperor Alexander Severus to put him to death. But the emperor not only disregarded their clamour, but raised Dion, A. D. 229, to his second consulship, in which Alexander himself was his colleague. Alexander also conferred other distinctions upon him, and undertook out of his own purse to defray the expenses which the dignity of consul demanded of Dion. However, as Dion could not feel safe at Rome under these circumstances, the emperor requested him to take up his residence somewhere in Italy at a distance from the city. After the expiration of his consulship, Dion returned to Rome, and spent some time with the emperor in Campania ; but he appears at length to have become tired of the precarious life at Rome, and under the pretext of suffering from a bad foot, he asked and obtained permission to return to his native place, and there to spend the remainder of his life in quiet retirement. At Nicaea Dion completed his history, and there he also died. The tine of his death is unknown. Respecting his family nothing is recorded, except that in two passages he just mentions his wife and children; and it may be that the Dion Cassius whom we find consul in A. D. 291 was a grandson of our historian. The account we have here given of the life of Dion Cassius is derived from scattered passages of his own work, and from a short article in Suidas.
  The following list contains the works which are attributed by the ancients to Dion Cassius : 1. The work on dreams and prodigies, which we mentioned above, is lost. Dion had probably written it only to please the emperor, and he seems afterwards to have regretted its publication; for, although he is otherwise rather credulous and fond of relating prodigies, yet in his history he mentions those which have reference to Septimius Severus only very cursorily. 2. The history of the reign of Commodus, which he afterwards incorporated in his history of Rome. 3. On the reign of the emperor Trajan. This work is mentioned only by Suidas; and, if it really was a distinct work, the substance of it was incorporated in his Roman history. 4. A history of Persia is likewise mentioned only by Suidas, but is probably a mistake, and Suidas confounds Dion with Deinon, who is known to have written a work on Persia. 5. Enodia, that is, Itineraries, is mentioned by Suidas ; but it is very doubtful whether it was a work of Dion Cassius, or of his grandfather, Dion Chrysostomus, whose extensive travels may have led him to write such a work. 6. A life of Arrian is altogether unknown, except through the mention of Suidas. 7. Getica is attributed to Dion Cassius by Suidas, Jornandes, and Freculphus; while from Philostratus (Vit. Soph. i. 7) we might infer, that Dion Chrysostomus was its author. 8. The History of Rome (Rhomaike historia), the great work of Dion Cassius, consisted of 80 books, and was further divided into decads, like Livy's Roman history. It embraced the whole history of Rome from the earliest times, that is, from the landing of Aeneas in Italy down to A. D. 229, the year in which Dion quitted Italy and returned to Nicaea. The excerpta, which A. Mai has published from a Vatican MS., and which belonged to a work containing the history from the time of Valerian down to the time of Constantine the Great, bear indeed the name of Dion Cassius, but are in all probability taken from the work of a Christian writer, who continued the work of Dion, and A. Mai is inclined to think that this continuation was the work of Joannes Antiochenus. Dion Cassius himself (lxxii. 18) intimates, that he treated the history of republican Rome briefly, but that he endeavoured to give a more minute and detailed account of those events of which he had himself been an eyewitness. Unfortunately, only a comparatively small portion of this work has come down to us entire. Of the first thirtyfour books we possess only fragments, and the Excerpta, which Ursinus Valesius, and A. Mai have successively published from the collections made by the command of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. A few more fragments have recently been published by F. Haase (Dionis Cassii librorum deperditorum Fragmenta, Bonn, 1840, 8vo.), who found them in a Paris MS. It must further be observed, that Zonaras, in his Annals, chiefly, though not solely, followed the authority of Dion Cassius, so that, to some extent, his Annals may be regarded as an epitome of Dion Cassius. There is a considerable fragment commonly considered as a part of the 35th book, which however more probably belongs to the 36th, and from this book onward to the 54th the work is extant complete, and embraces the history from the wars of Lucullus and Cn. Pompey against Mithridates, down to the death of Agrippa, B. C. 10. The subsequent books, from 55 to 60, have not come to us in their original form, for there are several passages quoted from these books which are not now to be found in them; and we therefore have in all probability only an abridment made by some one either before or after the time of Xiphilinus. From book 61 to 80 we have only the abridgment made by Xiphilinus in the eleventh century, and some other epitomes which were probably made by the same person who epitomized the portion front the 55th to the 60th book. A considerable fragment of the 71st book was found by A. Mai in a Latin translation in the Vatican library, of which a German version was published anonymously Braunschweig, 1832, 8vo,); but its genuineness is not quite established. Another important fragment of the 75th book was discovered by J. Morelli, and printed first at Bassano, and afterwards (1800) at Paris, in folio, uniform with Reimarus's edition of Dion Cassius.
  Notwithstanding these great losses, we possess a sufficient portion of the work to enable us to form a correct estimate of its value. It contains an abundance of materials for the later history of the republic and for a considerable period of the empire, for some portions of which it is our only source of information. In the first of the fragments published by A. Mai, Dion distinctly states, that he had read nearly everything which had been written on the history of Rome, and that he did not, like a mere compiler, put together what he found in other writers, but that he weighed his authorities, and exercised his judgment in selecting what he thought fit for a place in his work. This assertion of the author himself is perfectly justified by the nature and character of his history, for it is manifest everywhere that he had acquired a thorough knowledge of his subject, and that his notions of Roman life and Roman institutions were far more correct than those of some of his predecessors, such as Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Whenever he is led into error, it is generally owing to his not having access to authentic sources, and to his being obliged to satisfy himself with secondary ones. It must also be borne in mind, as Dion himself observes (liii. 19), that the history of the empire presented much more difficulties to the historian than that of the republic. In those parts in which he relates contemporary events, his work forms a sort of medium between real history and mere memoirs of the emperors. His object was to give a record as complete and as accurate as possible of all the important events; but his work is not on that account a dry chronological catalogue of events, for he endeavours, like Thucydides, Polybius, and Tacitus, to trace the events to their causes, and to make us see the motives of men's actions. In his endeavours to make us see the connexions of occurrences he sometimes even neglects the chronological order, like his great models. But with all these excellences, Dion Cassius is the equal neither of Thucydides nor of Tacitus, though we may admit that his faults are to a great extent rather those of his age than of his individual character as an historian. He had been trained in the schools of the rhetoricians, and the consequences of it are visible in his history, which is not free from a rhetorical tinge, especially in the speeches which are introduced in it. They may not be pure inventions, and may have an historical groundwork, but their form is rhetorical; though we must own that they are among the best rhetorical productions of the time. In the formation of his style he appears to have endeavoured to imitate the classic writers of ancient Greece; but his language is nevertheless full of peculiarities, barbarisms, and Latinisms, probably the consequence of his long residence in Italy; and the praise which Photius (Bibl. Cod. 71) bestows upon him for the clearness of his style, must be greatly modified, for it is often harsh and heavy, and Dion seems to have written as he spoke, without any attempt at elegance or refinement.
  The work of Dion Cassius was first published in a Latin translation by N. Leonicenus, Venice, 1526; and the first edition of the Greek original is that of R. Stephens (Paris, 1548, fol.), which contains front book 35 to 60. H. Stephens then gave a new edition with a Latin translation by Xylander. (Geneva, 1591, fol.) The epitome of Xiphilinus from book 60 to 80 was first printed in the edition of Leunclavius. (Frankfurt, 1592, and Hanau, 1606, fol.) After the fragments and eclogae collected by Ursinus and Valesius had been published, J. A. Fabricius formed the plan of preparing a complete and comprehensive edition of Dion Cassius; but his death prevented the completion of his plan, which was carried out by his son-in-law, H. S. Reimarus, who published his edition at Hamburg, 1750-52, in 2 vols, fol. The Greek text is not much improved is this cdition, but the commentary and the indexes are of very great value. The Latin translation which it contains is made up of those of Xylander and Leunclavius. A more recent edition is that of Sturz, in 9 vols. (Leipzig, 1824, 8vo.), the ninth volume of which (published in 1843) contains the " Excerpta Vaticana," which had first been discovered and published by A. Mai. (Script. Vet. Nov. Collect. ii.)

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

Acropolita Georgius

Acropolita Georgius (Georgios Akrpolites), the son of the great logotheta Constantinus Acropolita the elder, belonged to a noble Byzantine family which stood in relationship to the imperial family of the Ducas. He was born at Constantinople in 1220, but accompanied his father in his sixteenth year to Nicaea, the residence of the Greek emperor John Vatatzes Ducas. There he continued and finished his studies under Theodorus Exapterigus and Nicephorus Blemmida. The emperor employed him afterwards in diplomatic affairs, and Acropolita shewed himself a very discreet and skilful negociator. In 1255 he commanded the Nicaean army in the war between Michael, despot of Epirus, and the emperor Theodore II. the son and successor of John. But he was made prisoner, and was only delivered in 1260 by the mediation of Michael Palaeologus. Previously to this he had been appointed great logotheta, either by John or by Theodore, whom he had instructed in logic. Meanwhile, Michael Palaeologus was proclaimed emperor of Nicaea in 1260, and in 1261 he expulsed the Latins from Constantinople, and became emperor of the whole East; and from this moment Georgius Acropolita becomes known in the history of the eastern empire as one of the greatest diplomatists. After having discharged the function of ambassador at the court of Constantine, king of the Bulgarians, he retired for some years from public affairs, and made the instruction of youth his sole occupation. But he was soon employed in a very important negociation. Michael, afraid of a new Latin invasion, proposed to pope Clemens IV. to reunite the Greek and the Latin Churches; and negociations ensued which were carried on during the reign of five popes, Clemens IV. Gregory X. John XXI. Nicolaus III. and Martin IV. and the happy result of which was almost entirely owing to the skill of Acropolita. As early as 1273 Acropolita was sent to pope Gregory X. and in 1274, at the Council of Lyons, he confinned by an oath in the emperor's name that that confession of faith which had been previously sent to Constantinople by the pope had been adopted by the Greeks. The reunion of the two churches was afterwards broken off, but not through the fault of Acropolita. In 1282 Acropolita was once more sent to Bulgaria, and shortly after his return he died, in the month of December of the same year, in his 62nd year. Acropolita is the author of several works: the most important of which is a history of the Byzantine empire, under the title Chronikon os en sunopse. ton en husterois, that is, from the taking of Constantinople by the Latins in 1204, down to the year 1261, when Michael Palaeologus delivered the city from the foreign yoke. The MS. of this work was found in the library of Georgius Cantacuzenus at Constantinople, and afterwards brought to Europe. (Fabricius, Bibl. Graec. vol. vii. p. 768.) The first edition of this work, with a Latin translation and notes, was published by Theodorus Douza, Lugd. Batav. 1614, 8vo.; but a more critical one by Leo Allatius, who used a Vatican MS. and divided the text into chapters. It has the title Georgiou tou Akropolitou tou megalou logothetou chronike sungraphe, Georgii Acropolitae, magni Logothetae, Historic, &c. Paris, 1651. fol. This edition is reprinted in the " Corpus Byzantinorum Scriptorum," Venice, 1729, vol. xii. This chronicle contains one of the most remarkable periods of Byzantine history, but it is so short that it seems to be only an abridgment of another work of the same author, which is lost. Acropolita perhaps composed it with the view of giving it as a compendium to those young men whose scientific education he superintended, after his return front his first embassy to Bulgaria. [p. 16] The history of Michael Palaeologus by Pachymeres may be considered as a continuation of the work of Acropolita. Besides this work, Acropolita wrote several orations, which he delivered in his capacity as greatlogotheta, and as director of the negotiations with the pope; but these orations have not been published. Fabricius (vol. vii. p. 471) speaks of a MS. which has the title Peri ton apo ktiseos kosmon eton kai peri ton basileusanton mechri haloseos Konstantinoupoleos. Georgius, or (Gregorius Cyprius, who has written a short encomium of Acropolita, calls him the Plato and the Aristotle of his time. This "encomium" is printed with a Latin translation at the head of the edition of Acropolita by Th. Douza : it contains useful information concerning Acropolita, although it is full of adulation. Further information is contained in Acropolita's history, especially in the latter part of it, and in Pachymeres, iv. 28, vi. 26, 34, seq

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


Constantinus Nicaeus

Constantinus, surnamed Nicaeus from the place of his abode, by which surname alone he is usually designated in the Basilica, was a Graeco Roman jurist (Basil. iii.). He was posterior to Garidas, who flourished in the latter half of the eleventh century of the Christian aera, for in Basilica, ii, he cites the Stoicheion of Garidas. He was a commentator upon the Novells of Justinian (Bas. iii.), and upon the books of the Basilica. Nic. Comnenus (Praenot. Mystag.) cites his exposition of the Novells. In Bas. iii., he speaks of Stephanus as his teacher (ho didaskalos hemon Stephanos; but by this expression He may have referred to the jurist Stephanus, who was a contemporary of Justinian, as an English lawyer might call Coke his master. Reiz, however (ad Theoph.), thinks it more probable, that he referred to an Antonius Stephanus, judge and magistrate, who is said by Nic. Comnenlus (Papadopoli) (Praenot. Mystag.) to have written scholia on the Ecloga of Leo; but G. E. Heimbach (Anecdota, i.) has in this case clearly exposed the fabrication of Comnenus. In the scholia of Constantinus Nicaeus appended to the Basilica are citations of Cyrillus, Stephanus, and Thalelaeus, of Joannes Nomophylus, with whom he disagrees, of the Institutes, of the Digest, of the Novells of Leo, and of the Basilica.

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



, , 240 - 300

Members of the Filiki Etairia (Society of Friends)

Praidis Georgios

, , 1791 - 1843



APAMIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Cleochares (Kleochares), a Greek orator of Myrleia in Bithynia, contemporary with the orator Demochares and the philosopher Arcesilas, towards the close of the third century B. C. The chief passage relating to him is in Rutilius Lupus(de Figur. Sentent.), where a list of his orations is given. He also wrote on rhetoric: a work in which he compared the styles of Isocrates and Demosthenes, and said that the former resembled an athlete, the latter a soldier, is quoted by Photius (Cod. 176, ed. Bekker). The remark there quoted is, however, ascribed to Philip of Macedon by Photius himself (Cod. 265, ed. Bekker), and by the Pseudo-Plutarch (de Vit. X Or. viii. 25). The obvious explanation is, that Cleochares inserted the observation in his work as having been made by Philip. None of his orations are extant. (Strab. xii.; Diog. Laert. iv. 41)

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

Aristaenetus, (Aristainetos)

NIKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
   A Greek grammarian and rhetorician, of Nicaea in Bithynia, friend of Libanius, who praises him in the highest terms; he was killed in an earthquake at Nicomedia, A.D. 358. His name is erroneously attached to a collection, probably composed in the fifth or sixth century, of erotic Epistles, feeble imitations of Alciphron, loose in tone and declamatory in style. The text and a Latin version are contained in the Didot collection of the Epistolographi Graeci (Paris, 1873).

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

Dion Chrysostomus

PRUSSA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Dion Chrysostomus, that is, Dion the golden-mouthed, a surname which he owed to his great talents as an orator. He bore also the surname Cocceianu (Plin. Epist x. 85, 86), which he derived from the emperor Cocceius Nerva, with whom he was connected by intimate friendship. (Orat. xlv.) Dion Chrysostomus was born at Prusa in Bithynia, about the middle of the first century of our era, and belonged to a distinguished equestrian family. Reimarus has rendered it very probable that a daughter of his was the mother of Dion Cassius, the historian. His father, Pasicrates, seems to have bestowed great care on his son Dion's education and the early training of his mind; but he appears to have acquired part of his knowledge in travels, for we know that he visited Egypt at an early period of his life. At first he occupied himself in his native place, where he held important offices, with the composition of speeches and other rhetorico-sophistical essays, but on perceiving the futility of such pursuits he abandoned them, and devoted himself with great zeal to the study of philosophy : he did not, however, confine give himself up to any profound speculations, his object being rather to apply the doctrines of philosophy to the purposes of practical life, and more especially to the administration of public affairs, and thus to bring about a better state of things. The Stoic and Platonic philosophies, however, appear to have had the greatest charms for hilm. Notwithstanding these useful and peaceful pursuits, he was looked upon in his native place with suspicion and hostility (Orat. xlvi.), which induced him to go to Rome Here he drew upon himself the hatred of Domitian, who had so great an aversion to philosophers, that by a senatus-consultum all were expelled from Rome and Italy, and Dion found himself obliged to quit Rome in secret. (Orat. xlvi., xiii.) On the advice of the Delphic oracle, it is said, he put on the attire of a beggar, and with nothing in his pocket but a copy of Plato's Phaedon and Demosthenes's oration on the Embassy, he undertook a journey to the countries in the north and east of the Roman empire. He thus visited Thrace, Mysia, Scythia, and the country of the Getae, and owing to the power and wisdom of his orations, he met everywhere with a kindly reception, and did much good. (Orat. xxxvi.; comp. xiii.) In A. D. 96, when Domitian was murdered, Dion used his influence with the army stationed on the frontier in favour of his friend Nerva, and seems to have returned to Rome immediately after his accession. (Orat. xlv.) Nerva's successor, Trajan, entertained the highest esteem for Dion, and shewed hint the most marked favour, for he is said to have often visited hill, and even to have allowed him to ride by his side in his golden triumphal car. Having thus received the most ample satisfaction for the unjust treatment he had experienced before, he returned to Prusa about A. D. 100. But the petty spirit he found prevailing there, which was jealous of his merits and distinctions, and attributed his good actions to impure motives (Orat. l.), soon disgusted him with his fellow-citizens, and he again went to Rome. Trajan continued to treat him with the greatest distinction: his kindly disposition gained him many eminent friends, such as Apollonius of Tyana and Euphrates of Tyre, and his oratory the admiration of all. In this manner he spent his last years, and died at Rome about A. D. 117.
  Dion Chrysostomus is one of the most eminent among the Greek rhetoricians and sophists. This is the opinion not only of the ancients who have written about him, such as Philostratus, Synesius, and Photius, but it is also confirmed by the eighty orations of his which are still extant, and which were the only ones known in the time of Photius, who, however, enumerates them in a somewhat different order from that in which they now stand. These orations are for the most part the productions of his later years, and there are very few, if any, among them that can with certainty be at tributed to the early period of his life. They are more like essays on political, moral, and philosophical subjects than real orations, of which they have only the form. We find among them lopsoi peri basileias or logoi basilikoi, four orations addressed to Trajan on the virtues of a sovereign ; Diogenes se peri turannidos, on the troubles to which men expose themselves by deserting the path of nature, and on the difficulties which a sovereign has to encounter; essavs on slavery and freedom; on the means of attaining eminence as an orator; further, political discourses addressed to various towns which he sometimes praises and sometimes blames, but always with great moderation and wisdom; on subjects of ethics and practical philosophy, which he treats in a popular and attractive manner; and lastly, orations on mythical subjects and show-speeches. Besides these eighty orations we have fragments of fifteen others. Suidas, in enumerating the works of Dion Cassius, mentions one on the Getae, which Casaubon was inclined to attribute to Dion Chrysostomus, on account of a passage in Philostratus ( Vit. Soph. i. 7), who says, " how fit Dion (Chrysostomus) was for writing history, is evident from his Getica." There are extant also five letters under the name of Dion, and addressed to one Rufus. They are published in Boissonade's Ad Marini Vit. Procl., and some critics are inclined to consider them as productions of Dion Chrysostolmus. All the extant orations of Dion are distinguished for their refined and elegant style; the author most successflly imitated the classic writers of Greece, such as Plato, Demosthenes, Hyperides, and Aeschines. His ardent study of those models, combined with his own eminent talents, his firm and pleasing voice, and his skill in extempore speaking, raised him at once above all contemporary rhetoricians. His style is throughout clear, and, generally speaking, free from artificial embellishment, though he is not always able to escape from the influence of the Asiatic school of rhetoric. His sentences are often interrupted by the insertion of parenthetical clauses, and his prooemia are frequently too long in proportion to the other parts of his discourses. " Dion Chrysostomus," says Niebuhr (Lecturses. on Rom. Hist. ii., ed. Schmitz), " was an author of nncommon talent, and it is much to be regretted that he belonged to the rhetoricians of that unfortunate age. It makes one sad to see him waste his brilliant oratorical powers on insignificant subjects. Some of his works are written in an excellent and beautiful language, which is pure Attic Greek and without affectation : it is clear that he had made the classical language of Athens his own, and he handled it as a master. He appears in all he wrote as a man of an amiable character, and free from the vanity of the ordinary rhetoricians, though one perceives the silent consciousness of his powers. He was an unaffected Platonic philosopher, and lived world, and which made him forget Rome, its emperor, and everything else. All this forms a very charming feature in his character. Whenever he touches upon the actual state of things in which he lived, he shews his master-mind. He was the first writer after Tiberius that greatly contributed towards the revival of Greek literature." (Comp. Philostratus. Vit. Soph. i. 7; Photius, Bibl. Cod. 209; Synnesius, Dion e peri tes kat' diagoges; Suid. s. v. Dion; Westermann, Gesch. d. Griech. Beredis and Beilage x.; Emperius, de Exilio Dionis Chrisostomi, Braunschweig, 1840, 8vo.)

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



APAMIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Amelius (Amelios), a native of Apamea according to Suidas (s. v. Amelios), but a Tuscan according to Porphyry (vit. Plotin.), belonged to the new Platonic school, and was the pupil of Plotinus and master of Porphyry. He quoted the opinion of St. John about the Logos without mentioning the name of the Apostle : this extract has been preserved by Eusebius.


PRUSSA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Himerius, (Himerios). A Greek sophist, born at Prusa in Bithynia, about A.D. 315, and educated at Athens, where, after extending his knowledge by travelling, he became a teacher of rhetoric. As such, he was so successful that he received the rights of citizenship and became a member of the Areopagus. Among his pupils were Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus; for, although himself a pagan, nevertheless, like Libanius, he exhibited no animosity against Christians. He was summoned to Antioch by Julian , and appointed his private secretary. On the emperor's death (363), he returned to his earlier occupation at Athens, and there died, after becoming blind in his old age, about 386. Of his speeches and declamations twenty-four exist in a complete form, ten in fragments, and thirty-six in the summaries and excerpts preserved by Photius. His style is ornate, turgid, and overladen with erudition. He owes his special importance solely to the fact that his speeches contain material for the history of the events and of the manners of his time. The complete works of Himerius have been edited by Wernsdorf (Gottingen, 1790) and Dubner (1849).

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

Himerius, (Himerios). A celebrated Greek sophist of Prusa in Bithynia, where his father Ameinias distinguished himself as a rhetorician. (Suid. s. n. Himerios.) According to the most correct calculation, the life of Himerius belongs to the period from A. D. 315 to 386. He appears to have received his first education and instruction in rhetoric in his father's house, and he then went to Athens, which was still the principal seat of intellectual culture, to complete his studies. It is not improbable that he there was a pupil of Proaeresius, whose rival he afterwards became. (Eunap. Proaeres. p. 110.) Afterwards he travelled, according to the custom of the sophists of the time, in various parts of the East: he thus visited Constantinople, Nicomedeia, Lacedaemon, Thessalonica, Philippi, and other places, and in some of them he stayed for some time, and delivered his show speeches. At length, however, he returned to Athens, and settled there. He now began his career as a teacher of rhetoric, and at first gave only private instruction, but soon after he was appointed professor of rhetoric, and received a salary. (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 165. p. 109, ed. Bekk.) In this position he acquired a very extensive reputation, and some of the most distinguished men of the time, such as Basilius and Gregorius Nazianzenus, were among his pupils. The emperor Julian, who likewise heard him, probably during his visit at Athens in A. D. 355 and 356 (Eunap. Himer.; Liban. Orat. x. p. 267, ed. Morel.; Zosimus, Hist. Eccles. iii. 2), conceived so great an admiration for Himerius, that soon after he invited him to his court at Antioch, A. D. 362, and made him his secretary. (Tzetz. Chil. vi. 128.) Himerius did not return to Athens till after the death of his rival, Proaeresius (A. D. 368), although the emperor Julian had fallen five years before, A. D. 363. He there took his former position again, and distinguished himself both by his instruction and his oratory. He lived to an advanced age, but the latter years were not free from calamities, for he lost his only promising son, Rufinus, and was blind during the last period of his life. According to Suidas, he died in a fit of epilepsy (hiera nosos).
  Himerius was a Pagan, and, like Libanius and other eminent men, remained a Pagan, though we do not perceive in his writings any hatred or animosity against the Christians; he speaks of them with mildness and moderation, and seems, on the whole, to have been a man of an amiable disposition. He was the author of a considerable number of works, a part of which only has come down to us. Photius (Bibl. Cod. 165, comp. 243) knew seventy-one orations and discourses on different subjects: but we now possess only twenty-four orations complete; of thirty-six others we have only extracts in Photius, and of the remaining eleven we have only fragments. In his oratory Himerius took Aristeides for his model. The extant orations are declamations and show speeches, such as were customary at the time, and were delivered either on certain occasions, as those on the marriage of Severus, and on the death of his son Rufinus, or they were spoken merely by way of oratorical exhibitions. Some of them relate to events of the time, and so far are of historical interest. Their style is not above that of the ordinary rhetoricians of his period; it is obscure and overladen with figurative and allegorical expressions; and although it is clear that Himerius was not without talent as an orator, yet he is so much under the influence of his age, that with a great want of taste he indulges in bombastic phraseology, mixes up poetical and obsolete expressions with his prose, and seldom neglects an opportunity of displaying his learning.
  After the revival of letters, the productions of Himerius were very much neglected, for a complete edition of all that is still extant of them was never made till towards the end of last century. Five orations had been published before; one by Fabricius (Bibl. Graec. ix. (, &c. old edition), another by J. H. Majus (Giessen, 1719, 8vo.), and again three by the same Majus (Halle, 1720, fol.), when G. Ch. Harles edited one oration (the seventh in the present order), as a specimen and precursor of all the others, with a commentary by G. Wernsdorf, Erlangen, 1784, 8vo. Wernsdorf now prepared a complete collection of all the extant productions of Himerius, with commentary and introduction, which appeared at length at Gottingen, 1790, 8vo., and is still the only complete edition of Himerius. One fragment of some length, which has since been discovered, is contained in Boissonade's Anecdot. Graec. vol. i.

This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks



NIKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Aemilianus (Aimilianos), a native of the town of Nicaea, and an epigrammatic poet. Nothing further is known about him. Three of his epigrams have been preserved. (Anthol. Graec. vii. 623, ix. 218, 756.)

Related to the place


KIOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Hymeas, (Humees), a son-in-law of Dareius Hystaspis, acted as a general of his against the revolted Ionians, and was one of those who defeated the rebels near Ephesus in B. C. 499. In the following year Hymeas took the town of Cius on the Propontis, and reduced the Aeolians and Gergithians, in the midst of which successes he was carried off by illness. (Herod. v. 102, 111, 116.)


Molpagoras of Cius



NIKEA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Diophanes, a native of Nicaea, in Bithynia, in the first century B. C., who abridged the agricultural work of Cassius Dionysius for the use of king Deiotarus. (Varr. De Re Rust. i. 1. 10; Colum. De Re Rust. i. 1. 10; Plin. H. N. Index to lib. viii.) His work consisted of six books, and was afterwards further abridged by Asinius Pollio. (Suid. s. v. Polion.) Diophanes is quoted several times in the Collection of Greek Writers, De Re Rustica.

Isigonus (Isigonos)

Isigonus (Isigonos), a Greek writer, who, according to Stephanus Byzantinus (s. v. Nikaia), was a native of Nicaea, and, according to Cyrillus (adv. Julian. 3) of Cittium, though it is not improbable that in the latter passage ho Kittieus may be only a false reading for ho Nikaeus. The time at which he lived is uncertain, though Gellius (ix. 4) calls him an ancient writer of no small authority. Tzetzes (ad Lycoph. 1021) calls him an historian, but the only work he is known to have written bore the title Apista, whence he is regarded as one of the class of writers called paradoxographoi. (Tzetz. Chil. vii. 144.) The fact that Pliny (H. N. vii. 2) and Sotion used the work seems to show that lsigonus lived previous to the beginning of the Christian era. The work of Isigonus is lost, and the few fragments of it which have come down to us are collected in Westermann's Paradoxographoi.

You are able to search for more information in greater and/or surrounding areas by choosing one of the titles below and clicking on "more".

GTP Headlines

Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.

Subscribe now!
Greek Travel Pages: A bible for Tourism professionals. Buy online

Ferry Departures