Full text of "Works"
V:
NOT WANTED IN RBSC
• THE WORKS OF
RICHARD BENTLEY, D.D.
COLLECTED AND EDITED
BY THE REV. ALEXANDER DYCE.
VOL. IL
DISSERTATIONS UPON THE EPISTLES OF PHALARIS, &c.
AND EPISTOLA AD MILLIUM.
LONDON :
PRINTED BY ROBSON, LEVEY, AND FRANKLYN,
46 St. Martin's Lane.
DISSERTATIONS tJPUN •
THE EPISTLES OF PHALARIS,
THEMISTOCLES, SOCRATES, EURIPIDES,
AND UPON
THE FABLES OF iESOP:
ALSO,
EPISTOLA AD JOANNEM MILLIUM.
BY RICHARD BENTLEY, D.D.
EDITED, WITH NOTES,
BY THE REV. ALEXANDER DYCE.
LONDON:
FRANCIS MACPHERSON,
MIDDLE ROW, HOLBOllN.
1836.
-^
(1
(.'>.
(^'
^
DISSERTATION
UPON THE
EPISTLES OF PHALARIS.
XIIL
But, since tyrants will not be confined by laws,
let us suppose, if you will, that our Phalaris might
make use of the Attic, for no reason at all but his
own arbitrary humour and pleasure ; yet we have still
another indictment against the credit of the Epistles,
For even the Attic of the true Phalaris's age is not
there represented, but a more recent idiom and style,
that by the whole thread and colour of it betrays
itself to be many centuries younger than he. Every
living language, like the perspiring bodies of living
creatures, is in perpetual motion and alteration ;
some words go off, and become obsolete ; others are
taken in, and by degrees grow into common use ; or
the same word is inverted to a new sense and notion,
which in tract of time makes as observable a change
in the air and features of a language, as age makes in
the lines and mien of a face. All are sensible of this
in their own native tongues, where continual use
VOL. II. B
J
1
Z DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
makes every man a critic. For what Englishman
does not think himself able, from the very turn and
fashion of the style, to distinguish a fresh English
composition from another a hundred years old ? Now,
there are as real and sensible differences in the
several ages of Greek, were there as many that could
discern them. But very few are so versed and prac-
tised in that language, as ever to arrive at that sub-
tilty of taste. And yet as few will be content to
relish or disHke a thing, not by their own sense, but
by another man's palate. So that should I affirm
that I know the novity of these Epistles from the
whole body and form of the work, none, perhaps,
would be convinced by it, but those that, without my
indication, could discover it by themselves. I shall
let that alone then, and point only at a few parti-
cular marks and moles in the Letters, which every
one that pleases may know them by. In the very
first Epistle, m Ifjuo) •r^or^s'Ts/?, which you accuse me ofy
is an innovation in language ; for which the ancients
used 'T^ofps^g/^. In the cxlii., among other presents
to a bride he sends ^vyari^ag rsrrcc^ag 6[jbrjXiKag, which
would anciently have signified daughters ; but he here
means it of virgins or maidens ; as Jille and jiglia
signify in French and Italian ; which is a most mani-
fest token of a later Greek. Even Tzetzes,^ when he
tells the story out of this Epistle, interprets it maids,
^z^wiraivag. In the lxxvii. 'TroXkot Trocthcop ovrsg Igaffrai,
many that are fond of their children, for that is his
sense of the words ; which of old would have been
taken for a flagitious love of boys ; as if he had said
" Chiliad, p. 196. [=V. 915. p. 192. ed, Kiess.-~T>.1
NEW ATTIC. a
ToKkol ovrzg 'Traih^mrai They that will make the
search may find more of this sort; but I suppose
these are sufficient to unmask the recent Sophist
under the person of the old Tyrant.
What the Examiner has been pleased to animadvert
upon this article is comprehended under two heads; his
general reflection upon the purity and stability of the Greek
tongue, and his particular exceptions to the words that I had
marked out as tokens of a recent writer.
In his general harangue he first spends a whole page to
inform us of a gi'eat piece of news, that our English tongue
has undergone very considerable changes (p. 69.) : then he
asks me these pertinent questions, Do you take the Greek of
Lucian to be as different from that of Plato, as our English
now is from that which was spoken soon after the Conquest ?
are not Homer and Oppian much nearer one another in their
language than Chaucer and Cowley, though in time they are
far more distant ? (p. 70.) As if I had supposed that the
gradual alteration of the Greek language was as great in
every century while it lasted, as that of our English tongue
this last hundred years : whereas it's as plain as words can
make it, that I compared the changes of the Greek during
the whole interval between the true Phalaris and the Sophist,
which I called in a round number a thousand years, with the
changes of our English in the last hundred. Then he com-
mences a formal and sophistical declamation about the rea-
sons that made the Greek language so fixed and unalterable
(p. 70.) ; where he gives us some shining metaphors, and a
polished period or two ; but for the matter of it, it is either
some common and obvious thought dressed and curled in
the beauish way, or some new mistake, which now at last
has its happy birth from the fertile genius of our Examiner.
The reader shall judge between us, whether I pay him in his
own coin, that is, misrepresent him, when he has considered
what I shall now say.
4 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
The accusation that I brought against the Epistles was
this ', that the author has writ them in the new and recent
Attic, not that which was in use in the age of the true Pha-
Zam^ whom the Examiner himself o^vns to have been con-
temporary with Solon. So that, if we can make any dis-
covery what the Attic language was in Solon's time, we may
be sure that the true Phalaris would have spoken in the same
way, had he a mind to have used that dialect. There's an
oration ascribed to Lysias, against Theomnestusf which Har-
pocration once or twice questions if it be genuine : but whe-
ther it be Lysias's or not, it's all one to our present purpose;
for we know the time that it was made, and by that account
it may well enough be Lysias's. That orator died at Olymp.
c. 2. or c. 3.,^ and this oration appears to be made three or
four years before, at Olymp. xcix. 4. For the person who
speaks it tells us, *EyLtot yitev eV?; elaX TptdKoyra'^ e'f otov
vfiel^; KareXrfKvOare, elKoarov tovtL' ^aivofjuau ovv rptcrKaiSe-
Kerrji; cbv, ore 6 Trarrjp viro rcov TpLCLKOvra aireOvqa-Ke ; I am
now, says he, xxx. years old, and this is the xxth year since
you Athenians returned hither : so that I was xiii. years of
age when my father was killed by the thirty tyrants A This is
the common reading of that passage ; but if we examine it,
it will be found to be a manifest depravation. For the
thirty tyrants began Olymp. xciv. 1.,® and, in fear of them,
half of the Athenians forsook their country : then, at Olymp.
xciv. 4. the thirty were deposed, and those that had left
Athens {KaTekrfKvdacn) returned again. If the person, then,
that spoke this oration was xxx. years old in the xxth year
after the return of the Athenians, he could not possibly be
XIII. years old, nor above x., when the thirty tyrants mur-
dered his father. But the true correction of this place may
be had from the next oration, which is called The Second
^ Lysias koto Qeoixvijarov. * Dionys. Halic. in Lysia.
[* 'E^Lioi yap .... cTTj eiVt rpidKovra rpia. Or. At. I. 281. ed. Bekk. — D.]
^ Lys. p. 116.
^ Diod. and others. [Bentley was misled here by Diodorus: see Clinton's
Fasti Hellen.from LV. to cxxiv. 01. p. 84. sec. ed. — D.]
NEW ATTIC.
against Theomnestus,^ but is really nothing else but the
rough draught of the other ', where the person's age is thus
set forth ; "jEtt; . . ean /not, 8vo kol rptd/covra' i^ ov B' vfiel<i
Karr/XOere, elKoarov rovri' ^alvofiai, ovv ScoSeKaeTT}^ cov, ore
6 TraTTjp vTTo Twv TpLCLKovTa aireOvr/aKev ', I am now, says he,
XXXII. yea7^s of age ; and this is the xxth year since your
return; so that I was xii. years old when my father was
killed by the thirty. Now, this account is agreeable to his-
tory and truth ; for if the xxxii. year of this person's age
was coincident with the xxth after the return of the Athe-
nians, then his xiith falls upon the last year of the thirty
tjTants, and in that we must suppose his father was killed.
So that, in the other oration, for errj V we must read eV?;
Xy8', and i^eT7](; for iyerrjf;; for the numbers, being thus
wTitten in numeral letters, were very liable to be mistaken.
Upon the whole, therefore, as I said before, this oration
must have been written at Olymp. xcix. 4., which is ccxiii.
years after the archonship of Solon, when he made his body
of laws. Now, by the laws of Athens, if a man called
another dvSpo^ovov, a murderer, it was penal : so that the
person who speaks this oration brings an action against
Theomnestus for saying he had killed his father, rbv irarepa
aTreKTOvevaL. The defendant makes his exception to the in-
dictment, because he did not call him dvhpo<f)6vov, which was
the word that was penal by law. But the other replies, that
the sense and meaning of the laws Avas to be regarded, as well
as the words : For though things, says he, continue the same,
yet we do not use some of the same words that our ancestors
did.s Let the crier read some of the old laws of Solon.
AEAE^&AI EN THI nOAOKAKHI. Here what was
TToBoKaKT], the stocks, in Solon's time, is now called to ^vKov,
EnETTTAIN EHIOPKH^ANTA TON AnOAAfl- AE-
AIOTA AE AIKH^ ENEKA APA^KAZEIN. Here is
iinopKelv, to swear, which we now call o/ioaai ; and hpaaKa-
^€Lv, to run away, ivhich is iioiv dTroBiBpaaKetv, OSTI^
^ Lys. p. 119. B Lysias, p. 118.
b DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
AniAAHI THI OTPAI. Here's airlWeiv, to exclude,
for ivhich we now say airoKkeUtv. TO APFTPION XTA-
^IMON EINAI. Here o-Tdai^ov does not signify to weigh
money in scales, as we now use the word, but to let it out at
use. O^AI nE^AXMENn^ nilAOTNTAI KAI 01-
KHO^. Here 7re(pa(T/ji,iv(o<; signifies openly, which we now
call <^avepS)<s ; and iraiXeladaL is to walk, now ^ahl^eiv ; and
oiKYjo^ is a servant, now OepdirovTOf; : a7id there are many
more such as these. ^ The ingenious reader may please to
observe the last words of Lysias, that there are many more
such as these ;^ and then he will have a just apprehension of
the great change of the Attic tongue between Solon and
Lysias's time. Some of those words of Solon that our
orator has produced here are mentioned too by others : as
irohoKCLKT} is quoted from Solon by Demosthenes ;J and
7re^aafjbevo)<; TrcoXovvrac by Plutarch,^ which he interprets,
as Lysias does, ifKpavco^; (f>oLT(oaLv. And if a proportionable
number of such antiquated words do not occur in the other
fragments of Solon's laws, the reason is because the writers
do not cite the very words, but only express the sense of
them. As when Plutarch relates the law, that ivhoever
/3id(T7jTat, ravished, a free-woman should pay a hundred
drachms,^ we know from Hesychius that the original word
of Solon was not /Bcdaaadat, but ^ivelv.^ But, in another
place, where he declares that he cites the law avrol<i 6v6-
fiaa-i,^ word for word, EHI ^ONfll H ^^ATAI^IN, we
do not fail to meet w ith the old obsolete idiom, as G-^a^alaiv
here for <r(j>ayal(;.
Now, I suppose it's sufficiently plain from these speci-
mens, that the Attic dialect was not so very stable and im-
mutable as the Examiner imagines. There were only two
centuries betwixt Solon and Lysias ; and the alteration
seems to be almost as great as what has happened in our
•> P. 117. ' UoWa Se roiavra Koi &Wa iffrlv.
J Demost. c. Timoc. ^ Plut. Solon.
1 Plut. Sol. "• Hesycli. in Buveiv.
" Plut. Sol.
NEW ATTIC. 7
owii language within the same space. For as to the changes
of entire words, the instances here alleged are a plain proof
of it ; and for the orthography, or way of spelling, which is
the principal variation of the modern English from the old,
we should find as considerable a difference between Solon's
and Lysias's spelling, if we had a sight of the original
Kvp^ei^, tables of his laws. For in Solon's time there were
but XVIII. Greek letters in all, the rest being invented after-
wards by Epicharmus and Simonides ;° and we are sure that
the whole xxiv. were not in public use at Athens till the
archonship of Euclides, Olymp. xciv. 2.P So that some of
the words cited above by Lysias and Plutarch were by Solon
spelled thus; AEAEXTHAI' TEI THTPAL HHONOI E
^IIHArAISIN. Upon all accounts, therefore, the Attic
was no more privileged from change than the other lan-
guages of the world are. Nay, we may suppose there was
a greater change in it betwixt Theseus and Solon than
between Solon and Lysias, the former interval being three
times as long as the latter. For we know that the Attic and
Ionic were originally the very same language,^ and yet after-
wards we find them to differ exceedingly. I make no ques-
tion but the lonians, who were Attic colonies, had a gradual
change in their dialect, as well as Athens, their common
mother, had. For Herodotus informs us, that the lonians
had four quite different idioms of language;^ so that it's
evident that they too had varied from the ancient Attic.
But yet it's pretty observable that several of those anti-
quated words of Solon's are what we now call Ionic : as,
TTcoXov/juaL for ^aSl^co is very frequent in Homer ;
OvT€ TTOT et9 ayop7)v TrcoXicrKeTO KvScdvecpav.^
And so oIktio^; for OepdirovTOf; is doubly Ionic, both as to the
° See here, vol. i. p. 291, 292.
P See Meursius, Fort. Attic, p. 63. Vales. Harpocrat. p. 101.
•> See here, vol. i. p. 358.
*■ Herod, i. 142. XapaKrrjpes yXdffffTjs T6<r<ropes.
[* //. I. 490.~D.]
8 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
whole word and as to the termination of it^ 7709 for ew? :
and this too is several times in Homer ;
^E^ vTTVov yoocLxra (J)l\ov<; olK7]a<; iyeipoi.^
And this illustrates^ and is itself illustrated by, Dionysius
Halicarn., who asserts clearly, and fully to our purpose, that
the ancient Attic dialect had but some small variations^ from
the Ionic. Now, to apply this to the Epistles of Phalaris, I
would crave leave to ask the admirers of them, if the Attic
dialect there be after Solon's example, as it would certainly
be if the Tyrant had writ them ? Is the formation of nouns
after Solon's model, aidi for at?, and 7709 for eo)? ? Are
there any antiquated words there, as TrcoXela-Oai,, Spao-Ka^ecv,
ire^ao-jjuivco^, &c.? And yet the sense of some of them occurs
there, but expressed in a more recent way. Though, if we
consider what Lysias says, that there were TroWa roLavra,
MANY such in Solon's laws, it must be owned that the true
Epistles of Phalaris had been full of such words as perhaps
would have puzzled a better scholar (if there can be one)
than the late Editor of the false ones.
The Examiner seems to take pains to persuade us that
the Attic dialect was of such a fixed and durable nature, that
it's in vain to pretend to distinguish any different ages of it.
But the Greeks themselves were of another opinion, if they
may be allowed in their own language to be as knowing as
Mr. B. Some of them were so nice as to distinguish a
middle age of that dialect between the times of Solon and
Lysias. Dionysius Halicarn. tells us, that Lysias was the
best pattern of the Attic tongue, not of that ancient one that
Plato and Thucydides used, but of the fashionable one in his
own time.^ So that here are three sorts of Attic specified
within the compass of two centuries ', for I suppose it's plain
that Thucydides's language is as difi'erent from that of
Solon's laws as from that of Lysias's orations. Demetrius
[* //. V. 413., where eye/pr?.— D.]
* Dionys. de Thucyd. p. 147. MiKpds rivas . . . ^ia<popas.
* Dionys. v. Lys. \^De Lysid Judicmm. — D.]
NEW ATTIC. y
Magnes, in the passage above cited^ calls a pretended letter
of Epimenides to Solon an imposture, because it was written
in the Attic tongue, and even in the new Attic,^ Do but sub-
stitute the name of Phalaris instead of Epimenides, and 'tis
exactly the same indictment that I have made to the Epis-
tles. All the three, Epimenides, Solon, and Phalaris, were
contemporaries ; and if Epimenides's letter was detected to
be a cheat, because it was the new Attic, by the same rule
we must discard Phalaris's ; for Demetrius could know of no
newer Attic than that of Phalaris's Epistles. Nay, there's
nothing more common in the Greek writers than this dis-
tinction of the old and new Attic f as may be seen in
Etymologicon M., Eustathius, Prolegom. ad Aristoph., Syne-
sius De Insomniis, &c. The Attic language, says Lucian, has
in tract of time undergone many changes ; but the word airo-
if)pa<^ has had the luck to continue all along.^ So far was he
from believing it so fixed and enduring, as the Examiner
dreams it was.
The causes of the changes in the Attic language are not
so secret and abstruse, but that a man of less sagacity than
Mr. B. might easily have found them out. For, if we con-
sider the great conflux of strangers to that city; the vast
numbers of slaves from all nations, and of foreigners that
settled there ; the frequent wars that they had abroad, and
the hired troops that they often maintained at home ; and
their mighty trade both in their own port and all over
Greece ; we shall rather admire, that the alterations in their
dialect were so few, than affirm with Mr. B. that there were
none at all. In Demetrius Phalereus's time, at Olymp. ex.,
the inhabitants of Attica were 21,000 citizens, 10,000 fo-
reigners naturalised, and 400,000 slaves.^ Now, if there
were above xix. slaves and strangers to one citizen, as by
" Laer. in Epim. reypafiixhrjv 'ArOiSi {(pcoi'^), koI ravrrt viq..
^ 'Apx«^« 't**' *'^'« 'Ar&is.
"■ Lucian. de Apoph. IIoAAet iKrpi^dvrwv.
^ Athen. p. 272. [=11. 543. ed Schtv.—D.]
VOL. II. C
10 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
this account it plainly appears, this cause alone is more than
sufficient to introduce a great change in their dialect.
But the ingenious Mr. B. tells us, that the empire of the
Greeks did not a little contribute to the stability of their
language- {^. 710^ ^^^ is, as he afterwards expresses it, to
the keeping it entire and unmixed. Now, I am of opinion,
that if another man had been to name some of the causes
of the change and mixture of the Greek, or indeed of any-
other tongue, he would have pitched upon empire in the first
place. For even common sense will tell one, that if a nation
extends its conquests over other countries of a different
speech, and retain [s] them in subjection by standing armies
and garrisons, and by keeping all the civil power and public
offices in its own hands, it may extinguish indeed, by this
means, the ancient language of the conquered, but its own
too must needs have a little mixture, and imbibe something
from the tongue that it destroys : as, by pouring a great
quantity of water to a little wine,
you may quite destroy the wine, but yet the water will taste
of the mixture. It is evident, from the laws of Numa, and
the XII. Tables, and the Inscription on the Columna Duiliana,
compared with the plays of Terence, that the Roman lan-
guage had a greater change in the last c. years between
Duilius and Terence than in the cccc. between Numa and
Duilius. And the true reason of this was empire ; for before
Duilius's time, in the first Punic war, the Romans had got
nothing beyond Italy ; but in the following century they
carried their eagles almost all over Europe. So that the
vast confluence of people from all the provinces, the intro-
ducing of foreign artificers and captive slaves from every
quarter, and the natives that returned home from the expe-
ditions, made an innovation of language at Rome itself.
[* From the Cyclops of Aristias : see Suidas in 'A7r«Ae<ras, and Schw.
Animadv. in Athen. iv. Q6Q. — D.]
NEW ATTIC. 11
And if Alexander's conquests in Asia had not altogether as
great an effect upon the Greek tongue^ the reason was
because the empire was soon divided into so many branches.
But if Alexander had returned out of Asia, and placed the
seat of his empire in some city of Greece, and transmitted
it entire to posterity, the vast crowds of those that would
have come to court from the furthest parts of the monarchy
would have made the same alteration of the language there
as afterwards happened at Rome.
But Mr. B. is in great admiration at the stability of the
Greek tongue : it was incomparably, he says, the most fixed
and enduring of any that we are generally acquainted with
(p. 70). What languages we, that is, the Examiner and his
Assistant, are acquainted with, I know not; and therefore
I have nothing to say against this proposition. But when
he goes on, and tells us, that no other language that has been
of known and familiar use in the world (p. 71 •) has been as
durable as the Greek, and that it was absolutely the most
holding tongue in the world (p. 72.), the Examiner had better
have holden his tongue than have talked so crudely and
erroneously^ For we are sure, from the names of persons
and places mentioned in Scripture before the deluge, not to
insist upon other arguments, that the Hebrew was the primi-
tive language of mankind ; and it continued pure for above
3000 years, till the captivity into Babylon. Even from the
date of the Mosaic law to the prophecy of Ezekiel there's a
distance of 900 years ; yet the language of the two writers is
the very same. What can the Examiner shew like this,
either for continuance or purity, in the Greek tongue ? I
will mention one language more, and that is the Syriac.
The Holy Scripture informs us, that Laban the Syrian,
when he made a league Avith his son-in-law Jacob, called the
heap of stones, that, after the custom of those times, was
erected for a memorial of it, smTHtt? "i:i> Igar Sahdutha^y
y- Genes, xxxi. 47.
12 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
the heap of witness; which we are sure^ from the Syriac
versions of the Old and New Testament y continued to be pure
and vulgar Syriac for 2000 years ; nay, the very same lan-
guage is said to be preserved and spoken to this day by the
Maronites of Mount Libanus in Syria; so that the Syriac
has lasted for above 3400 years, with little or no variation.
The Examiner makes a mighty flourish about the sweet-
ness, and smoothness, and the music of the Greek tongue
(p. 70.) ; and assigns that as the reason of its lasting so
long. But, at that rate, he must make another speech about
the sweetness and smoothness of the Eastern tongues, since
they lasted much longer. But the true reason of that long
continuance both of Hebrew and Syriac was because the
nations continued unmixed and separate from strangers ;
and the preservation of the Greek language, though not in
the same degree of purity and duration with the two other,
is wholly owing to the same cause. For, till the time of
Alexander, the wars and the business of the Greeks were
for the most part among one another, and not with foreign
nations. So that, though the particular dialects were per-
petually changed and diversified by their mutual conquests
and commerce, yet the same language for the main con-
tinued still. But when the Roman government was esta-
blished among them, immediately the Latin names of offices,
and terms of law, &c. overrun the old Greek language ; so
that we have Dictionaries of barbarous words of Greece,
almost as voluminous as those of the true ones.
Mr. B. avers, that we have Greek books, ivrit by authors
at almost 2000 years' distance, which disagree less in phrase
and manner of speech than any two English ones at 200 years'
distance (p. 71)' But Mr. B. is not aware, that the reason
of this was not, because the same phrases and manner of
speech continued all that while in civil and popular use, but
purely because the later writers would imitate the old ones,
as the moderns now imitate Cicero and Virgil. This is
evident from the innumerable Greek Lexicons and Scho-
NEW ATTIC.
13
liasts, some yet preserved, but most of them lost, the design
of which was to explahi the obsolete words in the old writers
of verse and prose by such other Greek words as were then
in use. For Homer and Archilochus, Thucydides and He-
rodotus, were not thoroughly understood by the vulgar
Greeks in Gppian's time, but only by the learned. Nay,
even Oppian himself, who took the allowed privilege of using
antiquated words, (as, among us, Spenser and Milton did,
though a little more sparingly,) could not be understood in
his own town, except by the learned. And, to shew farther
that it was imitation only, that makes the Greek books of
different ages so alike, that general manner of speech called
KOLvrj BtdXeKTOff, the common dialect, which the writers after
Alexander's time commonly used, was never at any time, or
in any place, the popular idiom, but perfectly a language
of the learned, almost as the Latin is now. I say almost,
because they did not tie themselves up so strictly to imita-
tion, but that still their style had some leaven from the age
that each of them lived in. 'Tis the felicity, therefore, of
the Latin tongue, that it's no longer in popular use ; and
it*s more fitted, upon that very account, to be the universal
language of learning, because it's no longer liable to those
changes to which living languages are naturally obnoxious,
but, by being dead, it's become immortal. The Greek,
indeed, would have done as well for that purpose ; but there
ought to be but one such language, and the Latin has
already got the possession. As for our English tongue, the
great alterations it has undergone in the two last centuries
are principally owing to that vast stock of Latin w^ords
which we have transplanted into our own soil : which being
now in a manner exhausted, one may easily presage that it
will not have such changes in the two next centuries. Nay,
it were no difficult contrivance, if the public had any regard
to it, to make the English tongue immutable, unless here-
after some foreign nation shall invade and overrun us.
I have now examined Mr. B.'s general reflections upon
the stability of the Greek tongue, which he has made so
14 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
sinistrously, and with so very little judgment, as if he aspired
after the character of Homer's Margites,
who knew a great many things, but all of them wrong. But
let us see what exceptions he has made to my particular
instances of Phalaris's recent language.
I. The first that I had produced is out of the first
Epistle, TTpoTpeirco, to accuse; which Mr. B. perhaps be-
lieves he has answered in an harangue of four pages (p. 208,
209, 210, 211). But, if I may be allowed to speak freely,
'tis such miserable chicanery, "tis so much below even him-
self {I compliment him when I say so (p. 54.), to return him
his own civility,) that I cannot abuse my reader's patience
in winnowing and sifting it, since the whole is nothing but
chaff. He had translated TrpoTpeira) to exhort; but I ob-
served, that in this place neither sense nor syntax would
allow of that signification. As for the syntax , he has not so
much as offered any example, either Greek or Latin, where
7rpoTp€7rco, in the sense of exhortation, admits a dative case
after it, as it has here ; yet, however, he still contends that
the sense of the passage will admit that meaning of the word.
And, to give him his just commendation, he has taken the
right way to put an end to any dispute ; for a man that talks
at that rate resolves not to be confuted. If I say that grass
is green, or snow's white, I am still at the courtesy of my
antagonist ; for if he should rub his forehead, and deny it, I
do not see by what syllogism I could refute him. So, if the
learned Examiner shall still insist upon't, that the sense of
the place is to exhort, I have nothing further to urge, but
must leave him either to be laughed at, or pitied, or ad-
mired, as his readers are disposed towards him.
I had observed, that the Latin version of Phalaris, which
[* From Alcib. ii. of Plato, Op. iii. 116. ed. 1826. Buttman would read,
Tl6\?C TiTrlaraTo epya, kukcos, k. t. K. ; and so the line is given among the Frag.
Horn. ed. Ern. — D.]
NEW ATTIC. 15
is falsely ascribed to Cujacius (for both original and trans-
lation of this book have the luck to be fathered upon wrong
authors), interprets TrporpiTrco to accuse; so that Mr. B.
might have learned from thence the true meaning of this
passage : but it so happened, that that edition, though in the
public library at Oxon, lay all the while concealed from our
late Editor, that then lived there. Upon this, Mr. B. com-
mences a very heavy charge against me : 'tis a greater
blemish to me, he says, than want of judgment ; Fm a man of
extraordinary confidence, that can so boldly assert, what it's
impossible I should know ; that would face him down, that he
never saw what he knows himself to have often seen and used,
(that is, before he finished his Edition of Phalaris) ; and at
last he avers, that indeed the edition of Cujacius was one of
those printed copies he meant in his Preface (p. 212). Now,
this is a very tender controversy, and I'm afraid the very
softest handling of it will touch somebody to the quick.
Honour and reputation are nice things, and if once they
happen to receive a flaw, they are not easily repaired. I will
not make myself an arbitrator here; but the reader shall
judge between Mr. B. and me. The words of his Preface
are these ', there are tivo versions of Phalaris that I had
before me; the one by Naogeorgus, published in the year
1557 ; the other, as it seems, by a certain Jesuit, for the use
of their schools, in the year 1614. The Jesuit is pretty
elegant in his language, but he is too loose and diffuse ; so that
he always differs from the style of the author, and often from
the sense. There's a third version too by Francis Aretine.^
Now, I must own, that at that time, when I first published
my Dissertation, 1 had not seen this edition of the Jesuit
that Mr, B. here speaks of; and I believed it had a trans-
lation peculiar to it. For I trusted to Mr. B.'s account,
that the Jesuit had made it, and consequently that it could
not be the same with Cujacius's. I concluded, therefore, he
" Versiones . . duae, altera a . . Naogeorgo . . edita an. 1557; altera Ji quodam,
ut videtur, Jesuita in usum Schol. Soc. Jes. 1614. . . . Jesuita in dictione non
inornatus est, sed laxus, &c.
16 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
had never seen Cujacius's version; because he expressly
says he made use of three only, that of Naogeorgus, and the
Jesuit's, and Aretine's. And where now was my extra-
ordinary confidence, in saying he had not seen the edition of
Cujacius ? and how was it impossible that I should know it?
I believed my inference to be true and logical ; and I'll put
it into the form of a syllogism, that Mr. B. may examine
whether it agree with his System of Logic.
Mr. B. made use of three versions only; one made by
Naogeorgus, another by a Jesuit, and a third by Aretine :
But Cujacius's version was neither made by Naogeorgus,
nor by a Jesuit, nor by Aretine :
Therefore Mr. B. made no use of Cujacius's version.
If it be such a blemish to me, and such extraordinary
confidence, to pretend, by virtue of this syllogism, that
Cujacius's edition was then unknown to Mr. B., I shall have
the worse opinion of all books of logic for 't, not excepting
Mr. B.'s own system. I had a small suspicion too, besides,
that the editor had not seen that edition in the public
library, because it is not entered in the Catalogue under the
title of Phalaris, but of Epistolce, and Cvjacius. So that a
person that does not otherways know of that edition, cannot
find it in that Catalogue, unless by a great chance, or by
reading it all over. I believed likewise, that Mr. B. had not
seen the edition of Aldus ; because Aldus's text is sometimes
better than that which Mr. B. has followed. I had that
opinion then of his judgment, that I supposed he had not
seen those things, because he did not give them the pre-
ference; as indeed it was a third argument to me that he
had not seen Cujacius's, because he did not follow him in
the true translation of the word irpoTpeTrco. Thus 1 reasoned
at that time ; but I am now sensible that I argued weakly
enough ; for I have found by tedious experience, that he can
stumble upon things without seeing them, and see and
handle things without understanding them.
The reader has now a fair and ingenuous account, on my
part : let us see if Mr. B.'s have the same characters of can-
NEW ATTIC. 17
dour and veracity. He affirms, with great warmth and ve-
hemence, that he had {prcs manibus) before him and in his
hands both the edition of the Jesuit and that of Cujacius;
and he adds too, that the version ascribed to Cujacius is
exactly the same with that put out by the Jesuit (p. 212).
Which is very true, for the Jesuit only reprinted it. Give
me leave now, without calling Mr. B.'s honour in question,
to argue a little for dispute's sake, that, notwithstanding this
repeated asseveration, yet he had not Cujacius by him.
Cujacius was printed at Geneva, in the year 1606. And the
Jesuit's edition, that Mr. B. used, was printed at Ingolstadt,
1614. Now, Mr. B. tells the world in his Preface, that the
Jesuit made that version; and the Jesuit, he says, is
elegant in his Latin, but differs from the style of the original.
But how could Mr. B. suppose that the Jesuit made it at
Ingolstadt, 1614, if he then knew that exactly the same
version was printed viii. years before at Geneva? If he had
both the books before his hands, he could not possibly make
such a horrible blunder. Those that have a just esteem of
his wit and sagacity will never believe, no not upon his own
word, that he could be guilty of such wretched stupidity.
There must needs be some other way, then, for solving this
difficulty, though I confess it's too hard for me. I refer
it, therefore, to the reader's consideration ; and if he find it
gravels him too, it may call a certain verse to his memory;
Accipe nunc Danaum insidias, et crimine ab uno
Disce omnes.^
II. Another word of a recent stamp was Ovydrijp, which
in Phalaris signifies a maiden ; and I took that to be a mani-
fest token of a later Greek : and, that it might not be sus-
pected that I put a wrong meaning upon the word, I
observed that even Tzetzes took it in the same sense that I
do. But Mr. B., with the assistance of two Concordances,
which shewed him the word dvydrrjp in the Old and New
Testament, has found out an answer. For he says, that in
[* Virg. ^n. ii. 65.— D.]
VOL. II. D
18 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Prov. xxxi. 29., IloWal 6vyaTep€<; eKTrjaavTO ttKovtov,
many daughters have got riches, 6vyaT€p6<; must mean wo-
men or maidens {]p. 67). Now, the original here is mD^
daughters ; and it's well known to any one that ever perused
the Septuagint, that they often translate word for word,
though the phrase that results from it be against the genius
of the Greek tongue. This has so filled that version with
Hebraisms, that one may affirm Demosthenes himself could
not have thoroughly understood it; and the Greek Fathers
oftentimes mistook the sense of it, for want of skill in the
Hebrew. What does Mr. B. mean, then, by this instance
out of Proverbs ? For if his Sicilian prince have Hebraisms
in his style, here's a new argument to shew him a cheat ;
and we must impeach him not only for Atticising, but for
Hebraising too. But FU leave Mr. B. to manage this new
topic : and go on to his instances from the New Testament ;
where our Saviour says to the woman, Odpcrei, dvyarep' rj
irio-TL^ aov G-eacoKe ere, daughter, be of good comfort ; thy faith
hath made thee whole (p. 67).^ Where Mr. B. supposes
Ovyarep means not properly daughter, but woman. Now,
if we view this argument on every side, we shall find it in
all respects worthy of its author. For, were it true here
that Ovyarep means woman, it would be another Hebraism
or Syriasm ; which, instead of supporting Phalaris's credit,
is enough to overthrow it. Nay, were it a genuine Greek
phrase, this would still come very short of being a good
answer. For I accuse this Sophist of a recent style, much
later than the language of the true Phalaris's time; and
Mr. B., in justification of him, brings a passage of the Evan-
gelists, that come dc. years after Phalaris. But, if it will
give him any satisfaction, I'll allow that the Sophist himself
was as ancient as the Evangelists : no wonder, then, if the
same use of the word Ovydrrjp should be found both in him
and them. But yet I humbly conceive it would not follow,
that the old Phalaris would use it so. But the worst of all is
» Mat. ix. 22. Mark, v. 34. Luke, viii. 48.
NEW ATTIC. 19
still behind, that Ov<yaTep in the Gospels does not signify
woman, but properly and strictly daughter. For it was the
common way in conversation, not only in the Eastern coun-
tries, but every where else, when persons of age and autho-
rity spoke kindly to their juniors, to say son, or daughter;
and the others again used to say father, or mother ; though
there was no kindred at all between them. So Helena in
Homer calls Telemachus son ;
Awpov rot Koi iyoi), t6kvov (piXe, tovto 8lBco/jll.^
And her husband Menelaus too accosts him in the same lan-
guage;
Ai/j,aTO<; eZ? ayadoco, <f>l\oy TeKO<;, oV ayopev6L<i.\
On the contrary, Euryalus greets Ulysses with the title of
father ;
Aevp' aye koX au, ^etve Trdrep, ireCprjaaL aeOXwv.X
And so Bacchis says to Chremes in Terence ;
Asperum,
Pater, hoc est ; aliud lenius sodes vide.^
There are other instances innumerable of this custom in
conversation. Our Saviour therefore called the woman
daughter, as Eli said to Samuel my son. But must we infer
from thence that the words son and daughter may signify
absolutely man and woman, as Ovydrrjp does in Phalaris ?
'Tis an inference that may become Mr. B. ; but if other
authors should follow his fashion, it would sit but scurvily
upon them. But he has another invention yet in reserve;
and it's best to make way for him, for he seems to be in
a rapture with it. 'Tis probable, he says, that in the more
ancient MSS. of Phalaris it was written contractedly Oepai,
[♦ Od. XV. 125.— D.] [f Od. iv. 611.— -D.]
[X Od. viii. 145., where Laodamas, not Euryalus, is the speaker. — D.]
[§ Heaut III. i. 49.— D.]
20 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
which may be read either dvyaripaq or Oepairalvaf; (p. 67).
And being full blown with the opinion of his wonderful
acuteness in discovering this rare expedient^ He will ask, he
says, an insulting question, If our great dealer in MSS.
did not observe this, where is his sagacity ? if he observed it,
without owning it, where is his sincerity? Why, they are
just where they were before this question was put; and I
dare warrant that neither of them are in danger of being
hurt by 't. For I deny that there's any such abbreviation
used in any Greek MSS. as Oepa^; for 6epa7raiva<;. This
the Examiner should have first proved, before he pretended
to argue from it. But he'll never be able to do that, nor to
produce one single instance, no not out of all the MSS. of
the Bodley. For abbreviations were never made use of but
in words that come frequently; so that both labour and
room was saved by their repeated contractions : as irp was
written for Trarrjp, avo<; for avOpwrro^; ; and in the old copies
of the Bible, ^9, ^9, %9, for 6eo<;, Kvpio<i, ;^pfc(TT09, because
those words come in almost in every verse. But if a writer
should abbreviate such words as Oepairalva^, which scarce
comes once in a whole book, he would save himself but one
moment's labour, and make his copy unintelligible. 'Tis a
mere dream, then, of our Examiner, to think Oepa^ may
stand for 6epa7ralva<; : and His just as if he should say that
TTp may stand for Trprjarrjp, or avo<; for avBepiKOf;, So
seasonably has he put his insulting question, at a time when
he may think he comes very well off, if himself be not in-
sulted on.
III. Another instance of language which the true Pha-
laris would not have used was iraihayv ipacrrai; for the
Sophist speaks of parents who love their own children ; but
in the old time those words had a lewd signification. But
to this the gentleman replies, that to him the argument seems
to lie quite the other way. For in later times the words were
scandalous, so that a Sophist would not have put 'em in
Phalaris's mouth ; but in Phalaris's time the expression might
NEW ATTIC. 21
be innocent (p. 65). True, a Sophist of learning and good
sense would have put proper words in the Tyrant's mouth ;
but this sorry declaim er, as he has committed many worse
blunders, so he might be guilty of this. We may know his
character, from that wretched ignorance of history and anti-
quity which he so often discovers ; and 'tis a just punish-
ment upon him to have such translators and such defenders.
But let us see how Mr. B. proves that in the true Phalaris*s
time the words had an innocent meaning. When Phalaris,
he says, ivould express the scandalous love of boys, he does
not use this word, as later authors do ; for he calls Lycinus
iropvov iv iraLdl, but not iraiSepaaTTjv (p. 65). Here our
learned Examiner takes iropvov eV nraLorl to be equivalent
to iraihepaa-rrj'^ ; and so indeed his translation expresses it,
cum pueris scortatorem esse,^ But his Assistant methinks
might have taught him better ; that iropvo^ is not scortator,
but scortum, cincBdus, Had he ever read JEschines's Oration
against Timarchus, he would have met with a dozen in-
stances; and indeed it's never taken in any other sense.
The true version, therefore, of iropvov iv iraial is inter
pueros cincedum, a catamite when you was a boy. So that
this argument, instead of shewing that the Sophist would
put proper words in Phalaris's mouth, has only shewn that
a late Editor puts improper words in the Sophist's mouth.
To convince Mr. B. that iraihepaa-T-qf; had no innocent
meaning even so early as Phalaris's time, Solon, a contem-
porary of the Tyrant's, forbade it by law to all servants. He
made a law, says Plutarch, ^ AovKov /nr) ^rfpaXoLcj^eLv, firfBe
iraihepacTTelv, that servants should not love boys. And that
the vile practice of it was in Sicily then, as well as in
Athens, Mr. B., who believes the Epistles genuine, may be
satisfied from the iv., which we have newly cited -, for if
Lycinus was nr6pvo<^, there was somebody else irauhepao-Trj^i,
And they that have a lower opinion of those Epistles may
be convinced of it by another token, because Chariton and
^ Ep. iv. « Plut Solone.
22 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
MelanippuSj two Agrigen tines and conspirators against Pha-
laris, are infamous for TracBepaaTLa, though the devil's
oracle celebrated them for it ;d
EvBaificov XapLTcov koL MeXdvLTnrofi €<j>v,
Geia<i rj<yr]Tr)pe<i i(f)7j/jLepL0L(; (pcXorrjrof;.
But Mr. B. further objects, that iralBcov ipaaral and
iraiSepaaral sound very differently (p. 65). Musically argued
indeed ! there's a very sounding syllable, cov, that makes
them differ extremely. But we'll allow Mr. B. to be a
good judge of sounds, if he'll allow others to be tolerable
judges of sen^e ; and in that the words are so exactly alike,
that the nicest writers never thought of distinguishing them,
-^schines, therefore, when he speaks of the same law of
Solon, does not use iraihepacrrelv, as Plutarch does, but
7ratSb<; ipav:^ and even Plutarch himself in another place
expresses it so, AovKol^ ipav appevcov iraiScov aTrelTreS Let
them sound, then, never so differently, they are equivalent
we see in signification.
Mr. B. concludes this point with what he thinks to be his
strongest defence; that 7ratB6pa(jTr]<; is used in Plato in a vir-
tuous sense (p. 66) . True, perhaps; but let us see how he proves
it. Why, he brings a passage out of Plato's Symposion, TIdv-
T(0<; . . . o TOLOVTO<; iraihepaa-rr}^ re koI ^Ckepaa-rr)^ ^i^verai,.
But Mr. B. has once shewn us already,? how very skilful
he is in Plato's writings; and his second essay upon them
does not degenerate from his first. The matter lies thus :
the subject of that dialogue of Plato's is an encomium of
love ; and each of the guests makes a set speech in its com-
mendation. But we must not suppose that all the speeches
are philosophical, and becoming the mouth of Socrates or
Plato himself; but they are suited to the characters of the
several persons that speak them. Some of them, therefore,
•^ See Athenaeus [V. 179. ed. Schw., where ayi]Trip€5 i(l>a/j.€plois (piXSraros. —
D.], iElian, Euseb. Praep. Evang,
^ ^schin. c. Timarchum. AovXov iXevOepov iraiSos /i^ ipav.
^ Plut. in 'EpwTiKw. « See here, vol. i. p. 326.
NEW ATTIC.
23
are lewd enough, according to the company. For even
Agatho himself, the master of the feast, was a catamite, as
appears by the dialogue itself, and by the old comedians and
others. Among the rest, then, Aristophanes the comic poet
is introduced, making an oration about love. And he tells a
long fable, that at first mankind were all made double, with
two heads, four arms, four legs, &c., and there were three
sorts of them, some were double men, some double women,
and some hermaphrodites. Afterwards, upon some offence
they had committed, Jupiter split them all into two's ; from
whence arises now in mankind that natural desire of some
companion, as his other half, to perfect his being ; and even
all the varieties of that desire proceed from the same cause.
For of those that in the former state were hermaphrodites,
the male half still desires the woman, and all such are now
lovers of women, and adulterers ; and the female half desires
the man, and such are lovers of men, and adulteresses. But
of those that in the original state were double men, both the
halves now are lovers of males; so that when young they
are catamites, and when grown up they are TracSepacrTal,
lovers of boys : and of those that were double women, both
are now kTatplarptai, women lovers of women. This is the
substance of Aristophanes's speech ; and as it's observed by
some of the ancients, that Plato in his Symposion makes
Aristophanes have a drunken hiccough, taking that revenge
upon the poet for abusing his master Socrates; so I am
persuaded, that from the same motive he has put such a
speech in that poet's mouth, as shews him to be, what he
really was, a very debauched fellow. And is^not Mr. B.,
now, a man of wonderful judgment, to produce a passage
out of this speech of Aristophanes, as an instance that
rrraiSepaarrjf; has a virtuous sense ? What sort of sense was
in himself, then, I leave others to judge. For if the iraLhe-
paaral there has an innocent meaning, by the same rule the
fjbOL')(oi, and fjLot')(^€VTpcai, and iracpLo-rptac, must be harm-
less names too, which perhaps Mr. B. will not be willing to
affirm. But he says, that the speaker himself professes
24 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
afterwards that he meant not those words of a lascivious
love (p. 66.) : which is just after his usual way, to defend
one error by another. For the very words that he cites
there prove the contrary to what he draws from them.
Aristophanes, to make the fable he had told look probable,
describes some instances of such vehement lovers, that the
one cannot live at ease one moment out of the other's com-
pany. In which cases, says he, the pleasure of venery does
not seem a competent cause of it; but the true reason is,
that every such couple were the numerical halves that made
up one complete person in the former state ; whereby they
have such a natural propension to one another, that, if it
were possible, they would be one body again. Is it not
evident here, now, that a lascivious love is supposed, only it
is not allowed as an adequate cause ? Read but Aristo-
phanes's own plays, and the character that's given of him
in this very Symposion,^ and then say if his meaning can be
so chaste here.*
We have seen now what a rare commentator upon Plato
our learned Examiner is ; and / shall leave him to be scourged
(p. 66.), not only by the Platonists, as he did me, but by
every one that understands good sense and decorum. But
yet, after all, I am far from asserting that TraiBepacrTTjf; and
iraihiKa are never innocently meant in Plato and other Socrati-
cal writers. For the word was used by them metaphorically ;
and though it had better been let alone, and no scandal been
^ *ApiffTo^av-^s, ^ Trepl AiSuvcov Kol 'A(ppodlrr}V iracra diarpi^'ff.
[* On Eurip. Supplic. v. 1088. (1098.) natScov t ipacTT^s ^v, Markland
observes : " Suspiciosae significationis locutio videri potest, nam valSuv ipourr^s
" nefario sensu ponit Aristophanes Plut. 154. eodem quo iraidepaa-r^s: et alii.
" CI. Bentleius ex hac locutione iraiSwv ipaffT^s argumentum duxerat contra t^v
" yvr}<ri6Tr}Ta Epistolarum Phalaridis. Hie locus Phalaridem defendit, satis
" aliunde reprehensibilem. Necesse est ut ttuISmv hoc loco idem sit quod
" TiKVuv, liberorum, non puerorum, a lover or desirer of children." To this
passage of Markland's commentary the following note is added in the ed. of
1811: " Confer Ion. 67. "Hkouci irphs ixavrcV * hiT6XK<t}vos rdSe, "Epcari iralSuv.
" Dan. 6. oZtos S' ipuni iraiths apcrevos o'xe^ety. Ion. 1246. IlaiSci^i' yap ekdova'
" us ipov tol^ov TTctpo. PoRSONUS." D.]
NEW ATTIC. 25
given by it, yet in [it] self the metaphor was proper and just.
For a philosopher may be said to be the true TralBoyv
ipao-T7}<;, in opposition to the others ; since what they admire
in beauty out of impure lust, he loves and reverences as an
image of the divine beauty. But even this is a certain argu-
ment that TralBcov epaaral could not in those ages signify
lovers of their own children, (as it does in Phalaris's
Epistles,) no not metaphorically. Because there was no-
thing to take such a metaphor from; for though sodomy
was an epidemical vice in those unhappy ages of the world,
yet the abomination of a father with his own son, such a
horrid mixture of sodomy and incest, was never spoken of
even then, nor had any name. Nay, though we should
suppose that such a complicate wickedness had been prac-
tised among them, yet the name would have been even then
accounted too foul and abominable to be employed for a
modest metaphor.
IV. Mr. B. has had the privilege of committing a great
number of mistakes ; and, upon a review, I do not find he
has yet made out that I have writ one single word amiss,
except where, by a small slip of the memory, Buda was put
for Belgrade. Four hundred pages, then, have been all
spent in refuting his abuses and errors; a very great ex-
ercise both of patience and good-nature. For a recompense
of all which tedious labour, I desire but one small favour of
him, that he'll give me leave to make the next mistake : I'll
promise him it shall be no shameful one, and it shall be the
only time I'll trouble him in this way, in all the controversy
that I have with him. Among the words that I believed
had an innovated sense in the Epistles of Phalaris, there
were Trpohlhwfii, to give beforehand, and Slcokco, to follow as
a friend, not as a pursuer. I could not call to mind at that
time any old writer that had used them so; and the press
staying for more copy (for the whole Dissertation was
carried thither leaf by leaf, while the ink was scarce dry on
them), I had no leisure to make any search. I will freely
VOL. II. E
26 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
own^ therefore^ to Mr. B., that my memory^ which is none
of the best^ deceived me here. For I had formerly read
those very passages that he produces, and when I read them
I understood them in the same meaning that he does,
though at that time they were quite out of my mind.
But though I was mistaken by a deceitful memory, yet
the glory that Mr. B. acquires by correcting the error is too
light to be put in the balance against his faults. Though I
shall not go about to make it less, but give him and his
admirers leave to magnify it as much as they can. He has
told me, that I expose myself to be corrected by every one
that can turn an index or a lexicon (p. 68). And, to explain
himself, he adds in his margin this passage of Quintilian;^
which serves for no other purpose there, but to shew he
understood it not. For Quintilian does not speak of such
indexes as books have now-a-days ; but, after he had named
several of the Greek poets. Homer, Antimachus, Euphorion,
&c., / pass over the names of the rest, says he, for there's
nobody so destitute of the means of knowing them, but he may
copy the catalogue of them out of a library. This shews us,
that, in those days too, the libraries had catalogues of the
books belonging to them; but what relation has that to
lexicons and our modern indexes? Mr. B. presently excuses
himself for the multitude of quotations that fill the margin of
that odd work of his. And indeed, after such a citation
from Quintilian, it was very seasonable to beg that pardon,
though upon another account than he was aware of. But,
to forgive our Examiner this blunder, 'tis very true what he
says, that a man that can turn an index or a lexicon might
easily correct those mistakes of mine. For those significa-
tions of 8lq)K(o and TrpoSiSayfii, which I had then forgot,
are taken notice of in the Greek Concordances and Con-
stantine's Lexicon. Mr. B., then, has taught the world
nothing, nor improved learning in any sort; for the things
^ Quint. X. 1. Nee sane quisquam est tam procul a cognitione eorum
remotus, ut non indicem certe ex bibliotheca sumptum transferre in libros suos
possit.
NEW ATTIC. 27
were known, we see, a hundred years ago. And it*s pretty
remarkable, that, after all the clamour of the Examiner, and
some inferior tools that have seconded him, that I know
nothing but out of indexes and lexicons ; J yet the only mis-
take that their united learning could convict me of, had
been avoided, if I really were such a turner of indexes and
lexicons.
A mistake through mere forgetfulness, and but once or
very seldom committed, has been always esteemed one of
the best sort, and to leave the least blemish upon the author.
For if that were enough to disgrace a writer, nobody could
escape the infamy, except those that were inspired. If I do
not make false judgments of things, and if I reason truly
from premises, for a bare error of the memory I shall not be
solicitous, but fairly trust my reputation to the present age
and posterity. Whatever the world shall think of my per-
formances, I shall acquiesce in the censure. As I do not
write books for fame, so I am not concerned about the
reception they shall meet with ;
Valeat res ludicra, si me
Palma negata macrum, donata reducit opimum.^
However, when I consider what the things are that among
the best judges raise or depress the character of a man of
letters, I had much rather be found guilty of forgetting those
unusual significations of irpoBlBcofj^c and Bccokco, than of
managing the matter as Mr. B. has done. For, of eight
examples that he has brought of the latter of those words, six
are nothing to the purpose. The thing that I had said was
this, that Bia)Kco then only signified to pursue, tvhen that
which fled feared and shunned the pursuer : as where Achil-
les pursues Hector in Homer ;
J Virum in volvendis lexicis satis diligentem. [From the Preface to Alsop's
Fabularum jEsopicarum Delectus : see note on Bentley's Preface to the present
work, p. xliv. — D.]
[* Hor. Epist. II. i. ISO.-r-D.]
28 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Tfj pa TrapaBpafjberrjv, cjyevyeov, 6 8' oiriarOe Bi,cok(ov'
npocrde fJL6V eV^Xo? 6^ev<ye, hl(OK€ he ficv fjuey a/juelvcov.*^
And Mr. B., in refutation of this^ has produced six instances
where hiooKai does not at all mean to pursue, but, in a meta-
phorical sense, to desire, to court, to seek. And what are all
these to the point ? I spoke of that sense of Blookco when it
signifies to pursue. ^Twas the very supposition, that it had
the meaning of pursuing ; which notion, when it belonged to
it, was accompanied, as I then thought, with another of
being shunned. As for the figurative sense of desiring and
seeking, that I had not forgot, for 'tis the most common ac-
ceptation of it. The only true way, then, to answer me was,
to bring an instance where it means a pursuit, but yet with-
out being shunned ; as when one friend pursues or follows
after another. And I own that two of his instances plainly
prove this ; but the other six, that are all metaphor, among
which are those out of Scripture, are not at all pertinent
to the business ; and they are a greater evidence of his bad
judgment than mine are of my bad memory.
Mr. B. makes a mighty outcry (p. 62, 63.), as if my for-
getting a Greek word in the Septuagint or the New Testa-
ment was to subvert the authority of them : and he has an
inquiry to make of me, whether I think my Philosophical
Lectures serve more to the establishment of religion than my
criticisms do to overthrow it ? (p. &J, 68.) The gentleman
has told us what disposition he's of, for he thinks ridicule
the most diverting thing in the world (p. 285). But, I
humbly conceive that he had better employ his talent at
grimace and banter upon other occasions than where the
Scripture is concerned. For it shews no great reverence to
those sacred writings, to bring them, though it be but as
accessaries, into farce and ridicule. And perhaps it's no
great discretion in him to cast such an oblique slur upon my
Lectures against Atheism. They were preached upon an
[* //. xxii. 157.— D.]
NEW ATTIC, 29
establishment of the great and good Mr. Boyle^ to whom
this gentleman has the honour to be related; and though
they are much below what I could wish them, and what the
subject of them deserves, yet the world has received them
favourably, and they are translated into more languages
than one. He had better, therefore, have omitted this little
affront upon those sermons ; lest the readers, calling to
mind the founder of that lecture, should be in\dted to make
a comparison between him and another of his name.
The most excellent Bishop Pearson had designed a new
edition of Ignatius's Epistles, with an ample commentary;
a specimen of which posthumous work has been published
by the learned Dr. Smith, and the whole is earnestly ex-
pected from him. For though it has not passed the last
hand of the author, yet it's every way worthy of him, and
the very dust of his writings is gold. In that published
specimen there is this annotation upon the words of Igna-
tius, TON TMA^ XO^IXANTA. Vox Paulina, ex 2 Tim.
iii. 15. Ta Swd/juevd ae aocpta-ao €t9 o-corrjpLav. Quae te
possunt sapientem reddere. Neque ante eum vox activa eo
sensu reperitur cum accusativo personce. Where the Bishop
positively affirms, that o-o^l^eiv, in the acceptation o/" making
wise, is a word of St. Paul's framing ; for before him nobody
used it in that sense. But in this his memory deceived him ;
for, as Dr. Smith observed to me, there is the very same use
of the word in Psalm xviii. 8. [7.] 'H. fiaprvpla Kvpiov Tnarr]
ao(j)i^ovcra vriiria : and Psal. civ. 22. Kal tov<; irpeo-^vrepov^
avTov (ro(j)Lcrai.^ What shall we say now to this ? for the
Bishop's case is exactly mine. His lordship had forgot one
word in the Bible, and I had forgot another. Will the
Examiner insult upon that great man, as he has done upon
me ? I will only change the persons, and we'll see how his
insulting and grimace becomes him. The Bishop avers that
St. Paul is the first that uses crotpi^etv for making wise.
[* " Hesiod. 0pp. et D. 649. [647. ed. Gaisford. P. M. G. i. — D.] ff^ffo-
*' tpiffixevos." PoRSON, in his Tracts, ^c. ed. by Kidd, p. 316. — D.]
30 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
What shall we do then for the Septuagint ? At this rate^
that translation must come after St. Paul ; so that the writ-
ings that carry their names must be ccc. years younger than
we Christians suppose ^em. And that version ascribed to the
Lxx. cannot be an ancient work, but loas penned by some
recent Sophist. What shall we say to this ? Shall we allow
Bishop Pearson to be a scurvy critic, or shall we, in tender-
ness to his honour, give up our Greek Bibles? Perhaps the
Bishop may for this once be mistaken (p. 62.*) : but I have 07ie
inquiry more to make of him on this occasion, and that is this.
Whether he thinks his Exposition of the Creed serves more to
the establishment of religion than his criticisms do to over-
throw it ? For is he not positive that ao<^i^eLv in that sense
was first used by St. Paul ? And is not the very same word
in the same sense to be met with twice in the Septuagint?
Should not so profound a Grecian and divine as he is have
looked a little into the Old Testament, before he had pro-
nounced such rash and groundless assertions? Could men
imagine one who writes at this rate to have any meaning, they
would think he had a very ill one ; but the whole management
of his controversies clears him from all suspicions of meaning
and design (p. 67). These are the very words of Mr. B.,
only the Bishop and his writings are substituted for me and
mine : not that I make any comparison of my poor papers
with that great man's incomparable works; but I would
shew that Mr. B.'s argument holds alike against us both.
And Mr. B. must needs acknowledge now that / have one
good page (Pref.) in this edition of my Dissertation^ as well
as I had in the former ; for, being his own, I think I know
his humour so well^ that he cannot but be pleased with it.
But, to put an end to this article. The only thing that
Mr. B. has said well upon this head is about the meaning of
two words ; which may prove, indeed, that I was mistaken,
[* Old ed. " P. 60." — a mistake, as I find by referring to Boyle's book.
-D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. ' 31
but it does not at all defend his Phalaris. For of the five
words that I instanced in, the greater part do still keep their
ground: and if two strings be broken^ here are three yet
left^ that will hold as strongly as all the five. If the Sicilian
prince, therefore, has no better a champion than Mr. B. is,
his case will still appear to be desperate. For the wild
question that the Examiner puts to me, Hoiv do you know
but those words might be in use in Phalaris's time, and be
dropped aftefi'wards ivhen the learned age came on, and be
revived again as that declined (p. 61.) ? though it deserve no
answer, yet it has one. For we know from the laws of
Solon, who was Phalaris's contemporary, that the language
of the Epistles was not the language of that time. Nay,
though we had not those remains of Solon's to shew,
Mr. B.*s suppositions would still be very infirm ones. For
here are three revolutions of the same words, used, dropped,
revived, that are all precariously supposed, without any
manner of proof. A way of argumentation that some young
writers (Pref.) may make a dust with, but then their works
will hardly live to be old ones.
XIV.
But, should we connive at his using the Attic
dialect, and say not a word of those flaws and in-
novations in his style, yet there is one thing still, that,
I fear, will more difficultly be forgiven him, that is,
a very slippery way in telling of money. , This is a
tender point, and will make every body shy and cau-
tious of entertaining him. In the lxxxv. Epistle he
talks of a hundred talents, ToCkoLvra ixarov ; of fifteen
more, in the cxviii. ; eight, in the cxxxvii. ; seven, in
the civ. ; ^ve, in the cxliii. ; and three in the xcv.
These affairs being transacted in the middle of Sicily,
and all the persons concerned being natives and in-
32 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
habitants there, who would not be ready to conclude
that he meant the talent of the country ? since he
gives not the least hint of his meaning a foreign sum.
If a bargain were made in England, to pay so many
pounds or marks, and the party should pretend at
last that he meant Scots marks or French livres, few,
I suppose, would care to have dealings with him.
Now, this is the very case in so many of these Letters,
In the Lxxth, indeed, he is more punctual with Poly-
clitus his physician ; for he speaks expressly of Attic
money, (Jbv^tahccg 'Arri%,oig 'rivTs, 50,000 Attic drachms.
But this is so far from excusing him, that it is a plain
condemnation out of his own mouth. For if it was
necessary to tell Polyclitus that he meant the Attic
money, and not the Sicilian, why had he not the
same caution and ingenuity towards all the rest?
We are to know, that in Sicily, as in most other
countries, the name and value of their coins, and the
way of reckoning by sums, were peculiar. The sum
tale?it in the Sicilian account contained no more in
specie than three Attic drachms, or Roman denares ;
as plainly appears from Aristotle,'' in his now lost
treatise of the Sicilian Governments, And the words
of Festus are most express ; There are several sorts of
talents : the Attic contains 6000 denares, the Syracusan
3 denares} What an immense difference 1 One Attic
talent had the real value of two thousand Sicilian
talents. Now, in all these Epistles, the very cir-
cumstances assure us, that by the word talent, simply
k Pollux, lib. ix. c. 6. [p. 1068. ed. Hemst.—D.']
* Talentorum non unum genus: Atticum est sex millium denarium .
Syracusanum trium denarium.
SICILIAN MONEY. 33
named, the Attic talent is understood. But should
not our wise Sophist have known that a talent, in
that country where he had laid the scene of his
Letters, was quite another thing ? Without question,
if the true Phalaris had penned them, he would have
reckoned these sums by the Sicilian talents, increas-
ing only the number : or, should he have made use
of the Attic account, he would always have given
express notice of it, never saying raXavrov alone,
without the addition of 'Arrtzov.
The Examiner enters upon this article with such an air
of satisfaction, as carries in it an assurance of victory. If
the Dr., says he, can make this out, I promise to renounce the
whole set q/" Epistles (p. 73). Now, here's fair encourage-
ment for me to take pains, since if I can carry this single
point, I shall have the honour of making by it so illustrious
a proselyte. But, if we consider that extraordinary zeal
that he shews all along for his Sicilian prince, we may look
upon this as a defiance rather than a promise. Nay, I am
informed that this part in particular is by some others, as
well as by himself, believed to be unansw^erable ; nay, that
some have proceeded so far in its commendation, as to
suspect that it was not written by the same hand that made
the rest of the book. But I shall do the Examiner that
piece of service to clear him of that hard censure upon ac-
count of this admired chapter; for I will prove it's no
better than the rest of the performance, but every paragraph
in't either mistake or false reasoning, from beginning to
end.
Before he comes to the business itself, he will shew us
how captious he can be, and how expert at chicanery. He
would ridicule my comparison of the Sicilian talent in Pha-
laris to the Scots marks and French livres. For the case, he
says, is just contrary (p. 74). Now, the ground of my com-
parison was this : by the spurious Phalaris, the reader is
VOL. II. F
34 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
made at first to believe that great sums of money are ex-
pended^ ten talents and a hundred talents; but when he
comes to look narrowly into the matter, he finds he's
deceived, for the Sicilian talent must be intended, if he be
the true Phalaris, and by that means the account will fall
and dwindle from a hundred pounds sterling to a single
shilling. Let the reader be judge now, if the comparison
was not just. But he asks me, IVhat cloudy author had I
been conversing with, that could give this perverse turn to my
imagination ? If conversation with a cloudy author would
necessarily confound a man's head, Mr. B. might be secure,
for his book could never be answered. But I hope that,
notwithstanding that dangerous conversation that I have had
with it for some time, I can yet be able to clear up all the
puzzling and perplexed stuff that he has brought or can
bring against me.
But first it may not be improper, for the satisfaction of
such as read not Phalaris 's Epistles, to shew the Attic talent
must be meant there, value 180/. English ; not the Sicilian
talent, which is no more than five groats. I suppose here,
as I did above,*" that the Attic pound weight of xii. ounces
is equal to an English one ; so that a mina, weighing xii.
ounces of silver, may be reckoned equal to three pounds
sterling. There's no need of greater exactness in our pre-
sent calculations. Now, the Tyrant is introduced complain-
ing that the Catanians, by an incursion into his territories,
had plundered him of vii. talents;" which, if they be sup-
posed Attic talents, make 1260/. sterling, but if Sicilian but
12^. 7d., too small a sum for a prince to be concerned at.
In another place, out of great liberality, he gives v. talents
for a lady's portion ;o which in Attic is 900/. sterling, but in
Sicilian 9^., too small a fortune for a lady of her quality.
There are more instances of this sort : and in several places
too he names 8pa%yLtal, drachms, which were no Sicilian
money.
«» See here, vol. i. p. 400. " Ep. 104. « Ep. 143.
SICILIAN MONEY.
35
Mr. B. begins with an attack against the credit of my
witnesses, Pollux, Festus, and Aristotle (p. 7^, 76). And
first he cavils at my calling Aristotle's book a treatise of the
Sicilian Governments. He owns Aristotle wrote an account
of the governments of the Sicilian cities (as the UoXlreia
XvpaKovarlcdv, ^Ijiepaicdv, jiKpayavTivcov, FeXaxoVy Sec), but
it does not appear that the book bore such a title. But if
that do not appear, something else plainly does, that Mr. B.
was in great want of arguments, when he descended to such
trifling exceptions. Among which I must reckon what he
says against the authority of Pollux, that one of Seberus's
MSS. wanted those pages whence this passage is cited; so
that there's room to doubt ivhether it be genuine (p. 76).
But it was extant in the MS. from which Aldus first printed
the book; and in a MS. of the late Is. Vossius's, a tran-
script of which I have by me; and in the Palatine MS.
used by Salmasius.P The same Seberus informs us, that
one of his MSS. wanted all the iv. last books, and two of
them wanted viii. : will Mr. B. therefore discard all those,
and leave us two only of the ten ? And is it not something
like a riddle, that so small a hole will make room for him to
doubt if Pollux's passage be genuine; and yet no room is
wide enough to let him doubt if his Phalaris be genuine ?
But, allowing the passage to be Pollux's own, yet we are
told there, he says, that a Sicilian talent is equal to xii.
vov/jl/jlol, and a vovfjbfjbo^ equal to three ofioXta ; which ojjLoXia
is a corrupted word, and must be helped out by a correction :
so that all that we can talk from Pollux about the nummus and
the talent is bottomed upon a mere conjecture (p. 77). But
this objection of the Examiner is bottomed upon a mistake
of his own ; for the MS. of Vossius has it plainly r)fjLco)l36\ia,
Nay, though all the copies were corrupted here, they would
do the Examiner no service ; because our accounts with
Phalaris about his talents are not so nice as to depend upon
o/jLoXia or rjfjLLay^oXca, a penny or three halfpence. For we
» Salmas. de Modo Usur. p. 257.
36 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
know from another passage^ which is not corrupted, that the
vovfifjLo^ was a single piece of silver.^ Let the piece then be
as big as the Examiner dares suppose it ; yet if the Sicilian
talent contained but xii. of them, it is still vastly too low to
be meant in the Epistles.
The next page is spent in telling us, " that those who
" would settle the value of the Sicilian talent from its ad-
'' justment to xii. vov/jl/jloo, seem to tal^e it for granted that
^' vovfjL/jLo<; there means the Roman nummus or sestertius:
^' but it cannot be so, because the words are not Pollux's,
'^ but Aristotle's, who lived before the Roman sestertius was
'^ coined. So that the ground upon which the computation
" of the talent seems to be made plainly fails" (p. 7^)'
What may seem to Mr. B.'s imagination is too wide to be
measured and comprehended by mine. But I am persuaded
there's not one writer extant that has given the least hint
that he believed the nummus here was compared by Aristotle
to the Roman sestertius. This is a dream, therefore, of the
Examiner's; for he tells us, ^Tis no wonder if he should not
be awake sometimes (p. 203.) ; and he seems now to have
been in one of his sleepy fits. The value of the Sicilian
talent may be gathered from this passage thus : a talent was
XII. vovfjb/JLoi, and every vov/jLfio<; was an obelus and a half.
Now, six oboli make a drachm; so that four vov/jl/jloi, and
a drachm are equivalent. If a talent, therefore, contain
XII. vovfi/jboi,, it must contain three drachms. Thus we see
the Sicilian talent is adjusted in its value, as I had reckoned
it before, without any consideration of the Roman ses-
tertius.
But, after all, he says, / have imposed upon people in my
valuation (p. 79) • ^' For Aristotle mentions two sorts of
^' Sicilian talents ; the old one, consisting of xxiv. vov/jufjioc,
^^ tiie new one, of xii. ; which small one I have followed in
'^ my computations, though Phalaris must be supposed to
" reckon by the most ancient." This indeed is very mate-
P Pollux, p. 436. [=1056. ed. Hemst.—D.']
SICILIAN MONEY. 8f
rial, and I know not how to come off ^ for I have sunk the
prince's expenses half in half. Let them be stated, then,
as Mr. B. will have them : and so the Catanians plundered
Phalaris of 1/. \bs. 2d. ; and the lady's fortune, that he paid
out of his coffers, came to 18^.; both which bills I had cut
off in the middle. And is the matter now mended by this ?
or is my argument at all the weaker for't ? Mr. B. shews
himself to be a better steward of his master Phalaris's re-
venue than of his own reputation ; for he owns the point is
not worth contending for. But, however, it serves to fill a
whole page, which is no inconsiderable service. The reason
why of the two accounts that were both equal to my main
purpose, I chose to follow the latter, was because Festus
reckons the Syracusian talent by Aristotle's lower rate ;
so that two authors concurring in't, I gave it the pre-
ference.
Mr. B. grows at last angry with Pollux himself, and will
give him no credit in this matter. For he cites such things
here out of Aristotle as cannot be admitted, no, not upon
AHstotle's own testimony (p. 80). ^^ As where he tells us
^^ that the Sicilians reckoned hvo ')((dl\kov^, two brass pieces,
'' to be equal to i^aXirpa, six litrse, and six brass pieces to
'^ be equal to half a litra. But how can two be xii, times
^^ as many as six ?" Again, says he, to confound us the
more, he tells us, from the same Aristotle, '^ that ef rd-
^^ Xavra, six talents, are equal to two brass pieces, and that
^^ Tpia raXavra, three talents, are equal to three brass
'^ pieces. But how can three be more than six ?" Now,
if this argument have any force in't, it must prove that Aris-
totle, or Pollux at least, could not count three, nor knew
the difference between two and six. Mr. B. I dare say is
the first man that disputed at this rate : and till such ano-
ther Aristotle as he describes here comes into the world, per-
haps he will be the last. The whole banter is only founded
upon three false readings of Pollux, e^dXirpa,^ and e^ rd-
1 Pollux, p. 216. [=454. ed. Hemst.—D.']
38 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
\avTay and rpia raXavra.^ The two first belong to one and
the same thing, and must both be corrected e^dvra, and the
third TpidvTa. So slight an emendation makes the whole
passage consistent ; and I shall shew by and by that it's
both necessary and certain. The Examiner must give me
leave now and then to ask him one of his own questions,
though I will not give it, as he does, the epithet insulting;
If our great dealer in spurious authors did not observe this,
where is his sagacity ? If he observed it without owning it,
where is his sincerity ? (p. QtJ-) Oiie of the two will be very
hard pressed; but for his sincerity I'll be voucher in this
particular, because it's plain by his miserable offer at a cor-
rection, to be considered anon, that his sagacity was not
awake here.
But he says, Pollux in the same place informs us (p. 81.),
'^ that the talent of every country was divided into lx. minae,
^' and each of those minae into c. drachms. If the Sicilian
'' talent, then, was but three Attic drachms, the Sicilian
^' mina was no more than one English farthing and a half,
'^ and the drachm not the Lxvith part of a farthing, and yet
^' in silver too ;'' a species of money not to be counted with-
out the help of microscopes : so that when we have occasion
hereafter to express the value, or rather worthlessness, of
any contemptible performance, we shall say it is not worth
a Sicilian drachm, I like the gentleman's motion well;
and, since we can never have a better occasion of using this
new saying, I must crave leave to tell him, that his own per-
formance in this very paragraph is contemptible, and not
worth one of his imaginary Sicilian drachms. For there's no
such thing in Pollux as what the Examiner teUs us from
him, that the talent of each country was divided into lx.
mince. I will set down that author's words : As the mina,
says he, at Athens contained c. Attic drachms, so the minee
of other countries contained c. drachms of each country;
which drachms were in value to the Attic drachm in the same
' P. 436. [=1057. ed. Hemst.—J).}
SICILIAN MONEY. 39
X>roportion as the talent of each (above mentioned) was to the
Attic talent.^ Here it's evident, from Pollux, that the mina
of every country contained c. drachms, and the drachm of
every country was the 6000th part of the talent of that
country; but here is not the least hint that the talent of
every country contained lx. minse. These two, I humbly
conceive, are very different propositions; though the Exa-
miner, with his logic-system in his head, confounded them.
Wherever there were such names of money as min(B and
drachms, there was a talent; Pollux therefore observed
truely, that in every country these two bore the same pro-
portion to Attic min(B and drachms as talent did to talent.
But then it is not true in the reverse, that wherever there
was a talent, there were min(B and drachms ; for in Sicily
and the Doric colonies of Italy, Tarentum, Rhegium, Nea-
polis, there was a talent, but no such name, nor species, nor
sum, as either mina or drachm. The talent there was not
divided into minae and drachms, but into vovfifiov^, \lTpa<;,
ovyKta^;. Pollux, therefore, has quite separated his account
of the Sicilian money from that of other nations ;* but if the
Sicilian talent had been divisible into mina and drachms, as
the other talents he there speaks of, he would certainly have
included that too in his general estimation of talents. Let
the reader now be judge, if the Examiner's performances
here do not deserve his own new-invented expression, not
ivorth a Sicilian drachm. Let him take it, then, to himself;
for he tells us, that his Sicilian prince was celebrated for his
justice, when he made Perillus handsel his own invention.^
Mr. B., therefore, cannot complain, if he gives the first
handsel to his ; though the phrase carries a lower worthless-
ness in't than he was aware of. For he computed the Sici-
lian drachm to be the Lxvith part of an English farthing;
• Pollux, p. 437. [=1068. ed. Hemst.—B.} 'H fiva Se &s vap' 'AOrivaiois
eKarhv €?%€ SpaxfJ-o-s 'Attj/cos, ovrco koI irapa ro7s &\Xois ras e'7rt;^a>pious, Svva-
fjievas irphs \6yov rod Kaff eKoiffTovs raXavTov, koto, re •npoadriKijv KoX i/tpaipiffiv.
» Pollux, p. 437. " Praef. Phalar.
40 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
whereas now it plainly appears to be nothing at all, and
exactly of the same value with an Utopian drachm.
Mr. B. in his margin quotes two very learned men,
Brerewood and Gronovius, who affirm, he says, that every
talent contains 6000 drachms (p. 81, 82). Now if this had
really been their opinion, yet it had signified nothing here ;
for we do not go by authorities, but by truth. If they
believed so, they were certainly mistaken ; neither do Pol-
lux and Suidas, the authors cited by Brerewood, say any
such matter. But if Mr. B. had either been diligent or
ingenuous here, he would have seen that it was only a loose
expression of those two learned men, that dropped from
them unawares ; for Brerewood in the same page, and
Gronovius in the same chapter, that Mr. B. has quoted,
expressly affirm on my side, that the Sicilian talent was
anciently six, and afterwards three denares. Mr. B. we see
has another obligation here to excuse himself to the reader
for his multitude of quotations (p. 68).
His next attempt is upon the passage of Festus, Talentum
Syracusanum trium denarium (p. 83, 84.) ; which he ushers in
vrith an harangue about Festus's Abridgment of Verrius Flac-
cus, and Paulus Diaconus's Abridgment of Festus ; a story
known to every body that have once looked into Festus. But
what was this to his purpose ? Let Paulus be as mean a writer
as Mr. B. pleases ; yet this passage is not cited from his Epi-
tome, but from Festus himself. But Mr. B. will now tell us
something, which is more to his purpose, that all the editions
of Festus take care to warn us, that for Syracusanum trium
denarium, we ought to read Syracusanum trium millium de-
narium; and thereupon, to make a show and a noise with,
he crams his poor margin vrith half a dozen citations. Now,
the thing is no more than this : the first editor of this
passage of Festus, not understanding how a talent could be
so little a sum as three denares, put that conjecture in the
margin for an emendation, as he thought it; and so it ha§
been continued since, and some of the editors have espoused
it; for all editors, Mr. B. knows, are not infallible. But the
SICILIAN MONEY. 41
MS. copy of Festus, and the text of all the editions, re-
present it as it's quoted by me; and all the best writers
about money have for this hundred years embraced it,
Scaliger, Brerewood, Salmasius, Gronovius, &c. ; and before
this section is ended, it will be made out to be the true
reading.
But he'll prove now, out of Sicilian writers, and those
that speak of Sicilian affairs, that the talent of that country
had not such a low value as I would assign to it out of
Festus and Pollux (p. 85, 86, 87? 88.) : but of all his authors
there's but one that ^vrites in the Sicilian dialect, and that
is Theocritus; and he indeed mentions a mina as the price
of a woman's gown, and vii. drachms paid for v. fleeces of
wool; which cannot be of that low and small sort of
drachms that Mr. B. has now discovered by the help of his
microscope. Now, allowing what Mr. B. supposes, that
Theocritus speaks here of Sicilian money, yet it ought to be
considered that he lived near ccc. years after Phalaris's
time, in which interval the species of money might be altered
in Sicily. That the money of Syracuse, where Theocritus
was born, was recoined in that time, is very certain. Aris-
totle informs us,^ that Dionysius the First got all the money
and riches of Syracuse into his hands in five years' time.
And that having borrowed money of the citizens at interest,
upon their demanding it, he ordered every man, upon the
pain of death, to bring in all the money he had ; and when
the money was brought in, he recoined it, and made every
piece of new money pass for double the former value, and so
paid them out of their own silver ."^ So the Romans, in the
first Punic war, recoined all their brass money, and made
every ounce go for vi. times as much as it did before.'^ But
Dionysius perhaps did not only recoin the money of Syra-
cuse, but alter the species too and the names of it: for
Aristotle there says he coined a drachm, which he put off
" Arist Polit. v. II. "^ Arist. (Econ. ii. 20.
^ Pliny, xxxiii. 3.
VOL. II. G
42 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
for a double drachm. y Now, we may gather from Aristotle
himself, as Pollux has cited him, that among the old Sicilian
money there was no such name as a drachm. Dionysius,
therefore, or somebody before him, had altered the money at
Syracuse, and had introduced the Greek species there. But
perhaps we ought not to take Aristotle's words so strictly
and literally in this place. In his accounts of the Sicilian
Governments, whence Pollux has his citations, he was obliged
to use the words of the country ; but in his Economics he
might take the common liberty of writers, to reduce the
Sicilian money to some equivalent of the Attic. By the
drachm, therefore, of Dionysius, he may mean perhaps the
Sicilian BeKoXcrpov, or denare, and express it by the name
of drachm, as known among the Grecians, and about the
same value. But let this be as every one pleases ; I suppose
it will be allowed, that in ccc. years' time the species of
money might be altered in Sicily ; as in England, by the late
great restitution of our coin, the species called nine-pences
and four-pence half-pennies are gone, and perhaps may
never be reduced into use again. What Aristotle, therefore,
tells us about the old Sicilian money cannot be refuted from
the species of Theocritus's time, or any that come after
him.
Besides this, I have another answer to this instance from
Theocritus, for the poet does not speak of Sicilian money.
The passages that Mr. B. cites are out of the xvth Idyl-
Hum ;*
To. TIpa^LVoa, fjLoka roi to KaTa'TTTV')(e^ ifiTrepova/jba
TovTO TTpeireL' Xiye fjuoi, iroaaw Kare^a too acpi* tcrrw ;
Up. Mt] ixvdarj^;, Topyol' ifKeov apyvplco KaOapS) jjbvav
^Bvo-^^
And again ;t
Xoi)fio<; TavTCL y e^^et, (j)96po^ apyvplov, AiOKkelSaf;'
[* V. 34.— D.] [t V. 18.— D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. 43
'Ettto, Spa')(/jL(ov KvvdSa^, ypatav airoTlXjJbaTa Trrjpcov,
Uevre 7r6Ka)<; eA,a/3' €')(de<^, dirav pvirof;, epyov iir epyo).^
Where it's owned that mince and drachms are spoken of; but
who are the persons that speak ? Mr. B. tells us they are
Syracusian ladies. No wonder that he has made ladies
of two women of low rank; for he made a king Zaleucus
from a shepherd; and to go to the palace to see a sight
there, like the king's fine coach, is in Mr. B.'s language
to appear at court. But to let that pass ; pray, where are
these ladies when they say this ? I must declare here my
astonishment at the conduct of our Examiner ; and it seems
to me to be wholly unaccountable, unless I have recourse
again to that fatality of mistaking that he seems to lie under.
What, was he not awake here neither, that he could not see
the scene of this Idyllium was not at Syracuse in Sicily, but
at Alexandria in ^gypt ? The Idyllium itself, had he ever
read it, would have told him this over and over ;
Bap,6<; T(o ^aaiXrjo^ iir a(f)veL(0 IlTo\€/jLaLQ).f
Lefs go to king Ptolemy's court, says one woman to the
other; and so away they foot it, and return home before
dinner. Now, if they lived in the same city, this journey of
theirs is feasible ; but to go from Syracuse to Alexandria
and back again in a morning, and on foot too over the sea,
is a stretch something extraordinary. To be short with the
Examiner ; they were natives indeed of Syracuse, but they
had removed to Alexandria, and there they had husbands,
and children, and servants, and dwelling-houses. All this
appears from the very poem; and that Mr. B. may not say,
that the minae and drachms here were laid out upon clothes
[* The later editors of Theocritus agree in giving Tavrd and apyvplw in the
first line, iri]pa.v in the second, and pWov in the third. Instead of 'Exto ^pax-
ixu)v in the second line, Bentley (p. 45.) prefers 'ETrraSpc^x/twy, which Gaisford
(P. M. G.) also gives: but see Toup, Epist, ad Wart. p. 320.; Valckenaer ad
I. (Theoc. Decern Eidyl.) ; and Kiessling ad I. — D.]
[f V. 22., where 4s a</>. — D.]
44 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
at Syracuse^ before their departure from thence, the very
verse that he cites vrill teach him the contrary, Tlevre iroKco^^
eX(XyS' EXQE^, Yesterday 77iy husband laid out vii.
drachms upon wool. But if Mr. B. shall pretend to have
known that the scene of all this was at Alexandria, where
was his sagacity, that he could not see the Alexandrian
money must be meant, and not that of their old country
Sicily ? If a French refugee drives a bargain here at London
Avith sixpences and shillings, will Mr. B. infer from it that
those species are the money of France too ? Here's another
of his performances not worth a Sicilian drachm : and his
facetious computation, that the vii. drachms in Theocritus
must be short of the eighth part of a farthing, if they were
paid in the Dr.'s money (p. 87.)^ must, like the rest of his
assertions, be interpreted backwards, and then it will be
true. For, in the Dr.'s account they were Alexandrian
drachms, and consequently not lower than the common
Attic drachms, but double their value.
But Mr. B. will scatter his learning occasionally, besides
what he bestows upon his main subject. He acquaints us
that in the first passage, ifXeov apyvptco KaOapco fjuvdv 'H
Bvo, H. Stephanus in the margin reads it fivd^ (p. 86.) : and
accordingly Mr. B. translates it, it costs somewhat more than
a mina or two (p. 87.) ; as if the original was irXeov fivd^; rj
Bvo. And, to allow Mr. B. all the favour we can, the Latin
versions have interpreted it so before him, plus mind una
et altera, plus mind una vel duabus. Now, a mina was a
pound weight of silver, and consequently equivalent to three
pounds sterling. And I'll crave leave to ask Mr. B. what
sense there is in his or their version ? Pray what does your
gown stand you in ? Answer, Ifs a very dear gown, it costs
me above three or six pounds. Pray, who ever talked at
this rate ? What, is there no medium between three and six
pounds ? If I should ask a friend what he rents his house
at, and he should tell me, at above forty or fourscore pounds
a-year, it might pass perhaps for a banter, but an answer I
should not take it for. And yet the woman in Theocritus is
SICILIAN MONEY. 45
very serious, and does not seem to have been of those that
take ridicule and grimace for the most diverting thing in the
world. If Theocritus had really writ at this rate, I perceive
it would pass upon Mr. B. ; but I'm afraid that king
Ptolemy, a good judge of wit, whom Theocritus presented
this poem to, would have paid him for't in Sicilian drachms.
But the fault is not the poet's, but theirs that translate him ;
and the true reading is MNAN, the genitive Doric for fjuvcSv ;
and the construction is, irXeov rj Sua fivdv dpyvpico KadapoS,
it cost me above six fair pounds.
There's another fault too in the second passage that the
Examiner cites ;
'Etttcl Spa^^yLtcSv Kvvdha^y ^palav diroTiKyuaTa TrrjpooV
for in the old editions of Aldus and others 'tis
*E7rTa8pd'^fjL(o<i Kvvdha^
which, because it was not understood, was changed by the
later editors. But the ancient reading is the true, if we take
it, as it ought to be taken^ eTrraSpa^yu-Gj?, the accusative
Doric for eTrraSpd'^/Mov';, from the adjective eirTdhpa')QjLO<^.^
The sense indeed will be the same still, but the composition
will be more elegant. Mr. B. may say, and he has good
reason, that the not correcting these passages cannot be
imputed as a fault to him, when such great men as Stepha-
nus, Casaubon, Heinsius, &c. failed as well as he. We'll
allow this, therefore, and not lay these omissions to his
charge; but then he ought not to abuse and calumniate
others, who have honest endeavours to improve this part of
learning, if envy will let them be quiet.
The other authors that Mr. B. has produced to shew
that talents, minae, and drachms, of an equal value with
those of Greece, were current in Sicily, are Thucydides,
Plato, Polybius, Diodorus, and Plutarch; but not one of
them was a Sicilian, except Diodorus, and he too wrote his
History in a foreign country, and uses the common dialect,
[* See note p. 43.— D.]
46 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
and comes ccccc. years after Phalaris. Now, to answer all
these instances at once, for the thing is too vulgar to be
insisted on particularly; I must acquaint him with what
every body else knows, but to him is a secret, that all the
authors that write in the Attic or common dialect do of
course turn the sums of money of any country that they
speak of into the Attic account ; not meaning that the Attic
coins were used in specie upon these occasions, but that the
money, of whatever sort it was, was equivalent in weight or
value to so much Attic money. And the end that they had
in so doing is conspicuous enough ; for, designing their his-
tories for general use, they thought the best way to be
understood by all, was to reduce the money to some species
universally known. And if Mr. B. had ever compared the
Greek and Latin writers of the Roman history together, he
must necessarily have observed it. I'll give him one or two
examples of it, which may serve instead of all. Livy, ^
who, as a Roman, writes in the style of his own country,
tells us Servius Tullius divided the Roman citizens into five
classes ; the first was of such as were rated at centum mil-
lia ceris, that is, 100,000 asses, or brass money ; the second
at 7^^000; and so on to the lowest. But Dionysius Hali-
carnassensis, * who wrote for the Greeks, turns these ac-
counts into Attic silver, and makes the first class to be rated
eKarov fivcov, rj fivpicov hpaj(jjbS)v, at a 100 jnince, or 10,000
drachms: and the second, irevre koI e^BofiTj/covra jjlvcov, rj
€7rTa/ctcr^tXfca)v koI irevTaKoaicov Bpa')(/jLcav, at 7b mince, or
7500 drachms : and so to the fifth. Now, this account of
the Greek historian cannot be true, if we understand those
drachms to have been used in specie ; for it's known that
the Romans had no silver money till ccc. years after the
time of this Servius. But Livy and he agree in the value,
though not in the species ; for x. asses of brass being equi-
valent to one Attic drachm of silver, 100,000 of such asses
are worth 10,000 drachms, and 7^,000 asses worth 7^00
* Livy, lib. i. . * Dionys. Halic. p. 22.
SICILIAN MONEr. 47
drachm. The same Livy informs us^ that Camillus was
threatened to be fined quingentum millium ceris mulcta,
500,000 asses of brass ; which Plutarch^ represents in silver
money, and calls it irevre jMvpidhwv dpyvplov ^rjfjLLOjaLv, a fine
of 50,000 drachms. And yet the Romans had no use of
silver coin till a hundred years after Camillus. If Plutarch,
therefore, in his account of Camillus, has turned the Roman
money to Attic, why may he not have turned the Sicilian so,
in his history of Timoleon ? And if he did it, why not
Polybius too ? and why not Plato and Thucydides much
rather, being natives of Athens ? Diodorus, it's true, was a
Sicilian ; but as he forsook the dialect of Sicily, so, in con-
sequence, he ought to depart from it in the names and
species of its money, and not fill his History with vovfMfioi,,
and ovyKiai, and e^avre?, and TrevTovyKca, words that no-
body would understand abroad but grammarians and anti-
quaries. Besides that, as I observed before, he is so many
centuries junior to Phalaris, that the money of that island
might possibly be altered to the Greek species in all that
tract of time. But that the old names of money continued
there till the time of Gelon tyrant of Syracuse, lxx. years
after Phalaris's death, Diodorus himself will teach us. For
he says that, upon tke defeat of the Carthaginians, Dama-
reta, the wife of Gelon, coined a new piece of money, of the
value of ten Attic drachms ; but the Sicilians called it from
its weight TrevTrjKovToXLrpov,^ This passage even alone will
shew that there was no such money nor name as drachm in
those days in Sicily. For if there had, they would have
called this money SeKuBpaxf^ov, from the value of ten
drachms; and not TrevTTjKovTaXcrpov, from the weight of
fifty litrce. From which compound word it plainly appears,
that the litra, one of those Sicilian coins that I and my au-
thors contend for, was yet in use in the time of Gelon. With-
out question, therefore, it was used there in Phalaris's time ;
^ Plut. in Camillo.
' Diodor. Sic. p. 21. Elx^u 'Attikcls SpaxfJ^as Se/co- iK\r]97i 5e vaph roTs StKe-
\iuTais airh tov araOfiov TriVTT)Kovr6,\npov.
48 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
and if you admit of the litra for a Sicilian coin, you must
take all the rest after it, that are mentioned by Aristotle and
Pollux ; as the BeKoXorpov, the rj/jucXiTpiov, &c. ; for these
plainly refer to and suppose one another, as a half-crown
English supposes a crown. And what has the Examiner
got now by his approved Sicilian writers? To what pur-
pose are his ridiculous computations ; a talent, Is. lOd.^ for
a month's pay of a ship ; 200 mince, 65. ?>d.for the magnificent
funeral of a general ? (p. 87^ 88.) I know not what they
can stand for there, but to be emblems of his own perform-
ance, which, at first view, and to unskilful readers, seems a
business of great value and price, as the Greek talents and
minae were ; but when examined more narrowly, it dwindles
into talents of eighteen pence, and mince of three farthings.
But see what it is to be engaged with such a master of
defence : he may freely admit, he says, of the low value of
the Sicilian talent, and yet think the Letters genuine. For
there are several suppositions that must all be shewn impos-
sible, before any convincing argument can be drawn from
hence to prove them spurious (p. 88, 89). To prove supposi-
tions to be impossible, is a very hard task indeed ; and if
nothing less than that will serve, 'tis more difficult to con-
vince Mr. B. than to convert a Jew. But let us see what
his suppositions are : I. There might be a low value of the
Sicilian talent in some other age, and yet the talent of Pha-
laris's time might be higher (p. 89). But I'll presently shew
him that in Epicharmus's and Sophron's time, the very next
generation to Phalaris, the Sicilian money was as I have
stated it : and Aristotle*^ says, that to apxc^lov, in old time,
the talent there was but xxiv. vovfjL/jLoi, about yiis. Engl.
II. Or a low talent might be in other parts of Sicily, but a
higher at Agrigentum. But Aristotle^ tells us in general,
XcKekiKov ToXavTov, the Sicilian talent was xxiv. vov/jl-
fj^t; which must include Agrigentum, unless Mr. B. will
carry that too into Crete, as he did Astypalaea. Nay, the
d Poll. p. 437. [=1068. ed. Hemst.—B,^ « Ibid.
SICILIAN MONEY.
49
philosopher expressly says/ that the Xirpa was Agrigen-
TiNE money : and if the litra come in there, the talent and
all the rest will follow it. III. Or there might be a loio
talent of baser metal, suppose brass, equal to a litra ; and yet
Phalaris's silver talents might be higher. Here are so many
blunders in this supposition, that I scarce know which to
begin with. He believes a talent in Sicily was a single
piece of money, or a coin; but it was a sum, as a pound
is in England. And upon this he fancies a brass talent was
less than a silver one ; which is just as if he should say that
a pound paid in copper farthings is less than a pound paid in
sixpences. But from whence could he have that extravagant
stuff, a brass talent equal to a litra ? I am afraid again that
he was not awake here ; but methinks he might have got out
of his nap in his second or third edition. A brass litra of
Sicily weighed a pound, and lx. of them made a talent.
And a small coin of silver, of equal value to a litra of brass,
had from thence the name too of litra, (as among the
Romans the silver coin was called denarius, because it was
valued at x. asses of brass,) and l.x. of those silver litres
made the ancient talent of silver. So that a talent of silver
and a talent of brass were both equal in value, and both
contained lx. litrae. But Mr. B. has a marginal note here,
that the talents in Pollux are compared to ycCkKol, and are
lower in value than they. Admirably observed indeed ! This
same margin of his has in several places quite outdone the
text. The text here says, a talent of brass was equal to a
litra ; but the margin tells us, it was less than a 'x^oXkov'?,
which was but the xiith part of a litra. So that both text
and margin together form a proposition exactly like this :
A certain book of a late writer's is worth four shillings, and
too dear of three pence. But the shameful mistake of this
marginal note is founded upon a corrupt reading in Pollux,
€^ rdXavTa, oirep ia-rl hvo 'xoXkol, that is, six talents, which
f Pollux, p. 216, 436. [=454, 1057. ed. Hemst. — D.'] 'Ej> 'AKpayavrivwu.
iroAtTetot (prffflv 'ApiCTOTeArjs ^rj/tuouo'flot rtva \' \iTpas.
VOL. II. H
50 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
is two brass pieces : which I have already observed^ and
shall presently prove, is to be corrected e^dvra. And I dare
appeal to any English reader, thongh he understands not
one word of Greek, if the passage, as I have faithfully trans-
lated it, does not betray itself to be corrupted. For the
author, being to make a general comparison of money,
would have expressed it, as all the world uses to do, in the
lowest numbers of proportion, and would certainly have
said, three talents make one brass piece ; not six make two.
And yet Mr. B., with all his acuteness, could argue from
this reading, as if it were genuine. IV. Or there might be a
low value {talent, I suppose he would say) used by the natives
and ancient inhabitants of Sicily ; and yet the talent used by
the Greek colonies, that placed themselves there, might be
higher. But the very names of the money we speak of shew
they belonged not to the Sicanians or Phoenicians in Sicily,
but to the colonies of Greeks ; as ov^Kia from 07/C095 vov/jl-
/iio<; from vofia, rerpa?, rpia^, €^d<;, r^fjuCKlrpiov, BeKoXtrpov :
these are certainly Greek words, and neither Phoenician nor
barbarous Sicanian. And Diodorus says the ^ cfceXtcorai,,
Sicilian Greeks (not the ancient inhabitants of the island)
called the money of Gelon's time irevTrjKovTaXtrpoy. Pol-
lux also and Aristotle say expressly they were the monies
Tcov iv ^cKeXta Acoplecov, of the Dorian colonies in Sicily ;
and that vovfjbfio<^ was a coin of the Tarentines in Italy, who
were a Dorian colony too, and had no concern with the old
Sicanians. V. Or, if these Letters might by a later hand be
changed out of the Doric dialect into the Attic, the same hand
might make them speak Attic in the valuation of the monies.
This is his last supposition, and the pleasantest of them all :
and though I doubt not but the very proposal of it will be
received with laughter by all competent readers, yet I'll give
him an answer to it, when I consider the general way of his
defence. We have now got, and I hope safely, over all his
suppositions : and though I will not pretend to have shewn
them impossible, yet I have shewn them so groundless and
absurd, that a wise man will be ashamed of them. But to
SICILIAN MONEY. 51
prove any thing of this nature impossible is truly an impos-
sible thing. For how can we bring demonstrations about
matters of mere history ? If nothing, therefore, but down-
right impossibility will convince the Examiner that his Pha-
laris is spurious, he may still, to his comfort, believe them
genuine. But at that rate he's well prepared to believe all
the stories of Ovid's Metamorphoses, or Apuleius's Ass.
But our misfortune is, that, though we have stood the
shock of so many suppositions, yet we are just where we
were before. For, lastly, he says, though none of his rea-
sonings should hold, 'tis agreed by those who treat of these
matters, and give us this loiv value of the Sicilian talent, that
wherever the word talent is used by Greek writers (as it is in
Phalaris's Epistles) without any addition, the Attic talent
must be understood (p. 89). And for this he quotes Grono-
vius, Bernard, and Brerewood. Now, allowing this to be
true, what would our sagacious critic infer from't ? Do not
I myself affirm too, that in Phalaris's Epistles the Attic
talent is understood ? The very circumstances of every
passage there where talent is mentioned shew he meant the
Attic; and 'tis the sole ground and foundation of all this
article against him. Mr. B. therefore may assure himself
that I shall never make Phalaris's Epistles an exception
to that rule of Gronovius. That the Attic is meant in the
Epistles will be allowed on all sides; but whether the true
Phalaris would have used the word so, there is the question.
And do Mr. B.'s marginal citations prove any thing of that?
Diodorus, though a Sicilian, had good reasons for his reck-
oning by Attic money; because he wrote in the common
dialect, because the Attic valuation was then universally
known, because other historians had done so before him.
But must Phalaris therefore be supposed to have used the
Attic accounts, at a time when the Attic talent was no better
known than the Sicilian ? Must he do it in private letters,
that were never intended for the public ? in stating the
expenses of his household, which, being laid out in Sicilian
money, could not be expressed in Attic without puzzling
52 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS,
fractions ? If Mr. B. will obstinately maintain such ab-
surdities as these, he'll fully satisfy his readers, that, what-
ever there was in Phalaris's accounts, in Mr. B/s genius
there's nothing of Attic.
Mr. B. declares, that he finds the moderns go into the
opinion of a Sicilian talent of low value, without any other
authority, as he can find, but the obscure and interpolated
passages of Pollux and Festus (p. 88.) : but the notion ought
to be supported by good authorities, taken from approved
Sicilian writers, or others that purposely treat of Sicilian
affairs (p. 84). I will give him an account, therefore, of
the authorities we go upon; and I believe it will presently
appear that the approved Sicilian writers, such as Epichar-
mus and Sophron, who were nearest the age of Phalaris, and
those that purposely treat of Sicilian affairs, such as Aris-
totle in his account of the Sicilian Governments, do all coun-
tenance and support the notion, that the Sicilian money was
different from the Attic both in species and name. But, for
the clearer illustration of what I shall say here, I will give a
table of the Sicilian coins, according to those authors, and
compare them with the Roman coins, which were all bor-
rowed from them.
SICILIAN MONEY.
53
A TABLE OF THE SICILIAN MONEY.
METAL.
SICILIAN.
ROMAN.
VALUE.
Brass or silver.
Silver.
Silver.
Silver.
Brass or silver.
Brass, silver.
Brass.
Brass.
Brass.
Brass.
Brass.
TdXavrov.
Yleyrvjy.QvrciXirpoy.
AexaXiT/JO)/.
Airpa,
'HfiiXir piQV.
Jlevrovyyciov.
TpioL^.
Terpaq.
Ovyv.ia,.
{
Denarius.
{Nummus,
Sestertius.
{
Libra, As,
Libella.
{Semissis, "I
Sembella. j
Quincunx.
Triens.
{Quadrans, 1
Teruncius. J
Sextans.
Uncia.
{
60 brass or silver
litrae.
50 litrse.
10 litrae.
2J litrse.
'A pound weight
of brass, or a
piece of silver
equivalent.
Half a litra.
5 ounces of brass.
A third part of a
litra.
A fourth of a litra.
A sixth of a litra.
I ounce of brass.
This table comprehends all the names of the Sicilian
sums or coins^ from the highest down to the lowest : and I
shall now subjoin the passages of authors which establish
and warrant every one of them.
TAAANTON.
The Sicilian talent^ says Pollux,^ had the lowest value
of all. Of old, as Aristotle teaches, it contained xxiv.
vovfjLfjLot, but afterwards only xii. Now, a vov/j,/jbo<;, nummus,
as I shall shew presently, was the ivth part of a denare ; so
s Pollux, p. 4-31. [=1068. ed. Hemst.—D.}
54 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
that the ancient talent contained vi. denares, and the latter
III. And Suidas falls in exactly with Aristotle's account;
for he informs us, that among the Sicilian Greeks a talent
was anciently xxiv. nummi, but now xii.^ In the vulgar
editions ^tis fjuvcov, but the true reading is vovfi/jLayv, as the
passage of Aristotle clearly shews ; and so it's corrected by
Budaeus, and every body since that have treated of these
matters. The word voufifjucov being not understood by the
copier, was corrupted into /jlvcov. To these authorities we
may add Festus, who, giving the value of several sorts of
talents, says, the Neapolitan contains vi. denares, the Syra-
cusan III., and that of Rhegium half a denareS What Festus
here calls the Neapolitan talent has the same value with the
old talent of Sicily ; which is not to be wondered at, since
Aristotle and Pollux affirm that the vov/jl/iio<;, one of the
coins of Sicily, was common to the Tarentine and other
Dorian colonies of Italy. And the Syracusan talent of
Festus is the very same with what Aristotle and Suidas call
the later Sicilian. Here are four authorities, then, Aris-
totle, Pollux, Suidas, and Festus, for the low valuation of
the Sicilian talent. And the alteration that Mr. B. and
some others would introduce into the text of Festus now
appears to be groundless. They would interpolate it thus,
Syracusanum trium {millium) denarium^ the Syracusan talent
had 3000 denares. But what authority have they for this
talent of 3000 ? None at all. Is it not a glorious correction,
then, and worthy to be embraced by Mr. B., to change the
reading that's warranted by three authors, and to substitute
another that's supported by none ? And what will they do
with the following words, Rheginum victoriati? Will they
insert millium there too, and make it neither Latin nor
sense ? But if the talent of Rhegium was but equivalent to
five pounds of brass, why must that of Sicily be thought too
low when it's made equal to thirty or sixty ?
^ Suid. in TaKavrov.
' Festus. Tal. Neapolitaimm sex denarium. Syracusanum trium denarium.
Rheginum victoriati.
SICILIAN MONEY. 55
'Tis very certain that the Romans called the common
Attic talent talentum magnum^ the great talent; an expres-
sion never used by any Greek author : so that the reason
and ground of it has been a great inquiry among the anti-
quaries of the last age. But the ingenious and learned Gro-
noviusJ has lit upon a conjecture that has all the characters
of truth and certainty. The Romans had no such sum nor
name as talent in their way of accounts ; but, by their deal-
ings with the neighbouring Greeks, the Sicilians, Rhegians,
Tarentines, Neapolitans, they knew a talent among them
stood for a small sum of silver. Afterwards, when they
extended their commerce or their conquests to other parts
of Greece, they found a talent there meant a vast sum of
6000 denares, which was 1000, or 2000, or 12000 times as
much as the talents of their neighbours. This latter, there-
fore, was called the great talent, and in process of time
talent alone, the other acceptation of the word falling into
disuse. I do not question but all competent judges will
receive this notion of Gronovius with approbation and
applause. And as the expression talentum magnum is so
fairly explained by the low Sicilian talent, so, reciprocally,
the low value of that talent is plainly made out by the ex-
pression talentum magnum.*
i Gronov. de Pecun. Vet. iii. 3.
[* Gronovius was under a mistake in supposing the Romans had no such
sum as a talent in their accounts ; as Mr. Clarke has clearly shewn, in his Con-
nexion of Roman, Saxon, and English Coins, p. 395. n. t. Every talent bore
the very same proportion to that pound which was the basis of the computation,
i. e. all were sixty pounds of their own weight. A nummulary talent, from a
pound of XII. ounces, was five times xii., or sixty pounds. By the same rule,
the commercial retail talent, from a pound of xvi. ounces, was five times xvi., or
eighty pounds. That this was the talentum magnum, is evident from Plautus,
Mostell. act iii. so. 1. 102, 114. Tranio endeavours to persuade his master to
engage for a debt which his son had indiscreetly contracted, and for which the
creditor was then making very pressing demands. " Quater quadraginta illi
" debentur mince. Die te illi daturum, ut abeat." This sum is afterwards com-
puted in great talents, " — eas quanti destinat?
" Tr. Talentis magnis totidem, quot ego et tu sumus."
Here two talents are four times forty, or twice eighty pounds, viz. from a pound
56 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
But there's one thing not yet accounted for ; how it came
about^ that in those Dorian colonies the word talent was
applied to such inconsiderable sums. I will crave leave to
propose a conjecture of mine^ and submit it to the censures
of the learned. Talent^ originally is a word of static, and
means lx. pound weight of any thing. Now the brass Xtrpa
of Sicily being at first a pound weight, as the libra or as
was among the Romans, lx. such litra weighed in all lx.
pounds, and consequently were called a talent. Afterwards,
when silver money came into use among them, the species
of it had their denominations from the proportions they bore
to the brass lltra. So that a small silver coin, equivalent in
worth to a brass pound, was called Xlrpa ; and another coin,
containing ten of them, ^eKoXirpov : just as the Romans
called their silver coin denarius, because it was equal in
value to deni asses, ten brass pounds. By the same rule,
therefore, a sum of silver containing lx. silver litra, or vi.
{BeKokcTpa) denares, was called a talent, because it was equi-
valent to LX. pound weight of brass. Here I conceive is a
probable account how the old Sicilian talent came to stand
for VI. denares, or, as Aristotle expresses it, xxiv. nummi.
But the same author acquaints us, that afterwards the talent
sunk lower, to the value of xii. nummi, or iii. denares. The
occasion of which seems to have been this. As Solon dimi-
nished the Attic drachm a fourth part in weight, making
of XVI. ounces. Priscian confirms this evidence: " Talentum parvum Athe-
" niense minae sexaginta; magnum octoginta et tres librae, et quatuor unciae."
Gram. Vet. vol. i. p. 134. Priscian was in this instance making a nice calcu-
lation how many Roman pounds were equal to this great talent. The Attic
pound, by the account of these later writers, was a 24th part larger than the
Roman. Divide 80 by 24, you have 3 and i for the quotient, or octoginta tres
librce et quatuor uncits, in round numbers eighty pounds. The very character of
the persons in Plautus destroys Gronovius' reasonings on this subject. The
scene is Athens, the dramatis personse Greeks, well acquainted with their own
nummulary talent, before they ever heard of those diminutive computations.
And therefore when the Athenians spake of the talentum magnum, it was to dis-
tinguish either the commercial talent, or the Asiatic nummulary talent, from their
own of sixty pounds. Note on ed. 1777. — D.]
•^ Suidas, Pollux, and others.
SICILIAN MONEY. 57
100 of tliem go to a pound, which lxxv. made before; and
as the Romans, being straitened in the first Punic war,
lowered their brass money five parts in six, making their as,
which till then was a full pound weight, to be no more than
two ounces, so the Sicilians seem to have lessened their
brass money half in half; and yet the old names (as among
the Romans) continued still, notwithstanding the change in
weight. A talent of brass, therefore, containing lx. of those
half-pound litrae, was no more than iii. denares, or xii.
nummi of silver. But the Rhegians, according to Festus,
seem to have sunk their brass litrae from a pound weight to
an ounce; which is exactly what the Romans did in the
second Punic war, when they made their as to be uncialis,
of a single ounce weight. By which proportion, though the
talent even among the Rhegians might at first be lx. litrae,
each of which weighed a pound, yet after they were dimi-
nished to an ounce a-piece, a talent of lx. such litrae would
be worth no more than half a denare, or the victoriatus of
Festus.
nENTHKONTAAITPON.
We have an account of this coin from Diodorus Siculus ;*
that, after Gelon had vanquished the Carthaginians in Sicily,
Ol. LXXV. 1., Demareta his wife interceded in their behalf,
and obtained for them an honourable peace ; and upon that
occasion she caused a new coin to be stamped, weighing l.
litrae, that is, five SeKoXLTpa, denares, or, as Diodorus com-
putes it, X. Attic drachms. This money was called Arjixa-
pirLov, from her name, and by the Sicilians ireyTTjKovraXi-
Tpov, from the weight and value of it. The same money is
mentioned by Pollux,^ but he tells us quite another story
about the occasion of coining it; that, ivhen her husband
wanted money in the war against the Carthaginians, Demareta
and the rest of the women brought all their silver utensils to
the mint, and the coin was called vofiiafia Arj^apeTiov, But
the very bigness of the money, being five times the weight
1 Diodor. p. 21. °» Pollux, p. 437. [=1067. ed. HemsL—D.']
VOL. II. I
58 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
of their heaviest ordinaiy coin, shews Diodorus's narrative
to be truer than Pollux's; for if Gelon had been in any
straits for money, he would certainly have stamped it in
the smallest species ; whereas this was a sort of medal, and
by its magnitude declared the greatness of the victory and
the booty. This Demareta was the daughter of Theron
tyrant of Agrigentum, and after Gelon's decease was mar-
ried to Polyzelus his brother, as we learn from the Scholiast
of Pindar ;^ who adds too, that from her a Sicilian coin was
called Ar}ixapeTeLov. Diodorus acquaints us farther,? that
Gelon out of part of the booty made a golden tripus of
XVI. talents, and sent it to Delphi a donary to Apollo. And
there's an epigram of Simonides upon the same tripus,
which I suppose is not yet published, and therefore I shall
give it here out of the MS. Anthologia ;
^tficoviSov.
^tj/jlI PeXft)v', ^lipcova, UoXv^rjXov, Opaav/SovKov,
IlalSa^ Aeivopjevev^ tov rpliroh^ dvdi/jLevao,
'E^ eKarbv Xcrpoov koI TrevTrjKOVTa raXdvrcov
AapeTLOv ')(pvaov ra? heKdTa<^ BeKarav.
Where it's observable, that Simonides, who perhaps was
then in Sicily, and saw the tripus, says it weighed above l.
talents; but Diodorus says xvi. If we believe the Scholiast
of Pindar, P 'twas not one tripus only, but several, that
Gelon dedicated to Apollo, and this inscription was en-
graved on them ;
^rj/jLi Tek(ov\ 'lepcovay TIoXv^rfKov, Opao-v/SovXoy,
Tlaiha^; AetvofjLevev; rov^ rpLTroEa^; Oefjuevai,
Bdpj3apa ViKTjaavra^ edvr}, nroWrjv Be 'jTapaa')(elv
^vfjbfia')(pv "EXk7)a-LV X^^P ^^ iXevdepiJjv.
Which appears to be the very same epigram with that
" Schol. Find. Olymp. ii. 'A^' ?i$ koi rh A7}fiap4r€ioj/ vSjJLurixa iv 'ZiK^Xiq..
« Diod. ibid.
P Schol. Find. Fyth. i. ^hvadilvat. t^ 6f^ XP^^*^^^ rpl-noSas iiriypd\l/avTa ravra.
SICILIAN MONEY. 59
ascribed to Simonides; and the one perhaps is to be sup-
plied out of the other, the latter distich of this being to be
added to that. But what can be the meaning of Aaperlov
')(^pvaov ? If we consider the passages already cited out of
Diodorus, Pollux, and Pindar's Scholiast, which all belong
to the subject of this epigram, we can scarce doubt but the
true reading is,
AajJbapeTiov '^^pvaov ra? BeKara^ BeKarav'^
where the poet was constrained of mere necessity to use a
paeon instead of a dactyl, as another poet did without any
necessity ;
'AWa rebv ovirore Ovfiov ivl (rrrjOeaaiv eVet^e.f
But the copiers, not considering this, and observing the
verse to have a syllable too much, contracted the word into
Aaperiov, which has been done above dcc. years ago, as it's
evident from Suidas : Aaperlov, says he,^ tov rpLiroBa S'
dvOifjuevac ef i/carov XirpoiV Kal irevTrjKovra rakavTcov Aa-
perlov yjpvGov rd<; BeKura^ ; where the word, we see, is set
down, but there's no explication of it. He has only given
part of our epigram, where he found that Aaperlov : and as
that word both in Suidas and the epigram is to be corrected
from other authors, so the rest of that passage of Suidas is
to be corrected from the epigram.
AEKAAITPON. AITPA, HMIAITPION.
Aristotle, in his treatise of the Agrigentine Government^
informs us, that a person was fined there {rptaKovra \lrpas;)
[* Toup, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) II. 509., reads Aaperlov, and adds:
" Idem Aafiaperiov, Aafiperlov, et Aaperlov. Ut 'Oix66poov, S/xOpoov, et SOpoou.
" 'OfiSCvyes, '6ix(vyes, et '6(vy€s. 'O/JiSrpix^s, '6p.rpix^s, et "6rpix^s. Nimirum rh
" /a' euphoniae gratia non rar6 omittitur." — See this epigram in Anth. Gr. ex
rec. Br. (ed Jacobs.) 1. 66., Anth. Gr. ad fid. Cod. Pal. 8fc. I. 253., and Poet. Min.
Gr. (ed. Gaisford.) I. 373., where the common lection, Aaperlov, is given. — D.]
[f Praxilla in Hephaest. Enchir. p. 22. ed. Gaisf., where .... ^ireidoy. — D.]
1 Suid. V. Aaperlov.
VOL. II.
60 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
XXX. litrce ; and that a Ittra was equal in value to an ^gi-
ruBan obolus. The same he repeats m his discourse about
the Himercean Government, that the litra ivas equal to an
obolus, and the heKokuTpov contained x. litrce, and was worth
a Corinthian stater.^ These particulars are told us twice by
Pollux^ in his ivth and ixth l)ook^ so that there's no room
for any suspicion that he mistook his author. Alt pa, says
Hesychius^ 6^o\6<y, ol Be vofjuLcrfxa irapa ^CKeXoW ol he eVt
(TTa6/jL(bv' ol Be 'P(o/jLaloL Bta to /3' Xl^pa. Photius in his MS.
Lexicon, Alrpa rjv fiev vo/jLio-fid tl, oo? A[(j)iko<^' iirl^ re
araOfJiov ^ETrlyapixo^; re koI ^cocppoyy e')(^pr)aavro* ^o(f)OK\7]<;
Be XirpoaKOTTOv ^tjctl rbv dpyvpafjuoc/Sbv drro rov vofMLcr-
fiara* Hesychius again, ALrpoa-Koirov^, dp<yvpa/jLoc^ov<;,
diro rov ^cKeXcKov yofj.t(rfjLaro<;, o Kokelrai Xlrpa. Here
are two good authors concurring with Pollux, besides the
three others that one of them cites, Diphilus, Epicharmus,
and Sophron ; but we have not the names of them only, but
the very passages too preserved to us in Pollux. The comic
poets, says he,^ of Sicily use the word Xlrpa sometimes for a
small piece of money ; as when Sophron says, in his book
called TvvaiKeloi Mlfioc, 'O fxtcr6o<; BeKoXirpov (the true
reading here seems to be BeKa Xirpoiv or Xirpdv), and again
in his 'AvBpeloL MlfxoL, ^cbaao 8' ovBe Ta9 Bvo \irpa<i Bv-
valval ; and sometimes for a pound weight, as Demologus in
his Medea,
TerpaKovraXirpov^ rivl veavl(TK(p 7reBa<;.
In the vulgar editions it's 7ralBa<;; which Salmasius* has
truly corrected rreBa^, chains of xl. pound weight. But
there's another error still remaining; Arj/noXoyo^, a poet as
unheard of as Phalaris's two tragedians Aristolochus and
Ly sinus : instead of which Demologus, the MS. of Is. Vos-
' Pollux, p. 216, 436. [=454, 1057. ed. Hemst.—D.~\
[* €irl 5e rov err. k. t. A. ed. Pors. — D.]
» Pollux, p. 215. [=454. ed. Hemst.—D.}
' Salmas. de Modo Usur. p. 234.
SICILIAN MONEY. 61
sius has it ^€iv6\oxo<;, which is certainly the true reading.
For this Dinolochus was really a Sicilian comic poet (as
Pollux here supposes him)^ beinff a Syracusan, or an Agri-
gentine, and the son, or, as others say, the scholar of Epi-
charmus, and the author of xii. Doric comedies.^ He is
cited again by Pollux,v JetvoXoxo'i eV 'Afjua^oatv; and twice
or thrice by Hesychius. But our author proceeds, and tells
us,^ that even some of the Athenian comics mention the word
Xlrpa, as Philemon in his play hiscribed XiKeXiKo^;, and
Posidippus in his TaKdreia. In the editions 'tis printed
TaXdrr), which learned men have corrected TaXdreia : and
the great Salmasius acutely observes, that it appears by the
names of these two comedies, that the scene and subject
of them were in Sicily; so that the poets there used the
word XuTpa not as Attic money, but as Sicilian. In another
place,^ our author ascribes the play not to Philemon, but to
Diphilus, as Photius also seems to have done in the passage
above cited ; but Athenseus gives it to Philemon ;y so that it
was dubious, even in those days, whether of them was the
author of it. The words of Diphilus are these ;
Olov dyopd^eiv Traard, /jLrjSe ev S' e^eiv.
El /jLTj KiKLvvovf; d^Lov^ XtTpacv Svolv.^
In the Vossian MS. it's irdvra for iraarrd, which may seem
the truer lection, because of the elegant opposition there
between Trdvra and fjuT^he ev. But iracrrd too is a very
tolerable lection, being a dish made of cheese and other
ingredients; and the cheese of Sicily, where the action of
this play lies, was famous, as the poet tells us in this very
comedy.^ But Epicharmus, continues Pollux,^ mentions
several names of money in his play called ApTra^yaL The
" Suid. V. Aetj/oA. ^ Pollux, p. 500. [=1368. ed. HemsL—D.I
-^ Id. p. 217. [=455. ed. Hemst.—T>.']
^ Pollux, p. 436. [=1058. ed. Hemst.—D.]
y Athen. p. 658. [=V. 395. ed. Schw.—l>.'\
[* Pollux, p. 1058. ed. Hemst.—D.]
^ Athen. ibid. » Pollux, 436. [=p. 1059. ed. Hemsf.~I).'\
62 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
passage there is thus represented in the Vossian MS.,
'flaTTCp ai irovrjpal fidvTC6<; ai&* vTrovefiovrai jvva2Ka<; fiay-
pa<; dfiTreTaKLov dpyvpiov, dXkat, he Xirpav at S* dv ^ft-t-
XcTpov Be^ofievai,, Kal iravra ytyvcoaKovrc. And I guess,
from the emendation of Salmasius,^ that the Palatine MS.
had it exactly so too, and perhaps the MS. of Vossius is
nothing but a copy of it. Salmasius has thus reduced the
words into trochaic verses ;
— ' flair ep al irovqpai fidvrcef;,
A19 VTrovefiovrai yvvalKa<; jxaypd^, al ireTTOvyiciov
ApyvpioVy oKkai he Xirpav, al 8' r/filXcrpov he')(^6fievai
Udvra yiyv(i)<TK0VTi
Where in the third verse the true measure is not observed, a
spondee being put there instead of a trochee : but as for
ficopd<; in the second verse, the Dorians frequently made the
accusative a? short, as we see in Theocritus. I would read
the whole in this manner ;
airep ai Trovrjpai yu-avrte?,
AW^ vTTovefjLOvrac yvva2Ka<; ficopd^;, dp, irevTOvyKiOV
^Apyvpeov, dWac Be Xlrpav, al S' dv tj/jlcXltplov
Ae')(opbevaty Kal irdvra yuyv (dctkovti to3 rr^vdv XoycpJ^
The three last words do not appear in the MS.; but the
vulgar editions have tw tl 'Xoyca, which must be lengthened
by a syllable to close up the trochaic. The meaning of the
^ Salmas. p. 261. [De Modo Usur.— D.]
[* " — Kol iravra yiyv^CKovri KHTIAHt AOrHt nostra emendatio
" verissima et elegantissima est. Vox K(ariXo$ usitata est de muliebri garrulitate
" et sermone fraudulento." Toup, Emend, in Suid. II. 312. In support of his
emendation, Toup cites Hesiod. Op. 373. ; Theocrit. in Syracus. 64, 87, 89. ; and
Suidas V. KwtiAtj.
In Lobeck's Aglaophamus, II. 1040. the passage is given thus;
&(rTr€p at irovripaX fidurics,
<dff vTTovefiovrai yvva7Kas ficopas, al fiev ovyKiav
apyvplov, ral S' rifxiXiTpov, raX 5e X'lTpav dex^H-^vah
KoX TO TrdvTa yivuxTKovri. D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. 63
passage is this; Lake those roguish fortune-teller s^ that
wheedle foolish tvomen, some of them exacting a five-ounce
piece of money, some a litra, some half a litra ; and, as those
silly women believe, they know all things. "Aim in the second
verse is for av, for in ancient writing, when the N came
before M or E or IT or ^, it was changed into M; as in the
Chron. Arundelianum, EM IIAPfll for ivlldpa ; and in the
Marble of Smyrna, EM MAFNH^IAI for iv Mayvrja-ia:
and the modern Greeks, though they write it N in those
cases, yet they pronounce it as M. In the third verse I read
r]fjLCk{,TpLov instead of rjp^LkiTpov', for I observe that's the
form of the compounds with rjfii, as r]fjuia[jb^6pLov, r^pLLOco-
pcLKLov, '^fMLBLTrXotSiov, rj/jLtcr^alpcov, '^fiCTToSLov, and many
more. Another passage from Epicharmus is thus cited by
the same Pollux,^ ^Eyo) yap to jBaXavriov XtrpoBeKaXiTpov
i^dyyoov re Kal irevrdyyiov ; which is thus exhibited in the
Vossian MS.,* ^Eyoy yap roye ^aXdvTLOv XcTpoSeKdXcrpo^
(TTarrjp e^dvrcov re TrerdyKLov. And so in all probability
the Palatine MS. reads it; as one may gather from Sal-
masius,*^ who thus corrects it by the help of it ;
'jE^' (o yap TO ^aXdvTiov, Xlrpa,
AeKdXiTpo^i (TTarrjp, i^dvrcov re Kal ireTTovyiaov.
But by this emendation both the verses have false measure,
neither does the sense appear very elegant. It seems to me
very probable that ararrjp in the MSS. is an interpolation ;
because in other places Pollux tells us that the BeKdXcrpov
was worth a Corinthian o-rarrjp, from whence the inter-
polater borrowed it, and clapt it in here. But it cannot be
Epicharmus's own, for two reasons, both because it is no
Sicilian word, and because it makes a tautology. If I may
have leave to propose an emendation, I would read the
passage thus ;
«= Pollux, ibid. [p. 1059. ed. Hemst.—D.^
[♦ But see the reading of the MS. as given in the notes on Pollux, p. 1059.
ed. Hemst. — D.]
^ Salmas. p. 260. [De Modo Usur.— D.]
64 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
-*!E^ft) r^ap Toye j3d\dvTtov Xtrpdv
AeKoXcrpcov re TrX^Jpe?, e^avTcov re, Kal TrevTOvyKLCOv.
I have my purse, says he_, full of litres, and denares, and two-
ounce pieces, and five- ounce pieces.
NOTMMOX.
Julius Pollux, who wrote his book at Rome, and dedi-
cated it to the Emperor Commodus, tells him, that the word
vov/jbfjLo^ appears indeed to be of Roman original, but it*s
really Greek, belonging to the Dorians of Sicily and Italy.^
So Varro also expressly teaches, that the word nummus was
borrowed from the Sicilians : In argento, nummi : id a Sicu-
lisj The same Pollux adds, that Aristotle, in his treatise
of the Tarentine Government, says, a certain coin there was
called vovfifjiof;, which for its impress had Taras the son of
Neptune astride upon a dolphin. Half a score of these Taren-
tine vovfi^oi, with that stamp upon them, are in Goltziiis.
Again, our author acquaints us, that according to Aristotle,
the old talent of Sicily contained xxiv. vovfifioi, but the
later xii. only; and that a vovfifjio^ was equivalent to an
obolus and a half^ And then he confirms the authority of
the word vovfi^o<; by two passages of Epicharmus;t the
first of them, Ki]pv^ Icov €v6v<^ irpLw jjlol BeKa vov/j,/jlcov
p.6(T')(ov KaXr]v; which is thus to be distinguished, and re-
duced to iambics ',
Kapv^ Iq)v
Ev6v<; Trplo) /jloc 8eKa vovfi/jbcov ^6G-')(pv koXtiv.X
^ Pollux, p. 436. [=1056. ed. Hemst.—D.']
' Varro de L. L. p. 41. [42.— D.] [* Poll. p. 1068. ed. Hemst.—D.l
[t Poll. p. 1056. ed. Hemst.—D.']
\X Valckenaer, ad^rfow. v. 16. {Theocr. Decern Eidyl.), cites this passage, and
reads vSyt-wv and KoKav, adding, " Conf. Bentlei. c. Boyl. p. 263. [ed. Leu.] sed
" sic Epicharmum suspicor suo aevo vocem scripsisse vSfiwv, quam postesl aliter
" scribebant, nummos, vovfifiovs, Tabula Heracleensis vocat NOMHS, 75." —
Toup, Emend, in Suid. I. 419., reads vS/xcav and KdKav: and, Emend, in Poll. IV.
382., unhappily proposes EvQvs ttpiSo vovfxnuv 5e/ca iioi fxdffxov koXtju. — D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. 65
There seems to be no room for doubting but that the
verses were thus written by the poet; and yet the reader
may take notice that there's a spondee in the fourth place
instead of an iambic ; but then it is softened by two short
syllables that come immediately before it. The same mea-
sure seems to be used in the second fragment of Epi-
charmus, cited by Pollux ; ^AX)C 6/j,(o<; Kokal koI ttIol apv€<;
evpTjaovao Be fioL Koi vovfifiovs, TrcoXarcdi^ yap ivrl ra?
fiarpo^;-, which is thus reducible to trochaics, though here
the MS. do not assist us ;
^AX\! o/jiCt)<; KoXai re ttlol t apve<; €vp7]CT0vcr[ fjLOO
AeKa vovjjbjjbov^, TrcoXareat yap ivrl fiera Ta<^ iJLaTepo<^.\
TIlo<; I take to be a true Doric word, from whence come
TTLorepo'^, TTtoraTO?.
The Divisions of the AITP A.
JJENTOTrKION, a coin of five ounces brass, or of
silver equivalent to them, is mentioned by Epicharmus in
that fragment produced above ;
^E^dvTCOV T€y KOI TreVTOVyKLCOV.
The Latins called it quincunx. And perhaps, as the Latins
had the septunx too, so the Sicilians might have eTrrovyKiov,
though we have now no author that mentions it. I will
correct here a passage of Festus, which has created some
trouble to the learned antiquaries of this and the last age.
Sextantarii asses, &c. The asses, says he, 0/ two ounces
weight, called sextantarii, came into use in the second Punic
[* Eds. of Pollux iru\aTias. — D.]
[t Toup, Emend, in Suid. I. 419., reads vSfiws: and, Emend, in Poll. IV.
382., proposes an alteration of the line, so objectionable in all respects, that it
need not be quoted here. — Koen {ad Greg. Cor. p. 130.) would read ir«XoT4/c5y
yhip ivrl ras ixarpSs, sunt enim matris vendacis. — D.]
VOL. II. K
66 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
war ; to which he adds, septuennio quoque (anno) usus est,
ut priore numero ; sed id non permansit in usu, nee amplius
processit in majorem.^ Here Festus is very much blamed by
Budaeus, Hottoman, Harduin, and others, for affirming that
the sextantarii asses continued in use seven years only, since
it plainly appears from Pliny that they lasted a good while
longer. But the fault is not in Festus, but in those that
transcribed him ill; for the true reading is thus, SeTptuncio
quoque Varro usus est, ut priore numero, &c. that is, Varro
used the word septuncium, as he did the number before it
(sextans) ; but the word did not continue in use, nor did the
compounds from uncia go to a higher number than seven. He
means, the Latins did not say octuncium, nonuncium, decun-
cium. But let us hear Varro himself, who will be voucher
for this emendation. Septunx, a septem et uncid conclusum.
Reliqua obscuriora, quod a deminutione : et ea quee demi-
nuuntur, ita sunt ut extremas syllabas habeant : ut a duo-
decim una demptd uncid, deunx : dextans, dempto sextante :
dodrans, dempto quadrante : bes, ut olim des, dempto triente}^
The meaning of which is, that they went no higher than
septunx in the compounds from the number and uncia, but
they said bes for viii. ounces, dodrans for ix., dextans for
X., deunx for xi. : so that, when Festus tells us in another
place, Nonuncium, quod vulgo magistri ludi appellant, signi-
ficat novem uncias, we are to understand him, that nonun-
cium, though it was used by schoolmasters when they taught
boys, was no legitimate word, nor of popular use.
TPIA^. TETPA^. EBAH, The account that Pollux
gives of the divisions of the Xlrpa is exscribed from Aris-
totle's book of the Himenean Polity : the passages are very
faulty ; but, because they come twice over, they may easily
be corrected, by comparing one with the other, and both
with the Roman monies which were borrowed from Sicily.
s Festus, in Sextant. ^ Varro de L. L. iv. p. 41. [42. — D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. 67
^ApiaroTeXr)';, says he, iv rfj ^Ifiepalcov iroXiTela ^7)a\v, co?
ol fiev ^iKeXcwrac tov<; Bvo '^aXKov^; e^aXcrpa (p. 436. €^
ToXavra) KaXovai, rov Be eva ovyKLav, tov<; Be rpelf; rpid-
Kovra (p. 436. rpla raXavra) tov<s Be ef r/fjuiXcrpov, rov Be
o^oXov Xlrpav, rov Be KoptvOiov a-Tarrjpa BeKoXcrpov, bro
BeKa 6^o\ov<i Bvvarai,^ Where the first error of the copiers
is e^dXcTpa in one place, and e^ raXavra in the other : in
the former place the Vossian and Palatine MSS. have it
Bi^avra, in the latter they vary not from the editions. Now,
from all the three words compared together, the true reading
easily results, e^dvra : so Hesychius, 'E^d<;, elBo<; {vofila--
/juarof;) irapd SvpaKovaLoi<;; and Arcadius the grammarian,
in his MS. tract we pi Tovcov, quoted by Salmasius,J 'E^d^
eirl TToaoTT^TO^ ov Trepca-Trdrai, which is word for word too
in Theodosius's MS. Epitome of Herodian's book called
KaOoXov, in the public library at Oxford. And we met with
the word just now in the fragment of Epicharmus,
AeKaXcTpcbv re TrX^pe?, e^dvTcoy re, /cal irevrovyKlcDV.
For the MS. there reads it e^dvTcov; and it's well known
that to are commonly mistaken by copiers for co. I myself
have had frequent experience of it in sheets from the press :
as in my Notes on Callimachus, it's somewhere printed tgjv
instead of rlov. The second mistake of Pollux's copiers is
TpcaKovra and rpla rdXavra for rptdyra. Hesychius, TpL-
dvTO<; wopvrj, Xa/jL^dvovcra rpidKovra, 6 icm, Xeirrd ecKocri.
Here again is the very same error that the copiers of Pollux
committed, rpidKovra instead of rpiavra. For this and
e^a? being foreign words, and not commonly understood in
Greece, had the common fate of all words of that sort, to be
corrupted by transcribers.
OTTKIA, So the MS. has it, instead of oi/yyla, and
« Pollux, p. 216, 436. [=454, 1057. ed. Hemst.—B.']
^ Salmas. de Modo Usur. p. 256. [The treatise of Arcadius was printed in
1820, edited by Mr. E. H. Barker.— D.]
68 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
that's the truer reading, though it's written both ways in the
books of the Greek physicians, in the time of the Roman
empire, when they speak of weights and doses. Photius in
his MS. Lexicon, Ov^yKiav, toy araOfiov, ^oxppcov koL ^Ettl-
'^apfio<;. Suidas, OvjKLa, €l8o<; /jiirpov, tj aradfjio^.
The ancient writers were content to be moderately accu-
rate in their comparisons of monies. They commonly reck-
oned the Roman denare to be equivalent to an Attic drachm,
though in strict examination they were not so. But they
thought it better to neglect those fractions, for the conveni-
ency of expressing themselves in round sums ; and they
considered they were historians, and not masters of the
mint. We have an instance of this in the very thing that
now lies before us ; where the Sicilian money is thus ad-
justed by Aristotle to the monies of Greece; An ovyKia,
says he, is one Attic chalcus, and the rjfiCktTpLov is six chalci,
and the litra is an jEgincean obolus.^ Now, if we examine
this rigidly, the computation cannot be true. For the litra,
according to Aristotle, contained xii. Attic chalci, and yet
was equal to an ^ginean obolus ; so that, by this reckoning,
the ^ginean obolus was equal to xii. chalci. But the ^gi-
nean obolus was to the Attic as x. is to vi. ; and the Attic
obolus had the value of viii. chalci : therefore the ^ginean
obolus was not equal to xii. chalci, for the proportion of
XII. to VIII. is not the same with the proportion of x. to vi.
But, as I said before, such small differences were neglected
by the old writers, and they were content if their calcula-
tions were tolerably exact. Diodorus Siculus says^ the
irevrriKovTakLTpov of Demareta was equivalent to x. Attic
drachms : by which computation a heicaXirpov was equal to
II. Attic drachms. But Aristotle computes that a heKoXi-
Tpov was equivalent to xii. -^ginean oboli, which are more
than II. Attic drachms. The same Aristotle assigns rpla
rjfiiojSoXLa, an obolus and a half, as an equivalent to the
Sicilian vov/h/jlo^; where he seems to mean the JEginean
^ Pollux, p. 216, 436. [3^=454, 1057. ed. Hcmst.—D.}
\
SICILIAN MONEY. 69
obolus ; and at that rate the vov/Mfjio<i was the fourth part
of an ^ginean drachm. But as the nummus at Rome was
the ivth of the denarius, so the vov/jl/jlo^; in Sicily seems to
have been the ivth of the BeKoXirpov. The SeKoXcrpov,
therefore^ by this reckoning, was equal to an iEginean
drachm, or to one Attic drachm and f . And it's no great
wonder if Aristotle in different books should make such
different computations ; since in one and the same para-
graph his accounts, as we have seen, are not consistent.
But the learned Salmasius and Gronovius, instead of rpta
rjfjbiopoXLa in Pollux, read it rpirov r^fjuLo^oKiov, two oboli
and a half; and if this correction be admitted, the calcula-
tion will be the juster. For, a litra being equal to an
obolus, the vov/jl/jlo^;, two oboli and a half, will be exactly
the ivth part of the Be/caXtrpov ; as the nummus, being two
asses and [a] half at Rome, and therefore called the sestei'tius,
was the ivth of a denare. And indeed it must needs be
owned, whether we read rpla rjiMLo^oXia or rpirov rffxio^O'
Xiov, that as iv. nummi made a denarius, so iv. vov/jl/j,oc
made a SeKoXtrpov ; as the passage of Festus compared with
Pollux, and the Roman accounts compared with the Sicilian,
make it plain beyond controversy.
The Roman triens signified a third part of an as, or of
XII. ounces, the quadrans a fourth, and the sextans a
sixth. This is certain, and needs not now to be proved.
But yet, among the Sicilians, from whom the Romans bor-
rowed those words, a TPIA^ is said to mean three parts of
the Xlrpa, or three ounces, not the third part of it, or four
ounces ; and so TETPAX to be four ounces, and EKTAX
to be six ounces ; which makes a very wide difference be-
tween the accounts of the two nations. Tpel<; ')(aKKol,
says Pollux,^ oirep rptdvra ; and again, Tptdvra oirep rpel^
')(a\Kol, that is, a TPIA^ means three ounces. Terpdf;
BrjXol reo-aapa^; ')(a\Kov<;, says Hesychius, a TETPAX
stands for four ounces. And in another place, Tpodvra,
' PoUux, p. 216, 436. [=454, 1057. ed. Hemst.—D.}
70 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
oirep XeTTTa el/cocn, a TPIAS is xx. lepta. Which is the
same again with three chalci or ounces, one chalcus con-
taining VII. lepta. What shall we say to this matter ? must
we disbelieve these grammarians ? or suppose their copiers
have done them wrong ? or must we take it at their words,
that the Sicilians reckoned so, though we do not know why ?
Jos. Scaliger supposes"^ that the Sicilians took those words
in the same sense as the Romans did 5 and that the gram-
marians were mistaken, though, says he, it is not so much a
mistake as an idiotism ; /or the vulgar used to call a division
into IV. parts tetrantes, and into viii. octantes, as we may
see in Vitruvius. On the contrary, Salmasius maintains^
that the grammarians are in the right, and that the Sicilians
took TpLa<;, and rerpdf;, and ^e/ca?, for iii., iv., and x. parts
of XII. ounces or litres; and that the Romans were to blame
for changing the meaning of those words ; and that Vitruvius* s
sense of them is not an idiotism, but the true and proper
notion. If so mean a writer as I am may have the liberty
to interpose in the controversy of such great men, I am per-
suaded the thing was thus. Both Sicilians and Romans had
the same notion and use of the words : rpta^; and triens,
rerpaf; and tetrans or quadrans, ef a? and sextans, meant the
iiid, ivth, and vith part of any whole, whatsoever was
spoken of; so that when they were applied to a pound
weight of xii. ounces, they must signify iv., iii., and 11.
ounces. Thus far I agree with Scaliger ; and I think Sal-
masius was quite out when he espoused the other opinion.
For the words themselves refute him ', all we have of them of
this form in the division of the litra being only these three,
€^a9, T/3ta9, and rer/oa?; but if efa? meant six ounces, and
so the rest, then we should have had other such divisions of
the litra, eTrra? for vii. ounces, oKra^ for viii., ivved^ for
IX., Be/cd^ for x., ivBeKa^ for xi. On the other side, if efa?
signify the vith part of the pound, that is, 11. ounces, and
"> Scalig. de Re Num. p. 5, 6.
" Salmas. de Modo Usur. p. 254, &c.
SICILIAN MONEY. 71
the Other two words in like manner, then the reason is plain,
why we have no more divisions of it than those three ; be-
cause ihey are the only divisions of xii. that make even
numbers, all the rest producing fractions ; as irevrd^, a vth
of XII. ounces, would be ii. ounces and iV* oi an ounce ;
67rTa9, a viith, would be i. ounce andf; oktol^, an viiith,
would be I. ounce and J; e'vvea?, a ixth, would be i. ounce
andi; Se/ca?, a xth, would be i. ounce audi; evSe/ca?, a
xith, would be i. ounce and iV- These being all fractions,
the Sicilians would not coin any money of these several divi-
sions, because, instead of being useful, they would puzzle
and confound all reckonings. But if Salmasius's opinion
were true, we should certainly have had Trevra? for a coin of
V. ounces ; for we are sure they had money of that weight,
but then they did not call it Trevra?, but irevTov^Kiov, as in
the fragment of Epicharmus ;
This single word TrevrovyKcov is a demonstration against
Salmasius. For as the Romans, taking quadrans for a ivth
part of XII. ounces, could not express the notion of a v.
ounce piece by quintans, but by quincunx, so, by the way of
reverse, the Sicilians, expressing a v. ounce piece by Trevr-
ovjKcov, could not mean iv. ounces by rerpa^, but the ivth
part of xii. ounces. Again, we are told by Pollux, that the
Sicilians took k^avra for ii. ounces; but according to
Salmasius, e^a? must mean a vi. ounce piece, which is
utterly improbable upon another account, because efa?
would then be the same with '^fiiXlrpcov. But as the Ro-
mans used semissis to denote a piece of vi. ounces, and had
therefore no such word as sexunx, so the Sicilians, having
the word r^fiikiTpiov, or vi. ounces, as appears from Epi-
charmus, Aristotle, and Pollux, had no need to say ef-
[* Altered to " |." in the ed. of 1777, where is the following note: " Dr.
" Bentley had printed it ii. ounces and Ji-; too hastily supposing |. to have
" been equal to JL."— D.]
72 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
ovyKiov or e^a<; for the same weight. ^Tis true_, m some
MSS. of Pollux 'tis not k^avra, but hi^avra ; and Salmasius
is pleased to prefer that reading, as a Doricism, from Stf 69.
But it's only in one place of Pollux that the MSS. have it
8if ; in the other they all read it ef . And, with submission_,
they were not the Dorians, but the lonians, that used Stf 09
for 8i(T(To<;, as we see in xx. places of Herodotus. And if
the Sicilians used St^dvra in Salmasius's sense, why did
they not say rpi^dvra, but rptdvra ? for Herodotus has
rpL^ol for rpoaaol, as well as Bc^ol for Blcto-ol. Upon all
accounts, then, I espouse the opinion of Scaliger, against
that of Salmasius : but in the remaining part of the dispute I
humbly conceive they are both mistaken; the one, while he
excuses the use of rpta? and rerpd<; for iii. and iv. parts of
XII., as an idiotism, which may be justified by Vitruvius;
the other, while he thinks Vitruvius must be taken in that
sense which he esteems the true notion of the words. The
passage of Vitruvius is thus ; Dividuntur circinationes , , , te-
trantibus in partes quatuor, vel octantibus in partes octo, ductis
lineis.^ Scaliger interprets these tetr antes and octantes to
be a square and an octagon inscribed in a circle; which
jnistake is so palpable, that it needs no refutation. Salma-
sius says, tetrans here means a thing with iv. parts, and
octans a thing with viii. On the contrary, to me it seems
evident that Vitruvius takes tetrans for a quadrant, or the
ivth part of a circle, and octans for the viiith part. A
circle, says he, must be divided into iv. parts, tetrantibus.
If tetrans had meant all the iv. parts, he would not have
said tetrantibus, but tetrante. But there's another place
that plainly shews what he understands by tetrans. Ducatur
. . rotunda circinatio . . . .et in ed catheto respondens diametros
agatur. Tunc ab summo sub abaco inceptum in singulis te-
trantorum actionibus dimidiatum oculi spatium minuatur, doni-
cum in eundem tetrantem, qui est sub oculo,^ venial."^ Here
he supposes a circle to be divided by two diameters at right
" Vitruvius, x. 11. [* Eds. of Vitruv. " sub abaco." — D.]
p Vitruvius, iii. 3.
SICILIAN MONEY. 73
angles^ that is, into iv. equal parts ; and these iv. parts he
calls tetrantorum, and one ivth he calls tetrantem. So that
Vitruvius's notion of tetrans and octans does not differ from
the received notion of quadrans among the Romans, as
Scaliger and Salmasius thought. They were taken by Vitru-
vius, and every body else, for the ivth and viiith part of
any whole whatsoever ; and all the words of that form that
could be applied to the divisions of the as or libra have the
very same meaning ; sextans the vith part of the whole as,
triens the iiid, quadrans the ivth ; and so among the Si-
cilians, e^a?, Tpca<;, rerpa?. Octans, indeed, was not used
as a division of the libra, because, as I observed before, it
would have made a troublesome fraction ; but it was used in
the division of other things, whether magnitude or number,
as here by Vitruvius for the viiith part of a circle. So
AEKA'X, a Sicilian word mentioned by Arcadius,^ To heKa^
TrepKrirarat, 6t€^ iirl TToa-OTtjro^ rdacrerat, though it was no
species of money, for the reason above named, yet it was a
name of measure and quantity, and denoted the xth part of
any thing. It appears, then, from the whole account, that
the ancient Romans had all their names and species of
money from the Dorians of Sicily and Italy, and continued
every word in its original sense. And because money was
first coined at Rome by Servius Tullius, who began his reign
Olymp. L. 4., and died Olymp. lxi. 4., and consequently
was contemporary with Phalaris, His a plain case that in
Phalaris's time, as well as afterwards, the Sicilians had those
species of money.
After I had prepared this defence of my account of the
Sicilian talent, I observed that Mr. B. in his second Edition
had made some few additions to his remarks upon this
article. At first he told us, it would not, perhaps, be difficult
to offer some emendations of Pollux, that might set these
things right (p. 81.) : but it seems, for some secret reasons,
1 Salmas. p. 256. [De Modo Usur.— D.] [* '6ti. Salm. ibicf.—D.}
VOL. II. L
74 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
he would not oblige us with them. But in his 2d Edition,
being in better humour ; not to be too reserved, says he^ with
the Dr., I shall now offer tvhat may set Pollux right, and I
wish the Dr. himself were as capable of emendation (ibid).
I thank the gentleman for his good wish ; but if he can give
me no better emendation than this that he has given Pollux,
he would be no better a dir'ector to me than somebody has
been to him. His first conjecture is, that ef raXavra, oirep
earl hvo 'x^oXkoI, is an error of the copyists for e^dXcrpov.^
A profound conjecture indeed ! 'tis but borrowed from the
other place of Pollux,^ where the text has it e^dXirpa ; and
I have proved above that both places are corrupted, and that
the true reading is e^dvra. Which e^dXcrpov, says Mr. B.,
signified the \ith part of a litra ; and so the rest of the
compounds of Xirpa in the same manner. Here our Emen-
dator makes e^dXiTpov mean the with part of a litra, which,
by all analogy and all examples of authors, must needs
mean vi. whole litres; so that he's out of his reckoning no
less than six times six. What thinks he of e^d/nTjvo^;, e^a-
njfjL€po<;, 6^a6Tr]<;, e^d'iTiqj(y<;, 6^aSdKTvXo<;, e^aS/3a^//,09, efa-
(TTij(0'^, and XX. more ? Must these signify the vith of a
month, day, or year, he, ov, as all the world has yet sup-
posed, must they mean vi. months, vi. days, vi. years, and
so on ? According to Mr. B.'s wise computation, the
heKdXiTpov must not be ten litrae, but the tenth of a litra,
which is a hundred times less than Aristotle and Pollux
dreamed of. The TrevTrjKovrdXLrpov must not be l. litres^
but the Lth of a litra, which is 2500 less than poor Dio-
dorus Siculus thought it, who values it at x. Attic drachms.
The prisoner's chains, that Diphilus [Dinolochus] calls re-
TpaKovrdXirpoi,^ must not be xl. pound weight, but the XLth
part of a pound, which would not be quite so heavy as some
of those in Newgate. But of all men Aristophanes is in the
most dangerous condition with his
' Pollux, p. 436. [=1057. ed. Hemst.—B.']
^ Id. p. 216. [=^5i. ed. Hemst.~D.}
t Pollux, p. 215. [=454. ed. Hemst. — See p. 60. of this volume. — D.]
SICILIAN MONEY. 75
HoOev av Xd^oLfXL prj/jba /jLVpt,dfjL(f)opov ;^
for he wished here for something that would hold the
measure of 10^000 casks : but Mr. B. can tell him that it
means no more than the I0,000th part of a cask; so that
either the poet or Mr. B. are mistaken a hundred millions in
the reckoning. After so glorious a beginning, Mr. B. tells
us in the next sentence, that the Sicilian talent was a piece
of silver that answered to lx. litrce of brass. It seems he
cannot open his mouth without mistaking; for the talent
was no piece of silver, nor a single coin, but a sum, as a
pound sterling is in English ; and 'twas reckoned a talent,
whether it was paid in silver or brass, whether with vi.
silver SeKoXirpa, or xxiv. vovjjl/jloc, or lx. Xlrpac, or cxx.
TjjjLLKLTpia, or all in ef avre? or ov^iciai of brass ; just as a
pound here is the same, whether it be paid in crowns, or
shillings, or half-pennies, or farthings. His very next sen-
tence acquaints us, that this lx. pound weight of brass was
then divided into xxiv. pieces called vov/mfiot, each vovii^io^
being equal to two pounds and a half, which the Uomans
would have called nummus sestertius, as they would have
called IV. of them a decussis. Here are three mistakes in
the compass of one proposition ; so very fruitful is Mr. B.
in those happy productions. The Sicilian vovfifjuot; he makes
to be a brass piece of 2 pound and J, which was a small
piece of silver about the weight of three pence English.
Aristotle says, the Tarentine vovimixo^ had stamped upon
it TAP AX astride upon a dolphin; and there are several
silver ones of that sort yet preserved, but nothing like it in
brass. And indeed the absurdity of the Examiner's notion
is visible at first view ; for who would stamp any species of
2 pound and \ weight? the heaviest coin was but one
pound, and higher than that they did not go. He mistakes
again when he teaches us that the Romans would have
called that brass piece of 2 pound and \ a nummus sestertius.
For the Roman sestertius was, like the Sicilian, of silver : In
" Aristoph. in Pace. [v. 513. ed. Bekk. — D.]
76 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
argento, says Varro^ nummus, id a Siculis. There was no
such coin as sestertius till the second Punic war, when silver
money came into use. Then, he says, they would have
called four of those brass pieces a decussis. Here he ima-
gines that decussis was a particular coin, which was a sum
of XII. asses, or of xii. pound weight of uncoined brass; so
were tressis, quinquessis, octussis, and so on to centussis^ all
sums, and not species; though some learned men have
maintained these to be coins, and the sestertius to be brass
too, and so might lead Mr. B. out of the way. In the next
place, he proceeds to give an account how the Sicilian talent
of XXIV. vovfjbjjLOL came to sink so low as xii. vovfifioL : but
his suppositions, being bottomed upon those two mistakes,
that the talent was a single coin of silver, and the vov/jb/jLo<i a
coin of brass, they must needs be all mistake too, and the
superstructure be like the foundation. If the readers be not
yet tired with his endless blunders, they may see what work
he makes of this in pag. 81 .
But the strangest thing of all, if any thing, besides being
in the right, can be now thought strange in our Examiner,
is the flat contradictions between this new addition and what
Mr. B. had said here before. The old part is to prove that
the low Sicilian talent is a mere figment; the new is to
make it probable that there was a low talent, and to shew
how it came to be so : the old decries the passage of Pollux,
as so obscure and interpolated (p. 88.) that nothing can be
made on 't ; the new offers to clear it up, and to set the thirig
right, to make way for the low value of the talent : the old
undervalues Festus, and corrects it 3000 denares instead of
3 (p. 83, 84.) ; the new espouses the present reading 3, and
would reconcile it with other writers : in the old the e^dXc-
Tpov is interpreted vi. litrae (p. 80.), in the new it's but
II. ; in the old, he has good reason not to admit that the
Sicilian vovfjujjbo^ was the same with the Roman sestertius
(p. 79.) ; in the new, he readily admits and plainly supposes
it : in the old, a talent may be brass, and equal to a litra
(p. 89.) ; in the new, the talent is a piece of silver, and
SICILIAN MONEY. 77
ansivers to lx. litrce. Now, if the old text had been
cashiered and struck out, we might allow this new addition
as the Examiner's second thoughts, and give him the com-
mon right of changing his former opinion upon better con-
sideration. But, as if it were on purpose to amaze and
astonish his readers, the old text stands still as it did, and
the new piece is clapt into it, as if they both consisted very
well and suited together. We have had one instance before,^
where his text and his margin, like the two faces of Janus,
look quite contrary ways ; but in this place not only the
margin is at war with the text, but the very text too, by
another addition, has a civil war within itself (p. 89). Now,
the readers perhaps may be inclined to suspect that some
Assistant was over-officious here, and that Mr. B. himself
would not blow hot and cold with the same breath ; but I
would advise them not to be too rash, but to learn by my
example,^ how feeble all such arguments from reason are,
in things that concern the Examiner. However, if there
was any such Assistant that put in a finger here, I must own
myself obliged to him ; for though he bungled grievously in
his work, yet his design was wholly on my side, to account
for the low Sicilian talent, and to void all that Mr. B. had
written about it before. And I am the more confirmed in
my opinion that he was against Mr. B., because I find him
playing mere booty with him ; Suppose, says he, there was
a Sicilian talent of this low value; yet, when a talent was
simply mentioned, it must mean the common talent, made up
of 60 mincB, and those divided each into 100 drachmae, and
these into oholi (p. 89). This looks now like a salvo, to
come off with Mr. B., and to reconcile the new piece and
the old together ; but it's perfectly a banter upon him, and
seems designed for a piece of nonsense ; for the meaning of
it is exactly thus : Tfiough a current talent in Sicily was but
worth about half a crown ; yet when a talent was mentioned
in Sicily, it must mean 180 pound sterling. But we may
« See here, vol. i. p. 224. » See p. 15, &c. of this vol.
78 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
expect to have this passage cleared when Mr, B, and the
Assistant next see one another : and then too he may please
to resolve whether he will still oppose my account of the
Sicilian money; or, if not, renounce, as he promises, not
some particular Epistles only, but the whole set of them,
XV.
But, to let pass all further arguments from words
and language, to me the very matter and business of
the Letters sufficiently discovers them to be an im-
posture. What force of wit and spirit in the style,
what lively painting of humour, some fancy they dis-
cern there, I will not examine nor dispute. But,
methinks, little sense and judgment is shewn in the
ground-work and subject of them. What an impro-
bable and absurd story is that of the liv. Epistle !
Stesichorus was born at Himera ; but he chanced to
die at Catana, a hundred miles distance from home,
quite across the island. There he was buried, and a
noble monument made for him."^ Thus far the So-
phist had read in good authors. Now, upon this, he
introduces the Himerenses so enraged at the others
for having Stesichorus's ashes, that nothing less will
serve them than denouncing war, and sacking their
city. And presently an embassy is sent to Phalaris,
to desire his assistance, who, like a generous ally,
promises them what arms and men and money they
would ; but, withal, sprinkles a little dust among the
bees, advising them to milder counsels, and propos-
ing this expedient, that Catana should have Stesi-
chorus's tomb, and Himera should build a temple to
^ Suidas, Tldvia oktw et Sttjctix*
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 79
him. Now, was ever any declamator's theme so
extravagantly put? What, to go to war upon so
slight an occasion, and to call in too the assistance
of the Tyrant? Had they so soon forgot Stesi-
chorus's own counsel?" who, when, upon another
occasion, they would have asked succour of Phalaris,
dissuaded them by the fable of the horse and his
i^ider. Our Sophist had heard that seven cities con-
tended about Homer, and so two might go to blows
about another poet. But there's a difference between
that contention and this fighting in earnest. He is
as extravagant too in the honours he would raise to
his poet's memory; nothing less than a temple and
deification. Cicero tells us, that in his days there
was his statue still extant at Himera (then called
Thermae), which one would think was honour
enough. But a Sophist can build temples in the air
as cheaply and easily as some others do castles.
What an inconsistency is there between the li.
and Lxix. Epistles! In the former he declares his
immortal hatred to one Python, who, after Phalaris's
flight from Astypalaea, would have persuaded his wife
Erythia to a second marriage with himself; but
seeing her resolved to follow her husband, he poi-
soned her. Now, this could be no long time after
his banishment, for then she could not have wanted
opportunities of following him. But in the lxix.
Epist. we have her alive again, long after that Pha-
laris had been Tyrant of Agrigentum, for he men-
tions his growing old there.^ And we must not
imagine but that several years had passed, before he
* Aristot. Rhet. 1. ii. >' Ato rb itnhv yripas. Ep. Cy9.
80 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
could seize the government of so populous a city,
that had 200,000 souls'' in it, or, as others say,
800,000.^ For he came an indigent stranger thither,
according to the Letters ; and by degrees rising from
one employment to another, at last had opportunity
and power to effect that design. Besides, in the
LXix. Letter she is at Crete with her son ; and in the
LT. she is poisoned (I suppose) at Astypalasa, for
there her poisoner dwelt ; and 'tis expressly said, she
designed, but could not follow her husband. Which
seems an intimation, that the Sophist believed Asty-
palaea to be a city in Crete. 'Tis certain that the
editors of Phalaris, by comparing these two passages
together, made that discovery in geography; for it
could not be learned any where else ; and 'tis an
admirable token, both that the Epistles are old and
genuine, and that the commentators are not inferior
to, nor unworthy of, their author.
What a scene of putid and senseless formality are
the Lxxiix.,* Lxxix., and cxliv. Epistles! Nicocles a
Syracusian, a man of the highest rank and quality,
sends his own brother an hundred miles with a request
to Phalaris, that he would send to Stesichorus, an-
other hundred miles, and beg the favour of a copy of
verses upon Clearista his wife, who was lately dead.
Phalaris accordingly sends to Himera with mighty
application and address, and soon after writes a
second letter of thanks for so singular a kindness.
Upon the fame of this, one Pelopidas entreats him
that he would procure the like favour for a friend of
his,'' but meets with a repulse. Now, whether there
^ Diod. Sicul. p. 205. * Diog. Laert. in Empedoc.
[* =rLXXViii.— D.] ^ Ep. Ixv.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 81
was any poem upon Clearista among the works of
Stesichorus, whence our Sophist might take the plot
and ground-work of this story, or whether all is
entirely his own invention and manufacture, I will
not pretend to guess. But let those believe that can,
that such stuff as this busied the head of the Tyrant ;
at least they must confess then, though the Letters
would represent him as a great admirer and judge
too of poetry, that he was a mere asimis ad lyram.
For, in the lxxix. Epist. he calls this poem upon
Clearista [jjiKog and iLzkcohiocv, which must here (as it
almost ever does) signify a lyric ode,^ since it is
spoken of Stesichorus, a melic or lyric poet. But in
the cxLiv. he calls it an elegij, lXsyi7ov, which is as
different from [jusKog as Theognis is fi'om Pindar, or
Tibullus from Horace. What, the same copy of
verses both an ode and an elegy ? Could not some
years' acquaintance with Stesichorus teach him the
very names ? . But to forgive him, or rather the So-
phist, such an egregious piece of dulness, why, for-
sooth, so much ado, why such a vast way about,
to obtain a few verses ? Could not they have writ
directly to Stesichorus, and at the price of some
present have met with easy success ? Do not we
know, that all of that string, Bacchylides, Simonides,
Pindar, got their livelihood by the Muses ? So that,
to use Phalaris's intercession, besides the delay and
an unnecessary trouble to both, was to defraud the
poet of his fee.
Nay, certainly, they might have employed any
[* " Plato Ion. p. 146. B, Laemar. |ueA.os de Homeri versibus." DoBREti,
Advers. II. 367.— D.]
VOL. Ti: M
82
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
hand rather than Phalaris's. For, begging pardon of
the EpistleSy I suspect all to be a cheat about Stesi-
chorus's friendship with him. For the poet, out of
common gratitude, must needs have celebrated it in
some of his works. But that he did not, the Letters
themselves are, in this point, a sufficient witness.
For, in the lxxix. Phalaris is feigned to entreat him
not once to mention his name in his books. This
was a sly fetch of our Sophist, to prevent so shrewd
an objection from Stesichorus's silence as to any
friendship at all with him. But that cunning shaU
not serve his turn. For what if Phalaris had really
wished him to decline mentioning his name ? Stesi-
chorus knew the world well enough, that those sort
of requests are but a modest simulation, and a dis-
obedience would have been easily pardoned. In the
Lxxiv. Letter the Tyrant proclaims and glories to his
enemy Orsilochus, that Pythagoras had stayed five
months with him : why should he then seek to con-
ceal from posterity the twelve years' familiarity with
Stesichorus? Pindar, exhorting Hiero the Tyrant
of Syracuse to be kind to poets and men of letters,
tells him how Croesus had immortal praise for his
friendship and bounty to them, but the viemory of
that cruel and inJiospitable Phalaris was hated and
cursed every where J" How could Pindar have said
this, had he heard of his extraordinary dearness with
Stesichorus? For their acquaintance, according to
the Letters, was as memorable and as glorious as that
of Croesus with iEsop and Solon. So that Pindar,
*^ Pyth. i. Thv 5e ravpcf xaAfcey nav \ rr/pa vr]X4a v6qv \ 'Ex^p« ^dXapiv Kar^-
X^i TravTo. (j)dTis. [v. 18o. ed. Ileifii. — D.J
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 83
had he known it, for that sole kindness to his fellow-
poet, would have forborne so vile a character. Plato,
in his second Epistle, recounts to Dionysius some
celebrated friendships of learned men with tyrants
and magistrates; Simonides's with Hiero and Pau-
sanias, Thales's with Periander, Anaxagoras's with
Pericles, Solon's and others' with Croesus. Now,
how could he have missed, had he ever heard of it,
this of Stesichorus with Phalaris ? being transacted in
Sicily, and so a most proper and domestic example.
If you say, the infamy of Phalaris made him decline
that odious instance, in that very word you pro-
nounce our Epistles to be spurious. For if they had
been known to Plato, even Phalaris would have
appeared as moderate a tyrant as Dionysius himself.
Lucian,*^ that feigns an embassy from Phalaris to
Delphi for the dedication of the Brazen Bull, makes
an oration in his praise, as Isocrates does of Busiris,
where, without doubt, he has gathered all the stories
he knew for topics of his commendation ; but he has
not one word of his friendship with Stesichorus.
Nor, indeed, has any body else. And do not you yet
begin to suspect the credit of the Letters ?
'Twould be endless to prosecute this part, and 1
shew all the silliness and impertinency in the matter
of the Epistles, For, take them in the whole bulk,
they are a fardle of commonplaces, without any life
or spirit from action and circumstance. Do but cast
your eye upon Cicero's letters, or any statesman's,
as Phalaris was : what lively characters of men
there ! what descriptions of place ! what notifications
^ In Phalar. prior.
1
\
84 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
of time! what particularity of circumstances! what
multiphcity of designs and events ! When you return
to these again, you feel, by the emptiness and dead-
ness of them, that you converse with some dreaming
pedant with his elbow on his desk; not with an
active, ambitious tyrant, with his hand on his sword,
commanding a million of subjects. All that takes or
affects you is a stiffness and stateliness and operose-
ness of style ; but as that is improper and unbecoming
! in all epistles, so especially it is quite aliene from the
i character of Phalaris, a man of business and de-
\ spatch.
Mr. B. begins the examination of this article with a
pedantic digression and commonplace about pedantry , which
I will not now meddle with, but reserve for a more proper
place ; that I may not, as he has done, interrupt the busi-
ness of this section with an impertinent excursion that has
no manner of relation to't.
The first absurdity that I noted in the matter of the
Epistles was the Hiineraeans going to war with the Cata-
n(Bans about Stesichorus' s ashes, and calling in Phalaris to
their assistance, against Stesichorus's own advice in a case
exactly like it. Now, the Examiner pretends to answer this ;
but, with greater craft than ingenuity^ he drops the principal
part of it. What is there, says he, in this story either absurd
or improbable, that the Himerceans should be so concerned to
get the ashes of Stesichorus, and the Catanaans to keep them
(p. 100.) ? What I, from the Epistles, called a war and
sacking of a city,^ and a dependence upon the most brutal of
tyrants, our Honourable Examiner styles a concern, and
says not one word about the going to war. But he tells us,
this very thing happened afterwards in the case of Euripides,
* Ep. 54. ''E.Komtv v[uu -noXiv iv 'SiK(\l(f.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES.. 85
whose bones the Athenians sent a solemn embassy to Mace-
donia to retrieve, but their request was denied. And is this
the very thing, and the same case, with that in the Epistles ?
It's so far from being the very thing, that one can hardly
pick out a more proper instance to refute the Epistles. For^
as the Athenians met with a denial when they demanded
Euripides's ashes, and yet declared no war upon that ac-
count, nor committed the least hostilities; so likewise the
Himeraeans would never go to war upon so slight an oc-
casion, especially against a powerful city, that had the same
original with their own, both colonies being founded by the
Chalcidians of Eubcea. After this, he informs us, from
Pausanias, that the Atheiiians built a noble monument to
Euripides (p. 100.) ; but neither Pausanias nor Thomas
Magister, who are the only authors, I suppose, that speak of
it, say a word of its nobility ; but the one calls it barely
jbLvi]fia EvpLirlhov. Kevov,^ and the other K€voTd(f)Lov,s with-
out a word in its commendation. Then he tells us, out of
Plutarch, that the Orchomenians endeavoured all they could
to get Hesiod's bones ; but the Locrians, that had ^em, would
not be prevailed upon to part with 'em (p. 100). And here
again he puts a force upon his author, and makes him say
more than he really does : but though the case were so as
he represents it, it would be, as the most of his are, a good
argument against himself. For, as the Orchomenians did
not go to war upon't, though the very oracle advised them
to fetch Hesiod's bones ; so the Himeraeans would not have
run that hazard for the sake of Stesichorus's.
I had blamed the Epistles for raising a temple^ to Stesi-
chorus, which the Examiner justifies from the several temples
erected to Homer at Smyrna and in other places ; which the
Doctor, says he, kneio nothing of, though it be no secret even
to the first beginners of learning (p. 101). 'Tis a good proof
indeed that the first beginners may know this thing, because
' Pausan. p. 2. « Thorn. Mag. Vita Eurip. p. 100.
^ Ep. 54. Newy iffraadw 'Xrrja'ix^pov.
86 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
our Examiner knows it. But there's another thing that I
perceive even he knoivs nothing of, that Homer's case and
Stesichorus's have no relation to one another. For, I pray,
at what time were the temples built to Homer? 'Twas a
long time before he was honoured with so much as an
epitaph. He was buried, says Herodotus, in the island los ;
Kol varepov ttoWS '^p6v(p, and a long time after, when his
poems became famous, they made an epitaph upon him,^ As
for his temple at Smyrna, which Strabo,J Cicero, and others
mention, it must needs be as recent as the city itself, and
that was built by Antigonus and Lysimachus six or seven
hundred years after the poet's time, the old city having been
ruined and desolate for 400 years together. And then the
temple at Alexandria, that Ptolemy Philopater erected to his
memory, was later than that at Smyrna ;^ and the Marble of
Homer's Apotheosis, which is published with an ample com-
mentary by the very learned Cuperus, may be reasonably
supposed to be later than them both. What has the Ex-
aminer got, therefore, by his instances of Homer's temples ?
They are all near ccc. years younger than Phalaris and
Stesichorus ; and if a custom obtained in this latter age, will
he infer that it was used too in the former? Or will he
compare the fame of Stesichorus with the glory of Homer ?
Or \\411 he suppose that Stesichorus could immediately
obtain those honours which Homer did not till his books
had lasted vi. centuries, when he was numbered among the
ancient heroes ? This is so poor an excuse for the Sophist,
that it's a further detection of him. For, since he lived
after Ptolemy's time, and had heard of Homer's temples at
Alexandria and Smyrna, it might easily come into his head
to build the like for Stesichorus : but the true Phalaris, in
whose days even Homer himself had no temple erected to
him, would never have thought on't.
But what a morose piece of critic is that^ where he will
' Herod. Vita Homeri. J Strabo, p. 646.
•' ^lian. xiii. 22.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 87
not give me leave to say, as others have done, that Himera was
afterwards called Thermae? (p. 101, 102.) Because, forsooth,
Diodorus and Cicero say they were not built upon the same
spot of ground. And yet Diodorus himself expressly calls
the inhabitants of Thermae Himeraeans ;^ and Scipio, when
he gave them the statues that formerly belonged to Himera,
and Cicero, when he tells that story of Scipio, do both as
good as declare that they looked upon them as the same
city. Polybius, therefore, joins both words together, and
calls them ©epjucoy tcov 'I/xepaicov ',^ and so Ptolemy, &6p-
fial "IfiepaL TroXt?, which Cluverius corrects 'Ifxepalai ; and
so an inscription in Gruter, ^ col. avg. himeraeorvm
THERMIT. And if I may not say Himera was called Thermae,
because they were not upon the same spot, I must not say
neither, what every body has said, that Naxos was called
Taurominium, nor that Sybaris was called Thurii, no, nor
that Smyrna was called Smyrna, nor Magnesia called Mag-
nesia ', for the new towns of those names were as remote
from the old ones as Thermae from Himera.
I had charged the Letters with an inconsistency, because
the List makes Phalaris^s wife to have been poisoned at Asty-
pahea, soon after her husband's flight, but the Lxixth makes
her alive in Crete many years after, when Phalaris was
grown old in the monarchy at Agrigentum. Mr. B. is
pleased to reply, that here I make an unreasonable supposi-
tion, that the Letters must have been written in the same
order that they now stand ; for if that do not take place,
there's no manner of inconsistency between these tivo Epis-
tles (p. 102, 103). Now, what name ought to be given to
such a writer as this is, who prevaricates so notoriously, in a
case as plain as the sun ? Did I ever make such a supposi-
tion, that the Letters were written in the order they are
printed? Had I not expresslj^ supposed, in the ivth arti-
cle, that the Lxxxvth Letter might be written before the
1 Diod. p. 280. » Tolyb. p. 24.
" Gruter. p. 433.
88 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Lxxxivth, nay, before the xxth,* nay, before the very first
of all?o And is it not visible and plain to any man of
sense, that I place the inconsistency here, not upon the order
of the Epistles, but upon the differences of place and time ?
I would ask him now, in his own language, was the pleasure
of forging this imaginary supposition, which is worthy of
himself, and none of mine, an equivalent to the shame of
being told orit ?
But he tells me, / make four other suppositions, which
have not the least countenance from the Epistles, or any other
history (p. 103). What the Examiner will grant or deny,
to me is indifferent ; but I appeal to others, if every par-
ticular that I said there may not be fairly gathered from the
Letters themselves. Phalaris fled from Astypalaa ;^ his
wife, endeavouring to follow him, was poisoned by Python,
who courted her to a second marriage.^ Again, his wife is
alive in Crete, when Phalaris had long possessed the govern-
ment of AgrigentumJ All this is plainly affirmed in the
Letters. Now, if Astypalaea was not a town of Crete, but
an island of the Sporades, as I have proved already against
Phalaris's editors, then, if she was poisoned at Astypalaea,
she could not afterwards be alive in Crete. And if she was
poisoned for endeavouring to follow her husband, w^hich
cannot reasonably be supposed to be very long after his
flight, she could not be yet alive when he was grown old
in Sicily. I must confess that these two accounts are still
in my opinion inconsistencies. But Mr. B. and I may have
very different notions of what deserves to be called by that
name. For his Examination flatly contradicts his own In-
dex to Phalaris ; and his margin, in more places than one,
is directly opposite to his text ; and yet he seems not to
apprehend them to be inconsistent one with another ; for he
has made no retractation of his Index to Phalaris, and has
made his margin keep company with his text^ as if they
were very good friends.
[* xxist: see vol. i. p. 204. — D.] "> See here, vol. i. p. 204.
1' Ep. 4, 49. 1 Ep. 51. »• Ep. 69.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 89
My other exception against the Epistles was the Sophist's
absurd conduct about Nicocles's address to Phalaris, to ob-
tain by his intercession a copy of verses from Stesichorus.
But the Examiner protests he can see no harm, nor any thing
unnatural int (p. 104). Now^ this being a matter of mere
judgment, and no controversy of fact, I am not surprised to
see Mr. B. and myself have such different opinions about it.
And when a thing is once brought to that issue, 'tis in vain
to dispute further about it; but we must refer the whole
matter to the readers that have taste and skill. I shall only
take some short notice of the particulars that his argument
is built on. He says, Phalaris was not successful in a second
attempt upon Stesichorus, at the instance of a Sicilian gentle-
man (p. 104). But it's plain from the Epistle itself,^ that
Phalaris refused to make a second attempt ; so that the gen-
tleman was unsucccessful with Phalaris, not Phalaris with
Stesichorus. Mr. B., it seems, does not know his o^vn
favourite book 5 and yet if I, that despise it, and believe
it not worth the reading, had made such a mistake about
it as this is, he would have given us two whole pages in
aggravation of the fault, and have poured out his grimace
and banter profusely upon so worthy a subject.
But he finds I have high thoughts of Phalaris, because
I said that such stuff as Stesichorus' s verses did not busy his
head (p. 104). They were not high thoughts of his great mon-
archy, but hard ones of his cruelty and barbarity, that made
me suppose such matters did not busy his head. Mr. B.,
then, might have saved that diminishing character that he
gives here of Phalaris's power. One may guess it was much
against his mind to depress his Sicilian prince; but his
anger against his antagonist was stronger here than his
sense of loyalty. But let us see how he manages ? He was
only a petty prince, he says, of one town in Sicily, I per-
ceive he has not lost all his former respect for him ; he'll
make him a prince still, though it be but a petty one. But
^ Ep. 65.
VOL. II. N
90
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
why SO ill-natured as to allow him but one single town^
Agrigentum, and in that single tow^n too to take away half
of his subjects ? What will he do therefore with Suidas, who
makes him Tyrant of all Sicily ?^ or with Diogenianus, who
affirms that he subdued the city and country of [the'] Leontini?^
or with Polysenus^ who makes him conquer the Sicanians,
and take Ouessa (or rather Inessa), their capital city F^ or
with Diodorus^ who informs us that he had two castles^
"E/cvofio<; \60o9 and ^dkdpiov,^ in the territories of Gela, a
day's journey from Agrigentum ? or, lastly, what will he do
with the Epistles themselves, which pretend he vanquished
the Leontini, and the Tauromenites and Zanclseans their
allies ?^ If Mr. B. pleases to take all these into the account,
he may allow his prince to have been master of a million of
subjects; though Agrigentum should not be so populous as
Laertius represents it. And why now would Mr. B. deal
so unkindly with him, to make him a petty prince of one city
only, when such credible authors assign him many more ?
Is there not, as I have often observed, a certain fatality in
this gentleman's errors, so that, whether he talks for Phala-
ris or against him, on both sides he is always mistaken ?
He goes on, and tells me, that there have been tyrants
with many millions of subjects, that have employed themselves
about poems. Has not the Dr. seen, says he, the fragments
of Augustus's letters to Horace, pressing and obliging that poet
to write? (p. 105.) Never was piece of history more aptly
applied : I can heartily now forgive him all he has said
about me, when I see how judicious and exact he is in
bestowing names and characters. Phalaris is a Sicilian
prince with him, and Augustus is a tyrant. Methinks that
Dionysius, tyrant of Syracuse, had been a nearer and pro-
perer comparison ; for he was so concerned with poets and
poems, that he not only had several poets in his court, but
* Suid. *oA. Tvpavvi]eas St/ceAtas SXtjs.
" Diog. Uapoifjiicoi/ ii. 50, KoTaTroAe/i^o-as rovs Acoyrlvovs.
" Polysenus, v. 1. '' Diod. p. 741.
^ Epist. 85.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 91
himself made several tragedies. Though even this or any
other such instance had been wholly impertinent; for, as I
said, 'twas not Phalaris's greatness, but his barbarity and
ignorance (being an illiterate publican before he usurped the
tyranny), that makes his dealings with Stesichorus for copies
of verses to be so improbable and absurd.
But a present, he says, had been an improper means to
obtain verses of Stesichorus ; for he was one of the greatest
men of Sicily (p. 105, 106). This is a new piece of history,
and to be sure he takes care to make it out well. Yes, by
two very good arguments. First, because, as Suidas tells
him, his brother Helianax was vofjuoOirrj^, a lawgiver. Ay,
no doubt on't, if he was a lawgiver, he must consequently
be a member of parliament. But it falls out unfortunately,
that the legislative power was not alwaj^s m such great
hands as it's now-a-days : the best law-makers, says Aris-
totle,y were of the middle rank of citizens ; for Solon was
such a one, as appears by his poems ; and Lycurgus, for he
was no king; and Charondas, and most of the rest. Even
Aristotle himself, whose nobility was not extraordinary,
made laws for the Abderitans.^^ Zaleucus, as we have seen
above, was but a shepherd and a slave. Eudoxus the
Cnidian made laws to his own citizens f- and yet he was so
poor,^ that Theomedon a physician bore his charges at
Athens ; and his friends made a purse for him when he was
to travel to Egypt. And Protagoras was lawgiver to the
Tliurians,*^ and yet at first he was no better than a porter to
carr^^ burdens.^ Why then must Stesichorus be one of the
greatest men in Sicily, because he had a brother a lawgiver ?
The Examiner, we see, will still be true to his old way of
reasoning; for one may fairly infer the very contrary from
it, that he was but of middle and ordinary quality. Well,
but he must needs be one of the greatest men there, because
^ Arist. Polit. iv. 11.
^ Laert, Plutarch, c. Colotem. * Laert., Plut. ibid.
'• Laert. c j^aert
^ fiajulus, <popfjLO(p6pos. Gellius, v. 3.
92 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
he made an apologue to the Himeraans against Phalaris, about
the horse and his rider, and the stag^ (p. 106). And is that
such a proof of his wealth and greatness, above the low
temptations of money and presents ? Menenius Agrippa
made such another apologue to the Romans,^ and yet he was
so very poor^ that he left not enough to bury him. There's
another apologue too of ^sop's mentioned by Aristotle^ in
the very place where he tells Stesichorus's ; and if -^sop,
a poor slave, could make apologues at Samos relating to
public affairs, why must Stesichorus's apologue at Himera
prove him one of the greatest men in Sicily ? The Arundel
Marble gives us a date when Stesichorus the poet eU rrjv
^EWdBa d^iK€To, went into Greece. Now, et? 'EWdSa
d(f>iKea6aL means to travel into Greece to get money, as his
brother poets did, who were to make their fortunes by their
pen. When Homer was very poor, says Herodotus,^ some
persuaded him et9 t7]v 'EXkdBa aTrcKeaOao, to go into Greece ;
and he designed it, but died in los before he began the
voyage. And the readers will be apt to suspect, for all the
greatness that Mr. B. dreams of, that Stesichorus had no
other errand to Greece than Homer had before him, and
Simonides and others after him.
I had made another censure upon the Epistles, for
calling the same copy of verses both jjueko^ and iXeyelov.
The Examiner replies, that, by the different cast of his head,
he should have reasoned just the other way, and have inferred
something in favour of the Letters. First, he says, a Sophist
would not have confounded the words (p. 106, 107). True:
a learned Sophist would not have writ such sorry epistles,
as a judicious man would not have published them ', but our
mock Phalaris is a Sophist of that size that no kind of
blunder is below his character. But a prince, says Mr. B.,
might not think himself obliged to write with all the exactness
of a scholar. This is just the second part of his compliment
" Arist. Rhet. ii. 2. ^ Livy, ii.
9 Herod. Vita Homeri.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 93
to Queen Elizabeth ;^ he's resolved, it seems, to stand up
for princes, and maintain for them a royal prerogative of
speaking improperly. But let Mr. B. be as good a courtier
as he pleases ; I am now to consider him only in his capacity
of a critic. I shall proceed, therefore, to his next remark,
that Phalaris called it an iXeyetov when he asked it of Stesi-
chorus, and knew not what measure it would be in ; but when
he had it, and saiv it was lyric, he then called it yu-eXo?
(p. 107). Wlio can deny, now, but this is sharply observed?
but there's one inconvenience in't, that, while he's careful
of the j^Wwce'^ reputation, he betrays the poet's. For if an
elegy, in the proper sense of the word (as this excuse sup-
poses), was bespoken of Stesichorus, why should he make a
lyric poem instead on't ? This had been just like the sign-
painter, that, whatsoever was bespoken of him, whether a
lion or a dolphin, always painted a rose. But Mr. B. will
prove, that e\ejo<; and iXeyetov had a looser sense than what
the grammarians put upon them, because Dion Chrysostom
calls ?ieroic verses on Sardanapalus's tomb iXeyelov (p. 107).
But there's a figure of rhetoric here, called self-contradiction,
that's very frequent in our Examiner's reasonings. For he
had newly said, a Sophist could not mistake iXeyelov, the
distinct sense of which was so well settled before his time by
the grammarians (p. 106.) : and now he produces Dion
Chrysostom, (who, as he tells us, was as errant a Sophist
and declaimer as ever was) (p. 26.), employing it in a looser
meaning than what the grammarians put upon't. But, to let
this pass; what he teaches us here about the distinct sense
that the grammarians settled upon't, is but a cast of his own
loose and unsettled sense. For the grammarians knew well
enough that iXeyelov was taken for epitaph, even without
a pentameter in't. They could learn that out of Herodo-
tus, among others, when he tells 'em, that the people of los
TO iXeyelov ro^e eireypa'^av, wrote this elegy on Homer's
tomb ;^
•» See here, vol. i. p. 272. ' Herod. Vita Homeri.
94 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
EvddSe rrjv leprjv K6<^akr]V Kara ^ala KoXviTTet
!AvBpCOV rjpCOCOV KOCTfJL'tJTOpa BtOV^ ''O/jLTjpOV.
And SuidaSjJ one of those grammarians^ could not be igno-
rant of this ; for he cites the very same epitaph, and calls it
iXejelov. The case is no more than this : in the old times
they generally made their epitaphs in a single distich, hexa-
meter and pentameter ; whence in process of time an epitaph
at large came to be called iXeyelov. The ancients, says the
Scholiast upon ApoUonius Rhodius,^ used iXeyeia for in-
scriptions upon tombs. Ta iXeyela, says Lycurgus the ora-
tor,^ ra eTriyeypafi/jLeya iv rot? /jLvrjfieloL^. But what ad-
vantage is this now to Mr. B. and his Phalaris ? An
iXeyelov of all hexameters is as remote from a lyric song as
if it was mixed with pentameters. So that iXeyetov and
fteXo? cannot yet be used for the same copy of verses, but
by that privilege of making solecisms that Mr. B. would
vindicate to princes.
But his next proof perhaps may be better : for a night-
ingale, he says, in Aristophanes' s Aves is said to sing eXeyoi,
and by and by those very eXeyoc are called fjuekr] (p. 107^ 108).
This indeed carries both surprise and demonstration along
with it. What a strange reach of fancy has our Examiner !
Who but he could ever have thought on this pretty argument
from a nightingale ? Let us put it into a syllogism : a
nightingale sings /jueXi], a nightingale sings ekeyoi, ergo fjueKr)
and ekeyoL are the same. Very quaint indeed, and out of
the common way ! but it has one little fault, that if a night-
ingale can sing more tunes than one, his syllogism must
then be hushed. Mr. B. seems to bring this argument with
a very serious air; as if, because the poet metaphorically
calls the singing of a bird by the several names of human
music, we may infer that all those names may signify one
[* Eds. of Horn. Vita Oiiov. — D.] J Suid. v. "O/tTjpos.
^ Schol. Apollonii, ii. 784. [782. — D.] Tols iXeyeiois iv rols iiriTa<t>iois
^xpf'iVTo 01 iroKaioi.
^ Lycurg. p. 168.
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 95
,ind the same thing. But, in the very same page, Aristo-
phanes says that the upupa, which we call the hoopoe, no
very melodious bird, chanted a [leko^ ;
'OvTroyfr fieXcpSetv av 'TrapaarKevd^eraL.^
Mr. B. therefore, by the very same reasoning, may give us
another syllogism : the nightingale sings a //-eXo?, the hoopoe
sings a //.eXo?, ergo the hoopoe sings like the nightingale.
And, by the same argument, blackbirds will sing like them,
for their notes too are /neXi] ;
KocrcTvcjyoL d')(^evaiv iroiKiXorpavKa fieXr].^
And so the cicada too ;
Hou^av e/c Trrepvyajv dSv KpeKovaa fi6\o<;.^
Nay, the very frogs will croak like nightingales ;
Tal<; vvfJb^aKTL S' eho^ev del tov ^drpa'y^ov aSecv.
Tft> S* iyot) ov (f)6ov60i/jLLy to yap yLteXo? ov koXov aSec.P
But, what is still more extraordinary, the same nightingale
in Aristophanes a little after begins to chant a lesson of
ana2)(Psts ;
"TjJbVODV crvvrpo^^ dTjSol,
^Ap')(ov TMV dvaTrato-Tcov.^
So that, by Mr. B.'s powerful argument, both /jLiXrj and
eXeyot and dvaTrataTOL may be all used in the same signifi-
cation. And if Mr. B. had but produced some anapaests of
"> Aristoph. p. 376. [Av. v. 226. ed. Bekk.—D.']
" Anthol. i. 20. [Jnth. Gr. ex rec. Br. {ed. Jacobs.) 1. 195. — J7ith. Gr. ad fid.
Cod. Pal. Sfc. II. 155. — Poet. Min. Gr. ed. Gaisf. II. 225.— The epigram is by
Theocritus. — D.]
" Ibid. iii. 24. \_Anth. Gr. ex rec. Br. {ed. Jacobs.) I. 125. — Anth. Gr. ad fid.
Cod. Pal. 8(c. I. 361. — The epigram is by Mnasalcas. — D.]
p Moschus, Id. iii. [v. 113. — D.]
1 Aristoph. p. 395. \_Av. v. 679, 684. ed. Bekk.—D.l^
96 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
nightingales^ to confute my observation about the measures
of that verse^'" they might have done him, perhaps^ much
better service than those of JEschylus and Seneca.
I had declared, that I suspected all to be a cheat about
the friendship between Phalaris and Stesichorus, because the
poet himself never mentioned it, nor any other vrriter, though
several, had it been true, had fair occasion to speak of it.
Now, the Examiner accounts for Lucian's silence, because
he had said enough in naming Pythagoras; and to have
added Stesichorus's name would have made the piece look
stiff and unnatural (p. 109). Wonderfully nice and exact:
he can tell you, to a single word, when a treatise will be
stiff; like the gardener that could determine to a minute
when his melons were ripe. How many have I saved, says
Phalaris in Lucian, who plotted against me, and were con-
victed; as Acanthus that stands here, and Timocrates, and
Leogoras his brother?^ Now, according to the Letters,
Stesichorus too was taken plotting, and yet the Tyrant
saved his life, and made him his friend. But, says Mr. B.,
if Lucian here had added Stesichorus to the other three,
that single name would have made the discourse as stiff as
any buckram. And yet, allowing that Lucian himself had
as nice a sensation of stiffness as Mr. B. appears to have,
and therefore would not put down four names, but three
only, yet methinks he might have spared one of those three,
and put Stesichorus in his room; unless Mr. B. will shew
that Timocrates or Leogoras (whom nobody ever heard of)
were as famous as Stesichorus, and their examples as me-
morable. But Mr. B. adds further, that, if Lucian' s silence
be an exception to Stesichorus's acquaintance with Phalaris,
it is to Abaris's too ; which yet our critic has before,^ for
the sake of Aristotle and Jamblichus, been graciously pleased
to allow. Now, without the Examiner's telling us, we might
guess that he was not awake sometimes in his work (p. 203.) ;
■^ See here, vol. i. p. 191, &c. « Lucian I. Phal. p. 845.
' Dissert, p. 15. [See vol. i. p. 98.— D.]
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 97
for surely the man that writ this must have been fast asleep,
or else he could never have talked so wildly (p. 13/). There
is not one word in that place that his margin refers to about
Phalaris's friendship with Abaris. And how could I allow
it for the sake of Aristotle, who says not the least syllable
of it? or if I should allow it for the sake of Jamblichus,
what would that be to Lucian ? For, according to Jambli-
chus, the Tyrant was killed by Abaris's means upon their
first acquaintance ; how then could Phalaris in Lucian have
magnified himself to the Delphians upon the past friendship
of that Hyperborean ? If Lucian had believed the story as
Jamblichus tells it, that the Tyrant was deposed by Pytha-
goras and Abaris at their first visit, his mentioning Abaris
or Pythagoras in Phalaris's speech at Delphi had been very
absurd. But Stesichorus had been a proper instance, if the
Letters be true ; for he was xii. years the Tyrant's friend,
and died too before him. So that Lucian's not mentioning
him shews he knew nothing of the Epistles; as, on the
contrary, his mentioning Pythagoras shews he knew nothing
of that story of his deposing Phalaris.
In the next place, Mr. B. accounts for Plato's silence
about the friendship of Stesichorus and Phalaris, because
Plato meritions nothing there of the acquaintance between
Pythagoras and Phalaris (p. 109). An admirable account
indeed ! Plato, says Mr. B., might omit the mention of
Stesichorus's friendship with Phalaris, and yet might believe
it true, because he mentions not another friendship that,
in all probability, is as mere a fiction as that. Which is
just* as if he reasoned thus : the ancients, in their accounts
of ^sop, say nothing of his ugliness, and yet they might
believe it, because they say nothing neither of Xanthus the
philosopher, with his company of scholastics.^ But, says
Mr. B., the Pythagoreans all agree that their master and
Phalaris tvere acquainted, and Dr. B. grants it. I granted
they were contemporaries ; and, by a familiar slight of hand,^
[* Old ed. " a just"— D.]
" Planud. V. TEsop. '' See here, vol. i. p. 99.
VOL. II. O
9S DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
he turns the word into acquaintance, as he once did before.
But how knows he that all the Pythagoreans agree, when
the only men that speak a word of it are Lucian and
Jamblichus^ and they were neither of them Pythagoreans ?
or suppose the Pythagorean story true as Jamblichus reports
it,^ that Phalaris blasphemed the gods, despised philosophy,
and designed to murder Pythagoras ; would this have been
as proper and domestic an instance for Plato as the xii.
years' friendship with Stesichcrus ? What a master of
decency is Mr. B., and what a relish has he of dexterous
management, who goes about to excuse Plato for not num-
bering Phalaris's and Pythagoras's enmity (for so it's re-
presented by those Pythagoreans he speaks of^) among the
celebrated friendships of learned men with tyrants ?
As for the argument from the silence of Pindar, he will
not attempt to answer it ; which is a better sign of discretion
than he usually shews. However, he'll put me in mind of
one false colour that I have given to my argument ; for I said,
Pindar exhorts Hiero to be kind to poets and men of letters :
but, says he, there's not a word of that in the verses them-
selves, whatever guess the Scholiast may make at their remote
meaning. So that the Doctor weight as well prove his point
from "Apiarov fjuev ijScop (p. 110, 111). What shall we say
now to such a hardy writer as this is, who can deny, with
such an air of confidence, what every body's eyes can
witness to be true ? The very words of Pindar immediately
preceding the passage I cited are,
Kal \o^[ois Kol aotSot?,*
which, by the nicest translation, means men of letters and
poets. And to be kind to such, the poet exhorts Hiero in
the paragraph just before ;
EvavOel 8' iv opya irap/juevcov,
Eiirep Tt (f)i\€L'i aKoav aZelav a-
el KkveLV, firj Kafive \iav Ba7rdvai<i'
*^ Jambl. V. Pythag. p. 184. [* Pyth. I. 183. ed. Heyn.—D.}
THE MATTER OF THE EPISTLES. 99
that is, continue your generous temper, and, if you desire
immortal fame, do not be weary of being bountiful.
After he has denied that to be in Pindar which is evi-
dently and expressly there, the next and last advance he
makes is, to deny that to be in the Letters which he himself
once knew to be there, if it was he that translated them.
The Letters, he says, do not imply that there ivas any ex-
traordinary dearness between Stesichorus and . Phalaris ;
there's no proof from them that Stesichorus loved him; his
friendship was desired, and he only out of prudence did not
stand off {p. 111). This is spoken with a good measure of
assurance; let us see with what measure of truth. The
Tyrant declares, that, though he gave Stesichorus xii. years
of life, yet still he was in debt to him-; for he alone of all
mortals gave him courage, and taught him to despise death :^
and that, ybr the sake of Stesichorus, he's ready to encounter
certain destruction, "^ And the fame of Phalaris's kindness
to him was so great, that the Tauromenites applied to Stesi-
chorus to intercede with the Tyrant, that he would remit the
price of their captives.^ Stesichorus dies before he could do
it for them ; but he leaves it in command to his daughters to
ask that favour in his name. The Tyrant, upon the first
notice of the request, immediately returns the money, with
this protestation, that he would not only do that for his sake,
aXX el Kai tl Kal roiv aBwdraJV ecrrl fiel^ov, but any thing
else, though 'twere more than impossible. And yet it ap-
pears, from another Letter,^ that the sum he remitted here
was no less than a hundred talents, or 18,000 pound [s]
sterling, the greatest sum by much that appears in the whole
set of Epistles, and six times as much as in another Letter^
he was forced to borrow for himself. This, I presume, is a
pretty good token of an extraordinary dearness on Phalaris's
side ; and this alone w^ould be argument enough to prove
Stesichorus was not insensible on his part; for Mr. B.
Ep. 103. y 54. ^ 31.
85. »» 118.
100 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
surely will not make such a ninny of his Sicilian prince, as
to suppose him so prodigal of his highest favours^ with-
out suitable returns of friendship. But, besides this, the
very Letters are as express for Stesichorus's love as for
Phalaris's. For, as the Tauromenites addressed to Stesi-
chorus to obtain favours of the Tyrant, so Pelopidas^ and
Nicocles^ apply themselves to the Tyrant to get favours of
Stesichorus, which in his way were copies of verses. And
the argument that Phalaris uses to persuade the poet to do
that favour, is, to confirm the received opinion that the world
had of their friendship.^ And he tells us both there and once
more,^ that Stesichorus desired leave to celebrate him in his
poems. But the Tyrant begs he would not do it, irpo^
eraLpeiov Aio<;, koI kolvt]^ k(TTia<^,^ by such obtestations as
are used among the dearest friends and relations. And it's
sufficient, he says, /or him to be written iv avrcp ^T7}aLxop(p,f
in Stesichorus's own heart. Now, if these do not imply a
friendship on Stesichorus's part as well as Phalaris's, let the
reader be judge ; and at the same time let him reflect, what
an odd-sighted Examiner I have to deal with, that at some
times can see in books what never was there, but at other
times cannot see the plainest things, not only in other men's
books, but even in his own.
XVI.
It must needs be a great wonder, to those that
think the Letters genuine, how or where they were
concealed, in what secret cave, or unknown corner
of the world ; so that nobody ever heard of them for
a thousand years together. Some trusty servant of
the Tyrant must have buried them under ground;
and it was well that he did so. For if the Agrigen-
tines had met with them, they had certainly gone to
« 65. ^ 78. « 78. f 146.
[* 79. ed. Oxon.—D.'\ [f Ibid.—D.]
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 101
pot.* They that burned ahve both him, and his
relations, and his friends, would never have spared
such monuments of him to survive them and their
city. And without doubt it was immortal vellum,
and stolen from the parchments of Jove, ^ that could
last for ten ages, though untouched and unstirred,
in spite of all damp and moisture, that moulders
other mortal skins. For, had our Letters been used
or transcribed during that thousand years, somebody
would surely have spoken of them : especially since so
many of the ancients had occasion to do so ; so that
their silence is a direct argument that they never had
heard of them. I have just now cited some passages
of Pindar, Plato, and Lucian, which are a plain indi-
cation that they were unknown to those three. Nay,
the last of these, besides the proof above named from
his silence and pretermission, does as good as declare
expressly that he never saw our Epistles, For, not
to mention other differences of less moment, he makes
both Phalaris'' and his smith Perilaus to be born at
Agrigentum ; but the Letters bring one of them from
Astypalaea, and the other from Athens. Lucian, then,
knew nothing of them, or at least knew them, as I
do, to be spurious, and below his notice. Much less
could he be the author of them, as Politian and his
followers believe ; for he would neither have been
guilty of such flat contradictions, nor have so for-
feited all learning and wit, by those gross blunders in
[* Lennep translates this passage : " Si enim eas invenissent Agrigentini,
*' sine dubio tergendis natibus inserviissent." — D.]
8 Ai<f>d4pai Ai6s. [See Valckenaer's note on Herod, p. 400. ed. WesseL, and
Diatr. in Eurip. &c. p. 184, sq. — D.]
^ Phalar. i. 'Eyw yap oh rwv a<pavwi/ iv ^AKpdyavri &v. and ibid. TltpiKaos iiv
Tis rjfjLidan6s.
102 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
chronology, and that wi'etched pedantry in the mat-
ter. And whosoever those authors were that Lucian
followed in his narrative of Phalaris, they too are so
many witnesses against the Epistles. One can hardly
believe, indeed, that the Sophist should venture to
fetch his Tyrant from Astypalaea without the warrant
of some old writer. But yet Lucian and other au-
thors compel us to think so. And we find him as
foolhardy on other occasions. Heraclides of Pontus,'
that lived within two centuries of Phalaris's age, says,
the Agrigentines, when they recovered their liberty,
burned him and his mother ; but our Sophist makes
him an orphan, 6§<paviccg Tru^aCrjvai,^ which if any one
shall contend to mean the loss of his father only, yet
still he and Heraclides will not set horses together.
For if Phalaris fled alone from Astypalasa, neither
wife nor child nor any relation following him, accord-
ing to the Letters, how came the old woman to be
roasted at Agrigentum? So little regard had the
Sophist to fit his stories to true history ; and I have
had too much regard to him, in giving him the hon-
our and patience of so long an examination.
The Examiner, as if he designed to make some amends
for his former tedious trifling, will give us very little trouble
upon this last article. He would only parallel the thousand
years that Phalaris's Epistles lay in obscurity with some
examples of other genuine books that had the same fortune
(p. 113, 114). Velleius Paterculus, he says, is not quoted
till Priscian's time, 500 years after he wrote ; and then we
hear no more of him till Aventinus's time, 900 years after
Priscian. So, Phaedrus is first mentioned by Avienus (400
' De Polit. 'Eviirpii\<Tt Se Koi t^v /jLrjTfpa, J Epist. xlix.
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 103
years after the author's time), and by none after him till
Pitliopiis brought him to light. And Lactantius De Mortibus
Pei'secutorum was not seen, since St. Jerome's time, till, after
a thousand years, Baluzius published it. But the gentleman
is out in his last instance ; for Lactantius's book is men-
tioned by Freculphus, an author of the ixth century, and by
Honorius Augustodunensis in the xiith, as the very editions
of Lactantius might have informed him. But, to pass that
over, what are all these examples in comparison of Phala-
ris's case ? Paterculus's book was owned within 500 years,
Phaedrus's within 400, and Lactantius's within 100 5 and, if
they were not mentioned from those times till the restora-
tion of learning, the reason is apparent, because the Western
world in that interval of time was so wretchedly ignorant
and immersed in barbarity, that such books as those were
not read ; or if they were read, the readers of them were not
writers themselves, so as to let posterity know that they
read them. So that the case of these three authors is com-
mon with most of the rest ; for there are several others of
the ancient books, which we now have, and acknowledge for
genuine, that are not mentioned by the writers of those bar-
barous ages. But the fortune of Phalaris's Epistles runs
counter to all this : the thousand years that followed that
Tyrant's age was the greatest and longest reign of learning
that the world has yet seen, or perhaps ever will; and in
all that time these Epistles were never once heard of; but
they first came into notice when learning was decaying, in
the very dusk and twilight before the long night of igno-
rance. Neither were they mentioned at 100, or 400, or
500 years after the date of them, and then forgot for some
centuries, (as it happened in Mr. B.'s instances,) but they
were never seen for the first thousand years after their pre-
tended writing ; and when they once appeared, they con-
tinued always in use. A man must have a very singular
cast of his head (p. 106.), that can think these cases to be
parallel. But the greatest difference is yet behind; for,
though the writers of the barbarous ages do not speak of
104 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Paterculus^ nor Phaedrus, nor Lactantius ; yet they do not
tell lis any thing that implies there were no such books in
being. If they say any thing amiss, that they might have
corrected out of those authors, ^tis to be imputed to their
own ignorance or laziness, that they would not search into
them, and cannot pass for a negative proof that there were
no such authors. But the writers for the first ten ages after
Phalaris being men very inquisitive, and of universal learn-
ing, and acquainted with all sorts of books, some of them
must needs have met with the Epistles in all that time, if the
book had been above ground ; and yet they tell us several
particulars relating to Phalaris, which of necessity imply
that they never had seen the Letters.
As, besides the passages that I have already produced,
there was a controversy in those ages about Phalaris's Bull :
for Timseus, the famous Sicilian historian, who wrote about
Olymp. cxxviii., said the whole story of the Bull was a
mere fiction, though it had been so much talked of by his-
torians, as well as poets. Tijxaio^ ^rjao .... fjuijTe yeyovivai
TOiovTOV (ravpov) iv rrj irpoeiprifievrj iroXei (AKpayavn),
says Polybius :^ Tovrov rbv ravpov 6 TlfjLaLo<i iv rat? Icrro-
plaL^ 8La^efiaL(ocrdfjb€vo<; fjuy yeyovevai to avvo\ov, says Dio-
dorus.^ This I suppose is a plain argument, that, in the age
of Timaeus (who was a native of Sicily, and the son of
Andromachus the fo\mder and governor of Taurominium,
and wrote his histories at Athens,"") the Epistles were
neither known in Sicily, w^here they are supposed to be
writ, nor at Athens, the common academy of learned and
curious men. For if Timaeus had heard of these Letters,
how durst he have called in question the common tradition
about the Bull, since these Letters, if they be genuine, are
such an authentic and demonstrative proof of it ? Well,
but Polybius and Diodorus endeavour to refute Timseus, and
to prove that there was really such a Bull. And pray, how
^ Polyb. Excerpta, p. 58. [where Tif^aios . . . ipdrTKcov . . . fi'fjTe, k. t. \. — D.]
' Diod. p. 210. •« Plutarch, de Exilio.
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 105
do they go about it ? Do they appeal to the Tyrant's own
Letters ? the most certain and easy way of conviction, if such
Letters were then in the world. Nothing like it; but the
sole argument that they go upon is a Brazen Bull that
Scipio found in Carthage, with a door in the side of it,
which was therefore supposed to have been Phalaris's Bull,
and to have been carried to Carthage, Ol. xciii. 3., among
the spoils of Agrigentum. But, could either of them have
omitted to mention the Tyrant's Letters, if ever they had
met with them ? and yet the one of them was a Sicilian
born, and both of them great travellers and great scholars.
The Epistles, therefore, were not heard of in Polybius's
time, cxx. years after Timaeus, nor in Diodorus's time, cxx.
years after Polybius. I am aware that the Scholiast of
Pindar represents Timseus's narrative quite another way;
for he tells us, as from that historian, that the Agrigentines
cast Phalaris's Bull into the sea ; and that the Bull in Agri-
gentum, which in his time was shewn for Phalaris's, was only
a statue of the river Gelon.^ So that, by this account,
Timaeus did not deny that the Tyrant had a Brazen Bull,
but only censured the mistake of those that took a statue
of a river for it; for rivers were often represented ravpo-
fiopcpoc, in the shape of bulls.° And if any one pleases to
give credit to this Scholiast before Polybius and Diodorus,
this passage of Timaeus will have no force against the Epis-
tles. But I suppose there will not be many of that mind ;
or if all should be so, yet the authorities of Polybius and
Diodorus are still as strong against the Epistles for their two
ages as if they were believed in their account of Timaeus.
For, since it's evident and undeniable that they both sup-
posed Timaeus had denied the whole story of Phalaris's
Bull, they would as certainly appeal to the Epistles, upon
the supposition that Timaeus denied it, as if he really had
denied it.
Another instance, which seems plainly to imply that the
" Schol. Find. Pyth. i. « JEVmn, Var. Hist ii. 33.
VOL. II. P
106 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Epistles of Phalaris were not extant in those ages, is a tra-
dition that he ate his own son. Aristotle, among other ex-
amples of eaters of human flesh, reckons to ire pi ^akapuv
Xeyofievov, the report about Phalaris.^ What that report
was, the philosopher does not say expressly; but perhaps
we may be informed by his scholar Clearchus, who, in his
book Of Lives, says, Phalains the Tyrant came to that degree
of cruelty and immanity, that he devoured sucking children.^
And from him perhaps Tatian might have it, where he tells
us, that Phalaris used to take infants from the mothers'
breasts, and eat themJ But this can hardly pass for Aris-
totle's meaning; because he says there, that some of the
savage nations about the Euxine were eaters of children,
and yet he makes Phalaris's inhumanity to be different from
theirs. He seems to explain himself presently after, where he
says, ^aXapi<; .... i7ro6v/jLcJov iraihiov (f>ay€LV, Phalaris long-
ing to eat a child ; but his paraphrast Andronicus Rhodius (as
he's commonly supposed to be) says it was Phalaris's own
son that Aristotle makes him eat : *^0 ^aXapL^ iiro [7)(7e
^aycDv Tov eavTov iralha : and so Aspasius the Scholiast,
'O ^dXapc<; Xeyerat ^ayelv tov eavTov TracBa, Phalaris is
reported to have eaten his own son.^ It appears, I suppose,
sufficiently from these several authors, that there was a pre-
vailing tradition about Phalaris's eating his own son when
he was an infant ; and that alone will effectually prove that
in those ages they had never heard of the Tyrant's Epistles.
For we have five there to his son Paurolas, and two to his
wife Erythia, about his son's education ; by all which it
appears that he was a very fond father, that his son was
then grown a man, and that he was his only son.^ How
then could he eat his own son while he was an infant,
according to that tradition ? or, how is't possible that such
P Aristot. Ethic. Nicom. vii. 5. Eudem. vi. 5.
1 Athen. p. 396. [=111. 466. ed. Schw.—D.'] TaXae-nva eoivaffdai fip4<pT].
^ Tatian. sect. 54. 'O [hs] robs iirifiaffriHovs doivd/jLcvos iraTdas.
■■' Aspasius ad Ai-istot. p. 154.
* Ep. 18. 'ris iroT^p vTTfp kvhs vlov (fio^ovfx^vos.
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 107
a story could obtain in the world, if the authentic Letters
of the father could be produced to disprove it ?
I had observed, that Lucian, in his two tracts about
Phalaris, where he supposes the Tyrant to have sent the
Brazen Bull to Delphi as a donary to Apollo, and endea-
vours to persuade the Delphians to accept of it, has several
particulars that contradict the Epistles ; which is an argu-
ment that he either had never heard of them, or believed
them to be a cheat. Mr. B. endeavours to answer this, by
producing my own words, that Lucian feigns an embassy
from Phalaris to Delphi : so that if the whole, says he, be a
fiction, how can we argue from it seriously? (p. 115.) But,
if Mr. B. himself argue seriously here, he discovers no
extraordinary judgment. For the whole story may be
feigned by Lucian, and yet the several parts of it may and
ought to be agreeable to truth.
WevBoifi7]v atovTo<; a Kev ireirlOoiev aKOvrjv,
If I tell lies, says Callimachus, / would tell such as are
probable and plausible,^ Ovid's Epistles of the Heroines are
all fictions of his own; but yet the subject and ground of
them is taken from ancient history; he does not confound
countries and ages together. So, Lucian's Dialogues of the
Dead are nothing but romances ; but he takes care to repre-
sent the true history and character of each person ; he does
not make Croesus a cynic philosopher, nor Diogenes a king.
By the same reason^ if Lucian had seen and believed these
Epistles, he would not call Phalaris an Agrigentine, whom
they declare an Astypalsean ; nor Perilaus a Sicilian, whom
they represent as an Athenian ; nor have mentioned such
obscure names as Acanthus, Timocrates, and Leogoras, for
examples of the Tyrant's clemency, when the Letters them-
selves would have furnished him with such an illustrious
instance of it in the story of Stesichorus.
But Mr. B. is pleased to say further, that Lucian *s
[♦ //. in Jov. 65. But see Blomfield ad 1. — D.]
108 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
differing from the Epistles either proves nothing against
them, or proves too much; even that Lucian never saw
Timaeus, as learned as he ivas, and as often as he mentions him.
For Timceus relates, that the Agrigentines thretv the Bull into
the sea, but Lucian says Phalaris sent it to Delphos (p. 115).
Now, I'm afraid he that consulted books for the Examiner
has deceived him here ; for I do not remember that Lucian
ever quotes Timseus's wi'itings, much less mentions him so
often as Mr. B. here pretends. He names him indeed once
in his Macrobil, that he lived xcvi. years; but he could
hardly have that from Timeeus himself, but from the ac-
counts of others. But, however, I'll allow Mr. B. that
Lucian had read Timseus ; but I cannot by no means allow
him, that this argument of mine must, if it prove any thing
at all, prove that Lucian never saw Timceus. That is such an
inference as I could hardly have believed a man that has
dealt so much in logic could possibly be guilty of. For it*s
evident that if Lucian had seen and approved the Epistles,
he would never have departed from them in his account of
Phalaris's country, for the Letters had been an authority
above all exception. But the case is very different with
Timaeus, who wrote his histories ccxl. years after Phalaris's
death. Lucian might have read those often enough, with-
out giving as much credit to them as to Phalaris's own
Letters, Nay, it's plain he might have read this very ac-
count that Timaeus has given of Phalaris's Bull, and yet
might purposely contradict it. For he might read in Poly-
bius and Diodorus, whose passages we have cited above,
that the very Bull was found at Carthage, and restored to
the Agrigentines by Scipio's order; and so think Timaeus to
be both ways mistaken, whether he denied, as those two
historians say, that there ever was such a Bull ; or affirmed,
as the Scholiast of Pindar says, that the Bull was sunk in
the sea. So very weak and absurd is Mr. B.'s inference,
that, if Lucian has receded from Timaeus 's account, he
might as well depart from the Epistles themselves, though
he looked upon them as genuine. But, besides all this,
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 109
there is no contradiction at all between Lucian and Timseiis :
so that the very ground that Mr. B. reasons from is as
fallacious as his way of reasoning. For Lucian says no more
than this^ that the Tyrant sent the Bull for a present to
Delphi ', and the Delphians demurring whether they should
accept it or no, he makes two orations in Phalaris*s name,
to persuade them to receive it : but that they really received
it, there is not a word said. Nay, one may rather infer,
from the custom of Lucian and other Sophists to choose the
^TTO) \6yov, the weaker and paradoxical side of a dispute,
that there was some tradition that the Bull was sent to
Delphi, and rejected by the priests there. It might be
returned therefore to Agrigentum, and afterwards be either
thrown into the sea, according to Timaeus, or carried to
Carthage, according to Polybius and Diodorus.
In the next attempt, Mr. B. would reconcile the Epistles
with Jamblichus's story about Abaris's conversation with the
Sicilian prince. In the former Edition of my Dissertation I
had allowed that story a place among the historical accounts
of Phalaris, though even then I believed it a mere romance
of Jamblichus's, but I had no room nor occasion to examine
and refute it. But in this second Edition, where the excep-
tions of the Examiner has [have] made it necessary to inquire
into all those particulars, I have freely declared, and, as I
humbly conceive, have fully made out my opinion, that
there's no credit to be given to that story about Abaris.^
To go on, then, to the following paragraph, where he
endeavours to make Heraclides agree with the Epistles. He
takes hold of a small handle I had given him, that the
6p<^avla of Phalaris may possibly mean the loss of Ms
father only, not the loss of both parents (p. 117)- But then
he ought to have retracted his own translation of Phalaris,
for there he renders it, a prima infantid v auentibv s fuisse
orhatum.^ But perhaps, as he says, he did not remember any
such Epistle in his Edition of Phalaris ; and indeed he seems,
« See here, vol. i. p. 114, 115, 116. '' Phal. Ep. 49.
110 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
by the frequent contradictions he makes to that Edition, to
have quite forgot that he ever set it out ; though some have
been so free as to make a question, whether that proceeds
from the badness or the goodness of his memory. But that
is no question with me : the question here, that I am con-
cerned in, is, whether it may be gathered from the Epistles,
that Phalaris^s mother did not follow him to Agrigentum,
Now, the reasons why I think that she did not are these.
First, the Tyrant tells us that he was an orphan in his child-
hood,^ which is likely to signify, that his mother was then
dead : then he tells us, in several Epistles, that he was
forced to leave his wife and only son behind him ; which is
a shrewd sign that the mother too, if alive, was left with
them. Besides this, there is not one word in all the Epistles
relating to the old gentlewoman, which Mr. B. will confess
a man of Phalaris's benevolence and affection to his family^
could hardly have omitted; and in the letters to his son
there's no mention made either of the young man's duty to
his grandmother, or of her love to him; and so, in the
letters to his wife there's as great a silence about the
mother's kindness to her daughter-in-law. Now, it can
hardly be supposed, that, in familiar epistles, as these are,
and never intended for the public, the mother should be
quite forgot when he writes to his son and his wife. In the
xivth book of Tully's Epistles, which are written to his
family, we have his wife Terentia, his daughter Tullia, and
his son Cicero, all that were then alive, mentioned in every
page ; and if his aged father or mother had lived then, with-
out question scarce a letter would have 'scaped him without
some testimony of his duty and affection to them. If Mr.
B., therefore, will not take it ill, that we compare a Roman
senator's Epistles to his Sicilian prince's, we may fairly
infer, from the comparison, that Phalaris's mother was dead
before the date of these Letters ; and consequently that
Heraclides contradicts them, where he says that the old
^ Ep. 49. » Index. Phalar.
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. Ill
woman was burned in the Bull, when her son was de-
posed.
Mr. B. has two exceptions still behind, which must
briefly be considered. He denies that his copy of Heraclides
says Phalaris was burned in his Bull (p. 117-) • but I have
answered this already,y and no more needs to be said to't.
Then he tells us, that his copy of Phalaris has no such Epistle
as implies that the Tyrant fled alone from Astypalaa ; but, if
there should be such an one in the King's MS., he'll answer
this objection when the Library -keeper is in so good an
humour as to favour him with a sight of it. Now, in my
opinion, Mr. B.'s o^yn Edition of Phalaris sufficiently im-
plies it, as I think I have newly proved. But there is no
epistle in the King's MS. but what is extant in the common
copies ; on the contrary, there are several wanting. And if
Mr. B. pleases to make trial of my good humour, either for a
sight of that MS. or of any thing else in my power, he may
then represent me to the world upon his own knowledge,
and not upon the reports of those that think to ingratiate
with him by calumniating me, though they never knew me
any more than he does.
I have now gone through all the gentleman's exceptions
to my Dissertation about Phalaris's Epistles; and, that I
may oblige him at parting, I will help him to a rare expe-
dient, that will give a clear and plausible account why the
Tyrant's Epistles were not known for about 1000 years after
his death. It appears, by the xxxivth Letter, that he began
to be very apprehensive of some conspiracies against him :
'tis very probable, therefore, that he would provide against a
sudden stroke, and secure such things as he esteemed most
valuable. And, because all other monuments besides letters
are short-lived and perishing, he must needs have a particu-
lar regard to his Epistles, those monuments of his wit and
learning and virtues, which might do him right to posterity,
y See here, vol. i. p. 211.
112 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
against the calumnies of popular hatred. We may suppose,
then, that he would put these his precious remains into a
chest of cedar or cypress, secured against moisture with
pitch and other bituminous substances, and so bury it in
the earth in a case of marble, where it might remain for a
thousand years, till at last it was fortunately dug up, though
the manner and circumstances of the discovery of it are now
quite extinct. We have a famous instance like this of our
Sicilian prince in the story of Numa the Roman prince.
Numa ordered some writings to be put up safely in a coffin
of stone, and to be privately buried with him;^ and tliey
happened to be dug up A. U. C. dlxxii., when they had
lain in the ground ccccxc. years. Here are very good wit-
nesses of this matter of fact, Cassius Hemina, Lucius Piso,
Valerius Antias, all Roman historians of great antiquity and
reputation. 'Tis true, indeed, that Numa's books are not
now to be had, for they were burned by order of the ma-
gistrate, because they contained something that was dan-
gerous to the public religion. But, however, the story, we
see, has three substantial vouchers ; and if the years that
these books continued under ground do not reach to the
number that Phalaris's lay buried, we must consider what
Livy tells us from the historians named above, that the
writings were not only entire, but looked as fresh as if they
were newly writ.^ If they lasted, then, near 500 years, with
all the freshness of a new book, we may reasonably suppose
they would have been legible still, had they lain 500 years
longer. Now, to use the words of Mr. B., what is there in
this story about Phalaris's burying his Letters either absurd
or unnatural (p. 100.) ? what was really done at Rome, may
be fairly presumed to have been done too in Sicily. Nay,
further, as he judiciously observes, this supposition must
be shewn impossible, before any convincing argumejit can be
drawn from the silence of all the ancients to prove these
'■ Liv, lib. xl. Pliny, xiii. 13. Plut. Numa. Lactantius, i. 22.
* Liv. xl. Non integros inod6, sed recentissima specie.
THE LETTERS UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENTS. 113
Letters sjmrious (p. 89). And if once he can bring his
matters to that point, he can lie so intrenched there, that he
may hold out for his Phalaris as long as Troy did against
the Greeks.
Nay, to leave the gentleman still in better humour, I'll
oblige him with a further remark, and shew how all the
objections against the Letters may be evaded by his single
supposition, that they were buried under ground. For, as
the lives of the greatest heroes have been attended with such
extraordinary events as seem to be either miraculous or in-
credible, so the writings that have had the singular fortune
of lying some ages under ground have all of them had some
remarkable qualities that cannot be found in vulgar books.
As the writings of Numa, for instance, were ii. Latin books
and II. Greek books ;^ and yet they were vii. Latin and vii.
Greek f nay, they were xii. Latin and xii. Greek.^ Now,
for the same things to be ii., vii., and xii., is no ordinary
case, but a peculiar property of buried writings. Again,
those Greek writings of Numa's were a system of the Pytha-
gorical philosophy j^ and yet we know that Pythagoras, the
founder of that philosophy, lived iv. or v. generations after
Numa's time. And again, the books of Numa were made
of Egyptian papyrus, which was not applied to the use of
writing till a good while after Numa was dead. But if
Numa's books could consist of Egyptian paper, and contain
the precepts of Pythagoras, so many generations before
paper was made, or Pythagoras was born, what wonder is it
if the Epistles of Phalaris, which we suppose now to have
been buried like Numa's, should have the names of several
towns and other things that were not built nor heard of till
long after the Tyrant's death ? So the famous Hetruscan
monuments, that Curtius Inghiramius* dug up in Italy, after
they had been buried some thousands of years, were written
upon vulgar paper such as now is in use, and made of linen
^ Pliny. " Livy. ^ Plut. " Pliny, Livy.
[* See note, vol. i. p. 84. — D.]
VOL. II. Q
114 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
rags, a very recent invention; and^ which is still the more
wonderful, upon every sheet there was the cipher of the
man that made it, who was either then alive, or newly dead,
when the monuments were found. ^Tis the privilege, there-
fore, of buried books to have that prophetic quality of con-
sidering future things as if they were present ; which will
fully account for all the odd things in chronology that the
Letters are taxed with. And then for the Attic dialect that
Phalaris has used there, we have a salvo clear beyond
Mr. B.'s project of transdialecting , For the Revelation of
St. James, that was writ with the apostle's own hand, and
lay buried in Spain from that time to the xvth century,
had some parts of it in modern Spanish, which was not
in being in the time of the apostle. Now, if the buried
writings in Spain can use dialects that were no where spoken
till many ages after the date of them, why might not the
buried Epistles in Sicily use the new Attic dialect, though it
was first formed and introduced some generations after the
author's death ? 'Tis true, the learned Aldrete^ endeavours
to account for the modern Spanish in the apostle's writings
from the gift of prophecy that he was inspired with, by
which he foreknew when his buried writings would be dug
up, and therefore used the language that would then be in
fashion. But he needed not to have recourse to any aposto-
lical gift, if he had but considered that it's the general pro-
perty of all such buried writings to speak proleptically, and
to anticipate those things that are to happen in future ages :
so Numa did, so the Hetruscan heroes of Inghiramius, and
so the Sicilian prince.
XVII.
When I was to write my Dissertatioiz upon Pha-
laris, at the request of my learned friend,* I read the
Epistles over, and the passages that I remarked as I
' Bern, Aldrete, Varias Antiguedades de Espanna, Africa, y otras Pro-
vincias. [* Wotton. — D.]
Ilpoyoia. XTOL')(^ela. K6(r/jLo<;, 115
went along were the topics of that discourse. But
having since been obliged, upon the account of Mr.
B., to read the Epistles over again, I observed three
or four places, that then had escaped me, which are
as certain signs of an imposture as any I had pro-
duced before.
In the iiid Epistle the Sophist uses the word
nPONOIA to express the notion of God's provi-
dence, sig rriv rov ^atfjuovtov 'r^ovotccv avcc^ps^cov ra ttb^i l[Jbov.
And again, in the civth he threatens the Catanaeans,
that he will never cease to be their enemy, eojg h rj hoi-
zovcrcc TTPOvoicc T9Jv avTTiv ccdi/jOvIuv rov K02M0T (pvXdrr'/],
as long as Pr^ovidence sustains the frame of the world ;
and he presently adds, that they prof aned the fire of
JEtna, if the fire of that mountain, like the other ele-
ments of nature, had any thing of divinity in it ; Ei'ys
Bilag rvyjig,^ says he, ooffTrz^ rot XotToi rrjg (pvffsofg 2TOI-
XEIA, fcai ro pcuroi rriv A'lrvTjv 'ttv^ [jusiJijoi^arat, Now,
here are no fewer than three words, ITPONOIA,
2T0IXEIA, K02M02, that were never taken in
those senses in the days of the true Phalaris. For
Laertius^ acquaints us, out of the famous Phavori-
nus's viiith book HccvrohccTr^g 'laro^iocg. Of Omnifai^ious
History, that Plato first applied aroiyfiov, element, to a
philosophical sense, and first named 'tt^ovoioc the Provi-
dence of God ; Yl^ajrog h (piKoffo^ia, , . . ouvo^aGS . . 2TOI-
XEION Kou hocXszriz^v pcat kov HPONOIAN. So
that '7r^ovota'\ before Plato's time did not signify divine
Providence, nor was ever ascribed to the Deity, but
was used only to denote human consideration and
[* Lennep, in his ed. of Phalar. Epist., reads ^vxns, p. 150., where see note.
— D.] t Laert. in Platone. [I. 180. ed. Meih.—T).']
[f But see the long note by Lennep on Phalar. Epist. p. 148. — D.]
116 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
forecast. And so croiyjiov seems to have meant no-
thing else but the letters of the alphabet, till Plato
first applied it to signify the elements of natural
bodies. Ta ilIv t^^toc, says Plato,^' olocrs^si 2TOI-
XEIA, l| ouv ^[/jBtg rs (rvyzst(Jbedoc za) roiXkoc, the Jirst
elements, as it were, whereof vien and all other things
consist: and in another place he says/ Tovhz rov
;c6()[/jOv, ^oijov i[h'^vyj)V 'ivvovv n, rri c&Xj^Osia ^ta rriv rov 9iov
ysnff^cci nPONOIAN, the world, being an animal en-
dued tvith soul and wind, was in ixality made by the
Pi^ovidence of God, Where Proclus, in his Commen-
tary,-' tells us, C'Or/) ^u (jijS[JjV7^(t0oci, za) m 6 ^s^oi^st)^ utz
'/TS^i Tfjg. 'TT^ovoiag ovo^ocTog, cug HXdrcovog ovrc/j ts^i ttjv
Oiiav fceXsvaavrog, For ^s^o^s:)^ we must read Xai§MVsvg,
that is, Plutarch, who was born at Chaeronea; and
the latter part of the sentence may thus be corrected,
ug UXoircovog ovrco 'tt^utov hiav Kakkaavrog,^ We must
remember, says he, ivhat Plutarch says about the name
of 'TT^ovoioc^, that Plato was the first that applied the word
to signify divine Providence. There's little question
to be made but that this is a true emendation;
though whether Plutarch says this in any of his books
that are now extant, I do not now remember. Well,
since it appears from so good authority, who it was
that first put these new significations upon 'Tr^ovoia
and GToiyfm, we may justly pronounce that the Epis-
ties are a cheat, since they have used the words in
the Platonic sense, and yet pretend to bear date
above a whole century before Plato.
^ Plato in Sophista. [The passage occurs in the Thetvtetus : Plat. Op. III. 546.
ed. 1826.— D.] ' Plato in Timaeo. [Plat. Op. Vlt. 258. ed. 1826.— D.]
i Proclus in Plat. Timaeum, p. 126.
[* Lennep corrects ws TIAot. ovtcd -rrpofxriQuav {vel tV TrpoyLT]Oitav) Ka\4<r. :
note on Phalar. Epist. p. 142. — D.]
npovoca. XTOL')(ela. Kocr/jLoq. 117
And now that I am speaking of 'proovota, I cannot
omit a very elegant saying of Hierocles the Stoic,
which, as A. Gelhus tells us,'' the Platonic philo-
sopher Taurus had always in his mouth when Epi-
curus was mentioned, 'Hlov^ riXog 'Tro^vrig Uyfjucc ovx,
sffrtv To^vsTa, ovlh Tro^vrjg loyfjucc : which being manifestly
corrupted, our most excellent Bishop Pearson' cor-
rects it thus, 'HhovTJ rikog' Tro^vrig loyfjijcc, ovx, hn t^o-
vota ovUv To^vTjg loyfjua ; i. e. Pleasure is the summum
bonum : a strumpet's tenet. Providence is nothing : a
strumpefs tenet. Now, the emendation, in the main,
is true and good, for 9ro^vs7a is, with great sagacity,
changed by him into 'Tr^ovoia, which is the basis of the
whole sentence. But yet there's something harsh in
the syntax that his lordship has made there, ovz hrt
'TT^ovoia ovUv : for the author, if he had used ovlh,
would have said, Tr^ovoia ovhiv Iffrt. Besides that the
same answer, Tro^v/jg ^6y(jba, coming twice, makes the
saying a little flat, and scarce worthy to be used
by Taurus so frequently ; nor is it true that all
strumpets deny Providence. I am persuaded that
the true reading is thus, 'Hlot/^ r'ikog* Tro^vrjg loyfijoc,
OvK effri 'TT^ovoia' ovis To^t/j^g loyf/joc. Now it's impos-
sible in our language to express this saying with the
same brevity and turn that the original has ; but the
meaning of it is. Pleasure is the summum bonum : a
strumpefs tenet. There s no Providence : a tenet too
had even for a strumpet.
In the passage already quoted from the Letters
we had a^fjuovioc rov K02M0T, the harmony and frame
of the WORLD. But I have sufiiciently proved above,™
'' Gellius, ix. 5. [where vulgb 'HSoj/^s reKos, k. t. A.. — D,]
^ Prolegom. ad Hieroclem, p. 14. '» See here, vol. i. p. 391,
118 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
by the testimonies of four or five good witnesses, that
Pythagoras was the first that called the universe
zoaijjog. And I humbly conceive, that very few, when
they have considered what I have said about the ages
of Phalaris and Pythagoras, will believe that the
Tyrant was a disciple of the philosopher's. The
word K02M02, therefore, is another detection of
the Sophist's imposture ; and not Koa^hog only, but
APMONIA too, for that also is a Pythagorical ex-
pression; and it was a position of that sect, ;co5^'
APMONIAN (TvvsffTcimi roi oKoc, that the universe and
all things in it consisted by harmony ;'' which is the
very notion here of the Sophist.
XVIII.
Demosthenes made the oration De Corona when
Aristophon was archon, 01. cxii. 3. This we know
from the famous critic Dionysius Halicarnassensis ;
but the passage where he tells this wants emenda-
tion.° ('O) Ts^/ Tov ^TS^dvov (Xoyog) . . . gT ' A§i(TTo(p^vTog
a^yjivrog f/jh Ivtavrov (/jsroi r^v h ILcci^aovBioc [/jdy^rjv, hzroj ^g
|M;sra rnv ^iki'Tr'Trov rikzvTTiv, Some editions have in
the margin Iviocvtoj, instead of hiavTov : but the whole
passage is to be read thus ; It ' A^i(rro(poovrog d^x^vrog,
7f (i. e, oyhocu) (Jtjh Iviocvtm (jusroi r^v b Xat^cijveicx, ^dyjiv,
zKTco Sg jW/gra rnv ^ikiir'Trov rsKivr^v : that is, the oration
about the Crown was made in Aristophons archon-
ship, the Yiiith year after the battle at Chceronea, and
the vith after Philip's death, ^ That the numbers
n Laert. in Pythag. • " Dionys. Halic. de Demosth. p. 124.
[* See the examination of the difficulties in the date of the cause irepX tov
crre^dt/ov, in the Ap. to Clinton's Fasti Hellen. from LV. to cxxiv. 01. p. 361,
362, 363, 364. sec. ed.—D.']
MfjSev dfiapTcivecy, Oeov. 119
here are agreeable to matter of fact appears from
Diodorus, and from Dionysius himself, in his Life of
Dinarchus. In that oration the orator has given us
the epitaph that was made by public order upon
some of those that were slain in the war against
Philip, the last distich of which is this f
MySev afiaprelv icm Oeoyv, koX Trdvra KaropOovv
^Ev piory fiolpav K ovrc <f)uyetv eiropev.
To miscarry in nothing, and to succeed well in every
thing, belongs only to the gods. This part of the
epitaph became very famous in the following ages,
and was often cited; as by Themistius/ 'E-rs/ Ss to
f/jrjhih d[jjccprdmv 'i^oj r^g (pvffzojg zzirai ccv^^coTivTjg, &c. ;
that is, to iniscarry in nothing, is above the power of
human nature; for I cannot believe there were ever
such men as the Stoics describe and call ivise ; and the
epigram that was written upon the public sepulchre at
Athens seems to say truer, for it makes the miscarrying
in nothing to be the attribute of the gods alone ; tcou yap
rolg hoig (juovoig ro Trdvra zaro^hvv aTovBi/jSi. 'Tis cited
too by an anonymous author in Suidas:"" '0^^<a;^ yd^
sl^j^Tcct, TO [Jbh [/jyjhh dpua^rsTv hov Iffrt, zcu 'icdvTcc zaro^-
0OVV' dv&^co'Trog Sg ovk du el^rot Xir ovhm, on [ju^ 'Trsiffercct
roh Ti, 'Tis a good saying, that to miscarry in nothing,
and to succeed in every thing, is the property of God;
but a man can say upon no occasion that such a thing
shall not befall him. Justinian too seems to mean it,
when he says,' Omnium habere memoriam, et penitiis
p Demosth. de Corona, p. 187. {Or. Att. IV. {pars pr.) p. 355. ed. Bekk.,
where KoropBovv
iv ^lor^, HQipav, k. t. A.. D.]
1 Themist. Orat. iii. [=xxii. p. 276. ed. Hard. 1684, where rris avQpcair. — D.]
' Suid. V. '2,vYfvu^Jl.ova. * Cod. lib. i. tit. 17. leg. ii. § 14.
120 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
in nullo peccare, divinitatis magis quam mortalitatis
est ; quod et a majoribus dictum est. But the strangest
thing of all is, that the Tyrant is introduced with
that very saying in his mouth. To (Lrihh afjucc^ravBtp
zl'/coroog h&jg kou hzaiojg hov po[jbi^6rat ; never to ??iis-
carry in any thing is reasonably, perhaps, and justly,
accounted to be the privilege of God alone^ And yet
the Tyrant himself had made his last and fatal mis-
carriage above cc. years before that epitaph was
written.
XIX.
There's nothing in the world more liberal and
profuse than a sophist ; he can give five or six thou-
sand pound sterling with as httle concern as another
man would part with ten shillings. The first present
that the writer of Euripides's Letters gives the poet
was no less than xl. talents/ which amounts to
7,200/. English. But our mock Phalaris goes quite
beyond him in generosity ; for he rewards Polychtus,
a physician that had cured him of a dangerous dis-
temper, with IV. goblets of refined gold, ii. silver howls
of ancient workmanship not to be snatched in the present
age, X. couple of large Thericlean cups, xx. young boys
for his slaves, and 50,000 Attic drachms; besides an
annual salary for life, as great as was paid to the chief
officers of his fleet and army^ Now, this is a story
credible enough, if we consider that a sophist was
the paymaster ; for, as the actors in comedies paid all
their debts upon the stage with lupins, so a sophist
pays all his with words. But, if we consider the true
» Ep. 129. " Eurip. Epist. v. " Phal. Ep. 70.
PHALARIS'S LIBERALITY. 121
Phalaris and real physician of that age, the whole is
most improbable and absurd, both in respect of him
that gives and of him that receives.
First, it does not at all suit with the state of
those times, that the Tyrant should so abound in
gold as to give iv. cups of that metal, which perhaps
were more than he had in all his possessions. We
are assured, by good hands, that in those days gold
ivas a very scarce commodity in Greece ; amviov ovrojg to
'TTcxXaiov 'TTa^ot roig "Y.7Xri(Tiv 6 x^vffog xcci tccvv, are the
words of Athenaeus,'"' who adds, that the first gold
that shone among the Greeks was that which was
plundered from the temple of Delphi by the Pho-
cagans, which happened Olymp. cvi. 3. Afterwards,
says he, when Alexander had conquered Asia, there
was plenty of it brought among them. But in Pha-
laris's time there was scarce any gold to be found in
all Greece, as appears by this story. The Spartans
were commanded by the oracle to gild the face of
Apollo's statue with gold; and having in vain in-
quired in Greece for some of that metal, they asked
the oracle where they might purchase any? and he
ordered them to go to Croesus king of Lydia, and buy
some of him, which was accordingly done.'' This is
told us by Athenaeus, out of two very ancient and
credible historians, Theopompus a scholar of Iso-
crates's, and Phanias a scholar of Aristotle's. Now,
Croesus, we know, was contemporary with Phalaris ;
^ Athen. p. 23L [= II. 388. ed. Schw., where <rirdvios yap ovrcts i^v rh iroK.
-D.]
^ Athen. 232. [= II. 390. ed. Schw. The Spartans were not " commanded
" by the oracle" to gild the face of the statue : Ao/ceSot/ttivtot olv xpv(rw(rai fiov-
K6fX€voi rh npSffwirov, k.t.K. — D.]
VOL.. II. R
122 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
SO that in the Tyrant's time there was not gold
enough in Greece (except what was already con-
secrated in the temples) to gild the face of a statue ;
and yet the Sophist gives away in one Letter more
than would have gilt the whole statue from head to
foot. Nay, even at or after the plundering of the
temple at Delphi, gold was yet so scarce in Greece,
that Philip king of Macedon having a little golden cup,
(pidXiov xDVGovv, weighing no more than l. drachmae, or
half a pound troy-weight, was so chary of it, and
afraid it should be stolen from him, that every night,
when he went to bed, he put it under his pillow/
And yet we see the Sicilian piniice so abounded with
it cc. years before, that he could spare four golden
cups, (pia\ag riaaaoag, of the very same fashion with
king Philip's, only all of them larger, for one gift to a
favourite. But perhaps the admirers of Phalaris will
be ready to say, that gold might be common in
Sicily, though scarce in other countries in Greece.
But then another piece of history lies cross in their
way : for the same Theopompus and Phanias tell us
farther, that when Hiero king of Sjrracuse, who
began his reign above lxx. years after Phalaris's was
ended, had purposed to make a tripus and a victoria
of fine gold, ccTr'iip&ov y^^vaov, and present it to Apollo
at Delphi, he sought a long time in Sicily for gold,
but none could be found. Whereupon he sent mes-
sengers into Greece, who, after a long search to no
purpose, at last met with some at Corinth in the
hands of one Architeles, who, having for many years
y Athen. p. 155 and 231. [=11. 105 and 388. ed, Sclnv,—Y>:\ Pliny,
xxxiii. 3. Eustath. Iliad, p. 815.
PHALARIS'S LIBERALITY. 123
bought up gold by little and little, had amassed a
pretty quantity of it/ But it's something strange
that Hiero should be forced to send out of Sicily for
gold, and yet Phalaris so long before him would have
his very physician served in gold plate, a'7rs(p0ou
Xi^f^ovy of the very same fineness that Hiero wanted.
'Tis true the same historians tell us, that, a year or
two before Hiero's reign, his brother Gelo had de-
dicated a tripus and a victoria to Apollo/ But of
Gelo's donary we have had occasion to speak al-
ready ;'' and it appears there, that the gold which Gelo
then had was the spoil of the Carthaginians ; so that
it was not in Sicily in Phalaris's days, neither did it
continue long there. For the Carthaginian army
brought it Olymp. lxxv. 1. ; and before the end of
Hiero's reign, Olymp. lxxviii. 2., there was none of
it to be found.
In the next place, if we consider the receiver
of this vast present, Polyclitus the physician, the
reward will seem disproportioned to the condition of
the man. It was the common practice of those old
times to hire physicians by the year, for the service
of a whole city, and to pay them out of the public
stock ;'' nay, some of the lawgivers took express care
of it in the very constitution of their governments.**
The general price of a year's service we may learn
from Herodotus,' where he tells us how Democedes
the Crotonian, who had the greatest reputation of all
^ Athen. 232. [=IL 39L ed. Schw.—Ii.'\
» Athen, p. 231. [=11. 390. ed. Schiv,—I>.'\
^ See here, p. 58, 59. of this vol.
<= Strabo, p. 181. Aristoph. and Schol. p. 301. {=Acharn. v. 994. ed. BekTc.
-D.]
♦^ Diodor. p. 80. * Herod, iii. 131.
124 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
the physicians of his time^ which was a few years
after Phalaris's death, was hired pubhcly a whole
year by the ^Eginaeans for one talent ; and the next
year by the Athenians for a hundred minae, i. e. a
talent and f ; and the next year by Poly crates the
Samian for two talents. Now, what proportion does
this bear to the extravagant present of the Sicilian
princel where, besides the gold and silver vessels,
and the score of handsome slaves, and the yearly
pension equal to an admiral's, the very ready money,
50,000 Attic drachms, comes to viii. talents and i,
which is more than Demo cedes could earn in four
whole years : and yet Polycrates excelled Phalaris in
riches and power, as much as Democedes may be
supposed to excel in his art this unknown Polyclitus.
And if we take our measure from those physicians
that were not hired by the public, but practised
privately for fees, as the custom is now, the dis-
proportion will still be the greater. For the ordinary
fee of a physician was very low in those days and
after, as appears by those famous verses of the philo-
sopher Crates,^ where he represents the account-book
of some of the wealthy men of that age ;
TiOei fjuayeipo) fJLvd<; Be/c, larpM Spa'^/jurjv,
KoXaKL raXavra irevre, (rvfi^ovKM Kairvov^
Uopvr) raXavTOV, (pcXoo-ocf^a) rpico^oXoy,
i. e. to a cook 30/., to a physician two groats, to a flat-
terer 900/., to a counsellor nothing, to a whore 180/.,
to a philosopher a groat, 'Tis true the same Demo-
cedes, when he afterwards in Persia cured Darius's
' Laert. in Cratete. [I. 355. ed. Meib.—D.}
ATOSSA THE INVENTRESS OF EPISTLES. 125
foot, had a very rich present of gold by the emperor's
wives ; but to argue from the riches of the Persian
court, that the hke might be done at Agrigentum, is
truly, as the mock Phalaris says, to compare an In-
dian elephant to afiy,
XX.
Tatian, in the beginning of his oration Against the
Greeks, gives a list of some inventors ; and among
the rest he tells us, out of Hellanicus the historian,
that At OSS a the Persian empress was the first that
wrote epistles; 'ET/croXa^ avvraaaiiv (k^sv^sv) ti Tls^ff&iv
'TTore ^'yrjffccfjbsvyj yvvrj, zoc^aTrs^ (prjffh 'YXKavifcog, " Kroaaa
W ovo[jija avrri riv. The same thing is affirmed by
Clemens Alexandrinus, and from the same author;
Yl^urriv hTtffroXoig cvvToi^ai "Aroffcrccv rrjv Ue^fTcijv ^affiKzv-
(Tocffdv (priffiv 'Exxduizog,^ Now, that Atossa was younger
than Phalaris by one or two generations, appears
several ways. She was the sister and wife of Cam-
byses,*" who began his reign Olymp. lxii. 4. She was
afterwards married to Darius,' and 'was ahve at his
death, Olymp. lxxiii. 4. Nay, she was still alive
when Xerxes returned from his expedition, Olymp.
Lxxv. 1., as it's evident from Fersce, a tragedy of
^Eschylus. The odd manner of her death is told us
by Aspasius ; that her son Xer.ves in a fit of distrac-
tion butchered her and eat her ; as^^^g, says he, 6 tojv
Tli^ffaiv (^ccffiXevg [/jocmg 'i<pccys ttjv savrov (/jrjri^a, z^sov^
yyjffocgJ Now, suppose him to have done this in the
s Clem. Alex. Strom, i. p. 132. •» Herod.
' Herod. ^ Aspasius ad Aristot Ethic, p. 124.
126 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
very year of his return, yet Atossa would survive
Phalaris lxx. years; though we allow him by the
most favourable account to have lived till Olymp.
LVii. 3. And according to Hippostratus and the
Scholiast of Pindar, ^ she is two generations lower
than Phalaris;
Phalaris — 1 . Telemach us.
2. Emnienides,
3. JEnesicIamus, 1. Atossa.
Reigned 4. Theron. 2. Xer.ves, Reigned
01. LXXIII. 1. 01. LXXIII. 4.
It is evident, then, that if Atossa was the first invent-
ress of epistles, these that carry the name of Phalaris,
who was so much older than her, must needs be an
imposture. And that she really found out the way
of epistles, we have the most proper and competent
witness that can possibly be had. For Hellanicus
was a contemporary of this Atossa, being lxv. years
old at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war :'' so
that he was born at 01. lxxi. 2., and was in the
xvith year of his age at Xerxes's expedition. But,
besides the authority of Hellanicus, Clemens tells
us of himself,* that he took his account of the seve-
ral inventors from Scamon, Theophrastus, Cydippus,
Aristophanes, Aristodemus, Aristotle, Philostephanus,
and Strato, in their books About Inventions ;"' so that
either all or at least some of these must be supposed
to have reported that invention of Atossa's. And I
conceive we have a double argument here against our
i See here, vol. i. p. 103, 104. '' Gellius, xv. 23.
^ Clemens, ibid. "• YlcpX EvprjfidTcov.
ATOSSA THE INVENTRESS OF EPISTLES. 127
mock Phalaris ; a positive one, that Atossa first in-
vented epistles ; and a negative, that the Epistles of
Phalaris were not heard of in the days of those
w^riters.
The w^ords of Tatian and Clemens are, g-r/o-roXa?
(Tuvrccffffsiv : now, whether we take (xwraffffuv in a gene-
ral sense for writing, or more strictly for comprising
in a volume and publishing, 'tis either way sufficient to
prove Phalaris's Epistles a cheat. But it may be
objected in their behalf, that epistles were in use
many hundred years before Phalaris, even before the
Trojan times ; as appears from Apollodorus and
Zenobius'' and others, who relate how Bellerophontes
carried l-r/^rroXa^, epistles, from Proetus to lobates :
and how then can Atossa be called the inventress
of epistles ? But, in answer to this, we are to ob-
serve that those authors speak not accurately there,
but accommodate their expression to the manners of
their own times. For Homer, out of whom they all
have it, does not call it an epistle, but -r/val rrvr.rog :
Tlopev S' 076 (TrjiJLaTa \vypa,
Tpd'^a<; iv irivaKi irrvKTw 6viJbO(^66pa iroXXd.^
Now, 'TTiml TrrvKTog is the same with IzKrog, and in
Latin tabellce, pugillares, codicilli, small leaves of
wood covered with bees-wax, and so written on by
a pen of metal. So Pliny interprets this passage of
Homer, Pugillarium usum fuisse etiam ante Trojana
tempora invenimus apud HomerurnS And he expressly
affirais, that the writings that Bellerophontes carried
" Apollod. p. 81. Zenob. p. 50. " Horn. II. C v. 169.
p Pliny, xiii. c. 11.
128 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
were not epistles, but codicils : (^Horner us) Bellerophonti
codicillos datos^ non epistolas, prodidit."^ Now, it's evi-
dent that these codicils could never serve for a volume
of letters, as Phalaris's are ; for the use of them was
only for a single letter, which as soon as read was
erased, and the wax smoothed anew, and so the
codicils were returned with an answer upon the same
wax where the former letter was written. The occa-
sion of Pliny's writing this last passage is pleasant
enough. Licinius Mucianus had reported in his His-
tory, that when he was governor of Lycia, himself saio
and read in a certain temple there a paper-epistle writ-
ten from Troy by SarpedonJ Now, if this were true,
Hellanicus and his followers must be miserably out
when they make Atossa invent epistles so many
hundreds of years after. But I wonder, says Pliny,
at this paper-letter^ of Sarpedon's^ since even in Homer's
time, so long after Sarpedon, that part of Egypt which
alone produces paper was nothing but sea, being after-
wards produced by the mud of the Nile, Or, if paper
was in use in Sarpedons time, how came Homer to say,
that in that very Lycia where Sarpedon lived, not epis-
tles, but codicils, were given to Bellerophontes f^ So
that learned naturalist refutes the pretended letter of
Sarpedon, though, with humble submission, he puts
a false colour upon one part of his argument ; for
the epistle was not given to Bellerophontes in Lycia,
but in Argos of Peloponnesus, to be carried to Lycia.
1 Ibid. c. 13.
■" Sarpedonis k Troja scriptam in quodam templo epistolae chartam. Plin.
ibid.
* Papyrus, charta.
* In ipsa ilia Lycia . . . codicillos datos, non epistolas.
ATOSSA THE INVENTRESS OF EPISTLES. 129
However, without that needless colour, he has suffi-
ciently confuted the creduhty of Mucianus, who,
though he was governor of a great province, and
general of a great army, and three times consul in
Claudius's and Vespasian's time, and, besides all that,
a learned and inquisitive man, was miserably imposed
on with a sham letter of Sarpedon's : a remarkable
instance, that not only the title of Honourable, but
even the highest quality and greatest experience,
cannot always secure a man from cheats and impos-
tures !
VOL. II.
DISSERTATION
UPON THE
EPISTLES
OF
PHALARIS, THEMISTOCLES, SOCRATES,
EURIPIDES, AND THE FABLES op ^SOP.
(Appended to Wotton's Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning, 1697.)
Sir William Temple's Essay upon Ancient and Modern
Learning, pag. 58.
^' It may perhaps be further affirmed, in favour of the
" ancients, that the oldest books we have are still in their
" kind the best. The two most ancient that I know of in
'^ prose, among those we call profane authors, are ^sop's
" Fables and Phalaris's Epistles, both living near the same
" time, which was that of Cyrus and Pythagoras. As the
*^ first has been agreed by all ages since for the greatest
^^ master in his kind, and all others of that sort have been but
" imitations of his original; so I think the Epistles of Pha-
" laris to have more race, more spirit, more force of wit and
" genius, than any others I have ever seen, either ancient or
" modem. I know several learned men [or that usually pass
^^ for such, under the name of critics) have not esteemed them
^' genuine; and Politian, with some others, have attributed
" them to Lucian: but I think he must have little skill in
" painting, that cannot find out this to be an original. Such
^' diversity of passions, upon such variety of actions and
" passages of life and government ; such freedom of thought,
" such boldness of expression ; such bounty to his friends,
" such scorn of his enemies ; such honour of learned men,
'^ such esteem of good; such knowledge of life, such contempt
*^ of death; with such fierceness of nature and cruelty of
" revenge, could never be represented but by him that pos-
'^ sessed them. And I esteem Lucian to have been no more
*^ capable of writing than of acting what Phalaris did. In
" all one ivrit you find the scholar or the sophist : and all
" the other, the tyrant and the commander.'*
DISSERTATION
UPON THE
EPISTLES OF PHALARIS, &c.
TO MR. WOTTON.
SIR,*
I REMEMBER that_, discoursing with you upon this
passage of Sir W. T. (which I have here set down), I hap-
pened to say, that, with all deference to so great an autho-
rity, and under a just awe of so sharp a censure, I believed
it might be even demonstrated that the Epistles of Phalaris
are spurious, and that we have nothing now extant of
iEsop's own composing. This casual declaration of my
opinion, by the power of that long friendship that has been
between us, you improved into a promise, that I would send
you my reasons in writing, to be added to the new edition of
your book, believing it, as I suppose, a considerable point in
the controversy you are engaged in. For if it once be made
out, that those writings your adversary so extols are sup-
posititious, and of no very long standing, you have then his
and his party's own confession, that some of the later pens
have outdone the old ones in their kinds : and to others,
[• As this address has been quoted in a note, vol. i. p. 78, 79., it is neces-
sary to state, that I originally intended to omit that portion of Bentley's
Appendix to Wotton's work which treats of the Epistles of Phalaris ; but, since
the preceding sheets were sent to press, I have seen the propriety of reprinting
the Appendix entire. — D.]
136 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
that have but a mean esteem of the wit and style of those
books, it will be a double prejudice against him, in your
favour, that he could neither discover the true time nor the
true value of his authors. jmm^
-These, I imagine, were your thoughts when you engaged
, me to this that I am now doing. But I must take the
I freedom to profess, that I write without any view or regard
ito your controversy, which I do not make my own, nor
(presume to interpose in it. 'Tis a subject so nice and
jdelicate, and of such a mixed and diffused nature, that I am
content to make the best use I can of both ancients and
moderns, without venturing with you upon the hazard of a
wrong comparison, or the envy of a true one.
That some of the oldest books are the best in their kinds ^^-r,
the same person having the double glory of invention and
perfection, is a thing observed even by some of the ancients.^
But then the authors they gave this honour to are Homer
and Archilochus; one the father of heroic poem, and the
other of epode and trochaic. But the choice of Phalaris and
iEsop, as they are now extant, for the two great inimitable
originals, is a piece of criticism of a peculiar complexion,
and must proceed from a singularity of palate and judgment.
To pass a censure upon all kinds of writings, to shew
their several excellencies and defects, and especially to as-
sign each of them to their proper authors, was the chief
province and the greatest commendation of the ancient
critics. And it appears from those remains of antiquity that
are left us, that they never wanted employment. For to
forge and counterfeit books, and father them upon great
names, has been a practice almost as old as letters. But
it was then most of all in fashion, when the kings ^ of
Pergamus and Alexandria, rivalling one another in the mag-
nificence and copiousness of their libraries, gave great rates
for any treatises that carried the names of celebrated au-
» Dion. Chrysost. Orat. 33. p. 397.
^ Galen, in Hippoc. de Natura Hominis, Comm. 2. p. 17. ed. Basil.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 137
thors. Which was an invitation to the scribes and copiers
of those times to enhance the price of their wares by as-
cribing them to men of fame and reputation, and to suppress
the true names, that would have yielded less money. And
now and then even an author that wrote for bread, and
made a traffic of his labours, would purposely conceal him-
self, and personate some old writer of eminent note, giving
the title and credit of his works to the dead, that himself
might the better live by them. But what was then done
chiefly for lucre, was afterwards done out of glory and
affectation, as an exercise of style, and an ostentation of wit.
In this the tribe of the Sophists are principally concerned, in
whose schools it was the ordinary task to compose rjOo-
TToda^y to make speeches and write letters in the name and
character of some hero, or great commander, or philosopher :
Tiva<^ av eliroi, \6yov<^, what would Achilles, Medea, or
Alexander, say in such or such circumstances? Thus Ovid,
we see, who was bred up in that way, writ love-letters in
the names of Penelope and the rest. 'Tis true they came
abroad under his own name, because they were vrritten in
Latin and in verse, and so had no colour or pretence to be
the originals of the Grecian ladies. But some of the Greek
Sophists had the success and satisfaction to see their essays
in that kind pass with some readers for the genuine works of
those they endeavoured to express. This, no doubt, was
great content and joy to them, being as full a testimony
of their skill in imitation, as the birds gave to the painter
when they pecked at his grapes. One of them^ indeed has
dealt ingenuously, and confessed that he feigned the answers
to Brutus, only as a trial of skill; but most of them took
the other way, and, concealing their own names, put off
their copies for originals, preferring that silent pride and
fraudulent pleasure, though it was to die with them, before
an honest commendation from posterity for being good
imitators. And, to speak freely, the greatest part of man-
•= Mt^piSaTTjs. Praef. Epist. Bruti.
VOL. II. T
138 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
kind are so easily imposed on in this way, that there is too
great invitation to put the trick upon them. What clumsy
cheats, those Sibylline Oracles now extant, and Aristeas's
story of the Septuagint, passed without control even among
very learned men ! And even some modern attempts of this
kind have met with success not altogether discouraging.
For though Annius of Viterbo,* after a reputation of some
years, and Inghiramius immediately, were shamed out of all
credit ; yet Sigonius's Essay De Consolatione, as coming from
a skilful hand, may perhaps pass for Cicero's with some, as
long as Cicero himself shall last. Which I cannot presage
of that bungling supplement to Petronius (I mean not that
from Traw, but the pretended one from Buda),t that scandal
to all forgeries : though, I hear, 'tis at present admired as a
genuine piece by some that think themselves no ordinary
judges.
OF
PHALARIS'S EPISTLES.
That Sophist, whoever he was, that wrote a small book
of letters in the name and character of Phalaris, (give me
leave to say this now, which I shall prove by and by,) had
not so bad a hand at humouring and personating, but that
several believed it was the Tyrant himself that talked so big,
and could not discover the ass under the skin of that lion.
For we find Stobaeus^ quoting the 38, and 67, and 72, of
those Epistles, under the title of Phalaris. And Suidas, in
the account he gives of him, says he has wrote most admir-
able letters, eiriaroXa^ Oav^aaia^ rrrdvv, meaning those that
we are speaking of. And Johannes Tzetzes, a man of much
[* See notes, vol. i. p. 84. — D.]
[t See vol. i. p. 88.— D.] ^ Stob. tit. vii.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 139
rambling learning, has raany and large extracts out of them
in his Chiliads, ascribing them all to the Tyrant whose
livery they wear. These three, I think, are the only men
among the ancients that make any mention of them; but
since they give not the least hint of any doubts concerning
their author, we may conclude that all the scholars of those
ages received them as true originals ; so that they have the
general warrant and certificate for this last thousand years o^'-y
before the restoration of learning. As for the moderns,
besides the approbation of those smaller critics that have
been concerned in the editions of them, and cry them up of
course, some very learned men have espoused and main-
tained them, such as Thomas Fazellus^ and Jacobus Cap-
pellus.^ Even Mr. Selden himself^ draws an argument in
chronology from them, without discovering any suspicion or
jealousy of a cheat. To whom I may add their latest and /j ^^
greatest advocate, who has honoured them with that most 1
high character prefixt to this treatise. •
Others, indeed, have shewn their distrust of Phalaris's
title to them; but are content to declare their sentiment
•without assigning their reasons. Phalaris, or somebody
else, says Cselius Rhod. lib. iii. c. 7* The, Epistles that go
under the name of Phalaris, Menagius ad Laert, p. 35.
Some name the very person at whose door they lay the
forgery. Lmcian, whom they commonly mistake for Phalaris,
says Ang. Politianus, Epist. 1 . TTie Epistles of Phalaris, if
they are truly his, and not rather Lucian's, Lilius Greg.
Gyraldus, Poet. Hist. p. 88. ; who in another place, p. 332.,
informs us that Politian's opinion had generally obtained
among the learned of that age : The Epistles, says he, of
Phalaris^ which most people attribute to Lucian. How judi-
ciously they ascribe them to Lucian, we shall see better
anon ; after I have examined the case of Phalaris, who has
the plea and right of possession. And I shall not go to
« Historia Sicula, p. 118. ' Historia Sacra et Exotica, p. 249.
«f Marm. Arundel, p. 106.
140 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
dispossess him^ as those have done before me, by an arbi-
trary sentence in his own tyrannical way ; but proceed with
him upon lawful evidence^ and a fair^ impartial trial. And
I am very much mistaken in the nature and force of my
proofs, if ever any man hereafter, that reads them, persist
in his old opinion of making Phalaris an author.
The censures that are made from style and language
alone are commonly nice and uncertain, and depend upon
slender notices. Some very sagacious and learned men
have been deceived in those conjectures, even to ridicule.
The great Scaliger* published a few Iambics, as a choice
fragment of an old Tragedian, given him by Muretus ; who
soon after confessed the jest, that they were made by him-
self. Boxhornius writ a commentaiy upon a small poem
De Lite, supposed by him to be some ancient author's ; but
it was soon discovered to be Michael Hospitalius's, a late
Chancellor of France. So that if I had no other argument
but the style to detect the spuriousness of Phalaris's Epis-
tles ; I myself, indeed, should be satisfied with that alone,
but I durst not hope to convince every body else. I shall
begin, therefore, with another sort of proofs, that will affect
the most slow judgments, and assure the most timid or in-
credulous.
The time of Phalaris's tyranny cannot be precisely deter-
mined, so various and defective are the accounts of those
that write of him. Eusebius sets the beginning of it Olymp.
XXXI. 2., Phalaris apud Agrigentinos tyrannidem exercet ;
and the end of it Olymp. xxxvii. 2.,t Phalaridis tyrannis
destructa. By which reckoning he governed xxviii. years.
But St. Hierom, out of some unknown chronologer (for that
note is not extant in the Greek of Eusebius), gives a different
time of his reign, above lxxx. years later than the other;
Olymp. Liii. 3., or, as other copies read it, lii. 2., Phalaris
tyrannidem exercuit annos xvi. Which is agreeable to
Suidas, who places him Kara ttjv v^' ^0\vfi7nd8a, about
[* See Scaliger in Varr. de Re Rust. p. 212. ed. Steph. 1573. — D.]
[t See vol. i. p. 99.— D.]
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 141
the Lii. Olympiad. If the former account be admitted, the
cheat is manifest at first sight ; for those letters of Phalaris
to Stesichorus and Pythagoras must of necessity be false.
Because Stesichorus was but vi. years old at that supposed
time of Phalaris's death; and Pythagoras was not taken
notice of in Greece till lxxx. years after it. But^ for the
sake of Aristotle and Jamblichus, who make these three to
be contemporaries, and that I may prevent all possible cavils
and exceptions ; I am willing to allow the latter account, the
more favourable to the pretended Letters; his government
commencing Olymp. liii. 3., and expiring after xvi. years,
Olymp. L.VII. 3.
I. In the last Epistle, to those of Enna, a city of Sicily,
Phalaris says the Hyblenses and Phintienses had promised
to lend him money at interest 5 01 he uTreV^T/vTo Bavelo-etv,
ft>9 'T^XaloL Kol ^ivTLel<i. The Sophist was careful to men-
tion such cities as he knew were in Sicily. For so Ptolemy
places ^LVTia there ; and Antoninus, Phintis ; and Pliny,
Phintienses. But it is ill luck for this forger of letters, that
a fragment of Diodorus,^ a Sicilian, and well acquainted
with the history of his country, was preserved to be a wit- fu. ^^w^ -
ness against him. That excellent writer informs us, that "^^ '^ **"*^
Phintias Tyrant of Agrigentum (the very place where Pha-
laris was before him,) first built Phintia, calling it by his
own name ; Kri^et Se ^ivria^ ttoXlv, 6vo/jLdcra<; avrrjv ^cv-
TcdSa; and that this was done while the Romans were at
war with king Pyrrhus, that is, Olymp. cxxv. ; which is
above cclxx. years after Phalaris's death, taking even the
later account of St. Hierom. A pretty slip this of our
Sophist, who, like the rest of his profession, was more
versed in the books of orators than historians, to introduce jj o^f f
his Tyrant borrowing money of a city almost ccc. years
before it was named or built.
II. In the xcii. Epistle he threatens Stesichorus the
poet for raising money and soldiers against him at Aluntiuni
«» Diod. p. 867.
142 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
r
and Alaesa^ koI el^ UXovvtlov kov eh ^AXaiaav ; and that
perhaps he might be snapt before he got home again from
Alaesa to Himera^ ef ^A\alar)<^ eU 'Ifiepav. What a pity
tis again, that the Sophist had not read Diodorus ! for he
I would have told him that this Alaesa was not in being in
' Phalaris's days. It was first built by Archonides,^ a Sicilian,
Olymp. xciv. 2. ; or, as others say, by the Carthaginians,
about two years before. So that here are above cxx. years
slipt, since the latest period of Phalaris. And we must add
above a dozen more to the reckoning, upon the Sophist's
own score : for this letter is supposed to bear date before
Stesichorus and Phalaris were made friends, which was a
dozen years, as he tells his tale,J before Stesichorus died ;
and Phalaris he makes to survive him. I am aware that the
same author says,^ that there were other cities in Sicily
called Alsesa ; but it is evident from the situation, that this
Alaesa of Archonides is meant in the Epistles ; for this lies
on the same coast with Himera and Aluntium (to which two
the Sophist here joins it), and is at a small distance from
them. And indeed there was no other town of that name in
the days of the Sophist, the rest being ruined long before.
III. The Lxx. Epistle gives an account of several rich
presents to Polyclitus the Messenian physician, for doing a
great cure upon Phalaris. Among the rest he names ttott)-
pl(ov ©rjpLKXeicov ^evyrj BeKa, ten couple of Thericlean cups.
But there is another thing, besides a pretty invention, very
useful to a liar ; and that is, a good memory. For we will
suppose our author to have once known something of these
cups, the time and the reason they were first called so ; but
that he had unhappily forgot it when he writ this Epistle.
They were large drinking- cups, of a peculiar shape, so called
from the first contriver of them, one Thericles, a Corinthian
potter. Pliny, by mistaking his author Theophrastus, makes
him a turner, lib. xvi. cap. 40., Celebratur et Thm^icles
i Diod. p. 246. J Epist. 103.
^ Diod. ibid.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 143
nomine, calicos ex terebintho solitus facere torno. The words
of Theophrastus are these, Hist. Plant. 1. v. cap. 4., Topvev-
ea-Oai 8' e^ avrrj^ (repfilvOov) KvXcKa<; QripuKXeiov^, uxttc
fiTjS^ av eva Bcayvcovai, Trpo? Ta<i K€pafjLea<;; that the turners
inake Thericlean cups of the turpentine tree, which cannot be
distinguished from those made by the potters. [Tjhere can
nothing be gathered hence to make Thericles himself a
turner; for, after he had first invented them, they were
called Thericlean from their shape, whatsoever artificer made
them, and whether of earth, or of wood, or of metal. But,
as I said, by the general consent of writers, we must call
him a potter. Hesychius, 0T}pLK\€to<;, kv\i,ko<; eZSo?, airb
Or)pt,KXeov<; Kepafj^ico^. Lucian in Lexiphanes, pag. 960.,
Kal yrjyevri TroXka, oia QijpcKkrjf; WTrra. Etymologicon M.y
SrjpWXeLov KvKiKa, . . . . 7)v XiyovaCy TrpoiTC^ Kepafjuev^; QrjpL-
KXrj<; eiT0i7]crev, w? ^7](rtv Evl3ov\o<;, 6 t^9 fieo-Tjf; KoyfjuaySiaf;
TToiTjTrjf;. The words of Eubulus, whom he cites, are extant
in Athenaeus, lib. xi. p. 471. ;*
Ka6ap(oT6pov yap tov /cipa/Jbov elpya^ojjLrjv
"H ©7jpcK\rj<; ra? KvXcKa^, rjvt/c rjv veo^.
And again,
V2 yala Kepafjulr, ^ are ©7]pLK\rj<; irore
"JEreuf e, kol\7]<; Xayovo^ evpvva<; fidOo<;.
Now, the next thing to be inquired is the age of this
Thericles ; and we learn that from Athenseus ; one witness
indeed, but as good as a multitude in a matter of this nature.
Pag. 470.,t KaracTKevdaaL Xeyerat rrjv KvXiKa ravrrjv ©rjpi-
K\7j<i 6 KoplvOiO^; KepafjL€V<i, .... yeyovoD*^ rot? ')(povoi<i Kara
TOV KWfjbLKov ^ApL(7To^dv7j; tMs cup, says he, was invented
by Thericles the Corinthian potter, who was contemporary
tvith Aristophanes the comedian. And, in all probability, he
had this indication from some fable of that poet's now lost,
[* = I V. 244, 245. ed. Schw., where in the second passage Kepa/xlTi, 6 ah. —
D.]
[f = IV. 241. ed. Schw.—J).]^
144 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
where that Corinthian was mentioned as one then alive.
But all the plays that we have left of his are known to have
been written and acted between the lxxxiix.* and xcvii.
Olympiads, which is an interval of xxxvi. years. Take
now the very first year of that number ; and Thericles, with
the cups that had their appellation from him, come above
cxx. years after Phalaris's death.
But I must remove one objection that may be made
against the force of this argument ; for some ancient gram-
marians give a quite different account why such cups were
called Thericlean, Some derive the word OrjpLKXeco^;, airo
rcbv drjplcov, from the skins of beasts that were figured upon
them: and Pamphilus the Alexandrian^ would have them
called so, amo rod Orfpa^ KXovelv, because beasts were scared
and frightened^ when, in sacrifices, wine was poured upon
them out of those cups. So I interpret the words of Pam-
philus ; CLTTO Tov Tov Al6vv(70V Tov^i 6rjpa<; kXov6lv, (TTrevBovra
TaL<; KvXi^L ravrai^ KaT avrcov. For what is more ordinary
in old authors than the memory of that custom of pouring
wine on the heads of the victims ?
Ipsa, tenens dextrd pater am, pulcherrima Dido,
Candentis vaccce media inter cornuafudit.f
Nor are wild beasts only called Or^pes, but tame too,
such as bulls and cows ; as the Epigrammatist calls the
Minotaur avOpwrrov fxt^oOrjpa.X I cannot therefore com-
prehend why the most learned Is. Casaubon will read airev-
Bovra in this passage, and not o-TrivBovra. For I own I see
little or no sense in it according to his lection. And as for
the authority of the ancient Epitomiser of Athenseus, who,
he says, reads it aTrevBovra, one may be certain *twas a fault
only in that copy of him that Casaubon used. For Eusta-
thius, who appears never to have seen the true Athenaeus,
[* =LXXXVIII. — D.]
» Athenaeus, pag. 471. [= IV. 243. ed. Schw.—B.}
[t Virg. jEn. iv. 60.— D.]
[X Ep. adesp. Antli. Gr. ex rec. Br. (ed. Jacobs.) IV. 180. — D.]
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 145
but only that Epitome, read it in his book aTrivSovTa, and
took it in the same sense that I now interpret it, p. 1209.*
Iliad., *^H SiOTC 6ripa<; KXovel, cnrevhova-L 'yap Kar avroiv
KifXi^L TotavTaL^. And now for those two derivations of
the word S7)plk\€lo<; ; was ever any thing so forced, so
frigid, so unworthy of refutation ? Does not common ana-
logy plainly shew, that as from 'Hpa/cXr)? comes 'H/ja/cXeto?,
from ^ocpofcXrjf;, ^o</)o/cXeto9, and many such like ; so Qrjpl-
Kketo^s must be from QrjpLKKrj^ ? besides so many express
authorities for it, which I have cited before. To which I
may add that of Julius Pollux, 1. vi. c. 16.,t Qr^pUXeiov koI
Kdvdapov airo t(ov TroLTja-dvrcov : and Plutarch in P. JEmi-
lius, pag. 2/3., O'l re Td<; jivriyovLSag, koI ^e\€VKl8a<;, koI
©7)pLKkelov<^ .... iTriheiKVVfjbevoL : and Clemens Alexand.
II. Peed, p. 69., ^Eppirayv rolvvv ©rjptKXeiOL tiv6<; kvXlk6<;,
KoX 'AvTiyovlSe^, koI KdvOapot. For one may justly infer,
that both Plutarch and Clemens believed ©ijpLKXetot, to be
from ©7]pcKXrj<; ', because they join them with those other
cups, all which had their names from men that either in-
vented or used them. And so says a manuscript note upon
that passage of Clemens ; ©rjplKXeLOL diro ©rjpcKXeovf; toO
e(f)6vp6vTo^. So that, upon the whole, let Pamphilus and
those other grammarians help him as they can, our Sophist
stands fully convicted, upon this indictment, of forgery and
imposture.
I must here beg leave of the late learned Editors of our
mock Phalaris, with whom I must by and by have some
further expostulation, to dissent from their new version of
this passage ; whereby this argument from Thericles would
vanish into nothing. For instead of ten couple of Thericlean
cups, as the former interpreters honestly translate it, they
present us, as an emendation, with the like number of
GLASSES, poculorum vitreorum, leaving us not the least foot-
step of our Corinthian potter. But methinks these glasses
[* ed. Basil— T>.'\
[t p. 623. ed. Hemst.—D.]
VOL. II. U
146 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
come in but oddly and stingily among those other things
named there of great value^ ^iaXa<^ aTri^Oov %/)ucroO, &c.
vessels of gold and silver, beautiful slaves, fifty thousand
drachmm, and a liberal yearly pension for life. If Aga-
thocles the tyrant had made this present of a score of
glasses, it might have passed for a mark of favour ', because
he was a potter in his youth^ and we might suppose them of
his own making. And, as I remember, Diodorus tells such
a story of him. But why Phalaris should make so cheap
and brittle a compliment, I cannot conjecture. ^Tis true,
Suidas translates it a glass, ©Tjpl/cXeiov ttottjplov, voXlvov,
and Etymolog, Mag., ©rjpLKXecov KvXiKa, irorripLov vekLvov.
But we know the old lexicons chiefly consist of excerpta out
of scholiasts and glossaries upon particular authors ; one of
which, in one single place, might expound it a glass. But
that it must universally mean so^ or particularly in this
passage before us, neither the use of the language nor good
sense will allow. For, besides earth, which was the first
material, some were made of wood, as Theophrastus says in
the place already cited ; others of silver or gold, as Plutarch
in P. JEmilius,^ 01 Be [re] Ta<; .... 07}pi,K\elov<; koI 6<ra irepl
hetirvov XPT^flMATA rod TIepaicof; iTTLSeLKvv/Jbevoi. And
Athenaeus, lib. v. p. 199.,t ^epovTe<i at fjuev olvox6a<^, ol Be
^id\a<;, ol Be ©rjpLKXelov; jxefyaXa^;, Trdvra XPT^A. And
I conceive it were more agreeable to the generosity of Pha-
laris, which is the subject of so many letters, to suppose
these Thericlean cups to be silver at least, if not a more
precious metal.
IV. In the Lxxxv. Epistle he boasts of a great victory
obtained over the Zancleans ; Tavpofjbeve[Ta<; koI ZayK\elov<i
o-vfi/jua')(^(TavTa<i Aeovrlvotf; eh Te\o<; vevUrjKa. But the
very preceding Letter, and the xxi., are directed to the
Messenians, Meacr7jvLoc<;, and the city is there called Mea-
aijVT] ; and in the first Epist. he speaks of IIoXvK\eLTo<; 6
Meo-o-rjVLo^. Here we see we have mention made of Zan-
[* In loc. sup. c<7.— D.] [i =ii. 267. ed. Schw.—D.l
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 147
cleans and Messenians, as if Zancle and Messana were two
different towns. Certainly the true Phalaris could not write
thus; and it is a piece of ignorance inexcusable in our
Sophist^ not to know that both those names belonged to one
and the same city at different times. Strabo, lib. vi. p. 268.,
MeaarjVT], .... ZdjKXr} Trporepov KaXovfievi], Messana, which
was before called Zancle. See also Herodotus, lib. vii., and
Diodorus, lib. iv., and others. Perhaps it may be suspected,
in behalf of these Epistles, that this change of name was
made during those xvi. years of Phalaris*s tyranny; and
then, supposing the lxxxv. Letter to be written before the
change, and the other three after it, this argument will
be evaded. But Thucydides will not suffer this suspicion to
pass, who relates,"^ that at the time of Xerxes's expedition
into Greece (which was Olymp. l-xxtii.), Anaxilaus king of
Rhegium besieged Zancle, and took it, and called it Mes-
sana, from the Peloponnesian city of that name, the place of
his nativity. The same says Herodotus :^ and agreeably to
this narrative, Diodorus° sets down the death of this Anaxi-
laus Olymp. Lxxvi. 1., when he had reigned xviii. years.
Take now the latest accounts of Phalaris' s death, according
to St. Hierom ; and above lx. years intervene between that
and the new-naming of Zancle. So that, unless we dare
ascribe to that Tyrant a spirit of vaticination, we cannot
acquit the author of the Letter's of so manifest a cheat.
But I love to deal ingenuously, and will not conceal one
testimony in his favour, which is that of Pausanias,P who
tells the story very differently from Herodotus and Thucy-
dides, placing this same Anaxilaus of Rhegium about a
CLxxx. years higher than they do; that he assisted the
refugees of Messana in Peloponnesus, after the second war
with the Spartans, to take Zancle in Sicily, which thereupon
was called Messana, Olymp. xxix. : Tavra Be iirl t^9
'OXf/ATTtaSo? eiTpd')(6rj Trj<; ivdT7}<; koL eiKOCTTrj^;, rfv X.l6vl<^
™ Lib. vi. p. 414. " Lib. vi. cap. 23.
" Lib. xi. p. 37. p M^sen. p. 134. ,^/
r
ur
148 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
AaKcov TO hevTCpov iviKa, MiXTidBov Trap' ^AB7)vaioi<; ap^
')(ovTo^. Now^ if this be true, we must needs put in one
word for our Sophist; that Phalaris might name the Mes-
senians without pretending to the gift of prophecy. Clu-
verius^i indeed would spoil all again ; for he makes it a fault
in our copies of Pausanias, and for elKoarrjfi, the xxix.
Olymp., reads e^7]/coo-rrj<;, the lxix. ; which is too great
a number to do our author any service. But we will not
take an advantage against him from a mistake of Cluverius ;
for, without question, the true lection is el/coo-rrj^, the xxix.;
because the time of the Messenian war agrees with that
computation, and not with the other ; and the ancient Cata-
logue'' of the Olympionic(S puts Chionis's victory at that very
year. ^OXv/jbTrtd^ etKoarr] ivdrr)' Xfcovt9 AaKcov crraStov.
TpiaKoorrr)' 6 avro? to BevTepov. So that, if Pausanias's
credit is able to bear him out, our author, as to this present
point, may still come off with reputation. But, alas ! what
can Pausanias do for him, or for himself, against Herodotus
and Thucydides, that lived so near the time they speak of?
against those other unknown authors that Diodorus tran-
scribed ? against the whole tenour of history, confirmed by so
many synchronisms and concurrences, that even demonstrate
Anaxilaus to have lived in the days of Xerxes and his
father; when Theron, and not Phalaris, was yLtoz;vap%o9,
monarch, of Agrigentum.^ Nay, though we should be so
obliging, so partial to our Sophist, as for his sake to credit
Pausanias against so much greater authority, yet still the
botch is incurable ; 'tis running in debt with one man, to
pay off another. For, how then comes it to pass, that the
Messenians in another Letter are in this called Zancleans ?
which, by that reckoning of Pausanias, had been an obsolete
forgotten word an hundred years before the date of this
pretended Epistle.
V. That same xcii. Letter, which has furnished us
1 Sicil. Antiq. p. 85. •■ Euseb. Scalig. p. 39.
" Herod, lib. vii. p. 438.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 149 >
already with one detection of the imposture^ will^ if strictly
examined, make a second confession, from these words, 09
avTov<; eKrpi'\]r(o tt/tuo? Slktjv : 'tis a threat of Phalaris to
the Himeraeans, that he would extirpate them like a pine-
tree. Now, here again am I concerned for our Sophist, that
he is thus taken tripping. For the original of this saying is
thus related by Herodotus :* when the Lampsaceni in Asia
had taken captive Miltiades the Athenian, Croesus king of
Lydia sent them a message, that if they did not set him
free, he would come and extirpate them like a pine, o-cfyia^
irlrvo'i Tpoirov aireiKee iKTpi-^eLv. The men of Lampsacus
understood not the meaning of that expression, like a pine,
till one of the eldest of them hit upon it, and told them, that
of all trees, the pine, when once it is cut down, never grows
again, but utterly perishes. We see the phrase was then so
new and unheard of, that it puzzled a whole city. But now,
if Croesus was upon that occasion the first author of this
saying, what becomes of this Epistle ? For this, as I ob-
served before, being pretended to be written above a dozen
years before Phalaris's death, carries date at least half a
dozen before Croesus began his reign.
Nay, there is good ground of suspicion that Herodotus
himself, who wrote an hundred years after Phalaris was
killed, was the first broacher of this expression. For 'tis
kno^\Ti those first historians make every body's speeches for
them. So that the blunder of our Sophist is so much the
more shameful. The third [fourth] chapter of the viii.
book of A. Gellius, which is now lost, carried this title.
Quod Herodotus . . . , parum ver^ diwerit, unam solamque
pinum arborum omnium ccesam nunquam denuo ex iisdem
radicibus pullulare ; " that Herodotus is in the wrong in
" saying that, of all trees, a pine only, if lopt, never grows
" again." I suppose Gellius in that chapter told us, out of
Theophrastus, ^ of some other trees, beside the pine, that
' Lib. vi. cap. 37.
" Hist PI. lib. iv. c. 19. Caus. PI. 1. v. c. 24. Plin. 1. xvii. c. 24.
150 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
perish by lopping; the pitch-tree, the fir, the palm, the
cedar, and the cypress. But I would have it observed, that
he attributes the saying, and the mistake about it, not to
Croesus, but to Herodotus ; after whom it became a proverb,
which denotes an utter destruction, without any possibility
of flourishing again. See 7r6VK7j(; rpoirov in Zenobius, Dio-
genianus, and Suidas. And 'tis remarkable that our Letter-
monger has Herodotus's very words, TrtTf? and iKrpiyjrecy;
when all those three other writers have irevKt) for ttItv^, and
KOTTTeiv instead of eKTpL^eiv ; which shews he had in his eye
and memory this very place of Herodotus. A strange piece
of stupidity, or else contempt of his readers, to pretend to
assume the garb and person of Phalaris, and yet knowingly
|to put words in his mouth not heard of till a whole century
after him. .
But here again our late Editors, as if they had been
bribed for the Sophist, have lopt off and destroyed this
branch of our evidence as far as lay in their power ; for they
have made bold to execute this proverb upon itself, and
have quite extirpated the pine-tree out of their new version :
09 avToif^ iKTpt'\]rco ttItvo^ Slktjv, that is, qui eos in arundinis
morem [modum~\ conteret, " who will bruise them like a reed,"
say our critical interpreters. It seems the translation in the
former editions, qui eos ewscindam instar pinus, was too easy
and vulgar. In H. Scripture, indeed, there is mention, by a
very elegant metaphor, of bruised and broken reeds. But
why reeds must be transplanted hither, and the innocent
pine rooted up, I confess to be above my small understand-
ing in gardening.
VI. In the Lxxxv. Epistle we have alrieady taken notice
of our mock Tyrant's triumph, on Tavpofjuevelra^ koI Zay-
K\6iov<; et9 TeXo9 vevL/crjKe, that he had utterly routed the
Tauromenites and the Zancleans. But there's an old and true
saying, TloWa Kaiva tov iroXi/jLov, many new and strange
things happen in war. For we have just now seen those
same routed Zancleans rise up again, after a thousand years,
to give him a worse defeat. And now the others too are
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 151
taking their turn to revenge their old losses. For these,
though they are called Tauromenites both here and in the
XV., XXXI., and xxxiii. Epistles, make protestation against
the name, and declare they were called Naxians in the days
of the true Phalaris. Taurominium, quce antea Naxos, says
Pliny, lib. iii. c. viii. Taurominium, quam prisci Naxon
vocabant, says Solinus, cap. xi.* Whence it is that Hero-
dotus and Thucydides, because they vrrit before the change
of the name, never speak of Taurominium, but of Naxos and
the Naxians. A full account of the time, and the reason,
and the manner of the change is thus given by Diodorus.^
Some Sicilians planted themselves, Olymp. xcvi. 1., upon a
hill called Taurus, near the ruins of Naxus, and bviilt a new
town there, which they called Tauromenion, airo rod Tavpo<^
Koi fieveiv, from their settlement upon Taurus. About forty
years after this, Olymp. cv. 3., one Andromachus,^ a Tau-
romenite, gathered all the remnant of the old Naxians that
were dispersed through Sicily, and persuaded them to fix
there. This is such a plain and punctual testimony, that
neither the power and stratagems of the Tyrant, nor the
rhetoric of the Sophist, are able to evade it. Where are
those, then, that cry up Phalaris for the florid author of the
Letters? who was burnt in his own Bull above cl. years
before Taurominium was ever thought on.
But I shall not omit one thing in defence of the Epistles,
which, though it will not do the work, let it go, however, as
far as it can. We have allowed that Pythagoras was con-
temporary with Phalaris ; and yet in the history of that
philosopher we are told of his conversation and exploits
at Taurominium. Porphyry says, he delivered Croton and
Himera, koI Tavpo/xevcov, and Taurominium, from tyrants :^
and, that in one and the same day he was at Metapontium
ill Italy, and Taurominium in Sicily.y The same story is
[* " colonia Taurominia, quam,'* &c. cap. v. ed. Salm. — D.]
^ Lib. xiv. p. 282 and 305. ^ Lib. xv. p. 411.
« Vita Pythag. p. 169. y P. 192 and 193.
152 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
told by Jamblichus ; ^ who supplies us too with another,
that a young man of Taurominium being got drunk , Tavpo-
fievelrov fietpaKLov, Pythagoras played him sober by a few
tunes of grave spondees.^ These several passages seem to
concur with and confirm the credit of the Letters, that
Taurominium had a name and being in the time of Pytha-
goras and Phalaris. All this would be very plausible, and
our Sophist might come off with a whole skin, but for a
cross figure in his own art, rhetoric, called prolepsis or anti-
cipation, viz. when poets or historians call any place by a
name which was not yet known in the times they write of.
As when Virgil says of ^neas,
Lavinaque venit
Littora [i. 2.]
and of Daedalus,
Chalcidicdque levis tandem super adstitit arce ;
[vi. 17.]
he is excused hy prolepsis, though those places were not yet
called so in the times of Daedalus and ^neas. So, when
Porphyry and Jamblichus name Taurominium in the story
of Pythagoras, meaning Naxos, which was afterwards called
so, the same figure acquits them. For His no more than
when I say, Julius Casar conquered France, and made an
expedition into England: though I know that Gaul and
Britian were the names in that age. But when Phalaris
^mentions Taurominium so many generations before it was
heard of, he cannot have the benefit of that same prolepsis.
For this is not a poetical, but a prophetical anticipation.
And he must either have had the prescience and divination
H3f the Sibyls, or his Epistles are as false and commentitious
as our Sibylline Oracles.
VII. The XXXV. Letter, to Polygnotus, presents us with
a sentence of moral ; otl Xoyof; epyov a-Kia irapa toI<^ aco(j)po-
^ Jambl. p. 128. ^ P. 109.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 153
v€(TT6poL<; 7r€7ri<rT€VTaty that wise men take words for the
shadoiv of things ; that is, as the shadow is not alone with-
out the presence of the body, so words are accompanied
with the action. Tis a very notable saying, and we are
obliged to the author of it ; and if Phalaris had not modestly
hinted that others had said it before him, we might have
taken it for his own. But then there was either a strange
jumping of good wits, or Democritus was a sorry plagiary,
for he laid claim to the first invention of it, as Diogenes
Laertius^ says, Tovrov earc koX to, \0709 epyov (tkct] : and
Plutarch,*^ Aoyo^ yap epyov aKtr}, Kara ArjfjLOKpirov. What
shall we say to this matter ? Democritus had the character
of a man of probity and wit, who had neither inclination
nor need to filch the sayings of others. Besides, here are
Plutarch and Diogenes, two witnesses that would scorn to
flatter, and to ascribe it to Democritus, had they ever read
it in others before him. This bears hard indeed upon the
author of the Letters ; but how can we help it ? He should
have minded his hits better, when he was minded to act the
Tyrant. For Democritus, the first author of the sentence,
was too young to know even Pythagoras ; ra rcov ')(^p6vcov
fid'^erai, says Diogenes ;^ and yet Pythagoras survived Pha-
laris, nay, deposed him, if we will believe his scholars. We
may allow forty years' space for Democritus's writing, from
the Lxxxiv. Olymp. to the xciv., in which he died. Now,
the earliest of this is above an hundred years after the last
period of Phalaris.
I am sensible that Michael Psellus^ refers this saying to
Simonides; and Isidorus Pelus.^ to the Lacedaemonians.
But these two are of little authority, in a case of this nature,
against Plutarch and Diogenes. Neither would the matter
be mended, should we accept of their testimony. For Simo-
nides was but seven years old, or, as others say, yet unborn,
when Phalaris was killed. And were it a Lacedaemonian
•> Vita Democrit « De Educat. Puer.
** Vita Democ. * De Daem.
' Epist. 252 and 259.
VOL. II. X
154 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
apophthegm, though the date be undetermined, it might
fairly be presumed to be more recent than he.
VIII. In the LI. Epistle, to Eteonicus, there is another
moral sentence; Ovr]Tov<i yap 6vTa<i aOdvarov opyrjv e^etv,
CO? (f>aai Ttve?, ov irpoarjKeL, mortal men ought not to enter-
tain immortal anger. But I am afraid he will have no better
success with this than the former. For Aristotle,? in his
Rhetoric, among some other sententious verses, cites this
iambic as commonly known ;
^AOdvarov opyrjv firj (jyvXarre, Ovrjro^ wv.
This, though the author of it be not named, was probably,
like most of those proverbial gnoma, borrowed from the
stage ; and consequently must be later than Phalaris, let it
belong to what poet you please, tragic or comic.
But, because it may be suspected that the poet himself
might take the thought from common usage, and only give
it the turn and measure of a verse ; let us see if we can dis-
cover some plainer footsteps of imitation, and detect the
lurking Sophist under the mask of the Tyrant. Stobaeus^
gives us these verses out of Euripides's Philoctetes ;
illairep oe ovrjrov Kai to (tco/jl rjfxwv e<pv,
OvTO) irpocrrjKei firjhe rrjv 6pyr]v 6')(^6LV
AOdvarov, oan^i a(0(f)povelv iTriaTaTai.
Now, to him that compares these with the words of the
Epistle, 'twill be evident that the author had this very pass-
age before his pen : there is e^etv and irpoo-rjKeL ; not only a
sameness of sense, but even of words, and those not neces-
sary to the sentence ; which could not fall out by accident.*
And where has he now a friend at a pinch to support his
sinking credit ? for Euripides was not born in Phalaris's
time. Nay, to come nearer to our mark ; from Aristo-
phanes^ the famous grammarian, (who, after Aristotle, Calli-
« Lib. ii. cap. 21. ^ Tit. xx. -aepi 'Opyrjs. [I. 382. ed. Gaisf.—D.']
[* See note, vol. i. p. 247. — D.] Argument. Medeae Eurip.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 155
machiis, and others, M'Tit the Aihaa-KcCkiai^ A Catalogue and
Chronology of all the Plays of the Poets ; a work, were it
now extant, most useful to ancient history,) we know that
this very fable, Philoctetes, was written Olymp. lxxxvii.,
which is cxx. years after the Tyrant's destruction.
IX. The XII. Epistle exhibits Phalaris making this com-
pliment to his friends ; 72v evrvxovvrojv, Kav avTo<; erepco
avfjLTrXaKco Saifjuovi, rjaOeU ovBev rjrrov evTV')(elv Bo^co, that
while they continued in prosperity, his joy for that, though
himself should fall under misfortunes, would still make him
happy. But methinks those words, erepo) SalfMovc, the
other god, or genius, that is, the bad one, have a quaint-
ness in them something poetical, and I am mistaken if they
be not borrowed from some retainer to the Muses.* And
now I call it to mind, they are Pindar' s,J
Aalfioav S' €T€po<;
'JE? KaKov TpiyfraLs iSafid [ araTo vcv ;
or Callimachus's, for this scazon of his is there cited by the
Scholiast^
Ou irdvT€<;, aW* ov<; ecr'^^ev drepo^ SalfKov.f
Whether of these our author made bold with, I cannot
determine. Pindar, I should incline to guess, but that I
find him familiar with Callimachus upon another occasion,
Epist. cxxii., speaking of Perillus's invention of the Brazen
Bull; ^Tirep ifiov rov oXeOpov evpe Kara rwv eirL^ovXev-
ovTcov dxOrjpoTarov. Where he has taken that expression,
Tov oXedpov evpe, from these verses of Callimachus,'^ that
concern the same business,
IIp(aTo<; eVel tov ravpov eKalvicrev, 09 rbv oXedpov
Evpe, TOV iv ^aX/co) koI irvpl yovo/jievoy.
[* See note, vol. i. p. 268.— D.] i Pyth. 3. [v. 62. ed. Heyn.—D.']
[f Fr. Call. xci. p. 211. ed. Blom.—D.']
^ Schol. Pind. Pyth. 1. [Fr. Call. cxix. p. 235. ed. jB/om.— D.]
156 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
But^ be it either of them as you will^ I suppose the ages of
both those poets are well enough known 5 so that^ without
any computation of years^ one may pronounce these fine
Epistles not to belong to Phalaris himself^ but to his secre-
tary the Sophist.
X. The XXIII. Epistle is directed to Pythagoras; and
there he gives to his doctrine and institution the name of
Philosophy; 'H ^a\dpiBo<; rvpavvl^i r?}? UvOayopov ^lAO-
II 0^1 A^ TrKelarov oaov SoKel K6')((Dpl(T6ai, And so again,
in the lvi. he gives him the title of Philosopher, IlvOayopa
Tc5 ^lAO^O^fl. I could shew now, from a whole crowd
of authors, that Pythagoras was the first man that invented
that word; but I shall content myself with two, Diogenes
Laertius and Cicero. The former says,^ ^CKoaoc^iav irpojrof;
wvofxaae UvOayopa^y kol eavrov ^iXoao^ov, iv ^lkvcjvc
SLaXeyo/JLevo^; Aeovrc, tS ^ikvcovlcov rvpdvvcp, rj ^XLacrlcov,
Pythagoras first named Philosophy, and called himself Phi-
losopher, in conversation with Leon the Tyrant of Sicyon, or,
as some say, of Phlius. The latter tells us,"^ That, when
Pythagoras had discoursed before Leon; the Tyrant, much
taken with his wit and eloquence, asked him what art or trade
he professed. Art, says Pythagoras, I profess none ; but I am
a Philosopher. Leon, in admiration at the newness of the
name, inquires what those philosophers were, and wherein they
differed from other men ; " quinam essent philosophi, et quid
^^ inter eos et reliquos interesset.'^ What a difference is
here between the two Tyrants ! The one knows not what
philosopher means ; the other seems to account it as thread-
bare a word as the name of Wise Men of Greece, and that
too before ever he had spoken with Pythagoras. We can-
not tell, at this distance of time, which conversation was
first, that with Phalaris, or that with Leon. But allowing
Leon^s to be the first, yet it could not be long before the
other. And 'tis very hard to believe that the fame of so
small a business could so soon reach Phalaris's ear hi his
1 P. 3 and 26. '" Tuscul. Quaest. 1. v.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 157
castle, through his guard of blue-coats, and the loud bellow-
ings of his Bull. Nay, could we suppose him to have heard
of it, yet surely, when he had written to Pythagoras, he
would have ushered the word in with some kind of intro-
duction, that science which you call Philosophy; and not
speak of it as familiarly as if it had been the language of his
nurse.
XL In the lxiii. Epistle he is in great wrath with one
Aristolochus, a tragic poet that no body ever heard of, /or
ivriting tragedies against him, Kar ifjuov ypdcpeiv rpayaySla^ ;
and in the xcvii. he threatens Lysinus, another poet of the
same stamp with the former, for ivriting against him both
tragedies and hexameters, cOOC eirrj koI Tpaj(pBta<; eh ifie
ypd(j)€L<;. Now, to forgive him that silly expression, of
writing tragedies against him, for he could not be the argu-
ment of tragedy while he was living ; I must take the bold-
ness to tell him, who am out of his reach, that he lays a
false crime to their charge. For there was no such thing
nor word as tragedy while he tyrannised at Agrigentum.
That we may slight that obscure story about Epigenes the
Sicyonian, Thespis, we know, was the first inventor of it ;
Ignotum tragical genus invenisse camence
Diciiur, et plaustris vexisse poemata Thespis.^
Neither was the name of tragedy more ancient than the
thing, as sometimes it happens, when an old word is bor-
rowed and applied to a new notion; but both were born
together, the name being taken from Tpdyo<;, the goat that
was the prize to the best poet and actor.f But Alcestis, the
first tragedy of Thespis, was acted about the lxi. Olymp.,^
which is more than twelve years after Phalaris's death.
XII. Had all other ways failed us of detecting this
impostor, yet his very speech had betrayed him. For his
language is Attic, the beloved dialect of the Sophists, in
[* Hor. Jrs Poet. v. 275.— D.]
[t See notes, vol. i. p. 285 and 338.— D.]
" Marm. Arund. Siiidas, ©eVirts.
158 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
[which all their ixekerai, or exercises, were composed; in
'which they affected to excel each other^ even to pedantry
and solecism. But he had forgot that the scene of these
Epistles was not Athens^ but Sicily, where the Doric tongue
was generally spoken and written; as, besides the testi-
monies of others, the very thing speaks itself in the remains
of Sicilian authors, Sophron, Epicharmus, Stesichoiiis, Theo-
critus, Moschus, and others. How comes it to pass, then,
that our Tyrant transacts every thing in Attic, not only
foreign affairs of state, but domestic matters with Sicilian
friends, but the very accounts of his household ? Pray, how
came that idiom to be the court language at Agrigentum ?
'Tis very strange that a tyrant, and such a tyrant as he,
should so doat on the dialect of a democraty, which was so
eminently fiiaorvpavvo^, the hater of tyrants ; which, in his
very days, had driven out Pisistratus, though a generous and
easy governor. Especially since, in those early times, before
stage-poetry and philosophy and history had made it famous
over Greece, that dialect was no more valued than any of
the rest.
I would not be here mistaken, as if I affirmed that the
Doric was absolutely universal or original in Sicily. I know
that the old Sicani, the natives of the isle, had a peculiar
language of their own; and that the Greek tongue there,
like the Punic, was only a foreigner, being introduced
by those colonies that planted themselves there. Most of
which coming from Corinth, Crete, Rhodes, &c., where all
spoke the Doric dialect ; thence it was that the same idiom
so commonly obtained almost all over Sicily ; as it appears
to have done, to omit other testimonies, from the ancient
medals of that island, TATPOMENITAN, ME^^ANinN,
GEPMITAN, nANOPMITAN, AIATBAIITAN, :^EAI-
NflNTIflN ; all which words, inscribed upon their money,
demonstrate the Doric dialect to have been then the language
of those cities. 'Tis true there came some colonies to Sicily
from Euboea, and Samos, and other places ; which, in those
parts where they settled, might speak, for a while, the Ionic
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 159
or the Attic ; and afterwards, being mixed with the Dorians,
might make a new sort of dialect, a compound of both : as
Thucydides° observes of Hiinera, that the language of that
city was at first a medley of Doric and Chalcidic. But that
is no more than what happened even in Greece itself, where
there were many viTohLaipeaei<; roTrcKal,^ local subdivisions
of every dialect, one country having always some singularity
of speech not used by any other. But those little pecu-
liarities do not hinder us from saying, in general, that the
Sicilians spoke Doric. For the other dialects were swal-
lowed up and extinguished by those two powerful cities of
Dorian original, Syracuse and Agrigentum, that shared the
whole island betweeen them. Syracuse was a Corinthian
colony, and spoke the dialect of her mother city.^ Agrigen-
tum was first built by the Geloans of Sicily, who had been
themselves a plantation of the Cretans and Rhodians, both
of which were Dorian nations. So that, upon the whole,
though in some other towns, and for a time, there might
be a few footsteps of the Ionic and Attic, yet our Sophist
is inexcusable in making a tyrant of Agrigentum, a city of
Doric language and original, write epistles in such a dialect
as if he had gone to school at Athens.
But there is a learned Greek professor'' (whose pardon
I must ask, that I forgot to name him above among the
patrons of Phalaris,) who, after he has asserted the credit
of Euripides 's Letters, gratuitously undertakes to apologise
for these too about this matter of the dialect. First, says
he, because Phalaris was born at Astypala, an island of the
Cyclades, where was an Athenian colony,^ that is one reason
for his speaking Attic. It were easy to overthrow this first
argument at once, by refuting our spurious Epistles, and by
shewing, from much better authority, that Phalaris was a
" Lib. vi. p. 414. p Vetus Auctor irepl AiaXeKrwi/.
1 Theocrit. Id. xv.
[Joshua Barnes. — D.] Vid. Eurip. edit. Cantab, p. 523.
» Is enim Astypala natus erat, una ex Cycladibus, ubi Atheniensium erat
colonia.
160 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Sicilian born. But I may speak, perhaps, of that by and
by; and I will have every proof I bring stand by itself,
without the support of another. Let us allow, then, that
Phalaris came from Astypalaea, (for so it is to be called) ;
not that isle of the Cyclades, according to Stephanus,* but
of the Sporades, mentioned by Strabo^ and Pliny t'^ for this
latter was nearest to Crete, whither Phalaris's wife and son
ll are supposed to have fled, Epist. lxix. ^Tis true, our late
\j industrious Editors have discovered a new place of his birth,
Astypalsea,^ a city of Crete, never mentioned before by any
geographer, situate in the 370th deg. of longit., bearing
south and by north off of Utopia. And I am wholly of
their opinion, that he was born in that, or in none of them.
I But because tradition is rather for the island, we will beg
[ their good, leave to suppose it to be so : and there, as it
seems, was formerly a plantation of Athenians ; and Phala-
ris, being one of their posterity, must needs, for that reason,
have a twang of their dialect. Now, what a pity 'tis that
Phalaris himself, or his secretary, did not know of this
plantation when he writ the cxx. Letter to the Athenians,
^S2 ao(j)(OTaTOL yrjiyeveif; !A6r}vaLoi ! What a fine compliment
would he have made upon that subject of their kindred ! If
any one know an express testimony that there was an Athe-
nian colony at that Astypalaea, he can teach me more than I
now remember. This I know in general, from Thucydides'^
and others, that the Athenians sent colonies to most of the
islands ; and so that may come in among the rest. But
what then ? must the language for ever afterwards be Attic,
wherever the Athenians once had footing ? Thucydides
says, in the same passage, that they planted Ionia. They
had colonies at Miletus, at Ephesus, and most of the mari-
time towns of Asia Minor. Nay, the lonians and the Attics
were anciently one people, and the language the same : and
#
t V. 'AaTUTToA. "" Lib. x. p. 488.
^ Lib. iv. cap. 12.
^*' Vid. Vitam Phalar. et Indicem, edit. Oxon.
^ Lib. i. p. 10. Kal^loiuas Hfv ^AQi^ouoi koX vqffiwTwv tovs -noWohs ^Kiffav.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 161
when Homery says^ "EvOa Se Boiwrol koX 'Idov€<;, by the
latter he is known to mean the Athenians. And yet we see
that, in process of time, the colonies had a different dialect
from that of the mother nation. Why, then, must Asty-
palaea needs be Attic ? and that so tenaciously, that twenty
years living in Sicily could not at all alter it in one of her
islanders ? He was part of that time a publican, or collector
of taxes and customs :^ could not that perpetual negoce*
and converse with Dorians bring his mouth, by degrees, to
speak a little broader ? Would not he, that aimed at mon-
archy,^ and for that design studied to be popular, have
quitted his old dialect for that of the place, and not by every
word he spoke make the invidious discovery of his being
a stranger ? But what if, after all, even the Astypalaeans
themselves should be found to speak Doric ? If we make
a conjecture from their neighbourhood, and the company
they are put in, we can scarce question but they were
Dorians. Strabo^ says, the island lies between Cos and
Rhodes and Crete, /xera^v r^? Kcj fJuaXtorra koL 'PoBov fcal
KprjT7]<;. And that all these three used the Doric dialect,
is too well known to need any proof.
But let us hear the second apology for the Atticism of
Phalaris. He^ defends him by the like practice of others
that, being Dorians born, repudiated their vernacular idiom
for that of the Athenians ; as Diodorus of Agyrium, Empe-
docles of Agrigentum, and Ocellus of Lucania. So that
though Phalaris be supposed to be a native of Sicily, yet
here is an excuse for him for quitting the language. But
I conceive, with submission, that this argument is built
partly upon a vulgar mistake, and partly upon such in-
stances as are quite different and aliene from the case of
our Epistles.
y Strabo, lib. viii. p. 333. and lib. ix. p. 392. [Horn. II. xiii. 685.— D.]
* Polyaenus, Stratag. [* See Preface, vol. i. p. liv. — D.]
" Ibid. b Lib. x. p. 488.
*= [Joshua Barnes. — D.] Sed nee ipse Diodorus Siculus, nee Empedocles
Agrigentinus, nee Ocellus Lucanus Doricd sed Atticd ferd scripserunt.
VOL. II. Y
162 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
Ocellus Lucanus, the Pythagorean philosopher, writ a
small treatise Of the Nature of the Universe, which has been
several times printed, and is ev Koivfj BcaXeKTw, in the
common and ordinary Greek. But, if I may expect thanks
for the discovery, I dare engage to make out that the author
composed it not in the dress that it now wears, but in Doric,
his own country fashion. For I find it was agreed and
covenanted among all the scholars of that Italian sect (fxovfj
'X^pTjaBai, rfj iraTpwa,^ to use their own mother -tongue : this
was the injunction of Pythagoras ; this was the tessera of
the whole party; and those that know any thing of their
story, will believe they would have lost their lives rather
than have broken it. 'Tis most certain, if one had pub-
lished a book against that injunction, he would have been
banished the society. Besides, when Jamblichus tells us
of this compact of theirs, he makes not one exception to it ;
which he could not have missed, neither from ignorance nor
forgetfulness, if so common a tract as this of Ocellus had
been writ in the Attic. Nay, we are assured that other
pieces of this author were made in the Doric ; as one Of
Law, JJepl NofjLov, cited by Stobseus:® the fragment begins
thus ; ^vve')(ei ra p^ev aKovea ^coa, ravra^ S' alriov 'xjrv^^^d'
Tov Se Koafjbov apfiovla, ravra^ 8' aiTio<^ 6 Be6<^. But,
which is plain demonstration, four citations are brought by
the same writer out of this very book,^ Tlepl t7J<; tov iravTO';
0u<7eo)9, About the Nature of the Universe, all which are in
Doric, and not, as they are now extant, in the ordinary
dialect.* The first of them begins thus, "Htl Se to avap^ov
KOI aT6\evTaT0V /cal rw a'^i]/jbaTO<; koX Ta<^ Ktvdcrco<; kol tw
^povft) Kol Ta<; o)(7 La<; tovto 7rt(TT0VTat : which is thus extant
in the vulgar Ocellus, p. 16.,^ "Etl Be koI to dvap^ov kol
aTekevT7)T0V koX tov (T')(f}[jLaT0<; kol Trj(; Kivrjcrewq koX T7]<;
ovala^ TOVTO irLdTovTaL. The second, thus beginning, "Eireo
d Jamblichus, Vit. Pythagor. 202. « Eclog. Phys. c. 16.
t Ibid. c. 24. [* See vol. i. p. 423.— D.]
e Edit. Cantab, [where "Ert Se rh &v ttjs kip. koI tov xp^vov koX r^y
ohff. — D.]
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 163
S* eV Tw Travrl, extant p. 17. The third, npdTO)<; yap vKa
TO TravSe^e?, &c. ; thus extant, p. 21., npcorco^; vXt] to Trav-
Be'^et;. The fourth, UavreXr^f} Be <l>dopa Ta<; irepl rav yav
SLaKoafidaco<; ', extant in ordinary Greek, p. 31., UavTeXrfq
Be (j)Oopa Tfj<; irepl r^v <yrjv BiaKoo-jj,rjcre(o<;. From which
passages these two points are manifestly evinced ; that
Ocellus composed his writings in Doric, and so is falsely
brought in for an excuse to our Phalaris : and, which is
much more considerable, that this tract of his now extant
is to be acknowledged for a genuine work; which hitherto
learned men have doubted of, from this very business of the
dialect. For we now see, by these fragments, that every
word of the true book is faithfully preserved ; the Doric
only being changed into the ordinary language, at the fancy
of some copier since the days of Stobaeus.
As for Empedocles and Diodorus, a poet and an histo-
rian, their case is widely remote from that of our Tyrant.
The former, being to write an epic poem, shewed an excel-
lent judgment in laying aside his country dialect for that of
the lonians, which Homer and his followers had used before
him, and had given it, as it were, the dominion of all heroic
poetry. For the Doric idiom had not grace and majesty
enough for the subject he was engaged in ; being proper,
indeed, for mimes, comedies, and pastorals, where men of
ordinary rank are represented ; or for epigrams, a poem of a
low vein ; or for lyrics, and the chorus of tragedy, upon the
account of the Doric music; but not to be used in heroic
without great disadvantage. And the historian likewise,
with the rest of that and other Dorian nations, Philistus,
Timaeus, Ephorus, Herodotus, Dionysius Halic, &c., had
great reason to decline the use of their vernacular tongue,
as improper for history, which, besides the affectation of
eloquence, aims at easiness and perspicuity, and is designed
for general use. But the Doric is coarse and rustic, and
always clouded with an obscurity ; i'x^ovcrr]^ tc koI d<Ta(f)e^
rrj(; (JcoptSo?) BcdXeKTOv, says Porphyry,^ who attributes the
^ Vita Pythag. p. 205.
164 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
decay of the Pythagorean sect to their writing in that dialect*
And we have just now seen an instance of it ; since some-
body thought it worth his labour to transcribe Ocellus into
another idiom. And now^ what affinity is there between
Phalaris's case and that of historians or heroic poets ? What
mighty motives can be here for assuming a foreign dialect ?
The Letters are dated in the middle of Sicily^ mostly directed
to the next towns, or to some of his own domestics, about
private affairs, or even the expenses of his family, and never
designed for the public view. If any will still excuse the
Tyrant for Atticising in those circumstances, 'tis hard to
deny them the glory of being the faithfullest of his vassals.
XIII. But since tyrants will not be confined by laws,
let us suppose, if you will, that our Phalaris might make use
of the Attic for no reason at all but his own arbitrary
humour and pleasure ; yet we have still another indictment
against the credit of the Epistles, For even the Attic of the
true Phalaris's age is not there represented; but a more
recent idiom and style, that by the whole thread and colour
of it betrays itself to be a thousand years younger than he.
j (Every living language, like the perspiring bodies of living
r***^* jjcreatures, is in perpetual motion and alteration ; some words
[go off, and become obsolete; others are taken in, and by
lidegrees grow into common use; or the same word is
inverted to a new sense and notion ; which in tract of time
makes as observable a change in the air and features of a
language as age makes in the lines and mien of a face. All
are sensible of this in their own native tongues, where
continual use makes every man a critic. For what English-
man does not think himself able, from the very turn and
fashion of the style, to distinguish a fresh English compo-
sition from another a hundred years old ? Now, there are as
real and sensible differences in the several ages of Greek,
were there as many that could discern them. But very few
are so versed and practised in that language as ever to arrive
at that subtilty of taste. And yet as few will be content to
relish or dislike a thing, not by their own sense, but by
f*.
-^.r
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 165
another man's palate. So that should I affirm, that I know
the novity of these Epistles from the whole body and form
of the work, none, perhaps, would be convinced by it, but
those that without my indication could discover it by them-
selves. I shall let that alone, then, and point only at a few
particular marks and moles in the Letters, which every one
that pleases may know them by. In the very first Epistle,
wv i^iol TrpoTpiireif;, which you accuse me of, is an innovation
in language; for which the ancients used 7rpocf)ipec<;. In
the XVII. TTpoSeSoyKOTa, having given before, never used by
the ancients in that sense, but always for having betrayed.
In the LI. fiov\ofxevr]v ifie 8l(o/c€lv, desirous to follow me,
where he speaks of his wife that would accompany him in
his exile : but StcoKecv anciently signified to pursue, when
that which fled feared and shunned the pursuer.* In the
cxLii., among other presents to a bride, he sends dvyaripa^^
TeTTapa^ o/jLtjXLKa^;, which would anciently have signified
daughters; but he here means it of virgins or maidens; as
^lle and figlia signify in French and Italian ; which is a
most manifest token of a later Greek. Even Tzetzes,^ when
he tells the story out of this Epistle, interprets it maids,
OepaTralva^;. In the Lxxvii., iroWol iraihcov ovre^ ipaaral,
many that are fond of their children, for that is his sense
of the words; which of old would have been taken for a
flagitious love of boys ; as if he had said, ttoWoI ovre^ irac-
SepaaraLf They that will make the search may find more
of this sort; but I suppose these are sufficient to unmask
the recent Sophist under the person of the old Tyrant.
XIV. But should we connive at his using the Attic
dialect, and say not a word of those flaws and innovations in
his style ; yet there is one thing still, that, I fear, will more
difficultly be forgiven him; that is, a very slippery way in
telling of money. This is a tender point, and will make
[* See p. 27. of this vol. — Lennep in his edition of Phalar. Epist. gives
irphs SeSw/cdro, p. 354., where see note : see also his note on the meaning of
SiuKeiv in this passage, p. 114. — D.]
* Chiliad, p. 196. [=V. 915. p. 192. ed. Kiess.—D.}
[t See note, p. 24. of this vol.— D.]
166 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
every body shy and cautious of entertaining him. In the
L.XXXV. Epistle he talks of a hundred talents, rakavra e/ca-
Tov; of fifteen more^ in the cxviii.; eight, in the cxxxvii.;
seven, in the civ. ; five, in the cxliii. ; and three, in the
xcv. These affairs being transacted in the middle of Sicily,
and all the persons concerned being natives and inhabitants
there, who would not be ready to conclude that he meant
the talent of the country ? since he gives not the least hint
of his meaning a foreign sum. If a bargain were made in
England to pay so many pounds or marks, and the party
should pretend at last that he meant Scots marks or French
livres, few, I suppose, would care to have dealings with
him. Now, this is the very case in so many of these
Letters, In the lxx., indeed, he is more punctual with
Polyclitus his physician ; for he speaks expressly of Attic
money, fjbvptd^a<; !^TTt/ca9 Trevre. But this is so far from
excusing him, that it is a plain condemnation out of his own
mouth. For if it was necessary to tell Polyclitus that he
meant the Attic money, and not the Sicilian, why had he
not the same caution and ingenuity towards all the rest?
We are to know, that in Sicily, as in most other countries,
the name and value of their coins, and the way of reckoning
by sums, was peculiar. The sum talent, in the Sicilian
account, contained no more in Specie than three Attic
drachms or Roman denares ; as plainly appears from Aris-
totle,J in his now-lost treatise of the Sicilian Government.
And the words of Festus are most express ; Talentorum non
unum genus: Atticum est sex millium denarium....Syracusanum
trium denarium. What an immense diff'erence ! One Attic
talent had the real value of two thousand Sicilian talents.
\JNow, in all these Epistles the very circumstances assure us
that by the word talent simply named, the Attic talent is
(understood. But should not our wise Sophist have known,
ithat a talent in that country where he had laid the scene of
I (his Letters was quite another thing? Without question, if
J Pollux, lib. ix. c. 6. [p. 1068. ed. Hemst.—D.]
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 167
the true Phalaris had penned them, he would have reckoned
these sums by the Sicilian talents, increasing only the num-
ber : or should he have made use of the Attic account, he
would always have given express notice of it, never saying
ToXavTov alone, without the addition of jIttckov.
XV. But, to let pass all further arguments from words
and language,l\to me the very matter and business of the
Letters sufficiently discovers them to be an imposture.
What force of wit and spirit in the style, what lively paint-
ing of humour, some fancy they discern there, I will not
examine nor dispute. But methinks little sense and judg-
ment is shewn in the ground- work and subject of them.
What an improbable and absurd story is that of the liv. !
Stesichorus was born at Himera ; but he chanced to die at
Catana, a hundred miles' distance from home, quite across
the island. There he was buried, and a noble monument
made for him.^ Thus far the Sophist had read in good
authors. Now, upon this he introduces the Himerenses so
enraged at the others for having Stesichorus's ashes, that
nothing less will serve them than denouncing of war, and
sacking their city. And presently an embassy is sent to
Phalaris to desire his assistance ; who, like a generous ally,
promises them what arms and men and money they would ;
but withal sprinkles a little dust among the bees, advising
them to milder counsels, and proposing this expedient, that
Catana should have Stesichorus's tomb, and Himera should
build a temple to him. Now, was ever any declamator's
theme so extravagantly put ? What ? to go to war upon so
slight an occasion ? and to call in too the assistance of the
Tyrant? Had they so soon forgot Stesichorus's own counsel ?i
who, when upon another occasion they would have asked
succour of Phalaris, dissuaded them by the fable of the
ho7^se and his rider. Our Sophist had heard that seven
cities contended about Homer; and so two might go to
blows about another poet. But there's a difference between
^ Suidas, Udvra 6kt&> et 2Trj(rtx. ' Aristot. Rhet. 1. ii.
168 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
that contention and this fighting in earnest. He is as ex-
travagant too in the honours he would raise to his poet's
memory ; nothing less than a temple and deification. Cicero
tells us^ that in his days there was his statue still extant at
Himera (then called Thermae)^ which one would think was
honour enough. But a Sophist can build temples in the air
as cheaply and easily as some others do castles.
What an inconsistency is there between the li. and
Lxix. Epistles ! In the former he declares his immortal
hatred to one Python, who, after Phalaris's flight from
Astypalaea, would have persuaded his wife Erythia to a
second marriage with himself; but seeing her resolved to
follow her husband, he poisoned her. Now, this could be
no long time after his banishment, for then she could not
have wanted opportunities of following him. But in the
LXTX. Epist. we have her alive again, long after that Pha-
laris had been Tyrant of Agrigentum, for he mentions his
growing old there. And we must not imagine but that
several years had passed before he could seize the govern-
ment of so populous a city, that had 200,000 souls in it,"^ or,
as others say, 800,000.^ For he came an indigent stranger
thither, according to the Letters; and by degrees rising
from one employment to another, at last had opportunity
and power to eff*ect that design. Besides, in the lxix.
Letter she is at Crete with her son; and in the li. she is
poisoned (I suppose) at Astypalaea, for there her poisoner
dwelt; and His expressly said, she designed, but could not
follow her husband. Which seems an intimation that the
«i^u*.4*^ Sophist believed Astypalaea to be a city in Crete. ^Tis
.V //certain, our diligent Editors, by comparing these two pas-
j sages together, made that discovery in geography ;° for it
I could not be learned any where else ; and 'tis an admirable
\ token, both that the Epistles are old and genuine, and that
the commentators are not inferior to, nor unworthy of
their author.
™ Diod. Sicul. p. 205. ° Diog. Laert in Empedoc.
" Vita Phalar. and Index.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 169
What a scene of putid and senseless formality are the
Lxxiix.,=* Lxxix., and cxliv. Epistles ! Nicocles a Syra-
cusian, a man of the highest rank and quality, sends his
own brother an hundred miles with a request to Phalaris, that
he would send to Stesichorus another hundred miles, and
beg the favour of a copy of verses upon Clearista his wife,
who was lately dead. Phalaris accordingly sends to Himera
with mighty application and address, and soon after writes a
second letter of thanks for so singular a kindness. Upon
the fame of this, one PelopidasP entreats him, that he would
procure the like favour for a friend of his ; but meets with a
repulse. Now, whether there was any poem upon Clearista
among the works of Stesichorus, whence our Sophist might
take the plot and ground-work of this story, or whether all
is entirely his own invention and manufacture, I will not
pretend to guess. But let those believe that can, that such
stuff as this busied the head of the Tyrant: at least they
must confess then, though the Letters would represent him
as a great admirer and judge too of poetry, that he was a
mere asinus ad lyram. For, in the lxxix. Epist. he calls
this poem upon Clearista fjueXog and jxeXwhlav, which must
here (as it almost ever does) signify a lyric ode,f since it is
spoken of Stesichorus, a melic or lyric poet. But in the
cxliv. he calls it an elegy, iXeyetov, which is as different
from fie\o<; as Theognis is from Pindar, or TibuUus from
Horace. What, the same copy of verses both an ode and an
elegy ? Could not some years' acquaintance with Stesi-
chorus teach him the very names ? But to forgive him, or
rather the Sophist, such an egregious piece of dulness, why,
forsooth, so much ado, why such a vast way about, to obtain
a few verses ? Could not they have writ directly to Stesi-
chorus, and at the price of some present have met with easy
success ? Do not we know that all of that string, Bacchy-
lides, Simonides, Pindar, got their livelihood by the Muses ?
So that to use Phalaris's intercession, besides the delay, and
[♦ =Lxxviii. — D.] p Ep. Ixv.
[f See note, p. 81. of this vol. — D.]
VOL. II. Z
170 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
an unnecessary trouble to both^ was to defraud the poet
of his fee.
Nay^ certainly, they might have employed any hand
rather than Phalaris's. For, begging pardon of the Epistles,
I suspect all to be a cheat about Stesichorus's friendship
with him. For the poet, out of common gratitude, must
needs have celebrated it in some of his works. But that he
did not, the Letters themselves are, in this point, a sufficient
witness. For, in the lxxix. Phalaris is feigned to entreat
him not once to mention his name in his books. This was
a sly fetch of our Sophist, to prevent so shrewd an objection
from Stesichorus's silence as to any friendship at all with
him. But that cunning shall not serve his turn. For what
if Phalaris had really wished him to decline mentioning his
name ? Stesichorus knew the world well enough, that those
sort of requests are but a modest simulation; and a dis-
obedience would have been easily pardoned. In the lxxiv.
Letter he proclaims and glories to his enemy Orsilochus,
that Pythagoras had stayed five months with him : why
should he then seek to conceal from posterity the twelve years'
familiarity with Stesichorus ? Pindar, exhorting Hiero the
Tyrant of Syracuse to be kind to poets and men of letters,
tells him how Croesus had immortal praise for his friendship
and bounty to them, but the memory of that cruel and in-
hospitable Phalaris was hated and cursed every where.^ How
could Pindar have said this, had he heard of his extra-
ordinary dearness with Stesichorus ? For their acquaint-
ance, according to the Letters, was as memorable and as
glorious as that of Croesus with ^sop and Solon. So that
Pindar, had he known it, for that sole kindness to his
fellow-poet, would have forborne so vile a character. Plato,
in his second epistle, recounts to Dionysius some celebrated
friendships of learned men with tyrants and magistrates;
Simonides's with Hiero and Pausanias, Thales's with Pe-
^ Pyth. i. Tbj' 5e ravpcp x^^^^^V i^^^ 1 Tijpa vt\\ia v6ov \ 'Ex&po- ^aAapiP Kare-
Xei travTci (pans. [v. 185, ed. Heyn. — D.]
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 171
riander, Anaxagoras's with Pericles^ Solon's and others with
Croesus. Now, how could he have missed, had he ever
heard of it, this of Stesichorus with Phalaris ? behig trans-
acted in Sicily, and so a most proper and domestic example.
If you say, the infamy of Phalaris made him decline that
odious instance, in that very word you pronounce our
Epistles to be spurious. For if they had been known to
Plato, even Phalaris would have appeared as moderate a
tyrant as Dionysius himself. Lucian,"" that feigns an em-
bassy from Phalaris to Delphi for the dedication of the
Brazen Bull, makes an oration in his praise, as Isocrates
does of Busiris ; where, without doubt, he has gathered all
the stories he knew for topics of his commendation : but he
has not one word of his friendship with Stesichorus. Nor,
indeed, has any body else. And do not you yet begin to
suspect the credit of the Letters ?
It would be endless to prosecute this part, and shew all
the silliness and impertinency in the matter of the Epistles,
For, take them in the whole bulk, if a great person would
give me leave, I should say they are a fardle of common-j)
places, without any life or spirit from action and circum-
stance. Do but cast your eye u^n Cicero's letters, or any
statesman's, as Phalaris was^^hat lively characters of men
there ! what descriptions^.'of place ! what notifications of
time ! what particularly o^ circumstances ! what multiplicity
of designs and ev^iits ! ' When you return to these again,
you feel, by the emptiness and deadness of them, that you
converse with some dreaming pedant with his elbow on his
desk; not with an active, ambitious tyrant, with his hand
on his sword, commanding a million of subjects. All that
takes or affects you, is a stiffness and stateliness and ope- i
roseness of style: but as that is improper and unbecoming j
in all epistles, so especially it is quite aliene from the cha-
racter of Phalaris, a man of business and despatch.
XVI. It must needs be a great wonder to those that
' In Phalar. prior.
*•/<?!<
172 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
think the Letters genuine, how or where they were con-
cealed, in what secret cave, or unknown corner of the
world ; so that nobody ever heard of them for a thousand
years together. Some trusty servant of the Tyrant must
have buried them under ground ; and it was well that he
did so. For if the Agrigen tines had met with them, they
had certainly gone to pot. They that burnt alive both him
and his relations and his friends, would never have spared
such monuments of him, to survive them and their city.
And, without doubt, it was immortal vellum, and stolen
from the parchments of Jove, ^ that could last for ten ages,
though imtouched and unstirred, in spite of all damp and
moisture, that moulders other mortal skins. For had our
Letters been used or transcribed during that thousand years,
somebody would surely have spoken of them. Especially
since so many of the ancients had occasion to do so : so that
their silence is a direct argument that they never had heard
of them. I have just now cited some passages of Pindar,
Plato, and Lucian, which are a plain indication that they
were unknown to those three. Nay, the last of these,
besides the proof above named from his silence and preter-
mission, does as good as declare expressly that he never saw
our Epistles. For, not to mention other differences of less
moment, he makes both Phalaris and his smith Perilaus to
be born at Agrigentum ;* but the Letters bring one of them
from Astjrpalaea, and the other from Athens. Lucian, then,
knew nothing of them ; or at least knew them, as I do, to
be spurious, and below his notice. Much less could he be
the author of them, as Politian and his followers believe ; for
he would neither have been guilty of such flat contradic-
tions, nor have so forfeited all learning and wit, by those
gross blunders in chronology, and that wretched pedantry
in the matter. And whosoever those authors were that
* AKpOepai Ai6s. [See Valckenaer's note on Herod, p. 400. ed. Wessel., and
Diatr. in Eurip. &c. p. 184 sq. — D.]
* Phalar. 1. 'E7(i> yap ov ruv a^avSiv ev 'AKpdyavTi &v. and ibid. nepl\aos iiv
Tis TJixedairSs.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 173
Lucian followed in his narrative of Phalaris, they too are
so many witnesses against the Epistles, One can hardly
believe, indeed, that the Sophist should venture to fetch his
Tyrant from Astypalaea without the warrant of some old
writer. But yet Lucian and his authors compel us to think
so. And we find him as foolhardy on other occasions.
Heraclides of Pontus, that lived within two centuries of
Phalaris's age, says,^ the Agrigentines, when they recovered
their liberty, burnt him and his mother : but our Sophist
makes him an orphan, 6p^avla<i Tretpadrjvac ;^ which if any
one shall contend to mean the loss of his father only, yet
still he and Heraclides will not set horses together. For
if Phalaris fled alone from Astypalaea, neither wife nor child
nor any relation following him, according to the Letters,
how came the old woman to be roasted at Agrigentum ?
Jamblichus^ brings in Abaris the Hyperborean in company
with Pythagoras to Phalaris's court : but our Sophist has
writ a letter for him,^ wherein he refuses to come. So little
regard had he to fit his stories to true history : and I have
had too much regard to him, in giving him the honour and
patience of so long an examination.
I must now beg the favour of one word with our late
Editors of this author. They have told the world, in their
Preface, that (among other specimens of their diligence) they
collated the King's MS. as far as the xl. Epistle ; and
would have done so throughout, but that the library-keeper,
out of his singular humanity, denied them the further use of
it.y This was meant as a lash for me, who had the honour
then and since to serve his Majesty in that ofiice. I must
own 'twas very well resolved of them, to make the preface
and the book all of a piece ; for they have acted in this
calumny both the injustice of the Tyrant, and the forgery
" De Polit 'EvfirpTjCe 5e *cal ri]v fnjrepa. ^ ^ Epist. xlix.
^ Vita Pythag. p. 183. ^ Epist. Ivii.
y Praef. Phalar. edit. OXon. Manuscripto in Bibliotheca Regia, cujus mihi
copiam ulteriorem Bibliothecarius pro singulari sua humanitate negavit.
.<A
174 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
of the Sophist. For my own part, I should never have
honoured it with a refutation in print, but have given it the
neglect that is due to weak detraction, had I not been
engaged to my friend to write this censure upon Phalaris ;
j^^ .where to omit to take notice of that slander, would be
•^ v; tacitly to own it. The true story is thus. A bookseller
came to me, in the name of the Editors, to beg the use of
the manuscript. It was not then in my custody: but as
soon as I had the power of it, I went voluntarily and offered
it him \ bidding him tell the collator not to lose any time,
for I was shortly to go out of town for two months. 'Twas
delivered, used, and returned. Not a word said by the
bearer, nor the least suspicion in me, that they had not
finished the collation. For, I speak from experiment, they
had more days to compare it in than they needed to have
hours. 'Tis a very little book, and the writing as legible as
print. Well, the collation, it seems, was sent defective to
Oxon ; and the blame, I suppose, laid upon me. I returned
again to the library, some months before the Edition was
finished: no application was made for further use of the
manuscript. Thence I went for a whole fortnight to Oxon,
where the book was then printing; conversed in the very
college where the Editors resided. Not the least whisper
there of the manuscript. After a few weeks, out comes the
new Edition, with this sting in the mouth of it. ''Twas a
surprise, indeed, to read there, that our manuscript was not
perused. Could not they have asked for it again, then, after
my return ? 'Twas neither singular nor common humanity
not to inquire into the truth of the thing, before they ven-
tured to print, which is a sword in the hand of a child. But
there is a reason for every thing ; and the mystery was soon
revealed. As for the King's manuscript, they had no want
nor desire of it ; for, as I shall shew by and by, they had
neither industry nor skill to use either that or their owii^^
p;^' '^VAnd for my part, I, it seems, had the hard hap, in some
private conversation, to say the Epistles were a spurious
piece, and unworthy of a new edition. Hinc ilia lacrymce.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 175
This was a thing deeply resented ; and to have spoken to me
about the manuscript^ had been to lose a plausible occasion
of taking revenge.
Pro singulari sua humanitate ! I could produce several
letters from learned professors abroad^ whose books our
Editors may in time be lit to read^ wherein these very same
words are said of me candidly and seriously. For I endea-
vour to oblige even foreigners by all courtesy and humanity ;
much more would I encourage and assist any useful designs
at home. And I heartily wish that I could do any service
to that young gentleman of great hopes whose name is set to
the Edition. I can do him no greater at present than to
remove some blemishes from the book that is ascribed to
him : which I desire may be taken aright ; to be no dispar-
agement to himself, but a reproof only to his teachers.
It is counted an ill omen to stumble at the threshold.
In the very first epistle, to Alcibous, we have these words,
Wv')(ri<i he vbdov Larpb<; larat, ddvaro^' ov aveira')(6eaTaTov
avrl TToWcov Kol fieyaXcov dScKij/judrcov, ovk dKovcrtcov, a>v
i/jLol 7rpoTp67ret<;, dW eKovaicov, o)V avro<; etpyacraOy irpocr-
he')(ov : that is, for a disease of the soul, the only physician is
death : do you therefore expect a most painful one for those
many and great injustices, not involuntary ones, such as you
accuse me of but voluntary ones, that yourself have com-
mitted. Let us see now how our new Editors have man-
aged this passage. First, they interpret dveira'x^Oio-TaTOV
nulli gravem; meaning, I suppose, that Alcibous's death
would be grievous to nobody. Which not only produces
a flat and far-fetched sense, but is contrary to the rules
of good language. For the Greek is in the superlative
degree : let them put it then nulli gravissimam ; and it will
shew them the error of their version. It will be evident
to such as know propriety of speech, that dveTraxOea-rarov,
since no dative case follows it, must be referred to Alcibous,
and to nobody else. I do not expect from our Editors much
sagacity in way of critic; but though they could not of
themselves find out the true reading, yet methinks they
176 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
might have emhraced it when they saw it in the manu-
script;* which reads it ov av iTra'^^Oio-rarov, a most grievous
and cruel death, meaning that in the Brazen Bull ; which he
calls in the cxxii. Epist. oXeOpov d')(^6r)p6TaTov,f an epithet
of the same root and signification. lAv in this place is an
expletive particle, TrapaTrXrjpco/jLaTLKov, as the grammarians
call it ; which being a rare and quaint usage was the cause
of corrupting the text.
The next words in the same passage, oZiKruidrcdv, ouk
aKovalcdv, our elegant interpreters render scelera, non invita.
And this we are to receive for one of their many improve-
ments after the former translators.^ Those old ones, good
honest men, put us off with plain country Latin, scelera, non
prceter voluntatem patrata, and other such periphrases. For,
as it was in their days believed, aKwv signified unwilling, and
was always meant of the agent; aKovaLo^ was involuntary,
and generally meant of the action. And this latter, when it
signifies the action, cannot be expressed in Latin by one
single word. For involuntarius was not in use ; and invitus
is the same with aKcov, and is always spoken of the person,
never of the thing. So that if any body else had said scelera
invita, unwilling crimes, some bold readers would be apt to
take it for barbarism and nonsense ; but coming from those
great geniuses, with whom Learning, that is a leaving the
world, has taken her last residence, they receive this as a
new discovery in language, like another of theirs in geor
graphy.^
In the very next words to these, dKovaiodv, wv i/nol
iTpoTpe7reL<;, let us see if they make any better work there.
Invita, ad quae me hortaris ; involuntary crimes, to which you
exhort me, says the version of our late Editors. Admirably
[* Boyle denies that any of the MSS. which he saw had this reading : see
his Exam. p. 204. The King's MS. (which is now before me) certainly has,
though Lennep doubts it, the reading stated by Bentley. Lennep gives hv
iiraxO^o'Tarov. Phalar. Epist. p. 310. — D.]
[f Lennep gives axOciuSrarov. Phalar. Epist. p. 28. — D.]
' Praef. p. 3. » Sup. p. 160.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 177
well (lone again ! Pray, how can this Alcibous, a Messenian,
be said to exhort him to those cruelties, who so much
abhorred him and them, (as it is in this very Letter,) that he
had the physician his townsman tried for his own life for
saving the Tyrant's ? It would puzzle a common wit to re-
concile this ; but here's a note upon this passage, that will
set every thing aright. Ad qu(R me hortaris ;] i. e. Moribus
tuts nequisshnis provocas^ Commend me to these annota-
tors for a help at a dead lift. To provoke a man, we see,
tvith the basest tricks, is, in their language, to exhort him.
So that when they, by a vile aspersion, instead of thanks for
a kindness received, have given me just provocation to
answer them as they deserve, it is only, in their manner, to
exhort me to do it. It is my singular humanity, that I do
not follow their exhortation. But I am apt to believe, that
even the Sophist himself, as illiterate as he was, would
disdain to own such a version to be the echo of his meaning.
Had he had in his thoughts so ridiculous a sense as they
father upon him, he would have said then eU a, or 60' a
efjL€ TTpoTpeTret^. For that is the syntax of irpoTpeiro), when
it signifies to exhort. Whereas a ifMol irpoTpeireLf; (the wv in
the text is for a) is, in that sense, as absurd and incon-
gruous in Greek, as quae mihi hortaris, or quce mihi provocas,
would be in Latin. I think I have shewn already, that
TrpoTpeireiv is here oveihl^eLv, exprobrare, to accuse and re-
proach : those involuntary wrongs that you lay to my charge.
^Tis true the word is not used in this acceptation by any
ancient authors. I have mentioned it therefore above, as a
token of a more recent writer. But, without doubt, it was
of known use in the age of the Sophist, and the innovation
was not at all improper. For as the ancients, both in
poetry and prose, used 7rpo<j)ip€cy to denote this meaning,
Taarepa fiot 7rpo<f)6p€L(;, KaXkicrrov oveihof; airdvTcov,^
so, by a like metaphor and analogy, we may use irporpeTretv
^ Annot. ad Phalar. p. 145.
[* Suidas in TacT-fip. — Diogenian. iii. 85. Adag. p, 205. ed. Schot. — D.]
VOL. II. 2 A
178 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
to express the same notion : just as the Latms say vitio
VERTERE. All this, I suppose, was known to the translator
of Phalaris, who is commonly, but I believe falsely, sup-
posed to be Cujacius ; for he interprets it very well, cujus-
modi mihi objicis. But that edition, and another of Aldus,
though the two principal of all, and both of them in the
public library at Oxon, had yet the odd fortune to lie all the
while concealed from our late Editors that lived there.^
I was but just now in the mind to oblige them, by going
through their whole book, and correcting for them all the
faults that give offence to the best readers. But now that I
cast my eye backwards, it makes me look as blank at the
prospect of all that's to come, as Hercules did, when, after
he had made a bargain unseen, he saw the stables of Augeas.
For if the very first Epistle, of nine lines only, has taken me
up four pages in scouring, what a sweet piece of work
should I have of it to cleanse all the rest for them ? I must
beg their excuse therefore for the present; and shall only,
to keep my promise, give one touch of their industry and
skill in making use of the manuscript.
They have confessed to us they collated the manuscript
to the XL. Epistle. 'I But, it seems, they could make no use
of its various lections but in one single place, Epist. xxvi.
It is writ to one Ariphrades, to caution his son to leave off
plotting against Phalaris ; tva, orav eir avrS yivrjrai rS
KaKM Bi,aT€iVO}V ev oh iarc, fjurj irpoaTTOCijOy Bok€lv rj^vor}-
Kevat ; lest, when punishment overtakes him for persisting in
his present courses, he pretend he had not fair warning. But
what now do our new Editors make of this ? Biarelvcov iv oh
icTTL they translate suam expendens conditionem. This puts
me in mind of the old Greek proverb, that Leucon carries
one thing, and his ass quite another. For here's no affinity
at all between the text and the version, which would every
whit as well agree to any other words in the book. Even
our Editors themselves seem sensible of this ; for they give
«= Praef. p. 3. ^ Praef. p. 4.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 179
US this note upon it, that 8caT€iV(o cannot admit here of any
other meaning : and yet they find it no where else used in this
sense.^ I dare pass my word for the truth of this latter
part: to the former I shall say more anon. So that, say
they, the better reading is in the King's manuscript, Bia rivwv
iv oh ia-TL, i. e. for those things which he now does. In the
King's manuscript, which I have now by me, it was written
at first hLareivayv: but another hand has rased out the e,
as appears by the void space, and made it hid rcvcoy. This
corrector, whoever he was, though we know him from hence
to be a sorry critic, yet he was a degree above our new
Editors. For he made his tlvcdv an enclitic ; but they theirs
an interrogative, as we see by their accent. Which in this
place is directly against either common grammar or common
sense, choose whether they please. But the genuine lection
and meaning is, as I rendered it above ; hiaTeivoav iv oh
icTTi, persisting and proceeding in his present ways. So in
the XXXIX. Epist. fiivcov iv oh e'crrt,* continuing in the present
station. 'Tis true our Editors will not find SLarelvcov thus
rendered in their dictionaries : but they may please to
enlarge them then from this very place. For is not BtaretVo)
exactly the same as the Latin pertendo ? And is not per-
tendo to persist and persevere ?
Verum si incipies, neque pertendes naviterS
Even the version ascribed to Cujacius has here the true
interpretation, persistens in proposito ; which I would advise
our Editors to consult when they design to oblige the world
by another edition.
This is all the use they have made of the King's manu-
script : let us see if they have been more diligent in their
own. In the xxxiv. Epist. the Tyrant tells one Pollux,
« ^lanlvb) alium sensum hie vix admittit, in eodem tamen usurpatum
nullibi invenio. Melius itaque in MS. Regio . . . . 5to rivwv iv oh ia-Ti, ....
ob ea quae jam agit. Annotat. pag. 146.
[* fifuovarjs fiiv rrjs apxvs iv oh icri. — D.]
^ Ter. Eunuch, i. 1. [v. 6.— D.]
180 DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
who wondered he was grown so recluse and difficult of
access, iyo) Se ivheecrrepov '^Stj ^evyu) 7rdvTa<; av6p(07rov<;;
naif, says he, / avoid compaiiy less than I ought to do, for
I have found no faith either among strangers or friends.
Our new interpreters have given us here a cast of their
critic ; for instead of ivheeo-repov they venture to read eKrev-
earepov, ego jam sedulo omnes fugio ;S as for the former
lection, they confess they know not what to make on't.
Here are your workmen to mend an author; as bungling
tinkers do old kettles : there was but one hole in the text
before they meddled with it, but they leave it with two.
For the fault is not in ivBeearepov, but in ijSr] ; which is to
be corrected 7) hel : ivBeiarepov rj Bel, minus quam par est,
minhs quam oportet. This is so very easy an emendation,
that a small dose of sagacity might have found it out by
conjecture. But what will the men of letters think of our
Editors ? will they commend their skill or their industry
most ? when I assure them, that all the three manuscripts
which they pretend to have collated have it plainly and
fairly tj Bet. Which fault will the Editors plead to ? to
make a public boast of collating three manuscripts, and
yet neglect every one of them ? or, to have observed in the
manuscripts so certain a correction, without either know-
ledge to make use on't themselves, or ingenuity to commu-
nicate it to the world ? 'Tis a bad business on either side ;
and yet it receives a great aggravation from this other which
follows. Epist. Lxviii. Phalaris, to encourage his son's
bounty ; / do not think, says he, you spend me too much
money, a)OC efiavrov evBeearepov evptcrKco '^Brj ^T/crroT'^^Tt
7rat8o9 vTTTjpeTelv, but I rather think I allow you too sparingly
for so generous a son. Here is ivBeearepov rjBr} comes again.
Now, every one of the manuscripts have it here too r)
Bel : two of which, they pretend, in their Preface, to have
thoroughly collated. And yet they take not the least notice
« Legendum forsan iKrevearepov, quam enim interpretationem eVSceVrepo*'
hic admittat, non video.
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS. 181
of this plain emendation, evSeia-repov rj Set, parcihs cequo,
parcihs quam oportet ; but blunder on with the vulgar read-
ing, and translate it, But I find myself too poor to supply
your liberality,^ Which, besides that it does not answer
the words of the Greek, (which would then have been rfhrj,
V XP'^^'^') J^^al^es mere nonsense of the context. For in the
very next sentence he tells his son, you shall sooner want
friends to give it to, than I want money to give. Ingenious
translators ! to make him complain of poverty, and in the
same breath to declare that he has riches without end.
Let this serve for a short specimen of their care and
skill in using of manuscripts. I have many more instances
ready at hand ; but their humanity, I hope, will pardon me,
if I don't produce them now, nor now proceed, as I once
thought, to weed all their book for them. My time does
not lie upon my hands ; and this tract must be only a short
appendix to the book of my friend : but it's likely hereafter,
if, in their way of speaking, they mightily exhort me to it, I
may be at their service ; if not in this, yet in another lan-
guage : to carry the fame and glory of our Editors, whither
such Editions as theirs seldom go, to foreign universities.
^ Ego me pauperiorem invenio, qu^m ut filii benignitati sufficere possim.
[Sed meipsum pauperiorem, &c. — D.]
OF
THEMISTOCLES'S EPISTLES.
SIR,
I PRESUME I have been as good as my word^ in
detecting the cheat of Phalaris's Epistles : the other part of
my promise was a censure of ^sop's Fables. But^ before I
meddle with those^ I am willing, now that my hand's in, to
examine some other impostures of this sort, out of the same
schools of the Sophists. It will be no unpleasant labour to
me, nor, I hope, unprofitable to others, to pull off the
disguise from those little pedants, that have stalked about so
long in the apparel of heroes.
The Epistles of Themistocles were printed first at Rome,
in MDCxxvi., out of a manuscript in the Vatican. The
editor, a Greek bishop,* believed them genuine ; but there
were some that suspected a forgery, as Leo Allatius^ informs
us; who himself leaves the matter in doubt; but withal
observes in their favour, that nobody had ever said a word
in print to prove them to be spurious. Suidas^ is an evi-
dence in their behalf; for, speaking of their reputed author,
he says, he has writ Letters full of spirit, ejpayjrev i7rLcrro\a<;
<^povrj^aTo<; yefiovaa^. He, I think, is the only old writer
that makes any mention of them. Which alone, as before
in Phalaris's case, is a shrewd prejudice against their credit
and reputation. Thucydides^ and Charon Lampsacenus say,
that Themistocles, when he fled into Asia, made his address
to Artaxerxes, who was newly come to the throne ; wherein
[* Caryophilus, archbishop of Iconium. — D.]
» De Script. Socrat. p, 78. ^ V. ©efiiffroK.
•^ Lib. i. p. 90.
EPISTLES OF THEMISTOCLES. 183
they are followed by Cornelius Nepos*^ and Plutarch, against
the common tradition of Ephorus, Heraclides, and most
others, that make Xerxes the father to be then alive. Some
writers^ relate that he had five cities given him by the
Persian, others but three. Now, if the Letters had been
known to any of those authors, both these disputes had been
soon at an end, or rather never had been raised. For he
himself expressly says,^ it was Xerxes he went to, and that
he gave him but three cities. Now, where could these
Epistles lie, unkno^vn and invisible, from Themistocles's
time to Suidas ? We must needs say, that the Letters had a
worse exostracism than their author ; since he was banished
but for ten years, but they for a thousand.
II. 'Tis observable, that every one of the Letters bear
date after his banishment, and contain a complete narrative
of all his story afterwards, without the least gap or inter-
ruption. Now, His hard to say, whether is the more strange
of the two ; that not one single letter of his before that time
should be preserved, or not one afterwards lost, though
written from so distant places, Argos, Corcyra, Epirus^
Ephesus, Magnesia, from whence there was no very sure
conveyance to Athens. What a cross vicissitude of fortune !
while the author is in prosperity, all his letters are unlucky ;
and not one of them is missing after he himself miscarried.
But the Sophist can easily account for this, though Themis-
tocles cannot; for here are no letters before his exile,
because the latter part of his life was the whole tour and
compass that the Sophist designed to write of: and not a
letter afterwards perished, because, being forged in a sophist's
closet, they run no hazard at all of being lost in the car-
riage.
III. Themistocles was an eloquent man; but here are
some touches in his Letters of such an elevated strain, that,
if he did not go to school to Gorgias Leontinus, the Sophist
'• Vita Themistoc. * Plutarch, Diodor., Athenaeus, &c.
^ Ep. XX.
184 DISSERTATION UPON THE
of that time, I can hardly helieve he writ them. The his-
torians tell us moderately, that, after he was driven from
home, he was made much on at Argos ; hut he himself is all
melting when he talks on that subject. He was met, he
says,g on the road by two Argivans of his acquaintance,
who, when he told them the news of his banishment, railed
bitterly at the Athenians : but when they heard he was
going to Delphi, rather than to their town, in a kind quarrel
they tell him, that the Athenians had justly punished him^
since he so much wronged the city of Argos, to think of any
sanctuary but that. Well, he goes with them to Argos ; and
there the whole city teazes him by mere force to take the
government upon him,i taking it as the greatest injury , that
he offered to decline it. These, you'll say, are choice
flowers both of courtesy and of rhetoric ; but there's another
clearly beyond them, where he tells us, that he is so re-
solved of going to the Persian court, though it was a des-
perate risk, that neither the advice of his friends, nor his
father Neocles's ghost, nor his uncle Themistocles's, nor au-
gury, nor omen, nor Apollo's oracle itself, should be able
to dissuade himJ Here's a bold resolute blade for you I
here's your stoical KeKpcxa ! 'Tis almost impossible for a
sophist not to betray himself. Nothing will relish and go
down with them that is ordinary and natural. Then they
applaud themselves most, when they have said a forced,
extravagant thing. If one speaks of any civility, the com-
pliment must be strained beyond all decorum. If he makes
a resolution, he must needs swagger and swear, and be as
wilful as a madman.
IV. The subject of many of the Letters is common-
place ; mere chat, and telling a tale, without any business ;
an errand not worth sending to the next town, much less to
be brought from remote countries some hundreds of leagues.
e Ep. i.
^ 'Eiraiveiv 'A6r)valovs, cos SUaia tivSvtwv tj/jluv.
' 'AvayKoi^ovffiv, ws aSiKovficvoi, fjv fx^ 6.px(jifiiv.
J Ep. xiv.
EPISTLES OF THEMISTOCLES. 185
The XV. and xviii. Letters are written to enemies, his
friends, I suppose, failing in their correspondence ; and con-
tain nothing but a little scolding, which was scarce worth
the long carriage from Ephesus to Athens.
V. In the XX. Epistle we have this story: when The-
mistocles was at Corcyra, he designed for Sicily, to Gelo
the Syracusian tyrant. But jvist as he was going a ship-
board, the news came that Gelo was dead, and his brother
Hiero succeeded him. Now, if we make it appear that
Hiero was come to the crown some years before Themis-
tocles's banishment and this voyage to Corcyra, what be-
comes of the credit of our Epistles ? 'Tis true, the chrono-
logy of this part of history is not so settled and agreed,^
as to amount to a demonstration against the Letters ; but,
however, when joined with the arguments preceding, at least
it will come up to a high probability. Theophrastus, in his
treatise Of Monarchy} relates, that when Hiero had sent
race-horses and a most sumptuous tent to the Olympian
games, Themistocles advised the Greeks to plunder the
Tyrant's tent, rov rvpdvvov, and not to let his horses run.
'Tis evident, then, if Theophrastus speak properly, that
Hiero was monarch of Syracuse when Themistocles was at
Olympia ; but it's most certain he never came thither after
his exile.
But, to deal fairly, it must be confessed, that ^lian, in
telling this story, varies from Theophrastus ; for he says
Hiero himself came to the games. "=^ But that he would go
thither in person, after he got the government, is wholly
improbable. So that, if ^lian be believed, this business
must have been done before Hiero came to the throne. For
even in Gelo's life-time, who left him the monarchy, he kept
horses for the race, and won at the Pythian games, Pythiad
the xxvi.,^ which answers to Olymp. lxxiv. 3. But, be-
sides that Theophrastus is of much greater authoritj^, the
'' OuS* avro7s {xpoviKo7s) orpe/ta ffwraTTOfievois. Plut. Them. p. 227.
' Uepl BaffiXeias, apud Plut. Them. p. 225.
•" Var. Hist. ix. 5. " Piiul. Schol. Pyth. i. and iii.
VOL. II. 2 B
186 DISSERTATION UPON THE
other refutes himself in the very next words. For he says,
Themistocles hindered Hiero upon this pretence, that he,
that had not shared in the common danger, ought not to share
in the common festival : where it's certain by the common
danger he means Xerxes's expedition, when Gelo either
refused or delayed to give the Greeks his assistance.^ This
affront then was put upon Hiero after that expedition. But
the very next Olympiad after, Hiero was in the monarchy.?
It cannot be true, then, that his first accession to the throne
was, according to the Letters, while Themistocles stayed at
Corcyra.
Besides these inferences and deductions, we have the
express verdict and declaration of most of the chronologers,^
who place the beginning of Hiero's reign Olymp. lxxv. 3.,
and Themistocles's banishment seven years after, Olymp.
Lxxvii. 2. The Arundelian Marble, indeed, differs from
all these in the periods of Gelo and Hiero; which would
quite confound all this argumentation from notes of time.
But, either that chronologer is quite out, or we can safely
believe nothing in history. For he makes Gelo first invade
the government two years after Xerxes's expedition. But
Herodotus'" spends half a dozen pages in the account of an
embassy to Gelo from Sparta and Athens, to desire his
assistance against the Persian. And 'tis agreed among all,
that Gelo's victory over the Carthaginians in Sicily was got
the very same day with the battle at Salamis.^
VI. The whole volume of Themistocles's Letters con-
sists of XXI. only, and three of these are taken up in
the story of Pausanias. The second is writ to Pausanias
himself, before that Spartan's conspiracy with the Per-
sian was discovered. There he exhorts him to modera-
tion in his prosperity, lest some very great turn of fortune
should speedily befall him. Can you desire now a surer
indication of a sophist ? Without doubt, he that penned
«> Herod, vii. c. 163. Diod. xi. p. 21. p Diod. xi. p. 29.
1 Scholi. Pind. Pyth. i. Diod. xi. p. 29, 41. Euseb. in Chron.
' Lib. vii. * Herodot. ibid, and Diod. 1. xi.
EPISTLES OF THEMISTOCLES. 187
this epistle knew beforehand what happened to Pausanias,
who was soon after recalled home by the magistrates, and
put to death for treason. The xix. is to Pausanias again,
but after his conspiracy was detected. Here he tells the
particulars of that plot, as exactly as if he had been one of
the Ephori that overheard it. Nay, he foretells him, that
the Lacedaemonians would take away his life. Now, besides
that Themistocles would scorn to insult so, and rail to no
purpose, as this letter does, he would surely have had more
wit than knowingly to write to the dead. For, at the same
time he heard those particulars of Pausanias's treason, he
must needs hear of his execution, since those things were
not known till after his death, and the rifling of his papers.
The VI. Epistle is a long narrative of the whole business
of Pausanias ; for that was a subject worthy of eloquence,
and therefore was to receive ornament from the pen of the
Sophist. But it was scarce worthy of Themistocles to send
such a long news-letter to Athens, where, in all likelihood,
the story was common before he heard of it himself.
But how shall we reconcile this affair of Pausanias ac-
cording to the Letters with what Diodorus has left us upon
the same subject ? The Letter s, we see, make Themistocles
to be banished before Pausanias was suspected ;* and make
the one reside at Argos while the other was convicted and
put to death .'^ But Diodorus, who has brought all his his-
tory into the method of Annals, places the death of Pausa-
nias Olymp. Lxxv. 4.,^ and the exile of Themistocles six
years after, Olymp. lxxvii. 2.^ Now, I would fain know
of our Sophist, how he came to dispose and suit his matters
so negligently, to bring Pausanias upon the stage again,
when he had been six years in his grave ? I imagine he
will refer me to Thucydides,^ who makes an immediate
transition from one story to the other ; " That the Spartans
" accused Themistocles, who was then banished from home,
* Ep. ii. » Ep. xix., vi. ^ Lib. xi. p. 36.
^ Lib. xi. p. 4L « Lib. i. p. 88.
188 EPISTLES OF THEMISTOCLES.
" of conspiring with Pausanias." This^ indeed, might draw
the Sophist and some others into a mistake. But it may
be taken two ways : either that it was done presently upon
the death of Pausanias ; or a few years after, when Themis-
tocles's exile gave the Spartans, that hated and feared him,
an opportunity to ruin him. Plutarch follows the first
wayjy for he makes Themistocles, after his banishment, to
have private dealings with Pausanias ; in which opinion he
favours the author of these Letters. But the second will
rather appear to be the sense of Thucydides, if we consider
that he places the matter of Pausanias just after the flight
of Xerxes; 2 but when Themistocles went into Asia, he
makes Artaxerxes to be in the throne,^ which was a con-
siderable while after. Besides that Diodorus, whose design
was to refer all occurrences to years, and not to follow the
thread of story beyond the annual period, is of more crecfit,
in a point of chronology, than Plutarch or any other[s] that
write Lives by the lump.
y In Theraist. p. 224. * P. 63. " P. 90.
OF
SOCRATES'S EPISTLES.
The Epistles of Socrates, and his scholars, Xenophon,
Aristippiis, &c., were published out of the Vatican Library
by the learned Leo AUatius, and printed at Paris, mdcxxxvii.
He was so fully persuaded himself, and so concerned to
have others think, that they are the legitimate offspring of
those authors they are laid to, that he has guarded and pro-
tected them, in a dialogue of lvii. pages in quarto, against
all the objections that he or his friends could raise. And
nobody since, that ever I heard of, has brought the matter
into controversy. But I am inclined to believe^ that, by
that time I have done with them, it will be no more a con-
troversy, but that they are spurious. I shall make use of
nothing that AUatius has brought, except one objection only,
and that I shall both manage in a new way, and defend it
against all his exceptions.
L The first Letter is Socrates's to some king, ^tis sup-
posed to Archelaus king of Macedonia, in which he refuses
to go to him, though invited in the most kind and obliging
manner. That he really denied his company to Archelaus
and others, we are assured from very good hands; which
was the ground for our falsary to forge this epistle. But, I
believe, none of those that mention it make so tall a com-
pliment to Socrates as he does here to himself. For he
says, the king offered him part of his kiiigdom ; and, that he
should not come thither to be commanded, but to command
190 DISSERTATION UPON THE
both his subjects and himself.^ Can you desire a better
token of a sophist than this ? 'Tis a fine offer^, indeed, to a
poor old man, that had nothing but his staff and one coat to
his back. But a sophist abhors mediocrity ; he must always
say the greatest thing ; and make a tide and a flood, though
it be but in a basin of water.
II. Well; our philosopher goes on, and gives a reason
of his refusal ; that his demon forbid him to go : and then
he falls into the long story of what happened to him in the
battle at Delium, which w^as a tale of twenty years' standing
at the date of this letter. But the Sophist had read it in
Plato 5 and he would not miss the opportunity of an elo-
quent narration. I will not here insist upon the testimony
of Athenaeus,^ that the whole business is a mere fiction of
Plato's : let that be left in the middle. But we may safely
infer thus much from it ; that even Athenaeus himself, whose
curiosity nothing escaped, never met with these Epistles.
Which alone creates a just suspicion that they were forged
since his days, especially when the universal silence of all
antiquity gives a general consent to it.
There's a passage, indeed, in Libanius,^ which, in AUa-
tius's judgment, seems plainly to declare that he had seen
this very epistle. For, after he had mentioned Socrates's
refusal to go to Scopas, and Eurylochus, and Archelaus, he
adds, AvtS)V he iheofirjv rwv eTnaroXoyv, iv i/c€ivat<; rov
avOpcoirov KaXKiara av there. Now, should we concede
what Allatius would have, this is all that can be inferred
from thence in their favour, that they are older than Liba-
nius, which I am willing to believe; and that he believed
them true, which I matter not at all. For so we have seen
Stobaeus, Suidas, and others, cry up Phalaris for a genuine
book ; and yet I fancy none of my readers are now of their
* T^s ^acriK^las e<pr]s [e^Tjcas. — D.] fi4pos StSoVot. and" Ap^ovra koi tQjv &\\wv
Koi ffov avTov. ^ Lib. v. p. 215. [= II. 329. ed. Schw.—I>.}
•^ Apologia Socrat. [Liban. Orat. 8fc. iii. 59. ed. Reiske, where aifrwu iSeS.
KdWiffT hv eiSerc. — D.j
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 191
opinion. But, with Allatius*s good leave, 1 would draw the
words of Libanius to a quite contrary purpose. After he
had said that many princes had solicited Socrates, by letter,
to come and live in their courts, and he answered them all
with a denial. But, says he, / want the Letters themselves, in
which you might perfectly see the sjnrit of the man. This,
to me, is an indication that the Letters he means were not
extant. For if he had them in his hand, according to
Allatius, how could he want them ? And 'tis plain he
speaks here of several letters, being replies to several mes-
sages j but in this collection here's but a single one. /
wish, says he, the Letters were to be had; in those you might
read his character. If this be the sense of those words, as
probably it is, Libanius is so far from being patron to our
Epistles, that he is a positive witness against them.
TIL The VII. Letter is writ by Socrates to one of those
that had fled to Thebes from the violence of the xxx. Ty-
rants; in which he gives him an account of the state of
Athens since their departure; that himself was now hated by
the Tyrants, because he would have no hand in the condem-
nation of Leon the Salaminian : and then he tells the story at
large. Now, here's a manifest discovery that the Letters
are supposititious. For the business of Leon was quite over
before those fugitives left the town. For Leon was mur-
dered before Theramenes was ;^ and Theramenes was mur-
dered before Thrasybulus and his party fled to Thebes.
And that Socrates means them in this letter, 'tis evident
from hence, that he speaks here of their conspiracy to resort
privately towards Athens, and set upon the Tyrants ; which
afterwards came to pass.
IV. The VIII., IX., XII., and xiii. are Letters of jest and
raillery between Antisthenes and Aristippus and Simon the
shoemaker. 'Tis an affront to the memory of those men to
believe they would fool and trifle in that manner ; especially,
send such impertinent stuff as far as from Sicily to Athens,
^ Xenoph. Hist. lib. ii. p. 467, 470. Diod. 1. xiv.
192 DISSERTATION UPON THE
which could not decently be spoken even in merriment at a
table.
V. In the XIII. Epistle^ an^ong the acquaintance of
Simon he names Phsedrus^ the same that gives the title to
the Dialogue of Plato; and the xxv. is writ by Phsedrus
himself to Plato ; and both these are dated after Socrates's
death. I will appeal now to Athenasus^ if these two letters
can be genuine. He^ among other errors in chronology for
which he chastises Plato, brings this in for one, that he
introduces Ph(edrus discoursing with Socrates, who must cer-
tainly be dead before the days of that philosopher.^ How
comes he then to survive him in these Epistles, and dis-
course so passionately of his death ? 'Tis true, for want of
ancient history, we cannot back this authority with any
other testimony. But I am sure, all those that have a just
esteem for Athenseus, can have no slight one of this argu-
ment against the credit of the Letters.
VI. The XIV. Epistle gives Xenophon a long narrative of
Socrates's trial and death, being writ presently after by one
of his scholars* that was present at both. Among other par-
ticulars, he tells him, that the oration or charge against So-
crates was draion up by Poly crates the Sophist.^ But I doubt
this will turn to a charge against another sophist for counter-
feiting letters. For I think I can plainly prove, that at the
date of this letter there was no such report ever mentioned,
that Polycrates had any hand in it; and that this false
tradition, which afterwards obtained in the world, and gave
occasion to our writer to say it in his letter, did not begin
till some years after Socrates's condemnation.
Diogenes Laertius brings Hermippus's testimony, that
Polycrates made the charge.^ ^fveypai/re Be rov Xoyov
Tlo\vKpdT7)<; 6 (70^tcrT'^9, w? (jytjcTLV "EpfJunriTO'^. But, in
opposition to this, he presently subjoins, ^^ that Phavorinus,
^ Lib. xi. pag. 505. [= IV. 381. ed. Schw.—Yy.l 'AUvarov 5e Koi ^aidpou . . .
Karh 2«KpoT7jj/ elvai.
[* It is given to ^schines in the ed. of Orell. — D.]
^ ^Hv §6 (\6yos) UoAvKparovs rov \oyoypa.<pov. 9 Vita Socrat.
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 193
((
in the first book of his Commentaries, says, that Poly-
" crates's oration against Socrates is not true and real,
" because he mentions in it the walls built by Conon six
" years after Socrates 's death/' To which Laertius sub-
scribes his own assent, Kal eamv ovto3<; e'x^ov, and so it is.
I may freely say, that this passage of Phavorinus has not
been yet rightly understood. It is generally interpreted as
if he denied the oration that is attributed to Polycrates to be
really his. But this is very far from being his opinion.
For then he would be flatly confuted by Isocrates, a witness
unanswerable, who, in a discourse which he addresses to this
very Polycrates, tells him, I perceive you value yourself most
upon two orations, The Apology of Busiris, and Accusation
of Socrates.^ But Phavorinus*s meaning was, that Poly-
crates did not make that oration for a true charge to be
spoke at the trial of Socrates, but writ it several years after,
for no other trial than that of his own wit. The words in
the Greek can admit of no other sense ; Mr] elvac oXtjOtj tov
Xoyov TOV IIo\vKpdTov<; Kara ^coKparovfi' ev avrS yap . .
/jivrj/jLovevec to)v vtto K6vo}vo<; ret^wv, &c. Observe, that he
says fiv7)/jL0V6vei,, Polycrates mentions : if he had denied him
to be the author, he would have said in the passive, there is
mentioned. Besides, he expressly calls it tov \6yov tov
UoXvKpdTovf;, only denies it to be akrjOrj. But, if he had
denied it to be his, he would have said, Mrj elvac IIoXv-
KpaTov^ TOV Xoyov tov KaTa ^coKpaTovg : as Laertius speaks
in other places; Aa/ceBao/jLovLcov UoXtTelav, rjv (f>7](TLv ovk
etvai Hevo^covTO? o Mdyvr)<; Ar]/jL7]Tpio<;;^ AioXoyov^, . . . ov<i
Il€L(TiaTpaTO(; 6 ^Ecj^eato^ eXeye /jlt) elvat Ala'^tvov.3 This, I
think, is sufficiently clear. Now we are to know, it was the
custom of the old sophists to make an ostentation of their
art upon some difficult subjects and paradoxes, such as other
people could speak nothing to; as the commendation of
a fever or the gout. Polycrates, therefore, to shew his
rhetoric in this way, writ an apology of Busiris, that killed
^ 'Eirl T§ BovaipiSos avoKoyla Koi rfj 2(w/cpetTous KaTi)'yopi(^. Isoc. Blisir.
* In Xenoph. J In uEschine.
VOL. II. 2 c
194 DISSERTATION UPON THE
and eat his giiests ; and of Clytsemnestra, that murdered her
husband :^ and to give a proof of his skilly as well in ac-
cusing virtue, as in excusing vice^ he writ an indictment
against Socrates; not aX7]6rj, the true one, as Phavorinus
truly says, but only a scholastic exercise; such as Plato,
Xenophon, Libanius^ and others, wi'it in his defence. So
that we are no more forced to believe that his oration was
the true charge that was spoken at Socrates's trial, than that
he really pleaded for Clytsemnestra when Orestes was going
to kill her. Nay, it appears to me, from Isocrates himself,
that it was but a scholastic exercise, and after Socrates's
death. For he blames Polycrates for reckoning Alcibiades
among Socrates's disciples ; since, besides that nobody else
ever counted him his scholar, had he really been so, he had
been a commendation to his master, and not a disparage-
ment, which was the aim of the Sophist. So that, says he,
if the dead could have knowledge of your writings, Socrates
would thank you} Is not this a clear indication, that So-
crates was dead before the oration was made ? and that this
was not the true charge ? For then he would have heard it
at his trial ; and there had been no occasion to say, if the
dead could have knowledge of it. In the close of all, he
advises him to leave off shewing his parts upon such vil-
lanous themes, 7rov7jpa<; vTroOiaet^, lest he do public mischief,
by putting false colours upon things. Here again we are
plainly told, that his action against Socrates, like those for
Busiris and Clytaemnestra, was but a declamation, a theme
and exercise in the school, and not a real indictment in the
Areopagus at Athens. To all which let me add, that neither
Plato, nor Xenophon, nor any body contemporary with
Socrates, ever once mention Polycrates for the author of the
charge; which, had the thing been true, they would cer-
tainly have thrown in his teeth, considering the perpetual
^ Quintil. lib, ii. cap. 18.
^ Et yevoiTo i^ovala rdis T€T€\€vrr)K6(n fiovXeixraarOai irepl twu etpTjfjLiVcov, 6
fiev x*P*'' ^*' €*5ei77 aol. Isoc. Busir. [ 6 fxlv &u croi T0(ravr7]P exoi
Xdpiv. Or. Att. ii. 300. ed. BeJxk.—D.']
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 195
quarrel between sophists and philosophers. And 'tis well
known that the Athenians, in a penitential mood, either
banished or put to death all those that had any hand in
Socrates*s accusation. If Polycrates then were so eminently
guilty as to draw up the impeachment, how could he escape
untouched, when all the rest suffered ?
But when the Accusation of Socrates, though only a so-
phistical exercise, came abroad in the world, it was natural
enough^ in some process of time, that those that heard of it
only, or but perfunctorily read it, should believe it to be the
real charge. We have seen already, that Hermippus was in
that mistake, who lived an hundred years after; and with
him Quintilian, Themistius, and others innumerable. Pha-
vorinus, it seems, alone had the sagacity, by a notice from
chronology, to find it of a more recent date than Socrates*s
trial. And even that very passage of Phavorinus has lain
hitherto in the dark : so that my reader may forgive me this
prolixity and niceness, since he learns by it a piece of news.
As for Hermippus, lest the authority of so celebrated an
author should deter one from so plain a truth, I will shew
another slip of his, and a worse than this, in the story of
Socrates. When Gryllus the son of Xenophon was slain
in the same battle that Epaminondas was, most of the wits
of that age writ elegies and encomiums on him, in compli-
ment and consolation to his father. Among the rest, Her-
mippus says,™ Socrates was one. Which is a blunder of
no less than xxxvii. years, the interval between Socrates's
death and the battle of Mantinea.
Socrates was put to death Olymp. xcv. 1., when Laches
was magistrate. This is universally acknowledged \^ and to
go about to prove it, were to add light to the sun. And six
™ Laert. in Xenopli. ["E/j/xiiriros Iv ry 'Jrcpl &eo(l>pd(TTov Kal 'ZoiKpa.Ti] (()'r](rl
FpvWov iyKdfjLiov yeypacpfvai. I. 113. ed. Meib. — " But Hermippus will be
" cleared of this blunder, which Bentley imputes to him, if we restore in
" Laertius koX 'lero/cpc^TTj <pr]<rl." Clinton's Fasti Hellen. from cxxiv. 01. to
Death of Aug. (Jpp.) p. 518.— D.]
" See Diodorus, Phavorinus, Diog. Laertius, Aristides, Marmor. Arund.,
Euseb., Argumentum Isocr. Busir. &c.
196 DISSERTATION UPON THE
years after this, Olymp. xcvi. 3., in Eubulides's magistracy,
Conon repaired the walls. ^ Which gave the hint to Phavo-
rinus, and after him to Diogenes, to discover the common
mistake about Polycrates's oration. But Leo AUatius, to
avoid the force of their argument, undertakes an impossible
thing, to prolong Socrates's life above twenty years beyond
Laches ; so that he might see Conon's walls, and Poly-
crates's declamation be the true charge at his trial. Which
he would make out, by comparing together some scraps of
different authors, and some synchronisms of other men's
lives with Socrates's. As if those things, which are only
mistakes and unwary slips of the writers, could have any
force or credit against so many express authorities. By the
same way that he proceeds, I will shew the quite contrary ;
that Socrates died twenty years before Laches's government.
For we have it from good hands, that Euripides,? in a play
of his called Palamedes, using these words, ^Ejcdver, eKavere
rav 7rdvao<f)ov, &c., designed to lash the Athenians for
Socrates's murder ; and the whole theatre perceiving it,
burst into tears. Socrates therefore died before Euripides.
But 'tis well known that the latter died six years before
Laches was archon. Nay, Socrates must needs be dead
before Palamedes was acted. But that was acted Olymp.
XCT. 1.,^ which is sixteen years before Laches. Have I not
proved now exactly the quite contrary to Allatius ? But
still I hope I have more judgment than to credit such an
oblique argument against so many direct testimonies. If
Allatius had looked round about him, he would not have
° Diodor. xiv. p. 303. Phavorin., Diog. Laert.
P Diog. Laert. in Socrat., Argum. Isoc. Busir. [The lines are read thus in
Philostratus, Her oka (p. 168. ed. Boisson) :
'EKdver', iKdvere rav Travcro^ov, & Aavaol,
Tav ovdev aXyvvovffav a7]d6ua Mov<rav.
On which see Valckenaer ad Phoen. v. 321. and Diatr. in Eurip. 8ic. p. 191.
Boeckh thinks that they were added by some interpolator, when the play was
revived after the death of Socrates, Gr. Trag. Prin. p. 185. — D.]
1 iElian. Var. Hist. ii. 1. Schol. Aristoph. 'Opvie. p. 401. [^Schol to ed. Bekk.
p. 250.— D.]
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 197
committed so great a blunder, while he defends his Epistles
at one post, to expose them to worse assaults. If Socrates
died in Laches's magistracy, one epistle must be spurious,
that mentions Polycrates. This breach Allatius would secure,
and therefore he will needs make him live several years
longer. But then, say I, if we concede this to Allatius,
not one epistle only, but the whole bundle of them are
spurious. For, most of them plainly suppose that Socrates
died under Laches. Even this very epistle complains that
Xenophon was abroad when Socrates suffered,'' and that the
expedition of Cyrus hindered him from being present then
at Athens : and a second letter,® to name no more, dated
after Socrates 's death, makes Xenophon to have newly
escaped the dangers of his long march through enemies'
countries. Now, all the world knows* that Cyrus's expedi-
tion and Xenophon's march was in Laches's time, and the
year before him. So that, upon the whole, there is no
escape, no evasion from this argument; but our Epistles
must be convicted of a manifest cheat.
VIL In the xvii. Letter, one of Socrates's scholars,
supposed to be present at Athens when the things he speaks
of were acted, says, the Athenians put to death both Anytus
and Melitus, the prosecutors of Socrates ;^ which, being
contrary to known matter of fact, proves the epistle to be
a forgery. Melitus, indeed, was killed ; but Anytus was
only banished ; and several writers speak of him afterwards
at Heraclea in Pontus.^
VIII. The XVIII. is a Letter of Xenophon's, inviting
some friends to come to see him at his plantation near
Olympia. He says, Aristippus and Phsedo had made him a
visit ; and that he recited to them his Memoirs of Socrates,"^
which both of them approved of.^ This alone is sufficient to
' Ep. XIV. ' xviii. * Marm. Arund., Laert., Diodor. &c.
" ^hv\n6v T€ KoiX Me\iTou .... airsKTCivav.
^ Laert. in Socrat. et in Antisth. Themist. Orat. ii. Augustin. de Civ.
Dei, viii. 3.
^* 'ATTOfivrifioyeifiara, ^ 'E56k^i apiji.65id riya eJvai.
198 DISSERTATION UPON THE
blast the reputation of our famous Epistles. For, how is it
likely that Aristippus would go so far to see Xenophon, who
was always his enemy ?y Much less would he have given
his approbation to a book that was a satire against himself.
For the book is yet in being; and in it he introduces
Socrates, in a long lecture, reprehending Aristippus for his
intemperance and lust.^ Even Laertius takes notice, that
he brought in Aristippus 's name upon that scandalous occa-
sion out of the enmity he bare him.
IX. We have already seen Xenophon writing Socrates's
Memoirs at Scillus, near Olympia. But in the xxii.,* to
Cebes and Simmias, he is writing them at Megara, for there
the letter is dated. And in the xxi.,t to Xanthippe, he
invites her to come to him to Megara. One would think
there was [were] more sophists than one had a finger in this
volume of letters ; or if he was but one author, nature gave
him a short memory, without the blessing of a great wit.
'Tis true, upon Socrates's execution, his scholars left Athens
for fear, and retired to Megara, to the house of Euclides f-
which occasioned our Sophist to bring Xenophon thither
too. But he should have remembered, that while they were
scared out of Athens, for fear of their own lives, he was
safe at a great distance, in the retinue of Agesilaus ; from
whose company he went to Scillus, without ever residing at
Megara. Nay, the Sophist is so indiscreet as to bring in
Xenophon in forma pauperis, to beg and receive relief from
Cebes and Simmias ; whereas every body knows that he got
great riches in the war, and lived in very great splendour
and hospitality at Scillus.^
>' s.evo(}>S)V Se elxe trphs avrhu dvaixevcos. Laert. in Aristippo.
'■ Xenoph. Memorab. lib. ii. in princip.
[* It is given to iEschines in the ed. of Orell, where, at p. 244., see the
remarks of Luzac on what he thinks to be the meaning of airofxvrjiMovevfjLaTa in
this Epistle. — D.]
[f It is given to iEschines in the ed. of Orell. — D.]
'* Laert. in Euclid.
^ Laert. in Xenoph. Xenoph. Exp. Cyri, 1. v. p. 350.
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 199
X. In the XXIV. Epistle, Plato says he is quite weary of
a city life, and had therefore retired into the country, Bca-
rpl^cov ou /jbaKpav ^E(f)€(TTcdB(ov ', which Allatius translates
non long^ ah Ephestiadibus. He ought to have said ab
Hephmstiadis ; for the true word in the Greek is 'HcfyaccrTL'
aS(t)v. Plato had some estate there, which he disposed of in
his will : to iv 'HcfiataTcaSiov %a)ptov, as ^tis in Laertius.^
Hesychius, 'HcfyaicrTLdSai,, 'AOrjvaloi. Stejjhanus Byz., 'H(f>ai-
aridSai, 87J/jlo<; 'AOrjvatoyv* . . . . rd TOTTCKa, ef 'H^atcTTLahMV,
&c. In the Roman manuscript of Laertius 'tis writ ivc(f)c-
andScov; which manner of spelling is foimd also in Hesy-
chius, ^I(j>l<TTLo<;, 7]p(0(; . . .d(f)^ ov. . .^I<pc(TTidSai. If the reader
does believe that our letter-monger, like Hesychius, spelt
the word wrong, he will be satisfied of the forgery; for
surely Plato himself knew the true name of his own estate.
But if he incline to absolve the author, and lay the blame
upon the copiers, he may please to accept of this only as an
emendation.
XI. The XXVII. Epistle is Aristi23pus's to his daughter
Arete ; which perhaps is the very same that is mentioned by
Laertius, who, among the writings of this philosopher,
names eTrto-ToXrjv wpoq j4.p7]T7]v rrjv Ovyaripa. Allatius, in-
deed, is ready to vouch it; but I am not so easy of belief.
For here are two other letters^ of his in this parcel, and
both of them writ in the Doric dialect, though directed to
Athens ; because, forsooth, he was a Cyrenaean, and the
Doric his native tongue. Pray, what was the matter, then,
that in this he uses the Attic, though he writ from Sicily, a
Dorian country, to his own daughter at Cyrene ? One
would suspect, as I observed before, that a couple of
sophists clubbed to this collection. 'Tis true, we know
from Laertius, that, of xxv. Dialogues published by Aris-
tippus, some were in the Doric idiom, and some in the
Attic. But that, I suppose, was done because of the variety
•= Vita Platon.
[* 'li<l>ai(TTia, Srj/xos ^AKafiavriSos (pvXrjs D.]
** IX. and XI. .
200 DISSERTATION UPON THE
of his persons. In some dialogues the speakers were Sici-
lians^ and those were writ in the Doric ; and where the
Athenians were introduced, the Attic was proper. But
now, in this letter to his daughter both parties are Dorians ;
and so this epistle should rather be Doric than either of the
other two.
XII. In the same letter he mentions her estate in Ber-
nice, TO iv BepvUrj Krrjfxa. There is no question but he
means BepevUr] ; perhaps that city not far from Cyrene.
But there was nothing then in all Afric called by that name ;
for BepevUr] is the Macedonian idiom for ^epevUrj, the vic-
torious. In that country cj) was generally changed into y3 :
as, instead of KecpaX?}, they said Ke^Xrj ; for ^[\c7r7ro<;,
BtX^TTTTo?; for <f>a\aKpo<;, jSaXaKpof; ; and so in others.®
So that BepevUr) was unknown in Afric till the Macedo-
nians came thither ; and indeed they had their names from
the wives of the Ptolemies a whole century of years after the
date of this letter.
XIII. He goes on, and tells his daughter, that if he
should die, he would have her go to Athens, and live with
Myrto and Xanthippe, the two wives of Socrates. It was a
common tradition among the writers of philosophic history,
that Socrates had these two wives at once ; and from thence
our Sophist made them the compliment of a place in this
epistle. There are cited, as authors of this story, Callis-
thenes, Demetrius Phalereus, Satyrus, and Aristoxenus,
who all took it from Aristotle, in his book Of Nobility, we pi
Evyev€ia<;.^ But, polygamy being against the law of that
commonwealth, and the story therefore improbable, Hiero-
nymus Rhodius produces a temporary statute made in So-
crates's days, that, by reason of the scarcity of people, a
man might marry two wives at a time. But, notwithstand-
ing such a flush of authorities, Pansetius llie Stoic,? a very
« Etym. Magn. &c.
' Laert. in Socrat, Plutarch. Aristid., Athen. xiii. p. 556. [=V. 5. ed. Schw.
-D.]
If Athenaeus, Plutarch, ib.
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 201
great man, writ expressly against all those named above;
and, in the opinion of Plutarch, sufficiently^ confuted the
tradition of the two wives. For my own part, I dare pin my
belief upon two such excellent judgments as Plutarch's and
Panaetius's, and, upon their credit alone, pronounce this
letter to be an imposture. What grounds they proceeded
on, I cannot now tell ; but I think there is apparent reason
for rejecting the story, even laying aside their testimony.
For none of Socrates's acquaintance, not Plato, not Xeno-
phon, say one word of this Myrto. Aristotle, we see, was
the first that mentioned her; but Plutarch suspects that
book to be spurious.^ So that all this tradition rose at first
from a falsary, that counterfeited Aristotle's name. Be-
sides, they do not agree in telling their tale : one says that
he had both wives together; another, that Myrto was his
first wife, and the second came after her death; another,
that Xanthippe was the first. Let either of them come first,
and our Epistles are false ; for here we have both surviving
him, and living together. One says, this Myrto was Aris-
tides's daughter ;J another, his granddaughter; and an-
other, his grandson's daughter. Whatsoever she was, if
she outlived her husband, according to the Letters, pray
where was her ladyship at the time of his suffering ? Xan-
thippe, like a loving wife, attended him in the prison ;^ but
the other ne'er came near him. *Tis a mistake, sure, that
has past upon the world, that Xanthippe was the scold ;
it should seem that Myrto had the better title to that ho-
nourable name. But what shall we say to Hieronymus, who
brings you the very statute that gave allowance of two wives
at once ? Pansetius, you see, believed it not : and why may
not a statute be forged as easily as these Epistles ? If there
was such an act, there appears no great wisdom in it. It is
certain there is near an equality in the births of males and
females. So that, if some men had two wives for their share,
others must go without: and what remedy would that be
against the scarcity of people ? Besides that, by such a law,
'' iKavSas. ■' Ibid. i Ibid. ^ Plato, Apolog.
VOL. II. 2 D
202 DISSERTATION UPON THE
the rich only would be accommodated, who were able to
maintain a couple ; the poorer sort, who are always the
most fruitful, would be in worse circumstances than before.
And, without doubt, a very strong interest would have been
made against the passing of such a bill ; as we know what
the Roman matrons did, when Papirius Praetextatus made a
like story to his mother.^ 'Tis very odd too that nobody
but Hieronymus should ever hear of this statute ; and he too
a suspected witness, because he brings it to serve a turn,
and to help at a hard pinch. But certainly such a political
occurrence, had it been true, could never have lain hid from
the whole tribe of historians. It had very well deserved not
only a mention, but a remark. But how could it possibly
escape the fancy and spleen of all the comedians of that
age ? how could they miss so pleasant an argument of jest
and ridicule ? Those that are acquainted with the condition
of those times will look upon this as next to a demon-
stration. But let us grant, if you will, half a dozen wives to
Socrates ; yet, nevertheless, our Epistles will be still in the
mire. For here our Sophist makes the two women live
amicably together, which is pretty hard to believe; for (as
those that make them two tell the story of them"^), while
their husband was alive, they were perpetually fighting.
But, which is worse yet, there are other letters in the bundle
that plainly suppose Socrates to have had but one wife. He
himself, writing to somebody, tells him this domestic news,
that Xanthippe and the children are well;^ but says not a
word of my lady Myrto. Xenophon sends a letter top-full
of kindness and commendation to Xanthippe and the little
ones;° but it was very uncivil in him to take no notice of
the other, since, according to the story, she brought her
husband the more children. Nay, if we allow this letter
of Xenophon's to be genuine, he played a false and dirty
trick, much against his character. For, at the date of this
' A. Gellius, li. i. c. 23.
"^ Aristoxenus apud Theodoret. Serm. xii. ad Graecos.
" Ep. iv. o Ep. xxi. [See note, p. 198.— D.]
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 203
epistle, if we believe the very next to it,P he was writing
Socrates *s Memoirs. So that, while he here in his letter
wheedles the poor woman, and makes her little presents,
and commends her for her love to her husband, and for
many good qualities, in his book he traduces her to that
present age, and to all posterity, for the most curst and
devilish shrew that ever was, or ever would be,^ Nay, which
makes it the baser, he was the only man that said this of
her ; for neither Plato, nor any of the old Socratics, writ a
word about her scolding. Which made Athenseus suspect
it was a calumny;'' especially since Aristophanes and his
brethren of the stage, in all their raillery and satire upon
Socrates, never once twitted him about his wife. Well, let
that be as it will: but what shall we say to Xenophon's
double-dealing? For my part, rather than I'll harbour such
a thought of that great man, I'll quit a whole cart-load of
such letters as these.
XIV. Xenophon, in the xv. Letter, tells this story of
Plato, to whom he bore a grudge, that he should say, none
of his iwitings were to he ascribed to himself, but to Socrates
young and handsome ; ^rjal /jLTjSev elvai iroLTj/jLa avrov, ^w-
Kpdrovf; fjbevTot viov real KaXov 6vto<;. Now, this sentence
is taken out of Plato's second epistle to Dionysius the
Younger ; Ou8' ecrrt o-vyypa/iifjLa II\dT(i)vo(; ovBev, ovS' earac
rd he vvv Xeyofieva ^coKparov^ ecrn, koXov koI viov yeyo-
voTo^. Here's a blunder with a witness, from the Sophist's
ignorance in chronology. For his forged letter of Xenophon
bears date immediately after Socrates's death; but the true
one of Plato, which Xenophon here alludes to, is recenter
by a vast while. For Dionysius came but to the crown
Olymp. cm. 1., which is xxxii. years after the trial of
Socrates.
I must observe one thing more, that by no means should
be omitted. There were formerly more epistles of Xeno-
p Ep. xxii. [See note, p. 198.— D.] i Xenopli. Conviv. p. 87G.
' Lib. V. p. 219. [= II. 343, ed. Schw.—B.}
204 . DISSERTATION UPON THE
phon extant than appear in this collection. A large frag-
ment is cited in Stobseus^® out of his letter to Critoj two
fragments, out of a letter to Sotira;* and two more, out of
one to Lamprocles :^ none of which are found here in Alla-
tius's parcel. Theodoret produces a passage out of a letter
of his to ^schines, wherein he jerks Plato for Ms ambition
and voluptuousness ; to gratify which, he went to Sicily, to
Dionysius's court.^ Eusebius has this passage, and more
out of the same epistle ;^ and the whole is extant in Sto-
baeus.'^ What shall we say ? that the true letters of Xeno-
phon were extant in those days ? or that those too were
a cheat, and belonged to the same volume whence these of
Allatius were taken ? And so, as I observed before, they
will be older than Libanius's time. I am afraid it will be
thought ill manners to question the judgment of Eusebius
and Theodoret. But we know they have made other mis-
takes of a like nature ;y and the very letter which they cite
betrays itself to be a counterfeit. Xenophon, we see, re-
proaches Plato, in a letter to ^schines. If this were true,
it was a most rude affront to the person he writ to, whose
friendship he courts so much in the rest of his letter. For
-^schines himself was guilty of the very same fault, and
is wounded through Plato's side. 'Tis well known, that he
too, as well as Plato and Aristippus and others, made a
voyage to Sicily, and struck in with Dionysius, and that
purely for money and the table.^ Lucian says he was
parasite to the Tyrant;^ and another tells us he liked his
entertainment so well, that he did not stir from him till he
was deposed.^ I would ask any man now, if he can still
believe it a genuine letter, let him have what veneration he
can for the learning of Eusebius ?
' Serm. 81. » Serm. 120, 123. « Serm. 5.
^ ''Epws rvpayyiSos, Koi aurl Ajttjs SmiTTjs 'Zlk^Aiutls yaarphs ayiirpov rpd-
"^ Praep. Evang. xiv. 12. * Serm. 78.
y See Dissert, upon Jo. Malal.
' Laert. et Suidas in ^Esch., Plut. cle Adulat.
* In Parasite. '' Polycritus apud Laert.
EPISTLES OF SOCRATES. 205
In the beginning of this discourse I have said, that I
heard of none that, since the frst publication of these Letters_,
called them into question. But I was shewn to-day (after
mine was in the press), in Bishop Pearson's Vindicice Epp.
Sancti Ignatii, a digression made on purpose against So-
crates 's Epistles.^ I must confess, with some shame, I had
either never read that chapter, or utterly forgot it. But I
am glad now to find that incomparable man both to think
it worth going out of his way to discover this imposture,
and to confirm me in my judgment, by the accession of his
great authority. There is nothing there disagreeing with
what I had said, but that his Lordship allows the Epistle
to ^schines, cited by Eusebius, to be genuine, which I had
endeavoured to convict of a forgery. I refer it to those that
please to read both, whether they think I have just reason to
change my opinion ; especially when I shall tell them, that
not ^schines only, but even Xenophon himself, made a
visit to Dionysius. I have Athenseus*^ for my authority,
a witness beyond all exception. aevo(j)coy yovv 6 rpvXXov
irapa ALovvo-lcpy &c. Xenophon, says he, the son of Gryllus,
when at Dionysius the Sicilian's table, the cup-bearer forced
the company to drink; Pray, says he, Dionysius [speaking
aloud to the Tyrant), if your butler forces wine upon us
against our tvills, why may not your cook as well compel us
to eat ? So that, if we suppose the letter genuine, the
absurdity will double itself, both parties being guilty of the
very same thing that is charged upon Plato.
" Par. II. p. 12, 13. ^ Lib. x. p. 427. [=iv. 64. ed. Schw.—B.^
OF
EURIPIDES'S EPISTLES.
*Tis a bold and dangerous venture to attack Euripides's
Letters ; since a very learned Greek professor* has so pas-
sionately espoused them, that he declares it to be great
impudence, and want of all judgment,^ to question the truth of
them. I do not care to meddle with controversy upon such
high wagers as those : but, if I may have leave to give my
opinion, without staking such valuable things as modesty
and good sense upon it, I am very ready to speak my mind
candidly and freely.
I. There are only five epistles now extant ascribed to
Euripides ', but without doubt there were formerly more of
them ; as we have seen just before, that we have not now the
whole set of Xenophon's Letters, Neither can we suppose
a sophist of so barren an invention, as to have his fancy
quite cramped and jaded with poor five. We have here a
peculiar happiness, which we wanted in the rest, to know
whom we are obliged to for the great blessing of these
Epistles. ApoUonides, that writ a treatise Tlepl Kare-^evo--
/JL6V7](; ^Ia-TopLa<;, About falsified History, says, ^^ one Sabirius
^^ PoUo^ forged them, the same man that counterfeited the
" Letters of Aratus." This we are told by the writer of
Aratus's life, no unlearned author ; who does not contradict
* [Joshua Barnes. — D.]
'^ Perfrictae frontis et [aut. — D.] judicii imminuti. Eurip. edit. Cantab,
par. ii. p. 523.
^ 'Safiipios IlSWcav.
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 207
him about these of Euripides ; but for Aratus's^ he says,
that, bating this Apollonides, every body else believed them
to be genuine. I cannot pass any judgment of what I never
saw, for Aratus's Letters are not now to be had ; but if they
were no better than these of our tragedian, I should, in spite
of the common vogue, be of ApoUonides's mind; and I
wish that book of his were now extant. One may know, by
the manner of the name, that this Sabirius Polio was a
Roman ; but I do not find such a family as the Sabirii, nor
such a surname as Polio. What if we read Sabinius, or
Sabidius PoUio ?
Non amo te, Sabidi ; nee possum dicere quare.*
If that Sabidius in Martial was the forger of our Epistles,
though the poet could give none, yet I can give a very good
reason why I do not love him.
But the learned advocate for the Letters makes several
exceptions against the testimony of Apollonides. As, first,
that we may /airly infer from it, that a great many others
believed them to be true. Alas ! how many more, both
ancients and moderns, believed Phalaris's to be true ! If
that argument would have done the work, I might have
spared this Disse^^tation, But prove that these Letters now
extant are the same that were forged by Sabirius. Commend
to me an argument that, like a flail, there's no fence against
it. Why, had we been told too that he made Phalaris's
Epistles; yet how could we prove, unless some passages
were cited out of them, that they were the same that we
have now? But though I cannot demonstrate that these
are Sabirius's, yet I'll demonstrate them by and by to be an
imposture; and I hope then it will be no injustice to lay
them at his door. But 'tis an evidence that the true Epistles
of Euripides were once extant, because somebody thought it
not improper to father false ones upon him. Now, I should
think the very contrary ; that the cuckoo does not lay her
[* Martial. Epigr. I. 33.— D.]
208 DISSERTATION UPON THE
egg where the nest is already full. At least, I am resolved
I'll never go a book-hunting after the genuine Epistles of
Phalaris, though somebody has cheated the world with a
parcel of false ones.
II. It might easily have happened, though we suppose
the Letters spurious, that, in so small a 'number as five,
there could be nothing found to convict them by. But so
well has the writer managed his business, that every one of
them has matter enough to their own detection. The last
and principal of them is dated from Macedonia, in answer to
some reproaches that were cast upon him at Athens, for his
going to Archelaus. As for what you write from Athens,
says he, pray know, that I value no more mv vvv uiyddcov rj
MeaaTo<; Xeyei, what Agatho or Mesatus now say, than I
formerly did what Aristophanes babbled. Here we have the
poet Agatho (for without doubt he means the poet, since he
has joined him with Aristophanes,) residing at Athens, and
blaming Euripides for living with Archelaus. Now, could
any thing be more unfortunate for our Sabirius Polio than
the naming of this man ? For even this Agatho himself was
then with Archelaus, in Euripides's company;*^ besides that
they were always good friends and acquaintance, not there
only, but before at Athens.
But perhaps some may suspect it was another Agatho, a
comic poet, that was meant in the letter, and not the famous
Agatho the tragedian.^ This I find to be the opinion of the
learned person above named. But I will make bold to
expunge this comic Agatho out of the catalogue of mankind.
For he sprung but up, like a mushroom, out of a rotten
passage in Suidas, who, after he has spoken of Agatho the
tragic poet, has these words, /cw/xw^oTroto? HcoKpdTov<; Bl-
SaaKoXov ifcco/JLwBeoTO Be et9 OrfKvTrjTa : which his inter-
preters (Wolfius and Portus) thus translate, fuit et alius
Agatho, commdiarum scriptor. But there's nothing \)k.efuit
c ^lian. ii. 21. and xiii. 4. Plut. in Apoph. Schol. Aristopli. BoTpax-
d Vita Eurip. p. 29. ed. Cant.
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 209
et alius in the original, but the same Agatho is here meant
that was mentioned before. This they might have known
from the following words, eKcofKpSeoro Be et? OrjXvrTjTa, he
was libelled for his effeminateness. For whom can that
belong to but to Agatho the tragedian, whom Lucian ranks
with Cinyras and Sardanapalus ?^ Do but read Aristo-
phanes*s Thesmophoriazusce, and you'll see him ridiculed
upon that score for some pages together. The Scholiast
upon Bdrpa^oo of the same poet; !A.<ydOcov, says he, ovro<i
rpayiKOf; Troirjrrj^; iirl fJuaXaKLa Bce/SdWero. Here, you see,
it is expressly said, Agatho the tragedian was traduced as
effeminate. ^ It follows presently in the same Scholiast,
OvTO<; Be 6 'AydOcov /cco/JUMBoiroib^i rev ^(OKpdrov^ BiBacr-
KoXov ; where we have the very words of Suidas apj)lied to
the tragedian ; outo<;, this same Agatho was a comedian,
Socrates being his master ; not another, as the translators of
Suidas interpolate the text. But is it true, then, that our
spruce Agatho writ comedies too ? Nothing like it ; though
the learned Gregorius Gyraldus affirms it, from this very
passage.^ *Tis a mere oscitation of our Scholiast, and of
Suidas, that gaped after him; the occasion and ground of
the story being nothing but this. Plato's Convivium was in
the house of this Agatho : in the conclusion of which,^^
Socrates is introduced, proving to Agatho and Aristo-
phanes, that it belonged to the same m,a7i, and required the
same parts, to write both comedy and tragedy ; and that he
that was a skilful tragedian was also a comedian. Hence
have our wise grammarians dressed up a fine story, that
Agatho was a comedian, and of Socrates 's teaching. And
now, I hope, I have evidently proved the thing that I pro-
posed, to the utter disgrace of our admired Epistles.
III. Euripides, we have seen, did not value one farthing
what either Agatho or Mesatus^ said of him. I would gladly
* Ylava$p6v riva ^apSaud-rruXov, ^ Kivvpap, ^ avrhv 'Ayddcaya rhv rrjs rpaycp^
Bias iirepacrrov . . iroirjrijv. Rhet. Praec.
f P. 133. [Schol to ed. Bekk. 367.— D.] ? Dialog, de Poet.
'' P. 336. Thv T^xvp Tpaytfhoirothv 6vTa Kal KWficp^oiroihv elvai. ' fj MeVaros.
VOL. II. 2 E
210 DISSERTATION UPON THE
be better acquainted with this same Mesatus, for I never
once met with him but here in this letter. He must be a
brother of the stage too^ by the company he is placed in.
But what was the matter ? Was he so hissed and exploded,
that he durst never shew his head since ? I have a fancy he
was of the same family with Phalaris's tw^o fairy tragedians,
Aristolochus and Lysinus :J and that these Letters too are
akin to those of the Tyrant. But perhaps you'll say this
Mesatus is but a fault in the copies. It may be so : and I
could help you to another tragedian of those times not
altogether unlike him; one Melitus, the same that after-
wards accused Socrates; who was likely enough to hate
Euripides, that was the philosopher's friend. Or I could
invent some other medicine for the place : but let those look
to that, that believe the Epistles true, or think them worth
the curing.
The very learned defender of the Epistles, one of a sin-
gular industry and a most diffuse reading, has proposed
some objections against the Letters, communicated to him
by a private hand. That private person,* at the request of
^ Epist. Ixiii. and xcvii.
[* i. e. Bentley. The letter which he wrote to Barnes has been printed
(with a few slight inaccuracies) in Mus. Grit. ii. 405. It is now given from the
original, in the British Museum, Add. MSS. 6911. p. 34.
" Sir, « At the Palace in Worcester, Feb, 22, 169|.
" That the Epistles which are ascribed to Euripides are suppo-
sititious, I ever believed since I first read them, and 'tis likely shall continue
to do so still ; but as for arguments to prove them spurious, perhaps there are
none that will convince any person that doth not discover it by himself. 'Tis
always so, when there are no external proofs and testimonies to be had ; but
the verdict must be given from the intrinsic evidence. Then every man
passeth his own judgment according to his genius and proficiency : and there
can be no final determination of such matters without an infallible judge. A
late ingenious authorf admires the Epistles of Phalaris above any other prose
in that language ; and makes it an argument for the decay of human wit,
because Homer and that work are the ancientest and the best also in their
kinds. Now I would ask him, what dialect they wrote and spoke in Sicily ?
[t Sir William Temple.— D.]
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 211
the Editor, imparted his opinion to him in a very short
letter : to which he had no answer returned, till he found it,
with some surprise, brought upon the stage in print, and his
reasons routed and triumphed.^ But let us see if we can
'' Eurip, edit. Cant. p. 27. [xxvii.— D.] and 523.
and if Stesichorus (tlie supposed great acquaintance of Phalaris) did not use
the Doric ? I believe if this had come into his mind, it might have convinced
him that tliey could not be genuine. But what if we had wanted this argu-
ment? there had been nothing else to be done, but to let him enjoy his own
opinion sine rivalL If a man cannot perceive by himself that they are the
work of some sophist, he may acquiesce perhaps in another man's judg-
ment, but he cannot be convinced and understand that they are so. The
sham Letters of Theano and Heraclitus may be detected the same way ; for
the first wrote in Doric, and the latter in Ionic. Well, you say, Euripides's
are purely Attic, and therefore must not be rejected on that account. To
wave any controversy about so nice a matter, suppose that they be so. So are
Socrates's as much ; those also ascribed to Themistocles and Diogenes ; yet
who can believe them to be really theirs ? Neither will the Ionic dialect of
those that are fathered upon Hippocrates and Democritus persuade me that
they are genuine.
" All these are the forgeries and impostures of the Sophistae : they searched
a little into the history of the persons that they designed to personate, and so
adapted their letters to their circumstances. This was in great credit among
them, to follow the character of the person well, and suit the affairs of their
times. A man got reputation by it, and it was owned at first by the true
authors ; but in time they were forgot, and the personated writers kept the
titles. They made it an exercise to counterfeit thus, as much as Ovid did
when he wrote Epistles in the names of heroes and heroines. So Mithridates
tells you in the prologue to Brutus's Epistles, that he made feigned answers
from the persons and cities that Brutus had wrote to ; though any man that
hath vovs and sagacity will perceive that there is a double and triple sham in
that story : and, sir, as when I read a tragedy of Euripides, I could tell (with-
out any knowledge of the writer) that they are but representations, and not
the true actions and discourses of the persons in the drama, because I could
know that men in those circumstances could not talk at that rate ; so, methinks,
by the very Letters themselves I presently discern that 'tis not Euripides him-
self that here discourseth, but a puny sophist that acts him.
" And it may be that those very passages from whence you take arguments
to overthrow Meursius do give me my grounds of suspicion that they are illegiti-
mate. As, that they are all written to Archelaus, Sophocles, and Cephisophon,
which any pedant might know were persons concerned in Euripides's story, I
take to be magnum signum. And for the argument and subject of them; in
212 DISSERTATION UPON THE
rally them again : perhaps they may keep their ground in a
second engagement.
IV. Our friend Sabirius Pollo^ to make the whole work
throughout worthy of himself, has directed this same letter
those to Archelaus we have the refusing a great present of money, and, instead of
money, begging the lives and freedom of some that were condemned to die. Were
not these and such-like the common themes of such scholastics and ap^raXSyoi ?
And 'tis pretty that those prisoners and their father, though the €vyev€<TTaroi
of their country, had no names at all, or else concealed them from their bene-
factor Euripides, so that he petitioned indefinitely for some young men of Pella.
This Sophista was a great dunce : some service must be done to the Pellaeans
by all means, because he had read that Euripides lay buried at Pella ; but why
could not he invent some names for them, as easy as invent the whole story ?
But the Letter to Sophocles is most admirable. Sophocles his contemporary
and SfiSrcxt^os must certainly be a correspondent. But because they had no
penny post at- Athens, therefore a letter must be written to him while he was
absent from thence. Now, he knew that Sophocles was one of the Athenian
generals in the war with the Samians, and that \\6 touched at Chios (in Athe-
naeus, p. 602.), therefore thither a letter is directed; and let us hear about
what ? condoling that he had lost some plays in shipwreck. Alas, alas ! so
Terence lost an 108 plays in the sea, and himself too. But our sham author
had forgot Sophocles's errand ; that he was now the general, and not the poet ;
and if he had had some plays beforehand, he would not have carried them to
the war ; for I presume he did not use them, as our soldiers do quires of
paper, for a defence against bullets. But why must Euripides of all folks be
concerned for their loss, his antagonist and emulator ? Ka\ tttcox^s tttuxv
^[^oi/eei], Kal aoiBhs aoiS^. You may see a lampoon of one against the other in
Athenaeus. If these plays had been preserved, they would have been acted
against those of Euripides, as many before had been : when sometimes one got
the victory, and sometimes the other ; and it was scarce thought a less prize
to be crowned poet victor at the Dionysian feasts, than conqueror at the
Olympian games. And the pleasantest of all is that to. oXkoi 'iadi Kara vovv /col
liaa iireffreiKas eirtTeATj 6vTa. It seems they are such very great cronies, that
one commits the care of his domestic affairs to the other. Mihi quidem non
hercle fit verisimile, as Davus says. But have we any better luck in the letter
to Cephisophon out of Macedonia? This Cephisophon was thought once to
help Euripides in writing plays ; but at last he was taken in bed with his wife :
for which poor Euripides was so jeered upon the stage by the comedians, that
it is thought for this very reason he left Athens, and went to Archelaus. And
yet this Cephisophon must be the man that he corresponds with from thence.
And the worthy occasion of writing is, to justify his leaving Athens against the
calumnies of his enemies. And what have we here, but more refusing of money,
some thousands of pounds ; some stuff against covetousness, &c. €k KtjkvOov tS>p <ro-
tftiffTwv; the prating of Aristophanes against him (ay, to be sure, do not omit that),
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 213
to Cepliisophon, who was Euripides's actor for his plays.
For he had often heard of Cephisophon, and so he would
not let him pass without a share in his Epistles. But he
should have minded time and history a little better, if he
hoped to put himself upon us for the author he mimics.
'Tis true Cephisophon and our poet were once mighty dear
acquaintance : but there fell out a foul accident, that broke
off the friendship. For Euripides caught him acting for
him, not upon the stage, but in private with his wife.
Which business taking wind abroad, and making a perpetual
jest, w^as one of the main reasons why he left Athens, and
went to Macedonia. And is it likely, after all this, that our
poet should write a letter to him, as soon as he got thither ?
that he should use him as his most intimate friend, nearer
to him than his own children ? I know there are some so
fond of our Epistles, that they value all this as nothing.
Cephisophon is so much in their books, that, whatsoever is
said against him, must be calumny and detraction. Give me
an advocate that will stick close, and hang upon a cause.
By being their Editor, he is retained for the Letters, and
that surely he cannot desire riches now, when his ow9i dear mother was dead, (ay,
there's an argument indeed ; it would have been all for the sake of gammer
Clito the old herb-woman) ; and, good man, it forebodes him that he shall lay
his bones iv yi} fiapfidptf), and never see Athens again. Well done, Sophist,
thou knewest that he was worried there by a pack of hounds, and so wouldst
give us that hint
" But, sir, you now see what 1 said at first, that I believe indeed that they
are spurious Letters ; but arguments to convince another man I have none.
Therefore, when you confute Meursius, I desire that you would not name me ;
for I do not pretend to assert, but only to believe, they are shams. I am glad
to hear all the fragments are prepared : they will make a little folio themselves,
and will much commend your edition. Sir, I am yours to command,
« RICH. BENTLEY.
** Sir, I am very glad, if any thing that I have published can be serviceable
to your design : and shall count it an honour to be mentioned in so great a
work. Papers ready, I have none, and I cannot here make any review, being
absent from my books of that kind, and engaged in other affairs : and 'tis
likely yourself may have prevented me in most things. So that I can only
wish you good success." D.]
214 DISSERTATION UPON THE
therefore he must not desert his client. But why shall no
testimony be allowed that touches Cephisophon? Are not
Aristophanes and his commentator,^ and Suidas, and Thomas
Magister,"^ all lawful and good evidence ? And is there one
single witness against them, in his behalf? Not a writer is
now extant that mentions his name, but what tells the story
of him ; and if we must not believe them, we shall want new
evidence to prove there ever was such a man.
V. In a disquisition of this nature, an inconsistency in
time and place is an argument that reaches every body. All
will cry out, that Phalaris, &c. are spurious, when they see
such breaches upon chronology. But, I must profess, I
should as fully have believed them so, though the writers
had escaped all mistakes of that kind. For, as they w^ere
commonly men of small endowments that affected to make
these forgeries, a great man disdaining so base and ignoble a
work ; so they did their business accordingly, and expressed
rather themselves than those they acted. For they knew
not how to observe decorum in a quality so different from
their own ; like the silly player that would represent Her-
cules, tall indeed, but slender, without bulk and substance.
Let us see the conduct of this author. In the first letter,
Archelaus sends Euripides some money ; and our poet, as if
his profession were like a monastic vow of poverty, utterly
refuses it. And why, forsooth, does he refuse it ? Why,
it was too great a sum for his condition. Yes, to be sure ;
when a sophist makes a present, the greatest sum costs no
more than the least. But it was difficult to be kept, and the
fingers of thieves would itch at it. Alas, for him ! with the
expense of one bag, out of many, he might have provided
a strong box, and new doors and locks to his house. But
why could he not accept a little of it ? Even Socrates him-
self, and Xenocrates, took a modicum out of presents, and
returned the rest again." And is a poet more self-denying
1 P. 167, 184. "» In Vita Eurip.
" Laertius, in Socrat. et Xenoc.
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 215
than the most mortiiied of the philosophers ? But the best
of all is, that Clito, the king's chief minister, threatened to be
angry with him, if he refused it. What, could Clito expect
beforehand that the present would be refused ? The most
sagacious statesman, sure, that ever monarch was blest with !
Alexander could not foresee such a thing ; but was mightily
surprised when Xenocrates would not receive some money
that he sent him : " What," says he, " has Xenocrates no
^^ friends to give it to, if he need it not himself ?"o As for
our poet, he had friends, I assure you, but all of his own
kidney, 7nen of contentment, that would not finger a penny of
it, TO avTapK€<; y/ncv re koL tol<; (J)[\ol<; nrapov. What would
one give to purchase a set of such acquaintance ? And yet,
I know not how, in the fifth letter their appetites were come
to 'em ; for in that, Euripides himself, from Archelaus's
court, shared some presents among them ; and we hear not
one word but that all was well taken.
VI. The rest of this letter is employed in begging pardon
for the two sons of a Pellman old fellow,'^ who had done
something to deserve imprisonment. And the third and
fourth are commonplaces of thanks for granting this request.
Now, besides that the whole business has the air and visage
of sophistry, for this same is a mighty topic too in Phalaris's
Epistles, ^tis a plain violation of good sense to petition for a
man without telling his name : as if Pella, the royal city,
had no old man in it but one. How can such an address
be real ? But to this they give a double answer ; that a
sophist, if this was one, could not be at a loss for a name :
he might easily have put one here ; as hereafter he names
Amphias, Lapretes, and others. But the point is not, what
he might have done, but what he has done. He might have
named some other poet at Athens, and not Agatho, that was
then in Macedonia. All those mistakes and blunders, of
Phalaris and the rest, might easily have been avoided, had
the writers had more history and discretion. But he had
" Plut. Apoph. p YliWaios yepwv.
216 DISSERTATION UPON THE
vrrit a letter before this,^ about the same business ; and there,
we must suppose, he had mentioned his name. This indeed
would be something, if it would carry water. But, though
the Sophist has told you so, do not rashly believe him.
For it is plain, that pretended letter must have been sent
to Archelaus before this vast present came from him. Why
then did not the same messenger that brought the money
bring the grant too of his petition ? Would the king, that
did him this mighty honour and kindness, deny him at the
same time that small and just request? For the crime of
those prisoners was surely no heinous business. Had it
been a design to assassinate the king, he would never have
interceded for them. The charge against them was a venial
fault ; or, were it the blackest accusation, their innocence
at least would clear them ; for our poet himself tells us they
had done nobody any wrongs
VII. The second Epistle is to Sophocles, whom he
makes to be shipwrecked at the island Chios ; the vessel
and goods being lost, but all the men saved. That Sopho-
cles was at Chios, we are informed by Ion Chius the trage-
dian,^ who relates a long conversation of his there. If our
author here means the same voyage, as probably he does,
he is convicted of a cheat. For then Sophocles was com-
mander of a fleet with Pericles in the Samian war, and went
to Chios, and thence to Lesbos, for auxiliary forces.* But
our mock Euripides never thinks of his public employment ;
but advises him to return home at his leisure, as if it had
been a voyage for diversion. Yes, says his advocate, but
why might he not be at Chios another time, though nobody
speak of it, about private affairs ? Yes ; why not indeed ?
For Sophocles was so courteous and good-natured a man,^
that, to do our letter-monger a kindness, he would have
gone to every island in the Archipelago. But 'tis hard
1 npSrepov €7r6(rT6tAo/ieV (Toi. •" OvShv a5iKe7v iolKOffiv.
* Athen. xiii. 603. [V. 185. ed Schw.—T).']
* Ibid, and Thucyd. i. 75. " Ion Chius, ib. Aristoph. Ranis.
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 217
though, that a good ship must be lost, and our poet swim
for't, to oblige the little Sophist. For I fear the vessel was
cast away purely to bring in the great loss of Sophocles's
plays.^ Alas, alas ! Could he not go over the water, but he
must needs take his plays with him ? And must Euripides,
of all men, lament the loss of them, whose own plays must,
probably, have truckled to them at the next feast of Bac-
chus ? Must Euripides, his rival, his antagonist, tell him,
that his orders about family affairs were executed;^ as if he
had been employed by him as steward of his household ?
VIII. The fifth Letter is a long apology for his going
to Macedonia. ^^ Can they think,'" says he, " that I came
^' hither for love of money ? I should have come then
'^ when I was younger, and not now, to lay my bones in
" a barbarous country,^ and make Archelaus richer by my
'' death. '" I observed it as no small mark of a sophist,
that our author foretells he was to die in Macedonia, where,
we know, he was worried to death by a pack of dogs. But
what wonder^ say they, if an old man of seventy 'predict his
own death ? I do not question but our poet might presage
himself to be mortal. But 'twas an odd guess, to hit upon
the time and place when and where he was to die. For
what ground was there to be so positive ? The letter, we
see, carries date just after his arrival at court. He had, as
yet, had very short trial whether all things would continue
to his liking. And we have no reason to suppose that he
came thither for good and all, never to see Athens again.
Might he not, by some accident, or supplanted by some
rival, lose the king's favour? Or, was he sure his life
would last as long as his own ? 'Twas a violent death, and
not mere age and craziness, that took our poet away at last :
and he knew Sophocles to be then alive and hearty, and
making of plays still, that was fourteen years older than
himself. 7n these circumstances, to be so positive about his
^ 'H tripX TO Spafiara avfKpopd. ^*' To olfKoi tadi koto vovv . . . vvra.
* "iva it/ fiapfidpcf y^ atroQavufiiv.
VOL. II. 2 F
218 DISSERTATION UPON THE
dying there, was a prophecy as bold as any of the Pythian
Oracle. But, say they, he gives a hint too, that Archelaus
might be deposed : which a sophist would not say, because it
never came to pass. That was true, and came to pass ev ery
day, that he might be deposed : and he does not suggest
that it actually would be so; for he expressly says, God
ivould always stand by the king, and support him.y But
indeed, as they inter^Dret a passage there,* it looks as if he
had foreboded real mischief; OvBe dvcdarj, on olyeTai o
Kacpo<; eh dvOpcoTTCov evepyealav, dveOeh cj^povSof; rjhrj.
Which last words they translate ubi jam destitutus fueris et
abdicatus, '^ when you are deserted and deposed/' But,
with all due submission, I will assume the freedom of
changing the version. For dveOeh and (jipovSo^; belong to
the word tcacpo^, and not to Archelaus : and the distinction
is to be put thus ; on ol')(^eTaL 6 Kaipb<;, eh dvOpwiroiv
evepyealav dveOeh, <f)povSo(; r}hrj, tempus ad exercendam
benignitatem concessum ; '' You will not grieve that the time
" is gone past recalling, which was granted you by God to
" do good to mankind in." This, I suppose, is now clear
enough, and Archelaus is in no danger of being deposed by
this sentence. But let us examine our author's next words ;
to make Archelaus richer by my death,^ A very good thought
indeed, and worthy of Euripides. But pray, what could the
king get by his death? Would the poet be compelled to
make him his heir, as some were forced by the Roman
emperors ? Or, would the king seize upon his estate, and
defraud the true inheritor ? If the poet had such suspicions
as these, he would never have gone to him. But though he
had left all to him at his death, what would the king have
been richer for him ? For surely Euripides, having settled
affairs at home, carried no great stock with him to Mace-
donia, unless he thought Archelaus would make him pay for
his board. He might well expect to be maintained by the
^ HapeWat txkv del (o 0ebs), /cat (TT^ffeTOt KarSiriv. [Ep. iv. — D.]
[* In Ep. iv.— D.]
' "lya irXeiova 'Apx(^o.<f KaraKirroifxiv xpi\iJ.aTa, [Ep. v. — D.]
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 219
king's liberality; as he found it in the event.^ The king,
therefore, were he his sole heir, would only have received
again what himself had given before. Nay, even a great
part of that had been lost beyond recovery. For our poet,
by the very first messenger, had packed more away to
Athens, that Archelaus had given him, than all that he
carried with him could amount to, perhaps than all he was
worth before.
IX. But he has more still to say to those that blamed
him for leaving Athens. " If riches," says he, '^ could
'^ draw me to Macedonia, why did I refuse these very same
'' riches^ when I was young or middle-aged,^ and while my
" mother was alive, for whose sake alone, if at all, I should
" have desired to be rich?" He alludes here to the first
Letter (and perhaps to others now lost), where he refuses an
ample sum of money sent him by Archelaus. Alas, poor
Sophist ! 'twas ill luck he took none of the money, to fee his
advocates lustily; for this is like to be a hard brush. For
how could the poet, while young or middle-aged, refuse
presents from Archelaus ? since, according to most chro-
nologers,*^ he was about seventy, and, by the most favour-
able account, above sixty, when Archelaus came to the
crown.
X. But what a dutiful child had mother Clito the herb-
woman ! For her sake alone her son Euripides could wish to
be rich, to buy her oil to her salads. But what had the old
gentleman the father done, that he wishes nothing for his
sake ? And how had his three sons® offended him, that they
have no share in his good wishes ? 'Tis a fine piece of
conduct that our Sophist has shewn. He had read some-
thing of our poet's mother, for she was famous in old
comedy for her lettuce and cabbage; but having heard
nothing of his sons, he represents him, through all his
* Ep. V. ^ Thu avrhv tovtov ttKovtov. [Ep. v. — D.]
*^ Neot T6 Kol iniffoi T^v r]\iKlau.
•^ Diod. Sicul. et alii apud Athen. 1. v. p. 217. [= II. 337. ed. Schw.—B.]
^ Suidas, Tho. Magister, &g.
220 DISSERTATION UPON THE
Letters, as if he had no children. As here, the only motive
to desire wealth is his care of the old woman ; and when she
is supposed to be dead, all his concern is only for his
friends. In the first Letter, he and his friends^ are such
contented men, that they refuse the royal gift. Not a word
of the three young sparks, who, 'tis hard to think, were so
self-denying. In the fifth, he keeps none of the king's
presents by him, but sends all away to Athens^ to be shared
among his friends and companions.^ How, again^ would
the young gentlemen look, to be forgot thus by their own
father ? If it be suspected, in favour of the Letters, that the
sons might be all dead before, I can soon put a stop to that,
from a good evidence, Aristophanes, who, in a play made
the very year of our poet's death, mentions the sons as then
alive .^
XI. The Romans may brag, as much as they please, of
Mecaenas and others ; but of all patrons of learning, Arche-
laus of Macedonia shall have my commendations. Within
two or three days after Euripides's arrival, he makes him a
present of forty talents.^ Which was a greater sum of
money than our poet could ever have raised before, though
all that he had should have been sold four times over. The
great Themistocles was not worth three talents before he
meddled with public affairs ;J and two talents was thought a
good portion for a substantial man's daughter.^ Alexander
the Great, when he was lord of the world, sent Xenocrates
the philosopher a present of thirty talents, or, as others say,
fifty, which Cicero calls a vast sum, especially for those
times.^ But Alexander's natural munificence was stimulated
and exalted to that extraordinary act of bounty, out of a
pique he had to Aristotle."^ How generous, then, nay, how
profuse, was Archelaus, that, out of his little and scanty
' 'HpHv T€ Koi To7s <\>i\ois. ^ ToLS . . kraipoLS /col eTTiTTjSetotS'.
^ Bdrpaxoi, p. 184. edit. Basil, [v. 1404. ed. Bekk.—D.']
» Ep. V. J Plut. Themist. ^ Terent. Heaut.
' Cicero, Tusc. v. Pecunia temporibus illis, Athenis prsesertim, maxima.
'" Laert. in Arist.
EPISTLES OF EURIPIDES. 221
revenue, could give as much as his great successor in the
midst of the Persian treasures ? But all this is spoiled again,
when we consider, 'tis a sophist's present; who is liberal,
indeed, of his paper notes, but never makes solid payment.
And now I suppose it will be thought no great matter,
whether Sabirius Polio, as ApoUonides affirms, or any other
unknown sophist, have the honour of the Epistles. I will
take my leave of him and them, after I have done the same
kindness to ApoUonides that I did to Sabirius. For, as I
read the name of the one I!a^iBio<; IIoWlcov, instead of
^a^LpLo<; rioWeov, so, for ^A7roWcovt8'r]<; 6 K7](p6v<;, I dare
make bold to substitute ^ AiroXkodvlhrj^; 6 NcKa€v<i, The
former was never heard of but here. This latter is men-
tioned by Laertius, Harpocration, and others. He writ
several books, and dedicated one of them to Tiberius.^ The
time, therefore, agrees exactly with this emendation; for,
living in that emperor's days, he might well cite a Roman
author, Sabidius Pollio. But, to take away all manner of
scruple, this very book About falsified History is ascribed to
ApoUonides Nicenus by Ammonius;° ^A7roW(oviB7j<^, says
he, 6 NiKa€v<; iv rw rplro) irepl KaTeyjrevcrfjLevcov; just as the
writer of Aratus's Life* says, '^TroA-Xajv/S?;? o jK7;<^6U9 iv tm
oySoM irepl fcare'yjreva/jLev'rjf; 'l€rTOpia<;,
^ Laert. in Timone. ° V. KaTo//crj<rts. De Differ. Vocab.
[* Arat. ii. 433. ed. Buhle.—D.]
OF
iESOP'S FABLES.
I COULD easily go on, and discover to you many more im-
postures of this kind, the Epistles of Anacharsis, Heraclitus,
Democritus, Hippocrates, Diogenes, Crates, and others. But
perhaps I may be exhorted^ hereafter to put this Disserta-
tion into Latin, with large additions : till which time I will
adjourn the further discourse upon those several authors;
and proceed now to the last thing proposed, The Fables of
yEsop,
And here I am glad to find a good part of the work
done ready to my hand. For Monsieur Bachet, S. de Me-
ziriac, has ^vrit The Life of JEsop, in French ; which book,
though I could never meet with it, I can guess from the
great learning of the author, known to me by his other
works, to have in a manner exhausted the subject. Vava-
sor too, De Ludicrd Dictione, ascribes the present Fables
to Maximus Planudes, and not to ^sop himself. See also
a great deal upon this head in the late Historical Dictionary
of Mr. Bayle. All which make me look upon Sir W. T.'s
mighty commendation of the JEsopean Fables now extant,
which is the occasion of this treatise, to be an unhappy
paradox, neither worthy of the great author, nor agreeable
to the rest of his excellent book. For, if I do not much
deceive myself, I shall soon make it appear, that of all the
compositions of the ^sopic Fables, these that we have now
[* See p. 177 and 181 of this vol.— D.]
FABLES OF ^ESOP. 223
left US are both the last and the worst. Though I do not
intend a set discourse ; but only a few loose things, that I
fancy may have escaped the observation of others.
I. 'Tis very uncertain if ^sop himself left any fables
behind him in writing:* the old man in Aristophanes*
learned his fables in conversation, and not out of a book ;
AlacoTTLKov yeXoLOv y ^v^apiriKov
"^flv €iJ,ad€<; iv rS avfjUTroatq)
There's another passage in the same poet,^ OvS' Aiaoairov
7r€7rdTi]Ka<; ; which Suidas,*^ and from him Erasmus, Scali-
ger, &c. affirm to be used proverbially; You have not read
so much as JEsop (spoken of idiots and illiterates). From
whence one might conclude that JEsop wrote his own
Fables, which were in every body's hands. But it plainly
appears from the poet himself, that it is not a proverbial
[* " ^sopum ipsum fabulas soluta oratione scriptas reliquisse cur dubite-
" mus non video. Harum nonnullas etiam hodie, quoad materiam, superesse ex
" veterum testimoniis satis constat" Tyrwhitt, Diss, de Bahrio, p. 25., where
is the following note : " Dolendum est magnum Bentleium Dissertationem
" suam de ^sopo eo modo quo illam de Phalaride non retractavisse. Multa
'* quae hodi6 obscura sunt in hac materia sine dubio illustria fecisset singularis
" ea, qua in hisce litteris pollebat, eruditio et sagacitas. Sed ille, adversaries
" Dissertatione secunda Phalaridea, velut fulmine, prostravisse contentus, k
" pugna impari indignabundus recessit. NonnuUa igitur in Dissertatione
" iEsopea reliquit vir maximus, quae, si secundas curas adhibuisset, nisi fallor,
" mutavisset. Tale est argumentum illud, quo probaturus est ^sopi fabulas,
" tempore Socratis, scriptas non exstitisse, quia scilicet Socrates, qui aliquas
" ex illis metrice expressit, * non ait, se usum fuisse lihro fahularum ; sed,
" Scripsi, inquit, wv rjirKTrdfiriv, quas noveram, et primus in memoriam revocare
" potui.' Verba Socratis sunt ap. Platon. in Phaedone : otts irpox^ipovs eJxov
" KoX TjviardnTjv fiidovs tov Aiffdirov, tovtoov iTrolrjcra, oTs •yrpd^TOis eVeTu%oj'. Sed
" nemo cert6 concluserit, librum iEsopi fabulas continentem nusquam exsti-
" tisse, ex eo quod Socrates, in carcere positus et libris omnibus, ut verisimile
" est, destitutus, ciim fabulas unam et alteram {acpoa-idKrews x^P^^> "* ipse ait)
" metris claudere instituisset, ex memoria eas et non ex libro hauserit." —
" The fact seems to be," says Bishop Blomfield, " that iEsop himself never
" committed his fables to writing, but that a collection had been made of them
" before the time of Socrates." Mus. Grit. I. 408.— D.]
" In Vespis, p. 357. [= v. 1259. ed. Bekk.—D.]
^ In Avibus, p. 387. [= v. 471. ed. Bekk.—D.] c narrjffai.
224 DISSERTATION UPON THE
saying : for, when one had said, he never heard before thai
birds were older than the earth; the other tells him, he is
unlearned, and unacquainted with jEsop ; who said, '^ that
" the lark was the first of things ; and she, when her father
'' died, (after he had laid five days unburied, because the
^' earth was not yet in being) at last buried him in her own
" head." Now, what is there here like a proverb ? But
pray take notice, that this fable is not extant in our pre-
sent collection ; a good testimony that ours are not of the
Phrygian's o\\ti composing.
I will mention another place of our poet ; that I may, on
this occasion, correct a gross error of the Scholiast. 'Tis
extant in Vespis, p. 330. ;*
01 Se Xiyovai, fivOov<; r}fuv, ol S' AlacoTTOv to yeXolov.
Where he interprets Alawirov yeXotoVy of one ^sop, a ridi-
culous actor of tragedy. But our Scholiast himself is more
ridiculous ; if it was he that writ this, and not some trifler,
that foisted it in among the other's annotations. For there
was no ^sop a Greek actor in the days of Aristophanes :
he mistakes him for the famous -^sop in Cicero's time, an
actor of tragedy on the Roman stage, and far from being
ridiculous ;
Qu(B gravis ^sopus, qua doctus Roscius egit.\
But, the ^sop meant by our poet is the Phrygian himself,
whose Fables were called ^e^^^, yeXola : so in the other pas-
sage already cited, AlacoTrcKov yeXocoy. Hesychius, Alacoirov
fyeXola' ovtco<; eXeyov rov^; Alaanrov fivOov^i, Dion Chry-
sosto^,^ speaking of our ^sop, ^H.v€i')(ovTo avrov, says he,
rjBofievot eirl to3 yeXoto) koX Tot<; fjuvdoc'^. Avienus, in his
Preface ; {^sopus), responso Delphici Apollinis monitus, ridi-
CULA orsus est.
II. The first that we know of who essayed to put the
[* V. 5Q(i. ed. Bekk.—B.'] [f Hor. Epist. ii. 1. 82.— D.]
^ Orat. Ixxii. p. 631.
FABLES OF JESOP, 225
j^sojnc Fables into verse was Socrates the philosopher.®
Laertius seems to hint that he did but one fable, and that
with no great success : the beginning of it was this ;
^io-wTTo? iroT eXefe Koplvdcov aarv vefjuovcrc,
Mrj KpLveiv dp€Tr)v XaoSiKO) ao^ly.^
'Tis observable, again, that Socrates does not say he made
use of a book of fables ; but, / wrote, says he, wv yircardfjLrjv,
those that I knew, and that I could first call to mind.f And
this fable too does not appear in our present collection, if
we may gather so much from his naming the Corinthians.
III. After Socrates 's time, Demetrius Phalereus made
A6ya)v Alacdirelcov ^vyaya)yd<i, Collections ofJEsopean Fables;^
which, perhaps, were the first in their kind committed to
writing; I mean, in form of a book. These seem to have
been in prose ; and some, perhaps, may imagine that they
are the same that are now extant. I wish they were ; for
then they would have been well writ, with some genius and
spirit. But I shall demonstrate ours to be of a modern
date; and the composition itself speaks too loud that it is
not Demetrius's.
IV. After him, there was somebody, whose name is now
lost, that made a new edition of the Fables in elegiac verse ;
I find no mention of them but in Suidas, who cites them
often, under the name of MvOoi^ or MvOtKa. I will set
down a few fragments of them ; both to shew that they
belong to the jEsopic Fables, which has not yet been ob-
served, that I know of; and to enable you to judge, whether,
if we could change our modern collection for these, we
should not get by the bargain.
TovveKa rrjv IBlrjv ovti<; oircoTre Bvrjv.S
This belongs to the fable about the two bags that every man
" Plato in Phaedone. Plutarch, de Aud. Poet. Laert. in Socrat.
[* Laert. L 106. ed. Meib.—D.']
[t See Tyrwhitt's remarks, in note, p. 223. of this vol. — D.]
^ Laert. in Demet. « Suidas in Avrj.
VOL. II. 2 G
226 DISSERTATION UPON THE
carries ; one before^, where he puts other men's faults ; an-
other behind him^ where he puts his own. This is men-
tioned by Catullus^ Horace, Phaedrus, Galen, Themistius,
Stobseus, &c. : and it is a blot upon our modern set, that
there it is wanting.*
AlireLval'^ iKdraL^; eptaev ^dTO<^* rj [xev eeiire
Kal yau<; Koi vr}ov<^ Tefivofxevrf^ reXeeiv.^
AlTrecvrjv iXdrrjv ept9 copopev allavXa (f)dcr6ac.
OvBe ol ouS' aWoiV aSe 7rdpSa\t<;, ovveKa Ovfiov
^EfiTrXelrji
And,
And,
And,
TIcKprj jjbiv re "kvKOicnv, drdp ')(^L/jLdpoiai,v dK7]Eij<iM
Some of them, it seems, were all hexameters ;
''06i arv^eXcov iirl irerpodv
^OcrrpaKoevrd re ya>Ta Kal dyKvXa jvla KedaOr)}
'Tis an easy matter to find what fables these pieces relate to ;
and I think they are all extant in the present collection.
V. This, you see by this specimen, was no contemptible
author : and after him came one Babrius, that gave a new
turn of the Fables into choliambics."^ Nobody, that I know
of, mention [s] him, but Suidas, Avienus, and Jo. Tzetzes.
There's one Gabrias,t indeed, yet extant^ that has com-
[* " Libris ^Esopi, qui turn ferebantur, objecit Bentleius, fabulam notis-
" simam de duahis peris in iis non contineri ; quam tamen habet Codex Bodl.
" n. xlix." Tyrwhitt, Diss, de Bahrio {note), p. 29. — D.]
'' Vulgo TeixvofievT]v. ' Id. in AtVet?'^. ^ Id. in ''Adev.
^ Id. 'AktjSitjs. [ \vKois, avTap. Suid. ed. Gaisf. — D.]
^ Id. 2tu(^. [ airh irerpoiv. Suid. ed. Gaisf. — D.] and Schol. Aristoph.
p. 220. [Schol. to ed. Bekk. p. 57.— D.]
«^ Suidas in Ba^pios.
[f Gabrias, or Ignatius, a monk of the ninth century. But let us hear
Tyrwhitt: " Ignatium hunc Babrii fabulas in compendium redigisse supra
" monui, n. 5. quod luculenter confirmat tituhis hie tetrastichis ejus in codice
" Vindobonensi praescriptus ; Bafiplov iv iiriToixf} ixeraypacpev inrh 'lyvariov Ma-
" yiaropos. Fabric. Bihl. Gr. I. 398. ed. 2dae. Atque hinc nomeh Gabriae, qui
FABLES OF iESOP, 227
prised each fable in four sorry iambics. But our Babrius
is a writer of another size and quality; and were his book
now extant^ it might justly be opposed, if not preferred, to
the Latin of Phaedrus. There's a whole fable of his yet pre-
served at the end of Gabrias, of the Swallow and the Night-
ingale. Suidas brings many citations out of him, all which
shew him an excellent poet : as this of the Sick Lion ;
Ota Tt<; vovcTM
Kdjivcov i^el3X7}T, ovk a\r)66<; aaOfialvtcv.^
And that of the Boar,
^pL^a<; Be ^atri/v eKdope ^Q)\dBo<; KOL\r]<;.^
And a great many others.
VI. I need not mention the Latin writers of the Msopean
Fables, Phaedrus, Julius Titianus,? and Avienus ; the two
first in iambic, the last in elegiac : but I shall proceed to
examine those Greek ones now extant, that assume the
name of ^sop himself. There are two parcels of the pre-
sent Fables ; the one, which are the more ancient, cxxxvi.
in number, were first published out of the Heidelberg
Library, by Neveletus, A.D. mdcx. The editor himself
well observed, that they were falsely ascribed to -^sop,
because they mention holy monks. ^ To which I will add
another remark, that there is a sentence out of Job, Tvfjuvol
yap rjXOofjuev at irdvre^, yvfivol ovv dTrekeva-ofjueda, naked ive
all came, and naked shall we return.^ But, because these
" nullus, ut credo, exstitit, opusculo huic adhaesisse suspicor, ciim in quibus-
" dam exemplaribus, errore scribae, Tafiplov pro Bafipiov lectum sit. Qui error
" etiam apud Tzetzem deprehenditur, Chil. viii. 516." Diss, de Babrio {note),
p. 32.— D.]
° Suidas in 'Ao-0/a. [and 'S.-niiKvy^. — D.]
*• Suidas in "E/c^ope. [This line is to be referred to the fable of the Lion,
the Mouse, and the Fox : see Suidas in ^pi^Srpixa, and Tyrwhitt, Diss, de
Babrio, p. 38.— D.]
P Ausonius, Ep. xvi.
1 ii\ep-qfiois Kara 6(hv ixovaxois. Fab. 152.
' See Fab. 288. Job, i. 21.
228 DISSERTATION UPON THE
two passages are in the epimythion, and belong not to the
fable itself, they may justly be supposed to be additions
only, and interpolations of the true book. I shall therefore
give some better reasons to prove they are a recent work.
That they cannot be ^sop's own, the clxxxi. fable is a
demonstrative proof. For that is a story of Demades the
rhetor, who lived above cc. years after our Phrygian's time.
The cxciii. is about Momus's carping at the works of the
gods. There he finds this fault in the bull, that his eyes
ivere not placed in his horns, so as he might see ivhere he
pushed. But Lucian^ (speaking of the same fable) has it
thus, that his horns were not placed right before his eyes.
And Aristotle* has it a third way, that his horns were not
placed about his shoulders, where he might make the strongest
push, but in the tender est part, his head. Again, Momus
blames this in the man, that his <ppive^ did not hang on the
outside of him, so as his thoughts might be seen ; but in
Lucian^ the fault is, that he had not a window in his breast.
I think it probable from hence, that ^sop did not write a
book of his Fables ; for then there would not have been such
a difference in the telling. Or, at least, if these that are
now extant were -^sop's, I should guess, from this specimen,
that Lucian had the better on't, and beat him at his own
play.*
VII. But that they are recenter than even Babrius, who
is himself one of the latest age of good writers,! I discovered
* In Nigrino. * De Part. Anim. 1. iii. p. 54.
" In Hermotimo.
[* " Similiter objecit [see note, p. 226. of this vol.] vir doctissimus fabulam
" CXCIII. (edit. Oxon. 190.) aliter legi quani aut ab Aristotele, de Part. Anivi.
" 1. iii. c. 2. aut k Luciano, in Nigrino, p. 74. et Hermot. p. 759. memoratur, quos
*' etiam ipsos inter se non convenire notat. Haec autem fabula in Cod. Bodl.
** non paulo melius quam in editis exhibetur, et ad mentem Luciani multo pro-
" pius ; ita ut suspicioni locus sit, Aristotelem ad ipsius ^sopi fabulam allusisse,
** Lucianum autem ad eandem ut a Babrio repetita est." Tyrwhitt, Diss, de
Bahrio {note), p. 29. — D.]
[f " Quis ille Babrius, quibus temporibus et locis vixerit, nondum comper-
tum est. Suidas, qui ex opere ejus multa protulit, de ipso haec pauca notat.
FABLES OF iESOP. 229
by this means. I observed in 'em several passages that
were not of a piece with the rest, but had a turn and com-
position phiinly poetical : as in the cclxiii. fable, which
begins thus ; "Oyo<i 7raTi]aa<i aKoXoira ^a)\o9 iarrfKei,. This
I saw was a choliambic verse, and I presently suspected that
the writer had taken it out of Babrius. And I was soon
confirmed in my judgment by this fragment of his, that
belongs to the same fable ;
'O S' eVXv^et? TTovcov re Kavla<; 7rd(T7)<;,
Tov KVTjKiav ')(a<rKOVTa XaKTicra^ (pevyei,^
For in the fable in prose there are these words ; 'O 6vo<? 8e
ATQEIX TOT nONOT, iirl rhv \vkov XA^KONTA
AAKTIHA^ ^ETTEI. Whence it evidently appears, that
the author of that parcel which was published by Neveletus
did nothing else but epitomise Babrius, and put him into
*' Bafipias, ^ Bafipios. fiidovs ^TOi fivdid/x^ovs, eiVt 70^ 5ia xopta/t^Scoi' [1. x^^^^f^-
*' )3a>j/] iv fiifi\loLS 5e/co. ovros e/c ruv Alcrco-jrelav /xvOuu fxerefiaKev airh ttjs avruv
" Koyonoitas els e/Ltjuerpo, ijyovv rovs xopta/xjSovs [1. x<^^"*M)8ovs] • Bentleius
" [^Dissert, upon JEsop, sect, vii.] ponit eum in ultima ataie bonorum auctorum,
" Quod vagum est, et nullo, quantum video, argumento fundatum. Si crisis
** ilia, quam nuper proposui [Archesologia, vol. iii. p. 235.], de loco Apollonii
" in Lexico Homerico, v. "AetSe, vera sit (ut verissimam credo), juvabit non-
" nihil ad setatem Babrii accuratius pauld determinandam. Locus iste ex con-
" jectura nostra in metra choliambica distribuendus est, et sic legendus,
ravra S' A'iauiros
6 'SapBirjvhs eT-nev, '6vtlv oi AeXcpol [vulg6 dSeAi^ot]
^Sovra fivdov oh KoXws eZi^avro.
" Hffic Babrii esse et metrum et sensus clamant. Hunc igitur Apollonio anti-
" quiorem tuto statuamus ; Apollonium autem circa tempora Augusti floruisse,
" cum cl. ejus editore, verisimillimum arbitror; aut etiam aliquanto prills.
'* ^tati autem Babrio sic assignatae suffragatur Avienus, qui eum ante Phae-
" drum collocat Pra;f. Fab. Avieni. * Quas (fabulas scilicet ^sopi) Graecis
" iambis Babrius repetens in duo volumina coartavit ; Phaedrus etiam partem
" aliquam quinque in libellos resolvit.' In hoc autem ab Avieno Suidas disce-
" dere videatur, cilm alter Babrio duo volumina, alter decern libros tribuat; sed
" non constat Avienum volumina posuisse eodem sensu, quo Suidas fii$\ia; et
" praeterea numeri in Codd. MSS. non raro turbantur." Tyrwhitt, Diss, de
Babrio (note), p. 1. — D.]
* Suidas in KvTjKias.
230 DISSERTATION UPON THE
prose.* But I will give you some further proofs of it. The'
CCLXI. begins thus; "Ov(p rt? iiriOeh ^oavov rjye. Which,
at the first reading, one perceives to be part of a scazon;
and thus it is in a fragment of Babrius ;
In the CLVi. [clxvi.], about the Foa; with the Firebrand;
TavTTjv Se halfjbwv eU Ta9 apovpa'^ rov ^aX6vT0<i mB^yet. Who
does not discover here a scazon of Babrius ?
El^ Ta<; apovpa<; rov fBaXovro^ whrjyet,.
The ccxLiii. is a manifest turning out of choliambics into
prose^ for the whole is made up either of pieces or entire
verses ;
7J\lov irXiov Xd/jLTrec.
And,
l4.vi/xov Be (Tvpp€V(TavTO<;, €v6v<; ia/BeaOrj.
And,
!E/c Bevripov B* airrmv rt? —
And,
(paive, Xvyye, koI a-iya.
Tmv darepayv to (f)eyyo^ ovttot ifcXeiTret,
In the ccxciii. there are these remnants of Babrius ;
Iloay yap oXktj t ovpLOV at/jua irpoaOrjarj,
[* " Mihi sane .... verisimile videtur collectiones omnes, quas hodie te-
" nemus, fabularum iEsopearum ab opere Babriano originem suam duxisse,
" difFerentias autem earum scriptorum multitudini imputandas esse, qui diversis
" temporibus, et locis, et ingeniis, et studiis, metrorum elegantissimorum
" partes varias, pro libitu suo quisque, in prosam traducendas sumpserunt."
Tyrwhitt, Diss, de Bahrio, p. 25. — " Rect^ quidem collectiones scribit Tyr-
" whittus, sed rem deinceps ita definit, quasi omnes, quae his collectionibus
'.* continentur, fahulce 6 Babriano opere fluxerint, quod falsum esse, vel ea
" exempla docent, quae infra a nobis proferentur. Nunquam defuerunt Grae-
" culi, qui priscis et genuinis fabulis novas h. e. suas adderent." — Huschke,
Diss, de Fab. Archil. — apud Fab. jEsop: ed. Fur. (1810.) I. ccxi. — D.]
^ Suidas in KwyJfiTai.
FABLES OF .ESOP. 231
And,
"EcTTat fJbdyetpo<^, 09 fie avvTOfico^ dvo-ec.
And,
Kol TTokiv Kepel fie, koI croocreL.
The CLXV. begins thus; ^Avrjp //,ecro7roXto? Bvo epcofieva<;
el^j^ev* Mv r] fiev fila veavt^, r] he aWrf Trpea^vri^; : which I
suppose to have been in Babrius thus ;
Or,
^Avrjp fie<T07ro\Lo<; Bv epQ)fieva<; el;j^ev,
V2v ^ fiia vedvi^, t) he irpea^vri^*
Slv rj fiev rjv V :
In all these passages here are most visible footsteps by which
we may trace our imitator; but generally he has so dis-
guised the fables, that nobody can find they ev^er belonged
to Babrius. In the ccxlv., about the priests of Cybele,
there's nothing but a short dry story, and no reliques of a
verse. But there's a noble fragment of Babrius, belonging
to the same fable, which I will here set down; both to
correct it (for he that has given it us has printed it false ^),
and to shew you how much we have lost ;
TaXkoL<^ a'yvpTai,<; et? to kolvov eirpdOrj
^'Ovo<; Tfc? ov/c evfioipo<;, aXkd hvahalficov,
"OaTL'^ <pepr] •KTOd'yp'lai Kol Travovp^yoLai
IIetV7](; aKo<i hl'^rff; re, kol KaKrjV ri'^vrfv.
OvTOi Be KVfcX(p iraaav e^ eOov^ K(iifir]v
TIepu6vTe<;* e\eyovTO' rt? yap dypoiKtav
OvK olBev "Attlv \evKov, 009 eTrTjpcoOrj ;
Tl<; OVK d'jrap')(a^ oairpiwv re kol (tltcov
jiyvM (j)ep(DV BtBcoai, rvfiirdvco 'Peirji; ;
VIII. Thus I have proved one half of the Fables now
' Natal. Com. 1. ix. c. 5. [p. 968. ed. 1619., where in v. 4. ireimts aaxos and
KaK7]s rex^V^j ^^^ in v. 6. iMyov. — D.]
[* See Dobree's note, Porsoni Aristophanica, p. 135. {Adden.) — D.]
232 DISSERTATION UPON THE
extant that carry the name of ^sop to be above a thousand
years more recent than he. And the other half^ that were
public before Neveletus, will be found to be yet more
modern, and the latest of all. That they are not from
^sop's own hand, we may know from the lxx.. Of the
Serpent and the Crab-fish ; which is taken from a scolion, or
catch, much older than ^sop, that is extant in Athenseus,y
and must be corrected thus ;
'O KapK(vo<; wSe €<j>aj %aXa rov o^cv Xapoav
Ev6vv XPV ^Tolpov ejxev, koI /jlt) aKoXia (ppovecv.
And there is great reason to believe that they were drawn up
by Planudes, one of the later Greeks, that translated into
his native tongue Ovid's Metamorphoses, Cato's Distichs,
Caesar's Commentaries, and Macrobius. For there is no
manuscript any where above ccc. years old, that has the
Fables according to that copy. Besides that, there are
several passages that betray a modern writer : as in the
Lxxvii., ^ovTa\t<;, a bi7'd ; and xxxix., ^ouvevpov, a beast ;
both unknown to all ancient authors ; and in the cxxix.
^o(ji)v iv rfj KapBla, crying in his heart, a manifest Hebraism,
in imitation of Eccles. xi. 1 ., eliTov iv rfj KaphCa jjlov. The
Lxxv., about the Ethiopian, is taken almost word for word
out of the VI. of Aphthonius the rhetorician, who made an
essay upon some ^sopic Fables, that is yet extant. The iv.,
as appears from the last sentence of it, is a paraphrase on
the ccLxxxiv. of Neveletus's parcel; which parcel, as I
have proved above, are a traduction of Babrius; and par-
ticularly in this very fable there are footsteps of his verses ;
KarrfkOev eh jSadvv Kprj/juvov,
y Lib. XV. c. 15. [=c. 50. V. 540. ed. Sehw., where
'O KapKivos wS* e<pri,
'Evd4a xp^ ''"^'' ^Tcupov e/jtev,
KcH fii) (TKoXia (ppovilv.
See also Schw. in Animmlv. in Athen. VIII. 265. sqq. — D.]
FABLES OF iESOP. 233
And,
fl€T€v6€C, KoX ^O7}06v i^7]T€C.
This collection, therefore, is more recent than that other;
and coming first abroad with iEsop's Life, writ by Planudes,
*tis justly believed to be owing to the same writer.*
IX. That idiot of a monk has given us a book, which he
calls The Life of Msop, that, perhaps, cannot be matched in
any language for ignorance and nonsense. He had picked
up two or three true stories; that ^sop was slave to one
Xanthus, carried a burden of bread,^ conversed with Croesus,
and was put to death at Delphi : but the circumstances of
these, and all his other tales, are pure invention. He makes
Xanthus, an ordinary Lydian or Samian, to be a philoso-
phei" ;* which word was not heard of in those days, but in-
[• " Primus, qu6d sciam, Neveletus fabulas has ^sopi a Maximo Planude,
" ut et vitam ejus, scriptas se existimare prodidit. Prcef. ad Fab. Eandem opi-
" nionem videtur amplecti Bentleius, Dissert, upon Msop, sect viii. Et pro-
** fectd si Vitae ^Esopi, a Planude certissimd scriptae, eaedem fabulae semper
" subjunctae invenirentur, opinio ista verisimilitudine non careret. Sed res,
" opinor, longd aliter se habet. Vita ^sopi, cum nomine Planudis, saepissimfi
" MS. occurrit sine ullis fabulis. Occurrit etiam praefixa collectionibus fabu-
" larum, quae ab ilia, quam Accursius exscripsit, multiim discrepant. Ita
" fuisse credo in MS. Stephaniano. Ita cert6 est in MS. Laudiano Bihl. Bodl.
" n. 699. ubi Vitam ^sopi k Planude scriptam sequuntur fabulae, plures
" quidem ex Accursianis (quanquam diverso ordine), sed etiam multae ex Ne-
" veletianis. Quare nullam idoneam rationem video, qua adducamur ad cre-
" dendum fabulas eas, quas Accursius vulgavit, k Maximo Planude scriptas
" fuisse. Alia est doctissimi Bentleii in eadem Dissertatione h37pothesis,
" quam sine ampliore probatione admittere nolim, nempe collectionem banc
" Accursianam Neveletiana recentiorem esse. Neutram ab ^Esopo ipso con-
" ditam libens concesserim ; sed quae ex illis recentior, quae vetustior, frustra
" quaeri existimo, cum in utraque complures fabulae diversis auctoribus et tem-
" poribus, ut verisimile est, consarcinatae legantur." Tyrwhitt, Diss, de
Bahrio {note), p. 21. See also Huschke, Diss, de Fab. Archil. — apudFab. JEsop.
ed.Fur. (1810.) I. ccxlvi. — ** It is . . . clear that Planudes did nothing more than
" make some alterations in the style and number of this collection of fables,
" which, together with the life, was extant long before his time." Blomfield,
Mus. Crit. I. 409. — On the error of attributing the Life of Msop to Planudes,
see Prolegomena ad Fab. Msop. p. x. ed. Fur. 1810. — D.]
^ Eustath. in X. Odyss. p. 785. [ed. Basil.— D.']
* aavdos 6 <pi\6<TO(f>os.
VOL. II. 2 H
234 11IMEKTATI03I UPON THE
Tented aftenrndB by Pythagoras. He makes bim attendfd
too, like FlatD and AristoHey by^ a ci M i i| i aiiy of adioiaiSy
wbom he caDs axoXatrrucoi; tfaoa^ flie word was not yet
used in tliat sense even in Aiistofle's time. Twas the king
of JSthiopia's problem to Amasis king dJRgypt, To drmk
ip the tea ^ hot Flanades makes it a wager of Xandnis with
<me of his scholars. To tay nothing of his chronological
errors, mi^falr^ of a hundred or two hundred yean', who
can read, with any patience, that ally discourse between
Xanthus and his man .£sop; not a bit better tiian our
pemmf merrimemtt, printed at London Bridge?
X. But of an his injuries to Msofj^, that which can least
be foigiren him, is, die malnng such a monster of him for
ugiiness; an abuse diat has found credit so universally, that
all the modem painters, since the time of Flanudes, have
drawn him in the worst slu^es and features that fuicy
could inrent. ^Twas an old tradition among the Gredcs,
that Msop revived again, and lived a second life.^ Should
he revive once more, and see the picture before the book
that carries his name, could he tiiink it drawn for himself?
or for the numkey, or some strange beast introduced in the
FaUe$? But what revelatkm had this monk about JBaajya
deformity ? For he must kam it by dream and vision, and
not by ordinary meUiods of knoidedge. He lired about two
th4ingffTMl years after him;' and in all that tract of time
there's not one sing^ author that has giren the least hint
diat JBmop was ug^. What credit then can be given to an
ignorant monk, that broadies a new story, afiter so many
ages?* In Plutarch's Comtf ivium our JSaop is one of the
^ Tfuaudk. in Coawiw.
< Sodas ibAZk. and 'Am^iMMH. SdioL Anstoph. p. 3^ and M7. [SeiO. U
ed. Bekk. p, 177 and 24L— D.]
' A.D. mcccixx.
I* " Flanodcai in hie re tndenda nodnm ewttnlur, non negswenmL Sed
" pi1i> confidcnixte aeribit oMeonan prineepa [Bentieins] Atqfd
" in amribiis cat anctor, pfo tali anu a iuB i fadon^ aaiia a ul iqtuu, saecnB eatt
** qoarti aaqMor, ^ banc tern ^A fimdo trd legendo cognovcni^ Hiiai liiii
" dico, Oiat. xiiL i. pu 592. cd, Wernad. ita scribenf cm : fmA tk od Ktrmwrn
FABLES OF ^SOP. 235
guests, with Solon and the other sages of Greece ; there is
abundance of jest and raillery there among them, and par-
ticularly upon ^sop ; but nobody drolls upon his ugly face,
which could hardly have escaped, had he had such a bad
one. Perhaps you'll say it had been rude and indecent to
touch upon a natural imperfection. Not at all, if it had
been done softly and jocosely. In Plato's Feast they are
very merry upon Socrates's face, that resembled old Silenus :
and in this they twit ^Esop for having been a slave, which
was no more his fault than deformity would have been.
Philostratus has given us, in two books, a description of a
gallery of pictures ', one of which is ^sop, with a chorus of
animals about him.® There he is represented smiling and
looking towards the ground, in a posture of thought ; but not
a word of his deformity, which, were it true, must needs
have been touched on, in an account of a picture. The
Athenians set up a noble statue to his honour and me-
mory;
^sopo ingentem statuam posuere Attici,
Servumque collocdrunt (Btemd in basi ;
Patere honoris scirent ut cuncti viam,
Nee generi tribui, sed virtuti, gloriamJ
But, had he been such a monster as Planudes has made of
him, a statue had been no better than a monument of his
" rhv Xoyovoihv rhv ♦piryo, ot /lij Sri robs xAyovs rivai, oAA' IjdTj koI airrh rh
" irp6a-(inrov Kod rifv (fxayifi' y4Xtara Kol x^^^^ ^TYW^Ot y^viaOau fuv fovaoipov koL
" 8ia Tovro Upbv rod 'Ait6Wu>vos." HuscuKE, Diss, de Fab. ArchiL — apud Fab.
^sop. ed. Fur. (1810.) I. ccx.— D.]
« P. 73. [=766. ed. Olear.—D.']
' Phaedrus, 1. ii. ult, [Dr. B. in his edition of Phadrus, offers from others
an emendation of the first verse ; and would read JEsopi ingenio : but though
ingens is very awkward, ingenio seems no better : unless we say it must be ingens
statua indeed, whose basis is aterna. Salter. Note on ed. 1777. — Bentley, in
his ed. of Phaedrus, reads in the first verse " Msopi ingenio" (an emendation
of Gudius), and in the third " honori." See, on this passage, Hare's Epislola
Criticoy p. 72.— D.]
VOL. II.
236 DISSERTATION UPON THE
Ugliness : it had been kinder to his memory to have let that
alone. But the famous Lysippus was the statuary that
made it. And must so great a hand be employed to dress
up a lump of deformity ? Agathias the poet has left us an
epigram upon that statue ;^
Evye TTOLCov, Ava-Lirire yepcoVj ^Licvmvte TrXdorra,
AeiKekov Alawirov o-rijaao tov ^afxiov, &c.
How could he too have omitted to speak of it^ had his ugli-
ness been so notorious ? The Greeks have several proverbs
about persons deformed ; Oepalreiov /SXejx/jLa, El8€'^6r}<; Ko-
puSeu?^ &c. Our ^sop^ if so very ugly, had been in the
first rank of them; especially when his statue had stood
there, to put every body in mind of it. He was a great
favourite of Croesus king of Lydia, who employed him as
his ambassador to Corinth and Delphi. But would such a
monster as Planudes has set out be a fit companion for a
prince ? or a proper ambassador, to be hooted at by all the
boys wherever he came ? Plutarch represents him as a
polite and elegant courtier, rebuking Solon for his gruff
and clownish behaviour with Croesus ; telling him he must
converse with princes rj cw? rfSio-ra, rj &>? riKiara, either
agreeably, or not at all.^ Now, could either such a station,
or such a discourse, befit ^sop, if he was truly that scare-
crow as he is now commonly painted ? But I wish I could
do that justice to the memory of our Phrygian, to oblige the
painters to change their pencil. For 'tis certain he was no
deformed person ; and 'tis probable he was very handsome.
For, whether he was a Phrygian, or, as others say, a Thra-
cian, he must have been sold into Samos by a trader in
slaves. And 'tis well known that that sort of people com-
monly bought up the most beautiful they could light on,
because they would yield the most profit. And there is
s Anthol. lib. iv. Eis ^iXocr. \_Anth. Gr. ex, rec. Br. (ed. Jacobs.) IV. 16. —
Anth. Gr. ad fid. Cod. Pal. ^c. II. 725.— D.]
^ Plut. in Solone.
FABLES OF iESOP. 237
mention of two slaves, fellow-servants together, -^sop, and
Rhodopis a woman ', and, if we may guess him by his com-
panion and contubernalis,^ we must needs believe him a
comely person. For that Rhodopis was the greatest beauty
of all her age , and even a proverb arose in memory of it 3J
' Pliny, xxxvi. 12.
J Herodotus, Suidas, Strabo. [See too Erasmi Adagia, p. 1648. ed. 1606.
-D.]
RICHARDI BENTLEII
EPISTOLA
AD CL. V.
JOANNEM MILLIUM, S.T.P.
(Ad calcem librorum, quorum alter inscribitur Joannis Antiocheni cognomento
MalalcB Historia Chronica, ed. Oxon. 1691., alter Emendationes in Menandri et
Philemonis Reliquias, ed. Cant. 1713.)
CL. VIRO
JOANNI MILLIO, S. T. P.
RICHARDUS BENTLEIUS
s.
Memini equidem, Milli doctissime, cum abhinc dies com-
plusculos deambularemus una, strenueque de literulis nostris
sermones caederemus ; ibi forte fortuna de Joanne Antio-
chensi mentionem fuisse injectam : cumque me desiderium
cepisset librum adhuc musteum videndi, priusquam in lucem
publicam, te curante, exiret; ea me lege id abs te impetra-
visse^ ut siqua in tam depravato scriptore emendationem
nostram accipere possent, ea in schedulas conjecta ad te
mitterem. Duram profecto conditionem^ quamque adeo
multis de causis nollem acceptam. Nam ut omittam^ quod
ex illo fere tempore a meliori librorum et chartularum
mearum parte^ et (quod acerbius mihi accidit) a jucundissima
tua consuetudine longe disjunctus sim 5 quodque semel dun-
taxat hunc Malelam properans percurrerim, nee ut secundas,
quas sapientiores esse aiunt^ curas et cogitationes adhiberem,
ullo adhuc pacto potuerim animum inducere : ut illa^ in-
quam^ atque alia praeteream ; pudet hercle, ut verum fatear^
pigetque bonas boras, quae baud paulo melius coUocari pos-
sent, in tam ingrato et ignobili labore consumere. Sed quid
faciam ? data est fides : promissa flagitantur. Video, quod
mihi egomet intrivi, exedendum esse. Liceat modo, si-
quando in hac dvayKO(l)ayLa fastidium mihi suborietur, ali-
VOL. II. 2 I
242 EPISTOLA AD
unde petere quod fluentem nauseam coerceat. Dabitur
itaque potestas et venia evagandi identidem longiuscule;
dummodo ne plane e^co tcov iXaccov, neque levibus de causis.
Hoc autem scias velim in primis ; non mihi consilium esse
de Joanne isto qui cujasve fuerit, quando vixerit^ aut a
quibus laudatus sit^ omnino verbum facere: cum diu sit
quod omnem istam controversiam suscepit amicissimus nos-
ter atque eruditissimus Hodius.^ Quippe aliud est^ inquam,
scriptionis hujus institutum : quae vereor equidem ut satis ex
voto et feliciter mihi vertat. Ita sane prsesagit animus, ita
in ipso limine conspicio, quod etiam fortissimo terrorem
incutiat. Siquidem recte narrat Malelas pag. 90. edixisse
nimirum atque interminatum esse Orphea, ne quisquam
mortalium palam fecerit ra ^EpiKeired), ov, ait, ovofia 6 avTo<i
Op(f)6v<; cLKovaa^ eK rrjf; fjLavT6la<^ i^eiTre, Mi] riva (jydvai ra
^EpcK67r6(Of OTrep epfnjveverac rfj KOivfj yXcocrcrr}, ^ovXrj, (f)a><;,
^cooSoTTjp. Ego vero cum baud sim nescius, quam acerbos
olim vindices deos hominesque habuerit, qui pbvcrTrjpLa i^op-
')(r}(Taa6ai et Eleusinae Matris occulta proferre ausus sit;
qui sciam, annon ipse similem in me noxam admittam, si
mysterium hoc Orphicum sacro hactenus silentio celatum
evulgavero ? Neque adeo clam me est, O Milli suavissime,
quam audax impulsu tuo in me meosque facinus consciscam :
Sed tua me virtus tamen, et sperata voluptas
Suavis amicitiae, quodvis discrimen adire
Suadet, et inducit dias in luminis oras^
horribile illud arcanum protrahere. Bono vero animo eris,
capitique et setati mese parces metuere; ubi /jbopfioXvKelqy
[* Vide Humfredi Hodii de Autore Prolegomena in Malel. ed. Oxon. Confer
etiam Jortinum, Remarks on Eccles. Hist. v. iv. p. 383.; Gibbonum, Hist, of the
Decline, &c, chap. xl. note 11. ; Reiskum, Comment, ad Constant. Porph. de Cerim.
&c. p. 855. ed. 1830. ; Lud. Dindorfium, Prcef. ad Mai. Chron. ed. 1831.— D.]
\^ Lucretius :
Sed tua me virtus tamen, et sperata voluptas
Suavis amicitiae, quemvis ecferre lahorem
Suadet, et inducit nocteis vigilare serenas. i. 141.
dias in luminis eras. i. 23. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 243
isto detracto, putidisque illis fjurj rcva cfydvat, ra ^EpiKeTrecb in
malam rem ablegatis aliquo^ veterem illuc et veram lectionem
quasi postlimiiiio reduxero. Ea haec est : Ov {deov) ovo^a
6 a^T09 ^Op(f)6v<; cbKovaa'^ Ik. t?}? yLavTeia<^ i^elrre MrJTCV,
^dvTfTa, 'HpLKeiralov. Orpheus, ait, per oraculum edoctus
est Dei noiniua Mtjtlv esse et ^dvrjra, et 'HpoKeTraiov, quae
communi sermone interpretata hanc habent vim et senten-
tiam, BovXrj, ^w?, ZwoBoryp.
Porro hisce nomiiiibus Deum Orphicum vocari non de-
sunt mihi locupletes certissimique sane auctores. Damascius
irepl Toov irpdorcov dpySiv MS. in Bibliotheca Coll. Corporis
Christi Oxonii p. 156.*^ 'Ftv fjuev toIvvv rah (p€po/jbevaL<i
TavraL<; pa'^cphlat^; ^OpcfuKat^; rj^ OeoXoyla Brj Tt9 ecmy rj
Trepl Tov® voijTov {ScdKoa/jioy) rjv koI ol (j^iXoo-ocpoc hiepfXT]-
V€vovacv, dvrl fjuev T7J<; jjuia^ tmv oXcov dp')(i]<^ rov ^(^povov
TidevTe<^, dvrl he ralv^ hvolv AWepa koX Xdo<^, dvrl Se rov
6vT0<i a7rXw9 to ^JOLov dTToXoyi^ojjLeyoiy koI rptdSa ravrrjv
TrpcoTTjv TTOLovvre^. €t9 Be rrjv Bevrepav reXelv tjtoc to kvov-
jievov Kol to kvov '/2ov tov Oeov, rj tov dpyrJTa ^trwva rj ttjv
N€(f)6\7}V, OTl CK TOVTCOV eK6pCO(JKet, 6 ^ANH^. dW0T€
yap dXka irepl tov fjuecrov (pcXoaocjyovac, tovto fjuev^ ottoIov
av fi (W9 TOV vovv, ft)9 Be iraTepa kol Bvva/ncy dXka Ttvd
irpocreiTLvoovvTe^; ovBev tw ^Op<^el TrpocnfjKOVTa' ttjv Be TpcTrjv
TOV MHTIN TOV HPIKEnAION ch^ Bvvap.Lv, tov ^A-
NHTA avTov 0)9 TraTepa.^ Idem ibidem p. 106.^ o6ev Trrjyrjv
fiev TTTjycov avToi {to '^Ev) XaXBaicov 7ralBe<; dvevcprj/jLovcrcv,
'Op(f)ev<; Be fiiKTcrj^ airep/jba (f>epovTa 6ecov, ^oivcKe<; Be alcova
Koa/jLCKov, &)9 TrdvTa ev eavTM avvyprjKOTa. Locus corrup-
tus. Lego : 'Opcf>ev^ Be MHTIN cnrepjJLa cj^epovTa decov . . .
["= p. 380. ed. Kopp. — Tria typographi errata, quae, in hoc Damascii loco,
exhibet ed. Lips. Epist. ad Mill. 1781, pro Bentleii emendationibus habuit Kop-
pius! — D,]
[^ et. ed. Kopp.— D.] [« rh. ed. Kopp.— D.]
[^ ro7v. ed Kopp. — D.] [s fxeu ovv. ed. Kopp. — D.]
[•» " Quorum postrema sic emendanda sunt. Els Sh r)]v TpirTjv (rpidSa
TcAeTr) rhv Mtjt ip ws vovv, rhv *HpiK€iraiou us Suva/xiv, &c." Lobeckius, AglaopK
t. i. p. 483.— D.] [> p. 268. ed. Kopp.— D.]
[J abrh TTTjyuv. ed. Kopp. — D.] [•* fiiKrl ^. ed. Kopp. — D.J
244 EPISTOLA AD
Et pag. 125.^ Ov')(l Be koI ^Op(j>ev^ airo rov ^flov wapdyeo,
Kol Tr]<; N€(f>6\7]<; pa<y€Lcr7]<; (hac modo occasione cogita^ an
in loco superiore pro apyrjra reponi placeat tov payevra
^(^bTcava Tj ve(f)6Xr]v) tov TroXvTLfjLTjrov <f)dv'rjTai, irpooBov. Kau
iKelvo<i €V To5 vcp^ v7roaT7}adfi€vo<;. rj prjriov tt/do? ravra, et
quae sequuntur. Lege et distingue : tov iroXvTlfJbijTov ^A-
NHTA, TTpSoSov Koi eKelvo^, &c. Et prseterea p. 124.^
^'EvOev diroOpwaKei yey6aL<; iroXviriBaKOv^ vX'rjf;,
Ka\ oaa roiavra irepl Trj<i rd^eco^i eKeivqf; oi deol '^ijafitp-
hovaiv dXkd koX ^Op(f)€if<; tov iroXvTLfirjTov tovtov 6eov dvev-
(f>^aatfjLLP TOV airepfia <j)€povTa 6ea>v k avTov rjpLKeiralov, Kal
i^ avTov TTOiel nrpoiovcTav diracrav ttjv twv 6ecov yevedv*
Enimvero non leviter mendis aspersa est haec prjac^, quam
ita constitues : koI '0/?^eu9 tov TroXvTLfirjTOV tovtov deov
dveV^7]/JL€l
MHTIN (Tirepfia <\>epovTa Oewv kXvtov HPIKEnAION.
Pagina denique 164.^ Tolov dirio-TiX^e ')(p6vo^ dOavdTOLo
^ANHTOS, ubi legendum %/joo9j ut quideni extat apud
Proclum :^
Savfia^ov Ka6opS>VTe<; iv aWepL ^€7709 aeXiTTOv,
Toiov direaTiX^e 'xpoo^ ddavdTOio ^dvrjT0<:,
Idem Proclus in Parmenidem MS. haec habet:^ 6 fiev yap
'0/3(^61)9 fJL€Td TTJV KaTdlTOCTLV TOV ^ANHTO^ iv tS Alt TCL
irdvTa yeyovevac (f>7]aiv, iTretBrj irpoTepov^ fMev Kal '^vcofjuivaxi
iv eicelvcpy BevTepcof; Be kol BiaiceKpiiMev(o<; iv toS Brj/jLiovpytp
{} p. 309. ed. Kopp.— D.] [" votjt^. ed. Kopp.— D.]
[•» p. 307. ed. Kopp.— D.]
[° voXviroiKiXov. ed. Kopp. In Orph. p. 467. ed. Herman, sic (e Proclo) legi-
tur versus :
evOfu &5rjy OpdxrKei yevecis voKvttoikIXov v\t]s. D.]
[P avev<P'}]fjLr)(r€v. ed. Kopp. — D.]
[1 Deest hie locus, nisi fallor, in ed. Kopp. — D.]
[' In TimcBum, p. 132. ed. Basil, ubi Th tiv aireariXfie. Eosdem versus paulo
aliter citat Hermias in Phadr. : vide Orph. p. 506. ed. Herman. — D.]
[» Procli 0pp. t. V. p. 22. ed. Cous.— D.]
[* vpwrws. ed. Cous. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLTUM.
245
ra irdvTa av€(f)dvr) to, twv iyKocrfjLTjfjLdrcov^ aXna. et m Alci^
biadem pi-iorem MS. sic scribit :^ Kal fjLoi Bok€l /cat 6 JJXd-
T(ov €vp(ov Trap* ^Op<f>€i Tov avTOV TOVTOV^ Kol "Epoyra koI
Aal^ova p^k^av aTroKaXovp^evov, dyaTrrjcrai koI avTo<i eVt rod
"Epa)TO<; TOV tocovtov vp^vov irepl p,ev yap votjtov^ vov Xeywv
6 0€o\6yo^,
jiffpo<i l^pmy Kal MHTIS dTdadaXo^ —
Kal TrdXiv*
Otaiv eTreyLtySeySao)? Aalp,(ov p,eya<} alev eV t%V7;'
Trepl Se tov voepov vov Kal dp^eOeKTOv,^
Kal MHTI^ 7rpwT09 yeveTcop Kal ^Epco^; TroXvTepirTj^;*
Kal TrdXiv
"^Ev KpdTo<;, eh Aalp^wv yeveTO p,eya<^, ^P'XP'^ dirdvTwv.
Multa prudens et sciens prsetereo, quae ex Atlienagora, Ma-
crobio, Orphicis Hymnis, turn autem praecipue e Proclo in
Platonis Tim(sum adferre possem : ne forte qui me minus
norunt^ Pauli Leopardi* scrinia me compilare^ existiment.
Inde petere possunt^ vel a Theodoro Cantero^^ qui plura de
his rebus scire desiderent. Nam quid ego censeam de illo-
rum sententia, qui significationem mendosi verbi ^EpLKeireoy
ex anilibus Cabbalistarum nugis conantur exsculpere ? sed
nolo aliquid inclementer dicere. Non nostrum est K€cp.ivoi<;
iTre/jLjSaiyecv. Veniam etiam libenter dedero, si minus ea
perspexerint^ quae a multis saeculis homines latuerunt, cali-
gine et tenebris circumfusa. Nam ut concedam haec, quo-
modo a me emendata sunt, ita a Joanne fuisse concepta;
quod equidem baud facile crediderim ; Suidae tamen et
[" T^ irdvTwv ave<pdvr] ruv iyKOfffxiuv. p. 23. ed. Cous. — D.]
[' Procli 0pp. t. ii. p. 181. ed. Cous.— D.]
[^ TovTov Qi6v. ed. Cous. — D.] [* tov votitov. ed. Cous. — D.]
\J ipas, <p-n<T\, Kal. ed. Cous. — D.]
[• fifdfKTov. ex cod. Lobeckius, quem vide, Aglaoph. t. i. p. 495. — D.]
[• Emend, xii. 2. apud Grut. Fac. Art. t. iii. p. 237. — D.]
[•» " Pauli me Leop. scrinia comp." ed. Oxon. — D.]
[c Var. Led. i. 26. apud Grut. Fac. Art. t. iii. p. 736.— D.]
246 EPISTOLA AD
Cedreni temporibus depravatum esse hunc Malelae locum
illud argumento est, quod hi interpretamenta duntaxat ex
nostro afferant, de verbis Orphei ovSe ypv. Illud autem
mihi videor satis certo scire, non te expectare, ut vim verbi
^HpLKeiralo^ et naturam explicem i^ tune ut ineptas plerum-
que et cassas etymologias consectari me velis ? Dabitur
jusjurandum, ne ab Orpheo quidem ipso hoc fieri potuisse.
Scire prius aveo, unde ilia vulgaria, Al6vv<to<;, ''H</)atcrT09,
TIo(T6ih<x)v. Al6vv<to<^, ait Orpheus apud Macrobium,^ airo
Tov BtvelaOai, originem ducit :
IIpcoTO<i 8' 6t9 (f>do(; rjXOey Ai,Q)VV(ro<; S' iireKXrjdr],
Ovvefca BLvelrac Kar aireipova fiaKpov ^'OXvjjlttov.
Ride, et ad hoc exemplum crede alia fuisse dicturum. Nee
quidem de significatione tov ^HpiKeiralov belle convenit
scrip toribus. Secundum Malelam, Suidam^ et Cedrenum
est ^cooBorrjp. Nosti hos tres, quam ad unum redeant deni-
que. At Nonno in crvvaycoyfj laropLMV^ Phanes est ^cooSo-
rrjp. Ericepaeus aliam vim habet nescio quam. Ae<yovcrL
Be avTov {tov ^dvrjTa) €(j)opov eivat Tr]<; ^cooyovov Bvvd/jLeco<;,
6fjLol(o<^ KOL^ TOV ^HpLKeiralov Xeyovaiv eTepa'i e^opov elvat
Bvvd/jL€(i)f;, Quamobrem, si sapiam, non operam perdam in
etymologia hac inquirenda : magis ex usu fuerit, in quibus
primum institi vestigiis pergere ; et siqua restent Orphica
apud Malelam, quae correctione opus habeant, pro virili
restituere.
Sic igitur refingo locum, quem habes p. 89.
'/2 ava, A7)T0v<; vl,^ €KaT7}^6\€ ^olffe KpaTaie,
IIavBepK€<;, 6v7]Tolac kol d0avdTOicnv dvdaarwv,
p Confer nostrum in Addendis, et in Epist ad Bernard. Mus. Crit. t. ii,
p. 541, 543, 546, 550.; Gesnerum in Orph. p. 260. ed. Herman.; Lobeckium in
Aglaoph. t. i. p. 470. — D.]
[* Saturn, i. 18. Orph. p. 464. ed. Herman. — D.]
[i* In V. *oy775.— D.]
[<= Ad calcem Greg. Naz. in Jul. p. 154. ed. Mont. 1610. — D.]
[<> 5e Kal. ed. Mont.— D.]
[e 'O ^j/a|, Atjtovs vik. Mai. p. 88.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 247
'JfeXte, '^^pvcriatcTLv aeipofieve^ irrepvyecrcnv,
AayBeKaryv 8r]S r^vSe irapai (reo ckXvov 6/jL(f)r]v,
2!ev ^ajxevov, ae he 7' avrov^ 6K7]^6Xe, jxaprvpa OeLTjv.
Tcrtio autem versui simillimiis et maxime geminus ejus^
dem scriptoris est alius in Hymno ad Protogonum :
IIpayToyovov KoXea) Bi,(f)V'rj, fiiyav, aWepoTrkayKTOV,
^Jfloyevrj, '^pvcreaLatv^ ayaWofievov TTTepvyeaa-cv.
At vir bonus Joannes, atque item Cedrenus, ne in librarios
culpam banc transferas, rrjv Trrepvya arbitrabantur esse gene-
ris virilis. En cor Zenodoti, enjecur Cratetis fi
Multo vero gravius affectus est locus pag. 92. ita poetae
verba non modo cum interpretamentis Malelae confusa sunt
atque commixta; sed et insuper mendis obsita et cooperta.
Ilia quidem certe fMy Slo, /jLijSev veritus est Cedrenus descri-
bere, quippe quae nuUo prorsus modo intellexerit. At memini
vidisse Excerpta quaedam manu Patricii Junii ex Chronico
quodam penes CI. Seldenum manuscripto : ubi inter alia
ejusdem farinae haec Orphica habebantur, corrupta ea quidem
et mutila ; nihilominus in quibus extarent vestigia verae lec-
tionis : siquidem ibi scriptum erat fir) Sia fia fxrjhev. Proinde
de hoc loco mihi imlla dubitatio est, quin in versiculos re-
poni debeat ad hoc exemplum :
©P]pe^ r olcovoL re, /SpoTMV t akcr^poa cpvXa,^
"A')(6ea 7^9, elBwXa rervy/iiiva, fjb7]8a/j,a} /jurjBev
ElSoT6<;y ovre KaKolo irpoaep'yoyikvoio vorjcrat
^pdBfjL0V6<i, ovT diroOev fxalC aTroarpe^frai^ KaKorrjrof;,
[' xfjuo-eoto-tv aepc^yiiej/e, Mai. p. 89. — XP^^^V^^^' ^r?'** ?• 490. ed. Herman,
et sic Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 364?. — D.]
[K §€, et irapa ae'io. Mai. — D.]
[** (TcTo (pajjiivov, (re S* avrhv, et fleiTj. Mai. — ecu (pafidvoio, (re S* avr6v. Dobraeus,
Advers. t. ii. p. 364. — D.]
["' xp^^^V^^^' Orph. p. 260. ed. Herman. — D.]
[J Bibaculus apud Sueton. De III. Gramm. p. 95d. ed. Ouden. — D.]
['' 07jp€S T€, olwvol T6, fipoTuv TaActTe ofo <pvKau Mai. p. 91. — D.]
[' ^^ Zid. Mai. p. 92.— D.]
["1 oijTi -Koiov fidWa TTpoTpe^ai. Mai. — D.]
248 EPISTOLA AD
OvT dya6ov irapeovTO^i iiria'TpeyfraL re koI ep^at^^
l[8p(,e<;, dWa /jLdrijv dd)arj[jLove<;,^ dirpovoTjroi.
Ad hunc Orphicoriim numerum non dubito adscribere quae
extant pag. 30. etsi ea Mercuric Trismegisto attribuant
Malelas^ Suidas, Cedrenus, Auctor Chronid Paschalis, et de
quo postmodum plura MS. Baroccianus. Scilicet ab auctori-
bus multo plus idoneis, S. Justino in Paraenetica ad Grcecos,
et S. Cyrillo adversus Julianum ad Orphea iv toI^ 6pKoc<;
referuntur: ubi etiam veram hujus Xefeco? scripturam of-
fendes. Malelas enim cum suo grege antiquam adeo hie
consuetudinem obtinent, ut nihil sentiant. Proxime autem
ad Joannis verba accedes^ si ita legeris :
Ovpavov opKL^co ae, Oeov fieydXov cro^ov epyov,
'OpKi^ay (T avhrjv Trarpo'^, fjv icfidey^aro irpcorov,
^HviKa Koa/JLOV diravra efj (rTrjpl^aro ^ovXrj,^
Ficta ilia "et commentitia oracula quae habes p. 42. 79. et
172. adeo niisere ac foede accepta sunt^ ita verba poetica in
quotidianuni sermonem immutata, ut vix invenias disjecti
membra poetae. Quamobrem in iis recolligendis redinte-
grandisque frustra operam conterere non libet ; praesertim
cum Joannes ipse satis aperte fateatur, se quae Bid crri'xwv
scripta fuerant^ et? r^v kolvtjv BtdXeKTov immutasse. Verum,
ut beem aliquos tam optabili nuncio, est liber Oxonii annos
abhinc puto dc. calamo exaratus; in quo non pauca extant
Oracula Malelanis his germanissima : quae si omnia hie in
lucem proferam, quando bella occasio est, sane (quod in
Graecorum proverbio est) patella videatur operculum inve-
[" Othe et Kal elp^ai, om. re. Mai. — D.]
[° "iSpees et aS-fifioves. Mai. — Vide Orph. p. 490. ed. Herman. — D.]
[P Apud Mai. p. 30. 'Op/ci^w (re, ovpave, 0eoG fieydXov cro<phv epyov, 'IXaos
iffo' opKi^oi} ffe, ipcov^ irarphs, %v i<p64y^aTo Trpcarrjv, 7]uiKa KSfffiov airaura iarri-
pl^uTo fiovX^. In Orph. p. 455. ed. Herman, sic, ex Justino et Cyrillo, hie
BpKos legitur :
Ovpaphp SpKi^co (re, Oeov fxeyaKov (ro(pov epyov,
ouStji/ opKi^cD (re iraTphs, riji^ (pOey^aro irpCorov,
TjviKa K6(rfiov (iiravTa kals (TTTipi^aro fiov\a7$. D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 249
nisse. Spero etiam me gratiae aliquantulum initurum ab
hominibus illis perelegantis judicii, qui Oracula quae vulgo
feruntur Sibyllina tanquam ab anu fatidica Noachi filia fusa
venerantur. Adeste igitur, O vere o-c^vX\icbvT6<;, lotisque
iiianibus sacra haec tangite.
Xprja/jiol Koi GeoXo^iai 'EWrjvcov ^iXoao^cov.
I.
^Epfiov fieylarov irepl IIavTOKpdTOpo<;.
AKOLjxriTOv 7rup6<; ofjifiart, ^prj'yope, Spofiov al6epo<s ^cooyo-
vS)V, rjXlov 6ipp,7]v KparvvwYy XaiXaTTi fxeOiaTOdV vicpr], tov-
vofJLa fir) '^cDpcjv iv Koa/jbO), a(f)6LTov aevvaov TraveTrlo-KOTrov
ofifia' Trarepa toov oXcov deov ovra fiovov, air ovB6Vo<; e')(0VTa
o,p')(r}v eyvcoKa' eva fierd ae ovra /jlovov Ik aov yepaipco vlbv,
ov fxofjLT} diroppriTw koI o^vrepa (jycovy lSlov 6v6v<; d(j>6ovco<!
KoX d'jradS}<; diroyevvrjTon'^ \6yov iyivvrjo-ev (leg. iyivvrjaaf;) Oeov
ovra, TTjv ovcriav Ik Trj<; ovala^, 09 o'ov rov irarpo^i ttjv elKova
KaX (leg. Kara) irav ofiolav (^epet, ware 6K€lvo<; ev aoL, cv
8e iv i/ceivw, KdWo<; eaoirrpov dWri\ev(f>pavTOV irpoacoTTOV*
(leg. dX\'i]\ev<l>pdvT(ov Trpoacoircov,)
II.
Tov avTov irepl TpidSo^.
'*Hv (j)m voepov CK 0G)TO9^ ut apud Malelam habentur p. 29.
III.
Tov avTOv Tlpocev^rj,
'OpKL^o) <r€, Ovpave, Oeov fjueydXov, &c. Vide Mai. p. 30.
IV.
*Api,<TTOTe\ov<;,
*A/€dfiaTO<; <^v(ti<^ Oeov, yevea-ewf; ovk e')(pvcra dp^V^, cf
avTrj<; S* 6 TTavaOevr]<; ovaioDTai Xoyo^i*
VOL. II. 2 K
250 EPISTOLA AD
V.
Ov/c i(j)CKTov jJLOi ecTTL Tttdra irpo^; afivrjrov^ etVetv^ ovTe
8e 0avepw9 irapaSeadai,' ttXtjv tov voelv aKoverat (leg. tk>
voelv cLKOvere) on ovros eanv 6 icaT ovpavov /JueyaXov *
^\oyb<; vTrep^dWcov, ov rpifjuovacv ovpavol yald re koI 6d-
Xarra, avTOirdrcdp, dirdrcop, rptcroXySto?. Confer haec cum
Malelanis pag. 79.
VI.
GovkvBlBov.
To €v Tpia Kol rd rpia ev, daapKov TrpoacoTTiKov. Frj
riroKC tov ovpavov yevv^ropa.
VIL
X/Xa)vo9.
r6vo<; €K yovov KareXOwv yovifMov vScop iiroirjae. To
virepTarov twv oXtov aiTLov iinvoelrai ov (fxorl kol irvev^ari,
dX\! ft)9 irdvTwv 6eo^ koI Kvpco<; koI Trarrjp.
VIII.
UXovrdp'^ov.
*0 iraXaicxi veo^, koX 6 veo? dp')((uo<;, 6 Trarrjp y6vo<i, koI
6 70V09 irarrjp.
IX.
^ AvTi6')(ov Ko\o(f)ojvo(; irepl Tpi,d8o<;.
^Hv vov<; 6^9 irdvTcov voepojT€po<; * el Be ye eariv
Tov diro 7rayy€viT7]<; voepo<; X0709 d^6LT0<; alel
Tlo<: aTravyacT/jLOf; voepov 7raTpb<;, ei<; dfia Trarpl,
^Ev fiev eTTWvvfJbir) * el Be ye ecrnv ox; diro TTarpo<;,
El<; Be TreXcov <7vv Trarpl /cal e^ evo9 et^;, fila rd^t^;,
Uarpo^; 6jjloov(tlo^ d^Otrof; alel
Tlvevfjuari aw Trpcoro) dyltp Kal cnrepixaro^; dp')(ri.
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 251
Uno verbo, ne nescias^ te monitum velim in libro MS.
sic legi : tov d7ro7rayy6viTT]<i voep(OT€po<; X0709 a(j)6cT0(; i/t09
(iTravyao-fia. Sed nihil erat facilius, quam in versus concin-
nare. Quivis etiam emendare possit KoXocjxovlov vel i/c
Ko\o0c3vo9.P lUud fortasse plusculum habet difficultatis,
quisnam sit ille Antiochus conjectura assequi. Et profecto
nimis velim extaret Nicandri Colophonii liber irepl roov e/c
Ko\o(f>oovo<; TTOLTjTcov' mirum enim, ni ex animi sententia
hoc negotium conficeremus. Nunc vero, quandoquidem iste
liber, ut alia omnia KoXa, vel flammis, vel humore, vel iner-
tibus tineis consumtus est; eum optimum vatem arbitremur,
qui illud in re tam ancipiti protulerit, quod sit veri similli-
mum. Opportune autem venit in mentem Xenophani illi
Colophonio filium fuisse nomine Antiochum, quem res Sicu-
las et Italicas scripsisse multi commemorant. Verum accidit
perincommode, quod is etsi patre natus Colophonio, tamen
nescio qui Syracusius vocetur. Alius proinde quatiendus est
funis. Placetne ut pro Antiocho reponatur Antiphanes ?
Athenaeus, lib. vii.*i Mvrj/jiovevei avrov j4.VTi^dv7]<i 6 Ko\o-
<f>(ovio<; iv ry &7]l3atBo Xiycov ovt(ji)<;,
'H VKKTJVy fj LTTTTOy, Tj OV KL')(X7JV Ka\eOV(TLV>
Sed mihi crede, nusquam fuit gentium Antiphanes ille
Colophonius : quippe, quod a doctissimo Casaubono non
animadversum esse demiror, pro commentitio isto Antiphane
reponendus est Antimachus, notissimus auctor Thebaidos et
Lydes, uti memorant ipse Athenseus alibi, Etymologicon,
Hesychius, Suidas, Quintilianus, aliique bene multi. Huic
autem Antimacho vix equidem dubito quin putidos hos
versus affingere voluerint. Quo quidem consilio nihil in-
[P " Caeterum apud Joannem Damascenum quod Malalas vocatur 'IcoctvyTjs
'AvTtoxffos, non patriarcham, sed civem Antiochensem intelligendum esse
assentior Hodio Proleg. s. viii. : quomodo dictum ^AvtiSxov KoXocpuvos in opus-
culo MS. Oxoniensi fefellit Bentleium Epistola ad Millium." Lud. Dindorfius,
Praef. ad Mai. Chron. p. vii. — D,]
[<» t. iii. p. 114. ed. Schw.— D.]
252 EPISTOLA AD
consultius esse potuit aut dementius. Proclus in Commen-
tario Timm distinguens poeticam evOovv airo t7J<; re'^vLKr}^,
illius exemplum rovg ')(^pr]crfjbov<;, hujus to ^AvTtfjLd')(^eiov ponit.
Adeo ut Antimachum y^prjafiwhovvra fingere^ sit prorsus
avft) TTOTafMwv, Totus erat Antimachus in arte et opera :
nihil habuit e^ ivOovcnacrfjbov, nihil ex afflatu furoris^ et
coelesti illo mentis instinctu^ sine quo nullum poema sani
coloris^ nedum Oracula nasci possint.
X.
^Epoi)T7}(Ti'^ ^Idaovo^ ^a(Ti\iQ)<; twv ^ Apycovavrwv eh to
UvOiov Tov ^AiroWcovo'i,
IIpo<l>riT6vaov r^ixlv, IIpo(l)rjTa Ttrdv, et quae sequuntur;
ut habet Malelas p. 94.
XL
ITX,aTft)V09.
Pevero? ovSel^; iKavo'i yv(t)/jL7]<; d^avov<i IBetv aladr]T7]pi,ov.
^vcn<; yap fiovov Oeov w? alrlov rod Travrof; yvfivriv '>^v')(r]v
Bwafjiivov (leg. hvva^evrj) Ihelv el? yap aLTi,o<; rod 7ravTb<?,
el? Kal ef avrov aXV 0I09 (leg. aXA-09) 6 el?, Kai TTore ovrof;
6 el? ovK iv ')(p6v(p, dihio<; yap 6 el? Kal avvatBto<;,
XII.
Tov avTOv Trepl Xpcarov,
'O'v/re TTore rt? eTrl rrjv TroXvcry^^eSi]^ ravrrjv iXdaeo yrjv, Kal
S/^a (T(l)dX/jLaro<; adp^ yevrjaerai, dKafjidTOc<; Oeorr^ro^; 6poL<;
dvcdrayv iradwv \vaei, (f)6opdy, Kat rovro (jyOovot; yevTjaerac
ef aTTLarov Xaov Kal Trpo? v^jro^i KpeiiaadrjoreTai 01)9 Oavdroi
KaraBiKO)^ (leg. Oavdrai KardBiKos;) irdyra Trpdaa^i (leg.
TTpd^afi sive Bpdcra<i) irelcreTaL.
["■ TToAucxtS^, Toupius, Emend, in Hesych. t. iii. p. 431. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 253
XIII.
Xprj(Tfio<; Tov ^A7r6\X(ovo<; BoOeU ivAeXcjyoh ireplXpLcnov.
EU fi€ ^td^erat ovpdvLov (\>w^, koL 6 TraOcov 6e6<; eanv,
Kol ov OeoTr)^; eiradev avrr], dp.(\)(i} 'yap ^poroacofMot; kol
dffpoTO<; avTO<i ^eo? tjBt} koI dvrjp, iravra (j)€p(ov irapd nrarpof;
e^cov T€ tt)? p>r)Tpo<; diravra, irarpo^; fxev ep^^wv fcowv d\K€o,
/jL7]Tpb<; Be OvrjTrj'i aravpov, rdcpov, v^pcv dvirjTOV Kai airo
ffK€(f)dp(ov iroTe')(eva tcl Bdxpva Oepfid 6 irivre '^^tXidBat; ex
•jrivTe TTVpwv Kopiaac (1. era?) to yap Oekev afipoTO<; aXKei.
Xpia-TOf} 6 ifio<; deo^ icrrcv iv ^v\u) ravvdy 09 (leg* TavvadeLsi)
6dv6V. 09 eK racJDTjf; eh ttoWcov oXkwv,
Miris modis haec perturbata sunt; magiiam tamen par-
tem in versus suos nuUo negotio redigi possunt in hunc
modum :
El<; fie ^id^eraL ovpdvLov ^0^9
Kal 6 Tradcbv ^609 eaTiy Kal ov de6T7](; irdOev avrrj.
"AfKJxo yap PpoTOcrcDiJLO^ €7]v 77S' d^pOTO<; avTO<;
C7eo9 ^oe Kai avTjp,
Udvra (pepcov irapd irarpo^;, €^(ov Trj<; /jL7]Tpo<; diravra
^Ek 7raTpo<; jmIv e')(^cov ^(07]v dXKec
MijTpo^; Be 6v7)r7]<; o-ravpov, rdcjiOVy v^piv, dvirjv.
Tov Kal diTO ^e^dpwv nrore '^evaro Bd/cpva Oepfid.
XIV.
^Aardvov irepl rrjf; ©eoTOKOv,
TLfir)<TcopLev TTjv Mapcd/jb, <W9 «aXd)9 Kpv-^acrav to fivaTypcov.
Sine dubio loco ^Ao-Tdvov emendandum est ^OaTdvov,
Ostanes magus et Zoroastres etiam indoctis cognitissimi.
Theodoro Meliteniotae Prmfatione in Astronomiam non Osta-
nes dicitur^ sed 'OTdyq^;. Quae fortasse vera scriptura est :
nam et apud Herodotum non unus est Otanes Persa : et
vero Magus ille natione fiiit Chaldaeus. Theodori locum
describam, quod ibi plurimorum Magorum nomina videas,
254 EPISTOLA AD
qiios alibi frustra qusesieris. 'Ev of? (XaXSa/ot?) aXXot re
ifKelaroL ^e^6va(Tiv a^ioKo^oi dvBpe<;, teal /jLaXcara Zcopo-
dcrTp7]<;, Kal fjuer eKelvov ^Ordvr]<^, 6 re Kt^T^vct?, Kal Na^ov-
piayo<;, Kal crvv avroL<; 6 ^ovSlvo<;, aXXd Kal ^eXevKOf; diro
^e\evKla<^y Xa\8aL0<; Kal ovto^ ecniv,^
XV.
Qov\i<^ 6 AlyuTTTLcov /3a(7t\€v<; iirapOel^ toI<; Karopdco-
fiacriv '^pQ)T7}aev eh to fiavrelov rod EvpiTrlSov irepl avrov
OVTQ)<;.
^pd<rov fioi, TTvpca-Oevh, &c. ut Malelas p. 26. [27-]
Hominem sane festivum^ qui Euripidem ')(^p7]<T[xo\o'yovvTa
nobis exhibuit. Quidni autem, inquies ? cujus ex fiavrela)
hoc editum est,
MdvTL^ S' dpL(TTO^ ocrrt? elKa^et /caXcS?,*
oraculum quidem, quo nihil verius ac sapientius ; quale nun-
quam aut Bacis^ fudit, aut comicus iste Glanis, aut
Pythia, quae tripode ex Phoebi lauroque profata est.'^
Sed extra jocum : sine controversia corrigendum est rod
^apdwcSo^' cui Canobi templa dicata sunt; etiam Alexan-
driae et Memphi. Narrat Strabo^ miris quosdam laudibus
efferre rd^; dperdfi rcov tov ^apd7roBo<; iv Kavco^o) Xoylayv.
Haec scripseram, cum sero animadverti apud Suidam in voce
©ovXi<; ita legi avroXe^el, uti prius ex conjectura emenda-
veram.
Dubitantem me et quo proxime me vertam circumspec-
tantem ad se vocat Sophocles, indignis sane modis a Joanne
acceptus p. 47' O ydp ao(j>coTaTO<; Ho(f>oK\r]<; Bpa/xa i^eOero
[* Theod. Mel. Prooem. in Astron. (ad calcem Claud. C. Ptolem. De Jud. Fac.
&c. p. 228. ed. 1663.— D.]
[* Eurip. Frag. Incert. Trag. cxxviii. ed. Matt. — D.]
[" De Bacide et Glanide, vide Aristoph. Equit. v. 999. ed. Bekk. et Casau-
bonum ad 1. — D.]
[^ Lucret. i. 740. ubi — " lauroque profatur." — D.]
[* p. 1136. ed. Falc, ubi t^s . . ap. rwv iyTavOa \oy. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 255
Kal TTOirjTiKcof; ecTrev on (o Tetpea-iafi) rrjv UaXXdSa eiSe \ov-
ofjiivrjv Kal yvyij iyevero. Ego ver6 quovis pignore con-
tenderim nihil usquam de fabella ista profectuni a Sophocle,
quanquam ab aliis passim memoretur. Cum enim omnes
fere titulos Sophoclaeorum dramatum beneficio Grammati-
corum veterum habeamus, nullum est ubi Tiresiae persona
locum habere possit, praeterquam una Trilogia^ (Edipus
Tyrannus, Antigone, et (Edipus in Colono : sic enim sentio :
sive Tetralogiam malis, accedo; ut fabula satyrica, sicut
omnes omnium prseter Cyclopem Euripidis, periisse videatur.
Quanquam enim affirmet Suidas^'^ {on 6 ^o<^oK\ris) vp^^ '^^^
Bpafia 7rp6<; hpafia dycovi^eaOac, dWd fir) rerpaXoyiav' sci-
mus tamen ex didascaliis non ex omni parte verum hoc esse.
Vide modo Aristophanem Grammaticum in Argumento Me-
deae EuripidisJ Atqui haud commemini fabellam istam de
Tiresia in trinis illis narrari, neque ibi reperiri posse arbi-
tror. Prima haec est erga Sophoclem contumelia. Deinceps,
"OOev, ait^ i^eOero . . ^o<J)ok\7]<; iv to?9 avrov o-vyypdfjbfiaa-f,
ravTa akriOela'i elvac. EI<i ianv 6 Oeb^ 09 rov ovpavov, &c.
O hominis stuporem^ et Ihicoreiav meram ! Apud auctorem^
unde haec habuit Antiochensis, sine dubio scriptum erat ad
hoc exemplum : KaOoyf; 6 ^0(j>0K\rj(; elirev iv rat^ aXrjOel-
ato-cv eh io-rc 6e6^. Homo stolidus interpunctione falsa
jugulavit versum^ misereque disperdidit.^ Nimirum ab 6Xr)-
[* V. 'S,o<poK\ris. — D.]
[y " Immo certum est, etiam post primam actionem tetralogiis dimicasse
Sophoclem, quod praeter Triptolemum docuit Nausicaam satyricam et alia
satyrica dramata ; idemque apparet e didascalia Byzantii Aristophanis Argum.
Eurip. Med. 'EStSax^i? efi TlvQotupov "kpxovTos (01. Ixxxvii. 1.) Karb, t^v ttQ'
^OXvfnridSa. Tlparos Ev(popi(t}y, Sevrepos 'SiO(poK\^s, rplros EvpiiriSrts' Mi^Seto,
^iXoKT^Tjs, AIktvs, &€pi(TTai SoTupof ov (Tdi^ovTai. Hinc est quod Bentleius
Epist. ad Mill. p. 462. ed. Lips, dicit : Scimus tamen ex didascaliis non ex omni
parte verum hoc esse. Vide modo Aristophanem Grammaticum in Argumento
Medea Euripidis. Nempe et Bentleius eodem, quo alii, errore nimis genera-
tim cepit Suidae verba, &c." Boeckhius, Grac. Trag. Prin. &c. p. 105. —
Errorem suum de trilogia sive tetralogia, (Ed. Tyr., Antig. et (Ed. in Col, Bent-
leium in Addendis agnoscentem videas. — D.]
[^ " Nescio an verba Malelae corrupta sint ; et oKvOeias thai depravata sint
ex aX-ndfiaiffiy, ut at ex c sequente natum sit." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 364.
-D.]
256 EPISTOLA AD
Oelaiai distinction em posuit^ cum oratio post elire sustineri
debuerit. Sed efficiam ut posthac hi versiculi sano saltem
pede possint incedere. Sic igitur emendo :
Ev rac^ aX7)6eiai,(TLV et? icmv 6€6<;,
* O? ovpavov T^ erev^e koX ^alav jJuaKpav,
HovTOv re ')(apoTT6v olS/ia Kave/JLcov^ /Sta?.
Qv7]T0L re TToXkov^ KapBla TrXavcofjuevot
'IBpv(rdfzea6a Trrj/iaTuyv TrapayjrvxV^}^
GeoSv^ dyaX/iar eK 'XiOuyv rj '^aXKecov^
'JEL ')^pVaOT6VKT(OV Tf \6(j)aVTlV(0y^ tvttov^.
Qvaia<; re tovtol<; kol K€vd<;S 7ravr]yvp6C<;
T6v^ovTe<i oi/TO)?^ eva-epelv vojjbi^ofiev.
Ita fere leguntur apiid Justinum^ Clementem^ Eusebium,
Theodoritum^ et partim Athenagoram; adeo ut demirer in-
terpretem Chilmeadum, hominem sane pereruditum^ in luce
tam clara minus solito perspexisse. Sed non te celabo^ quod
pace sanctorum virorum dictum velim^ vebementer me suspi-
cari non esse haec a Sophocle. Id adeo cur in animum in-
ducam, si me interroges; dico, permirum mihi praeter alia
videri, tam illustrem locum Ecclesiasticis solis incurrisse in
oculos, aliorum omnium aciem effugisse. Qui factum^ uti
dormitaret hie Plutarchi diligentia? Qui Porphyrium prae-
terire potuit irepl diTO')(fj^ iiJb'>\rv'^o3v tam insigne testimonium
[' t' om. Mai.— D.]
[* 8e x°-P(^o^) et KoX avifiuv. Mai. — D.] j^ 8e troKi. Mai. — D.]
[•= 'iSutrcifie^a "n-qyufiaroiv irapai^vxas. Mai. — D.]
[d 06(?. Mai.— D.] [e KctX iiXwv. Mai.— D.]
\} i\e<pavrlvuv. Mai. — D.] [? Kaivds. Mai. — D.]
[} ovrws om. Mai. — Clementem (p. 63 et 717. ed. Pott.) maxime secutus,
sic locum exhibuit Brunckius, Soph. Frag, ex Incert Trag. li. :
ETs Tois dA7j0. ....
QvTiTol Se TToAAol Kaphiav Tr\av<i)fi^voi
^ X0.\K€0VS
*H XP*"^0T6tJ/CT0us, fj '\€(f)aVTlvovs rxmovs'
@valas T6 TotJrois Kal Ka\as Tro,VT)yipii5
f^e/xovT€s . . « . . D,]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 257
adversus rcov OvacMV ra^i Trapavojxovf; cr^a7a9j ut ad hunc
' locum ait Theodoritus ? Ubi tu, Stobaee, cessasti, literarum
oblivio ? tu, qui tot forulos bibliothecarum excussisti, Soplio-
clis autem et Euripidis monumenta studiose praeter caetera
lectitasti. Adeone paucos e Patribus, — quid Patres autem
dico ? umnnne aliquem tenebrionem, qui supposita persona
librum ediderit (ut et olim et liodie nonnuUorum opinio
est, neque adeo injuria) ceeteris omnibus perspicaciorem et
diligentiorem fuisse ? Clemens enim aperte et ingenue fa-
tetur Hecataei se fidem secutum, apud ipsum Sophoclem
omnino non legisse. *0 fiev 'Xo(\)OKkri^, ait, Strom. V._,*^
&<; (ftrjacv 'EKaTaLO<; 6 ra? l(TTOpla<; (ivvra^dfjbevo'^ iv rS Kar
"AfipafjLov Kol Tov<i AlyvTTTLOvfi. Illud autem exploratum
habeo tarn a Justino et Clemente Patres alios accepisse,
quam Justinum et Clemen tern commentitii ejus Hecataei
auctoritate tradidisse. Quem ad hominem demum, et quam
nulla fide res redierit, vides. Ille ne ut Sophocli versiculos
aliquot vereretur affingere, qui ilium ipsum, quo eos adduxit,
librum ediderit simulata persona Hecataei? Ipsa praeterea
oratio de se facit indicium. Non agnosco illud ^aX/cecov, et
TToXXov sumptum, ut aiunt, adverbialiter, esse hominis Attici,
aut in tragoedia ferri posse.^ Qualis enim liaec foret con-
fusio dialectorum, et ut ait ille,J sartago loquendi ? Oportuit
enim ttoXv et 'x^oXkcov. XaXKecov quidem a ^aX/cev? Attice
dixeris; minime gentium a ')(aXKov<;, non magis mehercule
quam ayaTrdei vel ^ApiaroTeKeo'^. Xpvaea, ait Phrynichus,^
dpyvpea, Kudvea, '^dXKea, raura ^laKa Scatpov/ubeva' '^prj ovv
Xeyetv '^^pvad, dpyvpd, Kvavd rbv ^ArTiKi^ovTa. Xpva-ovf;
Xeye, rb yap '^pvcreo^; ^la/cov, wcravrco^^ koI dpyvpov<;, ....
'X^a,XKov<;, Kvavov<;, kol rd ofMoca. Rogo denique, cui personae
haec oratio conveniat? Quave Sophocles fiducia die festo
ludorum (non alias enim in scena quam Panathenaeis ac
P p. 717. ed. Pott.— D.]
[' TToWhv Soph. Jntig. 86. : verum ibi 'k\c7ov legebat Porsonus ad Eurip.
Hec. 624.— D.]
[} Persius, i. 80.— D.]
[•* ed. 1517. fol. ult. Paulo aliter legitur locus in ed. Lobeck. p. 207., ubi
vide Pauwii notam. — D.]
VOL. II. 2 L
258 EPISTOLA AD
trinis Liberalibus tragoedise docebantur) illos ipsos dies
festos et ludos solennes in contemptionem adduceret ?
Istuccine se impune laturiim speraret?^ Nonne ^schyli
periculum cautiorem eum faceret, qui^ quod in Sisypho
opinor TrerpoKvXLcrT^ ad Cereris mysteria curiosius videretur
alludere^ nisi ad aram Bacchi confugisset, illico trucidatus
esset in scena : postea etiam in Areopago de capite suo
causam dLxit ? Habes, amice, suspiciones nostras :^ tu tui-
que similes rem cognoscite, et sententiam ferte; non Be/c-
KecreXrjyoi quidam, 7ro\v/JLa6et<; sine pectore et mente,
avipe<;, wv to Keap
UakCi a-eaaKTai Koi Sva-eKvlTrTco Tpvyo<;.^
Praeclare vero actum est cum Sophocle, quod a %/3o-
voppd(l)(o nostro non nisi semel ad falsum testimonium di-
cendum citatus sit : Euripides autem, qui Malelae erat paulo
familiarior, gravissimas istius consuetudinis poenas sustinuit ;
adeo quidem ut non minus incommodo hospite hoc An-
tiochensi, quam olim Promeri canibus usus esse videatur.
Non erit, opinor, ab instituto nostro alienum, si locos omnes
accuratius aliquantum examinem, in quibus Euripidis men-
tio fit : et, quoad ejus facere potero, fabularum titulos, quo
singuli quique loci referuntur, ostendam. Dabitur fortasse
occasio ex interioribus Uteris aspergendi aliquid: memores
tanien erimus, ut spondeo, verbi veteris, quo admonemur
Trj %6t/3l (Tirelpeiv, /jltjB* oXo) to5 OvKclkw.^
\} " Aliud argutnentum adferre potuerat Bentleius, Sophoclem scilicet de
Diis patriis longe reverentius semper loqui, quam ut hujus p-fjcrews auctor esse
possit." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 364. — D.]
[•" Confer nostrum in Addendis, et in Epist. ad Bernard. Mtis. Crit. t. ii.
p. 541, 543, 547. — De his pseudo-Sophoclis versibus egerunt Jortinus, Re-
marks on Eccles. Hist. vol. i. p. 309.; Toupius, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii.
p. 526. ; Boeckbius, Gr. Trag. Prin. p, 148. — D.]
[" Cercides apud Stobaeum. Vulgo rpxryi : vide Floril. t. i. p. 129. ed.
Gaisf.— D.]
[" . . . yeKaaaffa eKeivrj rp X^^P^ S^'*' ^^^ [Pindaro Corinna] crireipeiv ciAAa
fi^ oAy T^ OvKaKca. Plutarch. At1ienie7ises Bella, &c. — Mor. t. ii. p. 294. ed.
Wyttenb.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 259
Quae igitiir habes pag. 39. Uepl 979 {Aavdr^s) e^ivdo-
\6y7)cr€v EvpL7rlhr}<; 6 croc/xwraro? eV rfi avvTa^ec rov avTOv
Spdfiaro^, et quae sequuntur^ e fabula Danae desumpta sunt.
Laudat banc Pollux lib. 4. cap. 16.P Stobaeus autem non
semel, ut et aliam Sophoclis similiter inscriptam. Harum al-
terutram, magis tamen Euripideam, Latine convertit Naevius,
cujus Danae Nonio Marcello citatur. Plutarchus Conso-
latoria ad Apollonium :^ *0 Be irapaixvOov^evo^ rrjv Aavdijv
Bva7rev6ov<Tav Alktv<; <f>7](Ti,
AoKelfi Tov aSrjv (tcov tI (j>povTL^€iv yocov,
Kal TralB^ dvrjo-etv rov aov, el de\oc<; arevecv ;
Uavcrai' ^Xeirovaa 8' el<i rd rwv TreXa? KaKa
^Pd(ov yivoi dv, el Xoyi^eadac 6i\ot<;,
"OaoL re SecrfjLoo<i eK/juefio'^^^drjVTaL /Sporwv,
"OaoL re yrjpdaKovaiv opcpavol t6kv(ov,
Tov<; T €K fjbeyiaT7](; o\^la<; TVpavviho^;
To firjBev 6vTa<;' ravrd ae aKOirelv '^pe(ov.
Erravit eruditissimus Grotius in Ea^cerptis/ cum in versa
quarto reposuit ^Paov ^epoi'^ dv. Nihil enim magis usu
tritum, quam pdcov etvai, melius habere, hilariore animo esse,
convalescere. Etiam pueri hoc sciunt. Erravit^ cum in
versiculo quinto emendare conatus est ep^yi,efji6^6rivTai. Non
enim magis p.o'yQovpuai dixeris, cum yi^o'^Qw sit verbum
neutrum^ quam 'Trd(T')(o^aL aut Kafjuvofiai. Sine dubio scrip-
turn oportuit
"OcroL re 8ea/jLol<; i/jifie/xo'^evvTac ^poTMV,
vel
' Oaov re Becrfioccrc /Jue/jLO'^evvTac ^porcjv.^
Erravit denique, cum locum hunc ad hanc, de qua agi-
mus^ Danaen referendum putavit, qui omnino ex Euripidis
[P p. 415. ed. Hemst. — D.]
[1 Mor. t, i. p. 294. ed. Wyttenb. — Eurip. Diet. Frag. i. ed. Matt. — D.]
[' p. 381.— D.]
[■ Vulgatam (probante Matthiaeo) tuetur Wyttenb., Animadv. in Plut. &c.
t. vi. p. 352., vertens in vinculis defatigati, confecti, consumti, contabuerunt. — D.]
260 EPISTOLA AD
Dictye accersitus est:^ de quo consule Stobseuni, et alios.
Aristophanes Grammaticus in Argumento Medece. ^Ehuhd^OT]
iirl IIvOcoScopov^ dp^ovTO<; Kara rrjv 7rf ^OXv/jLTTLaBa. IlpdS-
T09 Ev<f>opio)y, Bevrepof; So(l)OK\rj<;, TpLro<; EvpcTrtSrjf;. Mtj-
BeLa, ^tXoKTTjrr}^, AlKTr)f;,^ QepKTTai. ^dTVpo<; ov aco^erac.
Scribe Alktv^, ©epoo-ral adrvpoo ov aoo^ovraL. i. e. ©eptaral
BpcLfia aarvpLKov. Ita loqui solent. Cave enim credas
TO adrvpoL esse partem inscriptionis. Ita Sophoclis fabula
Ka)(jiol adrvpoi. Scholiastes Nicandri" simpliciter ^ocj)OK\r)^
iv Ku)(f)ol<i. Sic ejusdem 'I'^yevral adrvpoi,, quemadmodum
apud Pollucem'^ est legendum pro Tp^vefral ^arvpcov.
Athenaeus"^ non apposito fabulae discrimine^ ^o(f>. iv 'I^y^v-
Tal<;. Sic ^Io(f)ot)v . . . . eV AvX(pSol<; G-aTvpoc<; apud Clemen-
tern :^ sic -^schylus eV Krjpv^i aarvpoLf; apud Pollucem -J
ita enim emendo pro Krjpv'^i aaTVpLKol<;. Pliotius in Lexico
manu scripto : Uupcrofcopaov XeovTO<;, Ala')(y\o^ ev Ki^pv^i^
aarvpotg. Ex quo restituendus Hesychii locus : Uvpao-
KovpaoXeovTog, irvppoKe^dXov, ^av6oTpl')(pv : lege, ut apud
Photium. Cum autem nomen fabulae cujuspiam sit numero
singulari; tunc o-arvpcKr] dicunt et a-arvpLKog. Potuit autem
Grotius erratum suum resciscere ex Fragmento illo Danacs,
quod primus in lucem edidit de Uteris optime meritus
Hieronymus Commelinus. Ibi dramatis personae sunt Mer-
curius, Danae, Nutrix, Acrisius, Minerva, Nuncius, Chorus :
Dictys autem minime comparet. In diroGiraap^aTii^ illo sic
vulgo legitur non longe a principio :^
Kara tto;? Keivr) rrrore
Evvrjv Kpv^alav yvovcra /cal fjur) yvovcra Brj
'TiroireTpov Xeovra Te^erai irarpL
[' " Grotium sequutus Barnes, in nota, Hunc, ait, locum alii ad Dictyn fabu-
lam referendum putant : cur Bentleium non nominat? qui in Epist ad Jo, Mil-
lium, Barnesio lecta, . . . solus monstraverat, locum ex Euripidis esse Dictye
repetitum." Valcken., Diatr. in Eurip. &c. p. 5. — D.]
[« 1. nu0oSwpou.— D.] [t 1. aIktvs. — D.]
[« Ad Ther. 343.— D.] [^ p. 1180. ed. Hemst.— D.]
[^ Lib. ii. c. Ixii. t. i. p. 241. ed. Schw.— D.] [* p. 329. ed. Pott— D.]
[y p. 1378. ed. Hemst— D.] [^ Kd/)v|t. ed. Pors.— D.]
[* V. 13. — Hoc Danaes fragmentum quin spurium sit non dubitarunt, ut alios
taceam, Jacobsius, Elmsleius, Matthiaeus. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 261
Cum nietri ratio^ turn res ipsa flagitat^ ut viroTrrepov
scribamiis, nou vTroirerpov. Quis non alatum Perseum et
in libris legit^ et in pictis tabulis vidit ? At interpres homo
sane festivus ita convertit ; sub saxo natum leonem. Nempe
huic committas, siquid recte curatum velis.^ Et tamen is
ipse^ est, ni fallor, qui bonam setatis partem contrivit^ ut
Suidam foras extruderet mendis maculisque usquequaque
obsitum, ut aliquando fortasse ostendemus.
Pag. 51. Ata TovTO he 6 EvpiTTiSrjf; .... tcov Ba/c^cov
i^edero Spd/jua, clj? oltto IIevdeco<; elir^y ravra' SefjbiXrj Bk
Xo'^evOetaa Sk /Sporov nvo^;, el<; Zrjva (pepovcra rrjv dfiap-
Tiav Xeyei. Bacchce EurijDidis etiam nunc supersunt. Illud
autem mentitur Malelas, 0)9 airb Tlevdiw^ : non Pentheus
enim, verum Semelae sorores 'Ivo)^ k Avrovoa, ^' d jxako-
7rdp7}o<; 'Ayava^ contumelias has ei dixerunt. Bacchus in
Prologo 'A
^Ettci fi dS€\(l)al /jL7]Tpo<;, a<; ^klctt ^XP^^^
Atovvaov ovK e^acrKov elvat tov Alo<;,^
XefxeXr^v he vvjji(f>ev6el(Tav eK Ovtjtov tlvo^s,
El(i Zi)v dvacj)epeiv rrjv dfMapTiav Xep^ou?.
Pag. 58. ^O yap ao^coTaTO^; EvpLirlhr}'^ 7roL7}TCKa)<i i^e-
6eT0 Bpd/jua, ox; ore 6 Zev<i eh crdrvpov e<f)6eipe rrjv ^ Avtio-
irriv, Censeo supplendum esse eU (rdrvpoy rpe^OeU ecf)-
Oeipe. Propter similitudinem duorum verborum accidit, ut
fieri solet, ut librarius unum omitteret. Porro fabula An-
tiopa^ memoratur ab Hesychio, Stobseo, aliis. Photius
Patriarcha in Lexico MS. EvKpa<; evKparo^; evpv^poTolcnv.
EvKpa<; ov yevoLT av rjheo)'^, iv ^AvnoTrrj. Lege EvKpa<;,
evKparo^' Evpnr, ev ^AvrLoirrj' Bporolauv evKpa^ ov yevocr dv
7)Seco<;, Suidas: Ev/cpar]<;, dvrl tov evKparo^. Scribe £v/c/)a9,
uti recte apud Etymologicon Magnum. Antiopam Latine
[" " Huic mandes, si quid recte curatum velis." Terent. .^rf. iii. iii. 18. — D.]
[»» ^milius Portus.— D.] [•= Theocr. Ichjl. xxvi. 1. — D.]
[^ V. 26. — D.] [^ vulgo iK<pvvai Ai6s. — D.]
[f " Bentleium miror Antiopam Euripidis leviter attigisse tantum."
Valcken., Dialr. in Eurip. &c. p. 68. — D.]
262 EPISTOLA AD
docuit Pacuvius, de Grseco Eiiripidis conversam : citantibus
Charisio, Diomede^ Servio^ et Marcello. " In quo admiror/*
ait Cicero De Finibus,^ " cur in gravissimis rebus non de-
lectet COS patrius sermo, cum iidem fabellas Latinas ad
verbum de Graecis expressas non inviti legant. Quis enim
tarn inimicus psene nomini Romano est, qui Ennii Medeam,
aut Antiopam Pacuvii spernat aut rejiciat? qui se iisdem
Euripidis fabulis delectari dicat, Latinas oderit?"^ Nosti
illud Persii,^
Sunt, quos Pacuviusque, et verrucosa moretur
Antiopa, aerumnis cor luctificabile fulta.
Pag. 63. 'O ^ap cro(l)a)TaTO<^ Evpi,7rlBr]<; itoitjtlkS)^ i^eOero
hpafia irepl tov OlSiTroSof; koX T779 ^loKaarijf; koI tt}? ^(fiij-
769. CEdipus et Jocasta in Phoenissis ad partes vocantur :
quin et ibidem de Sphinge mentio fit non semel. Potuit
igitur Antiochensis ad Phcenissas respicere, potuit ad fabu-
1am (Edipwn, quae laudatur ab Hesychio, a Stobeeo aliquo-
ties, ab Erotiano.
Pag. 88. Kal fiera Aia')(v\ov i^acrlXeva-ev avT&v (rwv
^ AOrjvaiwv) AKfiaicov err) hvo, irepl ov EvpL7rlSTj<; 6 aocfxora-
T09 Bpdfjba i^iOeTO* koX fiera ^ AKfialovra i/SaariXevaav avrcov
aWoc IH! , Amabo te, Syrisce, serione haec an joco ? quae
te enim larvae atque intemperiae agitabant,J cum haec scri-
beres ? ttov tol ^peve? eKTreTroravTai, ;^ ^AK/jualcov et ^AK/jual-
ovra pro AXKfjuatcov et AXKjjialwva ? Muli sunt ilia, non
hominis. Simile peccatum est, quod de Alcmaeone Atheni-
ensi tragoediam factam existimes. Siquidem ille est Alcmaeo
Argivus, Amphiarai filius, qui, quod Eriphylen matrem occi-
[fi^ I. 2. " In quibus hoc primum est, in quo admirer ; cur," &c. — D.]
[*» Vulgo " Latinas Utteras oderit," — quae spuria suspicati sunt editores.
-D.]
[i Sat. I. 77.— D.]
[J Terentii Heaut. iii. ii. 30, 32., et Plauti Aulul. iv. iv. 15. respicit noster.
-D.]
[^ Theocr. Idyl. xi. 72. "^n KwkAwi^, KvkKu^, ira ras (ppivas iKirevoTourai ;
-D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
263
disset, funis agitatus est. Inde scenae argumentum est ac-
cersitum. Timoclcs comicus :^
Tov<; yap Tpay(p8ov<; Trpfarov, et jBovXeCy aKoirei,
729 a)<f)e\ov(Ti 7rdvTa<f 6 fiev yap wv^ Trivrj^;,
Uray^orepov avrov Karafiadayv rov Tri\e(f)OV
Fevofjuevov, 7]Sr) rr)v Trevtav paov ^epeu'
'O voaSiV he fiavLKoyf;, jiXK/jLalcov eaKe-^aTO.
Antiphanes :°^
MaKapLov i(TTLV 7] Tpay^Bia
Uolrjfia Kara ttclvt
av ttoXlv
Elttt} Tt9 jiXKfiaLcova, Kal ra iraihla
Udvr ev6v<; eiprj'x^,^ on jjuaveh direKTove
Tr]v fJLTjripa.
Cicero Academ. 2.° ^^ Quid ? ipse Alcmseo tuus, qui negat
cor sibi cum oculis consentire, nonne ibidem incitato furore ;
Unde h(BC flamma oritur ? et ilia deinceps^ Incede, incede ;
adsunt, adsunt ; me, me expetunt, Quid^ cum virginis fidem
implorat ? Fer mi auxilium ; pestem abige a me, Flammi-
feram hanc vim, quae me excruciat. Cceruleo incinctce angui^
incedunt ; Circumstant cum ardentibus tmdis.'' Sed piget pro-
fecto in re certissima testibus usum esse non necessariis.
lUud opinor auribus tuis, Milli^ novum accedet; integram
hujus dramatis inscriptionem esse jLXKp^aiwv 6 hid W(o(J>lBo<;.
Nisi fortasse geminum Alcmceonem Euripides ediderit,<i aut
['' "Athen. 1. vi. c.ii. t. ii. p. 358. ed. Schw.— D.] \} &v ydp. ibid.— D.]
[" Athen. 1. vi. c. i. t ii. p. 355-6. ed. Schw.— D.] [«» etprfKev. ibid.— D.]
[" cap. 28.— D.]
[p Sic correxerat et Columna ad Ennii Frag. Vulgo " Coerulea incinctae
«^i."— D.]
[1 " Arg. [Eurip.] Alcest. in MS. Vat. No. 909. apud Dindorf. rh Spafia
ivoi-fjdTj il". iSiddx^V cTTi r\avKlvov 6.pxovros. rh A-. TrpioTov ^v 2o0okA^5, Sevrepov
EvpiviSrfS Kp^aaais, 'AkK/xaiovi rep 5ia\p(i}<f>i\<i}, TrjXeipw, 'AA./c^o'TtSi
From the mention of 'A\K/xalovi (where we must read 'AXK/jLaluvi t^ 5ta ^^cocpTSos),
we learn that the suspicion of Bentley, Ep. ad Mill. p. 16. [ed. Cant.], that there
were two dramas of the name, is confirmed. The present tragedy is the first,
the ^A\K/xaiwv which was exhibited after the death of Euripides was the second."
Clinton's Fasti Hellen., from the Earliest Accounts to the LV. Olymp. {Add. and
Corr.) p. 424.— p.]
264 EPISTOLA AD
iterum eundem^ correctum scilicet et hiecrKevaa^evov. Quic-
quid est hujus, solus adeo me docuit Hesychius noster^ et
fortasse solum : alios^ qui depravata ejus verba non poterant
intelligere, non item. ^Ap^alveiv, XevKalveiv. EvpLTriBrjf;
AXKfiaLcovt, Bca i|r7;^tSo9 apjalvovcra, Xev/calvovcra, (j)0CT(Saa,
Censeo corrigendum esse^ EvpLTrlBr}^ ^AX/cfiatcovt tm Blu
^ox^fcSo?' turn notam distinctionis ponendam f ^Apjalvovcra,
XevKalvovcra, (fiOL^&aa. Hapa he to dpybv, ait Eustathius ad
Odyssece secundum^'^ .... Kal dpydvTe<; ravpoi irapdUivSdpw,
Kal dpyatvecv to XevKaiveov Trap* EvpLirlBr) iv ^A\K/jLalo)vc.
Sive hsec Eustathius ab Hesychio, sive ab alio quopiam uter-
que transtulit, apparet hunc locum a multis jam saeculis
fuisse depravatum. Qui factum alioquin^ ut Eustathius tra-
goedise nomen mutilum protulerit^ nisi quod in verbis sequen-
tibus cerneret ovBkv vyL6<;. Idem Hesychius : '^rev/J?. "Hkw
B dTevTjfi diT oXkodv. EvpLTrlBrj^ ^A\Kfiai(DVi tS Bid 'xjrocpiBof;
o-vvT€ivacra. Corrige sodes in hunc modum^ EvpcTrlBrjf;
^AXKfiamvL tw Bid 'Wo)(f)cBo<;, crvvTelvaaa. ^ATevrj<^, ait^ est
avvTeivaaa, festinans summa cum virium contentione, Cujus
significationis exempla quod baud temere reperiantur^ prop-
terea verbi sedes a Grammaticis indicata est ^AXKiiaicov 6
Bid WwcfjcBo^. Rationem porro hujus inscriptionis non diu
neque frustra qusesiverit, qui in memoria habuerit Alc-
mseonem, quem antea contortorum anguium et ardentium
taedaram verbera nusquam consistere paterentur^ aliquando
tandem ad sanam mentem in Psophide Arcadise rediisse.
Videatur in Arcadicis Pausanias. ApoUodorus lib. iii.^
^AXKiJbalayva Be fieTrjXOev ^Epivvix; tov fjur^Tpcoov (povov, Kal
liep,7]vd)<; irpoiTOV fxev et? ^ApKaBlav 7rpb<s ^OiKXea irapayi-
veTai, eKeWev Be irpo^^ W(0(j>LBa 7rpo9 ^7]yea' Ka6apdel<^ Be
VTT avTov Apcrovorjv ya/juel ttjv tovtov OvyaTepa. Jam
monui emendandum esse Wco(j>lBa syllaba secunda producta.
Ovidius :^
Usque sub Orchomenon_, Psophidaque^ Cyllenenque.
[' p. 1430. ed. Rom.— D.] [» p. 135. ed. Heyn. (1803).— D.]
[« els. ed. Heyn.— D.] [« Met. V. 607.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. • 265
Percommode autem hie locus ApoUodori in inemoriam mihi
alium redigit, in libro primo; qui viros doctos in errorem
hactenus induxit : deinceps tamen, uti spero, non faciet.
TvBev^ Be a><; (f>rjaiv 6 rr)v ^AkKjJi^aiovLBa fye'ypa(j)cbs Krelva^
Toxj^i Me\avo<i iralha^ iTTL^ovKevovra^ Olvel, ^rjvea, &cJ
Quae sic Latine expressit interpres : Is qui Alcmceonidem
tragcediam scripsit, Hominem sane liberalem, qui vocem
illani tragmdiam benigne nobis de suo largitus est. Atqui,
O bone, ^AXK^amv ea tragoedia, non ' AXK/juaLovh inscribitur,
ut Erotianus, Stobaeus, Priscianus, aliique testantur. Sicuti
autem Philoclis tragici tetralogia de Pandione IlavScovU,
atque JEschyli de Oreste 'Opearela nominata est ; ita fieri
potest ut Euripides tria dramata de Alcmseone publicaverit,
una cum quarto satyrico argumenti omnino alieni : quam
integram tetralogiam ^AXKjjbaiwvlBa vocarent. Sed oportet
Epicharmi illud semper habeas in promptu,
Nd<f)€ Koi fiefjLvaa airto-Telv dpdpa ravra rav (ppevMV.^
Quicunque enim humaniores has Musas colit, ssepenumero
solet usu venire ut
*2(TKr} yjrevSea TToWa Xeycov irvfioicrtv ojJboia.^
Siquidem hae de AlcrrKBonide suspiciones, aegri sunt somnia ;
cum is scriptor, quicunque tandem fuerit, (neque enim de
eetate, neque de patria viri, aut nomine quicquam habeo
compertum) historicus sit, non tragicusJ 'O Be rrjv ""AXk-
/jLaccovlBa rypd-yfra^ (verba sunt Strabonis, lib. 10.^) 'iKaplov
[' ApoUodori verba sunt hsec : TuSews 5e au)!]p yevSfxeyos yevvaios, iipvyaSevdrj,
KTfipas, &s flip riv€S \4yov(nv, aSeXcphv Olvecos 'AXKciOoov' ws 5e 6 t^u 'AXK/xaica-
viSa yeypacbws, robs MeXavos, k. r. \. p. 23. ed. Heyn. — D.]
['^ Polyb. xviii. 23. t. iv. p. 88. ed. Schw., ubi . . . ruv <pp. — Suid. in N^<^e at
np6xfipos. — D.]
[* Horn. Od. xix. 203., ubi^Io-fcej/.— D.]
[y " 'AXfcfMaiwv nonien tragoedia. ^AXk/jluIouvis poema epicum." Toupius,
Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 475., ubi de his vocibus plura. — " Ale-
maonida carmen epicum fuisse, longe probabilius est : quae est sententia Heynii
ad Apollodorum." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 364. — D.]
[» p. 660. ed. Falc— D.]
VOL. II. 2 M
266 EPISTOLA AD
Tov nyveXoTTT}^ 7raTpb<; viov<; yevi<T6at Bvo, ^AXv^ea koI
A-evKahiov Bwacrrevaac 8' iv^ ^AKapvavla rovTOvg fiera tov
Trarpot;. Et quidem Euripide vetustior. Scholiastes ad
Orestem v. 1000.^ ^AkoXovOcIv SoKel (6 EvpiTrlBr)^) tS tjjv
^AXKjjLaKDvlha (w scribe etiam apud ApoUodorum, non o)
7r€7roi7]KOTC €t9 Tct TTcpl Tfjv dpva, 0)9 /cal Aiovvcnof; 6 kvkXo-
ypd(pO(; <f>r]aL ^epeKuSrj^ Se ov Ka6* ^Ep/juov fJLrjvlv (f)r]ai ttjv
apva VTTo/SXrjOrjvat. 6 Be rrjv ^AXK/JbaccovlBa ypd'^a<; rov
TTOLfiiva TrpoaayayovTa to iroifiviov t& ^Arpel avTairoKcCKel,
Quid tibi dicam depravatum mihi videri verbum illud pos-
tremum ? X9^^^ enim hrfkov^ to tov ^epeKvBov. leg. ^Avtulov
diroKoXel vel ^AvTavSpov KoXel vel AvTccjyov, vel simile quip-
piam; cum sine controversia desit nomen pastoris. Hjec
habui, Milli jucundissime, quae de Alcmceone et Alcrrueonide
ore^ ut opinor, alio indicia dicerem : non enim placet eorum
ratio, qui cum merse corniculae sint, emendicatis hinc inde
plumis germanos pavones se pollicentur.^
Pag. 104. Multa narrat Malelas de Proeto, Stheneboea,
et Bellerophonte, Kad(jb<; avveypdyfraTO Evpt7riSr](;, 6 TpayLKo<;
'7roL7}Tr)<;, 7r\7}poo(ra<^ to Bpdfia. Intellige de fabula Sthenebma,
cujus mentio fit apud Athenaeum, Stobaeum, alios. Julius
[» eV T^. ed. Falc— D.]
[•> V. 994. ed. Voxs.—Schol. t. iv. p. 452. ed. Matt.— D.]
[^ " In quorum quidem manus nondum venisset ilia R. Bentleii ad Jo.
Millium Epistola, cum prodiret Euripides Barnesii, in his fragmentis nonnulla
forte laudaverint velut nova, 'AKKfialwya rhv 5m Wa)(p7Sos' diversa dramata
inscripta Kprjres et Kprj(rcrai, et alia quaedam minime vulgata, Barnesiis certe
ante incognita, quam ista, qui solus forte viderat, primus monuisset Bentleius
in perdocta Epistola ; in qua cum haec scripserit, p. 20. [ed. Oxon.] non placere
sibi eorum rationem, qui, cum meree corniculce sint, emendicatis hinc inde plumis
germanos pavones se pollicentur ; quanta Bentleii debuit esse indignatio, cum sic
a Populari suo, Grsecae tamen linguae peritissimo, dilaceratas Tragici videret
reliquias, quas ipse, juvenis, tam sollicita cura composuisset; nam ex eadem
didicimus Epistola, fragmenta omnium Poetarum Grcecorum cum emendationibus
et notis grande opus edere olim Bentleium coustituisse. Hoc quale fuisset opus
pars ejus exigua demonstrat, quae publicata prostat, exhibens operum Callimachi
perditorum reliquias; qua nihil in hoc genere praestantius prodiit aut magis
elaboratum." Valcken., Diatr. in Eurip. &c. p. 3. — Confer etiam Person's
Tracts, &c. (by Kidd), p. 313.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 267
Pollux lib. 3. cap. 4.^ EiprjTat S^ ^evairaTr} irap' EvpLTTLSrj,
Nomen tragoedice non commemorat; aliunde tamen scimus
banc esse de qua agimus, Stheneboeam. BevaTrdra^, ait Pho-
tius MS. l8lq)<; cttI twv orav firj tolovtol irvewaiv
avejMOL ev roL<; 7r€\dy€(Ti,v, oirolot ev TOi<i Xcfieaiv. EvpL7r[8r)<i
^Oeve^ola. Tt^ dvSpa tlvcl ^evairdrav.^ Scribe autem in
Polluce ^€va7rdT7]<;. Apparet ita corrigendum esse^ cum ex
hoc loco Photii; tum ex Euripidis Medea, quae in extrema
fabula sic Jasoni convitium facit, T/? Be K\vei aov 6eo^ rj
Sat/jLcov, Tov ylrevSopKovKa I ^ecvairdra',^ Aristophanes Vespis :^
LTL<; vfjLcov, (o uearai,, rrjv e/jurjv lOcov cpvcrcv,
Elra Oavfid^eu fju opcov /xicrov Bcea-cpyKcofiivoVy
kraoKa'^ ey(o OLoa^o), Kav afjL0V<70<; rj to irpiv,
Scholiastes annotat ad versum novissimum : o <rTt%09 iic
XOevePoia^i EvpLTTiBov. Bene pol factum, quod nos docuerit,
unde tralatus sit hie o-ri'xp^i, quod quidem alias nesciremus.
Atque ea gratia non leve peccatum ei condonabitur. Enim-
vero non totus versus, ut ille existimavit, sed pars tantum-
modo posterior ex Euripide est. Nam in his rebus verba
mihi dari haud facile patior, qui, ut scis, fragmenta omnium
Poetarum Graecorum cum emendationibus et notis grande
opus edere constitueram : nunc, ut aiunt, "AWo^ /3/o9, dWrj
Biacra. Plutarchus ^v^TrocnaKcov i. 5.^ JTw? el'prjTac to,
MovcnKr]v 8' dpa
^Epco<; BcBdaK6iy Kav djj,ovcro<; fj to Trplv.
Quem ego locum admiror, cum sine dubio depravatus sit,
nemini unquam in suspicionem venisse. Ita exhibent, ut
vulgo legitur, Erasmus et Jos. Scaliger in Provei'biis ; ita
Grotius in Excerptis. Spes tamen est, ut nunc jam dehinc
[<* p. 296. ed. Hemst.— D.] [« rifxa. ^evairdr-nv. ed. Pors.— D.]
[' V. 1388. ed. Pors.— D.] [ff v. 1071. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[•» "HTis iffriv. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[' Mor. t. iii. p. 353. ed. Wyttenb.— Eurip. Stheneb. Frag. iii. ed. Matt.— D.]
268 EPISTOLA AD
tam turpe erratum ex libris et memoria hominum auferatur.
Legent enim qui sapient^ /jlovctlkov, non iJLovarLKr)v. Mov-
<TLKov BoBdcTKeL, i. e. TTOirjT'qv aTroSeiKwcri, poetam reddit :
quasi hoc senario Latine dixeris : Amor poetam vel fadt,
vel invenit.^ Ars musica et studium musicum est poetica.
Terentius :J Is sibi responsum hoc habeat ; in medio omnibus
Palmam esse positam, qui artem tractant musicam. Ea au-
tem signiticatio rov hthdo-Keiv elegantior paulo est et rarior,
proptereaque fraudi fuit librariis : attamen non desunt ex-
empla. Aristoph. Ranis :
Kal (Tif Ti Br) Bpdara<; avToix; ovto)(; dvhpelov^ eStSaf a? ;
Sed et hie locus in vitio est; et legendum auctore MS.
Oxoniensi^
Kal crif ri Spdcra^ outox? avTov<; yevvalov^^ ef eStSaf a? ;^
Vulgata lectio cum propter alia minus placet^ turn ob hoc
prsecipue; quod to rerpairoBiov sive iv. priorum pedum
mensura non debet in dimidiatum verbum desinere. Idem
Plutarchus Tlepl rov firj %pav e/jL/juerpa vvv rrjv Tlvdlav}
'O 8' EvpfTTiBn^f;, ait, elirayVy cb? 8cBdaK€0 TroLrjrrjv epco^;, kclv
cifjbovao^ y to irplv, ivorjo-ev otl, et quae sequuntur. Nicias
Medicus apud Schol. Theocriti Idyll, xi.^
"^Hv dp dXrjde^; tovto, QeoKpiTe, ol yap epSiVTe^
TloWdKL 7roi7jTd<i iSlBa^av tov<; irplv dpjOVGOV^.
[' " Observatio Bentleii minime vulgaris manet eadem, sive legatur fiov&iKhy,
seu, quod Euripidem arbitror dedisse :
iroi7}T-^v y Spa
"Epws SiSdcKci, Kau &/jLOvffos 77 rh irpiv.
Quod Grotius aliique dedere, ij.ov(tlk^p ^ &pa — semel apud Plutarchum, Sympos.
I. 5. p. 622. c. alterum legitur apud eumdem bis." [in libello de Pyth. Or., quein
infra citat Bentleius, et in Erot. — Mor. t. iv. p. 37. ed. Wyttenb. &c.] Valcken.,
Diatr. in Eurip. &c. p. 206., ubi plura. — D.]
[J Prol. in Phorm. 17.— D.]
\^ V. 1017. ed. Bekk., ubi Kal t: au.— D.]
\} Mor. t. ii. p. 454. ed. Wyttenb., ubi . . . . ws "Epus irotTjT^i/ SiSdffKei, et
iv(v6riffe. — D.]
["» Argum. Idyl. xi. — Poet. Min. Gr. t. ii. p. Ix. ed. Gaisf., ubi ... 01 yh.p
"EpwTcs TioKKovs iroiTjr. k. t. \. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
269
Sed quo me cunque recipio, omnia conspicio meiidis et
maculis inquinata. Ecce enim et huic medico medicina
adhibeiida est. Scribendum est, inquam,
KOI yap "Ep(OT€<;
UoWoLKL 7roL7]Ta<; iSlSa^av rou? Trplv dfiova-ovf;.
J.
P. 106. Tlepl he TTJf; IlacrKpdr}^ i^edero Spafxa EvpiTrlhr]^;
6 TToirjTT]^, Inanem, mihi crede, operam sumpserit, qui
Euripidis Pasiphaen instituerit quaerere. Non temere dico
atque equidem certe scio neminem ex scriptoribus vetustis
hodie superesse, qui tale quidquam memoriae tradiderit.
Hesychius tamen, ^apBa>, ait, eV Haau^dr) to aapBovLov, 17
(T<f>pajl(; etprfTai. quem si ad Euripideam fabulam respexisse
quispiam existimet; caveat moneo, et existimationi suae
insidias parari cogitet. Alcaei quidem comoedia Pasiphae
inscripta est, ut scimus ex Didascalia Pluti Aristophanis :
^EScSd^Orj eVl dp')(ovro^ ^AvrcTrdrpov, dyraycovc^o/iiivov avTcp
NLKO')(dpov<^ fiev Adfcwo-LV, ^Api,(7TOfjiivov<; Be ^AhjjLrjTWy Nlko-
(j)a)VTo<; Be ^ABmvlBc, ^AXKalov Be Uacrccj^drj. Sed Euripidis
Pasiphaen nusquam cuiquam laudari reperies. Quid igitur
fiet ? Num nam Antiochensis, cum haec scriberet, memo-
riola vacillavit yepovTiKoj^, an mendacio conatus est fallere ?
Utrum libet sane fecerit, baud arbitrario vapulabit: atque
adeo dudum est, quod homunculum video ctkvtt} ^Xeireiv,
Venmi hercle quanquam admodum nupera est inter nos
notitia ; me tamen et precatorem habebit et defensorem
paratum : cum et alias soleam esse in amicitiis fidelis. Dico
igitur Euripidem tragosdiam quidem de Pasiphae publicasse,
minime tamen Pasiphaen inscripsisse, sed Cretenses. Nee tu
mihi de Kprjacrai^ hoc perperam intelligas, quae ex Athenaeo,
Stobaeo, et aliunde satis in notitiam venerunt : sed de quibus
hodie fortasse primum inaudivisti, Kpr)al' quandoquidem et
Joannis Meursii, qui de trium tragicorum fabulis accurate
studioseque scripsit, diligentiam effugerunt. In Aristophanis
Ranis his verbis compellat Euripidem iEschylus :
270 EPISTOLA AD
^fl KprjTiKCLf; fiev o-vWiycov fJLOVcphia^;,
TdjjLov^ S' avoalovf; ela-^epcov eh Tr)v Tej(y7)v.^
Quo in loco haec annotat Scholiastes : ^Ev yap rot? KPH^IN
iKapoy /jbovcpBovvra iTTolijcre. Kal ol fiev et? rrjv ^iKcupov
fjbovcpSlav iv Toh KPH^I' Opaa-vrepov yap Bok€l° to irpo-
acoTTov. ^A7roW(ovLo<; Be, on hvyarau Kal eh ttjv ^Aepoirrjv
TTjv iv T0t9 Kpr)Tai<^ elprjaOac, fjv elarjyaye Tropvevovaav.
Olfiac Be Blcl ra iv rtp AloX(p. Ti,/JLa')(^iBa<; Be Bta rrjv iv roh
KPHXI fii^iv IIAIH^AH^ 7r/309 tov ravpov. Absolvimus,
opinor, Joannem ab omni suspicione peccati : nunc et huic
Scholiast! patrocinari oportet. Non enim deerunt qui per-
vulgata via quorundam, qui germanos se putant esse Aris-
tarchos, extemplo pro verbo Kprjcrl contendent esse reponen-
dum Kpr)(TaaL<i. Pedetentim tamen, et aliquantisper^ oro,
manum abstineant; dum tribunos adeam qui intercedant
tantae temeritati. Ecce iterum Scholiastes ad haec verba
Aristophanis,
^AX>C, w Kp7]Te<;, "IBr}<; reKva,
Ta To^a \a^6vT€<; iTra/Mvvare.^
Tavra, ait, irapa ra iic KPHTflN EvpiiriBov. Bina pro-
fecto sunt dramata Kprjre'^ et KprjaaaCy argumento longe
dissimili. Personae omnino aliae introducuntur, scenae po-
nuntur in locis disjunctissimis maximeque diversis. Illic
Icarum cernis et Pasiphaen : in Cressis Aeropen, Atrea,
Thyestem. Hie Argis Peloponnesi, illic in Creta insula res
aguntur. Aristophanes Vespis :^
TovTo Be
^ABrji; BiaKpivel irpoTepov rf '70) 7re[ao/jLai,»
Ubi Scholiastes, 'Ev Kp7)o-(Tac^, ait, EvpiiriBov, 6 ^Arpev^
7r/309 Tr}v ^AepoTTTjv * KpLvel ravra. Unde perspicuum est, in
superiore loco corrigendum esse ^Aepoirrjv rrjv iv rah Kprja-
[» V. 848. ed. Bekk.— D.] [» doKu iivai. Schol. ib.— D.]
[p Ran. V. 1352. ed. Bekk., ubi "iSas.— D.
[1 V. 762. ed. Bekk.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 271
a-aL<;, Porphyrius lib. 4.'' De Abstinentia : Mc/cpov fi€ irap-
rfkOe KoX TO EvptTTiSetov irapaOeaOai, 09 tov<; iv Kp^ry rov
Alo<; 7rpo(j>^Ta<; dTre^eaOat ^rjai, Zta^ TovToyv. Xiyovai, 8e ol
Kara rbv x^P^^ 7rpb<; tov Mlvco'
^oiviKoy6vov<i iral Tpj<i Tvpta<;
TeKVOV Evp(t)7rr)<; koI rod fieyaXov
Zr)vo^,^ avdacrtov
Kp^TT)^ eKaro/nTTToXLedpov
''Hkco ^a$iov<i vaov<^ TrpoXcTrcjv,
Ov^ avOiyevrj^ r/jLTjOecaa 8pv<i
^T€yavov(; irapix^L xj^Xv^ca TreXeKet,
Kal TavpoSirpM KpaOel-
a dTp€Kov<; dpfj,ov<; Kviraplaaov. et quae sequimtur.
Ita locum hunc emendare conatus est Grotius in Excerptis
ex Comoediis et Tragoediis Greeds,^ Cujus auctoritatem Can-
tabrigienses in novissima Porphyrii editione secuti sunt.
" Hoc fragmentum Euripidis " (verba sunt Grotii) ^' iv
Kkeial extare dicit Erotion, ut quidem nunc legitur. At
ex Cressis esse facile intelligitur, quod verba sunt chori ad
Minoa."^ Sed erravit in re levi, gravioribus, opinor, stu-
diis intentus, vir supra comparationem atque semulationem
nostram longissime positus. Cum enim in Cressis, ut jam
docui, Atreus et Aerope loquantur; scena autem sine con-
troversia sit Argos ; vix aut nuUo modo est^ ut haec Por-
phyriana ex eodem dramate petita videantur. Quod si sint^
demiror equidem cur in Creta Minos cum his sacerdotibus
sermonem instituat. Quae enim hse praestigiae ? quibusnam
macliinis haec dvco Kal Kdrco ? Eademne in fabula tarn
alienae historiae ? duplexne scena, et geminus chorus ? Modo
Cretan! spectemus, modo regiam Atrei ? modo chorus virilis,
Mystae, inquam, Idaei Jovis, modo grex foeminarum ad partes
[' p. 172. ed. Cant. 1655.— Cret Frag. ii. ed. Matt.— D.]
[» " Forsan det." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. SG*. — D.]
[' Zav6s. ed. Cant, et Grot.— D.]
[" p. 391.— D.]
[' p. 957. ubi ..." facile intelligitur ex Porphyrio de non edendis aniraa-
libus quarto. Ait enim verba esse chori ad Minoa." — D.]
VOL. II.
272 EPISTOLA AD
veniat ? Inde enim fabula Kprjao-ac nomen accepit, quod in
ea chorus sit mulierum Cretensium, videlicet quae Aeropem
e Creta comitatse sunt. Simileni ob causani ^oLvcao-ac,
Tp(odBe<;, Tpa'^iVLai, alise bene multae suis vocabulis nomi-
nantur. Nee tamen, quod chorus sit Cretensium^ idcirco
necesse est, ut in Creta scena sit posita : quando et in
Phcenissis res Thebis aguntur, chorum tamen constituunt
mulieres Tyrise : Tvptoy olS/jua XcTrova e^avjiKpodlvia Ao^la
^oivLcraa<; airo vdaov."^ Sed quid tergiversamur ? Scimus
Aeropen Catrei fuisse filiam, Minois neptem : et quo tem-
pore res hse transactse sunt, jam diu liberos suscepisse.
Siquidem Agamemnonem et Menelaum patri fuisse conscios
commemorant, cum coenam illam feralem Thyestse appo-
neret. Non ergo de Minoe proavo longa dubitatio est, quin
e numero vivorum pridem ante excesserit. Imo vero a filia-
bus Cocali trucidatus est: si Eusebio fides, prius circiter
triennio; sed secundum exactissimam rationem Guliehiii
Lloidii, Episcopi Asaphensis,
'-4vSpo9, ov ovT alvelv rolai KaKoicri ^e/x-t?,^
ante annis solidis quatuor et viginti, quam Atreus regnum
capesseret. Quamobrem baud facile patior, ut corrupta ilia
verba Erotiani EvpcirlSr)^ iv KXeccrl magis magisque a Grotio
depraventur : sed, quod ad vulgatam lectionem proxime ac-
cedit, auctor esse ausim, ut posthac eV KPHUI corrigatur.
Ita totum erit simplex et unum, omnia sibi constabunt, belle-
que convenient : Minos, chorus Mystarum, Pasiphae, Icarus,
Non opus erit KXcoOecv rd davyKXcoara. Restat, ut de loci
hujus Porphyriani miris quidem modis mendosi lectione ac-
curate quantum in nobis est, et exquisite disputemus :
''H/cco ^a6eov<i vaovs TrpoXnroDv,
[^^ V. 209. ed. Pors.— D.]
[^ '6ti iroXX^u evvoiav icrx^ irpbs rhv IlKdruva 6 *Api<rroT4\Tis, SrjXov ck rod
Koi fiufihy avi^pSxrai rep nxdruvi, iv ^ iireypaypev ovtw'
Buifjibv 'AptcTTOTeATjs ividpvcraTo r6u5e Jixdrcovos,
'ApSphs, tv ovS' [vulgo out'] alveiv rotai KUKolcri defiis.
Ammonius in Aristotelis Vita — Arist. 0pp. t. i. p. 46. ed. Bip., ubi vide Bulilii
notam. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
273
Ov<; avdcyevr)^ r/jLTjOela-a Bpv<;^
^reyavoiji; 7rape^6t XaXv/So) ireXeKeL,
Kal ravpoSerpo) Kpadel-f
^' aTp6Kov<;X ap/jLov<; KVTrapcaaov,
Quae ita vertit CI. Grotius :
Sacra advenio templa relinquens,
Quas prisca domos dedit indigena
Quercus Chalyba secta bipenni,
Taurique sibi glutine jungens
De vera tigna cupressu.
Haud ita facere debet qui interpretis munere fungitur. No-
lim eum in caeteris scriptis eodem modo indiligentem. Unde
enim dpfiol sunt tigna ? quid ista sibi vult vera cupressus ?
Cur spreta est vulgata Porphyrii lectio arpeKel^ ? Cur Ero-
tiani auctoritas repudiata^ qui locum hunc ideo citavit^ ut
ostenderet arpeKelf; dpfia^; non significare aXrjOelq veras, sed
dKpL^€t<;, arctas nempe et exactas compages. Ejus verba
sunt haec 'J Kal EvpLTTiBrjf; ev KXeia-i (leg. Kpr^al) (f)7}(riv,
'Hkco ^adeov<;, &c. KoWrjOel^; dTpeKel<; dp[jjd<;' ovk elirev dXrj-
6el<^ dpfid<;, dX)C dKpi^6l<;. Sic corrigendum esse facile
videbit, cui ad manum est Erotianus : vulgo enim perperam,
aXX' dTpe/c€l<;. Apagesis autem barbarum illud et soloecum
TavpoheTp(p, quo verbo nuUus unquam scriptor est usus, aut
per analogiam uti poterit. Quin etiam et versui bonsultum
oportuit. Quis enim^ qui non negligenter in his Uteris ver-
satus est, illud omnino probare possit Kal ravpoSirpo)
KpaOel . , . ., dimetrum scilicet brachycatalectum, ut proxime
ante paroemiacum veniat. Affirmo tibi neminem unum tra-
gicum comicumve in eo loco hoc metrum adhibere; multo
etiam mimis, quod Erotiani scriptura constituit Kal ravpo-
Biro) Ko\\r)6€i<;. Quid quod ne in Latinis quidem legitimi
* Erotianus Sokovs, vetus editio Porphyrii 5op6s.
f Porph. TavpoSercp KptiQuir', Erot. TopoXercf) KoW-nOus.
X Porph. oTpcKets, Erot. arpcKeis apfx-ds.
[y p. 36. ed. Franz.—D.]
VOL. II. 2 N
274 EPISTOLA AD
sunt numeri ? In secundo versu, Quas prisca domos dedit
indigena, tribrachys est loco anapaest! vel cujuscunque pedis
quatuor temporum. Quod vitium commune Grotio est cum
Jos. Scaligero, Flor. Christiano, aliisque^ opinor, omnibus
qui saeculo hoc et superiore vel tragoedias Grsecas Latine
verterunt^ vel ipsi scripserunt novas : quibus solenne est
anapaestos suos passim^ ubi nulla clausula est neque inter-
punctum, tribrachi vel trochaeo vel cretico terminare; vel
etiam vocali, aut litera M finire, versu proximo ab alia vocali
vel H incipiente. Scilicet etiam hie ut alibi postremam in
versu syllabam communem esse arbitrabantur. Nae isti, si
olim stante re Grseca vel Rom ana suas fabulas edidissent,
sibilis et K\a)yjjbOL<; e scena explosi fuissent. Non enim
Graecis ea licentia permissa.
Nee data Romanis venia est indigna poetis.^
Fas erat duntaxat versum illum^ qui paroemiacus dicitur,
trochaeo claudere. Eo usque non aliter continuari debebant
anapaest! vel pares anapaesto pedes, ac si unicus esset versus.
Quin et Seneca tragicus, ut scias eum de industria tempera-
visse, semel tantum atque iterum trochaeo anapaestos clausit,
nee nisi finita sententia : qui scilicet paroemiaci locus esset,
nisi is scriptor nescio cur versum ilium repudiasset. Veteres
tamen Latinos minime aspernatos esse paroemiacum, sed et
hie Graecbrum vestigiis institisse scire dabitur ex istis reli-
quiis, iisque, ni fallor, solis. Attius Phinidis :
Simul et circum magna sonantibus
Excita saxis saeva sonando
Crepitu clangente cachinnant.
[^ Hor. in Arte Poet. 264., ubi "JE^data," &c. — " Hanc ffwd^eiav," inquit
Dawesius, in nostrum, ut solebat, saeviens, " in anapaesticis locum habere
primus docuit, non jam, uti ipse ad Hor. Carm. iii. 12. 6. asseverat, CI. Bent-
leius, sed Terentianus. Is utique pag. 58." &c. Miscell. Crit. p. 57. ed. Kidd.
1827., ubi plura. Dixerat enim Bentleius — "ut primus olim docui in Disserta-
tione ad Joannem Antiochenum Malelam, et postea multo fusius in scripto
Anglico de Epistolis Phalaridis.*' [vide t. i. p. 190. et sqq. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 275
Locus est apiul Nonium in Cachinnare,^ Sed nemo a me
impetrabit, ut verba Attii sana esse concedam. Quorsum
enim pertinent magna soeva, et sonantihus sonando ? Pecca-
turus sum, uti spero, intra veniam, si parum prospere
medicinam experior. Ex ipso fabulse nomine magna sus-
picio est de Harpyiis verba fieri. Fallor itaque an sic legen-
dum est ?
Simul et circum stagna sonantibus
Excita saxis saeva Celaeno
Crepitu clangente cachinnat.
Illud clangente proprie et apte dictum est de Harpyiis.
Virgilius :
At subitge horrifico lapsu de montibus adsunt
Harpy iae, et magnis quatiunt clang or ibus alas.^
Quin et stagna bene reposui, approbante ibidem Virgilio :
Obscaenas Jt?e/«^^ ferro foedare volucres.*^
Attius Telepho :
Jamjam stupido Thessala somno
Pectora languentque senentque.*^
Id. Eurysace :
Super Oceani stagna alta patris
Terrarum anfracta revisam.^
Pacuvius Niptris :
Operite, abscedite, jamjam
Mittite : nam attrectatu et quassu
Saevum amplificati' dolorem.^
Attius Philocteta :
Heu quis salsis fluctibu' mandet
Me ex sublimi vertice saxi ?
[• cap. vi.— D.] [b ^n. iii. 225.~D.]
[•= ^n. iii, 241.— D.]
[«• Apud Prise, lib. x. p. 887. ed. Putsch.— D.]
[^ Apud Non. Marcel, cap. iii. in v. Anfractum. — D.]
[f Apud Cic. TuscuL ii. 20.— D.]
276 EPISTOLA AD
Jamjam absiimor : conficit animiim
Vis volneris^ ulceris sestus.s
Idem apud Cic. 2. Tuscul.^ ^^ Unde ignis lucet mortalibus
clam divisus ? eum doctus Prometheus clepsisse dolo poenas-
que Jovi fato expendisse supremo." Qui locus sic ad
anapaestos suos est reducendus :
Unde igneis cluet immortalibu*
Clam divis nimi' doctu'* Prometheus
Clepsisse dolo^ poenasque Jovi
Furti expendisse supremo.
Ut ad Porphyrium revertarj illud utique scire cupio^ quo
auctore vir illustriss. ravpoBirpay KpaOela-a de congluti-
natione acceperit. Nam Kpadelaa, nisi omnia me fallunt,
est permiwta et temperata, non conjuncta et compacta: rav-
poBerpov autem, ut principio dixi, plane barbarum. Quin et
Tavp6B6To<; non alibi reperio ; neque vero intelligo^ qui
commode dici poterit. Ut aXvo-lBerof; est akvaei he6el<^,
K7]p6BeTo<; KTjpM, et siqua sunt alia : sic et ravpoBero^ fuerit
ravpcp 8eSeyLt6vo9^ {tauro compactus, non glutino taurind).
Nam quis obsecro ravpov usurpavit avrl rrj^; ravpoKoXka^; ?
Demiror tamen unde ilia in Porphyrii et Erotiani codices
irrepserint. Haud sane temere factum id videtur : itaque
hseret hsec res ; neque prompte expedire possum. Ne tamen
dav/jL^oXof; hue veniam ; donee aliquid melius succurrit^
censeo ut ravpoBero) de medio auferatur : (cum sine eo plena
sit sententia, tw KoXXridelaa dpfMaf;, ex Homerico isto^ ut
videtur, adumbrata ;
Atque hoc pacto Pda-Lf; ista dvairaiarLKr], versus videlicet
qui paroemiacum antecedit, monometrum erit acatalectum;
[8f Apud Cic. Tuscul. ii. 7., ubi in ver. sec. " animam" — D.]
P c. 9. Hsec varie tentarunt viri docti: vide Davisium ad loc. ; et Her-
mannum in Elem. Doct. Met. p. 246. ed. Glasg.— D.]
* vel catu' doctu'.
[' Od. xxiii. 194.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
277
ut profecto plerumque est, et in hoc ipso quidem loco plus
semel.) Caetera autem porro sic legantur :
"H.KO) ^a660V<; vaov^ TrpoXcTrcov,
or? avOi'^evri^ r/jLTjdelcra Bokov<;
^reyava^i irape'^ei XaXv^cov ireXeKet,
Kal KoW7}6eta
^ATp€Kel<; apfJLa<; KV7rdpc(T(T0<;.^
Adsum a Sanctis templis, validas
Quibus indigena est sueta cupressus
Praebere trabes, ccesa securi
Chalybum, atque arctas
Compages glutine vincta.
Alibi nimis occupatum habuit animum 6 irdvv, cum illud
8/3U9 comminisceretur. Cur enim quercus vocaretur avdi'ye-
vrj<i} quid? non alibi tarn frequens quam in Creta nasce-
batur? Ego vero, ut primum oculis verbum illud agnovi,
continuo deprehendi Kvirdpicrao^ a poeta scriptum esse, non
Kviraplaa-ov. Earn enim illic memineram esse vere avOcyevfj,
et Creticam propterea appellari a Plutarcho -J ''U ^lo-d/juLKrjv
irlrvv rj KprjTiKrjv KvirdpLaaov' sicut et Idseam a Nicandro :
^Tripfiara ^ovifKevpov re koI ^ISaLr}<; KVirapiaaov'^
et Virgilio :
Nee salici lo toque neque Idseis cyparissis.^
Plinius xvi. 33."^ de cupresso loquens ; Huic, ait, patria
insula Creta, cum Cato Tarentinam earn appellet, credo quod
[• Postremos tres versus sic exhibuit Matthiaeus, Eurip. Creten. Frag. ii. ;
(TT^yavovs irapexet Xo\u)3qiJ TreAcKet,
KoX TavpdSerSs 7'
OTpe/ceTs apfioiis Kvirdpiaaos.
Confer J. Scaligerum apud Fabr. Bihl. Gr. t. vi. p. 237. ; Toupium, Emend, in
Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 549. ; Tyrwhittum, Not. in Toup. t. iv. p. 426. ; Porsonum,
Not. in Toup. t. iv. p. 490.; Hermannum apud Lobeckium De Morte JBacchi,
p. 11. ; Aglaoph. t. i. p. 622, ; Matthiaeum ad loc. — D.]
\} Conviv. Disp. lib. i. quaest. 2. — Mor. t. iii. p. 341. ed. Wyttenb., ubi t^v
'lad. irir. ^ rijv KpjT. Kvirapmov. — D.]
[^ Ther. 586.— D.] [i Gear. ii. 84.— D.]
[»• t. ii. p. 24. ed. Hard. 1723.— D.]
278 EPISTOLA AD
primum eo venerit : et in jEnaria succisa regerminat. Simili
sane tralatione^ quam Euripides Cretae indigenam vocat, ei
patriam esse Cretam Plinius commemorat. Sed in ejus
verbis macula inest foedissima^ quanquam haud valde hv-
creicifXvrof;. Quippe pro Earia non magna mutatione legen-
dum est Tarra.^ Siquidem interpretatur haec Theophrasti
lib. 2. Hist. cap. 2.^ Kv7rdpLTT0<i Be irapd fjuev rol<; aXkotf;
aiTo airipiJbaTOf;, iv KprjTr} he Kol airo aTe\e')(^ov<;, olov koI
airo T?79 Kovpa^ iv Tdppa' irapd tovtoi<; yap €(ttlv r) kov-
pL^o/jbivTj KvirdpLTTo^, Mihi quidem hoc certius est^ quam
ilia quae apud Sagram. Sed quia difficulter hoc nonnuUis
atque segre persuaderi video, agedum ex Solino irecOavdryKTjv
admoveamus OerraXiKrjv, ut contra siquis sentiat, nihil sen-
tiat. Ejus verba sunt cap. xvii.^ Mira soli {Cretici)
indulgentia : arborarii proventus abundantes : nam in hvjus
tantum insulce parte repullulant ccesce cupressi. Profecto aut
Tarra in Plinio suo legit Solinus, aut <^nariam arbitratus
est partem esse Cretse. Guanine antea cap. vii. in insulis
Italicis numeravit ? Oris esse ferrei oportet, qui hoc dixerit.
Quis autem credat cupressos in ^naria sponte nasci?
Ecquisnam isthuc memoriae prodidit ? non magis mehercule
quam Batti silphion aut auriferas malos Hesperidum. Verum
ut ulterius progrediamur, etiam Solinum non ab omni parte
sanum esse existimo. Valde enim suspicor ita scrip turn esse
antiquitus : Nam in Tarra hujus insulce parte repullulant :
vel, in hujus tantum insula Tarra repullulant. Nee enim
a vulgata lectione longe nimis abscedo : nee probabilem
causam reperire possum, cur abstineret cam partem insulce
suo vocabulo nominare. Dicerem etiam, si animus esset
hariolari conjectura, similitudinem verborum Catoni im-
posuisse, cum cupressum Tarentinam appellaret. Siquidem
urbs Cretae Tdppa, Tarentum autem Tdpa^ vocatur. Lanam
quidem, et purpuram, mel, salem, oleam, ceram, porrum,
["* Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard. Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 550. ; et Har-
duinum ad Plin. t. ii. p. 44. ed. 1723. — D.]
[" Theoph. 0pp. t. i. p. 46. ed. Schneid., ubi • . . a7r?» rov (TT€\4xovs, oTov rh
TTJs opelas iv Tdp^cf. — D.] [° xi. p. 22. ed. Salm. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
279
pectunculos, ostreas^ iiucem, castaneas^ ficus Tarentinas
animadverti fiiisse in pretio : cupressum Tareiitinam cedo
mihi unum, qui supra cseteras laudaverit, praeter Catonem.
Verum hoc obiter, et magis joco dictum existima, quam
quod ill ea sim sententia. Jam quod Euripides istam ar-
borem dicit firmissimas trabes templis praebuisse ; firmat id
adeo emendationem nostram: cum cupressum omnes uno
ore testentur 'x^poyLoyrdrrjv esse atque ao-aTreo-TdrrjV et quod
caput est, egregie prseter caeteras in Deorum sedibus locum
ct honorem invenisse. Hermippus apud Athenaeum :P
6K S* AlyVTTTOV TOL KpefiaG-To,
*I(nla Kal ySu/SA-of?, diro 5' av ^vpLa<; Xt^avcorov,
*II Be Kakrj KpTjrrj Kvirdpicraov rolcn deocac,
Theophrastus Hist. v. et 5. tovtwv Be '^(^povKOTaTa 8o-
Kel rd KVTrapLTTLva elvau, to yovv ev ^Ecpiaa), ef a)V at
Oupat, Tov veci) reOrjaavpLa/jbivai,, riaaapa*; €K€lvto yeved^;.
fjLova Be Kal (TToX^rjBova Bi'^^erac. Fallor, an oratio haec
aoXoLKL^ec ? Quo enim illud to referri possit ? lego : ra
yovv ev ^E(j)ea(p, e^ wv al Ovpau tov vecb, TedTjaavpicrfjLeva
Teaaapa^i eKecTo yeved^.^ Dicit materiem istam cupressinam
per 4. saecula sive cccc. annos, ex quo primum caesa est,
reconditam fuisse; priusquam ad valvas Ephesini templi
adhiberetur : et tamen incorruptam duravisse. Ea Theo-
phrasti sententia est. Profecto nihil hac emendatione cer-
tius et evidentius. Ausim equidem dejerare non aliter
legisse Plinium, siquidem ad haec Theophrastea respexit,
cum Ephesiae dicat Dianae templum tota Asia ewstruente
quadringentis annis per actum esse ; et, valvas esse e cupresso,
et jam quadringentis prope annis durare materiem omnem
novcB similemJ Scilicet tunc fere materia caedi solet, cum
aedificii fundamenta jaciuntur : valvae autem tum demum
fieri, cum caetera omnia perfecta sunt atque absoluta. Hac
[P Ep. lib. i. c. xlix. t. i. p. 104. ed. Schw., ubi in v. 3. Kvirdpirrov. — D.]
[1 Sic et Schneiderus, nisi quod rod vecoffrl ueii> et rirrapas dedit. Theoph.
0pp. t. i. p, 184. — Ed. Cant. Epist. ad Mill., typographi errore . . . nQ-riaavpKTfi^vai
r4<r<r. iKcimo yev. — D.] ["^ xvi. 40. t. ii. p. 36. ed. Hard. 1723. — D.]
280 EPISTOLA AD
quidem argumentatione Plinius videtur usus : rectene an
perperam^ nulla mihi quaestio est in prsesentia. Illud adeo
admiror, eruditis viris, qui tantopere locum hunc exagita-
verunt, nihil hujus omnino suboluisse. Sed eh avrjp ov
irdvO^ opa. Porro etiam nostra aetate^ ut referunt qui ea
loca viserunt^ tanta cupressorum \ds est in Creta; ut do-
niorum omnium trabes contignationesque atque adeo navigia
ex ea materie construantur.
Pag. 109. JJepl ^9 {^aihpa<i) 6 <ro(f>a)TaTO<; EvpLirlSrjf;
fiera ravra avve^pd'y^aTO Spd/aa TTOirjTLKoy^, Sine con-
troversia respexit Malelas ad Euripidis Hippolytum : prior-
emne an posteriorem nee possumus resciscere, nee sane
multum refert. Scimus utrumque salvum extitisse per di-
versa tempora Erotiani, PoUucis, et Stobaei. Quae Stobaeus
ex Hippolyto citat, eorum ne dimidiam quidem partem hodie
invenias. Frustra itidem quaeras, quae Erotianus afFert et
Pollux. Aristophanes Ranis :^
Tl<; ol^ev el to ^fjv fjuev earL KarOavelv,
To TTvelv Se ^euirvelv, Koi to^ KadevSetv kcoBlov.
Tavra,^ ait Scholiastes^ e^'IinroXvTov Spafiaroq. Age quaerat
hoc, qui velit in investigando operam perdere. Verum aut
librarii peccatum est, aut auctoris dfjudprrj/uba fivrj/juovLKov.
Aliunde* enim cognoscimus tralata esse e/c IIoXvlSov hpd-
fjLaTO<;.
Tfc9^ S' otBev el to ^fjv jiev eo-TC KaTOavelv^
To KaTdavelv he ^jjy.^
Hippolytus secundus qui hodie superest, HTe(j>avia<; sive
^Te(jiav7]^6po<i inscribitur : prior KaXvirTOfjuevo'^. Pollux ix.
c. v.^ EvpcTrlBijf! ev ^iTnrdXvTco KaXvTrTO/jbevcp' Trpo?
iTTTTcov evdv^ 6p/jL7]aa<^ cTTdo-Lv. Nee tamen omnino diversae
erant fabulae, sicut Iphigenia in Aulide et in Tauris, (Edipus
[q V. 1473. ed. Bekk.— D.] [^ rh 51 ibid.— D.]
[* rovro. Schol. — D.]
[' Schol. in Eurip. Hippol. v. 190., t. v. p. 432. ed. Matt.— D.]
[" Tt. eds. Epist. ad Mill,, operarum, credo, errore. — D.]
[" Eurip. Polyidi Frag. vii. ed. Matt.— D.] [''' p. 1014. ed. Hemst.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 281
Tyrannus et in Colono, Prometheus AeafKorr]^ et Avofievof;,
Vix, imo ne vix quidein hoc fieri potest, cum drama pos-
terius rem omnem, uti gesta est, complectatur ; ab eo tem-
pore quo primum OeijXarov privigni amorem Phaedra con-
ceperat, usque ad Hippolyti mortem : qusedam etiam ex priore
citentur, quae et in altero reperias. Quin mihi persuasissimum
est eam ob causam Kdkvirro^evov esse inscriptum j'^ quod
in extrema fabula sic loquatur Hippolytus moribundus :
\^ " Quantumvis autem Bentleius, cui hac in parte praeiverat Gul. Can-
terus, sibi persuasissimum esse scribat, priorem Hippolytum eam ob causam
K(iKvTrr6ix(vov esse inscriptum ; mihi tamen, pace viri his in litteris Maximi,
neque ea ratio satisfacit, neque etiam causa adparet, ob quam rhv irpSrepov
*l'mr6\vrov omnino censeremus inscriptum fuisse KaXvTrr6tiivov. Nam nihil
primum inest isti versui (1458. Kpvy\iov 5e fiov irpSaanrov, ws rdxos, ireirXois) cur
illinc petitum nomen inderent dramati ; quum morem designet usitatissimum,
Tragicis saepe commemoratum, quo cadavera tegebantur veste injecta, facies
praesertim deformata velabatur. Deinde si in utraque edit. Hippolyti, quod
statuisse videtur Bentleius, isti fuerint versus reperti, quae tandem erat causa,
cur ob istos versus diversis utraque editio nominibus insigniretur ? Tandem
nusquam apud Stobaeum, nusquam alibi mentio fit 'ImroXvTov KaXvirrofievov,
nisi in unico loco Pollucis, qui, verba quaedam exhibens ex editione priori, cujus
laudem editio posterior, et emendata, Atticisque judicibus probata, prorsus
obscurasset, propterea, mea quidem sententia, dixerit 'IttttJAutoj/ KaXvirTSficvov.
De Menandro Comico Quinctilianus (Instit. Orat. x. c. i. p. 899.) ' omnibus,
inquit, ejusdem operis auctoribus abstulit nomen, et fulgore quodam suae clari-
tatis tenebras obduxit :' Greece diceretur iravras air^Kpvxpe, vel iKd\i/\pe' quorum
hoc rarius, illud frequenter in istum sensum teritur. Alia quaedam ejusdem
Quinctiliani (ibid. p. 897.) hie adscribam, valde adposita: * Correctas (^schyli)
fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus Poetis Athenienses permisere, sunt-
que eo modo multi coronati.' Retractatum Hippolytum cum in certamen
detulisset (Olymp. Ixxxvii. anno 4.) superatis lophonte et lone, victor renun-
ciatus fuit Euripides et coronatus : hoc vetus adnotatio testatur Hippolyto
praefixa ('E5i5ax07j iirl 'Afielvovos &pxovTos, 'OAi»/A7rio5t tt^', ere* rerdpTq}, irpairos
EvpiirlSrjs, ScvTcpos 'locpwv, Tpiros "Imv). Haec si non sola, praecipua certe fuisse
ratio videtur, propter quam posterior Hippolytus a Grammaticis STe^ov/as
inscriberetur et ^re^avr]<l)6pos. et hujus quidem adpellationis quae mihi, eadem
ratio fuisse videtur Brumceo (Dans son Theatre des Grecs, t. ii. p. 135). Nee
prodit in scenam Hippolytus coronatus (v. 73.), sed manu gestans ex floribus
contextam coronam, quam imponeret Dianae simulacro, quod egregie Mus-
gravius animadvertit Dici tamen etiam potuit ob pudicitiam admirabilem ipse
Hippolytus, ut corona dignus, sic ab Atticis fuisse judicibus coronatus; quo
fortasse respiciens Apollonius Philostrati (De Vita Apollon. Tyan. 1. vi. c. iii.
p. 232.) de Tiraasione, yTj^tceo^ite^a, €^r/, i(TTe<papu<Tdai {(m<pavov(xQai) ahrhf
iirX ffw^poffvPY} Koi TTph 'lirnoKvrov rod &r}(r((»s' 6 fiiv yap is t^v *A<ppoS^lTriv
VOL.. II. 2 o
282 EPISTOLA AD
KeKaprepijTai ra/ju' oXooXa yap, iraTep'
Kpvyjrov Be fiov TrpoacoTTOv, co? Td')(os, 7re7rXoi9.^
Proinde in utraque fabula comperiebantur hi versiculi.
Similiter et alteri ^Tecl)av'rj(j)6pov nomen est inditum, propter
hfec verba Hippolyti non longe a principio :
^ol TovBe nfXeKTov aricjiavov ef dfcrjpdrov
Aet/jLcovog, 0) BeaTTOLva, KoafjL^(Ta<; (ffipcoJ
Non igitur Bpa/ia novum erat Hippolytus ^recpavla^, sed
correctum duntaxat^ atque interpolatum^ BuaaKevrj rod irpo-
repov, Vetus Grammaticus Argiimento Hippolyti. "Ectti
Be ovTO<s 6 'l7r7r6\vTO<; Bevrepof; kol ^Te^avta<; Trpoaayopev-
ofxevo^* i/JLcfyaLverai, Be vaTepo<; yeypafifievo<;' to yap aTrpe-
7r69 Kal KaT'r)yopla<; d^cov iv tovtco Bccopdcorat, tq) Bpdfiari.
Qui nescit quid sit BtacrKevr} et BieaKevacr/juivov Bpa/jLa,
considere poterit Casaubonum ad Athenaeum : ejus ego
scrinia non compilo ; sed Hesychii locum emendatum cu-
rabo, quern nee ille nee alius quisquam intellexisse videtur.
AvBi^coVy ')(opev(ov Bid tov^; AvBovf;, ot aco^ovTat, fiev, BiecrKev-
vPpicre. Veneri contra quotidie sacra faciens Timasion, cetera pudicus instar
Hippolyti, frustra quoque fuerat a noverca sollicitatus. Timasionis, novercae
quoque calumniis petiti, historiam attigit, similesque collegit Muretus (Var.
Lection. 1. i. c. xii.) quibus plures adjungi possent." Valcken., Presf. in Eurip.
Hippol. p. xix.
" Schol. [ad Theocr. Id. ii. v. 10.] Libri Vaticani, iu ry Kora/ca-
Xwroixivcp 'IttttoXut^. Recte. Ejus fabulae meminit Pollux, ix. 50. De ea
agit CI. Bentleius in Epist. ad Millium, et doctissimus Valckenarius ad Euripidis
Hippolytnm. Sed veram tituli rationem neuter adsecutus est. Ut 'linr6\vros
(rTe(pavr]<p6po5 caput redimitus, sic 'lirtrSXvros KaraKaXvirrSfievos caput ohvolutus.
Quod de Hippolyto pudore siiffuso baud absimile est. Idem autem Kara/coAu-
irrSfifvos et 'EyKaXvirrSfxevos. Quo titulo fabulam suam insignivit Anthippus,
Comicus apud Athenaeum, lib. ix. p. 403. Haec est mea de hoc loco sententia.
Alia aliis placebat. Sed nostra verior et ad rem ipsam adcommodatior."
Toupius, Cura Post, in Theocr. p. 7.
" KaXv'irT6iJ.ivos quid significet non satis convenit inter eruditos. Mihi
verisimillimum videtur, Hippolytum, postquam raptu equorum laceratus esset,
non vivum postea in scenam delatum esse, ut in superstite tragoedia, sed
mortuum et KoKvirrSfxivov.'" Musgravius ad Hippol. KaKvrrT. frag. — Confer
Monkium ad Hippol. Argum. — D.]
['^ V. 1455. ed. Monk.— D.] [r v. 72. ed. Monk.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 283
aafievoi 5' elaivJ Ita lege locum, cujus haec est sententia :
Magnes veteris comoediae scriptor drama docuit Avhov<;, qui
tunc superfuerunt, quo tempore Grammaticus qui primus
haec dixit in vivis fuit ; sed sub incudem revocati, novaque
lima perpoliti. Photius Patriarcha : Avhud^cov, Avhol Mdy-
vi]To<i Tov KcofjbLKou BcecrK€vd(Tdr}(Tav: lege ut apud Hesychium,
AvBl^cov. Castigandus etiam Suidas, qui AvBcd^cov habet
absque interpretatione.^ Idem Hesychius : Wtjvl^cov, tou?
'\jrr]ya<; \iyec TOV<i tov /jLdyvr)TO<; : scribe roi;? Wi]va^ tov
Mdyvt]To<i. Siquidem ille etiam fabulam '^rjva<i publicavit.
Aristophanes Equitibus ;*
TavTa fiev €l8o)<; a ^iraOe Mdyvrj<; afjua Tat<; TroXials ica-
Ti,ovaac<;,
'O? 7rXet<7Ta p^opwv toov dvTiirdXcov vIkt]^ ecTrjcre Tpoiraia,
IIdaa<; 8* v/jllv (j)(ovd<i lel^, koL yjrdWcov kol TTTepvyl^cov,
Kal XvBl^cov kol yjrTjvl^oDV koI paiTTOfievo^ ^aTpa^eloc^.
His verbis Magnetis fabulae Bap^LTihe^ sive Bap^tTcaTal,
"OpviOe^;, Avhol, Wrive<;, et EdTpa^ot indicantur. Cogita
autem, qui pax inter Hesychium Photiumque et Anonymum
Trepl KcofiQiStaq conciliari possit : hie enim omnia Magnetis
scripta deperiisse dicit, ovSev aco^ecrdaL. Mdyvrj^ ^Adrjvalo^
dycovcadfMcvof; ^AOrjvrjav viKa^ eayjcv la , rwv ^e SpafidTcov
avTOV ovhev aco^eTar Ta Be €7rL(f>ep6/jL€vd iaTCV evvea.^
Non nostrum inter eos tantas componere lites.*^
Pag. 148. 'O yap <to(I>6<; EvpL7rLSrj<; Bpafia i^eOeTo Trepl
TOV KvkXwito^, otl Tpel<^ ^^X^^ 6(f>6aXiJi,ov<;, (TTj/jLalvcov Tov<i
Tp6L<; dB6X(f>ov<;, et quae deinceps sequuntur. Os hominis !
Hoccine ut Euripides vel in somniis dixerit ? Bene factum,
quod etiam nunc Cyclops supersit. Quod si ita rem, prout
narrat Joannes, se habere comperias ; non recuso quin, quod
[j Vulgo AvSl^wv, x<wp€uwi/, Sto rovs, k. t. K. — D.]
[* Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 548. — D.]
[* V. 518. ed. Bekk., ubi Touto fxev 6t5(i>s 'diraQe, k. t. A. — D.]
['' Proleg. ad Aristoph. p. vii. ed. Bekk. — D.]
[= Virg. Eel. iii. 108., ubi " . . . . inter ro^."— D.]
284 EPISTOLA AD
gravissimsB poenae loco fore putes, per omne vitse tempiis
noctes diesque versandi mihi sint et ediscendi adeo Annales
hi Volusiani^^ Malelani volui dicere.
Pag. 210. 72? 6 <to^o<; EvpLTrlBrj^; Bpd/jLa irepl rov avrov
MeXedypov i^iOero. Meleagri fabulse mentionem faciunt
Macrobius, Stobseus, Scholiastes Pindaric cum aliis. Latine
convertit Attius. Hesychius : Kadcoaloycre, KareXvae^ Kareu-
Ovaev. ^EvpLirlhrj^i MeXedypo). Lego, KaOaxj-LCjae, Karidvae.
Vox altera non aliter quam litura sananda est.^ Nempe
primo mendose scriptum est KariXvae' postea librarius ali-
quis paulo doctior vel lector quispiam studiosus, in libri
margine vel medio fortassis inter versiciilos spatio veram
emendationem dederat Karedvae. Tandem evenit, ut utrum-
que vocabulum conjuncte in versu contexteque scriberetur.
Hac sane ratione cum in aliis scriptoribus, tum in lexi-
cographis prsecipue non raro peccatum est. Quae quidem
peccata cum baud cujusvis sit odorari; profecto opus est,
ut exemplis aliquot confirmemus sententiam nostram, ne
temere quidquam et inconsulte loco movisse videamur.
'EfeXev, e^aXev, eXa^ev. Ejiciendum est verbum posterius :
^eXXcLv enim eidem Hesychio est ^dXXeiv. EvrjporaroV)
cvBlov, KaXrj yrj, evrjporov, evyetov. Postrema ista ab emen-
datore quodam profecta sunt ; qui prima vitiosa non inepte
quidem correxerat. Totus itaque locus sic constituendus
est : Eif^pOTOV, evyecov, koXtj yrj.^ f ^vprolaiv, elKaloL^;,
crv/jL7r€(f)vpafjL6V0t<;. ol he aX^ira otvw BeBevfjuiva crv/ji7re<j>vp-
fjbivoL^. Tam scio verbum ultimum a correctore quodam
esse, quam me vivere. Nulla dubitatio est, quin ita scrip-
serit Hesychius : ^vprotcrcv, eiKaloL^, avfiire^vpixevoL^. ol Be
dX^LTa oiv(p BeBevjJbeva. f ^^vtcBl. dv rtvo ivey/jbeOa, evav-
Tiwixeda. Cum vocabulum hoc veniat pone ^AvninadcoTo^,
scire licet ex literarum serie sic auctorem scripsisse : "AvrL-
[« Vide Catull. Carm. xxxvi. ed Doer. — D.]
[^ Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 548. Nil mu-
tandum censet Tovipius, Emend, in Hesych. t. iii. p. 467, 531. — D.]
[« Confer nostrum in Addendis, et in Epist. ad Bernard., Mtis. Crit. t. ii.
p. 548.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 285
VL€V6yfi€6a, ivavTCcofieda. Postea quidam, qui deprehendit
erratum, supra emendavit ad hoc exemplum, scriptionis
dvTiBc
compendium faciens : dvTivceviyfjLeda. Scimus omnes ita
fieri solere. Tandem autem ineptus quispiam librarius earn
utriusque vocis continuationem fecit, quam hodie videmus/
^EK\vTpt<Tov, eKKvpiaov, KoXvy^ov, lUud iKXvptaov ex
eadem est officina correctorum. Scripsit Hesychius ^EkKv-
rpiaov, KoXvyjrov ut ipse literarum ordo testimonio est.?
Media enim incedunt inter "Ek\vto<; et 'E/cXcwTrtfet. Hoc
non intelligens pusillus quidam criticus (qui enim id intel-
lexerit, quod ne fando quidem unquam auditum est ?) emen-
dare conatus est eKKvpiaov, a verbo Xvpl^o) : 6vo<; mehercule
7rpo9 \vpav. Tantum enim to eKKvpl^etv et to KokviTTeiv
significatione differunt.
Quantum Hypanis Veneto distat ab Eridano.^
Alte profecto latet ulcus tetrum et fca/coTjdeorTaTov quod nisi
lancinata prius Hesychii existimatione, negat ad sanitatem
perduci posse. Siquidem erubescendo prorsus errore posuit
^EKXvTptaov pro EXvTpcocrov quod rectissime quidem inter-
preteris koKv^ov. Ipse Hesychius : ^E\vTpoL<;,^ E^ATM-
MAHI, cTKeTrdcrfMaaLv. "EXvTpa, Kvploi^ to, ivecXij/jLaTa rj
KAATMMATA. "EXvTpov, hepixa, Otjkt), \i7rvp0v, eveiXrjfjLa,
KAATMMA, o-KeTrao-fia. Inde iXvTpojadac apud Hippo-
cratem, et irpoarekvTpovv apud Athenaeum, involucro tegere :
similiter e^eXvTpooaaL, nudare, ex integumentis solvere. He-
sych. *E^€XvTpcoara<;, iyv/jLvcocra^;. Satin' hoc certum et
exploratum est, &> ^/Xt; K6(j)dX7], Milli jucundissime ? At
enimvero exclamet hie aliquis, O juvenem confidentem et
temerarium ! tune ilium Hesychium, doctissimum gram-
[' Confer nostrum in Addendis, et in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii.
p. 549.: vide etiam omnino Schowium ad Hesych. Suppl. p. 102. — 'AuTirjvey-
fieOa, 5ir}v4yfj,e9a, ivavTiwfieda. Toupius, Emend, in Hesych. t. iii. p. 558. — D.]
[ff 'EKXinpaxTov, iKK<i\v\l/ov. Toupius, Emend, in Hesych. t. iii. p. 431. — D.]
P Propert. i. 12. 4., ubi vulgo ..." dissidet Eridano." — " Pro dissidet in
Voss. quarto distat ah E., quae alterius verbi glossa est." Burm. ad loc. — D.]
[' Vulgo 'EvXvffrpois. — D.]
286 EPISTOLA AD
maticorum Hesychium tantae inscitiae affinem esse suspicari
ausis^ ut ^EKKvTpKTov scriberet; nisi verbuni illud alicubi
legisset, apud auctores forte quos loiiga dies et nimia vetustas
subtraxerunt notitise nostrse ? I jam et frontem nega de
rebus periisseJ Placide tamen amabo, O quisquis es : et
reprime te tantisper, dum alia nonnuUa profero^ quae te
quoque ipsum velis nolis in sententiam nostram cogent
transire. Dum enim ex antiquis Scholiastis, Grammaticis,
Lexicis^ quae non contexebantur Kara aTOi')(elov, omni ex
parte vocabula corradit^ quibus banc suam ^vvaycoyrjv locu-
pletet et referciat ; saepe usu venit ut ab imperitis librariis,
qui parum accurate scripserant, vel a sui similibus ovo-
jjbaroOrjpaL^ in errorem inductus sit; quaeque nusquam gen-
tium vel lecta vel audita sunt^ lectoribus suis obtrudat.
Illud sis vide, f AeKehdovrj, 6 fjuvXalo^ t%^i;?. Suo loco
hoc leges in litera J. Ego vero nugas has esse meras tibi
denuncio : scriptum enim oportuit 'EXeBcovrj, ocrfjuvKo^ l'^Ov<;.
Piscis est de polypodum genere; quem memorant Aristo-
teles^ Athenaeus^ alii. Idem Hesychius : ^Oo-fjuvXca, tcjv
TToXvTToSeov at o^aivat Xeyofievac, fcal l')(6vhLa iroLa drra
€VT€\i]M *Ocr/jLv\aCy /SoX^irlvat OaXdaaLOi} Sic emendandi
sunt hi loci. Videor autem mihi videre, quid errationis
ansam Hesychio dederit. Nimirum in auctore suo scriptum
erat r] S' iXeSoovr) vel fiiapa S* iXeBcovr], vel simile quippiam :
ille miser, cum sua aetate libri carerent signis accentus,
BeXeScovTjv piscem effinxit, qualem neque Nereus, neque
Neptunus, nee ipse pater Oceanus agnoverit. Ecce aliud
huic. geminum et germanum. f OoXKci^ei, '^(^aXivayayyec.
Nemo, ut opinor, inficias iverit, quin ita scriptum fuerit,
absque tamen notis accentus : ^'Ittitov^ 6* oXKa^et, vel Nrjd^;
6* oXKa^ec. Ipse Hesychius : 'OXKa^ec, eXKec, yaXivayoiyel.
Illud autem OoXKa^ec cedo quenquam mortalium qui legerit.
t ^EvSeKarevaa, rijvBe kootttjv iirap^dfiTjv. Recta serie hoc
scriptum offendes, ut et alia quae deinceps a me proferentur :
[J Vide Pers. Sat. V. 103.— D.]
[k Vulgo 'Oo-jU. T. IT. al o^ivai .... oAA' eur. — D.]
\} Vulgo 'OfffJLvvai, ffo\firjT7vai 6a\. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 287
quod certo indicio est non a librario, sed ab Hesychio ipso
peccatum esse. Atqui ad hiinc modum edidisse debiiit:
^ESeKarevaa, rrjv BeKarrjv eTrpa^dfirjv. f Aiarevovraiy fiepl-
^ovrai. et Aiarevovro, ifiepi^ovTO. Ea similitudo est h et hi
in libris calamo notatis, ut baud facile sit digiioscere. Inde
est quod mendosa ea posuerit pro Aareovrai et Aareovro,
quae legas apud Homerum.™ f ^cKvWcav, to Tot'9 Kpocraov<;
ciiroaeiecrOaL. Verbum hoc reperies inter ^l^dXe et ^i^vvrj.
Ipse literarum ordo satis argumento est ab Hesychio posi-
tum esse ^c^vWcav. idque errore manifesto pro XCKkv^iav.
Hesychius : ^iWv/Sa,^ KpooraoL ol he ra dvOifica Kal Kopo-
Koa-jjLLa. Pollux vii. c. xiv. :° Tov<i Se Ovadvov^^ kol aiXXv^a
ol TToXaiol KokovcTL TToiTfTaL Sic locus iste legendus est ex
codice MS. qui fuit Is. Vossii. Qvaavoc autem cum PoUuci
turn Hesychio sunt Kpoaa-oi. f ^Epedivra, iv vSart aTro-
TTViyevTa. ^Epadivrc, Xijcfydivrt. Portentosi errores. Primo,
oportuit scriptum ^Ep'^^Oivra. Ipse enim alibi : ^Ep')(6evTa,
iv vhari Trvcyivra. Ita Photius Patriarcha in Lexico MS.
Ita Suidas. Locus est in $. Iliadis ;P
Nvv Si fi€ XevyaXeo) ttot/jlo) e^ifiapTO dXcovac,
^Ep'x^devT iv fieydXm TroTa/jLO)) (09 TracBa avcpopffov,
^Ov pd T €vav\o<; diroepo-eu '^eo/jLcovc irepwvTa.
Iterum, illud 'Epadevri, librarii peccatum est pro ^EpeOevrt.
Constat hoc ex elementorum ordine. Qui quidem est error
auctoris^ pro AlpedevTL. At et E apud Grsecos non differunt
pronunciatione j de qua re postea plura dicemus. Ecce alia
monstra : f 'E7rd\o<yrj<;, aTTovBrj^;, avrairohoarew^^. Quam tur-
piter autem hie se dedit ! adeo quidem ut hominis me
pudeat pigeatque. Siquidem l4vTa7roS6crea)9 est eTraWayrj^;,
et ^TTOvBrj^ est 67r€L<y(D\i](i' putidum autem suum iTraXoyrj^
Ipse habeat secum servetque sepulchro, ^ f A'x^Lvdwv, rcov
["> //. xviii. 264., xx. 394.— D.] [" Vulgo ^iWyfia.—!).]
[" p. 733. ed. Hemst.— D.]
[P V. 281., ubi .... \fvya\4ci) Bavdrtf. — D.]
['« Virg. jEn. iv. 29., ubi ....«' ilk habeat," &c.— D.]
288 EPISTOLA AD
a^tSawv. Hercules^ tuam fidem ! enimvero non ab omnibus
portentis Grseciam liberasti. Erat hominis eruditi sic edi-
disse : ^E)(^Lvdcov, tmv 'E'x^cvdScov. Verbi sedes in Homeri
Boeotia est ;
Ot S' eK AovkL')(^LOLo, ^E^Lvdcov 6* C€pdo)VJ^
t ^Hdea€L, dvdel, d'yvoel, irapopa, Adeste hue eonjeetores et
interpretes portentorum. Negant usquam quidquam mon-
strosius vidisse. Seilieet hsee vera scriptura est, lA-TjOeaaei,
drjOet. Etymologicon Magnum : ^ArjOeaareiv, djvoelv, direlpay^i
€%etv. jirjOelv, \avddv6iv, dveiricrTrjiJLovelv. Hesychius ipse :
lArjOeiVy fJLTj r)del(T6ai, firj voelv. lege dr)6etv, firj eWiaOat.
^ArjOeaKov, (lege drjOeacrov) d(Tvvr/0€i<; rjaav. f ^EXevTvv,
eXacov. Mira vero Grammatici eruditio. Poteras baud
paulo melius, 'EXeijrvv, eXeov ; siquidem Homerici illius
meminisses :
OvK oTTiBa (j>pov€ovTe<; ivl (ppealv ovS* iXerjrvv.^
t ^Arpefjurf, v^ela. Pace quod tua dicatur, Hesychi, in his
verbis ovhev v'yce<;. Imposuit tibi depravatus aliquis codex :
oportuit enim 'ApTe/xTJ, vytd. Te ipsum arbitrum capio, qui
haec alibi : ^Apre/jurj, acoov, vyca, (7(o(f>pova. 'Apre/juia, vyeca,
(lege vyoa) vyirj. ^ApT€X€<;, (corrige ^Apre/jueq) vyii<;. Nec-
dum peccandi finis : ecce enim de integro : f ^Aprr^veo-repav,
vytecrrepav, ivTi/jLoripav. Duplex erratum est, hoc librarii,
illud auctoris. Apparet enim cum ex ordine, tum ex inter-
pretatione, non aliter scripsisse Hesychium quam ^Aprc/jbe-
(TTepav nempe vel scripturse mendum, vel minutse fugien-
tesve literae, vel nimia festinatio in causa fuit, cur illud ex-
hiberet pro Apre^earepav. Cum autem ^ApTifiecrripay non
multum absimile sit to5 Ti/irjea-ripav' ille secundam interpre-
tationem liberalissime donavit de suo; prout error errorem
generare solet. f ^ATLaiXivol^y irepl rd Xtvd i^ajjufidrcov
[' II. ii. 625. — Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 549.
-D.]
[» Odyss. xiv. 82.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
289
B€a€acv. Die socles, aniiou senigma tibi videntur hsee ?
Equidem non sum CEdipus : ausim tamen pro eerto polliceri,
rectain seripturam esse 'A^jrla^■ \lvov. Hesyehius alibi :
^Aylriat, \lvov, dfjUfiaaLv diro ri}? avva<f>rj(;. Homerus quinto
Iliadis ;*
M.rj7r(o<;, co? a-^lcTL Xlvov aXovre Travdypov,
^AvBpdat, Svafieveeaaiv eXcop koI Kvp/ma yivrjaOe.
Quid ego de istis dicam, quae pagella proxima mihi in oculos
incurrunt? f 'Apco-rrjpao, BovXat. Deceptus est similitu-
diiie literarum A et A. Siquidem oiportuit A ptarrjpai. Ipse
alio loco : AprjaTTjvai,, BcdKovoc, OepdTracvac. lege Aprjo-rijpai.
Verbo monendum est o, et, et rj in Lexicis, praesertim apud
hunc nostrum, promiscue usurpari : vera enim analogia
requirit, ut Aprjo-reLpai scribamus. Locus est Odyss. T.^
Tdcov, at Toc Bojfia Kara BpTJcrreopat eaaiv.
Vide tamen, ut magnifice de se loquatur ad familiarem suum
Eulogium. Ov ydp, ait, okvtjo-co jjuerd irapprjcrLa^; ecTrelv, ore
TO)V ^ApLaTdp')(ov KoX ^ATTicovof; Kol 'ITkioBdypov Xe^ecov
evTroprjcra^, koI rd /Si/SXia irpoaOel^; Atoyeviavov, b irpcorov
Kol fieyuarov virdp-^ei TrXeoveKTrj/bia, ravra S' avrb^i IBla
X^^P^^ ypdcfjcov iycb jjuerd irdarj^ opOorijTOf; kol aKpi^eardrT]^
ypa(f)7](; Kara rov ypafifMartKov 'HpcoBcavov. Ego vero, qui
Theodosii MS*^"^ ^EirirofjLrjv Tfj<i KadoXov Herodiani lectitavi,
testificor parum huic promisso vel nuUo modo satisfactum
esse, t ^Aprjadopev, eTrTjBrja-ev. Vitiosius hoc quidem, quam
illud alterum ^ApecrOopev, eTryBrjaev. Sed ex utraque parte
ostendit, non lautissimam doctrinse supellectilem sibi domi
fuisse. Quae enim haec conglutinatio verborum, quae dissolvi
denuo divellique desiderant ? Horn. Iliadis MJ
6 B dp eaOope (f)alBifMo<;''EKT(op,
NvktI 6ofj drdXavTOf; vTroyiria.
[' " In Homero II. E. 487. legisse videtur Hesyehius a\p7<ri Xivoio, quomodo
constaret metruni. — N. B. \ivov itavdypoio Ta\6uTes Beiitleius, unice probante
Heynio, qui ait oAoVres aliquoties citari apud Eustathium." Dobraeus, Advers.
t. ii. p. 364.— D.]
[« V. 345.— D.] [V V. 462.— D.]
VOL. II. 2 P
290
EPISTOLA AD
*Ap€vo^ocrKo<;, Trpo^aro^oaKOf;. Mirifice quidem^ ut nihil
supra. Atqui dpyv dprjvo<;, puto, dicitur^ noii dpevo<}' unde
7ro\vpp7]V6<^, et oi'9 v7r6pp7)vo<;. Imo, quin iambei principium
fuerit apud Sophoclem ^Ap7]vo^oaKo<; . . . ne dubitandum est
quidem. Melius ipse alibi : ^Apr)vo^oaKb<;, irpo/Saro^oaKOf;,
^ocf)OKXrj<^ Tvpol Kol ypd(f>eTaL Se ipprjvo^oaKOf; Bed re rov
* eco Kol Twv fiopcov. Verum hie quidem locus a librario
pessime acceptus est : ipse auctor procul abest a noxa. Lege
^o(f)OKX7](; Tvpol p. fypd(f)eTaL he koX ipprjvol3ocrKo<; Sid re
Tov e Kol Tcov yS pcov. Scribitur, ait^ 6pp7]vo^oaKo<; per
literam €, et duplicem p.^ Etymologicum Magnum : 'Epprj-
vo^oaKo^i, 6 irpol3aTO^o(TKO<;, iv Tvpol ^ ^o(j)o/c\.r]<;. f 'jEyit-
nrrjpov^ et "E/jLiTTjpoi vitium exemplaris est pro ^Efjupiripov^ et
"^EfjbpbrjpoL. Ipse alibi emendate : *Efjb/jb7]pov<;, iv op^ripela
6vTa<;, irapd tov<; 6iJurjpov<i tov<; iirl crvfi^daec SiBo/jLevov<;.
Totus autem locus ad hunc modum constituendus est : ^Efi~
pbr)pov<^. ArjfjLijTpLOf; iv Sc/ceXia'
AaKeBac/jLovcoL 6"^ rjficov rd re/^?; Kare^aXov,
Kal Ta9 TpL7]p6t<; ekajBov i/jL/ji'^pov<;,y oirox;
MrjKeTi OaXaTTOKparolvro UeXoTrovv^aiOL.
Demetrius iste comicus fuit; et ilia fabula inscripta est
Sicilia. Quare perperam hactenus judicarunt viri docti^
qui scriptorem eum historicum, orationem autem prosaicam
esse censuerunt. Athenseus lib. 3.^ Ar)fjLriTpio<i 6 kco/jlo)-
8o7roio<; iv rS i7ri'ypa<j)0/jL€vq) Spdjiari ^iKeXla. Etymo-
logici auctor Sck6Xov<; inscribit, non ^iKeXiav eum vide in
^E/jLfjbrjpov^. t Xcopovofjuelv, opyl^eadac. Oportet ut conni-
ventibus oculis haec legerit Hesychius. Ego quidem meis
vix fidem habeo^ cum ista lego. Proculdubio sic scriptum
est a prima manu : Xeipovo/juelv, opy^eladai. Ipse alibi :
XeLpovofMOf;, 6p')(7]o-Tr}<i. Manuum iste motus cum certa lege
et numero bonam partem saltationis olim constituebat.
Plena sunt exemplorum omnia. Lucretius :^
[^ Confer Brunck. Lex. Soph, in v. 'Eprjvofi., et Schowium ad Hesych. Suppl.
p. 136.— D.]
[^ Vulgo fieff Tjixuv.— D.] [y Vulgo i/xnrjpovs.—'D.']
[^ c. Ixxiii. t. i. p. 422. ed. Schw.— D.] ['^ iv. 772, 789.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 291
Quod superest, iioii est mirum, simulacra moveri,
Brachiaque in iiumerum jactare, et csetera membra.
Et postea :
Quid porro, in numerum procedere quum simulacra
Cernimus in somnis, et moUia membra movere ;
Mollia mobiliter quum alternis brachia mittunt.
t KaXvyjrLv, KoXvKa dvTi(TTp6(f>co<i. Medium hoc verbum est
inter KoKvBcovlov et KaXvKa<;. Agnosco manmn et in-
genium correctoris : qui videlicet^ cum in Hesychio suo
legerat KoXv^lv, KoXvKa, idque animadverterat extra seriem
et praepostere poni^ adscripserat in margine e regione loci
^AvTiaTp6<f>(D(i', nempe vice versa legi oportere KaXvKa,
KaXvyjrLv. Postea illud avTtaTpocjxa^ per inscitiam libra-
riorum insinuavit se in versum. Quis hujus rei ante nos
suspicionem habuit? Quin et alibi post vocem JJpocr-
fidWocvTo, quae et ipsa vitiosa est, haec leges : UpoaekOcov,
irpoo-^aKwv ef dvTLaTp6(f>a)<;. Dele hoc novissimum, quod
nimirum ab emendatore est, qui adnotaverat legendum esse
e converso Tlpoa^akcav, rrrpoa-eXOcov. Quo nihil verius dici
potuisse censeo : sed in altero, quicunque fuit, longissime a
vero abfuit. Profecto plus toto coelo distant KdXv^ et
KdXv-^L^. Ego vero pro explorato prorsus habeo sic scrip-
tum esse ab Hesychio ; KdXv^LV, KdXvKa' nempe depravate
loco KdXv^LV 5'pro ^' quem errorem millies erravisse eum,
si hie locus esset, nunc possem ostendere. Quam recte
autem KdXv^tv interpretetur KdXvKa, melius est ut ipsum ad
testimonium vocemus : KaXv^eL^;, poBcov KaXvKca. KdXv^c^;,
Koafjbo^ Tt9 e/c poScov. Habeo alia sexcenta, quae hac vice
condonabitur. Verum hercle si unquam usus fuerit, ut nova
Hesychii editio procuretur; qui, ut in pudendos errores
crebro incident, utilissimus nihilominus et pene necessarius
est omnibus, qui ad veram eruditionem viam affectant ;
Id tibi de piano possum promittere, Milli,^
[•» Lucret. i. 412.
" Hoc tibi de piano possum promittere, Memmi." D.]
292 EPISTOLA AD
quinque plus minus millia mendorum nie correcturum esse,
si libuerit ; quae aliorum evGToyJ.av et laboriosam diligentiam
hactenus eluserunt.^ Ut illuc, unde abii, redeam : multos
ubique lexicorum locos contaminaverunt correctiones illse
in librorum marginibus : quod ex illo tempore verbum
mendosum cum altero junctim continuaretur in versu; non
uti factum oportuit, litura tolleretur. Luculentum hujus rei
exemplum extat apud Julium Pollucem lib. vii. cap. xxxiii.,*^
ubi inter varia nomina jactuum in ludo talario nominantur
apTua et dpfjuartaCy avTLT€V')(o<; et avrlrvTrof;, €7ri(f)6va)v et
iircipopayv. Sed ex hisce binis non nisi singula quaeque a
Polluce profecta sunt : csetera qua dixi via insinuarunt se in
orationem. Cui quidem sententise non invitus accedet, qui
jam primum a me didicerit iambicos esse trimetros ex
Eubuli fabula Aleatoribus. Locus hoc exemplo consti-
tuendus est. 'O jjuev rot Mlha^ koI twv jjueacov ^oXcov rjv.
Kal dWot, 8e iroWol elauv, 01)9 ovofid^ei, Ei>l3ov\o<; iy Tolf;
KevrpcDTo^y lepo<;, dpfi vTrep/SaXkov iroha^,
Kripvvo'^y evSai/JLMV) KvvoiTO<^, dprca,
AdKo)V€<;, avTiTev^o^i, dpyeto^;, Sclkvcov,
[^ " Sed magni illi viri [Scaliger, Casaubonus, Salmasius, &c.] quae senti-
rent, palam dicere non audebant, sive Grammatici auctoritate deterriti, sive
clamoribus semidoctorum, semper obstrepentium doctioribus, nee satis aequo
animo ferentium, ipsum Hesychium in ordinem cogi. Ad banc rem proferen-
dam demonstrandamque opus erat docta Richardi Bentleii audacia, quae, si
unquam alias, hie certe bonis Uteris plus profuit, quam iners et superstitiosa
multorum, qui Critici dici haberique volunt, religio. Is igitur servili creduli-
tatis jugo excusso, edidit illam ad J. Millium Epistolam, mirabile ingenii et doc-
trinae monimentum, quale proficisci non poterat, nisi a principe seculi sui
Criticorum. In bac ille epistola cum alia docuit, quae plerisque eruditis, nee
vigilantibus, nee somniantibus, in mentem venissent, tum Hesycliium, cui satis
diuturna peccatorum impunitas obtigisset, ad severum Critices tribunal citavit.
Hanc autem accusationem tanta vi argumentorum, tantis testimoniorum copiis
instruxit, ut ne obtrectatores quidem illius, invidia partiumque studiis aestuantes,
quos plurimos nactus erat, in bac etiam Academia, contra hiscere, aut Hesycbii
patrocinium suscipere, auderent." — Verba vides magni Rubnkenii in Praef. ad
Hesycbii Albertiani tomum alterum. — D.]
['' p. 843. ed. Hemst., quern vide ad loc. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 293
TcfioKpiTOfiy iWetTTcov, TTvaXtrrjf;, i'Kl66TO<i,
^<f>dW(OV, dyvprrj^;, olcrrpo^y dvaKafJUTrrcov, Sopeu?^
AdfjLTrayv, KVK\(07re<;, iiri^epayy, aoXcov, (Ti/JLoyv,
Horum autem versuum ignoratione tota via erravit Joannes
Meursius, qui eos omnes inter j actus medios recenset.
Nempe non Eubuli esse verba, sed Pollucis : et quia Midas
esset Tcov fiiacov ^6\o)v, itidem et sequentes esse arbitratus
est. Sed parum est dubitationis, quin boni fuerint evhalfjucov
et apfi vireplSdWov 7r6Ba<^, qui nimirum aliis jactibus tan to
anteiret, quanto qui pedibus iter faceret, a curru vinceretur ;
7refo9, ut aiunt, oBevcov irapd Avhiov apfiaA Aukvcov autem et
(T<^dXk(ov et iXXeLTTcov merito opinor suo pro infelicibus
haberi possunt. Sed ad Antiochensem redeo : nam sero
sensi longe longeque declinasse me a proposito.
Singula dum capti circumvectamur amore.^
Pag. 172. [I74.] Kaeax; 6 (TocfxoraTO^ EvpcTTiSv^; i^edero
Spd/jLa 7roLr)TLK(o^, a)v /Jbepo<i oXlyov iarl ravra. Multa
quidem transcripsit Malelas ex Iphigenia in Tauris ; quae ex
usu fuerit ad Euripidea exigere, quo de ejus doctrina et fide
cognoscamus : si quis ilia tam dura habeat, ut earn molestiam
devorare possit. Mihi enim, qui jam lentus et fastidiosus
esse coepi, dabis veniam, si pluria rejiciens et aspernans,
unumquidquid quod erit bellissimum carpsero. Velut illud
p. 172. in Oraculo : El fir} Tre/jacra? Uovtov Kvixara^ ^kvOLt}^
T€ yalav Kara\dl3ot,<;, AvXlSo^ re ^((opav. et 173. KaTe(f)dacrev
iirl Trjv Av\l8a, %ft)joav t^? ^Kv6ia<;. Male vero sit vobis
quantum est geographorum. Rogo vos, an Scythicam illam
Aulidem silentio praetermissam oportuit? quid? an ultra Cim-
meriorum fines latitabat rjepL Kal ve^ekr) KeicciKvp.pLkvri} adeo
ut nemo vestrum usque eo potuerit oculis contendere ? Euge
vero, w ^IcoavviBcov profecto aptus natus es ad omnia abdita
[<» Vide Erasmi Jdag. p. 481. ed. 1606.— D.]
[« Virg. Georg. iii. 285.— D.]
[' ''EvBa Se Kcfi/xepiuv avSpwv SrJiJ.6s T€ ir6\is re,
'Hfpi Kal V€<p4\r) KiKaKvixjxivoi. Horn. Od. xi. 14. — D.]
294 EPISTOLA AD
et retrusa contemplanda : tarn acri es acie et mentis et ocii-
lorum.
Sed tamen amoto quferamus seria ludo.s
Geminam Iphigeniam etiam pueri sciunt Euripidem docuisse^
Tr]v eV TavpoL<; et ttjv iv AvXlSt. Joannes, cum Tauros esse
Scythas ab aliquo didicisset, etiam Aulidem, quae Boeotiae
oppidum est, regionem iis finitimam esse arbitratus est.
P. 173. TovTov^ Se icopaKoref; jSovKoXoc, eSpa/juov tt/do? t^v
I(piy€V6iav, Xiyovref; avTrj' ^Ayajjui/jLyovo'; koL KkvraLjJbvr}-
crrpa? Kopy, rjKaa-L hvo veavicrKOi irapa rrjv Kvaviav quae
ex his Euripideis^ expressa sunt :
BovK. ^Ayajjue/jLVOvo^;, iral, koX KXvTacfjLvr}(TTpa<i Koprj,^
^'Akovc Kaivoiv i^ i/buov Krjpvyfidrcov.
^I<f>. Tl S' ian rod 7rap6vTO<; iKirXrjcrarov Xoyov ',
BovK. "HKOvatv et? yrjv Kvavedv avfMirXrjydBcov
TLXdrrj (j)vy6vT€<; S/tttu^o^ veavlai.
Vides Antiochensem hunc ita eTrapiarepcof; accepisse senten-
tiam Euripidis ; tanquam si eh yrjv Kvaviav conjunctim
dixisset. Vos iterum appello de terra hac Cyanea; vos qui
geographiae magistros vos pollicemini. Quid autem mussi-
tatis ? nam Joannem ea loca convisisse Cedrenus affirmat,
prorsus otKoOev 6 ^dprv^. Damno itaque stultitiam meam,
qui Kvaveav cum G-vfJLifKrjydhcov componebam hactenus.
Atque hercle vero serio, nequid dissimulem, non placet iste
locus : neque enim video cur ii bubulci sermone Dorico
uterentur. Quid, malum, an Siculos se esse somniabant,
non Tauro-Scythas ?
Awpiahev ^ €^6(TTCy Bo km, tol<; AoypLieacrivJ
Atqui^ quantumvis essent Dorienses, si TrXareidahoLcrav suam
dialecton extra chorum adhibuissent, rus continuo vel in
[& Hor. Serm. I. 1. 27.— D.]
[»» Iph. in Taur. v. 238. ed. Markl.— v. 228. ed. Matt.— D.]
\} riKvov. Eurip. edd. omnes. — D.]
[J Theoc. Idyl. xv. 93.— D.]
['' Vide Valcken. ad Eurip. Phcen. v. 11.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 295
ultimas terras mandati essent non sine infortunio. Sciunt
id qui harum literarum gustum aliquem habent. Adde ora-
tionem soloecam esse ; ut quideni nunc habetur : sed certe,
si pro sano locutus est^ sic scripsit Euripides :
"Hkovctiv 669 7^v, Kvavea<; av/jL7r\r]'ydSa<i
UXdrr) ^vy6vTe<; StTrrv^ot veavlat.
aut, si illud Kvaveav antiquitatis causa servare velis^ quan-
doquidem qua vixit Malelas tempestate jam in libris invete-
raverat ; in hunc modum :
^'Hkovctiv et? 7^v, Kvaveav av/jLTrXyydBcov^
Tlerpav <f)vy6vTefi SItttv^oi, veavlai,
v^elut postea loquitur^ Kdya) ae aooaco Kvavea^ e^(o 7r€Tpa<;.^
Eleganter autem Kvaveav irirpav av/jLTrXrjydScov, ut nihil
supra. Sic Virgilius :
Quales Threicia cum flumina ThermodontisP^
et Lucretius :
Puherulenta Ceres, et Etesia flabra Aquilonum.^
et iterum :
Ut Bahylonica Chaldceum doctrina refutans.^
et tertium :
Impellant ut earn Magnesia flamina saoci.^
Sic legendi sunt duo loci novissimi ; in libris vulgatis minus
emendati feruntur.
\} Kvaveav 'S.vfnrKriydBa. edd. Markl. et Matt. — D.]
[™ V. 746. ed. Markl.— v. 729. ed. Matt.— D.]
[° jEn. xi. 659. Vulgo " Threiciae." — " Threicia vitium operarum ed. N.
Heins." Heynius ad loc. : sed videas Bentleium apud Wakef. ad Lucret. vi.
1062.— D.]
[« V. 741.— D.]
[P V. 726 " Chaldaeam." ed. Haverc— " Chaldaeum." ed. Wakef.—
Confer Bentleii Annot, ad calcem Lucret. ed. Wakef. (1813.) t. iv. p. 444. — D.]
[1 VI. 1062 Magnesi semina saxi." ed. Haverc. — " Magnesia Jlumina
saxi." ed. Wakef., ubi vide Bentleium ad loc, et in Annot. t. iv. p. 456.— D.]
296 EPISTOLA AD
P. 176. Tov UeXoTreiov yivov<; (TrjfxavTpov €')(^6L, iXalav ev
Tft) cofio). Jam hoc pro explorato habeo, ikalav ab hac
pecude positam esse pro iXicjiavra. Cui enim fando auditum
est^ oleaginum humerum fuisse Pelopi ?
Cui non dictus Hylas puer^ et Latonia Delos,
Hippodameque^ humeroque Pelops insignis eburno?^
^Eirel VLV KaOapov \e^7)T0<; e^eXe
KXcodo), iXiipavTC (^alhifiov
Alia multa sunt apud Malelain ex eadem fabula tralata^ quae
missa facio. Cur enim me mancipium faciam wapacppo-
vovvTo<; BearTTOTov}^ Majoris fuerit et voluptatis et fructus
cognoscere, quae summus poeta Ennius de priore Iphigenia
convertit. Julius Rufinianus De Figuris Sententiarum et
Elocutionis .•* Aganactesis, indignatio, quae fit maxime pronun-
ciatione. Ennius in Iphigenia : Menelaus me objurgat, id
meis rebus regimen restat. Dormitavit hie vir summus Ger.
Vossius. Nam, si unam syUabam addideris, trochaicus erit
catalecticus :
Menelaus me objurgat : id meis rebu regimen restitat,
quod genus versus commodissime inservit rfj a^yava/CTrja-ei'
ut diu est quod ipse in tragicis Graecis observavi ; priusquam
id de Scholiaste Hermogenis didicissem. Idem Rufinianus
postea:^ Syncrisis, sive antithesis, comparatio rerum atque
personarum inter se contrariarum : ut, ego plector^ quod tu
peccas : tu delinquis, ego arguor pro malefactis : Helena
redeat, virgo pereat innocens : tua reconcilietur uxor, mea
necetur filia.^ Hunc etiam locum ad Ennii i/^Ai^e^ziam refert
Italorum doctissimus Hieronymus Columna : invito tamen
et repugnante Vossio, partim quia auctor non laudatur,
[«! Virg. Georg. iii. 6.— D.] ["• Find. 01. i. 40. ed. Heyn.— D.]
[^ Aristoph. Plut. v. 2.— D.]
[* p. 205. ed. Ruhnk. (ad calcem Rutil. Lup.)— D.]
[° p. 222. ed. Ruhnk.— D.]
[^ plector pro vulg. projector, est e Pithoei et G. J. Vossii conjectura. — D.]
\^ mea necetur filia pro vulg. mea negeiur, filia mea, corr. Columna. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 297
partim quia noii vincta seel p^destris oratio est; ad quod
mirum, ait, non attendisse Columnam. Peccet Columna,
et peccat quidem, in versibus : ego vero, cum certis signis
hunc Ennii foetum cognoscam, non committam ut alium,
quam quo natus est, parentem sibi inveniat. Versus enim
sunt trochaici, ex eadem puto scena petiti, qua superior est :
Ut ego plecfar, quod tu peccas ; tu delinquis, ego arguar
Pro malefactis ? Helena redeat, virgo pereat innocens ?
Tua reconcilietur uxor^ mea necetur filia ?^
Non amplius, quod sciam, Euripides a Malela citatur prae-
terquani p. 35. 'O Tavpo<i e/c Trj<; Evpco7r7)<; ecr'y^ev^ vlov rov
Mlvq), Ka6a}'^ Koi EvpL7rLhr}<^ 6 aocfidoTarof; ttoltjtlkco^; crvv-
eypd-ylraTO' co? (fyrjcrL, Zev^; fjb6Ta^\7]6el<; et9 ravpov ttjv Eu-
pcoirrjv rfpiraaev. Hsec quidem unde accersita sint, non
certo scio : nam credibile est eum in non una tragoedia hsec
obiter attigisse; ut in Cretensibus fortassis, ubi chorus ad
Minoem; ^otvcKO<y6vov<; iral ttj^ Tvpla^ TeKvov Evpa)7rrj<;
Kol Tou /jbeyaXov Zrjvo^; :^ veri tamen simile est ex Euripidis
Phrixo tralata esse. Eratosthenes in Karaa-repLa/jLohJ {Tav-
po<;) \iyerac iv toI<; darpOL^} reOrfvai hia to EvpcoTrrjv ayayecv
€K 0OLVLK7]<} et? Kp7]Tr)v Sca Tov TreXdyov^, co9 EvptTriBrji^
[cl)7j(7lv] iv T(p ^pl^w. Profecto qui Europam tragoediam esse
volunt, narrant nobis insomnium ex eburnea porta.
Pag. 181. 'jEv to?9 'X^povoL^ toI<;^ /juerd rrjv okcoorLV
Tpoi,a<^, Trap ^EWtjctlv iOav/Md^ero 7rpcoTO<^ Qefjui^; ovofjuaTL'
i^evpe^ yap ovto<; TpayiKd<; yLteXwS/a?, Kal i^eOero nrpwTO'i
Spdfiara, Kal fjuerd tovto Mlvq)<;, Kal /jLerd Mlvcoa Av\ia<;
TpayLKovf; ')(opov^ Bpafidrcov avveypd'y^aTO. Utinam vero
Malelae cum praecursore suo melius conveniret ! nam Jubal,
si ei credimus, diu ante Trojse excidium tragoedias factitavit.
[^ " De Ennii loco apud Jul. Rufin. (p. 222. ed. Ruhnken.) non liquet.
Primum, ego melius in arsi collocaretur. Deinde, modus subjunctivus per omnia
servari debere videtur. Et delinquas quidem habet ed. B. Rhenani, quae sola ex
MSS. petita est. An legendum, Egone plectar, quod tu peccas? delinquas tuy
ego arguar? Sed, ne quid dissimulem, valde displicent Tu Ego in thesi: quare
ampliandum." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 364. — D.]
["^ 'E| h eo-x6J/. MaL— D.] [^ Vide supra, p. 271.— D.]
[y cap. 14. p. 12. ed. Schaub.— D.] [^ Se roty. MaL— D.]
[• ^|T?Df)€. MaL— D.]
VOL.. II. 2 Q
298 EPISTOLA AD
Verba, ne te ludere ^ddear, sunt p. 3. 'O Be (lov^aX) KuOapw-
hia<; Kol Tpaya)8[a(; Tot9 Bac/jLoviKOL<i iTnrrjSev/jiaaL Trpoaeire-
vorjcrev. Quid quod ad soccum baud minus idoneus erat, si
interpretem audis, quam ad cothurnum. Nam KcdapwBla
Chilmeado est comcedia ; qui, cum ad alios ingenii cultus
etiam musicae studium adjunxerit, cur adeo ab artificio suo
recederet, miror : clementer tamen, propter alia merita, sua-
que quasi lyra est increpandus. Vix equidem crediderim
in Bibliotbeca vestra Oxonii, quantacunque est, Jubaliana
dramata reperiri. Scilicet ea omnia perierunt olim ;
Quando ex diluvio magno exivere rapaces
Per terras amnes, atque oppida cooperuere.^
Quarum fabularum una cum ipsis etiam memoria occidisset,
absque illo Hamartolo^ fuisset, qui omnia omnino meminit,
quae fuerunt, et quae nuUo sunt tempore nata. Habeo ta-
men, quo desiderium meum et dolorem consoler; nam in
mentem opportune venit fieri posse, ut locus iste vitiosus sit,
et in hunc modum emendandus : 'O Se (lovffaX) KcOapcpSla^i
KoX \vp(phla^ Tot9 dpfiovtKOL<; iTTLTrjBevfjLaat irpoaeirevorjaev.
Et profecto quam magis magisque cogito, nimirum acu rem
tetigi; sin autem, nolim mihi quenquam posthac ne jurato
quidem credere. Tandem igitur aliquando lite hac compo-
sita, quantulum est tamen quod profecimus, si Joannes ipse
pugnantia loquatur? Non enim jam ab Ilio capto primus
mortalium Themis dramata fecit: siquidem ante istam me-
moriam ^gypti rex Pharao, ubi a negotiis et turbis requies-
cere volebat, solitus est comoedias scriptitare. Verba sunt
Joannis p. 76. Toiv Be AlyvTrricov i^aalXevae ITeTia-crcwvio?
6 Ka)fjL(pSo(i ^apaco. Quid rides ? Quasi vero novum nunc
proferatur, regem ad fabulas scribendas animum appulisse.
Etiam Dionysius tyrannus poeta fuit tragicus, et Augusti
P Audi ipsum poetam : —
" Aut cecidisse urheis magno vexamine mundi,
Aut ex imhrihus adsiduis exisse rapaceis
Per terras amneis, atque oppida cooperuisse." Lucret. V. 341. — D.]
[•= " Quod spectat ad ista quae huic Editioni praemittuntur Chronologica, sub
titulo Autoris Anonymi Excerptonim Chronologicorum : non alia sunt ea quam
Chronici Georgii Monacld cognominati Hamartoli sive Peccatoris principium."
Hodius, Proleg. in Malelam, s. xli. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 299
Ajdx in spongiam incubiiit.*^ Quanquam, si emendate loqui
velimus^ K(ofi(pB6<i non comicus est, sed comcedics actor. His-
trioniam igitur fecit Pharao; Thrasonis, opinor, vel Pyrgo-
lopolinicis partes agens ; ut Nero postea (Edipodis vel
Creontis. Verum haec ipsius Malelae stultitiam superant;
ut ea qui dixerit, non pro honiine sano loqui, sed ad agnatos
et gentiles deducendus esse videatur. Sine dubio vitium est
exemplaris, quo tamen modo tollendum sit, minus id possum
conjectura assequi. Quid si legamus, n€TC(7cr(i)vto<;, 6 tm
Mcoael ^apaco' Petissonius, qui a Mose Pharao vocatur?
Si caput scaberem fortasse aliud melius possem exsculpere :
sed indignus est Joannes, cujus causa commentari velim
quidquam, nisi si quid ex facili nascatur. Itaque ut ad
Themin istum propius accedamus. Eadem cum Antiochensi
narrat, et in eodem doctus est ludo Scholiastes vetus nescio
quis apud Stanleium in Vita JEschyli :^ 'Ev tol<; 'x^povoi^;
^OpecTTOv idavfid^ero irap* "EWrjcn ©€6fii,<;, 09 TrpSyro^ i^evpe
rpayayScfca^ ljuekwhia<i, koI i^idero vrpwTO? Bpdfiara. Kai,
fjL6T avTov MLyco<;, koI fjuerd Mivaya Av\ia<; ')(^opov<i rpayi-
Kov<: avvecTTrjaaTo. Haec habet doctissimus noster Stanleius
ex Bullengeri Theatro, Et tamen neuter de Themide, de
Minoe vel Aulea, quod quam diligentissime factum oportuit,
certiores nos facit. Concurrant jam omnes, quantum est
^L^\coTa(j)(j)v, et capita inter se conferant; nunquam se ex-
pedient, neque quidquam de tergeminis hisce tragicis rescis-
cent. Narrat Clemens ^rpayfiarecov^ primo to rjpwov to
€^d/jL6Tpov .... ©i/jLiv fiiav Tcov TcTaviBcov evprjKeyaCy Mi-
noem autem tov<; vo/jlov^'^ sed quod ad prsesens negotium
attinet, vacuum a se lectorem et hiantem dimittit. Quid
enim vofiot Minois ad nomos musicos ? Tl irpo^ tov Alovv-
o-ov;S neque heroes in tragoediis heroos hexametros dice-
bant. Itaque quantum video, perpetua jam criticis sollici-
[^ Vide Sueton. in August, c. 85. — D.]
[•J Stanl. In Vitam JEsch. Com. p. 700. ed. 1664.= p. 57. ed. Butl.— D.]
[e p. 366. ed.Pott., ubi e^pe?*/.— D.] [^ p. 365. ed. Pott.— D.]
[» Vide Suidam in OuSei/ -nphs rhv Ai6v., et nostrum in Dissert, de Phalar.
t. i. p. 293.— D.]
300 EPISTOLA AD
tudo et quasi crux constituta est: nisi Callimachi TI[vaKa<;
et Aristophanis Grammatici Commentarium longa nocte
sepultos protraliere possunt in lucem. Verum heus vos !
Ecquid erit praemi,^ si nodum hunc solvere ? quod quidem
ea lege et conditione faciam; ut dehinc mihi cum vestra
natione nullum omnino commercium intercedat. Enimvero
ab Antiochensi et ficulno illo, quicunque est^ Scholiaste
gravissime peccatum est, cum in nominibus turn in rebus
ipsis. Prorsus quot verba^ tot errata. Neque enim agnosco
commentitios istos Theomin^ Minoem, Auleam ; quorum ego
loco non dubia conjectura repono Thespin, lonem, JEschy-
lum :^ neque Tliespis ea, qua rentur, tempestate vixit ; nam
Solonis aequalis a Troicis temporibus longissime abfuit:
neque Ion ^schylo prior fuit : neque primus ^schylus
chores tragicos instituit; quod contra chorum, qui perpetua
ante oratione totam fabulam decantabat, primus diverbiis et
personis distinxit. Sed operae pretium fuerit accuratius haec
omnia tractare. Ac de Thespide quidem minor est dubitatio,
quia in discipulorum cathedris quotidie ista jactantur :
Ignotum tragicae genus invenisse camehse
Dicitur, et plaustris vexisse poemata Thespis.^
Suidas: Gea7rL<; . . iBlSa^ev iirl Trj<; Trpoorrjf; fcal f ^0\v/ii7ridBo<;'
jivrjixoveverai Be rcov Bpafidrcov avrov, ^AdXa TLeXlov rj
^opl3d(;, 'lepeU, ^Htdeoc, UevOev^. Pentheus fabula a PoUuce
laudatur lib. vii. c. xii.^ {To ovofia eVevSuTTy?) Xr^irreov eK
Tcjv ^o(f)OK\iov<; nXvvrptcbv, JJeifkov^s Teviaai XivoTrkweif;
T eirevBvTa'^' /cal ©ecTTTt? Be irov <^rjcrlv ev to3 Uevdel' ^Epyo)
vojjLi^e vevpiBa<; e^euv eTrevBvrrjv. De quo versu^ cum nihil
in praesentia succurrat, quod mihi satisfaciat, ejus emen-
[^ Ed. Oxon. EpisL ad Mill. " Ecquid erit pretii," quod mihi quidem melius
videtur. — D.]
[^ Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 553. — D.]
[d Hor. in Arte Poet. v. 275.— D.] [« p. 717. ed. Hemst.— D.]
[^ " Postea, Dissert. Phalarid. 2da, p. 245. expedivit Pseudo - Thespidis
locum, vcPplS" exeij/. Sed forsan non delendum, sed transponendum (T. vefiplS'
cxeti' 0"' pro vf^pida a' exetr." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — Confer nostrum in
Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 554., et in Dissert, de Phalar. t. i. p. 295.
-D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 301
dationem in aliud tempus differam : Sophocleum ilium sine
mora expediam. Neque enim cum Casaubono^ Meursio et
Gatakero Krevicrai substituerim ; cujus media syllaba est
brevis ; versumque redderet una syllaba breviorem. Non
enim diiambus est \ivo'rf\vvu<^^ sed paeon quartus. Neque
Gatakeri veoifkyvTov^ lirevhvra^ probaverim; nam sedes
quarta spondaeum non admittit; poterat paullo rectius veo-
7r\vTov<i. Sed aliud quiddam praetulerim, de quo ausim tibi
firmissime asseverare :
Ueifkov^ re vfjcrai, A-tvoTrXuve?? t e7r€vSvTa<;.S
Diversa ab illis^ quas Suidas recenset, fabula habetur in
veteri Marmore Arundeliano, quod nunc est Oxonii : A^ OT
eExnix o noiHTHS axi . . .oh ejiaaben
AA. , . HTIN. Supple AAKH^TIN, AX^tjcttcv non A\-
K6<TTcy, ut minus recte Editores.^ Locus est illustris apud
Clementem in Hrpco/jbarioiv quinto;^ quem nefas quidem
fuerit silentio praetermittere. 0eo-7rt9 /juiv rot 6 rpayiKOf}
SiaJ TOVTcov aWo tl arjiMalveadai (prjcrcv, mSS ttco? ypdcfxov
"ISe (Toi (TTrivSco Kva^^/Sl to XevKov^
^Airo OrjXa/iiovcov 6Xi'\lra^ KvaKMV.
"ISe arot ')(6vTnr)v rvpov pbl^a^;
^Epv6pS fjiiXcTCy Kara tcov crcov, Uav
AcKepco^;, rldefiai, jBfOfXfav afylcav.
IBe (TOi Bpo/julov alOoira (pXeyfibiA
Aelffco.
Haec narrat Clemens ex Thespide : ex aliis alia, quae ad
eandem rem spectant. Persuasum est hactenus viris eru-
[ts Confer nostrum in Addendis, et in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii.
p. 553. Hunc versum post Canterum et Bentleium sic dedit Brunckius {Lex.
Sophoc. in 'Eirej-SuTrjs),
UeirXovs re vrjcat, VioirXvvus t' iirevZiras. D.]
[•» Vide omnino nostrum in Dissert, de Phalar. t. i. p. 290. sqq. — D.]
[> p. 675. ed. Pott— Vide Dissert, de Phalar. t. i. p. 291.— D.]
[J irapk ed. Pott.— D.]
[^ Kva^0l \(vk6u. Toupius, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 565. — D.]
[' <p\oyfx6v. ed. Pott.— D.]
302 EPISTOLA AD
ditis^ magnam symbolicae et senigmaticae veterum theologiae
vim in barbaris illis vocabulis contineri. Rem igitur baud
ingratam facturum me spero^ si refregero haec claustra, quae
a multis sseculis omnem ad haic sacra aditum praecluserunt.
Quod autem Herculem ferunt dixisse^ cum in delubro quo-
dam conspexisset simulacrum Adonidis, OvBev lepov virdp-
%€^v^ idem mihi jam usu venit, hoc adyto recluso. Videlicet
erat olim ridicula et puerilis ratio ; ut ex quatuor et viginti
Uteris, semel duntaxat positis singulis, barbara quaedam et
infaceta verba conficerent, prout cuique libitum fuerit. Cle-
mens banc appellat o-rotp^etwri/CT^v tmv TralBcov hihaaKoXiav,
Postea certandum erat ingenio, ut sententiam istorum verbo-
rum aliquam omnibus vestigiis indagarent ; non eam quidem
omnino alienam et absonam, sed a propinquo si fieri potuit,
et verisimili petitam. Tria profert Clemens exempla eorum
vTToypafifMcoy iraiBcKcov' quorum unum hoc est :
Ita scribi oportere res ipsa clamat ', non ut in editis, yaapTrre?
et fuv%^7;S6v calculum jam pone, et omnes omnino literas
Cadmi, Palamedis, Simonidis, in quatuor istis vocabulis in-
venies. Ecce tibi secundum :
Ita legendum, non ut in vulgatis, fa-^fr et %^(»v nam eo
pacto et M litera deesset, et N bis poneretur. Tamen ut
XdfjL^Sa Xd^Sa, sic illud fa)L6i|r auctores Graeci ^dyjr scrip-
sisse et pronunciasse videntur: sic etiam Kd-^fra dicunt et
KdfMyfra* sic XrjyjreTat in antiquissimis MSS. scribitur \ijfi-
-^erai, et multa similia.^ Tertium denique est illud Thes-
pidis :
Kva^^^l, %^u7rT779, ^Xej/JLco, S/)oi|r.^»
Male apud Clementem est editum (j)X6y/iio<;, Spcoyjr' ut liquido
[} Vide Schol. Theocr. V. 21., et Suid. in OuSev UpSv.—D.']
[i p. 675. ed. Pott.— D.] p p. 674. ed. Pott.— D.]
{} Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 554. — Vide
etiam Schowium ad Hesych. Suppl. p. 414. — D.]
["" p. 674. ed. Pott.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 303
constabit, si digitis computans literarum numerum velis inire.
Qiiam mirifice autem Clemens hsec omnia quantumvis inepta
et ludicra interpretetur, malim ex ipso quam ex me audias.
Aliter pauUo haec ultima ab Hesychio proferuntur ; nam pro
Kva^^/Sl 'x^dvTTTrj^, Kva^ habet et ^^1% ^^ Ov7rT7)<;. Kva^
autem interpretatur <yaXa \evKov, SSt% (ita lege, non ^a^l'x)
XevKov, et ^utttt;? 6 rvpo^. Atque hujus auctoritate in-
ductus Salmasius^ verba Thespidis ad hunc modum immu-
tare voluit :
"ISe aoL aTrivBo) fcva^ S^^% XevKov,
et
"JSe (Toc OvTTTTjv TVpov fxi^a^;.
Sed profecto non ea est Hesychii auctoritas ; neque plus
habet momenti, quam Clementis et Porphyrii hominum
multis partibus illo doctiorum. Non enim librarii culpa
est apud Clementem : neque ulla similitudo veri est ;^
literam a verbo Kva^^^l fortuito disjunctam fuisse, et tertio
post versu repositam. Porphyrii autem hoc aTroaTrao-fjuaTCov
est ex libro MS*o Oxonii.
nOP^TPIOT ^lAOHO^OT
JJepl Tov Kva^^^l, 'xOvinr]^, (pXey/iiot), Spoyjr ep/HTjveia.
Ev Aek<^ol<i €t9 TOV vaov iiri'yeypaTrTaL Tpdyo<; Ix^vl eVl
Be\cl>Lvo<; eTriKeijjLevo^. Kva^ fiev 'yap iariv 6 rpd'yo<; Kara
cLTroKOTrrjv ToSv o-Tot^eicov tov k(d<; (lege kcov) koI ttoXiv
d(j)aipe(TLV (imo irpoadeaov) tov f . KvaKov <ydp KaXeuTaL, &)?
Kal OeoKpcTog ev povKo\oi<i Xiyet. otov Tpd>yo<; koX l^6v<;,^
6 fjuev (j)X€yofjL6Vo<;, 6 Be Bpbyjr o^lrov. Aeyei Be on 6 Tpdyo<;
(^Xeyofievo^ eari, iravrore vtto Xayvta^;, on edv Tt9 Td<; ptva<;
avTov diroacpaXLcreL (leg. diracrcf^aXLcrr)) , Bid twv KepdTcov
dvairvel. ' -E^^e^ Be koX eTepav ep/Mrjvelav ovtco<s' To Kva^^fil
[° Plin. Exercit. p. 629.— D.]
[° " Koi Ix^vs, K. T. \. Haec verba, gravissime corrupta, ad hunc fere modum
sunt legenda : Kal t^ /Mtu x^"^'''V5 'X^^^j """^ ^^ (pXeyixii <l>\€y6iJ.eyos, rh Se Sphx^t —
N. B. T^ (i. e. ■») infra, rh Kvai0i, etc." Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
304 EPISTOLA AD
'yaXa iarlv, to Be ^^utttt;? Tvpo<;, Bpo-^jr Be avOptdiro^' Spco7re<}
yap 01 dvOpcoTTOC Xeyovrat* Kal erepa Be irXelara rocavra
Bia Tc3v fcB crT0i')(eL(ov airapTL^ovTa IBtov aKOirov evpofiev, olov
BeBv, ^ayjr, x^^j irKrjKTpov, (7<f)Ly^. 6 earLV ovt(o<;' BeBv
eany r) vypa ovcrta, ^a-v^ rj 7rvpQ)B7j<i ovaia, %^ob 77 7^7, ttXtjk-
Tpov Be 6 arjp, (Tcf>ly^ rj tovtcov (ftcXia Blcl to crvveafpLyx^ac.
KXcoBlo^; Be 6 Nea7ro\iT7]<; ovT(o<i rjp/ju^vevae to TrpoKeLfievov
arjp, OaXaaaa, yfj, ^Xto?. Kal eTepoi rtve? <f)L\6ao<f>oi re
Kat 7roir)Tai tovtov tov ctkottov rjp/juijvevcrav.
Non longe a .principio sic scribe : kvcikcov yap KaXecTat,
ft)9 6 ©eoKpLTO^ ev Bovko\lkoI<; Xeyet,. Locus est Idyllio
tertio :P
Kai TOV evop^av
Toy Al/Svkov KvaKwva <^v\d(Taeo^ fiT) tv Kopv-slry.
Illud autem nimis festivum est^ quod aliquanto post sequitur :
capras scilicet^ siquis iis nares obturet^ cornibus spirare.
Sed pro KepaTcov certissime emendandum est ovaTcov vel
&TO)v. Varro De Re Rustica :^ De quibus admirandum illud,
quod etiam Archelaus scribit ; {capras) non, ut reliqua ani-
malia, naribus, sed auribus spiritum ducere solere. Idem
narrant Plinius et -^lianus. Clodius iste Neapolitanus
librum composuit adversus eos, qui carne abstiiierent ; ut
testis est ipse Porphyrius nre pi airox^^i e/jbyjrvxcoy neque alius
quisquam illius meminit, quod sciam. Fidem id facit^ mi-
nime '^evBeiTlypa<j>a haec esse^ sed ex Porphyrio bona fide
excerpta.
P. 181. Kal fJLeTCL TOVTO Mly(o<;, /cat jjueTa Mlvcoa Av-
Xea?. Dixi meam sententiam : nimirum aut vitio codicis
aut memorise falsum esse Joannem; et ad hunc modum a
prima manu scriptum videri^ Kal fieTo, tovtov "Icov, Kal fjueTa
"Icova ^tV^uA,09. Porro iste Ion poeta fuit tragicus, nation e
Chius : de quo ideo plura dicemus^ quia Thespide et JEschylo
aliquanto est ignotior ; tum autem ut quasi specimen demus
istius operis, cujus antea fecimus mentionem^^ quo Reliquias
[P V. 4. — Poet(s Min. Gr. t. ii. p. 31. ed. Gaisf., ubi . . . . /x^ tu Kopv^r}. — D.]
[1 Lib. ii. cap. iii. p. 81. ed. 1573.— D.]
[' Vide supra, p. 267.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 305
omnis Grceca Poeseos, Philosophicae, Epicae, Elegiacae, Dra-
maticve, Lyricaeque colligere voluimiis. Sed haec fuerunt.
Principio auteni non injuria Chins noster una cum iEscbylo
memoratur^ cui olini amicitia et familiaritate conjunctus
fuit; ut ex Plutarcho constat in libro qui inscribitur i7a)9 av
Tt9 aladoLTO eavTov TrpoKOTrrovro^; iir aperfj.^ Al(7')(v\o<;, ait^
.... ^laOfjLOL dea)fi6V0<i dyoova ttvktcov, eVel irXTjyevTOf; krepov
TO dearpov i^eKpaye, vv^a<; "Icova rov Xlov, 'Opa<;, ecfyrj, olov
7) a(TK7jaL<^ ecTTLV 6 7r67fX7]ya)<i crt(07ra, ol he decofjievoL ^ocucro.
Juvenis tamen cum sene versatus est ; et in eo quidem non
leviter peccatum est a Joanne^ quod lonem ^schylo vetus-
tiorem faciat. Utinam vero superesset hodie Batonis Sino-
pensis liber: plura de lonis setate, et evidentiora dici pos-
sent : nunc soli in obscuro lubricoque tramite magis reptamus^
quam pedetentim ingredimur. Platonis est Dialogus, quo
Socrates sermonem instituit cum lone quodam Ephesio;
quem a Chio non esse diversum opinio est Lilii Gyraldi,
Julii Scaligeri, Delrii^ et Menagii : quae si vera est sententia,
non opus est ut multa dicamus. Statim enim constabit
lonem -^schylo fuisse natu minorem. Quippe Socrates
natus Olymp. lxxvii. anno iv., tantummodo xiii. eetatis
annum agebat^ cum ^schylus ex vita excessit^ videlicet
Olymp. Lxxxi. an. i., Callia Athenis archonte. Sed de
Ephesio isto pugnant adversus Gyraldum et Scaligerum eru-
ditissimi quidem homines Leo Allatius et Joannes Jonsius :
ille contumeliis fretus^ et eo quod nullo auctore primus id
dixerit Gyraldus^ quodque Ephesius rhapsodus fuerit, non
tragicus; hie autem acerrimo telo armatus^ quia ratio tem-
porum reclamat : scilicet lonem Chium Olymp. lxxii. tra-
goedias docuisse non minus annos viginti priusquani Socrates
nasceretur^ Olymp. demum lxxvii. iv. Mihi quidem idem
est animus, non unum et eundem fuisse Chium et Ephesium :
Chius enim et genere et opibus fuit clarus : qui cum Athenis
quondam tragoedia simul et dithyrambo vicisset^ Chii vini
[• Mor. t. i. p. 211. ed. Wyttenb.— D.]
VOL. II. 2 R
306 EPISTOLA AD
cadum viritim cuiqvie civium dedit ; ut memorant Athenaeus*
et Comici enarrator ad Pacem.^ Luculeiitae vero divitiae,
quae tarn eximise liberalitati sufficere potuerunt. Ephesius
homo mendiciis et circumforaneus cantitando et gesticulando
victum iiiopem quaeritans, ut mos erat rhapsodis^ quos
Hoiiierus suus misella stipe et esuritione pascebat. Ipse
de se loquitur apud Platonem :^ Ael jdp [xe koI or^ohp
avTol^; {tol<; Oearal^) rov vovv irpoai^ecVf 0)9 iav fjuev K\alov-
Ta<; avTov<; /caOl^co, avro^ yeXdo-ofjuac dpyvpcoy Xafi^dvwv'
edv 3e 'yeSuWVTa<=;, avTO<; KXavaofjuac dpyvpcoy diroWix;. Chius
in omni literarum genere magnum nomen est consecutus :
Ephesius praeter Homerum niiiil doctus cantare ; sicut de se
fatetur : cum a Socrate interrogatus, utrum Homerum sohim
calleret, an etiam Hesiodum et Archilochum ; respondit^
minime quidem istos, sed Homerum sohim^ atque hoc satis
esse. Et aliquanto post^ "Orav fxev tl<;, ait^ Trepl rov aXkov
TTOirjTOv BcdXeyerat, ovSe 7rpocre')(^co vovv, dSwarco re koI
OTLovv avfi^aXiaOai Xoyou d^cov, dXV aT6^vw9 vvard^co,^
et alia pluria in banc sententiam. Sic igitur persuasum
habeo, Cbio illi et Ephesio patriam, genus^ fortunas^ inge-
nium, studia^ mores, omnia denique praeter nomen et aetatem
disparia fuisse. Et aetatem quidem cum dico, cave cum Jonsio,
Menagio, et Gerardo Vossio ad Olymp. lxxii. lonem Chium
rejicias, qui in erubescendum errorem inciderunt inscii,
Et graviter magni magno cecidere ibi casu :^
ab hominum futilissimo ^^milio Porto decepti, qui Suidaey
verba, "Hp^aro ra? Tpaywhla^ ScSdaKeiv iirl ttj^; 7ry3 'OXv/jl-
TT^aSo?, ita Latina fecit, tanquam si Ion Olymp. lxxii. scri-
bere coepisset. Atqui, O bone, 7ry3 sunt lxxxii. : et Scho-
[' Ep. lib. i. c. V. t. i. p. 12. ed. Schw., quem vide in Aniinadv. t. i. p. 39.
etp.489.— D.]
[•^ V. SOL ed. Bekk.— D.]
[^ Ion. — Plat. 0pp. t. ii. p. 455. ed. 1826., ubi . . . KXa-ovras . . . KaQiao). — D.]
["' Ibid. p. 438., ubi .... Trepi tK. rov iroi. biakfyrjTai, ovt€ irpoa. rhv vovp,
K. T. A.— D.]
[^ Lucret. i. 742.— D.] [r In v.''lw»/.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 307
Hastes Comici non numeroruni notas, vcrum Integra verba
exhibet, iirl 6ySo7jKoaT7]<i koI hevrepa^ ^OXv/uLirLciSof;. Facile
igitur per aetatem licitum est, usum et consuetudinem loni
Chio cum Socrate fuisse. Quin ipse in suis scriptis Socratis
mentionem fecit. Diogenes Laiirt.'^ 'Twv Be 6 Xlo<; /cal veov
ovra (tov Hco/cpdrrjv) et? Hd/JLOV avv ^ Ap')(e\d(ii iiTLSrj/jLTJo-aL
{(prjai). Quid AUatius, malevolentia et livor, non homo ?
quam falsus est animi, cum Gyraldum credidit primum in ea
opinione fuisse ? Ecce tibi e transverso Suidas : jampridem
is in AiOvpafJuPoBthdaKoKoL idem cum Gyraldo senserat.
K.al lIcoKpdrovi rod (j^ckaaocfiov earl \6yo<; et? avrov. Portus
haud praeter solitum perverse, ut nihil magis : Extat So-
cratis philosophi oratio in ipsum scripta. Sed de dialogo
Platonis intellexit Lilius ; et recte quidem : eo solum nomine
culpandus, quod errantem ducem secutus est. Jam vero,
cum illud exploratum sit de Olympiade lxxxii., quis dubi-
tet quin lonem ^schylus anteierit aetate ? siquidem obiit
fere septuagenarius, triennio prius ad minimum quam Ion ad
studium tragicum se applicaret. Praeterea, narrat Ion (apud
Athenaeumy) convenisse se in insula Chio Sophoclem poetam,
cum praetor f actus navigaret in Lesbum : et (apud Plu-
tarchum^) memorat solitum esse Periclem jactare se magni-
ficentissime, quod Samios vicisset. Ea vero gesta sunt
Olymp. Lxxxiv. iv. a morte JEschyli annis quindecim.
Didascaliae veteres in Argumento Hippolyti : 'H aKyvi] tov
Spd/jLaToi; VTTOKeirai iv Grj^ai^; (imo Tpot^rjvc)' [^EBcSd'X^Or)]
eVt ^AfJbeivovo<i dp)(^ovTO<;, ^OXvfiTTtdSc 7rf, ereo B. Tlpooro^i
EvpLTTiBrj^;, BevTepo<; 'lo^wv, TpLTO<i "Icov. Itaque Olymp.
Lxxxvii. IV. Ion fabula certavit annis septem et viginti
posteaquam iEschylus mortuus est. Denique haec sodes
vide ex Aristophanis Pace :^
06. OvK rjv dp' ovS* d Xeyovac Trepl^ tov depa,
'/2? darepe<^ ycv6fie6\ orav rt? diroddvr] ;
\^ In Socr. p. 94. ed. Meib., ubi .... a.TrodT]iJ.rj(rai. — D.]
[y 1. xiii. c. Ixxxi. t. v. p. 185. ed. Schw.— D.]
[^ In Pericl. — F\ut. 0pp. t. i. p. 646. ed. Reisk.— D.]
[» V. 798. ed. Bekk.— D.] [•» kutL Aristoph. edd. omnes.— D.]
308 EPISTOLA AD
Tp. MaXicTTa. Ge. Kal tl<; io-riv acrrrjp vvv e/cet ;
I p. Icov o 2Llo<;.
Scholiastes^ notat lonem jam mortem obiisse: "Otlo iiev^Iwv
7]S7] redvrjKe SrjXov. addo, etiam eodem anno quo acta est
ea fabula, xiii. videlicet belli Peloponnesiaci^ Olymp. xc. ii.,
uti constat ex ipsa comoedia^ ubi Trygseus sic Pacem allo-
quitur :
Ma AT y aX)C a7r6(f)7]vov 6X7)v cravTTjv
TevvaLoirpeirw^^ toIotlv ipacTTal^i
f TT « r/ ' /I' V ^
±l/jbLV, 01 (70V rpv^ofjueu r)Or)
Tpla Kal BeK errjA
Jam nusquam habet Malelas, quo abdat illud putidum et
inhonestum caput. Tantum abest ut Ion ^schylo natu
fuerit grandior; ut superstes ei fuerit annos solidos xxxvii.
Nunc tempus est ut de lonis scriptis fidem liberemus. Et
profecto non immerito propter multiplicem doctrinam a Cal-
limacho laudatus est Ion. Kal KaWLfia')(^o^, ait Suidas/ eV
')(^(o\idfi^oc<i fjbifivrjTac avTOv, on TroWa eypa^jrev. Nam ut
poemata prius recenseamus ; deinde quae oratione prosa
composuit : Melica lonis laudantur et Dithyrambica. Schol.
Aristophanis/ et Suidas : "Iwv hi0vpdjjbj3wv .... Kal fieXcov
7roc7)ry<;. Harpocration :S ^'E'ypa'\\re 8e fxekT] iroWd. Et dithy-
rambo quidem vicit, cum Atheniensibus viritim Chii cadum
distribuit. Ex melicis carminibvis extat odse principium,
^Aolov djjL6po(f)OLTav ^Acrrepa fielvafjuevy ^Aekiov XevKOTrre-
pvya TTpohpofjbov. Sic lege apud Scholiastem et Suidam :
male in utroque depocj^oirav, et in altero XevKj} TrripvyiM
[<= Ad V. 803. ed. Bekk., ubi T60v7]K6t.— D.]
[d V. 952. ed. Bekk.— D.] [^ In At0upajuj8o5.— D.]
[f Ad Pac. V. 801. ed. Bekk.— D.] [s In v.^Iwi/.- D.]
P fieivcofKv (vulgo fidvofxcv) . Schol. ad Pac. v, 801, ed. Bekk. — fxrjua fxev.
Suid. in AiOvpaii^oZ. —
^KOLOV T]€pO(polTaV
'Acrepa iJiciuwfieVy
'AeAiou, K. T. A.
Toupius, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 529. —
'Acrrey vixviajjiiv. Burgesius in Praef. ad Eurip. Troad. p. xiii. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 309
Paanes, Hymni, Scolia sive carmina convivalia. Schol. Aris-
topli. Elegiaca. Idem et Suidas. Ex elegis non paucos
versus adducit Athenaeus : ut lib. xi. c. 3.^ Kal "Itav 8' 6
X.l6<; <^7]aL,
Xatpero) '^fierepo^; ^a(TL\€v<;, (Tcorrjp re Trarrip re.
'HfiLV Se KprjTTjp* olvo')(ooL Oepaire^
KipvdvTcov rrrpo-^vraiacv eV apyvpioi<;' 6 Be ')(^pv<JO'^
Olvov e^ct)v ')(eLp(i)v vt^irco et? eSa<jf>09*
et quae sequuntur : ubi Casaubonum iiequicquam sestuantem
videas^ ut eliciat ex istis sententiam commodam ; nam prius
correctionis indigent^ quam a quoquam intelligi possint.
Non longe aberrabimus a scopo, si sic legerimus ;
o o eKacrTO<;
Olvov e')(^cov ')(^eLpolv l^iro) eh €3a^09.J
Comcediae, ut Comici Schol. Commdia, ut Suidas. Epigram-
mata. Idem Schol. et Anthologia Epigram, lib. iii. c. 26.''
'7covo<; €t9 EvpLlTihrjV,
Xalpe /jLe\a/jb7re7r\ot<;, Evpiiri^T], ev yvaXoLac
TItepla<; tov ael vvkto^; e^f^y 6aXafiov'
^I(r6o B* viro ')(j9ovo<i obv, on aoi KXeo<; dcpdcrov earai,
^laov '0/j,'r]pela{,<; devdoL<; '^(^dpcaLV.
Sed omnino falsa est et ementita inscriptio : quam ratio
temporum refutat et rejicit. Mirificum vero poetam lonem^
qui Euripidem mortuum epigrammate celebraverit, ipse jam
annos tredecim extinctus. Decessit lon^ Olymp. xc. ii.
{} c. viii. t. iv. p. 197. ed. Schw.— D.]
[J Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Grit. t. ii. p. ^o'^.—^
6 Se Xpva-rjs (Chryses, sacerdotis nomen.)
olvov excov ■)iZLpo1v vi^. k. t. A..
Toupius, Emend, in Suid. (Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 538.
De hoc loco videas Schw. Animadv. in Aihen. t. vi. p. 26. et omnino t. viii.
p. 49].— D.]
['' Anth. Gr. ex rec. Dr. ed. Jacobs, t. iv. p. 230. — Anth. Gr. ad fid. Cod. Pal.
&c. t. i. p. 319.— D.]
[' Vide Clintonum, Fasti Hellen. from the LV. to the cxxiv. 01. pp. 73, 81,
83, 85. sec. erf.— D.]
310 EPISTOLA AD
anno belli Peloponnesiaci xiii. Euripides autem et Sopho-
cles ejus belli xxvi. anno, Olymp. xciii. iii. uti constat ex
Aristophanis Ranis, quae actae sunt eo anno Dionysiis rol<;
Kar aypov^s' ut alia argumeiita mittam ab eruditis viris occu-
pata. Itaque loco ^'luvo^ scribendum est fortassis ^Icodvvov,
vel Blcovo(; vel -J/wvo?, ut cuique libitum fuerit. Ti^agoedice
numero xii., ut alii volunt xxx., ut alii xl. Xx^^'^ ^t Suidas.*^
Tituli quidem undecim a veteribus Grammaticis adhuc ser-
vantur. ArAMEMNflN. Idem J^^oX. et Athenaeus. Hesy-
chius : IleSavo) vttvm, rj TreBavat Kovcpo), "Icov Hya/juefjuvovL,
Tf-ve? Se 01) fie/Salo) : leg. rjire^avcS, Kovcfxp. AAKMHNH.
Hesych. Pollux x. 23. : 'JSv Se rfj *'Io)vo<; ^AXk/i'^vj}, b et9
TTjv T^9 Tpo<^rj<; TrapacTKemjv rjv, OvXaKiaKT] wvofxaaTaL.
Repone ex Cod. Vossiano, 6 et? rrjv tPjc; rpo^i)^ irapa-
(TK€vr)v OvKaKiaKo^ wvofjuacTTai.^ APFEIOI. Hesych. MEFA
APAMA. Pollux X. 45.P Hesych. in ^Ovora^o^evq, et Me-
Xdy')(^€Tov, fieydXw Bpa/jbari, diro rwv dv6pco7rcov, olov aKfid-
^ovcrav. Lego : MeXay^alrav, "Iwv MeydXq) Apdfiart.^ Ho-
mines dKjjbd^ovTe<i aetate florentes capillitio fere nigro sunt,
provecti canescunt. Sed verbum id inversum est ab lone,
et ad alia tralatum, quae sunt annis et viribus integris : quasi
diceretur exempli gratia itttto? yLteXa7%atT<x9, eqims florenti
(Rtate, juvencus. ^POTPOI. Schol. Aristoph. Hesych.
Athenaeus. ^OINIU' Julius Pollux -J "Icov Be iv ^oIvlkl
aacfiearepov ^AX)C co OvperpMV rwvBe /ca/jbrjrac OeoL Enar-
rator Comici ad Ranas :^ Tovro rov "Io)v6^ ecrTiv i/c ^oLvUrj^
[■» Ad Arist. Pac. v. 801. ed. Bekk.— D.] [« In \/\o)v.—T>.'\
[° "Vera sine dubio scriptura, quam Codices nostri MSS. conservarunt:
QvKuKos, ffdyTi' quid itaque Bentleius, vir doctissimus, ad Millium, p. 54. [ed. Ox.]
Repo7ie ex Cod. Vossiano : b ^h r^v rrjs Tpo<pri5 irapaaKev^v OvXaKicKos wySnaffraf
aliud egit profecto homo sagacissimus ; sic enim exaratum in Codice Vossiano,
ut nos expressimus in textu, nisi fallunt Excerpta [h els r^v r^s rpo^^s irapa-
(TKcviju 9v\aKos, ffdyrf oDvSfiaffrai]. Sed restat scrupulus in ^v, quod delevi :
duplicem in antiquis libris fuisse lectionem existimo, aut earn, quam reddidi
6 C. v., aut banc, ts I t. t. rp. ir. ^v 0." Hemst. ad Poll. p. 1264.— D.]
[p p. 1367. ed. Hemst.— D.]
[q " Forsan M^Kayx<-T(i3v,''l(t)v, &c. et . . . . ald^ovffavJ'^ Toupius, Emend, in
Hesych. t. iv. p. 97. — D.]
[' p. 1001. ed. Hemst.— D.] [* v. 705. ed. Bekk.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 311
ri Kal Olveo)^' El 8' iyu) 6p06<; ISelv ^iov avepo<;, TroXirJTat.
Repoiie ex certissima coiijectura i/c ^oIvcko^ rj KaLviox;' et
versus iste heroicus est, non alieuus a tragoedia :
El S* iyo) 6pOo<; ISecv ^lov avepo<;, co TroXcrjrai.
sic Athenseus lib. iii. et iv.* "Icov iv ^oIvlkl rj Kaivel. Itaque
est ^OINIB H KAINET:S et ^OINIa AETTEPO^ : vide
Hesychium in Ti^aXcfirj^;. Athenaeus fine lib. iv.^ ^Ev he tm
Eevrepo) ^olvlkl 6 . ."Icov (f)r](TLV' 'Ektvttov djcov ^apvv avKov
Tpe')(pvTi pvdfjLQ), ovTco Xiyoyv rS ^pvylay. Non de nihilo est
quod Codd. MSS^ constanter exhibent rpi'^ovra' ad quorum
indicium sic legerim :
eKTVTrovv, dycov /Sapvv
Avkov, Tpe')(pVTa pvO/mov
ut in Euripidis Rheso :^
JJoWolcTL avv KcoBaxTtv iKTVirec (jyojSov.
TETKPO^. Hesychius: AlSpol, dtSpce^, IwvTevKpcp f Al-
Bpo(j)oovrCf aiBpicov avaiperiKw : scribe "Iwv, et illud alterum
Hesychii peccatum est scutica dignum. Quicunque fuerit
interfector iste stultorwn, homo sane metuendus, sine dubio
trucidasset Hesychium, si occasionem hanc nactus fuisset.
Vera scriptura est ^AvSpeocpovTy, avBpo^v avaipenKcp, ex
Homerico is to :
M7]pc6v7](; draXavTOf; ^EvvaXlw dvSp6Lcf>6vTy,^
ji/jL(l)i,/3cor7}^, irepiporjTO^' "Icov TevKpco : lego irepLJBorjTOV.^
B(o(7a<;, ^e^(ofievo^ Herodot. inde dix(f)i^(Dro<^. Idem alibi,
'A/ji^cpcoTi^, irept^GTjTO'i. Iterum tibi, mi Hesychi, a stul-
ticida illo cavendum est ; nam cur non ego par pari referam,
et barbarian! tuam ulciscar nunc demum nato vocabulo ?
OM^AAH. Schol. Aristoph. Harpocration. Hesychius :
p 1. iii. c. xli. t. i. p. 357. et 1. iv. c. Ixxxiv. t. ii. p. 196. ed. Schw.— D.]
[" t. ii. p. 197. ed. Schw., quern vide in Atiimadv. t. ii. p. 684. — D.]
[^ V. 304. ed. Matt.— D.]
[^ It. vii. 166. Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mus. Crit. t. ii.
p. 554.— D.]
["^ Vide Schowium ad Hesych. Suppl. p. 72. — D.]
\
312
EPISTOLA AD
Eppo)7ri^ofi€v, 'Tcov ^Ofi^dXr). riveq pcoTrt^etv airehoaav to
ar€')(yeve(j6ai, Koi afjuaOeveG-Oai^y (pro afiaOalveiv) KaK(a<^.
EcTTL ^ap pMTTOf; 6 XeTTTo? Kol 7roiKcXo<; ^6pT0<;, Kol ySey^ato?,^
Kal ra eaw roov pcoircbv TrXiyfiaTa Kava koi aelarpa Kvpiw^.
Lego aTe')(yLTeveadaL' et "Eart <yap ^cotto? 6 XeTrro? Kal
7roLKL\o<; ^opTOf;, Kal yeXyao, Kal ra Ik tmv payTTMV irXey/naTa
Kava Kal arjarpa Kvplw^;. Quanto haec meliora quam ilia
Palmerii!^ Hesychius alibi: ^EpccoTri^o/jbi^v, rj rexyv^^^^/^V^y
7] (TvfjLjjbLKTa a')(rjiJLaTa el')(ov. Iterimi a librariis deceptus est.
Sana lectio est : ^EppcoTTi^ofJuev, i^T€')(ycTevo/jb€v, rj aviifjuLKTa
'X^pwfjuara ei')(o fiev .^ Etymolog. Magnum : EppcoTrt^ofjuey,
evfJbiKTa Kal avfjL7r6(f)opr}/jL6va eTroLov/Jbev quod ferri quidem
potest ; sed emendatius fortasse profertur ab Eustatliio :^
^eperai he Kal pij/jua to pcoTrl^etv, o SrjXoX to av/jufjucKTa Kal
o-v/jLTrecfivp/jLeva Troielv. Quod ad /3i/3aL0<i^ attinet, ter-
minatio O^ in libris MSS. minuto apice signatur: ilia vero
non oppido dissimilia jiXyat vel yeXjia et ^e/SaL.^ Aliis
est potius yiXyij numero singulari. Eustathius -J 'Pwtto?,
. . XeTTTO? Kal aTekr)'^ (leg. evTekrf'^) ^6pT0<;, dx; he AtXcof;
ALovv(Tio<; Xeyei, Kal iroiKiKoT yeKy7]v Be, ^t^a-iv, avTov
eXeyov ol iraXaioi. Hesych. : TeXyr], 6 poo7ro<;, Kal fid/jLjj,aTa,
Kal aTpaKToi Kal KTeve^. Photius Patriarcha : 'P(tj7ro<;,
[y Vulgo aixareveffdai. — D.]
[^ Vulgo d \f'irThs x^pTos Kal iroiKiKos Koi jSe'jSaios. — D.]
[* Totum locum sic legit Palmerius : 'Eppcair. "Icoi/ ^Ofji.<p. riues fxair. aireS. rh
a.re-)(yivea&ai, KaX afiaOevecrOai, kukoos' icrl yap ^ooTrhs, b K^Trrhs (pSpros, Kal irot/ctAoy,
Kal fiaihs, Kal ra e|a> rwv (xairwv irX^yi.iara, Kava Kal o-ffyia-Tpa Kvpiws. — D.]
[^ " Xpcifiara (txofi^v emendat magnus Bentleius, ut scil. respondeat
ry ^'E.^puiri^ojxev. Non video tamen, salvo V, CI. honore,* cur posterius e'ixofJi.ev
admittamus, et omnia in 1. pers. plur. efFeramus. Certe minima mutatione
praetulerim banc lectionem : 'Eppci}in(6iJ.r]u. rirexvLrevSfxrjy, ^ (rvfifx. xp<^M«Ta
elxov. Nisi quis ostenderit, in lonis 'OixcpaKri fuisse 'EppooTrl^ofxev, ut infra
scribitur." Albertius ad Hesych. t. i. p. 1435. — " 'E^pcoTri^ofxTju, ■f]Texvr]rfv6iJ.r)v, ?)
crv/uLfiiKTa xpi^fiaTa vel xp'hf'-o-TO-i €iXoi/." Toupius, Emend, in Hesych. t. iii. p. 496.
-D.]
[«= Ad //. N. p. 927. ed. Rom.— D.]
[•* " Kol ov fiefiaios, vel Kal afiifiaios, vel potius Kal /8at<Js." Toupius, Emend, in
Hesych. t. iii. p. 383. et p. 448.— D.]
[« Confer nostrum in Epist. ad Bernard., Mns. Crit. t. ii. p. 554. — D.]
[* Ad II N. p. 927. ed. Rom.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 313
/jLr)8€v6<;^ a^LOV. 'P(07ro<! Koi yeXyrj, 6 7roiKi\o<;, XeTrro? cpoprof;.
Jam crrjaTpa certissima emendatio : ea sunt canistra, virgul-
tis aut juncis contexta, Hesychius : Hr/arpa, KoaKiva rj
KVfjbpaXa' duo verba confundit arrja-rpa et aetarpa, quorum
hoc diro Tov aeUcv formatur, illud airo tov ar/OeLV, Achaeus
vetustus tragicus docuit Omphalen satyricam : quo de genere
persuasum prorsus habeo etiam banc lonis fuisse. Hercules
servivit Omphalae, Genio et Veneri assidue litavit: jussus
et inter ancillarum greges pensa carpere, sicubi duro et
indocto pollice fila rumpebat, e vestigio hominis caput
sandalium commitigabat.? Nihil hie triste neque tragicum :
Indus jocusque omnia. Favent huic sententiae fragmenta,
quotquot supersunt^ quae nihil nisi convivia, comessationes,
et symphonias poUicentur. Hesych. Mecrofju^aXoc, ^t,aXai.
Etym. UWl TlaKrcoXov pod<;. Pollux :^ Kal rrjv fJueXatvav
arijiixLv o/iifiaToypd^ov. Athenaeus :
Otvo9 ovK evL
et
et
*Evcav(TLav yap Sec fxe rrjv eoprrjv dyetv'i
Av86<; re fidyaSi^ av\o<; r^yelcrOo) l3orj<;'^
et lib. xiv.^
Aw* ela, AvSal 'yjrdXTpcac, TraXaiOirwv
"Tfjbvcov doiSol, TOV ^ivov KOo-fxrioraTe,
[^ Hy\Bfvhs, et mox /col Xitrrhs. Phot. ed. Pors. — D.]
[fif Terent. Eun. v. 7. 4. respicit noster. — D.]
[^ 1. V. c. xvi. p. 535. ed. Hemst. — D.]
[' lib. xi. c. xcix. t. iv. p. 350. ed. Schw. — D.]
[J lib. vi. c. Ixxiii. t. ii. p. 491. ed. Schw. — ^yeiv tacite Bentleius pro vulgata
Xeyeiv. — &y€iv. Porsonus, Advers. p. 88. — " Lege, t)]v eopr^v 5e7/t' &y€iv." Do-
braeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — Spr^v ityetf edidit Dindorfius, Athen. t. i. p. 561.
-D.]
\} lib. xiv. c. XXXV. t. v. p. 300. ed. Schw. — D.]
[' (Edd. Epist. ad Mill. " lib. x.")— c. xxxvi. t. v. p. 302. ed. Schw.—" Qu.
an legendum, rhv ^4vov KoifjL-fjffare. quamvis ferri possit vulgata." Dobraeus,
Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
VOL. II. 2s
314 EPISTOLA AD
Ita lege, non HXK' at AvBal, quod versus recusal. Et eodem
libro :^ ^Icov 8' eV 'O/JLcfxiXy e[M<f>avL(Ta^ ttjv 'IIpaK\eov<i ahhr)-
(paylav iiricpeper
'Tiro Be tt)? €V(f>r}fjLia(;
KareTTCve koI ra KoXa Kal TOv<i dvOpuKa^.
Casaubonus corrigere conatus est^ t?}? evcpaylaf;. Nollem
factum. Neque enim quisquam ita locutus est; neque, si
fuerit locutus, eo magis conveniret huic loco; quia syllaba
secunda foret brevis. Nihil aptius excogitari potest tt}?
/3ov\t/jLia(;' adeo quadrant omnia, similitudo, mensura, sen-
tentia. Libet illud afFerre cum probationis tum boni ominis
causa,
*T^^(o rdv fiovXtfjbov, eao) rav TrXovdvylecav.^
Atque haec quidem de Omphale scripseram, cum Strabo
mihi ad manum non esset. Posteaquam copia facta est
eum adeundi, delectatus sum ejus suffragio confirmari sen-
tentiam meam. Verba sunt lib. i.° de insulis, quae con-
tinenti quondam adhaerentes, postea interfuso mari avulsae
sunt. "Ift)v 8e ire pi rrjf; Evl3oLa<; (f>rjalv iv ^OfKfxzXrj ^a-
Tvpel^'
Ev/SotSa fjuev yrjv XeTrro? Evplirov KkvBwv
Boi6DTia<; e')((opLa clktt)^, eKTefJbwv^
npcx; Kprjra TTOpOfiov.
Locum hunc, ait Casaubonus, depravatum esse monere pos-
sum : emendare non possum sine ope codicum. Ego vero
nuUis adjutus codicibus, nisi tamen in integrum restituero,
["* lib. X. c. i. t, iv. p. 4. ed. Scliw., ubi ifKpavicras ai/rov [scil. Here] tV o.Sr}<p.
K. T. \. — Vulgatam eu^rj/xias defendit Toupius, Emend, in Suid. (Ep. Crit.) t. ii.
p. 535, ; et non temere mutandam judical Schw., quem vide in Animadv. t. v.
p. 292. et t. viii. p. 478.— D.]
[" Vide Plutarch. Conviv. Disput. lib. vi. qusest. 8. — Mor. t. iii. p. 586. ed.
Wyttenb.— Erasmi Jdag. p. 1436. ed. 1606.— D.]
[° p. 88. ed. Falc— D.]
[P fKre/xiifv est e Casauboni emendatione pro vulgata 4kt4ixvuv. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 315
nihil deprecor, ne dentatis criticorum chartis et caiiina
eloquentia conscindar. Lego autem sic :
Ev^otSa fiev yrjv XeTrro? EvptTrov kXvScov
BoL(oria<i i'^copta, aKT'qv iKTCfioDv
npo^rJTa 7rop6fjL(p.
Homenis, Od. E.^
I4X\* oLKTal Trpo/SXrjref; ecrav, <TrroXdB€<; re, wdyot re*
et Hymno in Bacchum :^
72? icjxivr) irapd 6lv aXo<i drpvyeroLO,
^Aktt] eVt Trpo^rjTi.
Nee minus recte illud iropOfjiM. Pomp. Mela r^ " Sicilia
.... aliquando continens^ et agro Brutio adnexa^ post
freto maris Siculi abscissa est." Idem Casaubonus legit
^OfKpakrj ^arvpLKTJ, vel ^arvpcKM videlicet Spafiarr nam
lonis Omphalam, ut Achaei, satyricam fuisse putat. Postea
tamen oblitus est hujus loci^ cmii aureolum ilium libel-
lum De Satyrica composuit. Sic enim narrat p. 186. Scrip-
serat et Ion Chius poeta tragicus Omphalam : sed id drama
fuisse satyricum nusquam lego. Tu revoca in memoriam
quae scripsimus supra paullo in hac Epistola^ et sine
cunctatione lege eV ^0/jb<pdXrj ^aTvpoL<;. Illud etiam no-
tandum, cum numero singulari conjungi ^aTupov<;' cujus
rei exemplum tunc non habuimus. Sic Lycophronis Meye-
h7)iMov ^arvpov^ laudant Athenaeus et Laertius. Jamque
etiam in memoriam redeo luculenti loci apud Galenum,
Comm. i. ad vi. ^E'TrcBrj/jLLoov'^ ubi Sophocles citatur in Xaka-
fiZvL ^aTvpoL<;. Is ita se habet. Nvvl Se dpKecret roU ypap,-
fiariKol^ aKoXovOrjaavTa, Kara ttjv eKetvcov ^tdra^iv elirelv
TL irepi TcSv Kara rrjv 7r€/jL(f)cya arjfiaLVOfxevwv, AoKel fiev
[1 V. 405,— D.j [' V. 2.— D.]
[» ii. 7.— D.]
[' Galeni 0pp. t. v. p. 454, 455. ed. Basil. — D.]
316 EPISTOLA AD
jiTTTj^e irkfx^i^Lv ov irkXa^ <^6pov. (lege
^AiTTj^e 7re/jL(f)L^ ^lovlov TreXa? iropov.
Sic -^schylus Prometheo :^
Xpovov Be Tov fiiWovra 7r6vTio<; fiV')(o<;,
^a^ftJ9 eiriaTaa, ^l6vco<; K\7)9rj(TeTaL,
Tri<i arj<i iropeia^ /juvrj/jua Tot9 Trdai, jBpOTol^.
Apollonius Rhodius lib. iv.^ loquens de Colchis :
To) KoX V7re(f>6r} tov<; ye, ^oKwv virep av'^eva yai'q<;,
KoXttov eorco nrovroLO Travea'^arov 'lovloio,
Vely ad hunc modum, si id minus placet^ seque commoda
mutatione ;
^Airri^e ireix^i,^ i^ eo) a€\aa<f>6pov.)^
Kai avrb<; ev ^aXa/nlvy XciTvpOi^' Kal rd'^ dv Kepavvia
7ri/jb<f>L^c Ppovrri<i Kal 8vaoa/jLLa<; Xd^oi. (lege . . . koX rd'^
av Kepavvca TlefKpi^i, ^povrrj^ Kal Bvaoafjb[a<i jBdXoL.)^
Al<T')(vXo^ he ev Upo/jLrjdel Aea/jLcorr} (imo vero Avofievo))'^
EvOelav epire rrjvhe'^ Kal TrpcoTLara /juev
['^ avTTjs. ibid. — D.] [' Scribendum Ko\x'^ai, — D.]
[^ V. 864. ed. Blomf., ubi /ce/cA^o-eTat.— D.]
[» V. 307.— D.]
[y Haec (" Vel ad ... . a-fhaff^Spov") , quae in prioribus editt. paulo supe-
rius leguntur, nunc demum in suum locum reduxi, Bentleio jubente in Cor-
figendis ad ed. Oxon. — D.]
[^ *Airf|e ire/x^i^ ws Ivvov (ri\a<T^6pov. Hermannus (De jEsch. Prom. Sol.
Diss. — Opusc. t. iv. p. 276.), de ignivomis tauris verba intelligens. — D.]
[* Kol rax' ^*' Kcpavvia
TrefKpiyL fipovrTJs Kal Svcroaixiau \dfioi,
Hermannus, ibid. — " Malim, Kal 6 avrhs koI rdx* &»' Kepavvia Tl^fxcpi^
«76 fipovTT]s Kal dvaoffixias fid\oi. Kepavvia irejxcpi^ fipovTrjs, ut eiesia flahra aquilo-
num, etc. supra, p. 37." [supra, p. 295.] Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
\^ Dubitat Hermannus ; vide Diss. sup. cit. — D.]
[•= epTrerV 5e. Gal. ibid. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM.
317
Bpo/jLoy Karacyl^ovTay firj cr avap7rd(7rj
Ava')(^eLiiep(p rrrifjUcpiyL ^vo-rp6yjra<;^ d(f)V(a.
'EttI Be Tcov aKTLVCov avTcov BoKel '^pijaOac rco t^9 nri/jucpcyo^
ovo/xart ^0(f)OKXrj(; iv KoX')(^ol<;^ Kara rdBe rd eirrj' Kav
iOavfiao-a TrjBe (tkottcov irifjLcj^Lya '^(^pvaeav IScov. (lege ....
KdireOav^aaa TrfkeaKOirov Trefjucpcya ')(^pV(Telav IBcov-Y ovtco
Koi Ala')(y\o<;' ^E^avrcaia^^ ovre irifKJii^ rjXlov irpoaBep-
Kerat, ovr darepov aro/jLa '\r)Tcoa<; K6p7)<;. (lege Ala')(y\o(; iv
aavTpLai^;'
'M9 0VT6 7re/x^t^ rfXlov TrpocrBepKerai,
Ovr daTepcoTTov ofifia Arjrc^a^i Koprjf;.^
Ea fabula citatur in Catalogo Dramatum et Scholiis Eumeni-
dum. Pollux X. c. 26.^ Td<^ /jLevroc \a/jL7rdBa<; kol KdjiaKa^
etprjKev e^avrpia^ Alcrx'^Xo^. MS. codex Is. Vossii habet iv
^avrplair ut et antea viri docti ex conjectura emenda-
runt. Porro JEschylus in his versibus se ipse imitatus
est: nam haec habet in Prometheo Vinctoi de Grseis sive
Phorcidibus :
MovoSovre?^ a? ovO^ i]\io<; TrpoaBepKerai
^AKTtaLV, ovd^ T) vvKrepo^ /jlt^vt) TTori.)
^EttI Be T7]<; payLTiBo^ (lege pavtBo<i^) 6 avT6<; (jyrjo-tv iv Upo-
jMTjdel'
^E^evKapov Be, jitj ae irpoa^dWy crroiJia
ni/ji^t^' TTLKpd yap, Kov Bed fo)?}? dr/jLoL
[<= irvoaiffiv, €v\apov. Gal. ibid. — D.] [^ Tp€i|/as. Gal. ibid.— D.]
[« Scribendum KoKx'^^^' — ^-1
[^ K&v idavfiaffas et xp^^^^^' Hermannus (ibid.), in ceteris Bentleium
secutus. — D.]
[e 41 auTiaias. Gal. ibid. — D.]
['• Consentit Hermannus, ibid. — Gin-' aarepui/, oUr' if^ixa A. k. corrigit
Blomfieldius ad ^sch. Prom. 821.— D.]
\} p. 1295. ed. Henist.— D.] [J v. 821. ed. Blomf.— D.]
['' Et sic Hermannus (ibid.), qui mox vpoa^dKij. — " Recte Bentleius pavidos
(pd'^TiSos). Deinde Ibyci locus Sophocleo ex Salmoneo praeponendus. Hoc
318 EPISTOLA AD
Kal ev TlevOel' Mrjb' aifxaTO^; Tre/JLcfiLya tt/do? TreSo) ^aXr}<^.
EttI Be Tov v6(pov(; SokcI rerd'^dai Kara ToBe to 67ro9 ev
^aXafjL'qvrj X(iTvpoL<^ irapa Xo(^OK\el' Tle/Jbcj^Lyt iracrav o'y^ia-
yeXcov 7rvp6<;. (scrib. IIi/ijL(f>Lyc iraaav oyjrov dy'yi\(p ttu/oo?.^)
Kal Trap* ^I^vkw' IIvKLvd<i 7reix<f)Lya<; Tno/mevoL. XeXe/crat Be
ovTO<; 6 X070? avTM Kara riva irapa^oXrjv e7ri')(^ei/jLa^o/iiev(ov
(lege eirl %etyLt.) elprjfievTjv. Bib Kal t(ov TTpoyvwcmKcov ol
ifKelaroL eiri, rcov Kara tov<; ofi^pov^ aTayovwv elprjaOal
(f)a(rL Ta9 7rejjL(f)L<ya<;. 6 Be K.aXklixa')(o<^ wBe' Mr) Bed ire/jL-
^ly(ov * ivdyovcTLV ea.^ 6 Be Ev(j)oplcov ovToy;' Elire 8' dvdrf
irefju^uyef; eiTLTpvt^ovaL davovra. Versus est hexametrus. El
ireBaval, vel ^HireBaval irefju^iye^ ewcrpv^ovo-L Oavovra. i. e.
murmure suo quasi lamentari videntur. Possis etiam legere
eTTiKXv^ovaL,^ Quod ad XaXafilva Xarvpov^ attinet, cujus
gratia caetera emendavimus ; nemo me adduxerit, ut verbum
mendo esse vacuum existimem. • ^schylus quidem fecit
XaXafuva, sive XaXap^Lvla^' Sophocleae fabulae, quae eo
titulo inscripta sit, nemo alius meminit. Ausim pro certo
dicere lectionem rectam esse XaXfjucovel Xarvpoc^. Hesy-
chius bis : 5'o</)o/cX^9 XaX/jicovel.
Quatuor hie invectus equis, et lampada quassans,
Per GraiClm populos mediseque per Elidis urbem
Ibat ovans, divumque sibi poscebat honorem,
Demens ! qui nimbos et non imitabile fulmen
^re et cornipedum pulsu simularat equorum."
Hactenus quidem argumentum est satyris aptum, et con-
veniens ad hilarem et festum diem. Hue quoque fragmenta
certum ; et ita extra dubium ponitur eximia ilia emendatio, o^l/iv ayye\(f> irupJs.
Quae enim sequuntur, sunt istorum verborum explicationes. In Callimacheis
forsan legendum ew — Li clouds brings on the day. In Euphorione malini
HIIEAANOI. Qu. eav6vriV' Dobraeus, Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
\} iTffupiyt 'ir\ii<ras o^iv ayye\a) irvpSs. Hermannus in Diss. sup. cit. p. 277.
-D.]
[m ivayiafxaTa. Hermannus, ibid. — D.]
[" TfTreSavhu ir^fi. itriTp. Oavovra. Id. ibid. — D.]
[" Virg. jEn. vi. 587.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 319
ilia videntur pertinere ; quae verba sunt cujuspiam qui facete
et urbane irridet jocularem illam simiam Tonantis :
Kal Td)( av Kepavvta
Il6/jL<l)i^L PpovTTj^i Kal Svo-oa/jLia<i ^aXot.
Forsan et petet Ceraunia
Odore tetro et vi corusca fulminis,
Et illud alterum :
ni/KJ^cyL iraaav oyJrLV dyye\(p 7rvp6<i.
Nimbo ora velans nuncio tonitrui,
Atque hucusque Sophocles in eo dramate processit: nam
quae sequuntur plane tragica sunt, et lamentabili carmine
deploranda.
At pater omnipotens densa inter nubila teluna
Contorsit, (non ille faces, nee fumea taedis
Lumina) praecipitemque immani turbine adegit.P
Et haec quidem conjectura probabili nituntur : sed extra
controversiam rem statuit Atlienaeus lib. xi.^ KaXelraL Be
jJLOLVTjf; Kal TO eVl'" kottcl^ov i<f)eaT'qKo<^, a^' ov (leg. e^' ov)
Ta9 XdTaya<; eV iraiBia eVeyLtTTov oirep 6 ^o<j)OK\rj<; iv ^aX-
fJLwvel ')(akK€Lov €(j>r} Kapa, Xiycov ovtco<;'
Td 8' earl Kvcafio^; Kal (fytXTj/ndrcov i/ro0o9,
ToS KaWtKorra^ovvTC yiKTjTrjpia
TiOrjiiL, Kal ^aXovTL yakKeiov Kapa.
Jam si potes, dubita, an drama satyricum fuerit necne.
Profecto qui potest animum inducere, ut versus proximos
autumet in tragoedia posse dici, auctor ego sum, ut prius
quid sit tragoedia, quid satyri discat, quam de rebus aliquan-
tum a vidgari notitia remotis sententiam ferat.
Undecima lonis fabula ETPTTIAAI. Athenseus lib. xi.s
Hesych. 'Irjlo^ .... Oprjvov arjfjuaivei, w? ^o^o/cX7}9 TpcoiXca
[P Virg. jEn. vi. 592.— D.]
[1 c. Ixxv. t. iv. p. 306. ed. Schw.— D.] [' eVl rov. ibid. — D.]
[» c. xc. t. iv. p. 336. ed. Schw.~D.]
320 EPISTOLA AD
ical "Icov ^EpvTlSai,<;: lege EvpvTiBaif;. ^AOUropaf;, aveird-
^ot>9 irapOevov^iy . . . oloy EupvTiSef;, Pulchre fecisse sibi
visus est, qui* emendavit, olov EvpLirlhr]^. Tu vero meo
periculo repone ^A6lktov<; Kopa^;^ aveird^ov^ irapOevov^, ''Icov
EvpvTihai<i.^ Eurytidse autem, ne quis forte nesciat, sunt
Euryti CEchaliensis filii, quos Hercules occidit. Habes tra-
goedise argumentum. Non pragtermittendus est insignis locus
apud Schol. Soph, ad Trachinias.^ Acacj^ovelrac 6 rwv
EvpvTcBcov dptOjJLO^. 'Ho-loSo<i fjLev yap (in ^Hoiau^, ut puto,
vel 'HpcoLKrj TeveaXoyla) rio-aapd^i ^rjatv ef Evpvrov koI
^AvTi6')(7)<; TralSa^;, ovtco<;'
'H S' vTroKvacra/jiivr} KaWi^covo<; ^^rparovifcr}
Evpvrov iv fMeydpotcrcv iyelvaro (j^lXrarov viov.
Tov 3' vl€L<; iyevovTo Ar)ta)v re, K\vtl6<; re,
To^€v<; T dvTideo^;, ^S' "Icjytro^ 6^o<; "Aprjoi;.
Tov<; Be [JLeO^ OTrXoTdrrjv reKero ^avOrjV ^loXetav
^AvTLO'xr} Kpelovaa, TraXatov yevo<; AvjBoXlhao.
Kpe6^L\o<; he Bvo' ^Api(TT0KpdT7)<; he Tpel<;, To^ea, KXvriov,
Arjiova. Satis jam pernosti, qui sint lonis Eurytidae. Sed
baud plene satisfactum esset promisso nostro, si versus eos
dimitteremus ex manibus, et mendum teterrimum silentio
dissimularemus. Principio legendum ^AvnoTrrj. Schol. Apol-
lonii :^ KKvtlo^ koX "I^lto^ — ol r?}? ^Avrioirr^f; Trachea. Hy-
ginus :^ Clytius, et Iphitus, Euryti et Antiopes Pylonis fili(B
filius. Quae quasi manu nos ducunt ad caetera corrigenda.
Jam enim Hygini auctoritate scribo TIvK(ovo<; pro rrraXaibv
yivo<;' atque adeo, ut pompam et prooemia missa faciam,
versum hunc integrum praestabo, sicut ab Hesiodo profectus
est,
^AvTCoirrj Kpelovaa IIv\(ovo<; Nav/SoXiSao.
Nam cedo mihi unum, qui Auboli vel Aubolidae meminit.
[' scil. Sopingius. — D.]
[" Confer nostrum in Addendis.— D.] [^' v. 264. ed. Erf.— D.]
[^ i. 87.— D.]
[* Fab. xiv. p. 42. {^uct. Myth.) ed. Van Stav.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 321
Naubolus vero nemini ignotus esse possit, qui labris pri-
moribiis gustavit literas humaniores. Apollonius Rhodiiis 'J
Tu> S' eiTi Bt] OeloLO Kiev Aavaolo yeveOXrj
Nau7r\L0(;' rj yap erjv KXvtov/]ov Nav/SoXlBao,
Navfio\o<; av Aipvov.
Conveniunt setas, locus : ut, quanquam de hac re nullum
verbum faciant alii scriptores, nihil tamen impediat, quo
minus Pylon Nauboli filius esse potuerit. Denique pro
KpeocfuXo^ lege Kpea)<f)v\o<;, qui poema composuit Olx^Xla^;
aXcocrcv: ad quod respexit Scholiastes. De Creopliylo con-
sulantur Appuleius^ Porphyrins^ Strabo^ Sextus Empiricus,
Suidas, scriptor Certaminis Hesiodi et Homeri, Plato UoXt-
T€L(av X. Photius in Lexico MS. Kpedx^vXo^''^ TIoXLT€La<;
i, o yap Kp6cocf)vXo<i, w ^coKpare^;, tcrw^ 6 'Ofiripov^ kral-
po<;' TOVTOV Ttve? Kal SiBdaKaXov 'OjJbrjpov XiyovcTL yeyo-
vivac, Kal earlv avrov TroLTjfia Ol')(aXla<^ oXwgl^. ap'^ato^;
/i€v o^v earl, vecorepo^; Se Ifcavcof; 'Ofi)]pov. Pausanias Mes-
senicis :^ QecraaXol Be Kal EvjBoel^ .... Xiyovcnv, ol puev
ft)9 TO EvpvTiov .... TToXi? TO dp'^aoov rjvy Kal eKaXecTO
Ol^aXta' Tat he EvjSoicov Xoycp KpeQ)(j)vXo<; ev 'HpaKXela
ireiTolrjKev 6/ioXoyovvTa. Heracleam banc diversam esse
totam ab Ot^j^aXta? dXcoaet sententia est Ger. Vossii. JEgi-
dius vero Menagius asseveranter affirmat pro iv^HpaKXela
scribendum esse ev Ol'^aXia. Demiror equidem viros excel-
lentes ingenio et doctrina morbo minime desperato medi-
cinam non reperisse : quae, nisi me omnia fallunt, haec est.
Tft) Be EvjSoecov Xoyo) Kpeco(pvXo(; 'HpaKXea ireiroiriKev 6/jlo-
XoyovvTa. Euboeensium autem sententia Creophylus Her-
culem induocit convenienter loquentem. Enimvero pars magna
illius poematis fuit Hercules ; ut propemodum jam illud
audire mihi videar :
Tov 3' avTe irpocreetTre ^irj 'HpaKXn^elrj.
[r i. 133.— D.] [^ Kp€6(pv\os. ed. Pors.— D.]
[» TOV 'Ofx. ibid.— D.] [^ p. 225. ed. Bekk.— D.]
VOL. II. 2 T
322 EPISTOLA AD
Similis locutio est in istis, quae occasione alia supra*^ adduxi-
mus : Ev rot? Kpijalv EvpL7rtBr]<; ^'iKapov fJbov(pSovvTa eiroLT]-
aev, et Ev Tal<^ Kp7](raaL<; ^AepoTrrjv el(7r}rya>ye Tropvevovaav
neque opus est^ iit plures testes excitemus. Sunt qui Ol'x^a-
\la^ aXcocTLv ad Homerum referunt; sicut auctor est Calli-
niachus^ apud Strabonem et Sextum :
Tou ^afjLLOv 7rovo9 elfjul, Bojjlm irore Oeiov'^O/JLijpov
Ae^ajxevov* K\aLco S' Evpvrov ocra eiraOe,
Kal ^avOrjv ^loXetav. 'O/Jbrjpecov Se KaXev/juai,
TpdfjLjjLa' Kp€co(f>v\(p, Zed <j)L\e, tovto fMcya.
Suidas in "Ofjbripo<;' ^ Ava^kperai Be eh avrov Kal a\Xa rcva
iroLrjfiara^ ^A/jba^oyla, ^I\ta<; jJULKpcUy NoaroCy 'jETTi/ct^XtSe?^
HOikiraKTO^ tjtol "lafi/Soc, ^LKe\la^ akayai^. Sed
pro SoK€\ia<; sine uUa dubitatione legendum est Ol')(aXla<;.
Addam illud quoque, quod^ si bene Millium meuni novi,
praetermissum esse graviter tulisses : nimirum 'H6c67raKTO(i
esse verbum nihili, et aliquanto inferius sic scribi^ 'EirrairdK-
rio<!. Kal ^ ETTTairdKTLOv, ait, Kal ^E'jnKi')(Xiha(; .... eVotT;-
o-ev. Et prima quidem specie ea conjectura vera videbatur,
eirrd scilicet 'ETrcyovoi. Memineram enim et septem esse
Epigonos, et ad Homericorum poematum numerum adscribi.
Herodotus iv.^ jiX}C 'HctloBw //.ev ecrn irepl ^Tirep^opiayv
elprjjjbeva, earl Be Kal 'OfJbrjpw ev ^ETToyovoccnv, el Srj rS ovrt
ye "0/jLr)po<; ravra rd eirea eiroiTjae. Sed repudiavi continuo
illam sententiam, ubi animadverti jEJjoi^owo^ esse eTrrj^ Kal ovk
IdfjL^ov^, non senarios, sed hexametros. Scriptor Certaminis
Homeri et Hesiodi:^ 'O Be ''OfjL7]po<; diroTvyoav rrj'^ vIk7]<;,
'7repcep')(^o/jLevo<; eXeye rd iroLrnxara* Trpcorov fiev rrjv Srj^atBa
eiTT) I, ri<; rj apxh,
"Apyo<; deiBe, 6ed, ttoXvBl'^cov' evBaZ dvaKTe^.
[<= p. 270.— D.]
[<* Call. Ep. vi. — " Apud Sextum legitur, Kpeu<f>6\ov ttSu. el, S6. tto. Be?. aoi56v,
quod magis placet." Bentleius, Not. in Call. — Kpew^. et^Ofiripov edidit Blomf.
-D.]
[« c. 32.— D.] \! p. 14. ed. 1573.— D.] [s ^vdev. ibid.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 323
Elra eTretyo/jLevov (lege noii clubitanter ^ Einyovovs:) eiri] ^,
ayy rj dpxv,
Nvv avO^ OTrXoripcjv dvSpcov dp')(^cofie6a, Movcrai.
Alii et Thebaidein et Epigonos attribuunt Antimacho Colo-
phonio. De ilia quidem res est vulgaris : de his testem
habeo Scholiastem Aristoph. ad Pacem :^ IJai. Nvv avO'
oTrXoripcov dvSpwi^ dp'^^cofjieda .... ^^o\. dp')(r} rwv ^Eiri-
yoviov ^AvTi/jbd'^ov. Verum extra omnem controversiam rem
posuit Joannes Tzetzes, qui utriusque scripti simul men-
tionem facit, in Iliade interpretata allegorice, quae nondum
edita est :
Tpia Kal BeKa yiypa(f)€ fivrj/jLoavvov jSi/BXia^
MapyLTTjv re, Kal Alyd t€, kol tcjv Mvmv rrjv /jLd')(T]v,
Trjv ^Einyovcdv P'd')(7]v re ypd(j)6C, Kal Orj/SatBa,
Tr)v OlxaXlav, KepKcoira^;, et? tov<} ©€ov<i re "Tjjlvov<;,
Kal T0U9 'Eirrd iiraKTioV) Kal ra? ^ EiTLKLyK\iha<;,
Kal ^ Eirtypafji/jLaTa TroXXd, crvv NvfjL(J)iKol<; to2<; ''T/jLVOC<y,
Kal TTjv 'OSvaaecay avrrjv /juerd r?}? 'JXtaSo?.
In his etiam (Echaliam habes : sed aliud exemplar non rov<i
habet^ verum rrjv 'ETrrd iirdKnov. Aut ego plane desipio,
aut legendum est
Kal rrjv ^ EirTaeirdKTiov,^ Kal ta9 ^E'mKi')(\l^a^'
postremam enim vocem non Suidas tantum, sed et Hero-
dotus ita exhibet^ et Athenseus lib. ii. et xiv. Quin etiam
apud Suidam illud 'ETrTairdKrtov ad hoc exemplum corrigen-
[»» V. 1236. ed. Bekk.— D.]
{} " Scribe rijv 'EirrdveKrov, et hominem [Tzetzen] ride, qui ex uno titulo
duos [tovs 'Eitt., et AT70 in v. 2.] confinxerit, et verba conjungenda disjunxerit.
Adcurate satis Proclus in vita Homeri apud Leon. Allatium : Teypa(pe
THN TE EnTAHEKTON AIFA." Toupius, Emend, in Suid. (Ep. Crit.)
t. ii. p. 580. — " Allatii emendationem kirTairiKTov atya, villosam, hirsutam, ita ut
vel septies tonderi possit, satis firmavit Toupius." Heynius aid VrocM Chresto-
math., ad calcem Hephaest. p. 470. cd. Gaisf. — D.]
324 EPISTOLA AD
dum est: et pro ^H6i,e7raKT0<;i scribendum videtur rj feTra/cTto?,
i. e. 7) eTTTaeTra/cTto?* nam f notat iirrd. Sic apud Hesy-
chium : ^Evve(opo<;, 6€T7]<;' lege 6eT7)<^, i. e. ivvairr]'^' quia 6
significat ivvea' et verbo imo interjecto^ ^Eyv7]r]<;, aco(f)pa)v,
aX7}6r)<;, dyadbf;, 7raTpcbo<^. Librarii, ut compendium operse
faciant, Trrjp scribunt pro Trarrfp, et pro Trarpooo^; irpoio^iy
quod in hoc loco depravatum est ex irpaof;- vide Hes. in
^Evtjr}'^. Cseterum de notatione t?}? ^ ETrTaeiraKrlov, ut et
illud attingam, facillimum est multa comminisci : proxime
tamen, opinor^ ad verum accedent^ qui Homerum putaverint
in opusculo illo lusisse de hominibus quibusdam numero
septem, qui eV dKTrj<^ in litore cibo vel somno curabant
corpora^ vel aliud quid jocosi et ridiculi faciebant. Homerus
ipse in Cert amine cum Hesiodo :^ ^AvSpda-t Xrj'iarrjpatv eir
oLKTTJf; Bopirov eXeaBaL' et Odyss. V.^ Tov 3* a/s' eV dicTrj<;
evpe Kadij/jLevov. Et Herodotus in Vita Homeri :^ Kal ovtw^
dva\a^6vT6^ avrov dvrj')(9r}aaVy koI tcr')(pvaLV iir d/CT^<;' oi
fiev Brj aXtet? 7rpo<; epyov eTpdirrjaaVy 6 Be' Ofir}po<; rrjv vvKra
eirl TOV alycakov Karefjueivev et aliquanto inferius : "^ Kal
dva')(66\<^ fjLerd tlvwv iy')((opio}v d7r7]V6'^67] et? rrjv "lov Kal
wpiXLadrjcrav ov Kara ttoXlv, dXk' ctt' dKTrj<^. Atque banc
vel illam rem verisimile est argumentum et occasionem
poemati dedisse. Venio ad ea, quae oratione prosa Ion com-
posuit. Nam in eo genere libros edidisse testis est Plutar-
chus De Fortuna Romanorum ;° "lojv /xev ovv 6 7rot7)Tr]<i iv
Tol<; St^a fjLerpov Kal KaTaXoydBrjv avTcp yey pa fjbfjbevoL<; cfn^alv,
dvofJLOLOTarov TrpdyjJia ry ao<f>la ttjv TV')(r]v ovaav, ofjboiord-
T(ov irpayfjudrcDV ylveaOau Brj/jbcovpyov. et Suidas in AuOvp.
"Eypa-^jre Be KcofjurpBlav^ Kal iirLypd/jL/jLara KaraXoydBrjv Kal
Upea^evTLKov Xeyojjbevov. Portus vertit barbare : Et epi-
grammata oratione soluta. Libenter vero videre vellem nobilia
[J " Uterque [Suidae] locus depravatus est Scribendum proculdubio
'ETTTciTre/cTos." Toupius, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii. p. 578. — D.]
p p. 6. ed. 1573.— D.] \} v. 151.— D.]
["» p. 19. ed. 1752.— D.] [° p. 34. ibid.— D.]
[° Mor. t. ii. p. 206. ed. Wyttenb.— D.] [i* KufiifSias. ed. Gaisf.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 325
ilia epigrammata pedestri sermone facta. Vali ! adeone
exaruerat penitus beiiigiia ilia vena ingenii ? et extincta erat
prorsus ea mentis inflammatio, sine qua nemo fit bonus
poeta ? Quid ? unane et generosum Ariusium in cellis eva-
nuerat, quo meniorant lonem bene libenter plerumque esse
usum ? enimvero verissimum esse comperit, quod olim dixerat
Epicharmus 5P
OvK evTi SL0vpafji/3o<;, okj^ vScop 77/^79.
Sed bene est, quod commoda mutatione propulsare possumus
hoc dedecus a summo poeta.^J Sic enim Suidam emendo.
"'Eypa-yjre Be k. kcli eTnyponiyuaTa^ koL KardXoydSrjv IIPEI!-
BETTIKON Xeyofievov. Schol. Aristoplianis :^ "Eypa-fe
CTKoXca, . . . Kol iXeyela, koI KaraXoydBrjv rov
TIpeajSevTLKov Xeyofjuevov, ov voOov d^tovcTL rtve? elvat, ovyl
avrov.^ Idem Scholiastes :* ^alverai he avTOv /cat KTLcrL<;,
KoX KocrfjLo\oyiKo<;, koI TUOMNHMATA, kol aXka rcvd,
Depravatum hunc locum sic corrige : ^alverac Be avrov
XIOT KTI^IS. Etymologicon Magnum : A6yya<^ y^epLBa^
"Iwve? Xeyovaiv. "Icov iv Kiov KTrjaei' ^Ek rrj^ Tea) \oy')(r}<;
X67%a9 TToielv.^ Certissime legendum est ''Icov iv Xlov
Krla-et,, Ion in Originibus Chii. Videlicet ipse fuit Chius
[P In Philoctete, apud Athen. 1. xiv. c. xxiv. t. v. p. 276. ed. Schw., ubi Ovk
i<rri, K. T. X. — D.]
[1 " Nimirum Kara\o'YaZ7]v, non secus ac Romanorum pedestris, non tantum
prosam orationem, sed prosce etiam simile significat; Hesychius KaTa\oyd5r}V'
"■^C^j ^ ''■^ ""6^^ \6y<i> ypa<p6fi€va. De lone Plutarchus de Fortun. Rom. p. 316.
D. : ''iwv fikv ovv, 6 irotTjT^s, iv to7s ^ix^ Merpou KOi KaraXoydSrjV avT^ yeypa/j.-
fi^vois. Scholiastes Aristoph. Pace v. 835. lonis irpeafievTiKSy' Suidas autem
epigrammata etiam ejus KaraXoydB-qv scripta fuisse, confirmat v. AiOvpafifioSi-
Sda-KaKoi. quamquam Bentleius ad Mill. p. 64. [ed. Oxon.] Suidse lectionem
sollicitet. qua de re, cum Presbeutici fragmenta nulla supersint, judicare vix
licet." Santenius ad Terent. Maur. p. 172., ubi plura. — Ad Suidai locum ne
verbum quidem Gaisfordius doctissimus, qui vulgatam exhibuit. — D.]
[' Ad Pac. V. 801. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[* a^iovaiv elval rives Kal ovx^ axnov. ibid. — D.]
[' ibid., ubi ^eperai 5e avr. k. t. A. — D.]
[" " In Etymol. dele Xdyxas, vel potius \6yxvS' Agios dividere." Dobrseus,
Advers, t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
326 EPISTOLA AD
natione, et insula Teos Chio propinqua est^ non Cio. Athe-
naeus libro x.^ Ilepl Be TavTr}<; Tr]<; Kpaaecof; "Icov 6 TrotT/r^?
eV tS Trepl Xlov (prjalv, on evpwv 6 jjbdvTL^ IIa\afjL7]B7]<;
ifjuavTevaaro ttKovv eaeaOau Tol^'EXkrjcn itIvovctl rpel^ Trpo^;
€va Kvddov<;, Unum idemque est scriptum; sed rideo eos,
qui haec perinde edideruiit^ quasi essent versus iambici^ non
oratio soluta : de mendo autem^ quo contaminatus est locus^
nihil suspicati sunt. Quorsum enim pertinet illud evpcov}
Quid reperit? quod pueri clamitant se in faba reperisse?
Ego vero ausim asseverare sic a doctissimo grammaticorum
fuisse scriptum : "Otl 6 olwvofiavTi^ nakajirjhr]^, hc."^ Pau-
sanias in Achaicis lonis quaedam citat, ex hoc Originum
libro, ut quidem conjicio : non tanien usquequaque servavit
verba auctoris. Ion enim, ut hominem Chium facere par
erat, in prosaicis scriptis lonica dialecto est usus. Constat
hoc ex superiore loco Etymologici, et Harpocrationis alio,
et fragmento alius operis, quod EUIAHMIAI inscribitur.
Athenaeus xiii.^ "I(ov ovv 6 7roi,rjTrj<i iv ral^; i7rLypa(f>o/ubeyai<;
Eirihr^filaL^s ypdcfiec ovrco^' ^o(J)ok\€c toS TrotTjrfj iv Xi(p
crvvrjVTr}(Ta, ore eirXec ei<; Aia^ov aTpaTrjyo<;, et quae sequun-
tur. Quanquam enim magnam partem perturbata ibi sunt
verba, et in communem sermonem immutataj non obscura
tamen restant vestigia lonismi : ut /cdpra BoKeov, d(f)aip6-
ovTa,y daaoTepa, e7rp7]aae, p€KTr)pLo<i, ev(d7rr]6ri rfj iirippa-
TTLo-et.^ Is. Casaubonus ad locum : 'EvcoireladaL, ait, si ita
scripsit auctor, nove usurpavit pro Buacoirela-dat, Nempe,
[^ c. xxviii. t. iv. p. 59. ed. Schw. — D.]
[^ '6x1 6 a\evp6fji.avTis HoX. Toupius, Emend, in Suid. (Ep. Grit.) t. ii. p. 543. —
" Neque Bentleii neque Toupii emendationem probare possum. Mallem legere
"Ort ETPOYN 6 fxavris. Constructio erit, 'E/iaj/reua-aTo tcXovv iaeaQai ETPOTN,
Navigationem fore secundum." Tyrwliittus, Not. in Toup. &c. t. iv, p. 426. — " Si
quid esset mutandum, probarem oiipiov, ad ttXovv relatum, quod proposuit Jacobs
in Animadv. in Eurip. Trag. pag. 141. Sed in librorum scrip tura omnino ad-
quiescendum arbitror." Schw. {Animadv. in Atheii. t. v. p. 387.), qui de Tyr-
whitti conjectura tacet. — D.]
[^ c. Ixxxi. t. V. p. 185. ed. Schw.— D.]
[y afpaipeTcovra. t. v. p. 187. ed. Schw.— D.]
[' Vide Toupium, Emend, in Suid. {Ep. Crit.) t. ii, p. 541. et t. iii. p, 69. — D,]
JOANNE M MILLIUM. 327
quod mireris, existimavit verba Athenaei esse, non lonis.
x\tqui ivwirelcrOaL vox nihili est : ivwrrrjOrj vero lonica, et a
vwrrelaOai formata. Hesychius : ^EvooTrrjrac, Teraireivwrat.
Antiquum obtinuit, cum depravatum illud protulit ex aliorum
fide, nihil ipse suspicans vel soUicitus. Lege vero integre
v€vco7r7]Tat, loco mutili istius. Idem alibi : NevcovTjrac, rera-
TTelviOTaiy KaTaireirXrjKTaL. Lege hie quoque vevooTrrjrai,.
Patriarcha Photius in Lexico MS. : NevayTrrjrac, Karaire-
ir\7]KTai Kol KarecTTv^vaKev. Rectissime quidem Photius,
ut ex hoc lonis loco perspicuum est. Quid ego de Athenaei
interprete dicam, qui ^E7riBrjfjLla<; Peregrinationes interpreta-
tur, perinde ac si ^AiroBrjfMtac inscriberentur ? Verum alibi
quoque 'EttlStj/jllmv meminit Atheneeus, ut 1. iii.^ Tmv Se
%7;/iwv /jLvrj/jLovevec "Icov 6 Xto? iv 'E7rcBr]fji,iai<;. Intellige
De adventibus clarorum virorum in Chium, sive De lis qui in
Chio insula commorati sunt. Similiter ac Polemo librum
edidit, De Eratosthenis adventu ad Athenas. Enarrator
Comici ad Aves :^ TIo\6fjb(ov iv rS Bevripo) irepl Trj<; ^AOtjvj}-
(TLv ^EparoaOevov^ i7rc8ijfjLia<;. Ex Epidemiis petita videntur
vel 'TTTOfivrj/naac, quae laudat Plutarchus in Vita Periclis ; et
Cimonis^ etiam non longe a principio : ^Hv Be fcal ttjv IBiav
ov /j,€/ii7rT0<;, W9 ^rjacv 'Twv o iroi'qTrjf;, oXka jxe^ya'^, ovXrj koI
iroXkfi TpL')(i Ko/jLcov rr)v Ke^aXrjv. Quae sine dubio est oratio
pedestris, et magis Plutarchi verba, ut suspicor, quam lonis.
Magnus tamen Grotius^ ad iambos tragicos redigere conatus
est :
T7)v yap IBeav ov fiefiTTTo^;, aXV €7]v^ fxeya^,
OvXt) t6 TToWfj re Tpi')(l ttjv KCcpaXrjv KOfMcov.
Haeccine autem oratio, tarn leves numeri tragicum quid
spirant, et cothurno dignum ? Hand vidi magis. Quid illud
ibidem,^ bene multis interjectis ? 'OB' "Icav aTrofivrj/jLovevec
KOL Tov \6yov, u> /jboKcara tol'9 'AOyvatovf; eKcvrjae (Kificov),
irapaKa\o)v fjii]Te rrjv 'EWdBa %<»X^v, /ju'^re rrjv iroXtv erepo-
[» c. xliv. t i. p. 362. ed. Schw.— D.] [^ v. 11. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[c Plut. 0pp. t. iii. p. 182. ed. Reisk.— D.] [^ Exc. p. 451.— D.]
[« 9ifp. ibid.— D.] [^ Plut. 0pp. t iii. p. 209. ed. Reisk.— D.]
328
EPISTOLA AD
^vya TrepuBetv yeyevTjfjuevrjv. Grotius® perinde haec accepit^
tanquam si ex tragoedise choro desumpta fuissent :
M7]re TTjv ^EXkdha '^coXyv,
IVLrjTe TTjv ttoXlv erepo^vya
UepuBelv yeyevTj/jievTjv.
Nos pusilli homunciili vix possumus carere venia^ cum etiam
maximi heroes labuntur identidem et hallucinantur turpis-
sime. Scripsit Ion et PhilosopMca, ut KO^MOAOFIKON-
Schol. Aristoph.^ et, si SuidseS credimus, De Meteoris, et Com-
positas sive ornatas orationes : Ovto<;, ait, eypayfre irepl Me-
T€(op(ov /cat XwOerov^i Xoyovg. Quo nihil ineptius vel falsius
dici potuit. Imo neque niagis contumeliose, siquis iirapt-
<7Tep(i)<; et perverse interpretari velit de sermonibus ad fraudem
et fallaciam compositis, secundum illud ^schyli in Prome-
theo:^
MijBe fi OLKTiaa^
'ByvOoKire fjuvOoiq ylrevSeat, voarj/jia yap
Ala')(^i(TTOv elvai <f>7j/jLc avv6eTov<; \oyov<;.
Error autem ortus est ex perperam intellecto loco Scho-
liastae Aristoph. ad Pacem.^ Poetse scilicet dithyrambici
verborum amant tralationes i/c tmv /jberccopcov, ex astris,
nubibus, aliisque quae in sublimi hunt ; libenter etiam voca-
bulis sesquipedalibus et coagmentatis utuntur. Demetrius
Trepl *Ep/ji7]V€La<;'i Arjirreov Be Kal avvdera ovofiara, ov rd
Bi6vpa/ii^cKa)<; crvyKeijjbeva, oloy QeoirepaTov^^ ir\dva<;, ovBe
^Aarpcov Bopvirvpov arparoy, aXX' iocKora toI<; vtto rrjf;
d\Tjdela<; <TvyKeL/jievoL<;. Et Horatii illud : ^^ Seu per audaces
nova dithyrambos Verba devolvit/'^ Ipse Suidas alibi :"^ AiOv-
pa/jL^oBcBdcTKaXoc irepl rSiV /xerecopcov Kal tmv ve^eXwv Xe-
yovai TToWd, Kal <7vvOeTOv<; Be Xe^et? iirolovv, Kal eXeyov
ivBLa€pLav6pcv7}')(^eTov<i'^ 0I09 ^v "Itwv o Xto? 7roL7)T7j<;. Omnino
[e Exc. p. 449.— D.] [f Ad Pac. v. 801. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[s In^Iwi/.— D.] [»» V.705. ed. Blomf.— D.]
[> vv. 795, 797. ed. Bekk.— D.] [i p. 42. ed. Schn.— D.]
[•^ deoTepdrovs. ed. Schn., cujus notam adeas, p. 142. — D.]
[1 Carm. iv. 2.— D.] [■" In Aidvpafi^odiS.—D.]
[" Vulgo 4v5ia€piai€pivi)x^Tovs. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 329
vide Aristophanem in Pace,^ ejusque enarratorem. Itaque jam
manifesto compertum et deprehensum est Suidae mendacium.
TPIAFMON, Locus est illustris apud Harpocrationem^
quem ex usu fuerit integrum describere. "Icov. 'IcroKparri^
iv To5 Trepl Tr}9 !AvrLB6cr€co<;. 'T«vo9 rod t^9 rpaywhla^
TToiijTov /j.vrjfjLovevoc av vvv 6 prJTcop (atqui nee in ea oratione^
nee in reliquis quae nunc extant, est ulla mentio lonis, quod
sciam), 09 yv Xlo<; fiev yevo<;, vto9 Se 'OpdofjL6Vov<;, iTriKXrjo-iv
Be UovOov. e'ypay^e he koI fjuekr] iroXka Koi rpaycpSiaf;, kol
(f)ikoao<f)6v Tc auyypa/jb/jia tov Tpoay/jLov iircypacpo/jLevoVy oirep
KaWifia'^of; avTiXeyeaOai <f>7]cnv, (it)9 ^ETrcyevov^;. ^Ev evL0t<;
Be KOL 7f\7}6vvTCK(o<i eTTcypdcperac Tpiay/jLol, KaOa ArjjULTjrpLOf;
6 XKrj'>^Lo<:i Kal ^AttoWcovlBt]!; 6 NtKaev^; avaypd^ovac Be iv
avT(a rdBe' ^Ap')(7] Be fjbot tov \6yov irdvTa rpla, Kal ifKeov
TovBe, irXeov eXdaacov tovtcov rpccov evo<;, e/cdarov dperrj
Tptd<;, <7vv€cri,<; koI Kpdro^ Kal rvxH-^ Male ista percepit
interpres, qui ita vertit : velut ex eo Bern, Sc. et Ap. N. ista
commemorant. Ego vero sic interpungendum esse censeo :
Kadd A. 6 ^. Kal A, 6 NcKaev<;, ^Avaypd(f)ov(TL B^, nimirum
aut Eratosthenes in Descriptionibus temporum, aut potius
Callimachus in Tabulis omiiis generis librorum. Nam dva-
ypd(f)ecv est in tabulas recensere et mittere, in catalogum
referre. Ipse Harpocration alibi : Evr]vo<;. . . . Avo dvaypd-
(j^ovacv Ev7jvov<; eXeyelcov iroiTjrd'^, ojJLfovvfiov; dWrfKoi'^'
KaOdirep *EpaToa6ev7)<; iv to3 Trepl Xpovoypa<f)L(av, Athe-
naeus xv.'^ Kal tov \6yov tovtov dveypayjre KaWlfia'Xp^i iv
TTj Tcov 'PrjTopLKcov ^ AvaypacpTj, in Catalogo librorum Rhetoric
corum. Hunc autem morem in Tabulis istis tenebat Calli-
machus, ut cuj usque libri prima verba describeret ; sicut hie
fit apud Harpocrationem. Unum tantummodo exemplum
afferam, quia pridem haec ab eruditis sunt occupata. Athen.
lib. vi.° Tov Xacpe(f>a)VTo<; Kal avyy pa [Jb[JLa dvaypd<j)eL Ka\-
{} vv. 795 sqq. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[" " Malim, \6yov iravrhs .... tXaffffov Toiniav (omisso rpiwv), vel rwv
rpiwv. In fine lege rpla pro rpids. Pro iv rovTcp \_avT^~\ qu. 4k tovtwv." Dobraeus,
Advers. t. ii. p. 365. — D.]
[" c. ix. t. V. p. 438. ed. Schw., ubi 'Prjr. 'A7ro7pa<^^.— D.]
[° c. xliii. t. ii. p. 435. ed. Schw.— D.
VOL. II. 2 u
330
EPISTOLA AD
XifMa^o'i iv To5 Twv iravTohairSyv o-vyypa/JLfJLdroyv TlivaKL,^
ypa^oiv ovTco(}' AeliTva oaoL eypa'^av. Xatpecpcov Kvprj-
^Lcovc. €l6^ e^rj<i rrjv ap')(7]v VTreOrjKev ^EiretST] fiot TroWaKLf;
€7r€<7T6L\a<i, cTTt^oJV Toe, Kal 6 Kvprj^lwv he on irapd-
(TCTo^i, TTpoelpTjraL. Ita locus iste corrigendus est. Chaere-
phon parasitus ad oyLtore^vov suum Cyrebionem epistolam
misit^ in qua describit coenam quandam sine dubio opipare
apparatam. Xaipe^cov Kvprj^Lcovc' 'jETreiS?; fioc 7roX\dKL<;
cTreo-re^Xa?, &c. Quod si vulgatam lectionem servare velis,
Xacpe<j>cov, Kvprj^lcov jam non Chaerephontis verba forent,
quae Athensei sententia est; sed Cyrebionis. lUud autem
exordium TpLay/jbov nondum a viris doctis emendatum esse
demiror ; qui^ etsi dissimulant et mussant^ juxta id intelligunt,
ac si in Ovidii Getica incidissent. Me auctore sic lege : ^Apj(7)
hi fjLOL Tov Xoyov JJdvra Tpla, Koi ovtc ttXcov ovt€ eXaaaov
TOVTcov TpiSiv 'Evo<; 6Kd(TT0V dp6Trj, TpLd<i' avvecTi^y Kpdro<;,
Kal TvxV'^ Ubi singula quidem verba sunt communia : qui
tamen ex ipso charactere et forma dicendi non sentit lonis-
mum, nihil sentit. De Epigene vero, quo me vertam nescio,
ita res et hinc et inde magnam liabet difficultatem. Nam
ecce tibi Suidas, qui non Epigenem, sed Orpheum auctorem
faciat Tpiajfjbwv. (Op(j)€v<;,) inquit, eypayjre Tpiay/jLov<;,^ Xe-
yerac^ he elvac "I(ovo<; rod rpayiKov. Cumque Epigenem
video enarrationem Orphei fecisse^ Clementi memoratam
^^Tpco/jb. i.* ^ETTLjevT]'^ iv T0fc9 Trepl tt)? €h ^Op(pea Trocrjaecos
KipK(i)7ro(i elvai Xiyec rod UvOayopelov rrjv el<; ''Ahov Kard-
^acriv KOI Toy 'lepbv Xoyov — (Proclus tamen In Timaeum
lib. v.^ ipsum Pythagoram hujus auctorem laud at. 'M ydp, ait,
'Op<^ev9 he* d7ropp'i]T(ov Xoycov fivarLKMf; TrapahihcoKe, ravra
IIv6ay6pa<; i^ifiadev, opytaaOel^ iv AecjSijdpoi'i to2<; Opa-
[p eV T(p rwv iravTodanZv TlipaKi correxit Bentleius, Callim. Frag. p. 471. ed.
Ern., probante Schw. — D.]
[1. apxh ^5e /ioi rod hSyov. iravra rpia Kal vXiov ouSe iKaffffov. rovrutv rwv
rpiwv evhs eKaarov aper^ rpias, (TvviCis KoiX Kpdros Kal rvxv- Harpocr. p. 103.
ed. Bekk.— D.]
[' vulgo Tpiaafiovs. — D.] [* vulgo xiyovrai. — D.]
[t p. 397. ed. Pott.— D.] [" p. 291. ed. Basil.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 331
KLOi^ ' Ay\ao(f)dfjL(j) reXeara fMeTaBcSovTO';, fjv irepl Oecov
^Op<f>€v<; aocpiav irapa KaWi67rr)<; Trj<i fjLr)Tepo<; iinvvordri'
ravra yap (f>7j(7tv 6 IIvday6pa<; iv tu> 'lepS Xoyw. Unde
constat 'lepov, ut alia scripta Pythagorica, dialecto Dorica
fuisse compositum) : — et v.* 'E'inyev7)<; iv tm Trepl rrj^ 'Op^eax;
iroiijaeco^i ra ISid^ovra irap* ^Op^el iKTLdefi6y6<; (j^rjai,, Kep-
KLaL Ka/jLTTvXo'^pcoori, roL<; dporpoc^; firjvvecrdac, &c. : cum hsec,
inquam, lego, propeiiiodum adducor in earn opinionem, ut
Harpocration hoc exemplo scripserit: owep KaXXlfiaxo^
avTiXiyea-Oai (firjanv, eo? koL ^E7nyev7]<^. E diverso ubi illud
venit in mentem, Orphei ipsius et Pythagorse quoque men-
tionem factam esse in illis Tpiayfiol^, continuo sententiam
earn abjicio, et manifesti erroris Suidam arguo. Clemens
Xrp, iy- "I(i)v Be 6 Xto9 iv TOL<i Tpiay/jLOL<; koI TJvOayopav eZ?
^Op<f>€a dveveyKelv Ttva la-ropel' et Diogenes Laert."^ "Icov Be
6 Xio<; iv Tot? TpLayfjLOL<; (fiTjalv avrbv (rov JJvOayopav) evia
TToirjaavTa dveveyKelv eh ^Opcjiia. Itaque constat Suidam
alterutrius verba perperam cepisse : et praestabilius est re-
ceptam Harpocrationis lectionem sartam et tectam tueri.
Nempe ut suspicor libri Epigenis cum lonis scriptis con-
juncti ferebantur : is enim commentarium fecerat in lonis
tragoedias ; quod scias ex Athenaeo lib. xi. cap. v. :^ ut nihil
miri sit, si librariorum, qui omnia perturbant et miscent, alii
tanquam lonis Tptayfiov^ inscripserint, alii ut Epigenis.
Pag. 174 [181] . Kal jjuerd Mtvcoa AvXia^; rpayiKoxx; ')(opov<;
Spafidrcov avveypd-^aro. Permirum fortasse videatur, Milli
doctissime, tenebrionem ilium Auleam pro ^schylo a Joanne
dici. Quid autem admirationis habet, cum in memoria quis
teneat tot alias hallucinationes hominis ? Etiam p. 74 cita-
tur A\jXea<; 6 (TocfxaraTo^ de Endymione, quem in monte
Cariae Luna consopivit, ut euni dormientem oscularetur.
Suspicor et hie quoque significari ^schylum, qui in fabula
Caribus sive Europa non potuit non eam historian! attingere.
Illud autem quam longe abest a vero, quod ^schylum
[' p. 675. ed. Pott.— D.] [" p. 397. ed. Pott.— D.]
[^ In Pyth. p. 493. ed. Meib.— D.]
["^ c. xxxiv. t. iv. p. 232. ed. Schw.— D.]
332 EPISTOLA AD
narrat primum instituisse choros tragicos ! E diverse partes
chori^ antea quam ^schylus tragoedias faceret^ erant altero
tanto longiores, quam post. Sed ea res nisi pluribus verbis
explicari non potest : tota fere scenae ratio et historia est
illustranda; complures auctorum loci qua corrigendi, qua
novo modo interpretandi ; multi errores amovendi, jam ipsa
vetustate cani et venerabiles. Nemo enim unus ex cohorte
eruditorum^ qui in eo argumento tantopere laborarunt^ scire
adhuc potuit^ quid Thespis, quid ^schylus et Sophocles
inventis addiderunt. Itaque tam odiosa disceptatione patien-
ter carere possis in praesentia : imo vereor ut citra fastidium
epistolam perlegas etiam absque ista concertatione nimium
loquacem. Me quidem et morse pertaesum est et ineptiarum.
P. 214. ^T7;cr/^opo9 Kol 3aK')(y\ihr)<;, ot rjaav 6p')(o]or€(o<;
evperalj kol TroirjraL Quid narras ? nimirum nostra nos
opinio fefellit^ qui credidimus te Antiochiae esse natum.
Siquidem auctor est Lucianus Antiochenses de saltatoribus
optime omnium judicare potuisse : te autem cum aliaruni
omnium, tum hujus artis imperitissimum videmus. Rogo
te, homo hominum ignavissime, nunquamne Sacras Scrip-
turas lectitasti ? nonne ibi frequens saltationis mentio diu
diuque, antequam Stesichorus nasceretur ? quid ? ne Home-
rum quidem per transennam aspexisti ? jam ergo eum audias
licet :
*Op)(r)(rTV<;, ^oXirrj re, rdirep r avaOrnjbara han6<;.^
^AXKfp fiev yap eSeoKe Oeo^; irokep^rjla epya,
^AW(p 8* 6p')(7](TTvv, eripa) Kidapiv koX aoihrjvy
Scio tamen, quid in fraudem te impulit; nempe nomen
Stesichori, tanquam si primus ea-Trjo-aro 'xppov^' et poemata
quaedam Bacchylidis, quae 'Tiropj^^fiara inscripta sunt, et a
Stobaeo citantur, et Athenaeo lib. xiv.^ 'H 8' v7ropxv/^^'^^f<^V
iaTLVy iv § aScov 6 %Oj0O9 6p')(^6tTaL' ^rjal yovv 6 BaK^v\lB7j<i'
[^ Od. i. 152., ubi MoAtt^ t' opX'lo'Tvs re* rh. yap r av. Satr.— D.]
[y //. xiii. 730.— D.] ['• c. xxx. t. v. p. 288. ed. Schw.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 333
Oi);^ eSpa? epyov, ovS* afi^o\d<;. Locus aliqiianto integrior
est apud Dioiiysium Halicarnassensem.^ 0^% eBpa*; epyov,
ovS' a/jL^o\a<;, dWa '^pva-aLyiSo^; ^Ircdvla^ "^pV "^^P ^^^^t-
haXov vaov ekSovra^ djSpov tl Bet^ac. Omnes cretici prseter
unum pedem, qui in pseonem solutus est; adeo ut^ cuin
hunc locum lego, coram oculis videre videar virop'x^ovfJLevov';
et subsultantes. Nee tamen princeps et inventor hypor-
chematum Bacchylides ; sed, ut quibusdam videtur. Pin-
dams ; ut alii volunt, Xenodamus. Vide Clementem, Athe-
nseum, et Plutarchum wepl Movo-lkti^;.
P. 133. r\avfco<;, io-'^upb<;, <l)p6vLfM0<^, evcre^rj<^. Atqui,
O Malela, tantum abest, ut sapiens fuerit iste Glavicus, ut
ejus nomen in proverbii consuetudinem venerit, de homine
qualis tu es, qui nescit quid sit in rem suam ; qui permutat
Xpvaea 'x^aX/ceicov, eKaro/ji^oL ivvea^olcov.^
Sed est potius ut librarii hoc esse facinus existimem, (prse-
sertim si non idem istud la^vpo^; iterasses,) et orationem esse
continuandam ad hoc exemplum : {Alv6ia<i) evTrcoycov, yXav-
k6<; (ccesius), (ppovt/jLOfi, evae^Tjf;.^ Agnosco ^mm JEneam 3 et
ita plane Isaacius Porphyrogenitus.
Illud p. 329. Kal KaTr)ve')(<d7] 6 ^l/iicov .... iirl rrjv irka-
Teiav, Kal iyjr6(j)7]a€,^ satis quidem congruenter ad hellenis-
mum vertit interpres,^ sed non apposite ad sententiam. Quid
si interpretemur to i'y^6<f)ria-€, ut, quod in N. T.^ de Juda Isca-
riota dictum est, iXaKTjae fiea-o^^ increpuit^ medius? Hesy-
[' De Comp. Ferb., 0pp. t. v. p. 206. ed. Reisk. — De hoc Bacchylidis loco
vide Gaisfordium ad HephasL p. 330., necnon Hermannum in Elem. Boot. Met,
p. 126. ed. Glas.— D.]
[b Horn. II. vi. 236.— D.]
[•= Malelae verba sic se habent ;
AiVeioy KOJ/SoeiSr??, iraxvs, €ij(rrr)0os, iffxvphs, wpf>6.Ky]s, iT\aT6\pis, eiiptyos,
\€VKhs, avacpdXas, einrwywv.
r\avKos, i(rx-> (ppdy-, fva. D.]
[^ Sic Malelas : /cat Tjt^aTo d Uerpos, Ka\ /coTTjvex^r; 'Siifjt.wv 6 fAayos iK rod
hfpos iis t))v yrjv, ivl tV irKar., fcoi i^p. — D.]
[«.... " mag7io cu7n sonitu in plateam decidens, interiit." — D.]
[« Act. Apost. i. 18.— D.]
[8^ Legendum videtur " crepuit." — D.]
334 EPISTOLA AD
chius : *'E\aK6v, ei|ro(^77o-ev et AaKciv, yfro(f)7](Tai. Pagina autem
16 sane dormitavit interpres, ut in opere longo et ingrato facile
queat somnus obrepere. ji^^^ata, UeXrjvr}, r] KoXovfJuevr] TleXo-
TTovvrjaor Achcea, Pelena, quce et Peloponnesus dicta est.
Obsecro, quis istud vel fando audivit ? Scribe 'Ax'Oi'i'ci, UeX-
Xtjvr)' et verte, Achaa, Pellene, et quce Peloponnesus vocatur.
IleWyvT} est Achaese urbs. Vide Geographos. ApoUonius
Argon, i.s
A(TTepLo<; Se koI A/jL(J)1(ov, '^Tirepaa-lov vt€<;,
TIeWrjvrj<^ a^iKavov A')(auho<^ .
Vereor ne putidum sit adnotare^ Bovttlo(;, Bottlo^^ et Bwt-
Tio^ vitiose dici apud Malelam pro BpovTTCo<; sive BpeTTLo<;,
Hoc quidem exploratum est, cum eandem plane narrationem
ex Brutio afferant Georgius et Hieronymus. Ita p. 200
OdXijs:, Kol KdcTTcop, KoX TIo\v^Lo<; depravate pro 0a\Xo9.
Similiter enim Castorem, Thallum, et Polybiiim de rebus
Assyriacis una citat Syncellus. Et adhuc p. 221 Callima-
chus eV 'Errjaloi,^ pro Alrioi^. Neque enim AXtlul inscri-
buntur, nequis erret, sed AlTi^a, ut in Epigrammate lib. i.
Anthol, cap. Ixvii.^
KaWlfjLa^o<^ to KaOapfia, to Tralyvcov, 6 ^vXlvo<; voO?.
Altlo<; 6 ypd-^jraf; AiTia KaWcfid'^ov.
Appello ad elegantiorum hominum judicia, annon melior
aliquanto sit lectio ex conjectura nostra :
AcTCO^iy 6 ypd'^jra^; AcTia, KaXkLfia')(p<i,
Cseterum homo Malelae germanissimus Fulgentius Plancia-
des,^ Jentaculum, inquit, gustatio dicitur. Callimachus Intesia :
Jentaculum proferre JovL Diceres hunc a Joanne 'ETijaia
ilia mutua petiisse. Illud vero incredibile videatur, Cyre-
naeum ilium Latine loqui et quidem versu; nam sic lego,
[K V. 176.— D.]
[** Anth. Gr. ex rec. Br. (ed. Jacobs.) t. iii. p. 67. — Jnth. Gr. ad fid. Cod. Pal.
8fc. t. ii. p. 396. — Hoc distichon Apollonio Rhodio tribuitur: vide Jacobsii
Animadv. in Anth. Gr. t. ii. p. iii. p. 47. — D.]
[' Expos. Serm. Antiq. — Auct. Myth. Lat. p. 779. ed. Van Stav. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 335
Jentaclum proferre Jovi Sed minuit admirationem,
quod Fulgentius et Mnasese EvpcoTnaKa et Demosthenis
Philippicai viderit Latino sermone conscripta.'*^ Sicut Ovi-
dianse Ibidis vetus enarrator putidissimos versus eosque
Latinos Eupolidi et (jocularem hominis confidentiam !) De-
mocrito affingit.
lUud prseterea pag. 52. KaOm Arjfiap')(o<i o (ro(f>coTaTo<i
avveypd-yfraTo irepl rov avrov Alovvctov, corrupte exhibetur
loco Aelvapxo^. Nam Georgius eandem historian! memo-
rans, Aelvap')(o<;f ait, 6 7rocr}Tr}<i, ou;^ 6 pijrcop' et Hierony-
mus : Dinarchus poeta, non rhetor. De quo in diversas
sententias ierunt viri docti. Verba Demetrii Magnetis in
opere JlepX tcov 'Ofjucovvficov, apud Dionysium Halic.^ Aeivdp-
p^ofc? 8e iveTV')(oiJbev reTTapacv, oiv early 6 fiev eK tcov prjropcov
Twv uimKMV 6 Be ra? Trepl Kpijrrjv avvayijo^e fiv6o\ojia<;'
6 Be irpea^vrepo^ fiev dfjL(f)olv toutocv, Arj\LO<; he to jevo<;,
7r€7rpaj/JLaTev/jLevo<; tovto fxev eiro^^ tovto Se Trpdy/Jia' re-
TapTo^ he 6 Trepl 'Ofjurjpov \6yov (TvvTedeLKco<;, Et Gerardus
quidem Vossius in prseclaro opere De Historicis ;"* Dinarchus,
ait, Delius Cretenses fabulas collegit, ut cognoscimus ex Diony-
sio Hal. . . . Videtur idem signari ah Eusebio, . . . ubi de Bacchi
gestis loquens, ait,"fl<i <f>'qaL Aeivap')(o<; 6 7roo7}Tr)<i, ou^ 6 prjTwp.
Condonamus quidem ei d/jLapTTj/jba fivTjfiovLKov' neque enim
Delius fuit Cretensium Fabularum collector, sed secundus
iste nescio quis ; quern vix est ut existimem eas versibus
edidisse, saltem hoc non exploratum est. Scaliger in Grceca
Eusebii p. 31." Viderint, ait, eruditi, an tertius Dinar-
chorum ArfKio^i to yevo<;, ireTrpayjjLareviJbevo^ tovto fiev eVo?,
[i Edd. Epist. ad Mill., aut Bentleii aut t)rpothetsB errore, " Philosophica."
-D.]
[^ Sed audiamus Fulgentium : " Mnaseas tamen iii. Europae libro scribsit
Apollinem, postquam ab love ictus," &c " Demosthenes ad Philippum :
sed quidem [1. sed ne quid] te Grsecum turbet exemplum, ego pro eo Latinum
tibi feram," &c. Expos. Serm. Antiq. — Auct. Myth. Laf. pp. 768, 774. ed. Van
Slav.— D.]
[' De Dinarcho Judic, 0pp. t. v. p. 631. ed. Ileisk. — D.]
[™ De Historicis Greeds, p. 355. ed. 1677.— D.]
[n p. 254. ed. 1606.— D.]
336
EPISTOLA AD
TovTo Be irpay/jia, sit iste poeta, quern innuit Eusebius. Nam
sane mihi ignotus est. Hactenus quidem accedo, iit aut iste
sit poeta de quo Eusebius^ aut iiuUus ex quatuor. Sed
amabo, quid sibi vult illud Trpdyfia ? nam, quantum ego
video, nulla ei subest sententia neque scientia. Latine sic
vertas : Dinarchus genere Delius, qui aliquid dixit, et aliquid
fecit : sive, qui aliquid versu dixit, aliquid re ipsa. Profecto
non multum in Demetrio perdidimus, si omnia sic dixit.
Sed opinor neminem inficias iturum, quin mutatione com-
moda et illi suus honos, et orationi sua sententia restitui
possit, si legamus : 'jr€7rpa<y/jLaT€VfMeyo<; tovto /juev €7ro<;, tovto
8e ypdfjLfjLa, id est, qui qucedam heroico carmine consci'ipsit,
alia oratione prosa : vel, (quia to ypd/jL/jua quodvis scripti
genus nonnunquam significat,) tovto Be Bpa/jua, qui et poe-
mata heroica et dramata edidit.
Domninus iste ')(povo'ypd(^o<; non aliunde quam a Malela
cognosci potest a quo saepissime ad partes vocatur. Antio-
chensem fuisse certissimis signis deprehendes, ubi per otium
licebit locos istos consulere : probabiliter etiam dixeris,
deduxisse eum historian! ab exordio mundi usque ad Justi-
niani tempora. Itaque inclinat animus, ut hunc fuisse Dom-
ninum ilium existimem, qui ea tempestate fuit ecclesise
Antiochensis Episcopus. Nam sane sicut hie a Joanne
p. 265 Domnus vocatur : ita istum Patriarcham hi Dom-
num, illi Domninum appellant. Accedit hue, quod plerique
omnes, qui aggressi sunt tempora describere, fuerunt Epis-
copi; Victor, Prosper, Theophilus, Eusebius, et Georgius
Episcopus designatus.
Equidem nescio, utra res majorem admirationem attu-
lerit, tot nomina hominum propria a Joanne corrupta esse,
an ea menda a doctissimo interprete dissimulata fuisse et
silentio prsetermissa : verbi gratia; p. 101 et 171 TvvBdpLo^
pro TvvBdpeco<;. ^AvSpoyyo^; 107 pro ^AySp6ye(o<;. II\7jao(avrj<^
121 pro II\r)l6vr}<; ', atque ea quidem non mater erat Atlantis,
verum uxor. ^iMJSdTr]^ 103 pro ^IopdTr}<;. MrjBlav ttjv tov
^AeTOV 97 pro MrjBelav ttjv tov AirjTOV. IleXcoyjr et UeKw-
7ro<i 99 et 104 pro IleXoyjr et HeXoTro?. 'A/McfiLcova 55 pro
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 337
^Afi^LOva. AlyeidBeq pro AlvecdSaL. 'IcoKaaTT] 59 pro 'lo-
KacTTrj. ^ET€a)K\eov<i 63 pro ^ET€OK\iov<;. ^Afjb<f>Lapo^ 63 pro
*Afi(j)cdpao<;. AevKoXlwv 6 vlb<i "EX€vo<; tov IlrJKOv 84 pro
"E\X7]vo<; ; nee tamen Deuealionis pater erat Hellen, sed
films. ^AvTL(j)dvrr)v 145 pro ^AvTi^drTjv. TrjXecpov regis Lati-
norum 205 pro TrjXefidxov, quorum hie Ulyssis et Penelopes
filius, ille Herculis et Auges. Duorum verborum similitudine
tota historiae ratio est perturbata. Sed propemodum omni
fide majora sunt errata p. 135, ubi Grsecorum duces recenset,
qui contra Trojanos arma ceperunt. Nam ut de numero
navium, etsi ea ratio longe vitiosissima est, nihil dicam ;
ecce tibi M6V6Xao<; koX A')]iaTO<; pro Hrjvekao^ koI AtjIto^.
Homerus :
BoLcoTcov jiev TIr)ve\€co<; koi Arjlro^i rjp'^ov,
^ApKeal\a6<; re, IIpodoi]vo)p re, KX6vc6<; re}
Mey7](; iic Ao\l')(r)<; rrj^ 'EWdBo<;, ex Doliche Helladica, pro
i/c AovXl)(^Iov i^evavria^ Tr]<; *'H\cSo^*
Ot S* iK AovXv^LOLo, ^E'^ovdcov 0^ Updcav
Nt](Ta)V, a'i valovai ireprjv d\6<;, "HXoSo^ dvTa,
Tcov avd^ TjyefJLoveve Miy7)<;^ dTd\ayTO<; "Ap7)l.^
'Ajr/voyp Kol TevOiBrjf;. Euge vero, Malela, qui de oppidi
noniihe heroem confinxisti. Siquidem in Homero legimus
^Aya'jrt]vo)p ck TeyeT)'^'
OX T €')(ov ^ApKaBlrfv Kol Kv\X7]V7j<; 6po<; alirv,
Kal Teyerjv eZj^ov kol Mavrcvirjv ipareivrjv,
T&v ^px *AyKaloio Trat?, Kpeiav ^Ayairrjvap.^
Ex Tegea eum profectum esse epitaphium^ satis indicat :
\} n. ii. 494.— D.] [m n. ii. 625.— D.]
[« //. ii. 603 (ubi Ot y ^x- *Ap/f., {nrh Kv\. 6p. at . . ), 607, 609.— D.]
[" Inter Epitaph ia in heroas Homer icos, quae Aristotelis nomen ptaeferunt :
Anth. Gr. ex rec. Br. (ed. Jacobs.) t. i. p. 113. — Atith. Gr. ad fid. Cod. Pal. ^c
t. ii. p. 751.— D.]
VOL. II. 2x
338 EPISTOLA AD
!A.p')(^6<; oS* 6K Teyir}<; ^Ayair'^vcop, ^AyKalov vio<;,
KelO^ vir ifjbov, Ta(f>Lcov TreXro^opwv ^aaiXev^;,
npoOcoof; KoX MayviTcop. Enimvero apud Malelam facilius
heroes nascuntur, quam fungi post pluviam. O fortunatam
Antiochiam tanto alumno ! Ineptus adeo Homerus, qui pro
isto Magnitore gregarios quosdam milites, vilissima capita, e
Magnesia duxit :
MayvqToyv S' VPX^ IIp66oo<;, T6v9p7)B6vo<; i;(69.P
Eufi6V0<; avv vrjva-lv La pro Evp,r)\o<i'
Tcov vpx ^A^firjTOio <f>i\o<i Trdh evBeKa vtjoov,
Ev/jL7)\o<;.^
Nrjpeij^; CK MvKrjvrjf; pro Ntpev^ €K !SvfjL7)<;'
Ncp€v<; S* av XvfJi'fjOev aye Tpel<; V7Ja<i €L(Ta<;J
XaXla<; €k TpiKK7)<; avv vrjvalv fi, Ecce tibi jam tertius
heros Chalias, qui a corrupto vocabulo Olxa\la<^ prodiit^
non aliter ac vermes in putrescenti cadavere nascuntur :
Ot 3 eZ^ov TpLKKTjv, Kal ^lOco/xrjv KXcofia/coeo-aav,
or T e^ov 0l')(a\l7)v^ ttoXlv Evpvrov Ol')(a\Lrio<;,^
COS ducebant Podalirius et Machaon. AeovTev<i Kal JJoXv-
infjT'qfi* scribe UoXviroLTr]^, ^Afi(j)cyev€ia<; i^ ^Tklov avv vrjvalv
ftv.* Profecto si Troicis temporibus Malelas vixisset^ non
decern annos totos Grseci consumpsissent in unius urbis
obsidione : tot iis terrae filios misisset auxilio. ^Afi<pLy€vela<;
et IlTeXeov oppidorum meminit Homerus :
Ol t6 IIvXov t ivifjLOVTO, Kal ^Aprjvqv ipareivrjv,
Kal KvirapcaaijevTa, Kal ^A/j,(j)iyiv6tav evacov,
Kal UreXeoVy Kal "E\o^, Kal Acopiov.^
[p //. ii. 756.— D.] [1 II. ii. 713.— D.]
[' //. ii. 671.— D.] [» //. ii. 729.— D.]
[' fiy'. Mai— D.] [« //. ii. 591, 3, 4.— D.J
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 339
'^;)^tXXeu9 eK tov "Apyov^; 7^9 'EXXd8o<;, ex Argis Helladis.
Et Argos et Hellas Thessaliae sunt urbes, ut pueri sciunt :
sed hie loeus fatalis est ad Malelse hallucinationes :
Nvv 3* avTOV<; (leg. au TOt'9) oaaot to UeXao-jcKov "Apyo<;
evatoV)
Oir el'^ov ^Oltjv, ^S' ^EWdBa KaWtyvvaiKa,
T(ov av irevTrjKovTa vecSv ^v dp')(p<; ^A^LWev^:.^
^cKoKTrjrrjfi €k Mo06vr}<; vitiose pro MrjOoavri^* et ^(opOrjf;,
^LXi,7nro<;, "AvTL<f)o^, avv vrjvalv orj. Quis autem porro mira-
bitur e cerebello Jovis Minervam esse natam, cum Antio-
chensis hie ex insulso suo capite progeneret absque ope
Vulcani
Ductores Danadm delectos, prima virorum ?^
Sorthem heroem nominat pro insula Carpatho, ut et Philip-
pum pro Phidippo :
Ot S' dpa Ntavpov r' el')(ov, KpdiraOov re, Kdaov re,
Tdov S' av ^elhiinro'; re koI ^'Avti^o^^ rjyr^a-da-Orjv,'^
Notum est jam a multis sseculis morem invaluisse apud
Graecos, ut eodem sono efFerrentur ai, et e, ol et v. Tarn
captiosa pronunciatio mendis infinitis libros opplevit : ut
Mai. p. 47 et 49 tg3 vlut tov AI'x^lovo^;, tS Uevdei, pro
^ E')(^Lovo<s' et e diverso 49 et 55 opo9 KtOepcovcov pro KiOat-
pdiveiov et 106 AvTewvu pro AvTaiw' et alia non pauca extant
ex eo genere : sic 212 [211] et 171 Tov''TaKo<;, viov tov Nav-
ifKlov, pro OXaKo^i' et ^'^(vvewf; 169 pro ^')(0Lvea)<;. In codici-
bus manu notatis promiscuus fere est vocalium horum usus.y
Hoc diligenter animadverso, deploratissimos locos emen-
[' //. ii. 681, 3, 5.— D.]
l^ Lucret. i. 87., ubi ** delecti."— D.]
[« //. ii. 676, 8.— D.] \J Confer nostrum in Addendis.— D.]
340 EPISTOLA AD
dabit nuUo negotio^ qui ingenium et judicium in numerato
habuerit. Plutarchus De hide et Osiride ;^ 'E/xTrehoKXrj^; Be
rrjv fi€V dyaOovpyov dp'^rjv (fxXorrjTa koX <pCklav, 7roXkdKt<;
o6 dpfxovlav KoXelaOac /juepOTn' rrjv Se ')(eipovay vecKO^ ov\6-
fM€vov Kal BrjpLy al/jLaroeo-aav. Frustra hlc Plutarchus per
annos ducentos criticorum auxilium imploravit. Tu verte
at in e^ et lege ^Apfjuoviav KoXel de^epoymv. Possum excitare
ipsum Empedoclem testem hujus correctionis^ apud Plutar-
chum irepl Ev6vfiLa<;'^
'EvO' TjG-av XOovIt) t6, Kol 'HXioirrj Tava(07rc<;,
Aripi,<i 0* al/jLaroecro-ay Kal *ApfjiovL7] IfiepcoTTLf;,
KaWca-Tco r , Alcr'^p'^ re, ©ococrd re, Aeivaurj re,
N7j/jLepTrj<; r epoeacra, /jLeXdyKapiro^i t ^ Aad^eua.
Ubi libenter legerim AT^vaLrj re, ut contraria inter se com-
parentur. Scio nunc quid in animo tute tecum volutes : sed
illud tibi confirmare possum syllabam primam verbi Ifjuepwin^
esse productam atque longam. Primus id reposuit Henricus
Stephanus ex conjectura quantum ego ex re ipsa conjec-
turam facio. Veteres editiones repraesentant koI dpfioviT] ye
/jL€pot)7rt<;. Itaque hie quoque legendum est ^Apixovir) defiepw-
TTL^;. Hesych. ©e/juepooTrt^,^ epaajjula, dyyovT], Lege epaapbla
dp/jL0VL7), auctoritate Empedoclis : nisi si mavis ipaafiia
alcT'^vvT] ex iEschyli Prometheo : ^Ek S' eifkrj^e /jlov ttjv
Oe/jLepcoTTLV al8co. AlScb^ est al(T')(yvrj. Perperam huic lec-
tioni Scholiastes et Etymologici auctor Oepfiepwiriv vocem
nihili anteponunt, tanquam depfxaivovaav rrjy wira. Atqui
eo pacto OepfjLooTTL^ esset dicendum : neque enim vel fando
auditum est depjxepo^, Pollux tamen lib. vi. c. 40.<^ To he
OepjJbepvveadat, Kal KL')(XoSiav KcofMiKd. MS^ '^tScav vel
KV')(Xot8iav' lege de/jbepuveadac Kal ^XtSav, vel ')(\oi,hav, vel
KvXocBiav. Hesychius : ©e/jLepov, aefjuvov, a0' ov Kal rb crepu-
vvvecrdaL, Oe/JiepvveaOat.^ ©e/jueprj, ^e^aia, crefivr], evaTa6rj<S'
[« Mor. t. ii. p. 356. ed. Wyttenb.— D.]
[» Mor. t. ii. p. 634. ed. Wyttenb.— D.] [*» vulgo ©e^epc^rrts. — D.]
[d p. 670. ed. Hemst.— D.] [^ vulgo 0e)uapwe(reot.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 341
G€fjb€p6(j)pova<;, crvv€Tov<;, (T(i}<f>pova<;. Sed ut planissime con-
stet, opus est ut strophen et antistrophen inter se con-
feramus : in quibus hi versus respondent ex adverso :
*Ek S' €7r\r]^e fjuov rav defjuepwinv alBco,
N60')^oU Se v6fjbOL<; Zev^ ddio-fico^ KpaTvyeiJ
Ubi pro a^e<7/i&)9 ex necessitate metri conjeci legendum esse
d6€Tco<;. Quam conjecturam firmavit Hesychius. ^A6eTdl)<;,
ddia/jbcof;, r) crvyKaraTeOec/Mevco^. Ala')(v\o(s Upo/jurjOel Bea--
fjL(or7j' lege, ov crvyK. sine consensu et approbatione reliquorum
deorum. Respexit ad hunc locum : neque enim alibi in ea
fabula occurrit. Plane jam imperitus sit oportet, aut ab
invidentia laboret, qui de Oefjuepojinv contra veniat. Ex-
periamur, quid in alteram partem possit haec observatio.
Hesychius : "Evaa-Tpos, * o^arefieva^, d^aLo^; d\<f>eai^0Lai
dvTv Tov vaaTa^ yap ^dK'x^a<; vdha<i eXeyov, Prodigiosa
plane oratio. Nunc vicissim e muta in ai, et lege : "Evacr-
Tpo<; ware Macvd<i' ^A'X(ito<; ^A\(\>e(7t^ola. dvrl tov 'Td<;.
Ta9 yap Bd/c')(^a^ 'TdSa<; eXeyov. Agnoscis, opinor, princi-
pium senarii ex Achsei fabula Alphesibcea. Similiter ol pas-
sim loco V Hesych. Koirjiia, yevvrjfjia, pro Kv7]fia' et vice
versa Srvxcovcrc, hiarvirovcn, pro SToi')(^ecovcrt, Idem :
^TOC')(^eL(oat<;y hiaTV'irwaL'iy rj Trpcorr] fjuddrjaL^;. Itaque Suidas
in Lexico diphthongos at et ol alieno loco proxime ante e
et V collocavit. Extat in Bibliotheca publica Oxonii liber
antiqua manu notatus, continens mille regulas de recta scri-
bendi ratione : quarum xl. docent quando at, scribere opor-
teat_, et quando v : totidemque ubi oi, et ubi v, Eum codi-
cem, cum ante inter dSeo-7r6Tov<; ferretur^ deprehendi ex
prooemio versibus senariis scripto Uteris prse vetustate pene
effugientibus obtutum oculorum, Theognoti esse grammatici,
quem laudat al^quoties Etymologici scriptor. Et quidem
omnia ibi reperi^ quae iste Theognoto accepta retulit. De
setate hominis rescisces ex prsefatione, cujus initium est^
Tc5 heairoTrj fiov, fcal ao(^w aTe(f37)(f>6pa)
[^ vv. 135, 154. ed. Blomf.— D.]
342 EPISTOLA AD
AiovTi, TM KpaTovvTL TTavTcov iv Xoyoc;,
QevyvcoTOf; evyvcorof; tl^ C09 wv olKirrjf;.
ConStitueram hie Epistolae finem imponere : sed iiiter-
venit amicus meus,^ aurium convitio rationem efflagitans^ cur
Joannes Malelas mihi dicatur, qui a Vossiorum utroque^
Usserio^ aliisque omnibus qui in hunc usque diem ejus men-
tion em fecerunt, Malela nominatur. Ego vero^ inquam, ne
in virorum quidem maximorum verba juraverim : sed in
aliam sententiam, ubi commodum est, quanquam invitus,
meo jure discedo. Roget igitur quispiam, cur Malela potius
sit vocitandus ? hoc scilicet ab iis responsum feret : Apud
Constantinum sic appellari, ^Iwdvvov rov iirlKKnfjv MoKeXa,
et apud Damascenum, ^Icodvvov rov koI Mdkaka' nusquam
alibi commemorari, praeterquam apud Tzetzem Tojavv/y? rt?
Me\i\7}<i. Atqui, si ita res se habet, vulgo et passim reperias
Tov ^oviBa, rov ©(Ofjud, rov ^Apicnea, rov ^iXTjrd, rov TpuoTra,
Tov HKoira, TOV Kpareva' nee tamen propterea vel Suida
Grammaticus dicitur, vel Thoma Apostolus, vel Aristea de
Lxxii. interpretibus. Ratio videlicet linguae Graecse vix aut
nullo modo patiatur, ut in A literam virilia nomina casu
recto terminentur. Atque ea causa est, cur peregrina viro-
rum nomina, quae in A exeunt, a Graecis inflectantur in A^'
TaX^a<;, ^vXKa<i, NovfMa^;, ^€viKa<;, ^Ayplinra';. Quod si
adeo jam exploratum est, nominativum Graecum esse MdXe-
Xa^' nolim ego Latine vertens postremam literam abjicere
praeter morem et consuetudinem eorum temporum, quibus
maxime viguit honos et gratia Latini sermonis. Vetustiores
quidem, ut auctor est Quintilianus 1. i. c. 5.^ Non ifi A et S
literas exire temere masculina Grceca nomina recto casu patie-
bantur. Ideoque et apud Calium legimus, Pelia Cincinnatus ;
et apud Messalam, Benefecit Euthia; et apud Ciceronem,
Hermagora : ne miremur, quod ab antiquorum ple7'isque Mnea
et Anchisa sit dictus. Priscianus lib. v.& Apud Grcecos in
A^ desinentia, . . . apud nos in A terminantur : ut Mapava^;,
[* scil. Hodius, — quern De autoris cognomine disputantem videas. — D.]
[' t. i. p. 129. ed. Spald., ubi " Ne in A quidem atque S," &c.— D.]
[1? p. 641. ed. Putsch.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 343
Scjo-laq, Bvppia<^, Xai,pia<;, Tovpia^i, Baypd8a<;' Marsya^
Sosia, Byrrhia, Cheerea^ Turia, Bagrada. Libro autem vi.
pag. 681 et "J^X}^ plerumque ait ^i frequenter hoc fieri solere.*
Et his fortassis auctoribus tueri se posse arbitrentur, qui e
contraria parte dicunt. Mihi vero longe videtur secus : sed
oportet baud jejune de hac causa^ et tanquam in transitu,
sed plene copioseque disputare. Principio, nulla contro-
versia est, quin indigena Latinorum sermo nullum habuerit
nominativum in As cum genitivo laoavKka^t^. Quapropter
antiquitus, sive Grsecus quispiam in Latina civitate viveret,
sive Graeca scripta in Latinum converterentur, ejuscemodi
nomina per A plerumque scribere et pronunciare placuit.
Atque hoc quidem ex ingenio et consuetudine linguae verna-
culae ab iis est factitatum. Comici igitur in Grsecis inter-
pretandis eam rationem tenuerunt; Chcerea, Sosia, Byrrhia,
Phania, Clinia, Demea, Phcedria, proferentes. Nimirum
auribus vidgi ista dabantur. Nee tamen deerant etiam anti-
qua ilia memoria (pace Quintiliani dixerim), qui ad Graeco-
rum exemplum instituerent loqui : quantum ex eorum reli-
quiis conjectura consequi possum. Apud Gellium lib. iii.
c. 7* verba sunt Catonis Censoris, qui ea tempestate in rep.
floruit, qua Plautus in scena : Leonidas Lacedcemonius lauda-
tur : Plauto tamen in Asinaria servus dicitur Leonida. Clau-
dius Quadrigarius apud Gellium 1. iii. c. 8. Ad nos venit Nicias
familiaris tuus. Lucilius apud Donatum :J
Ante fores autem et triclini limina quidam
Perditu^ Tiresia tussi grandcBvu' gemebat.
Ubi legendum est Tiresias : nisi si syllabam natura brevem
propter caesuram produci existimas. Priscianus lib. vi.^
Hie Calchas Calchantis, quamvis hie Calehas hujus CalchxB,
antiquissimi declinabant. Sed in his locis fortasse fides
exemplarium suspecta esse possit : in illo Plinii lib. xxxv.
cap. 10.1 nullus datur suspicioni locus. Decet non sileri et
[*> ed. Putsch.— D.] [i Confer nostrum in Addendis.— D.]
]} Ad Ter. Eun. ii. 3, 44.— D.] [" p. 702. ed. Putsch.— D.]
[' t. ii. p. 702. ed. Hard. 1723.-~D.]
344 EPISTOLA AD
Ardeatis templi pictorem, prcesertim civitate donatum ibi, et
carmine, quod est in ipsa pictura his versibus :
Dignis digna loca picturis condecoravit
Regin(B Junoni' Supremi conjugi templum
Marcus Ludius Elotas jEtolia oriundus,
Quern nunc et post semper oh artem hanc Ardea laudat.
Ea^ sunt scripta antiquis Uteris Laiinis. Elotas est El\(oTa<;,
elXcoTTj';. Gruterus"^ epigramma hoc profert^ tanquam a Bois-
sardo visum in liortis Julii III. Pontif. Romani ;
DIGNE DOCTILOQVEIS PICTVREIS,
et quae sequuntur. Sine dubio falsarius aliquis in lapide
inscribendum curaverat, a Plinio id mutuatus. Profecto
male operam lusit in versu primo corrigendo. Editio Veneta
anni mcccclxxxiii. liabet Dignis digna loco. Lego igitur :
Dignis dignu* loco picturis condecoravit,
Lucilius :^
Samnis, spurcus homo, vita ilia dignu' locoque.
Dignus loco est twv fiiacov et in bonam vel malam partem
capi potest. Nihil verius hac emendatione. In eadem est
editione JStolia orundus, longe quidem melius, quam quod
in indice Scaligeri est, ^tola oriundus, Lucretius lib. ii.°
Denique coelesti sumus omnes semine orundi.
Sive mavis cum vulgatis libris, oriundi ; certe trisyllabon sit
necesse est. Sic igitur vetustis illis mos erat, ut interdum
quidem in AS, frequentius in A Graeca nomina vellent exire.
Postea vero, ut ait Quintilianus,P recentiores instituerunt Gree-
ds nominibus Grcecas declinationes potius dare, Proinde hoc
institutum tenuerunt Lucretius,^
Id quod Anaxagoras sibi sumit :
[} vulgo « Eaque."— D.] [™ t. ii. p. 1065. ed. 1707.— D.]
[" Apud Non. Mar. (cap. iv.) in v. spur cum. — D.]
[o V, 990.— D.] [1^ t. i. p. 130. ed. Spald.— D.] ["J i. 876.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 345
Varro De R. R., antiqui tamen iit qui maxime amator ser-
monis^ Archytas, Hegesias, Athenagoras, Mnaseas : et apud
NoniumP in Scaturex, Ismenias Thebogenes fluit scaturex ;
lege Thebagenes, 07)^ayevrj<;. Et similiter Cicero^ apud quem
vulgo occurrunt Archias, Gorgias, Phidias, Cineas, Prusias,
Arcesilas, Charmadas, Critias, Diagoras, Hippias, Lysias,
et siqua similia. Nam de Hermagora Ciceronis^ vereor ne
vitioso codice usus sit Quintilianus. Profecto enim omnes
omnino, qui nunc supersunt MSS. constanter habent Herma-
goras. Sed melius est ex ipsis locis experimentum judieii
capere, libro prinio De Inventione ; Hujus constitutionis Her-
magoras inventor esse existimatur :^ et ibidem ; Quod si mag-
num in his Hermagoras habuisset facultatemJ Repone hie
paulisper Hermagora inventor, et Hermagora habuisset ; non
sentis vocalium concursum vaste hiantem ? Ego vero Cice-
ronem ita scripsisse ne ipsi quidem Ciceroni affirmanti cre-
diderim. Quid dicam de scrip toribus sevi Augustaei ? quid
de insequentium setatum ? nempe eadem turn consuetude
invaluit^ ut in As caderent Graeca nomina. Spero mihi
fidem apud te esse ', ne necesse habeam infinita hie exempla
enumerare. Quod tamen cum exceptione dictum velim ; ut^
quanquam eniditi homines eum, quem dixi, morem serva-
verunt^ nomina tamen servorum^ aut quicunque, ut principio
dixi, in Latina civitate vixere, vulgaris usus^ penes quem jus
est loquendi^ plerumque immutaverit ad Latinam consuetu-
dinem. Inde est apud Ciceronem^ Phania Appii libertus.
Frustra enim grsecissaret dominus ', cum ab omnibus conser-
vis et notis sine s litera Phania is vocabatur. Sed a Plinio
memoratur Phanias physicus : nempe is in Graecia vitam
egerat^ nullum habuerat Romse dominum aut patronum.
Inde illud Horatii_, Credat Judceus Apella,^ id est^ quivis
Judaeus; ut locum explanem parum hac memoria intel-
lectum. Judaei habitabant trans Tiberim^ et multo maxi-
mam partem erant libertini, ut fatetur Philo in Legatione
ad Caium. Apella autem libertinorum est nomen, satis
[p cap. ii., ubi " Is. hie Th." &C.--D.] [i cap. xi.— D.]
[' cap. vi.— D.] [» Serm. i. 5. 100.— D.]
VOL. II. 2 Y
346 EPISTOLA AD
frequens in inscriptionibus vetustis. Cic. Ep, 25. lib. vii.
Ne Apellce quidem liberto tuo dixeris. Ttaque Credat Judmis
Apella^ quasi tu dicas, Credat superstitiosus aliquis Judseiis
Transtiberinus. Inde illud alterum, Obeundus Marsya ;* quo
modo etiam loquuntur Ovidius, Silius, Lucanus. Marsya
scilicet in Foro collocatus et donatus quasi civitate Romana
non potuit non in ore vulgi quotidie versari; et prseterea
eo nomine fuerunt servi Phryges, In veteri marmore,
M. HELVIVS M. L. MARSYA. Vulgi autem auctori-
tatem libenter hie secuti sunt poetae ; cum secundum Grae-
cam pronunciationem Marsyas in hexametro non staret.
Sic Cassius Chcerea tribunus plebis^ notissimus ob Caii
Caesaris csedem : alter apud Plinium statuarius, qui nun-
quam credo Italiam viderat; et apud Varronem tertius
Atheniensis, qui de Re Rustica scripsit, Chcereas, Ita Per-
sius (priusquam Cornutus stoicus versum immutaverat metu
Neronis), Auriculas asini Mida rex habet ;^ et ad id exem-
plum Justinus : nuUam aliam ob causam, prseterquam quod
id nomen frequenter mancipiis est inditum, praesertim ex
Phrygia emptis. Terentius Phormione :^ Puer ad me occurrit
Mida, Vetus lapis apud Sponium p. 289. MIDA CVBI-
CVLARIVS. Nequeo tamen conjectura augurari, cur qui
Nepoti Perdiccas, Curtio et Justino et quibusdam aliis Per-
dicca nominetur. Siquidem apud utrumque caetera omnia
Graeco more proferuntur^ Amyntas, Bagoas, Philotas, Ophel-
ias, lollas, Gobryas, Alcetas frater Perdiccae. NuUos memini
Perdiccas inter Italorum servos aut libertos : neque quic-
quam aliud causae invenire possum. Nam cognomenta liber-
tinorum (ea ipsis nomina fuerunt, priusquam manu mitte-
rentur), si Graece in A<; caderent, Latinam terminationem
plerumque ceperunt. Non tamen usquequaque increbuisse
eam consuetudinem ex antiquis inscriptionibus animadverti.
Nam ecce tibi haec nomina ex Grutero, Reinesio, Sponio.
^A')(^bWa<i, M. Cornelius Achillas. L. Pontius Achilas,"^ % ^A-
[t Serm. i. 6. 120.— D.] [« Sat. i. 121.— D.]
[' V. 6. 22., ubi " accurrit:'—D.'\
['^ Ed. Cant. Epist. ad Mill. " Achillas:" sed vide Grut. Inscr. p. 851. ed.
1707.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 347
Xefa?, viroKopvariKov ab ^AXe^avhpoq. Q. Hortensius Q. L.
Alexa. Suavetiius Alexa, % 'AvSpea<i. C. Quinctius Andrea.
% '^TreXXa? {^A'7roXXa<; apud Athenaeum) ab ^ATroWoBcopo^,
T, Claudius Apella. % ' ApiroKpa^ ab 'Ap7roKpdTr)<i vel 'Ap-
TroKparteov, M. Lollius Arphocras.^ C. Herennius Harpocra.
^ 'Apre/jid^ ab ^ApT6fjLLSa)po<;, C. Ccecilius Artemas. Cecilius
Dexter et Artimas fratres, ^. FL Artema, L. Laberius Arte-
mas, ^ ^A6'rjvay6pa<;. Vireius Athenagoras. ^ KXeoTra^i in
N, Test., vel fortasse KXeo'rra'^, a KXe6iraTpo<; vel K\e6(j)iXo<;.
Ti. Cleuphas. ^ KkeLvia^; vel KXivla^. Juli. Clinias. Q.
Pomp. Clinias. % KTTjala^. M. Aur, Ctesias. % Sic Dama
apud Persium, si Graecum est^ a Aafia^ vel Arjfiag, quod est
diminutivum a A7)firjTpto<s. Mettius Damas. % 'Eiracjypd^ ab
^E7ra(j>p68LTO(;. G. Avillius Epaphra. M. Cornelius Epaphra.
C. Curtius Epaphra. C. Julius Epaphra. P. Nonius Epaphra,
C. Pridlius Epaphra. S, Proper tius Epaphra, C, Veiacus
C. L, Epaphra. Et e diverso, Epaphras postremum prastitit
qfficium, % FXavKia^, Glaucias Lib, % Top^yia^, Gorgias
Lib, L. Abuccius Gorgia, Spon. 288. % 'Hpd<; ab 'HpoSco-
po9. L. Abuccius Hera. M. Petronius Heras, P. Sulpicius
Hera. P, Valerius Hera, % 'HpaK\d<s ab 'HpaK\€6B(opo<;
Clem. Stromal, v. L. jEmilius Heracla. C, Annius Heracla,
C, Camelius Heracla. L, Clodius Heracla. L. Cornificius
Heracla. Q. Cornelius Heracla. L. Creperius Heracla. L.
Licinius Heracla. F. Longinus Heracla. C, Stiminius Hera-
cla. Q. Petinius Q. L. Heraclas. ^T 'Epfid^ ab 'Epp,6B(opo^,
Herma accommodator, L, jEmilius Hermas. P. Annius Herma,
C. Cassius Herma. Cornelius Hernia (vitiose pro Herma).
M, Junius Hernia (lege Herma) . Q. Lollius Herma. M. Mag.
Herma. Octavius Herma. C. Quinctius Herma, P. Statins
Herma. P, Tur annius Herma. Q. Vibius Herma, M, Ulpius
Aug, Lib, Herma, % 'EpfMay6pa<;, L. Mmcius L. F. Herma-
goras. % 'EpfMela^i. Aurelius Hermias Aug. Lib, T, Didius
Hermias, M, Helvius Hermias, C, Julius Hermia. Sex. Pom-
peius Sex. Hermia. Spon. 221. lege Sex, L, Her, ^ Aeovrd^
[^ Ed. Cant. Ejnst. ad Mill. ** Arpocras," et mox "Cleophas:" sed vide
Grut. Inscr. p. 801. et p. 64-0, ed. 1707.— D.]
348 EPISTOLA AD
fortasse viroKopto-TiKov a A€6vTto<;. L. Arcius Leontas. C.
Julius Leontas. M. Herennius M, L. Leonta. H J-ewva?.
Artemidorus^ p. 249. A^wva^ 6 ^vpo<i 6 TraKaiarr}^, Fabius
Leonas. C. Oppius C. L. Leonas, % Mt^vcl^ a MrjvoBcopo^;.
D, Lallius Mena. ^ Mr)rpd<; a MyrpoBcopof;, C. Fyrmius
Met7'as. % NtKLa<;. M. Annius Nicia, Cluvius A, L. Nicia.
A. Plauiius Nicia, ^ NLK'}]Ta<;. Aur. Niceta. ^ 'Ovrjo-d^;
ab ^Ovriai(j)opo^. Q. Virius Onesas, % JJaTrlaf;. C. Marcius
C. F. Papia. Munatius Papa (an depravatum loco Papia, an
a Udiras;). M. Plutius M, L. Papia. C. Purellius Papia.
L. Valerius Papia. ^ ^tXcora?. A. Annius Philotas. % ^i\dq
a ^iX68r]/jLO(;. M. Hirrius Phila. ^ ^i\ea<^. L. Magius Phi-
leas. ^ ^avia^. Phania apud Terentium et Ciceronem.
FL Phaneas. M. Tillius M. L. Phanias. % Qevhd^ vel
Qeohd^i a Seohwpo^. A. Fasonius Tfmda, Q. Veionius Teuda.
^ Qecovd^i Alexandriae Episcopiis, Theonas apud S. Hieron.
Livius Theona Aug. L., et Livius Theona ab Epistulis Grcec.
% Zdfiha^ Hierosol. Episcopus^ Zabdas S. Hieron. et Zabdce,
in monumento L. Valerii Savfeius Sabda. % Z7]vd<i a
Z7)v68(opo(;. L, Calpurnius Zena. Eninivero jam percontari
COS velim, qui sine S litera Malela pronunciant, quo auctore
didicerint Joannem hunc Antiochensem captivum in Italiam
abductum servitutem ibi serviisse ; tandem autem, postea
quam libertatem receperat^ ad historian! scribendam se con-
tulisse ? Sin autem ; cur obsecro^ cum Evandri matre et
cascis illis allium obolentibus^ aut cum faece Romuli loqui
malunt; quam cum Cicerone^ et bonis auctoribus Latini-
tatis ? Mihi quidem non longa deliberatio est^ utros imitari
velim. Sed haec nimium fortasse studiose atque anxie : nisi
quod omnino respondendum fuit iis, a quibus sum provo-
catus. Siquidem Gerardus Vossius, qui nescio an ab inter-
prete Damasceni in errorem ipse inductus sit^ certe aliis
exemplo suo et auctoritate viam ad errationem munivit^ non
certo judicio, sed inconsiderate prssterque morem videtur
egisse. Quippe qui nunquam alias abjecerit S : ne tum
quidem cum auctores haberet^ quos etsi perverse^ saltem
aliquatenus imitaretur. Apud quem Cheer eas vocatur histo-
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 349
riciis et Clinias, Marsyas Macedonicarum rerum scriptor et
Delphicarum Apellas : iiec tamen Chcsrea et Clinia in comoe-
dia, neque Horatii Marsya et Apella tenacissimam ejus
memoriam fugere potuerunt.
Tantum quod heec scripseram, Milli jucundissime^ cum
ecce milli nova res atque improvisa nunciatur, quae de sen-
tentise me meae statu propemodum dejecit. Enimvero, quod
in superiore causa probanda tantopere desudarem, nihil fuisse ;
meque in ea disceptatione prorsus ao-Koira Tero^evKivav.y
Nam apud Constantinum et Damascenum rov MaXeXa posse
nomen indeclinabile esse: neque abhorrere ab usu Grcecorum,
ut nomina barbara sine variatione casuum proferantur^ rod
^Afi/jLovv, Tov ^Avoif^, Toy ^AaKOVfi, rov BXap^, rov ''A'\jrKa\,
£fc. sexcenta dari masculina in A, ut 6 Hcadpa, 6 HaXa, 6
^ova, 6 ^i^d in Vet. Test,, 6 Zapa, 6 ''AjBia in Novo : Syro-
rum nationem (Syrum autem esse hunc Malelam) amare no-
mina in A literam exeuntia, Maruta, Barsoma, et pleraque
omiiia: sic et Arabas quoque Abdalla, Mashalla, Taphala^
et siqua sunt alia : occurrere denique apud Cantacuzenum
^Iwdvvrj^ nepaXra, et apud Theophanem ^laydvvr)^ 6 iiriKkriv
'HfMovXa, Joannes cognomento Hemula, secundum Victorem
Tununensem. Ego vero^ quanquam fortasse praestabilius
esset, ut ex amicorum consilio supersederem labore respon-
dendi^ libera esse judicia sinerem : constitui tamen devorare
eam molestiam; et eo quidem animo, nullum ut certamen
instituam, neque enim temperato calamo res agetur; sed ut
semel defungar^ nee tacendo committam, ut odiosae mihi de
lana caprina lites succrescant in posterum. Dico itaque
neque esse illud, de quo viri docti asseverant^ neque posse.
Nam ecce tibi Joannes Tzetzes, qui cum IdyviKcorepco^; ttw?
protulerit MeXeXrjq, certe secundum me judicasse videatur.
Crebro enim eae syllabae permutantur inter se, AecovlSaq
AeayvlSrjf;, 'Epfxa^i 'Epfi7]<^y '^TreXXa? ^A7r6Wrj<;, MaXeka<;
MaKe\7)<i. Eodem accedit^ quod in syllaba secunda statuitur
accentus^ rov MakiXa tanquam ab 6 Ma\e\a<;, non MdXeXa
neque MaXekd, ut plerumque assolet in vocabulis peregrinis.
\J Lucian. Tojcar.-^Opp. t ii. p. 5G6. ed. Hemst. — D.]
350 EPISTOLA AD
Verum illud in primis est admiratione digiium, quod ut de
Graeco nomine cognitio habeatur, iir aXkoOpoov^ dvdp(0'7rov<i
et ad barbaras nationes provocant. Siquidem ex Hunnorum
gente sunt ^Actkovjh et BXa^, de quibus vide ipsum Malelam
p. 159 et 170. Verum age, quandoquidem sic agi placet^
cedo quos volent arbitros. Stabimus etiam Hunnorum judicio :
neque homines plebeii, sed reges et regibus proximi pronun-
ciabunt. Verba sunt Malelae p. 59. Kal ijveyKev [avrov] afjua
avrS Kara ^ArrtXa, Maxime regum, bona tua venia libenter
rogaverim, qui Grsece vocaris casu recto. Cur autem occu-
pato molesti sumus ? Respondebit pro eo Malelas ibidem :
'fl(TavT(o<i he Kal jirrtXaf; ireXevTrjae. Sic omnes uno ore.
Apud Priscum Thracem in Collectaneis Constantini Porphy-
rogeniti: corrigendus obiter Suidas, qui Up icr/co 9 aitlTavtTT;?
. . . eypayjrev laTOplav Bv^avTiKrjv Kal Kara ^ArraXov lege
haud cunctanter, Bv^avriaKrjv Kal Kara ^ArTrjKav vel ^ArTrfKa'
apud Priscum, inquam, aliquoties legas ^ArryXa^ Kal BX^Sa?,
Is Attilae frater erat, a Jornande Bleta dictus, a Prospero
depravate Bleba, a Theophane BBe\a<;* ^ATTL\d<;, inquit,^
^O/jlvovBlov 7rat9 . . . airo/SaXcov BSiXav tov Trpecr/SvTepov dSeX-
(j)6v, Verbum illud dividuum facito, et scribe 6 MvovBlov
iraU, vel fortasse MovvB^lov, Jornandes enim Mundzuccum
nominat, et Sigebertus Mundzuch, perperam vero Nice-
phorus Callistus Novpbihiov. Quid Attilae patruus, 'Pova ne
declinabile an 'Pova<; ? De hoc statuet idem ille Priscus,
cujus verba sunt,^ 'Pova ^aaiXevovro^ rwv Ovvvcov et Trapd
TOV 'Povav d^LKvecaOat. Ita BaXa? dux Hunnoi*um apud
Procopium, Vandalorum ^ AfifidTa<i, Gotthorum Tplinra'; et
Beaaaf;, et M6ppa<^ et MapKLa<;, et ^AX^l\a<; et OvaBpi\a<i.
Eant nunc et ab Hunnis malum sibi mendicent. Apud
Malelam reperio p. 210. T^trra arpaTrfKarov 'PayfiaLcov et
202. Kara ^ouviKa Kal ^Ififia' et 111. /juerd tov r)VL6')(ov
KaXkioira' et 165. /^era tov (^vXap^ov \4peOa' plane ut
apud Constantinum est tov eiriKXriv MaXeXa. Placetne
jam, ut Joannem ipsum nobis arbitrum capiamus ? sequa,
opinor, et honesta postulatio est. Sententiam vero is suam
[« p. 88. ed. 1655.— D.] [» Excerp, Be Legal, p. 47. ed. 1648.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. . 351
ostendit p. 204. octtc^ TftTTa?* 203. XovvUa^ Se koL ^Ififiar
110. KaXkLOTTa^ tl^ r]vlo')(p<;* 166. ^ApeOa^; TC<i 6 <^vXap')(p<i
KOL rvov(f)a<;. Et adhuc dubitent^ si possunt, utnimne qui
haec scripserit, ullo modo est ut 6 MaXeXa vocatus fiierit.
Jam ^ca-dpa et ^ova quam inviti et recusantes in argu-
mentum ducuntur ! Recte quidem factum a lxxii. viris,
quod cum vetusta ilia et Ogygia nomina Uteris Grsecis man-
darent, ad syllabam de sermone barbaro expresserunt. Nam
qui amiis ante permultis excesserant e vita, nulla, credo, iis
futura erat consuetudo cum Graecis. Quod si alii juniores,
quibus eadem quae veteribus illis nomina, usum et commer-
cium cum Grsecis habuerunt, sine dubio eorum nomina
declinata sunt ad normam Graeci sermonis. Sic Paralip. i.
cap. 8. est quidam ^Avavia, et cap. 12. Bepx^ct, vel, ut in
MS° Regio est, Bapa^^a, Eadem occurrunt nomina in
Test. Novo; (Syrus enim interpres et hie et illic ]i1Ui,
1'^!*^. Hhananio, Brachio ;) cum Grseca tamen termina-
tione, ^AvavLa<;, Bapa')(^La<;. Similiter antiqui illi Ta/ca>y5,
^Icoarjcj), SaoifX perpetuo nominantur: juniores vero, qui
cum Grsecis rem habuerunt, ^IdKco^o<;, ^Icoo-tjtto^, ^av\o^.
Quo exemplo etiam ^ta-dpa^ et ^d\a<; et ^ova<; essent dicti ;
si Antiochise vixissent vel in alia quavis civitate Grseca, et
memoriam rerum gestarum Uteris consignassent. Neque
vero inficior Syrorum atque Arabum nomina frequenter in
A litera termmari : servatam esse a Graecis eam terminatio-
nem pernego. Abdalla, Masalla, Taphala. Ita quidem Ara-
bes. Quomodo autem Graeci? Theophanes p. 294. Mov-
afieB 6 Tov ^A^SeXd. Peril equidem, in A hoc exit, et contra
me facit. Sed nolo eos in Isetitiam frustra conjicere. lUud
enim perincommode intervenit ibidem o ''AfiBeXd<; i;/o9, et
apud Zonaram MaadX/j,a<; 6 twv ^Apd^cov «/9%^709, apud
Malelam Ta(f>apd^ 6 <j)vXapxo^. Eadem mihi de Syriacis
nominibus sententia est. Porphyrins apud Eusebium Scali-
geri :^ JlroXe/iato? ^e dyavaKTrjaa<;, on rep UrjXova-lcp wpo-
ae/3aXev o Ar]fi'^rpio<;, are tcov Kar AtyvTTTOv irpayjudTeov
ix6fi€vo<ff TrefiTrei ^aaiXea Trjs ^Aala^ 'AXi^ayBpov, <»? vlov
[^ p. 227. ed. 1606., ubi . . . . ayopaffrhs dvai vevonheai rod IItoA. — D.]
352
EPISTOLA AD
*A\e^dv8pov, 09 Sia to q)<; dyopacrrb'^ elvat rov IlTo\e/ia[ov
Za^ivd<; iireKk'ijOr] tt/jo? tmv ^vpcov et Josephus : ^AXe^av-
Spov Toy ZejSivdv eTriXeyofMevov. Et eodem nomine Antio-
chensis Episcopus Ze^lvot; Nicephoro^ ZePevvo<; Zebennus
Eusebio et Hieronymo vocatur. Atqui dyopao-To^ emptus
Syriace est p^^l Zbino vel Zbina, Ita Greece dixeris,
^I(i)dvv7)<; 6 ^AvTiO')(^ev<;, 09 3ta to <j)L\o\6ryo<; etvat Ma\eXa9
iTreKXojdr) 7rpb<; t(ov ^vpwv, vel, ut propius Syrorum pronun-
ciationem subsequitur Damascenus ipse Syrus, Ma\d\a<;.
Nam |l\V> Malolo vel Malala est orator, eloquens, loquax.
Non difficile est conjectura assequi, utram ob causam cogno-
mento illo auctus fuerit Joannes, AdXelv dpLo-To<;, dSvvaTcoTa-
T09 Xeyeiv.'^ Ipse Porphyrins a popularibus suis Syris ]*^\V)
Malcho sive Malcha vocabatur : Graece vero non MdX^a,
sed Md\')(o^. Ita '\si\D Cipha saxum Kr)(f)d<;, tsoli Thoma
gemellus ©co/iid^, et siqua sunt alia. Mai. p. 41. 'AvtIo^ov
Tov eTTtKXijv Xov^cova. Mirum ni ex illorum sententia cog-
nomentum Antiochi fuit Chuzona casu recto, ut Malela :
cum ambo sint Antiochenses. Quid ergo sibi volunt ista
p. 65. ^AvTiO')(ov TOV Xov^covay tov eyyovov ^ AvTL6')(pv tov
Xou^a)vo<; ? Quod si usquequaque Syriaca nomina imitari
et exprimere debemus, cur, obsecro, 'Icodvvrjfi dicitur, non
^layavdv MaXdXa ? nam Syris est ^ ■^-<^' Juhhanon, ut lxxii.
viris 'Icoavdv. Sed ecce tibi Cantacuzenus, qui p. 874 [718].
AaTLVO)v TL<i, ait, Icodvv7]<; Tlepd\Ta Trpoaayopevofievo^;. Scias
autem in quantas angustias adducti sunt, cum homines %^e9
Kol TTpcorjv yeyovoTa^i saeculo demum xiv. post Christum
natum inveterata jam barbaria, causae suae patronos adoptant.
Rem sane lepidam et jocosam. Joannes hie Antiochensis
bene Graece McCKeka dici potest, quia Italo cuidam nomen
erat Giovaiini Peralta, Sic enim Cantacuzenus p. 174 [874].
MdXiaTa Be NT^tovdv IlepdXTa 6 tovtcov rjyefjicov. Graecus
iste est sermo hodiernus : ita giostra T^ovo-Tpa, gingiva
T^cvT^ijSa, jecur vT^rjydpcov. Vah ! quam velim progredi-
antur longius, atque una opera probent NT^iovdv MaXeXa
dicendum esse : facinus pol magnum et memorabile fecerint.
[^ Eupolis apud Plutarch, in Alcib. — 0pp. t. ii. p. 21. ed. Reisk. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 353
Illud vero durum, quod apud Theophauem est 'Ia)dvvrj<i 6
€itik\t]v 'HfMovXa. Nee a Victore solum vocatur Hemula,
sed Anastasio etiam, qui Theophanem in Latinum convertit :
a Liberato Diacono Joannes Mela; nisi fortasse depravati
sunt codices. Ex Graecis vero scriptoribus solus Theophanes
et semel duntaxat cognominis ejus mentionem facit : caeteris
simpliciter Joannes vocatur, Nicephoro Patriarcha, Nice-
phoro Callisto ; sicut et Leontio Byzantio, Chronicoque
Orientali. Quo magis adducor, ut vitiosum esse illud ver-
bum existimem ; et istum apicem, qui in libris MSS. termi-
nationem a? signare solet, ab indiligenti librario mutatum
esse vel praetermissum. Praesertim cum cuncta id genus
nomina praeter hoc unum ab ipso Theophane per a? scribi
videam ; ^ApeOa^, '-^rr/Xa?, Maaa\/jLa<;, ^A^ovXdfia<;, Kovt-
^Lva<;, aliaque quamplurima. Itaque hoc in loco, ut mea fert
opinio, facta est Theophani injuria. Nee, quod Anastasius
et Victor Hemula Latine nuncupant, non Hemulas ; magis
id quenquam movere debet, quam quod Attila a Latinis
dicitur, qui Graecis est 'ArrcXaf;. Nam peregrina ejusce-
modi nomina Graeci Latinique neutri ab alteris, sed ab ipsis
barbaris utrique acceperunt. Toto igitur ccelo erravit Pris-
cianus, cum Turia et Bagrada (Africae sunt ista flumina)
declinari putat a Tovp[a<i et BaypdSa<;. A Graecis quidem
*l6^a<;, MiKL-y^a^, et BdpKa<; sunt dicti, qui a Latinis Juba,
Micipsa, Barca. Nee tamen haec quae proxime nominavi,
de Graecia petita sunt ; sed ex Africa recto itinere deportata
sunt in Italiam. Quid enim, cum illi 'AjjuCkKa^;, 'AvvL^a<;
proferunt, hi Hamilcar et Hannibal ; non signi hoc satis est,
unde utraque sunt accersita? Nempe hi masculina nomina
Africana in A libenter retinebant ; Graecorum aures tanquam
absona et inconcinna repudiabant. Sed ut concedam illud
'H/jLov\a a Theophane profectum esse : non ego monachum
aliquem adversus omnium auctoritatem magistrum dicendi
capere velim; sed ilium ipsum ad nationis suae exemplum,
addo etiam suum, componere. Vir multiplici doctrinae copia
praeditus Eustathius Thessalonicensis Episc. accurate dis-
putans de Homericis illis liririfKaTa Urfkevf; et 'Epfzeia^
VOL. II. 2 z
354 EPISTOLA AD
cLKCLKT^ra, See, non ^ladpa et Xaka, non 'H/jLov\a ad partes
vocat ; nam Giovanni Peralta qui potuit, priusquam is nas-
ceretur ? quod contra ex omni memoria duo duntaxat
memorat masculina Grgeca in A, eaque minime a se lecta^
sed Eudaemonis fide Pelusiotse; ejus, opinor, cujus librum
De OrtJiographia Stephanus Byzantius et Suidas et Etymolo-
gici scriptor citant : horuni unum Illyricum esse nomen, ex
epigrammate quodam^*^ Uarr^p K efi ecftvcre Koiraiva, tjtol
KoiralvT]^' Syracusanum alterum ex Sophrone, o MvpiXka'
Democopum videlicet architectum, cum theatrum exaedifi-
casset Syracusis, populo viritim unguentum distribuisse^ et
ex ea re cognomento vocatum esse Myrillam : nempe aTro
Tov fjbupov MvptWav. Ego vero Eudsemonem ilium jubeo
KpofjL/iiv ia-Qieiv, ut hominem infortunio mactem : siquidem
religio erat Pelusiotis cepas gustare. Nam profecto de Syra-
cusiorum dialecto eras credo^ hodie nihil. Theocritus Syra-
cusanus, qui idiomate vernaculo perpetuo est usus {Movaav
S' oOveirjv ovttot i<f>eCkKV(7dfirjv) ,^ annon ^ literam ubique
servat, AajioiTa^, Mev6XKa<;, ^AfivvTa^;, AioKkelha^} Non
Apollo Aaipviraf; Syracusis colebatur? Non Hicetas Syra-
cusius philosophus a Cicerone laudatur in Academicis ? non
eorum sermone ^a^d>ya<; Iwnbricus apud Etymologicon ? non
dissimulo apud Hesychium scriptum esse Ta^dra, aKQ)X7)^'
sed vero duplici errore. Nam excidit ^ litera, ut usu
venire solet^ cum proxime subsequatur altera: T autem
facillime mutatur in F, ut alibi Srevvrpov, eypvirwhecrre-
pov, avpt<yyo)S€<;' pro ^revvypbv, evpL7rcoB6<;, arevov, avpuy-
ycbBe<;. Ne ipse quidem Sophron aliter locutus est. Athe-
nseus lib. vii.^ Kal irapd ^Q)(j)povL 6 6vvvodr}pa<^' et Kap')(a-
pia<i aliquanto inferius p. 306.^ ^cocppcov, Ovyvodrjpaia Be
yacrrrjp Kap')(jcipia<^ 6 KdTivo<; Brjade. Priora verba^ quae
Casaubono molestiam creabant^ sic lege : ^axppwv Qvvvo-
[* Eustath. ad Odyss. p. 1457. ed. Rom. — D.]
[« Epig. xxii. — D.] [/ c. Ixvi. t. iii. p. 108. ed. Schw.— D.]
[s c. Ixxvi. t. iii. p. 121. ed. Schw., ubi 2ft>(^., &vvvo6ripa' 'A 5e yacrr. v/jl^cdv
Kapx- ^Ko. Tivhs Sriade. — De hoc loco vide Schw. Animadv. in Ath. t. iv. p. 278.
et t. viii. p. 450. ; Porson. Advers. p. 98, ; Blomfield. in Mus. Crit. t. ii. p. 344. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 355
6t]pai' 'A 8e yaa-TTjp — id est, Qvvyo6rjp-a. Nimirum iste
liber QvvvoOrjpa^ inscriptus est. Etymol. in "Hla. "D.^ <f>r}(TL
Sci)(f>pcov ev Qvvvodripa. Male alibi eV Qvvvodrjpat<;, Quod
si venim est illud de Democopo, vulgi joco cognomen suum
adeptus esse videatur : quia fortassis ea tempestate Syracusis
scorto cuipiam non ignobili nomen fuerit Myrilla. Nam
mulieris id quidem nomen esse proprium certiores nos facit
poeta nescio quis inter Lyricos H. Stephani. ^r/jaro/cXet?
(f>L\o(; Kvdi^pT)^, ^TpaTOKketf; ^tXo? MvplW7j<;, "IBe rrjv
(j)L\r)v 'yvvoLKay Ko/Maec, redrjXe, XdfJbireL. 'PoBoy avdewv
avdaraec, 'PoSov iv Kopac^ MvplXka.^ Quod ad Koirauva
attinet, etsi non facile fidem habeam, viderit de eo verbo
epigrammatis auctor, qui fortasse, cum barbarum lUyrium
^ap/BapL^ovra induxerit, bene moratum carmen fecisse vi-
deatur. Quod siquis Illyriorum exemplo 'Icodvvrjf; 6 MaXeka
proferre velit; id quidem perinde est, tanquam si 6 Kdro
dicens et 6 KUepo, se egregie loqui Graece contendat; quia
apud Aristophanem Caris^ cantilena est, QperraveXb rov
KvK\(07ra'i et Scythse istius Attica elegantia :
/29 i\a7rpo<;, wairep '\jrvWo Kara to kcoSlo'
et
12 ypdBL% CO? KapievTO aoi to TvydTpLO,
Kov BvaKo\\ dWd irpao' ttov to ypaSco ^^
Sed nimium diu, mi Milli, in litigiosa hac disputatione
te demoratus sum. Dabis autem veniam necessitati; nam
postea, per me licet, alii ut volent loquentur, non equidem
in video, neque intercedo. Imo enimvero invitissimus haec
scripsi,
f2<i ov'^ v7rdp'^(ov, dWd TLfjLcopovfj,evo<;.^
[•» Anacr. Od. Ixii. p. 229. ed. Fisch., ubi in v. 2. &vep pro <pi\os. — D.]
[' scil. Carionis. — Kol rh Kapluv i^e\Xrivi(6iJ.€Vov rhv ZovXov SyjKoi- Kapes
yiip 01 Sov\oi. Pluti Argum. — D.]
[J Plut. 290. ed. Bekk.— D.]
[^ Thesm. 1180. et 1210, 1211. ed. Bekk.— D.]
\} Apud Suidam (in 'Cis oi/x vk.) Chseremonis, apud Zenobium (vi. 51)
Menandri, apud Athenaeum (lib. xiii. t v. p. 219. ed. Schw., ubi ToS" ovx vtt-)
Aristarchi tragici hie versus esse perhibetur. — D.]
356 EPISTOLA AD
ADDENDA.
EccE iterum Crispinus. Cum enim adhuc supersit chartae
aliquantuliim^ ut narrat typographus; niminim ei parcere
stulta, lit ait ille^ foret dementia. Percurram igitur Epis-
tolam totam, adnotaturus identidem, siqua vel retractari
diligentius vel corrigi debeant.
Principio^ bene quidem factmii quod (pag. 246) de ety-
mologia rod ^HpiKeiraiov supersedi inquirere. Quamvis enim
^HpL in Graecorum verborum compositione non infrequens
sitj ^HpLTroXrjy rjpLyiveia, rjpi'yepwv, rjpLdaXe^;, nihilo tamen
minus peregrinam esse vocem mihi videor certo comperisse.
Siquidem Keir syllaba, quod jure mireris^ plane aliena est
atque absona a consuetudine cum Graeci tum Latini ser-
monis. ^Keir quidem in aKeirco, irepiaKeTrrj^;, crKeirapvov,
&c., Keir autem nusquam occurrit^ quod sciam, praeterquam
in Ki7r(f)o<;. Eam ego vocem^ cum solitaria sit atque unica,
vix dubito, quin olim pronunciaverint Keffos, non Kepfos:
prout hodie ^aTrcpco Saffo dicimus, non Sapfo. Apud Lati-
nos autem kctt syllabam brevem frustra quaesiveris. Con-
ception perception et similia, /ct/tt habent productam a per-
c^pi, concepi. Anceps, auceps, princeps, Ke-^fr in scriptura
exhibent, non kctt : neque vero casibus obliquis faciunt
aucepis aut princepis.
Ep. p. 255. Ut egomet vineta mea caedam^ falso credidi
tres istas Sophoclis fabulas ex una tetralogia fuisse, continua-
tione serieque historiae in eam opinionem adductus. ^AX>J
ov ireawv y eKelfjiTjv.^ Culpa enim postridie deprehensa
etiam amoveri facile potuit, si per typothetam licuisset.
^AWa TO fiev TTporeTifxpai idao/Jb€v, a%vuyLtevot Trep.^ Cer-
tum est eas tragoedias longo interjecto intervallo fuisse editas.
Antigonen ita placuisse ferunt, ut ea gratia praetura Sopliocli
[* 'AAA' ouS' eycb /xeVroi inffuv ye Keiffofxai. Aristoph. Ntcb. 127. ed, Bekk.
['' Horn. //. xviii. 112., ubi 'A\Ao ra fte*', k.t.K. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 357
decemeretur in bello adversus Samios. Ergo acta esse vide-
tiir anno iii. Olymp. lxxxiv. aetatis Soph, lvi.^ secundum
Marmor Arundel. (Edipus vero Tyrannus secundas tantum
obtinuit, et victus est a Philocle : quin et (Edipum Coloneum,
quern extrema senectute fecit omnium novissimam, editionis
tempore antecessit. Argumentum (Ed. Tyr. Elal Se koI oi
npOTepov avTov, ov Tvpavvov, i7rt,ypd(l)0VT€<;, Bca tov<; XP^~
vov<i Tcbv StBacTKaXccav, kol Sea tol TrpdyfiaTa, Ita scribendus
est iste locus, quem minus intellexit magnus Camerarius.
Sunt qui banc fabulam (Edipum Priorem inscribunt, non
(Ed. Tyrannum; quia prior erat cum tempore actionis, tum
serie rerum gestarum. Ea hujus loci sententia est.
Ep. p. 258. vers. 8. Auget vehementer suspicionem nos-
tram ipse Clemens in Protreptico ; qui posteaquam versus
eos tanquam Sophocleos protulit, Ouroal fiev, ait,<^ ijSrj koI
7rapaK€KtvSvv€Vfiivo(; iirX t^9 (tktjvPj^; rrjv oXrjOetav toI<; dea-
Tol^ irapeLcnfj^a'yev. Ergo et Clementis judicio in capitis
venisset discrimen, quicunque eos olim in scenam detulisset.
li alibi citantur hoc exemplo 'A
Svqrol 3e irovKvicepheia TrXavcofievoi
^Ihpvcrdfjbecrda Trrj/judrcov 7rapa'\Jrv')(rjv,
Oecov dydXfiar €k XlOcov t€ koI ^vXcov
*Jf ^vaorevKTCov rj ^\e<^avTLV(DV TV7rov<;.
Quamobrem, quia nulkis jam locus est censurae nostrae in
TToWov et ')(a\Ke(jov, alia afferam argumenta oportet, cur
subdititii sint. Multis sane nominibus non placet illud
irovXvKepBela. Nam quid, obsecro, facit ttovXv in tragoediae
'diverbio? est enim ex dialecto lonica. Neque vero Seta
spondaeus in sede quarta ferri potest contra morem consue-
[^ Vide Clintonum, Fasti Hellen. from the lv. to the cxxiv. Olymp. p. 57.
sec. ed. — D.]
[•= p. 63. ed. Pott, ubi . . . . TrapaK(Kiv^vv(vix4vws. — D.J
[** A Justino M., Ad Grac. Cohort, p. 14. ed. 1593., nisi quod pro irovXv-
Ktp^iia. ibi est voKKoX KapSi(f. Vide etiam Justinum, De Mon. p. 81., ed. 1593 ;
Clementem, Cohort, ad Gent. p. 63. et Strom, p. 717. ed. Pott. ; Theodoretum,
Grac. Aff. Cur. p. 109. ed. 1692; Eusebium, Preep. Evang. p. 398., ed. 1544;
Cyrillum Contra Julian, p. 32. ed. 1696. — D.]
358
EPISTOLA AD
tudiiiemque tragicomm. Theocritus : Kal (piXoKephetrj /Se-
^Xafjifjbivov dvBpa irapeKOelv.^ Neque porro TrovKvKephela
de avaritia possis accipere cum interprete Clementis : verum
ea sententia nimium quidem inepta atque inficeta, quasi si
prudentia sive astutia homines in errorem inciderint. TLdXv-
Kepheia enim est TroXv'lBpeta' ut Ulysses Homericus :
OvK ka elirifjuevai, iroKvlhpelrjaL vooioJ
AX)C 6 fjL€v fjv a\o')(ov 7ro\vK€pSeirj(Tcv dvcoye.^
Sed et alia fertur scriptura nihilo melior : GvtjtoI Se ttoWoI
KapBla 7rXavcojjL6V0L. Mihi quidem, salvo aliorum judicio,
nos multi mortales, parum ornate dici videtur pro elegantia
'ATTLKrj<; /j,€XiTTT)<;. Sed utcunque de ea re visum fuerit
eruditis : rogatos eos velim, qui luculenter Graece sciunt,
utrum KapSia irXavwp.evoL domesticus sit sincerusque sermo
Graecus, an potius peregrinus et Trovrjpov K6/jL/jLaT0<; ? Nimi-
rum suo se indicio prodidit Judseus iste sorex. Neque enim
Hellenismus est, verum Hebraismus purus putus ex S. S.
tralatus atque expressus. Psalm, xciv. (et Epist. ad HebrcBos) :
^AeX ifkavcavTai rfj KapBia' koI avrol ovk eyvcoaav Ta<; oBov^i
fiov. Esaias xxi. : 'H KapBla /xov TrXavaTat. Imo enimvero
negamus ista, *H '^(^pvcroTevKTcov rj 'Xe^avrtVwv ruwovi;, ab
homine Grseco nedum a Sophocle proficisci posse. Tvtto^
hoc in loco est ipsa statua, avro to dyaX/nay ovk elSo? rod
ayaXfjLarof;, ut apud Isocratem in fine Evagorce : Tov<; fiev
TVTTOVf; avayKolov nrapa T0VT0i<i ecvac Trap* ol? av aradcbcrL.^
Dicerent vero Grseci 'H '^pvaoT€v/CTov<i rj ^Xe^avrivov^; tv-
TTov^ OewVy non '^^^pvaoreuKTcov* velut elKova^ dicunt ')(a\KOi<;
^OXviiTTLOvLKOiVy uou '^aXKcov, Artcmidorus :^ XdXKeat, yap
€Ik6v€<^ t(ov eKevOepwv avarlOevrac. Ita passim et vulgo,
ut quidem testimoniis uti putidissimum foret. Neque vero
aliter Latini. Lucretius : Si non aurea sunt juvenum Simula-
era per tedes, non aureorumJ Plinius xxxiv. 7'' Lignea
[e Idyl. xvi. 63.— D.]
[f Od. xxiii. 77.— D.] [k Od. xxiv. 166., ubi Kvrap b V S\ox.— D.]
[^ Or. Att. t. ii. p. 275. ed. Bekk., ubi .... ^hai ix6vois -nap. — D.]
[> Oneiroc. lib. i. c. 50. p. 73. ed. ReifF., ubi Xd\K€oi, k. t. \. — D.]
[J ii. 24.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 359
potius aut fictilia deorum simulacra. Juvenalis : Effigies
sacri nitet aurea cercopitheci.^ Horatius : Quid referam, quo
pacto in imagine cerea Largior arserit ignis} Itaque tuttou?
eX€(l>avTLV(ov decov nihil minus est quam Graeca oratio : ea
tamen utitur Sibylla lib. iii. ^vXlvcov deoov etBayXa dicens pro
^vXcva'
OiTLve^ ovK aircLTrio-L Kevac<;, ovS* epy^ dvOpcoircov,
Xpvaea fcal ')(^dXK€ia, koI dpyvpov r/S* €Xe(j)avTO<^,^
Kal ^vXlvcov Xtdlvoov re Oecov etScoXa Ka/jLovrcov,
IlTjXcva, fjLLXr6')(^pC(7Ta, ^coypacfiLaf; rvTroeiBel^;,
Tt/MMatVy^ oaa Kev re ^porol Keveocppovt fiovXfj,
Eadem habet Protrepticus Clementis. Quis porro inficia-
bitur in eodem doctos esse ludo subjectorem hunc Oracu-
lorum, et commentitium ilium Hecataeum ? Quod si vicero
de versibus falso Sophocli attributis^ etiam illud evidentis-
sime constabit^ quod olim Philo Herennius et patrum me-
nioria Jos. Scaliger suspicati sunt : nempe librum ilium De
Judms, qui sub Hecatsei nomine ferebatur, a Judaeo quodam
Hellenista fuisse confictum : velut Aristeam ilium pari faci-
nore, quem supposititium esse convincunt post eundem Sca-
ligerum alii bene multi, in quibus omnium doctissime et
copiosissime Humfredus Hodius^^ cui multum olim debebit
Historia Ecclesiastica.
Ep. p. 284. Evrjporarov.) Suidas in Lexico : Evrjporarovy
TO KaXy-jv e^ov yrjv, ro koXXlcttov Trj<^ yrj<^. Evriporov, to KaX(o<i
rjpoTpcoy/jievov. Vides eum utrumque vocabulum agnoscere,
evrjpoTaTov quidem comparativum^ absolutum vero evr/poTov.
Quid igitur fiet ? An supplex ad Hesychium adeam, pacem
ejus oratum et peccati veniam ? Imo enim satis ostendunt
[•' XV. 4. — D.] [' Serm. i. viii. 40. sqq., ubi
'* Singula quid memorem ? quo pacto alterna, &c.
et imagine," &c. D.]
[™ In hoc versu Clementem {Cohort, ad Gent. p. 60. ed. Pott.) secutus est
Bentleius. Vulgo . . . . Kot apyvpi ^5* ihiipavra: vide Sibyll. Orac. p. 264.
ed. Obsop.— D.J
[" Sic Clemens. Vulgo Tifiuvr^s. — D.]
[" In Dissert, contra Historiam Jristea de Lxx. Interpretibus, 1684. — D.]
360 EPISTOLA AD
ea verba et mendi vetustatem, et emendationis niese prse-
stantiam. Quippe^ nisi ego plane desipio^ sic in compara-
tione dicendum esset, Evtjporov, evrjporooTepov, evTjpoTaira-
Tov, Quod si reponere velis EvTjpoTcoTarov apud Suidam,
jam ea vox inverso ordine post Evrjporov collocanda esset.
Ergo quocunque te vertas, hallucinatio Suidse est, qui sine
dubio sua male confinxit ex Hesychianisj vel ex illis unde
sua transtulit Hesychius.
Ibidem. ^Avtlvl, avTiSceviyfieda.) Liquido possis deje-
rare, Hesychium scripsisse avrivt, id enim series literarum
efflagitat ; et illud avrcSc ex correctore natum esse, qui kukm
Kafcov IdcraTo. Scrip tura a prima manu fuit in hunc modura :
^ lAvTLTjvey/jbeda, r/vavrccofieOa. Hesychius autem, qui, ut vide-
tur, non leviter tum lippiebat, sic legit et scripsit: ^Avtlvl-
viy/jueda' vt et t) paulum oppido inter se differunt, et facillima
sane erratio est. Nihil hac conjectura probabilius dici potest.
jivTt7]veyfJL€6a ab dvrt(j)€pofjLac, '^vavrcco/jLeda. Ipse Hesych. :
AvTi^iperac, ivavrLovrat, et !AvTi>(pep6a6a(, . . . evavriovadai'
et Suidas : ^Avn^epovTai, ivavTtovvTat. Sed ^AvTcBtaipi-
pofiai, nusquam lego.
Ep. p. 301. V. 10. ITe7rXof9 re vrjcrai \cyo7r\vve2<i t eirev-
hvra^.) vox ea bifariam accipi potest. Aut vrjaat erit v<f)dvai,'
quemadmodum ireifKoi evvrjroc ab Homero vocantur, "Ev6^
iyl ireirkoi Aeirrol evvrjroL ^e^Xrjaro, ep<ya yvvaLKMV^ qui a
Sophocle 6ui/(/)et9 vocantur in Trachiniis .^ "Oirco^ <f>epet^ jjlol
TovBe y evv(f>7] TriirXov. Aut erit vrjaac, awpevaat, accu-
mulare vestem, in arcis reponere, ut mos erat antiquorum.
Homerus :
'^2? (par' 6 8* v'^^opo^ov OaXa/uiov KarejBr^aaTO irarpo';
EvpVV, 60c V7;T0? ')(^pV(70<i KOl ')(a\KO<i €KeCTO,
^EaOrji; r ev ')(r]XoL(7iVy aXt? r euwSe? kXacovJ
Et alibi :
'EXivT] Se irapia-raTo (fxopLafiolaiv,
""EvO* eaav ol ireirXoi Tra/jLTTOiKLXoi, 01)9 Ka/juev avrr).^
[p Od. vii. 96.— D.] [1 v. 603. ed. Erf., ubi <p€pr)s.—T).]
[^ Od. ii. 337., ubi*ns <^c£i/.— D. [» Od. xv. 104.— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 361
Possis etiam, et magis quidem apposite ad nomen tragcediae
ILkwrpia^, vlyp-at reponere^ Lavato, &c.
JTeTrXof? re vi^frac \cvo7rXvv€L<; r eTrevSvra?.
Epist. p. 320. V. 5. adde : Idem Hesychius : KvBpo<;,
€v8o^o<;f Kol TCL ojJiOLa, yavpiMV, Treiroidoiv * evpurcScf: avy-
KOTTov Se Tov KuBpo<i KaWlaTpaTO^ TreirotOoi)^;. Nunquam
quidquam vidi inquinatius : lege javpiojv, 7re7roi,0ca<;, "Icov
EvpvTLBaL<i. avy/coTTTJ Be tov p kvBo^;. KdkXiaTpaTO<^' ver-
bum enim novissimum TreTrotdax; est emendatio tov ireiroiOoiv.
Vide Ep. pag. 284^ 285, 291. Et Callistratus quidem kvBo^ a
KvBpo^ deducit a-vyKoiry tov p' alii vicissimi KvBpo^; a kvBo<;
derivant eirevdeaec tov p. Etym. Magn. KvBo^, KvBoTepo^,
KvBoTaTO^, .... TrXeovacTfMw Be tov p yiveTao KvBp6<;.
Ep. p. 343. V. 3. adde : Martianus Capella lib. iii. cap.
De Analogia ;* " JEneas, Pythagoras, Lycas faciunt ^nece,
Pythagorae, Lyc(B. Quando nostra ratione nomina, quae
genitivo in E exeunt, nominativo A finiuntur; ut Catilm(e
Catilina. Sed haec Graeca sunt, ideo in nominativo S lite-
ram retinent. Quagdam tamen perdunt S literam in nomina-
tivo, ut Niccea, Medaa. Ergo in his nominativis consuetudo
servanda est." Ubi legendum est Nicia et Demea. Vide Ep.
pag. 348.
Ep. p. 339. V. 26. Sed nusquam alibi tam frequens earum
vocalium inter se permutatio est, quam in 2 Codd. MSS.
longe antiquissimis; Alexandrino uno in Bibliotheca Regia,
qui integra exhibet Biblia et Eplstolas S. dementis ad Corin-
thios ; Cantabrigiensi autem altero, mutilo quidem et decur-
tato; quippe qui Acta duntaxat habeat et Evangelistas ;
verum idem e regione ostentat interpretationem veterem
Latin am ad verbum de Graeco expressam, dignissimam sane
quae ex oblivione atque tenebris tandem aliquando in lucem
edatur. Servantur etiam Oxonii Acta Apostolorum, vetus-
tate quidem pari, sed versione multum diversa ; et in Gallia
denique Epistolce S. Pauli, qui codex et antiquitate et Latina
[' p. 77. ed. Grot., ubi " Tertia [species], ut ^Eneas, Pythagoras, Lycas : nam
facit iEneae," &c.— D.]
VOL. II. 3 A
362 EPISTOLA AD
versione atque adeo scripturse et voluminis forma Canta-
brigiensi nostro siniillimus est et germanissimus. Atque
haec quidem talia exemplaria^ cum aliis omnibus ubivis gen-
tium^ quod sciamus, longe longeque et dignitate et tempore
antecedant, neque quidquam hodie supersit simile aut secun-
dum, cum tineis (pro dolor !) atque muribus luctantur, et utut
lis incendia pepercerint, ipso senio intra annos paucos non
dubie peritura sunt. Tu vero, Milli doctissime, qui omnium
mortalium maxime in eo studio versatus es, non patieris
hanc laudem tibi prseripi ; sed maturabis veneranda ilia
pignora et monumenta vetustatis a situ et interitu vindicare.
Scimus enim te horum omnium editionem instituere, quae
una pagina et in uno conspectu Codicem Alex., qui familiam
ducet, et Cantabrigiensem cum versione sua, atque ubi hie
deficit, Oxoniensem deinceps atque Gallicum reprsesentet :
quae singulas literas atque apices exemplarium, etiam ubi
a librariis peccatum est, accurate et religiose subsequatur.
Nihil illi purpurae assuetur discolor aut diversum; nullae
interpunctiones, nullae notae accentuum, quorum omnis hodie
ratio praepostera est atque perversa : adeo ut qui tuam edi-
tionem sibi comparaverit, ipsa ilia propemodum archetypa
versare manibus atque oculis usurpare videatur. Ea res
olim. ut certum est augurium, et Britanniae nostrae splendori
erit, et Ecclesiae praesidio : tuos vero utique labores amplis-
simis praemiis atque immortali gloria compensabit. Macte
ista pietate et diligentia esto. In te omnes ora atque oculos
convertimus, te unum in hoc curriculum vocamus : ipsi
codices celerem tuam opem implorant et flagitant : quid
cessas per medias laudes et faventium plausus secundo
rumore ingredi ? Tu vero, ut polliceri de te possum, facies
id sedulo ; simulatque exibit Novum tuum Test amentum, jam
fere ad umbilicum usque perductum :^ quo in opere, nisi
vererer coram in os te laudare, dicerem quam longo inter-
vallo aliorum omnium in eo genere labores post te reliqueris.
Ea typorum elegantia est et magnificentia ; ea in anno-
[** Prodiit demum Oxonii, anno 1707. — D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 363
tationibiis eruditio elucet, in variis lectionibus industria :
quippe etenim ad earn copiam comparandam omnia S.
Patrum scripta, omnes antiquas versiones^ et infinitam vim
Codd. MSS. curiose excussisti. Enimvero mihi stomachum
subinde movent imperiti quidam homines et nullo usu bona-
rum literarum praediti^ qui omnem operam, qusR in variis
lectionibus colligendis impenditur, aut inutilem esse existi-
mant^ aut Ecclesiae periculosam. Eorum ego sermones,
quanquam indigni sunt quorum ulla ratio habeatur, uno in
praesentia exemplo retundam : quo perspicuum erit minuta
quaedam et prima utique specie levissima posse magnas diffi-
cultates expedire. Locus est cap. iv. in Ep, ad Galatas, qui
ab ineunte fere Christianismo usque ad banc memoriam
doctissimos viros exercuit. 22. riypaTrrac yap, otl 'AffpaafM
Bvo viov^ eo-'^ev eva ck rrj<; '7ratBL(TK7]<;, koI eva gk t^9 eXeu-
Oipa^. 23. ^AX}C 6 fiev e/c t»)<? TratBlo-fCTjf;, Kara crdpKa
yeyivvrjrar 6 Se ix Trj<; ekevdepa<;, Bca Trj<; eTTayye\la<^.
24. "Arivd eaTLV aXXrjyopovfieva' avrat, yap elaiv at Svo
SiaOrj/cat' jxla fiev aTrb 6pov<; ^ova, eh SovKelav yevvcoaa,
rjTL<; iarlv "Ayap. 25. To yap ^'Ayap Xi'Va 6po<; iarlv iv
rfj ^Apa^la, a'vaTOL')(^el Be rfj vvv 'lepovcraXrj/u,, SovXevei, Be
fMerd tCov reKvcov avTrjf;. 26. 'H Be dv(o 'lepovoraXrj/j,, eXev-
Bepa iarlv, 7]ti<; iarl fjt'tjrrjp iravTcov tj/jUcov. Memini equidem,
Milli^ me non ita pridem a te rogatum, ut de perdifficili hoc
loco judicium meum interponerem, vehementer approbasse
sententiam tuam^ quam in ilia tua editione posuisti : neque
enim eundem montem et Agarem vocatum esse et Sinam,
neque vero ullum usquam gentium eo nomine notatum esse,
neque porro Agarem servam (si de serva malit quispiam,
quam de monte accipere) in eadem allegoria et monti respon-
dere posse, et legi quae ex monte promulgata est : atque his
de causis in diversa consilia itum esse ab antiquis, quorum
alii ^Lvd, sed plures To yap "Ayap, e libris sustulerunt : quae
autem nostra et patrum memoria viri magni commentati
sunt, tantum abesse ut locum faciant explicatiorem, ut novis
etiam obscuritatibus involvant. Qua quidem occasione, ne
omnino dcrvfi^oXo'; essem, conjecturam, ut scis, extempo-
364 EPISTOLA AD
ralem in medium attuli^ quae etiam tum visa est ad veritatem
proxime accedere. Scilicet e regione verbi Xcvd adnotasse
olim quempiam enarrationis causa^ ^Lvd opo^ iarlv iv rfj
^Apaffla, Sina iste, quern memorat Apostolus, mons Arabics
est; ea autem verba non multo post, ut saepe usu venit,
de libri margine in orationem ipsam irrepsisse : nam Apos-
toli quidem ea non esse, sed TrapefjL^e^XTjfMeva, ex ipso
statim vultu et colore totiusque adeo corporis filo cognosci
posse : et proinde me paratum esse o^eXl^ecv hunc locmn,
nisi quid tibi secus videretur. Cum autem tibi valde placere
conjecturam meam prse te ferres : atqui, inquam, ut vera ista
sit sive opinio sive adeo suspicio nostra, necesse est illud Be
quod vocem o-varocx^l proxime subsequitur, pro superva-
caneo auferatur. Dictum ac factum editionem tuam inspi-
cimus, ibique quatuor ad minimum MSS. libros comperimus
conjunctionem istam non agnoscere : quod sane non de
nihilo est, neque ulla commode ratio reddi potest cur ab-
fueritj si verba, de quibus liaec quaestio est, nunquam non
in codicibus extitissent. Tanta res tam tenui'^ indicio pate-
facta satis refellit voculas imperitorum aut malevolorum ho-
minum, qui diligentiam istam minutas scripturae varietates
sectantem, tanquam obscuram et soUicitam et nimiam in
vituperationem adducunt. Quis enim dubitet quin melior
multo et apertior fiat sententia, si auctoritate manuscriptorum
expungatur Si' tum autem 5'tva opo<i io-Ttv iv ry ^ApajBla de
medio discedant ; et totus deinde locus sic legatur : "Arivd
idTLV aXkrjyopov/jLeva* avrai yap elaiv at hvo htadrjKaL' fjula
fi6V CLTTO 6pov<; Xivoi, €t9 BovXeiav yevvcoaa, rjTL<^ io-rlv "Ayap.
To Be *'Ayap (Tvorroi')(^el Ty vvv 'lepovaaXrj/jLf BovXevei yap
fjuera twv reKVcov avrrj^' hoc est, Affar autem respondet
Hierosolymis, serviunt enim cum progenie sua. Tap et Be
locum inter se permutare jussi fide MS. Alexandrini, et
aliorum : quinetiam dedita opera Hierosolyma dixi non leru-
salem; ut ex ipsa dictione foret perspicuum, quorsum illud
BovXeveL pertineret. Ipsa enim flagitat sententia ut 801;-
[* Ed. Oxon. Episf. ad Mill. ** pertenui."— D.]
JOANNEM MILLIUM. 365
\euet referatur ad 'lepova-dkijfi. Quod cum ita sit; cur,
amabo. Apostolus tali usus est constructione verborum, qua
Bov\€V€L cum "Ayap necessario convenire videatur ? aut quam-
obrem to "Ayap genere neutro posuit; quasi vero "Ayap
materialiter ac pro voce, non pro ancilla, hie usurpetur ?
Hactenus opinor prospere mihi conjectura processit, ut
mons iste Arabiae omnibus machinis loco movendus esse
videatur : sed male vero me habent hi scrupuli, neque aliud
habeo quod dicam aut conjectem ; prseterquam ex quo tem-
pore verba ista de margine in orationis textum adscita sunt,
sicuti mox conjunctionem 8e quosdam homines intrusisse,
ita alia nonnulla mutavisse leviter et ad commentitiam eam
sententiam accommodasse. Nam profecto facile animum in-
duco, ut credam hoc modo scripsisse S. Paulum : Tfj Bk
^Ayap (Tva-TOL'^el rj vvv 'lepovaaXy/j,, SovXevec yap fjuera 'Tu>^
reKvcov avTrj<;. 'H Be avco, &c. Agari autem respondet leru-
salem, servit enim cum liberis suis. Qua vero supra est Jeru-
salem, libera est, quae mater est omnium nostrum : postea vero
adulterina ista sese insinuasse hoc exemplo, Tfj Be "Ayap
^Lva 6po<; i<TTlv iv rfj ^Apa^la avaTOt')(^et rj vvv ^lepovaaXrj^.
Cum autem haec oratio, ut cernis, in manifestum soloecis-
mum cadat, simile sane vero est, ne dicam necessarium,
verba ista rfj et -q sic brevi a scribis immutatum iri, quemad-
modum hodie vulgo feruntur. Quis enim non incuset impe-
ritiam notariorum librariorumque incuriam, ut S. Hieronymi^
verbis utar, qui scribunt, non quod inveniunt, sed quod intelli-
gunt ; et dum alienos error es emendare nituntur, ostendunt
suos ? Vale.
[" Epist. ad Luci7iium,~0pp. t. iv. p. ii. p. 578. ed. 1693— 1706.— D.]
INDEX
RERUM MEMORABILIUM, ET SCRIPTORUM
QUI IN
EPTSTOLA RICHARDI BENTLEII
EMENDANTUR.
^scHYLUs emend., 317, 341.
iEschyli Schol. notatus, 340.
At et € eodem sono efferuntur, 287, 339.
Atria Calliiuachi, 334.
AUatius not., 307.
'O T-^v ^ AKKfxaicaviZa ypd^as, 265.
Anapaestorum ratio nunc demum ob-
servata, 274.
Antimachus Colophonius, 251, 323.
Judaeus Apella, 345.
Apollodorus em., 265.
Aristophanes com. em., 268.
Arist. Schol. not., 267, 270, 280 ; em.,
308, 311, 325.
Aristoph. grammat. em., 260.
A2 terminationem ubi servent Latini
in Graecis vertendis, ubi mutent,
342 &c.
Athenaeus em., 251, 309, 311, 314, 319,
326, 330, 354.
Attius poeta trag. em., 275, 276.
Auleas commentitius tragicus pro
iEschylo, 299, 331.
BeSu, C^fJ.\p, x^^t TrXriKTpov, (r(p\y^, 302.
BoTTios, BovTTLos, BujTTios, apucl Male-
lam pro BpovTTios, 334.
Camerarius not., 357.
Casaubonus Is. not., 301, 309, 314,
315, 326, 354.
Keir syllaba neque Graeca neque La-
tina, 356.
Cicero em., 276.
Clemens Alex. em. et explic, 301, 302.
Clodius Neapolitanus, 304.
Kua^0\, x^yTTTjs, (pXeyfid), Sph\p, 302.
Creophylus poeta scripsit Ot'xaAias
ctAwo'd', 321, 322.
Damascius irepl 6.pxfi>v MS. em., 243,
244.
Demarchus apud Mai. pro Dinarcho,
335.
Demetrii com. fabula 5t«6Ata, 290.
Dinarchus poeta, 335, 336.
Dionysius Halic. em., 335, 336.
Domninus chron., 336.
Empedocles em., 340.
Ennius em., 296, 297.
^Eviyovoi Homeri poema, vel Antima-
chi Colophonii, 322, 323.
Epigramma falso inscriptum, 309 ;
em., 334.
'ETTTaeTra/cTtos Homeri poema, 322, 323,
324.
Erasmus not., 267.
Erotianus em., 273.
Etymolog. M. not., 340 ; em., 31?, 325,
355.
Eudaemon Pelusiota not., 354.
Euphorion em., 318.
Euripidis Danae, 259 ; em., 261.
c-
Jntiopa, 261.]
'A\Kfial(au 6 dia WucplSos, 263.
Sllicnehoea em., 267.
Kpwis, 269 ; em., 277.
Hippolytus SieffKevafffievos, 280.
[Meleager, 284.]
Iphigenia in Tauris em., 295.
-in Eurip. tragoediis perperam
ponuntur
Pasiphae, 269.
et Europa, 297.
Euripidis Schol. em., 266.
Eustathius em., 312.
^HpiK^Tvoios deus Orphicus, 243, 356.
Fulgentius Plane, not. et em., 334, 335.
Galenus em., 315, 316, 317, 318.
Gatakerus not., 301.
Grotius not., 259, 267, 271, 274, 327,
328.
Gruteri Inscriptioves not. et em., 344,
346, 347.
Gyraldus not, 305.
368
INDEX RERUM ET SCRIPTORUM IN EPISTOLA.
Hamartolus em., 298.
Harpocration em., 329, 330.
Hecatseus Abderita De Judms a Judaeo
quodam Hellenista confictus, 257,
359.
Hesiodus em., 320.
Hesiodi et Homeri Certamen em., 323.
Hesychius em., 260, 264, 282, 283,
290, 310, 311, 312, 320, 324, 327,
340, 341, 354, 361.
Hesychii hallucinationes, 285, 286,
287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 303, 311,
312, 313, 327, S59, 360.
In Hesychio 7rope/i)8e;3A/j/ieVa quaedam,
284, 285, 291, 361.
Homerus em., 339.
Horatius explicatur, 345, 346.
Joannes Malelas : vide Malelas.
lonis Chii poetae tragici setas et scrip-
ta, 304 et seqq. copiose.
Ion Rhapsodus apud Platonem alius a
Chic, 305, 306.
Jonsius not., 306.
Liberatus Diaconus em., 353.
Lucretius em,, 295.
Magnetis comici fabulae, 283.
AuSol SieaKevaCfMevoi, 283.
Malelas sive Malalas in casu recto,
non Malela, 342 et seqq.
Malelas em., 243, 246, 247, 248, 255,
256, 261, [298], 299, [304], 333, 334.
explic, 269, 297, 333.
castig., 262, 283, 293, 294, 296,
298, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336,
337, 338, 339.
MapTTTi, (Tcply^, fcAebi//, ^vx^V^^^f 302.
Martianus Capella em., 361.
Menagius not., 305, 306, 321.
Meursius not., 293, 301.
MTJris deus Orphicus, 243.
Minos commentitius trag. pro lone,
299.
Nicias poeta em., 269.
Nonius Marcellus em., 275, 345.
UwireTadai vox lonica, 327.
Oi et V inter se permutantur, 339.
Omphale lonis Chii fab. satyrica, 313,
314, 315.
Oracula subdititia Gr. Philosopborum
ex MSto hie edita et em., 249, 250,
251, 252, 253, 254.
Orpheus em., 242, 246, 247, 248.
S. Pauli locus in Ep. ad Galatas em.
et exp., 363, 364, 365.
Pausanias em., 321.
Photii Patriarchae Lex. Gr. MS., 260,
267, 287, 312, 321, 327; em., 261,
283.
Plinius em., 278, 344.
Plutarchus em., 259, 268, 340.
Pollux em., 260, 267, 287, 292, 301,
310, 317, 340.
Porphyrins em., 277 ; ejus Fragmen-
tum de KvalC^X, &c. ex MS. editum
et em., 303, 304.
Priscianus not., 353.
Prisons Thrax de bello cum Attila,
350.
Proclus In Pannenidem MS., 244.
Prosper in Chronica em., 350.
^dvTis deus Orphicus, 243.
Quintilianus not., 345.
Julius Rufinianus em., 296, 297.
Salmasius not., 303.
SoA/tcoveus Sophoclis fabula satyrica,
318, 319.
SciTupot pro fabula satyrica, 260, 315.
Scaliger Jos. not., 267, 274, 335, 344.
Seal. Jul. not., 305.
Solinus em., 278.
Sophocles em., 301, 316, 317, 318.
Sophoclis locus commentitius, 256,
357, 358.
Sophoclis Schol. em., 320, 321 ; explic,
357.
Sophronis liber &vvvo6-f]pas, 355.
Henr. Stephanus not., 340.
Strabo em., 315.
Suidas em., [261], 308, 322, 323, 324,
325, 331, 350; not., 307, 328, 359.
Novi TESTAMENT! editio gemina a
CI. V. Jo. Millio procuranda, 362.
Thales apud Malelam pro Thallo, 334.
Qe/j-epooTTis, 340.
Theognoti Canones de Orthographia
MS. Gr., 341.
Theodosii Epitoma ttjs KaQ6Kov He-
rodiani MS., 289.
Theomis tragicus falso appellatus pro
Thespide, 299.
Theophanes em., 350, 353.
Theophrastus em., 279.
Thespis, 300; em., 301.
TpLuyfiol lonis liber, vel Epigenis, vel
Orphei, 330, 331.
Tzetzis Interpretatio Homeri Allegorica
MS. em., 323.
Varro em., 345.
Vossius Ger. not., 296, 306, 321, 335,
348.
INDEXES
TO THE
DISSERTATIONS UPON THE EPISTLES
OF
PHALARIS, THEMISTOCLES, SOCRATES, EURIPIDES,
AND THE FABLES OF ^SOP.
VOL. II. 3 B
INDEX
TO TUE
DISSERTATION UPON PHALARIS.
A.
Abaris the Hyperborean, age of,
115, 116; his acquaintance with
Phalaris, ii. 96, 97, 109.
Adimantus, when archon, 109, 110,
305, 306.
Adrastus, tragical choruses in honour
of his memory, 332, 339.
^gineans, their money, 387 — 389.
iElian quoted, 232 ; refuted, 310 ; cor-
rected, 374 ; solecisms of, 363.
iEneidos, a mistake for ^Eneis, 59.
iEsara, daughter of Pythagoras, her
name retrieved, 422.
iEschylus quoted, 191, 192, 193, 194;
corrected, 198, 199 ; his improve-
ment of tragedy, 282 ; one of the
first to introduce the new or serious
tragedy, 294, 321 ; added a second
actor, 300, 324; believed by many
to have added also the third, 325 ;
aspired after the sublime character,
343 ; inventor of scenery and other
stage- ornaments, 393, 394, 402;
number of his plays, 325 ; his age,
394 ; date of his first victory, 403.
iEsop, a slave, made apologues at
Samos, ii. 92.
Agamemnon, not a play of Seneca's,
203.
Agatharchides, a Samian historian,
372.
Agatharchus, the first painter of scenes,
393, 394.
Agathocles, 160.
Agathyrsides, a mistake for Agathar-
chides, 372.
Agrigentum, why called both mari-
time and inland, 157 ; its situation,
163 ; its language, 357 ; its popula-
tion, ii. 80.
At and € anciently pronounced alike,
328.
Alyav, a false reading for aiyaiv, 35.
Ath and ael, whether both used by the
Cretans, 373.
Atevs and aiaTT]s, adjectives in, formed
from substantives in aia, not in 77,
369.
Aiai for ais, ii. 8.
'AKfi^, import of, 123; of Pythagoras,
why brought so low by Christian
writers, 133.
"AKove, aiya, 254.
'A/coveT6, \eios, 253, 254.
Alaesa, a town in Sicily, 164 — 169;
when and by whom built, 164, 236 ;
its situation, 165, 166.
Alcaeus the poet, a native of Lesbos,
374; quoted, 415.
Alcman, age of, 107.
Aldobrandinus refuted, 125.
Alexander Ephesius quoted, 174.
Alexias, when archon, 400.
Alexis quoted, 182, 183; corrected,
182 ; his violation of chronology,
183.
Aliene, the word defended, 54.
" AXjcriffris, a play of Thespis, a mis-
take, 289—291, 298.
Allegory, use of, defended, 230.
Alphabet, Greek, not perfected in
Thespis's time, 291 ; consisted of
only eighteen letters in that of
Solon, ii. 7 ; letters said to have
been added, and by whom, 292 ;
ii. 7 ; how before expressed, 292.
Aluntium, 164 — 166.
*A/i for &v, ii. 62, 63.
Amasis, king of Egypt, 128.
'Aix\, Doric for ^/*e, 397.
Amorphus, false reading for Phormis,
252.
Av never put by the Dorians for wv in
the gen. pi. of the third declen-
sion, 36.
Anapaestic verse, 190 — 204; last syl-
lable of, not common, 190; never
372
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
ends in a tribrach, trochee, or cre-
tic, in the Greek poets, 190 ; only
twice in a trochee in Seneca, 203 ;
exceptions to this rule mere mis-
takes of copiers, 198; all passages
containing them in the Greek drama
quoted and corrected, 198 — 201 ;
those in Seneca quoted, 202, 203 ;
the rule frequently violated by mo-
dern writers, 190, 203.
Anaxagoras, age of, 322 ; acquainted
with Themistocles, 323 ; with Peri-
cles, ii. 83.
Anaxandrides, chronology violated in
plays of, 183.
Anaxilas, king of Rhegium, age of^
205, 206, 210, 217, 402; takes
Zancle from the Samians, 205, 211,
218 ; first changes its name to
Messana, 205, 207, 208, 210, 221,
222 ^ invites Hamilcar into Sicily,
212; his war with the Locrians,
ib. ; his victory at Olympia, 213,
214; a saying of, 209; his death,
222, 402 ; his sons, when and
by whom driven out of Messana,
222.
Anaximenes the historian, his forgery
upon his rival Theopompus, 87.
Andromachus, a Tauromenite, settles
the old Naxians in Taurominium,
233 ; father of Timaeus the Sicilian
historian, ii. 104.
Andronicus Rhodius, his paraphrase of
Aristotle's Ethics, its genuineness
doubtful, 373 ; quoted, ii. 106.
^Ai>Spo<p6vo5, ii. 5.
Annius of Viterbo, his forgery, 84.
Avos for &v6p(airo5, ii. 20.
'AvT iS-nixiovpynaacrOai, import of, 185.
'Aj/Ti7oi/tSa5, from nom. sing, in is, not
idys, 186.
Antimachus, saying of, 178.
Antisthenes, founder of the sect of
Cynics, 64.
\AirT]vr), a chariot of mules, why im-
pressed on some coins of the Mes-
senians, 213 ; when and by whom
first used at the Olympic games,
214, 215; when put down, ibid.;
the same as afxa^a, plmistrum, 258.
Aphepsion, or Apsephion, when ar-
chon, 328.
'AiriWciv, afterwards airoKKiUiv, im-
port of, ii. 6.
^ATro(ppas, ii. 9.
Aratus, an epic poet, 418.
Arcadius the grammarian quoted,
ii. 67, 73.
Archagetas, surname of Apollo, tute-
lar god of the Naxians, 239,
Archebolion, a false reading for Ar-
chilochium, 276; a mistake for Ar-
chebulion, 278.
Archebulion, verse so called, different
from the Saturnian, 278 ; examples
thereof, 278, 279.
Archestratus the Syracusan corrected
and explained, 149 — 151.
Archilochus quoted, 278 ; corrected,
341; his Iambics, 248, 249; only
two of those now extant are prover-
bial sentences, 249 ; not understood
by the vulgar in the time of Oppian,
ii. 13 ; Archilochian verse the same
with the Saturnian, 278.
Architeles, ii. 122.
Archytas of Tarentum, a Pythagorean,
preceptor to Plato, 148, 149, 151.
Aretine, Francis, his Latin version of
Phalaris's Epistles, ii. 15, 16.
Arion Methymnaeus, pretended in-
ventor of the dithyramb, 341.
Aristaeus, successor of Pythagoras,
age of, 146.
Aristeas, his story of the Septuagint a
clumsy forgery, 84.
Aristocles the Cydonian, his statue of
Hercules, 220.
Aristolochium and Aristodolium, false
readings for Archilochium, 276.
Aristolochus, a tragic poet never
heard of, 274—278.
Aristophanes quoted, 112, 192, 194,
282, 311, 312, 313, 314, 335, 346,
348, 399, 414; ii. 95; corrected,
201, 313, 316, 344, 345, 346; ex-
plained, 311, 312, 313, 316, 342,
343 ; ii. 75 ; date of his Plutus,
179; of his Ranse, 261, 265 ; of his
Aves, 265 ; prolegomena to, quoted
andcorrected, 349, 350 ; curious ora-
tion of his in Plato's Symposium,
ii. 23 ; Scholiast on, his passage on
Phalaris spurious, 92, 93.
Aristophanes the grammarian, his
AiScuTKaXiai, 248.
Aristophon, when archon, ii. 118.
Aristotle quoted, 247, 248, 351 ; ii. 48,
60, 67, 106; corrected, 311, 408;
defended, ii. 35 ; works forged in
his name, 85 ; when set up his
school at Athens, 145 ; made laws
for the Abderitans, ii. 91 ; Phalaris's
Epistles unknown in his age, ii. 106 ;
his successors, 148.
Aristoxenus, no Pythagorean, 421.
Arrian quoted, 236.
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
373
Arundel Marble quoted and appealed
to, 61, 109, 111, 25(i, 281, 289, 290,
296, 338, 349, 353, 3/3 ; ii. 63, 92 ;
readings of, restored and explained,
112, 258, 259, 290,291,296; its au-
thority questioned, 107 — 112; de-
fended, 296 — 303 ; emendations of,
rejected, 256, 257 ; in noticing the
victories of tragedians, never gives
the name of the play, 291 ; re-
cords only their first victories, 306,
307.
As of accusatives plural short in
Doric, 195; ii. 62.
As, Roman, its metal and value,
ii. 46, 53 ; its divisions, ii. 73 ; the
same as the libra, ii. 53, 73.
Asandrastus, a mistaken name, 215.
Asinus ad Lyram, ii. 81.
Aspasius quoted, ii. 106, 125.
Asson, a mistake for Assos, 59.
'AffTinrdKaia, not 'AarvtrdKr], 369.
Astypalaea, place of that name meant
in the Epistles, 169; no city of
Crete, 168, 169, 357, 366—371 ;
ii. 80 ; an island of the Sporades,
169, 357, 369; ii. 88 ; colonised by
the Megarians, 359 ; not the birth-
place of Phalaris, 366 ; its language,
371.
^AOdvarov opyrju e^eti', &c. 246 — 266 ;
the phrase from whom borrowed,
247, 248, 262, 263; its date,
248—266.
Athenaeus quoted, 121, 170, 174 — 176,
180, 181, 184, 185, 186, 284, 312,
345, 351, 391, 398, 418; ii. 121;
corrected, 150, 151, 285, 287, 288,
391,397; explained, 64, 150, 174,
180, 182, 185, 398, 405 ; defended,
64, 178—185.
'Ae-nv-pa-i, not eV 'Ae-ffvais, 256, 257 ;
not cV 'AdriuT)(ri, 413.
Athenians anciently the same peeple
with the lonians, 358 ; colonies of,
ibid. ; when invaded Sicily, 223 ;
when defeated there, 410; their
hatred to the iEgineans, 387—389 ;
send an embassy to Macedonia for
the ashes of Euripides, ii. 85 ; erect
a cenotaph to his memory, ibid.
Athens, the (xiroiKoi, or strangers of,
their number and occupation, 185.
Atossa, the Persian empress, invented
epistles, ii. 125 — 129; eaten by her
son Xerxes, ii. 125 ; her age, ii.
125, iH).
ArreXffiwSrjs, OTTcAeiSos, 150.
Attic dialect, 355 — 430 ; the favourite
dialect of the Sophists, 355 ; sole-
cisms in, aflected by them, 355, 362 ;
examples of these, 363 ; not yet in
fashion in the time of Phalaris, 355,
428; no Attic prose then but Dra-
co's and Solon's laws, ibid. ; why
adopted by several Dorian authors,
360, 371 — 430; originally the same
with the Ionic, ii. 7 ; changes in,
ii. 2 — 13 ; three sorts of, within 200
years, ii. 8 ; causes of its changes,
ii. 9— 11.
Attic, New, ii. 1 — 31 ; not in use in
the days of Phalaris, ii. 1, 3; words
in the Epistles in a sense peculiar
thereto, ii. 2. ; distinction of, from
the Old, common in Greek writers,
ii. 9.
Attica, number of its inhabitants in
the time of Demetrius Phalereus,
ii. 9.
AvTOfie\ivva explained, 397.
Avrhs e(pa, 379.
AuToo-xeStac^uoTo, import of, 325 ; first
gave rise to tragedy, ibid.
Avroffx^StaariKa, import of, 332.
B.
Bacchic hymn, what meant thereby,
340, 341.
Bacchus and the Satyrs the subjects
of all tragedies before the time of
Phrynichus and iEschylus, 321 ;
three choruses of, 283, 349 ; when
celebrated, 283.
Bacchylides got his livelihood by the
Muses, ii. 81.
BuKxais, Bpayxia, BaKx'ia, 288.
Bo/cxeta, false reading for Bo/cxeta,
288.
m^D, banoth, daughters, ii. 18.
BACIAEn2 *INTIA, import of, 161.
Beech-tree, the, lopping fatal to, 231.
Bellerophontes, the writings he car-
ried from Argos to Lycia, not epis-
tles, ii. 127, 128.
Bennet, Mr., bookseller, mistatements
of, refuted, 7—23.
Bentley, Dr., personal charges against,
examined and answered, 1 — 42 ;
respecting the MS. of Phalaris,
1 — 23 ; respecting the MS. of Al-
bcrtus Rubenius, 27 — 40 ; respect-
ing the Alexandrian MS., 40. Com-
plaints against his Dissertation
answered, 42 — 73 ; against his pe-
dantry, 52 — 68 ; causes that de-
layed his edition of Manilius, 39 ;
his works all published at the desire
374
INDEX TO PHALAllIS.
of others, 56 ; time spent by him in
writing his first Dissertation, 68 ;
his Notes on Callimachus, 69 ; his
candour in producing a passage
from an unpublished MS. that makes
against himself, 254 ; his Fragments
of Callimachus printed before any
part of his Dissertation was written,
270 ; has no desire to have his Dis-
sertation in Latin, ibid. ; frankly
confesses an error, ii. 25, 26 ; does
not write books for fame, ii. 27.
Berosus, a forgery, 88.
Bes, ii. 66.
Bias, a preceptor of Pythagoras, 124.
Biyeip, afterwards /Stciffcwr^at, import of,
ii. 6.
Bis terque, import of, 197.
Books, forgery of, in fashion at the
time of the Attali and the Ptole-
mies, 82, 85, 86, 383 ; motives that
led thereto, 82, 83 ; instances of,
83, 84, 86, 87.
Boxhornius deceived by a forged
poem, 91.
Boyle, Mr., his Preface to Phalaris's
Epistles quoted, 1, 46, 78 ; charges
Dr. Bentley with want of courtesy,
1, &c. 40, &c. ; with meanness and
baseness, 27, &c. ; with a desire
to rob him of his title to Phalaris,
42, &c. ; with the use of ill lan-
guage, &c. 46, &c. ; with want of
learning, &c. 50 ; with pedantry, 52,
&c. ; with want of method in his
Dissertation, 75 ; with out-of-the-
way quotations, 84 ; with want of
modesty, 97 ; with plagiarism, 189,
263, 424 ; with Anglicisms in his
Latin, 361 ; with afl'ectation, 362 ;
his captious objection to the use of
the plural for the singular, 24,
&c. 45, &c. ; his banter and gri-
mace, 24, &c. 181, 266, 267, 427 ;
ii. 28, 37, 38 ; his Phalarism, 25 ;
instance of his capacity as a cri-
tic, 37 ; his tutor and director of
his studies, 42, &c. ; cavils at the
phrase, first inventor, 60, 274 ; at the
phrase, mien of a face, 62 ; his un-
meaning censure and abuse, 64,
178, 230, 240: his Examination, its
heterogeneous character, 46, 70 ;
his sneers and insults, 49, 176,
325; ii. 28; his barbarisms, 55, 186,
334; his mistakes, 58, 60, 62,
64, 79, 80, 93, 157, 158, 160,
163, 165, 169, 180—183, 185, 189,
190—194, 240, 244, 245, 248, 249,
256, 257, 260, 269, 270, 275, 279,
301, 302, 304, 307, 326, 327, 333,
335, 336, 340, 342, 343, 357, 364,
366, 368, 369, 372, 373, 375, 376,
418, 420, 421, 426; ii. 8, 11, 14,
20—22, 26, 35, 36, 38, 40, 49,
74—76, 89, 90, 93, 96—100, 103,
108, 109, 111; his inconsistencies
and self-contradictions, 77, 81, 82,
157, 159, 160, 163, 167, 168, 224,
240, 261, 273, 426; ii. 35, 76, 77,
88, 93, 109 ; his good-breeding, 85 ;
fetches a witness against himself,
92 ; misrepresents his opponent's
words or arguments, 99, 166 — 169,
181, 218, 227, 243, 272, 366, 367 ;
ii. 84, 87, 97, 98 ; his false reason-
ing, 100, 158, 159, 160, 185, 218,
219, 220—222, 228, 229, 235—237,
273, 274, 297—303, 318, 324, 341,
342, 367, 369, 370, 424, 426, 428 ;
ii. 10, 18, 30, 41, 86, 91, 92, 94, 95,
97, 102, 107, 108; his emendation
of 'Tfi\aioL for "Ta\aioi. ; why never
made before, 156 ; his false emen-
dations, 173; ii. 74; considers
chronological arguments as touch-
ing only the particular Epistles,
187; his ignorance of anapaestic
verse, 191 — 197; of Latin iambics,
196 ; his gross and scandalous blun-
ders, 196, 197, 223, 224, 374, 376 ;
ii. 15, 43, 49 ; absurdly thinks that
Phalaris might use the phrase and
thoughts of Herodotus, &c. 227 ; his
nice distinction between speech and
message, ibid.; his notion of what
constitutes a poetical expression,
267, 268 ; misconceives the stress
of his opponent's argument, 269,
280 ; commends a piece of gross
and mean flattery, 273 ; his decla-
mation against Thespis being the
inventor of tragedy, all scraped to-
gether at second-hand from the com-
monest authors, 281 ; his judgment
commonly in favour of the weaker
side, 286 ; brings a charge of negli-
gence by an argument that betrays
it in himself, 301, 302; misrepre-
sents his author, 319, 327; ii. 85;
his false proposition, that things are
always older than the names by
which they are called, 337 ; quotes
two corrupt passages, to prove that
rpaytfdia signifies comedy, 343, 349 ;
claims his opponent's argvmient as
his own, 363, 364 ; cannot see that
his bustle about Phalaris's countrv
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
375
does not advance his argument,
371; lus acuteness, 425 ; a fatality
in his errors, 426; plumes himself
upon having emended a passage
tliat had escaped Casaubon, 427 ;
when smart upon his opponent ge-
nerally happens to lash himself,
429 ; his bad judgment in six of the
instances he brings on the word
diwKO), ii. 28 ; his trifling exceptions,
when in want of argument, ii. 35 ;
his want of sagacity in not detecting
three false readings of Pollux, ii. 38 ;
his disingenuousness in quoting the
opinion of Gronovius, &c. ii. 40 ;
his groundless suppositions on the
value of the talent meant in Pha-
laris's Epistles, ii. 48 ; brings an
argument against himself, ii. 51, 85 ;
his morose criticism in not allowing
that Himera was afterwards called
Thermoe, ii. 87 ; his anger against his
opponent stronger than his loyalty
to his Sicilian prince, ii. 89 ; calls
Phalaris a prince, and Augustus a
tyrant, ii. 90 ; wonderfully nice in
accounting for Lucian's silence
about the friendship between Pha-
laris and Stesichorus, ii. ^Q ; his
odd-sightedness, ii. 100.
Bpej/Ttot, or BpeTTtot, 396.
Brothers, the two pious, story of, 238.
Brutus, when he delivered his coun-
try, 134, 137.
Brutus, answers to, a forgery, 80, 83.
Buchanan, his violation of anapaestic
measures, 190, 203.
Bull: see ravpos.
C.
Cadmus the Coan, 217.
Caelius Rkod., his distrust of the Epis-
tles, 90.
Calf: see fxSffxos.
Callias, when archon, 323.
Callimachus quoted, 266, 267 ; cor-
rected and explained, 35, 37, 38.
Camarina, why called both maritime
and inland, 157.
Cambyses, when in Egypt, 128, 135.
Cappellus, Jacobus, deceived by the
spurious Phalaris, 89.
Carcinus, a tragic poet, 285 ; why
called 6pxn<^TiKhs, 312; his three
sons, why called opxwraX, 285.
Caro, Annibal, verses of, quoted, 67.
Carthalo, the Carthaginian admiral,
his victory over the Romans, 159.
Carts used in processions at the festi-
vals of different deities, 335 ; comic
and tragic poets carried about in,
258, 336.
Casaubon, Is., emendations of, re-
jected, 150, 172, 188, 351.
Castelvetro, Ludovico, character of,
defended, QQ — 68.
Catana, whence colonised, 409 ; place
of Stesichorus's death, ii. 78 ; story
of its contest with Himera for his
ashes, ii. 78, 79, 84—86.
Cedar, lopping fatal to the, 226, 231.
Centussis, not a coin, but a sum, ii. 76.
Ceos, language of, 373.
Chabrias, when archon, 265.
Chalcidians of Eubcea found Naxos,
239.
Chalcidic towns in Sicily and Italy,
404 ; the laws of Charondas made
for them, ibid.
XahKovs, value of, ii. 49.
Chares, when archon, 252.
Charondas the lawgiver, age of, 402,
403, 409; no Thurian, 403; his
laws, 384—386, 398—417; when
and for whom made, 402, 404 ; not
received by the Thurians, 405 ; to
what form of government adapted,
406, 407 ; in what dialect written,
409 — 411; used to be sung -Trap'
ohov at Athens, 413, 414 ; written
in verse, 414, 416 ; particular laws
of, noted, 406, 407, 408, 409, 414,
415 ; copy of his laws supposititious,
398—417.
Xepovevs, false reading for XcupcDvevs,
ii. 116.
Chinese, the, inventors of gunpowder
and printing, 61.
X6poi yvuaiK-r}ioi Keprofioi, 339.
Chorus, comic, 347, 348 ; cyclian,
341, 347, 348 ; the same as the di-
thyramb, 346 ; had its prize and
judges at the Dionysia, 347 ; tragic,
332, 333, 339, 344, 347, 348 ; triple,
what meant thereby, 348 ; comic,
cyclian, tragic, of musicians, ex-
penses of each, 399, 400 ; choruses,
three of Bacchus, what meant there-
by, 283, 349.
Chrysippus the Stoic, a racer in his
youth, 121.
Xs for Xpicrrhs, ii. 20.
Xd6irT7js, 291.
Cicero, M. T., quoted, 167, 168, 271,
365 ; corrected, 176 ; undecided re-
specting Zaleucus, 378, 384.
Cimon fetches the bones of Theseus
to Athens, 328—331.
376
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
Cinesias the dithyrambic poet, 344.
Cleanthes the Stoic, a boxer in his
youth, 121.
Clearista, wife of Nicocles, ii. 80, 81.
Clemens Alexandrinus quoted, 172,
186, 291; ii. 125; explained, 122,
123, 124; deceived by a tragedy
falsely ascribed to Thespis, 295.
Clisthenes the Athenian, age of, 152;
not the Clisthenes mentioned in the
Epistles of Phalaris, 152, 153.
Co, when used for con in Latin, 55.
Codicilli, ii. 127.
Coin, its greatest weight, ii. 75.
Columella quoted, 390.
Comedy, age of, 249 — 266 ; by whom
and where invented, 249 — 251, 284 ;
at first extemporal, 250, 288 ; no-
thing of the kind written before the
time of Epicharmus, 251 ; its first
measures, 249, 250, 255 ; its first
prize, 260, 301, 353, 354; in what
it had its origin, 260 ; more recent
than tragedy, 251, 252; Greek wri-
ters of, do not always observe the
rules of chronology, 183; instances
of this, 183; the old, number of
plays in, 248; its resemblance to
the Roman satira, 334 ; the middle,
number of plays in, 248.
Comias, when archon, 320.
Comic chorus. See Chorus.
Comic poets carried their plays about
in carts, 336.
Cotemporary for contemporary, a bar-
barism, 55.
Crates, the philosopher, verses of,
quoted, ii. 124.
Cratinus, a comic poet, a false reading
for Carcinus, 284.
Crete, why called 'E/cordftTroAts, 367 ;
language of, 359, 371.
Critics, ancient, province of, 82.
Croesus, when began to reign, 129,
320 ; story of, 225 ; his conversa-
tion with Solon, 320, 322; his
friendship with ^sop and Solon,
ii. 82; his overthrow by Cyrus, 116,
296, 303 ; contemporary with Pha-
laris, ii. 121.
Crotonians, when conquered by Dio-
nysius the Elder, 149.
Cujacivis, the Latin version of Phalaris
ascribed to him, a forgery, ii. 15.
Cyaxares, age of, 101.
Cyclian chorus. See Chorus.
Cylon, his conspiracy against the Py-
thagoreans, date of, 114, 137, 138,
144 ; murder of, when expiated, 125.
Cypress, lopping fatal to the, 226,
231.
Cypselus, age of, 102.
Cyrus, commencement of his reign,
102 ; his victory over Croesus, 296,
303.
D.
Aai/xuv erepos, 266 — 270 ; the phrase
explained, 266 ; when and by whom
first used, 266, 267 ; a poetical
quaintness in it, 266, 268 ; what this
depends upon, 268.
Aoper/ov, corrupt reading for Aafxa-
perioVf ii. 59.
Darius, age of, 296,
Daughter, license in the use of the
word, ii. 19.
Decius Jubellius, 160.
Decussis, not a coin, but a sum, ii. 76 ;
its amount, ibid.
AeSot/cw, SedvKoi}, formation of, 397.
AeKaAiTpov, its value, ii. 42, 53, 63, 68,
69, 74 ; its metal, ii. 53.
AcKas, a name of measure and quan-
tity, not a species of money, ii. 73.
Delphi, temple of, plundered by the
Phocaeans, ii. 121.
Delphos, a mistake for Delphi, 58.
AeKrhs, ii. 127.
Demareta, wife of Gelon, piece of
money coined by her, ii. 47, 57.
ArjfiapfTiou vSixiajxa, ii. 57, 58.
Demetrius the Magnesian, 430.
Democedes the Crotonian physician,
ii. 123, 124.
Democritus, the first who used the
phrase K6yos epyov (TKia, 242 ; age
of, 243.
Ar)ix6\oyos, false reading for Aeivo-
\oxos, ii. 60, 61.
Demosthenes quoted, 399, 408 ; ii.
119; age of, 382; date of his ora-
tion De Corona, ii. 118.
Denarius, Roman, its value, ii. 49, 53,
56, 68, 69 ; its metal, ii. 53 ; etymo-
logy of the word, ii. 56.
Deunx, etymology of, ii. 66.
Dextans, etymology of, ii. 66.
AiSocr/caAtot, 248, 255.
AtKTj, an action at law, joined with the
name of things, not of persons, 408.
Dinolochus, a Sicilian comic poet,
ii. 60, 61 ; his Medea quoted, ii. 60.
Diodes, when archon, 261, 400.
Diodorus of Agyrium, why he aban-
doned the Doric dialect, 360.
Diodorus the Aspendian, age of, 149.
Diodorus Siculus quoted, 167, 222,
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
377
223, 380, 383, 385, 389, 403, 407,
409, 410, 414, 415, 421; ii. 104;
corrected, 329, 415, 416 ; his ac-
count of Phintia defended, 160 — 162 ;
of Taurominium, 235 — 242 ; im-
posed upon by a forgery of Za-
leucus's laws, 383, 386 ; his copy
of Charondas's laws a forgery,
398 — 417 ; his language, ii. 45, 51 ;
his age, ii. 105 ; why he reckoned
by Attic money, ii. 51 ; the Epis-
tles unknown in his time, ii. 105.
Diogenes Laertius quoted, 121, 241,
242,243,271,329,391,418,419,430;
explained, 136, 137 ; corrected, 121,
133.
Aid>Kw, 70; import of, ii. 25 — 31.
Diomedes the grammarian quoted,
340.
Diomedes Scholasticus, his opinion of
a passage of Susarion controverted,
255.
Dion of Syracuse acquainted with
Plato and Speusippus, 429.
Dion, surnamed Chrysostom, de-
fended, 80.
Dionysia Trina, 283, 349 ; when ce-
lebrated, 283.
Dionysius Halicarnassensis quoted, ii.
46 ; corrected and explained, ii.
118 ; his dialect, 429 ; a reading in,
defended, 126, 127.
Dionysius Metathemenos forged a
tragedy in the name of Sopho-
cles, 86.
Dionysius of Syracuse, age of, 95 ; the
first Sicilian tyrant that styled him-
self jSaciAei/s on his money, 161 ;
allegorical message of, to the Lo-
crians, 230; his destruction of
Naxos, 240 ; entertained Plato and
others at his court, 429 ; ii. 90, 91 ;
author of several tragedies, ii. 90,
91.
Dionysius Thrax, story of, 175.
Dioscorides the epigrammatist quoted,
260, 338, 353, 354; corrected, 281,
282, 283 ; explained, 348, 349.
Diphiius the comedian, his violation
of chronology, 183 ; a comedy of,
quoted, ii. 61.
a\s Kot rpU, import of, 197.
Dithyramb, what meant thereby, 293,
340, 341 ; its inventor unknown,
341 ; prize of, 347—349 ; why called
iSoTjAoT^s, 348 ; chorus belonging to,
not tragic, but cyclian, 341.
Dithyrambic verse, example of, 341.
Ai^hs for Siffahs, whose idiom, ii. 72.
VOL.. II.
Dodrans, etymology of, ii. 66.
Dodwell, Mr., noted, 100; imposed
upon by the spurious Epistles, 69,
101, 152; mistake of, 137 ; his opi-
nion concerning the age of Phalaris
examined, 106—154, 382.
Dolon the inventor of comedy, a mis-
take, 259.
Doric dialect, the language generally
of Sicily, 356 ; character of, 360 ;
not suited for history or heroic
poetry, 360 ; why exchanged by cer-
tain Dorians for another dialect, 360,
371 — 430; never changes wj/into av
in genitives plural of the third de-
clension, 36 ; from a preterperfect
tense of verbs forms another pre-
sent, 397 ; frequently shortens as of
the accusative plural, ii. 62.
Drachm, a sort of money not in use
among the Dorian Greeks of Sicily
and Italy, 389 ; Attic, or Acttt^,
weight of, 387 ; its weight dimi-
nished by Solon, ii. 56 ; JEginean,
weight of, 387 ; the latter why and
by whom called Troxf ««, ibid. ; Alex-
andrian, value of, ii. 44 ; no coin of
that name in the old Sicilian money,
ii. 34, 39, 47 ; whether ever coined
there, ii. 41, 42.
Draco the lawgiver, age of, 380, 393 ;
his laws written, 380, 414 ; the lan-
guage thereof, 428.
Apatr/co^eij/, afterwards airoSiBpdcTKiiv,
import of, ii. 5.
E.
Ecclesiastical writers, by what in-
duced to give a late date to Pytha-
goras, 133.
'ExeTTcuKes, etymology of, 231.
Els t)}u 'EXXdSa atpiK^aQai, meaning of
the phrase, ii. 92.
'EKAa/CTiXcoj', iK\aKT Iff fibs, iK\(tKTi<r-
fiara, 315.
'EKTpiipeiu, 229.
'E\ey€7ov, difterent from fi^Kos, ii. 81,
92 — 95 ; how used in the sense of
epitaph, ii. 93, 94.
'E;u for eV, ii. 63.
Empedocles of Agrigentum, an epic
poet, 418; quoted, 133, 419, 420;
corrected, 133; his 4>u(riKi, 419; his
Ka6apiJ.o\, probable subject of, 420 ;
why he adopted the Ionic dialect,
360 ; why expelled from the Pytha-
goreans, 426.
^EfKpvffiovrai, from (pvcis, a barbarism,
417.
3c
378
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
*Ev *A6-fivaii, 'AO-fjvrjcri, iv 'Ad-ffypai,
256, 413.
English language, changes in, ii. 2, 3 ;
chiefly in the spelling, ii. 7 ; prin-
cipal cause of its changes, ii. 13.
Enna, 154.
'Ej'Texj'cws, 121.
Hoy for ecos, what idiom, ii. 8.
Epaminondas, age of, 143.
'EiTfcrBccv explained, 38.
"Etttj, eTTOTTotto, and irolriixa i-TTLKhv, of
the same import, 418.
Ephebi, at what year so called, 119.
^E^(X-i]ia, 121.
Epic poem, 418—420.
Epic poets, authors belonging to that
class, 418 ; not admitted into the
Pythagorean sect, 426.
^EtrixoLi-piKaKia, 48.
Epicharmus, inventor of comedy,
251—253; age of, 213, 252, 292;
long life of, 252 ; added certain let-
ters to the alphabet, 292 ; ii. 7 ;
his language, 355 ; many pieces
forged in his name, 86 ; not the
Epicharmus of the Epistles, 154 ;
fragments of, quoted, corrected, and
explained, ii. 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 71.
Epicurus, age of, 122.
Epigenes the Sicyonian, the pretended
inventor of tragedy, 275, 281, 286.
Epigenes cited by Athenaeus, not the
Sicyonian, but the Athenian comic
poet, 286; quoted and corrected,
287, 288.
'ETTtKOTT^, lopping, what meant there-
by, 231.
^EiriKT-^ov (TKeXos explained, 95.
Epimenides the Cretan quoted, 88,
373 ; corrected, 373 ; his poems
written in Ionic, not Cretic, 373 ;
why, 429 ; his letters to Solon for-
geries, 430 ; ii. 9 ; expiates the
murder of Cylon at Athens, 125;
one of the preceptors of Pythago-
ras, 124, 125 ; age of, 125,
*EviopK(7v, afterwards ofidaai, import
of, ii. 5.
'EiriffKe^is, false reading for eiriffKrir^/is,
408.
'Eiria-Krj^is, the law so called, 408 ;
when enacted, 409.
Erasmus, his opinion of the Epistles
of Phalaris, of Seneca, &c., 80.
Erythia, wife of Phalaris, inconsistent
accounts of, in the Epistles, ii. 79,
80, 87, 88.
Eryxidas, or Eryxias, of Chalcis, when
victor at Olympia, 134.
Eteonicus, 246.
'HdoTToitaL, 83.
Etymologicon Magnum quoted, 170,
340; explained, 351, 352; refuted,
353, 354.
Eualcidas, 109.
Evagoras, a Zanclean, 220.
Eubulus quoted, 170; explained, 179 ;
age of, 179.
Euclides, when archon, ii. 7.
Eudoxus the Cnidian, a lawgiver, his
poverty, ii. 91.
Euphorion quoted, 174.
Eupolis the comedian, fabulous story
of, 377.
Euripides, age of, 248, 399 ; quoted,
194, 247, 262 ; corrected, 200, 201 ;
four plays of, acted in one year,
264; his Philoctetes, when acted,
248, 264 ; his Phoenissae, when acted,
265 ; noted for the lowness of his
style and characters, 343, 399 ; his
Cyclops, a play of the satyrical kind,
334 ; a cenotaph erected by the
Athenians to his memory, ii. 85.
Eurymenes, a scholar of Pythagoras in
boxing, 121.
Eusebius quoted, 98, 340 ; his histo-
ries not to be depended on, 319.
Euseboneora, a mistake for Eusebon
Cora, 238.
Eva-efioiu Xcopa, 238.
Eustathius, age of, 93; quoted, 172,
231 ; appears to have used the Epi-
tome only of Athenaeus, 172, 175,
188—190.
Euthymus, when victor at Olympia,
221.
'E^a/iid^eiu, a barbarism, 334.
"E| a/xd^rts fie v^piae, origin of this
proverb, 335.
'E|e>77;8os, 118.
Father, license in the use of the word,
ii. 19.
Fazellus, Thomas, deceived by the
spurious Phalaris, 89.
Festus corrected and explained, ii. 66 ;
his authority defended, ii. 40, 41.
FcEminilis, barbarous word coined by
Queen Elizabeth, 272.
Fortunatianus quoted, 277, 278, 279.
Fuit, import of, 123.
G.
TaAaTTj, false reading for Tahdreia,
ii. 61.
Galen quoted, 85, 392.
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
379
Gela, why called both maritime and
inland, 157 ; by whom and when de-
stroyed, 160, 162.
Gellius, Aulus, quoted, 226 ; corrected
and explained, ii. 117.
Gelo the Syracusan, 161 ; acquires the
government of Syracuse and Gela,
212; age of, 212, 217; date of his
victory over the Carthaginians, ii.
57 ; his donary to Apollo at Delphi,
* ii. 58, 123.
Geloans, not different from the Phin-
tians, 162.
Generation, a, how many years it con-
sisted of, 103,104, 127, 145.
TfveaOat, yet/e<ns, import of, 123, 124.
r€(f>vpl^€iv, import of, 335.
Glaucippus, when archon, 40Q.
Goat : see Tpdyos.
Gold, scarce in Greece in the time of
Phalaris, ii. 121, 122.
Golden verses, not Pythagoras's, 426 ;
quoted, 379.
Graevius, J. G., his dedication of Ru-
benius, 30 ; his letters to, and cha-
racter of, Dr. Bentley, 28, 32—34,
51 ; his mistake in ascribing to
him a correction of Callimachus,
35.
Greek language, changes of, in the
different ages, ii. 2 — 13 ; instances
of such changes, ii. 2, 5, 6 ; cause of
its corruption, ii. 12; later writers
of, imitated the old ones, ii. 12.
Gregory of Nazianzen quoted and ex-
plained, 95, 96,
Grotius, his violation of anapaestic
measures, 190, 203 ; his mistake of a
passage in Diodorus, 415.
rvfiviKol, 315.
Gyraldus, Lilius, his testimony of L.
Castelvetro, 66 ; mistaken regard-
ing Epigenes, 286 — 288; his dis-
trust of the Epistles, 90.
H.
AAo, ahlrfv, a\hs, double meaning of,
37, 38.
Hamilcar the Carthaginian general
routed by Gelo, 212.
"Affal Kal Sis, import of, 197.
Harduin, Monsieur, his work on coins
noted, 375.
'Ap/xouia Tov k6(Tij.ov, a Pythagorical
expressijpn, ii. 115, 118.
Haud multum, 144, 145.
"Arepos for ercpos, what idiom, 270.
Hebrew language, the primitive lan-
guage of mankind, ii. 11 ; its long
duration unchanged, ii. ibid. ; cause
thereof, ii. 11, 12.
Hegestratus, when archon, 320.
Helianax, brother of Stesichorus, ii.
91.
'HKiKia, import of, 122, 123.
'H\iKiai, 137.
Hellanicus the historian, age of, ii.
126.
'H/ii, form of compounds with, ii. 6S.
'HfJuXlrpiov, its value, ii. 59, 71 ; its
metal, ii. 53.
Hephaestion quoted, 102 ; ii. 59.
'Enradpoixpi-us, Doric for kirraSpdxP'-ovs,
ii. 45.
Heraclean, or Herculean bowl, why so
called, 176, 177.
Heraclides of Pontus put forth tra-
gedies in the name of Thespis, 86,
289 ; himself deceived by a similar
forgery, 86; no remains of Thes-
pis's heard of before his time, 289 ;
quoted, 407 ; his age, ii. 102.
Heraclitus, epigram on, 177.
'Upaivri, a mistake for 'Upwivt], 288.
'Hpa/cAeios, how formed, 172.
Herculean cup, one single cup so
called, 173, 174; the same with the
Sun's cup, 174, 175.
Hercules, story respecting, 173, 174.
Hercules CEtaeus, not a play of Sene-
ca's, 197, 203.
Hermesianax the Colophonian poet
quoted, 132, 269.
Hermippus, his story of Pythagoras,
130; quoted, 413.
Hermodamas, a preceptor of Pytha-
goras, 125.
Hermogenes quoted, 430.
Herodotus quoted, 61, 225, 270; ii.
86, 92, 93, 94 ; explained, 339 ; age
of, 223 ; an example of his use of
prolepsis, 339 ; not understood by
the vulgar in the time of Oppian,
ii. 13.
Hesiod, the Orchomenians advised by
the oracle to fetch his bones, ii. 85.
Hesychius quoted, 35, 170, 315, 353,
386 ; ii. 60, 67, 69, 70 ; corrected,
315, 387 ; ii. 67 ; mistaken, ii. 69,
70.
'EraipiffTpiai, ii. 23.
'E^dXiTpa, e| rdXavra, false readings
for e^avTa, ii. 38, 67, 74.
'E^dfjLTjvos, e^arjfxepos, e^aerTjs, &c.
meaning of, ii. 74.
'E^dvTiov, false reading for k^dvTwv,
ii. 67.
'E^as, ii. 66, 67 ; whose money, ii. 50 ;
380
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
its value, ii. 53, 70, 71, 73; its me-
tal, ii. 53.
Hicetas tyrant of Syracuse, 160.
Hiero tyrant of Agrigentum, 161, 212,
213 ; his patronage of learning,
141 ; his age, 100, 213, 217 ; ii. 122,
123; not the Hiero mentioned in
the Epistles, 154 ; his donary to
Apollo at Delphi, ii. 122, 123.
Hierom, St., quoted, 98.
Himera, 164, 165, 168; a maritime
town, 165 ; its language, 356 ; af-
terwards called Thermae, ii. 79, 87 ;
the birth-place of Stesichorus, ii. 78 ;
story of its contest with Catana for
his ashes, ii. 78, 79, 84—86.
Hippias, eldest son of Pisistratus, age
of, 317, 318.
Hippocrates, tyrant of Gela, age of,
212; besieges the Zanclaeans, 217.
Hippostratus, 104, 105, 113.
Historians, the early, make every
body's speeches for them, 226, 227 ;
sometimes disagree in putting dif-
ferent speeches into the mouth of the
same person, 229.
Ot vep\ IWaTcoua, ol Trepl 'ApiarordArj,
what meant by these phrases, 24.
Homer quoted, 175, 177, 193, 358; ii.
7, 8, 14, 19, 28, 127 ; the poems
Cypria and CEchalia Capta said to
be forgeries, 86 ; not understood by
the vulgar in the time of Oppian,
ii. 13 ; his death, ii. 92 ; temples to
his memory, date thereof, ii. 85, 86 ;
Scholiast on, quoted, 392.
'OfM6\ia, false reading for i]ij.i<afi6\ia,
ii. 35.
Horace quoted, 17, 48, 66, 131, 252,
258, 284, 336, 338, 401, 414 ; ii. 27.
'fly ^1 a/xa|7js \a\e7, origin of this
proverb, 336.
Hospitalius, Michael, his forged poem
De Lite, 91.
''Ta\a7oi, false reading for 'Tfi\aioi,
155, 156.
Hybla, a town in Sicily, 154, 156 ; not
mediterranean, but maritime, 158.
Hyblenses, 154.
'Tc'Arj, 375.
Hyllus the Rhodian, his victory at
Olympia, 119.
'TiroSiaipeacis TOiriKol, 356.
I.
Iambic verse not used in tragedy and
comedy till long after their inven-
tion, 249 ; suitable for business and
discourse, 250.
lamblichus censured, 114, 115, 134,
135, 148, 149; ii. 97, 98, 109; cor-
rected, 147 — 151 ; a Platonic, not a
Pythagorean, 426.
James, St., book of Revelation ascribed
to him, a forgery, ii. 114.
las and avdpos, Greek names in, equi-
valent to one another, 216; exam-
ples thereof, ibid.
WmTnt:? -1:1"^ Igar Sahdutha, ii. 11.
Ignatius quoted, ii. 29.
"lAeto, a mistake for 'I\Uia, the Ilian
games, 121.
Iv, accusative of words in, sometimes
long, 193, 194.
Inghiramius, his forgery, 84; ii. 113,
114.
lo mistaken by copiers for w, ii. 67.
lonians, anciently one and the same
people with the Attics, 358 ; ii. 7 ;
when and by whom carried into
Asia, 361.
Ionic dialect, once the fashionable
language of epic poetry, 429 ; cha-
racter of, 430; adopted by several
Dorian authors, 360, 371 — 430; ori-
ginally the same with the Attic, 358 ;
ii. 7 ; gradual changes in, ii. 7 ; had
four idioms, ibid.
Isaeus the orator corrected, 400, 401,
408.
"iffais, Doric and iEolic accusative for
taas, 395.
'l<roiiiK-{](Tiou, 389, 390.
^laorapavrlvov, 391.
Iterum atque tertium, import of, 197.
Juvenal quoted, 67.
Justinian quoted, ii. 119, 120.
K.
Kar^ t}]v tSiav imoypd(pr]v riav 7}\iKmv
explained, 136, 137.
Kara rhv Atj/hSkpltov, Kara rhv Alff-
Xv^ov, &c., import of, 244, 245.
KaranapTvpioy, false reading for \pev5o-
fiaprvpLuv, 408.
KaOifjLaffe, falsely accented for Kadi-
fiaffe, 36.
KaOi/uLaffe, import and quantity of, 36.
KevordcpLOV, ii. 85.
K€7r<^aTT€A.6)8ccSi7s, 151.
King, Dr., his account of a conversa-
tion between Dr. Bentley and Mr.
Bennet examined, and its incon-
sistencies exposed, 17 — 22.
KiOap^Bol, harpers, contended for a
calf, 348.
KAetos, adjectives in, formed from
names in kXtjs, 172, 181.
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
381
Kva^0\, 291.
Koii/i] 5id\€KTos, a language of tlie
learned, ii. 13.
KSuiv, last syllable of, sometimes long,
193.
k6(tixos, the world first called so by
Pythagoras, 391, 392 ; ii. 115—118 ;
reason thereof, 392.
Kwfioi, Kcofirjrai, 353, 354.
KufiCfiSla, of the same import as rpv-
ycpSia, 342, 349, 350, 353 ; at first
the common name of both comedy
and tragedy, 353, 354 ; etymology
of, 353.
Kparlvos, false reading for KapKiuos,
285.
Kp6vovs rhv vovv, false reading, 313.
Ks for Kvpios, ii. 20.
KvK\iKcoy, false reading for kvkXIojv,
345, 346; its first syllable often
short, 345.
k6k\ioi x^P^h 346.
Kvau, its import in a passage of Athe-
naeus, 64.
K6pfi€i5 of Solon, ii. 7.
L.
AaKeii/iov, temple of Juno Lucina,
where situated, 396.
Lactantius De Mortibus Persecuto-
rum, ii. 103.
Lampsaceni, threatening message of
Croesus to, 225.
Languages, living, their perpetual
change, ii. 1, 2.
Lasus Hermionensis, pretended in-
ventor of the dithyramb, age of,
341.
Lawgivers anciently of the middle rank
of citizens, ii. 91.
Laws sung before the knowledge of
letters, 413, 414.
Afyerai, import of, 180, 181.
Leontines, 163.
Leontiscus, victor at the Olympic
games, 220; age of, 221.
AciTTol Kol irox^ot Spox/iOi, 386 — 389.
Lesbos, language of, 374 ; the metro-
polis of the -^olian cities, ibid.
Aea-^os, in a passage in ^Elian and
Suidas a mistake for Ae^SeSos, 374.
Letters of the alphabet : see Alphabet.
Leucon and his ass, 47, 52.
AfvKos, false reading in Hesychius for
Z<i\€VKos, 387.
Liberalia Trina, 283, 349.
Libra, libella, its metal and value, ii.
53 ; the same as the as, ii. 53, 73.
Alrpa, 389 ; ii. 59 — 64 ; whose money,
ii. 47—49, 60, 61 ; its value, ii.
53, 56, 60, 68, 69; its metal, ii.
53, 56.
Livy quoted, ii. 46, 47.
Locrians of Italy, laws of, 376 — 398;
origin of these, 379 ; the first laws
that were written, 380 ; a remark-
able law of, 381 ; only one new law
made by them in cc. years, 381 ;
what this was, 384 ; their good go-
vernment, 384, 385 ; species of
money in use among them, 389;
had neither the tpaxpM nor ofioXhs,
389 ; their language, 394—398 ;
their songs called fioixiKol, 398.
A6yos etSwKov twv epywv, whose say-
ing, 245.
A6yos epyov ffKia, 242 — 246 ; explained,
242 ; when and by whom first used,
242—246.
ASyos kp^ov aiKir], a mistake, 244.
Logotheta, Symeon Metaphrastus, age
of, 94.
AoKpiKbv difffxa, a Locrian song, an ex-
ample of, corrected and explained,
397, 398.
Lucian, the Epistles of Phalaris as-
cribed by some to him, 90 ; quoted,
170; his story of an embassy from
Phalaris to Delphi, ii. 107—109 ; his
Dialogues of the Dead, ii. 107 ; the
Epistles unknown to, or suspected
by him, ii. 101, 107, 108.
Lucian's ass, 53.
Lucretius quoted, 61, 267.
Lycon of Troas, a peripatetic, a wrest-
ler in the Ilian games, 121.
Lycurgus quoted, ii. 94.
Lygdamis, tyrant of Naxos, 128.
Lynceus Samius quoted and explained,
185,
Lysias the orator, age of, 409 ; ii. 4 ;
quoted, ii. 4, 5, 6 ; corrected, ii. 5 ;
the best pattern of the Attic tongue
fashionable in his time, ii. 8 ; his
oration against Theomnestus, when
made, ii. 4, 5.
Lysinus, a tragic poet of the name
never heard of, 274, 275.
Lysis, two Pythagoreans of this name,
144; the scholar to Pythagoras not
the preceptor to Epaminondas,
142—144.
M.
Macrobius corrected and explained,
174.
Maeno, 160.
MoKopirris, import of, 94.
382
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
Malalas Johannes corrected, 323.
Mamertines of Messana, 160, 162.
Manilius the Roman poet, character
of, 81.
Man tinea, battle of, when fought, 142.
Marathon, battle of, when fought, 125,
317.
Marmora Oxon. : see Arundel Marble.
Maronites of Mount Libanus, their
language, ii. 12,
MrjBfv a/xaprdueiv, deov, origin of this
saying, ii. 119, 120.
M7)SiKa ^aldooyos, probably a mistake
for MrjSiKa 'A(p€^iwvos, 328.
MeAeVai of the sophists, 355.
MeATjTos, MeXiTos, 345.
Meletus the tragic poet, 344, 345.
Melessus the philosopher, acquainted
with Themistocles, 323,
Me\o5 and yueAySto, signification of,
ii. 81 ; fieKos different from eAeyetov,
ii. 92—95.
Menagius, his character of L. Castel-
vetro, 66 ; distrusts the Epistles, 90.
Menenius Agrippa, his poverty, ii.
92.
M^TTOTc, import of, 182.
Messana, Messenians : see Zancle,
Zanclaeans.
M€T<i<ppa(ns, 94.
Metasthenes, a forgery, 88.
Metelli, the, quoted, 277.
Meursius mistakes Scaliger's '0\v/x-
iriddcov 'Avaypa<l>^ for an ancient
piece, 215, 329; his false correc-
tions in consequence, 329, 330.
M icy thus, 216.
Mien of a face, the phrase defended,
62, 63.
Milesian cloths, 389, 390.
Milesians and Samians take Zancle,
205 ; are driven out by Anaxilas,
205, 211, 218.
Mileton, Miletum, mistakes for Mile-
tus, 59.
MtA^Tou <L\(o<ri5, the taking of Mile-
tus, title of a tragedy of Phrynichus,
for which he was lined 1000 drachms,
304, 308, 314.
Miletus, when sacked by the Persians,
210.
Miltiades, when archon, 205 ; threat
of Croesus respecting, 225 — 232.
Mina, Attic, value of, 400; ii. 34, 44;
division of, ii. 38, 39 ; no such name
or sum in Sicily or the Doric colo-
nies of Italy, ii. 39.
Minos, king of Crete, not introduced
into the old tragedy, 325 ; not the
interlocutor in Plato's dialogue of
that name, 326, 327.
Mi<Torvpavvo5, 355.
'M.vdfiapxos, 133.
Mnasalcas, an epigram of, quoted, ii. 95.
Muuv, false reading in Suidas for
vovfjLfjLwy, ii. 54.
Money, scarce at Athens in the time
of the tragedians, 399 ; public, not
the custom in Phalaris's time for
princes to set their images thereon,
161 ; by whom first coined at Rome,
ii. 73 ; why authors in Attic, or the
common dialect, reduce the sums of
money of any country to the Attic
account, ii. 46, 47 ; ancient histo-
rians expressed themselves in round
sums, not aiming at perfect accuracy,
ii, 68.
Moixol, /xoix^vTpiai, ii. 23.
mSctxos, a calf, the prize of harping,
348, 349.
Moschus the poet, dialect in which he
wrote, 355 ; quoted, ii. 95.
Mother, license in the use of the word,
ii. 19.
Mucianus, Licinius, imposed upon by
a sham letter of Sarpedon's, ii. 128,
129.
Mumpsimus, absurd blunder for sump-
simus, 58, 59.
Muretus, his forged iambics, 91.
Mvdoi Kal irdOr], by whom first brought
on the stage, 321.
Mvpi,dfX({>opos, meaning of, ii, 75.
N.
N before M, B, IT, or *, changed into M
in ancient writing, ii. 63 ; in modern
Greek pronounced like M in those
cases, ibid.
Naevius, the first Latin poet who used
Saturnian verse, 277 ; corrected,
ibid.
Naogeorgus, his Latin version of Pha-
laris, ii. 15, 16.
Naxians, the inhabitants of Naxos,
afterwards called Tauromenites,
232—239.
Naxos, 232 — 242 ; by whom founded,
239 ; when and by whom destroyed,
239, 240.
Neapolitan talent, ii. 54,
Nearchus, tyrant of Velia, age of, 241.
Negoce, the word defended, 54.
NeofTfitAevra 7pa^/taTa, 282.
Nestorean cup, a particular cup de-
scribed by Homer, 175; no sort of
cups so called, ibid.
INDEX TO PHALARIS,
383
NecTopls, a word only of gramma-
rians, 175.
NeupiSas ^x^*''» ^ corrupt reading, 295.
Nicander, an epic poet, 418.
Nicocles the Syracusian, his applica-
tion for a poem from Stesichorus
an improbable story, ii. 80, 81, 89.
Noi^ct/io era and vov^fffxia euro, false
readings in an epigram of Diosco-
rides, 281, 282.
Nominative without a verb, or instead
of an oblique case, Attic solecisms,
363.
VSo/xcfShs, a law-singer, 414, 416.
Nonnus the poet, character of, 95.
Nonnus the commentator on Greg.
Naz. not Nonnus the poet, 95 ; his
mistakes, 95, 96 ; the same com-
mentary attributed to one Maximus,
96.
Nonuncium, not a legitimate word,
ii. 66.
Nossis the poetess, aLocrian, 394-396 ;
epigrams of, corrected and explained,
395 — 397 ; her dialect, ibid. ; her
age, 396 ; her mother, daughter,
396, 397.
HSffToi of Stesichorus, 165.
Novfifios, 389 ; ii. 64, 65 ; whose money,
ii. 50 ; a word of Greek origin, ii.
64 ; its derivation, ii. 50 ; its value,
ii. 35, 53, 64, 68, 69; its metal,
ii. 36, 53, 75 ; Tarentine, its im-
press, ii. 64, 75.
Numa, age of, 127; some writings of
his said to have lain in a stone coffin
for 490 years, ii. 112, 113; various
accovmts as to their number, ii. 113 ;
the story examined and refuted,
ibid.
Nummus, Roman, value of, ii. 53, 69 ;
why called sestertius, ibid. ; of what
metal, ii. 53, 76 ; when fii'st coined,
ibid.
O.
^0$o\hs, not in use among the Dorian
Greeks of Sicily and Italy, 389 ;
Attic, value of, 387 ; ii. 68 ; ^gi-
nean, value of, 387 ; ii. 68 ; Attic
and JEgmean, their proportion to
each other, ii. 68.
Ocellus Lucanus, 151 ; his De Natura
Universi, in what dialect originally
written, 423—427.
Octans, ii. 70, 72, 73; not used of
money, ii. 73.
Octavia, not a play of Seneca's, 203.
Octussis, not a coin, but a sum, ii. 76.
OtKTjos for OepdirovTos, ii. 6 ; a doubly
Ionic form, ii. 7.
"OKedpop eZpe, 267—270.
Olympiodorus quoted, 143, 393.
riv never changed into av in the geni-
tive plural of the third declension
by the Dorians, 36.
One as good as a multitude, the phrase
defended and illustrated, 177, 178.
Oppian, his use of antiquated words,
ii. 13 ; not understood by the vulgar
in his own town, ibid.
'Opxvo'TiKol, some poets why so called,
284, 312.
*Opxn<^Ttiio)ripa, the first poetry of
the stage so characterised, 312.
Orchomenians, advised by the oracle
to fetch the bones of Hesiod, ii. 85.
'Op^avto, import of, ii. 102, 109.
Orpheus, poems said to have been
forged by Pythagoras in his name,
86 ; an epic poet, 418.
OvZlv Tcphs rhv Ai6vv(Tou, 286, 293.
OvyKia, 389, ii. 67 — 73; its deriva-
tion, ii. 50 ; whose money, ii. 50 ;
its metal, ii. 53.
Ovid quoted, 234, 240 ; explained,
and mistakes in the Oxford edition
of, exposed, 44, 45 ; his love-letters,
83 ; instances of prolepsis from,
234 ; his authority defended, 241 ;
Scholiast on, quoted, 240.
Our, the word, great license in the
use of, 25, 46.
P.
IToxeia Spaxp-^t 386 — 389.
Paeon instead of dactyl, ii. 59.
llatSas, false* reading in Pollux for
ireSaJ, ii. 60.
HaiSoov ipacrrai, TraidepaCTai, import
of, ii. 2, 20—25.
Palm-tree, lopping fatal to the, 226,
231.
Palmerius, his emendation of the
Arundel Marble rejected, 258, 259.
Pamphilus the Alexandrian quoted
and explained, 171.
UavaO-rji'aia, when celebrated, 283.
Uapd^aaris, the part of a play so called,
255 ; measures used therein, ibid.
Parmenides, an epic poet, 418.
Paterculus, Velleius, when and by
whom first quoted, ii. 102.
Pausanias, his account of Anaxilas
and Messana refuted, 205 — 224.
Pearson, Bishop, a mistake of, ii. 29,
30 ; his emendation of a saying of
Hierocles corrected, ii. 117.
384
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
Tlfipas Zevrepas Ka^elv, not true Greek,
416.
Pelopidas, his application to Phalaris
for a poem from Stesichorus, ii.
78, 89.
UcvTaeria, what meant by it, 132.
UcvTTjKOVTaKiTpov, ii. 57 — 59 ; whose
money, ii. 50 ; by whom coined, ii.
47, 57 ; its value, ii. 47, 53, 57, 68,
74 ; its metal, ii. 53.
UevTovyKiov, 65, 66 ; called by the La-
tins quincunx, ii. 65 ; its value, ii.
53, 65, 71 ; its metal, ii. 53, 65.
Tl€(pa(TiJ.eva}s, afterwards (pavepws, im-
port of, ii. 6.
Perfect tense of verbs, formation of a
Doric present from, 397.
Periander of Corinth, age of, 102.
Perictyone, a Pythagorean, the frag-
ments of her writings forgeries, 421,
422.
Perillus, inventor of the brazen bull,
266, 269 ; the first who suffered in
it, ii. 39.
UfpariKoTs, false reading for tvcriKols,
419.
Petavius mistaken, 330.
Petronius Arbiter, the Belgrade sup-
plement to, a forgery, 84, 88.
TlevKV, 231.
Ilew/cTjs rp6irov K6imiv, 226, 232.
Phaedon, when archon, 328, 329.
Phaedrus, when and by whom first men-
tioned, ii. 102.
^aiwvos, corrupt reading for'A^e^j/fcwj'os,
329.
Phalaris tyrant of Agrigentum, age
of, 97—154,155,171, 205, 225,243,
248, 275, 296, 303 ; a Sicilian born,
357, 364^—371 ; ii. 101 ; contem-
porary with Pythagoras, 98, 99, 233 ;
with Solon, ii. 4, 31 ; with Servius
Tullius, ii. 73 ; said to have been
the first tyrant in the world, 102 ;
when and by whom deposed, 103,
105, 114, 116 ; extent of his domi-
nion, ii. 90 ; only a publican before
he usurped the tyranny, ii. 91 ; his
friendship with Stesichorus a fic-
tion, ii. 82, 83, 96—100 ; so his con-
versation with Abaris, ii. 109 ; a
tradition that he ate his own son,
106 ; his Bull, story of, examined,
ii. 104 ; himself, his mother, and
his friends burnt in it, 240 — 242,
365; ii. 102.
Phalaris, Epistles of, a forgery,
89 — ii. 129 ; high character of them
by Sir Wm. Temple, 77 ; the work
of some sophist, 89 ; many deceived
by them, ibid. ; ancients by whom
mentioned, 89, 92 ; moderns by
whom espoused, 89, 90 ; moderns
by whom distrusted, 90 ; ascribed
by some to Lucian, ibid. ; proofs
of their spuriousness from their vio-
lation of chronology, 154 — 354; ii.
114 — 120; in speaking of Phintia,
154—164 ; of Alffisa, 164—169 ;
of Thericlean cups, 169—204; of
the Zanclaeans and Messenians,
204 — 225 ; in using Herodotus's
phrase, irirvos Ziktiv iKTplfieiv,
225—232 ; in speaking of the Tau-
romenites, 232 — 242 ; in using De-
mocritus's phrase, \6yo5 epyov (Tkm,
242 — 246 ; Euripides's phrase, aBd.-
voTov opy^v, &c. 246 — 266 ; and
Pindar's and Callimachus's phrases,
dai/J-wv erepos, oXeOpovevpe, 266 — 270 ;
in calling Pythagoras <piK6(ro(pos,
270 — 274; in speaking of tragedy,
274 — 354 ; in using the words ■np6-
voia, (TToix^Ta, in the Platonic sense,
and the Pythagorical expression,
apfxovia rou kSctixov, ii. 115 — 118 ; in
quoting the saying, firfdev a/xaprd-
veiv, 6eov, ii. 118 — 120; proofs of
their spuriousness from their lan-
guage, 355 — ii. 78 ; in Phalaris
writing Attic, 355—430; and that
the new Attic, ii. 1 — 31 ; proofs of
their spuriousness in reckoning
money according to the Attic ac-
count, ii. 31 — 78 ; proofs of their
spuriousness from the improbabi-
lity, absurdity, inconsistency, &c. of
their matter, ii. 78—100, 120—125 ;
from their late appearance, being un-
known to the ancients, ii. 100 — 114,
125—129.
Phalarism, 25.
Phavorinus quoted, ii. 115,
Pherecydes, preceptor to Pythagoras,
124; age of, 126.
Philargyrius quoted, 340.
Philip of Macedon, age of, 144 ; his
golden cup, ii. 122.
^i\6(ro^os, philosopher, 270 — 274 ;
the word, when and by whom first
used, 271.
Philostratus, his style, 362 ; solecisms
of, 363.
Philoxenus, his Glossary quoted, 258.
Phintia, Phintis, 154 — 164; a town in
Sicily, 154 ; when and by whom
built, 155 ; not two towns of that
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
385
name, 157 ; why cilled both mari-
time and inland, 157 — 159 ; the re-
sidue of the Geloans transplanted
thither, 162.
Phintians, 154 — 163; the same people
with the Geloans, 162.
Phintias tyrant of Agrigentum, 155;
age of, 160, 161 ; built the town
Phintia, 155, 161, 162; for the
residue of the Geloans, 162.
^Xeyfii}, 291.
Phocaeans plunder the temple of
Delphi, ii. 121.
^uvfi ;^pT)(r0at rfj irorp^a,' what meant
thereby in Jamblichus, 425.
Phormus, more correctly Phormis,
the Syracusian, mentioned as one of
the inventors of comedy, 251 ; an
officer in the service of Gelo, 217,
253.
Photius suspects the Epistles, 92 ;
author in, corrected, 422 ; quoted,
ii. 60, 68.
Phraortes, time of his reign, 101.
Phrynichus the tragic poet, age of,
297, 304—306 ; scholar of Thespis,
285, 301 ; called opxncmKbs, 284,
312 — 317 ; celebrated for his songs,
311; one of the first to intro-
duce the new and serious tragedy,
294, 321 ; the first that made wo-
men its subject, 291, 300; when
he first wrote, 302, 321 ; the goat
no longer the prize of tragedy in his
epoch, 301 ; his victory, 305 ; fined
for his MtATjTov aXooais, 304,314;
period between his first and last
plays, 307 ; quoted, 305, 317 ; not
two tragedians of this name,
307—317.
Phrynichus the Athenian general, 309,
310.
Phrynichus the comic poet, 308, 309.
^vcriSw, its first syllable long, 417.
Physicians, how hired and remune-
rated in the age of Phalaris, ii. 123,
124.
Pindar, age of, 116 ; quoted, 61, 266,
348, 384 ; explained, ii. 98, 99 ; got
his livelihood by the Muses, ii. 81 ;
his character of Phalaris, ii. 82 ;
the Epistles unknown to him, ii.
101 ; Scholiast on, quoted, 214 ;
corrected, 215, 216.
ritVal TTTVKThs, what meant thereby,
ii. 127, 128.
Pine-tree, lopping fatal to, 225, 226,
231.
Titos, a Doric word, ii. 65.
VOL. II.
Pisistratus tyrant of Athens, when he
usurped the government, 103, 320;
story of his wounding himself, 320,
321 ; his sons, when expelled, 332.
Pitch-tree, lopping fatal to, 226, 231.
Pittacus tyrant of Lesbos, age of, 102.
TIItvos Si/cT/j/ iKTplfieiu, whose saying,
225—232.
Plato quoted, 61, 95, 125, 285, 289,
385; ii. 22, 116; explained, 125,
326 ; saying of, 245 ; age of, 146,
149; a disciple of Archytas, 148,
149 ; a wrestler at the Isthmian
games, 121 ; his statement respect-
ing the age of tragedy given by him
as a paradox, 285, 325 ; the Epistles
unknown to him, ii. 101 ; his usage
of the words trpdvoia, <ttolx^7ov, ii.
115, 116.
Plato the comedian quoted, 280.
Plays, first subject of, 293 ; at first
carried about the villages in carts,
258 ; of the old and middle comedy,
number of, 248.
n\rjKTpov, 7rA.7j(r(rco, 316.
Pliny quoted, 223, 231, 232; ii. 127,
128; corrected, ii. 128; mistaken
in making Thericles a turner, 169.
Plural, use of, for the singular, a li-
cense familiar in languages, 24, 25,
45, 46.
Plutarch quoted, 124, 172, 182, 186,
242, 244, 259, 320, 336, 372, 392,
418 ; ii. 21, 22, 47; corrected, 216,
328 ; explained, 330 ; censured, 321,
322 ; imposed upon by Heraclides
Ponticus, 294.
UoSoKdKTj, afterwards ^v\oy, import of,
ii. 5.
Ucc\e7(r6ai, afterwards fiadiC^iv, import
of, ii. 6.
Politianus ascribes the Epistles to Lu-
cian, 90.
HoWa Kaiva rod iroXc/xov, 232.
Pollux, Julius, quoted, 172, 186, 387 ;
ii. 60, 61, 69 ; corrected, 295, 315 ;
ii. 35, 37, 50, 60, 65, 67 ; imposed
upon by Heraclides Ponticus, 295 ;
explained and defended, ii. 35 — 40.
Polybius quoted, ii. 87, 104; age of,
ii. 105 ; defends the story of Phala-
ris's Bull, ii. 104, 105 ; the Epistles
unknown in his time, ii. 105.
Polyclitus, 169, ii. 32; story of his
rich reward from Phalaris absurd,
ii. 120—125.
Polycrates tyrant of Samos, age of,
128, 129; his father, 129.
Uo/xirfvciv and TTOfiirela, import of, 335.
3d
386
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
Uopviia, false reading for 'Kp6voia, ii.
117.
TiSpvos iv TraiaX, import of, ii. 21.
Porphyry quoted, 360, 422.
riori, Doric for irphs, 397.
TloTCfKd), formation of, 397.
Up for irar^p, ii. 20.
Pratinas, his plays, 294; why called
opxrjcTTiK^s, 312.
Proclus quoted, 385 ; corrected and
explained, ii. 116.
UpodeScoKSra, 57.
UpoSidco/jLi, 70 ; import of, ii. 25 — 31.
Prolepsis, use of, 234, 339.
np6uoia, Divine Providence, first used
by Plato in this sense, ii. 115, 116.
Protagoras, a lawgiver to the Thu-
rians, at first a porter, ii. 91.
UpoTpeirco, import of, in New Attic, ii.
2, 14 — 17 ; in the sense of exhort-
ing never takes a dative after it,
ii. 14.
Proverbial gnoma mostly borrowed
from the stage, 247.
Proverbs, Greek and Latin, the use of
them defended, 55, 56.
Psaumis, when victor at the Olympic
games, 215.
"VfvSofiapTvpwv, false reading for \pevdo-
fiapTvpicov, 408.
Hr-fja-a-Q), import of, 314.
Ptolemy quoted, ii. 87.
Pugillares, ii. 127.
Pyrrhichists, 400.
Pythagoras, age of, 98, 114 — 151; a
native of Samos, 426; table exhi-
biting a view of his life, 117, 118;
to whom scholar, 124; his rjXiKla
or aKfi^, 117, 122—124; this, why
postdated by ecclesiastical writers,
133 ; when first in Italy, 117, 126—
136,382; in Sicily, 116; his victory
at Olympia ■7ru7ju^, 117—119; the
first that boxed ivr^xvus, 121 ; why
called KOfjL-rjTTjs, 120; his stay in
Egypt, 135, 136; his marriage with
Theano, 132 ; his sons, 133 ; his death,
118, 136 — 151 ; contemporary with
Phalaris, 99, 233 ; ii. 97 ; not with
Numa, 127 ; not concerned in depos-
ing Phalaris, 114; stories respecting
him, 130, 233, 234; his advice to
his scholars, 181 ; their devotion to
him, 379 ; their number at Cro-
tona, 138 ; had no society of scho-
lars in Italy after Cylon's conspi-
racy, 117; his followers almost all
destroyed then, ibid. ; the first who
called himself ^i\6<TO(pos, 271 ; and
the world k6(Tixos, 391 ; ii. 118; his
division of a man's life, 124, 137 ;
said to have forged poems in the
name of Orpheus, 86 ; not the au-
thor of the Golden Verses, 426 ;
epistle ascribed to him, a forgery,
ibid.
Pythagoras Rheginus, a statuary, age
of, 221.
Pythagorean sect, continuance of, and
succession in, after Pythagoras's
death, 145 — 151 ; excluded all epic
poets, 426 ; its decay, to what at-
tributed, 361 ; age of the last of,
145, 421.
Pythangelus, 279.
Pytharatus, when archon, 122.
Python of Astypalaea, said in the
Epistles to have poisoned Phalaris's
wife, ii. 79, 80, 88.
Q.
Quadrans, Roman, its value, ii. 53,
69 — 71 ; its metal, ii. 53.
Quincunx, its metal and value, ii. 53,
Q5.
Quinquessis, not a coin, but a sum,
ii. 76.
R.
Rhegians, how long under the ty-
ranny of Anaxilas, 223 ; with the
Zanclaeans drive his sons out of
Messana, 222, 223; their govern-
ment and laws, 407 ; reduce the
weight of their brass litrae, ii. 57.
Rhegian talent, ii. 54.
Romans, the, recoin and enhance
the value of their brass money, ii.
41 ; the metal and value of their
coins, ii. 53 ; had no such sum as
talent, ii. 55 ; took their names and
species of money from the Dorians
of Sicily and Italy, ii. 73.
Roman language, its changes, and
their cause, ii. 10.
Rubenius, Albertus, his MS. treatise
on Th. Mallius, 27—40.
S.
Salmasius, character of, defended, 65 ;
his false corrections of Epicharmus,
ii. 62, 63 ; mistakes of, ii. 70, 71.
Sannyrion the comic poet, 343, 344,
345 ; date of his play called Danae,
261.
Sappho the poetess, a native of Les-
bos, 374.
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
387
Hdpa, false reading for Aladpa, 422.
Sarcles, when burnt, 109.
Sarpedon, pretended letter of, ii. 128,
129.
Satira, the Roman, nature of, 334;
when first abusive, ibid. ; what it
somewhat resembled among the
Greeks, ibid.
Saturnian verse, 276 — 278 ; called
also Archilochian, 278 ; found in
what Greek authors, 277 ; by whom
first used among the Latins, 277;
examples of, 276, 277 ; its inventor,
278.
Satyrica, the Greek, nature of, 334 ;
not to be confounded with the Ro-
man satira, ibid.
Scaliger, Jos,, character of, defended,
65 ; his opinion of Manilius, 81 ;
deceived by some forged iambics
of Muretus, 91 ; his violation of
anapaestic measures, 190, 203; mis-
takes of, 264, 265, 329 ; ii. 72 ; his
'OXv/xTTidSwv *Avaypa(p^ mistaken
for an ancient piece, 264, 329 ; this
quoted, 329 ; an opinion of his de-
fended, ii. 70—72.
Scaliger, Jul., quoted, 327.
Scaurus, ^Emilius, his argument
against Varius Sucronensis, 12, 52,
Scipio, story of, 365 ; brazen bull
found by him in Carthage, supposed
by some to have been Phalaris's
Bull, ii, 105, 108.
Scylax, corruption of the present copy
of, 369 ; quoted, 374.
Scymnus Chius quoted, 359, 380, 405,
410.
Scythes tyrant of the Zanclaeans, 211.
Selden, Mr., deceived by the spurious
Epistles, 89 ; his false readings of
the Arundel Marble, 256, 257, 281,
290, 298, 302.
"SieKcvKiSas, from nom. sing, in is, not
iBrjs, 186.
Semel atque iterum, import of, 197.
Semissis, sembella, its metal and value,
ii. 53.
Seneca the tragedian, his structure of
anapaestic verse, 190, 203 ; no tri-
brach or cretic found at the end
thereof in his genuine plays, 202 ;
a trochee when admitted there, ibid. ;
quoted, 196, 202, 203 ; explained,
197 ; his neglect of synalcepha, 203.
Septuagint, the, quoted, ii. 18, 29; its
Hebraisms, ii. 18.
Septuennio, false reading for sept-
uncio, ii. 66.
Septunx, derivation of, ii. 66.
Servius quoted, 277.
Servius Tullius, age of, ii. 73 ; first
coined money at Rome, ibid. ; his
classification of the Roman citizens,
ii. 46.
Sestertius, ii. 36, 53.
Sextans, its value, ii. 53, 69, 70, 73 ;
its metal, ii. 53.
Sextantarii asses, ii. 66.
Sherburn, Sir Edward, his Manilius,
27 ; his loan of books and papers
to Dr. Bentley, 27 — 40.
5t, termination of dat. plur,, length of,
before consonants, 191, 192.
Sibylline Oracles a forgery, 83.
Sicilian money, ii. 31 — 78; table of,
giving its metal and value, ii. 53.
Sicily, language of, 355 ; ancient me-
dals of, 356 ; whence colonised,
ibid.
Sicyonians, pretended inventors of
tragedy, 332.
Sigonius, his forged essay De Conso-
latione, 84.
Silli, their resemblance to the Roman
satira, 334.
Simonides the lyric poet, age of,
107—112, 214, 243, 292; a native
of Ceos, 373; quoted, 108, 110, 111,
213, 245 ; ii. 58 ; corrected, 347 ;
ii. 59 ; said to have invented the art
of memory, 109, 111 ; certain letters
of the alphabet invented by him, 292 ;
ii. 7 ; story of, 213 ; his victories by
dithyrambs, 347 ; got his livelihood
by the Muses, ii. 81 ; a friend of
Hiero and Pausanias, ii. 83.
Simplicius quoted, 419.
Smyrna, marble of, quoted, ii. 63.
Solecisms, Attic, affected by the so-
phists, 355, 362 ; definition and ex-
amples of, 363.
Solinus, mistake of, 134 ; quoted, 232.
Solon, when archon, 103, 319, 380;
ii. 5 ; prohibits the acting of plays,
318; when he conversed with Croe-
sus, 320, 321 ; his friendship with
Crcesus, ii. 83 ; his death, 320 ; say-
ings of, 49, 245, 321 ; laws of, writ-
ten on wooden tables, 414 ; these
quoted, ii. 5 ; their language, 428 ;
ii. 5 — 8 ; obsolete words found there-
in, ii. 5, 6 ; only eighteen Greek
letters in his time, ii. 7 ; his Kup-
)8ets, ibid.
Son, license in the use of the word,
ii. 19.
Sophists, their habit of making coun-
388
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
terfeit speeches, &c. 83 ; affect Attic
solecisms, 355, 362.
^o<t)i(€iv, to make wise, when first used
in this sense, ii. 29.
Sophocles quoted, 130, 194, 195, 270 ;
corrected, 199, 200; age of, 399;
his victory over ^schylus, 331;
added a third actor, 300 ; aspired
after the sublime character, 343 ;
period betw^een his first and last
plays, 306.
'2,o(p6K\(ios, its formation, 172.
Sophron, language of, 355 ; quoted,
ii. 60.
Spanhemius, Ezekiel, his character of
Dr. Bentley, 50, 51.
Spartans buy gold of Croesus to gild
the face of Apollo's statue, ii. 121,
"SiCpayaTaiy, obsolete form for ^(payais,
ii. 6.
Stanley, Mr., his correction of an
epigram of Dioscorides, 282.
'Xrdaifx.ov, its change of signification,
ii. 6.
2tot^/), not a Sicilian word, ii. 63.
Stephanus Byzantinus quoted, 411 ;
corrected, 413.
Stephanus, Henr., his testimony of L.
Castelvetro, 66.
Stesichorus, a melic or lyric poet, ii.
81; his age, 98, 106—113, 164;
his language, 355 ; his fable of the
horse and stag, 106; ii. 92; places
of his birth and death, ii. 78 ; got
his livelihood by the Muses, ii. 81 ;
his motive for going to Greece, ii.
92 ; story of his poem on the wife of
Nicocles, ii. 80, 81 ; of the contest
for his ashes, ii. 78, 79, 84 — 86;
his statue extant at Himera in the
time of Cicero, ii. 79 ; his friend-
ship with Phalaris a fiction, ii. 82,
83, 96—100.
Stesimbrotus defended, 322.
Stipendiarii, import of, in Pliny, 223.
Stobaeus deceived by the spurious Pha-
laris, 89, 91 ; quoted, 391, 392, 398,
416,417,422; corrected, 372, 393,
406, 417 ; Zaleucus's proemium thei*e
a forgery, 391 — 398; Charondas's
proemium there a forgery, 398 — 417.
2Totxetoi/, element, first used by Plato
in this sense, ii. 115, 116.
Strabo quoted, 358, 374, 384, 414.
Stratonicus the musician, story of,
254.
Style, arguments drawn from, their
force, 91.
Suidas quoted, 38, 98, 102, 105, 182,
411; ii. 68; corrected, 244, 274,
288, 353, 374, 412 ; ii. 54, 59 ; cen-
sured, 286, 308—313, 413; age of,
93, 94; deceived by the spurious
Phalaris, 89.
Sun, the, fabulous tradition respecting
his cup, 174.
Superbus, age of, 134.
Susarion, his pretensions to the in-
. vention of comedy, 249, 251 — 261 ;
his plays only extemporal farces,
not written, 251, 253; did not
bring comedy into Athens, 257 ;
did not erect a stage there, ibid. ;
why called an Icarian, ibid. ; the
prize he contended for, 259, 260,
353 ; his age, 260, 261, 341 ; a dis-
tinct poet from Sannyrion, 260, 261 ;
in his epoch the first rise of comedy,
349 ; five supposed iambics of his
quoted and corrected, 253, 254 ;
these not part of a play, 255, 256.
Sybaris, war of, with Crotona, 138 ;
when destroyed, ibid.
Sybarites afterwards called Thurians,
405, 409, 410 ; laws used by them,
405.
Symmachus, victor at Olympia, 220 ;
age of, 221.
Synaloepha, examples of neglect of,
203.
Syracuse, language of, 356.
Syracusan talent, ii. 54.
Syriac language, its long duration un-
changed, ii. 12 ; cause thereof, ibid.]
said to be yet spoken, ibid.
To i^ afia^wv, origin of this proverb,
335.
Tabeliae, ii. 127.
Tabulae triumphales quoted, 278.
Td\aifTOV, ii. 53 — 57.
TaAos, quantity of last syllable of,
195.
Talent, what originally meant by the
word, ii. 56 ; talent of silver and
talent of brass of the same value,
ii. 49 ; great, what meant thereby,
ii. 55 ; Sicilian, ii. 53 — 57 ; not a
coin, but a sum, ii. 49, 75 ; its divi-
sion, ii. 39 ; its value, ii. 32, 35, 36,
40, 48, 53 ; its metal, ii. 53 ; two
sorts thereof, ii. 36, 40 ; Attic, its
value, ii. 34 ; its division, ii. 38, 39 ;
Attic, Sicilian, which meant in the
Epistles, ii. 33, 34, 51 ; Neapolitan,
Syracusan, Rhegian, values of, ii.
54; the Neapolitan the same with
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
389
the old, and the Syracusan the
same with the later Sicilian talent,
ibid.
Tapavriviov, Hapavrlvov, TapavTiviSioy,
391.
Tarentines, their cloths, 390, 391.
Tos ^pvywv iKTo/xas explained, 95.
Tatian quoted, 123; ii. 125.
Tauromenites, called Naxians in the
days of Phalaris, 232 ; medals of, 239.
Taurominium, a city of Sicily,
232 — 242 ; formerly called Naxos,
232, 239 ; when and by whom built,
78, 233, 235, 236, 239; origin of
the name, 233 ; its situation, ibid. ;
mentioned in Phalaris's Epistles
many generations before it was
heard of, 235.
Taurominium, Tauromenium, how
written, 57, 58.
Taurominius, the river Onabala, when
first so called, 238.
Tavpos, a bull, prize of the dithyramb,
347—349.
Taurus the Platonic philosopher, a
saying which he used to repeat,
ii. 117.
T({|ts, 391, 392.
TcXe/ScoSr;, a false reading, 150.
Telemachus deposed Phalaris, 103,
105, 113, 114, 317 ; his descendants,
103, 104, 318.
Temple, Sir Wm,, his opinion of the
Epistles of Phalaris, 22, 77 ; his
use of Delphos for Delphi, 58.
Terence quoted, 47, 55, 61, 246 ; ii. 19.
Terillus tyrant of Himera, 212.
Teruncius, its metal and value, ii. 53.
Testament, New, Greek of, quoted, ii.
18, 29.
TerpdeuTa, mistake for TpdevTa, 138.
Tetrans, ii. 70, 72, 73.
Terpas, ii. 66, 67 ; whose money, ii.
50 ; its value, ii. 53, 69 — 71, 73; its
metal, ii. 53.
Thales the Milesian, age of, 125; pre-
ceptor to Pythagoras, 124; nothing
written by him, 392; a friend of
Periander, ii. 83.
Thales the Cretan, age of, 381, 413.
Theaetetus, epigram of, quoted, 120.
Theagenides, when archon, 109.
Themis, or Theomis, mistake for
Thespis, 323.
Themistius quoted, ii. 119.
Themistocles at the charge of a
tragedy by Phrynichus, 305 ; ac-
quainted with Anaxagoras and Me-
lissus, 323.
Theocritus quoted, 195 ; ii. 42, 43, 44,
95 ; explained, ii. 45 ; corrected, ii.
45 ; language of, 355 ; an epic poet,
418; his Pharmaceutria, 420.
Theodemus, or Eudemus,when archon,
382.
Theodoret, his mistake respecting the
Locrians, 382.
Theopompus, when archon, 400.
Theophrastus explained, 170, 406 ;
corrected, 406.
&epas for Oepatraivas, no abbreviation
of the kind in Greek MSS., ii. 20.
Q'qpes, import of, 171.
Thericlean cups. 169—189, 288 ; whose
invention, 169 ; named from the in-
ventor, 169, 172 ; cups afterwards
so called from their shape, 170 ;
size of, 184 ; when in great use at
Athens, 185.
©Tjpi/cAetos, the word, derivation of,
171, 172, 173, 181.
Thericles, inventor of the Thericlean
cups, 169 ; a Corinthian potter, 169,
170 ; age of, 170, 177—186 ; not the
same with the Athenian archon of
that name, 185, 186.
Theron tyrant of Agrigentum, age of,
105, 112 ; ii. 126 ; genealogy of, 103,
104,318; his victory at Olympia, 105.
Thersias, or Thersander, the first vic-
tor at Olympia with the airfjVT], 214.
Theseus, his tomb at Athens, 327
— 331 ; when built, 331 ; tragedies
not acted at, 328—331.
Thespis, the inventor of tragedy, 250,
251, 275, 281—296; age of, 251,
296—324, 393 ; an Icarian, 257 ;
carried his plays about the villages
in carts, 258, 336 ; called dpxVfJ''
TiKhs, 284, 312—317 ; his plays all
satyrical, 294, 295 ; styled kw/xoi,
353 ; never had women for their sub-
ject, 291 ; plays forged in his name
by Heraclides, 289—295; the al-
phabet not completed till after his
time, 291, 292 ; his acting hin-
dered by Solon, 318 ; date of his
first play, 296, 297, 303, 304, 321 ;
supposed fragments of his quoted,
291, 294 ; another fragment, cor-
rected, 295.
©7 for Oehs, ii. 20.
Thucydides quoted, 205, 388 ; not un-
derstood by the vulgar in the time of
Oppian, ii. 13.
QvyaTqp, import of, in New Attic, ii.
2, 17—20.
390
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
Thurians, when and by whom colo-
nised, 385, 398, 405, 409, 410;
when subverted, 385 ; money of, like
the Attic, 410 ; their language, ibid. ;
their misgovernment, 385 ; their
lawgiver and laws, 398 — 417.
Thurii, when built, 385.
Timaeus, Sicilian historian, age in
which he wrote, ii. 104, 108 ; denies
the story of Phalaris's Bull, ii. 104,
105, 108.
Timon, a writer of silli, 334.
Tiyas hv etiroi \6yovs of the sophists,
83.
Tragedy, age of, 274 — 354 ; by whom
invented, 251, 275, 281—296 ; not
older than Thespis, 324 — 354 ; what
it arose out of, 260, 325, 332, 340 ;
its first form, 250, 284, 288, 321,
325, 333 ; its first prize, 260, 275,
296, 301, 338, 340, 347, 349, 353,
354 ; its first subject, 293, 294 ; its
first measures, 249, 250 ; by whom
improved, 282, 321 ; expense and
furniture of, 399 — 401 ; in its in-
fancy had nothing pompous or orna-
mental, 393.
Tragic chorus : see chorus.
Tpdyos, a goat, the first prize of tra-
gedy, 260, 275, 296, 301, 338, 340,
347, 349, 353, 354 ; not continued to
the time of Phrynichus, 301.
TpaycfiSia, the word not older than
tragedy itself, or Thespis, 274, 275,
337, 338, 340, 393 ; its derivation,
275, 338, 340, 354; never means
comedy, 342, 350, 352 ; a meta-
phorical signification of, 393, 394,
398 ; this when first used, 398, 399,
401.
Tressis, not a coin, but a sum, ii. 76.
Triens, Roman, value of, ii. 53, 69, 70 ;
metal of, ii. 53.
Tpias, ii. 66, 67, 73 ; whose money, ii.
50 ; its value, ii. 53, 69, 70 ; its
metal, ii. 53.
Tpla rd\avra, false reading for rpiavra,
ii. 38.
T/Jt|oi for TpiffffoL, ii. 72.
Trochaic foot, proper for dancing, 250.
Tpvycf^ia, the same as Kwficfdla, 350,
353 ; never means tragedy, 342,
350, 353 ; its derivation, 349, 352—
354.
TpvycfShs, a less honourable name than
KcoiJL({)Shs, 344.
TpvyoKWjxepSla, a false reading, 353.
Tpui, wine, the prize of comedy, 353,
354.
Tynnondas tyrant of Euboea, age of,
103.
Tyrants, thirty, date of their usurpa-
tion and expulsion, ii. 4.
Tzetzes, Joh., quoted and explained,
96, 97 ; corrected, 347 ; deceived
by the spurious Phalaris, 89.
U.
Uncia, its metal and value, ii. 53.
V.
Valerius Maximus, mistake of, 241.
Valesius, Hen., his false emendation
of Dionysius Hal., 126.
Velia, an Ionic colony of the Pho-
cseans, 375, 376.
Vibius Sequester corrected, 238.
Virgil quoted, 157, 171, 193, 227,268,
326 ; ii. 17 ; explained, 335 ; exam-
ples from, of prolepsis, 234 ; of ne-
glect of synaloepha, 203.
Vitruvius quoted, 393 ; explained, ii.
72, 73.
Vizzanius, his edition of Ocellus Lu-
canus, 423 — 428 ; preface of, quoted,
424 ; his interpretation of a passage
of Jamblichus, 424, 425.
Vossius, Ger., mistakes of, 286 — 288,
327.
W.
We, the frequent use of, for I, 25, 46.
Wolfius, a mistake of, 94.
Wotton, Mr., his testimony that the
Dissertation was written at his re-
quest, 6 ; his censure of Sir Wm.
Temple defended, 58 ; address to,
why omitted in second edition, 79.
X.
Xenocles the tragic poet, authors who
mention him, 279, 280 ; his victory
over Euripides accounted for, 279 ;
plays of, 279, 280.
Xenocrates, when victor at the Py-
thian games, 105, 112.
Xenophanes, a writer of silli, 334 ; an
epic poet, 418.
Xenophilus, age of, 145 ; the last Py-
thagorean, 146, 421.
Xerxes, his expedition, date of, 305 ;
ii. 125 ; said to have eaten his mo-
ther Atossa, ii. 125.
Z.
Zaypa7os, a barbarism for Zaypevs, 96.
Zaleucus the Locrian lawgiver, his ex-
istence doubted, 376, 377; age of,
380, 381 ; no Pythagorean, 376, 379,
INDEX TO PHALARIS.
391
380 — 383; his book of laws a for-
gery, 376—398.
Zancle, the earlier name of Messana,
204; when and by whom first called
Messana, 205, 207, 208, 210, 222 ;
no example of its being called so
before the age of Anaxilas, 218 ; no
colony of the Messenians of Pelo-
ponnesus settled there, 222.
Zanclaeans, 204 — 225 ; dispossessed
of their city by the Samians and
Milesians, 205, 210; these again
driven out by Anaxilas, 205, 211,
218; no proof of a people bearing
this name after Zancle was called
Messana, 220, 224.
Zimisces the emperor, age of, 93.
INDEX
TO THE
DISSERTATIONS ON THE EPISTLES
OF
THEMISTOCLES, SOCRATES, EURIPIDES, AND ON
THE FABLES OF ^SOP.
A.
^LiAN, his self-contradiction, ii. 185,
186.
^schines entertained at the court of
Dionysius, ii. 204, 205.
iEsop, whether he left any written
fables behind him, ii. 223 ; no Greek
actor of that name in the time of
Aristophanes, ii. 224 ; whose slave,
ii. 233, 234 ; his conversation with
Croesus, ii. 233 ; place of his death,
ibid. ; his deformity a fiction, ii.
234 — 237 ; the story first broached
by Planudes, ii. 234; and never
hinted at by any author before
that time, ii. 234, 235 ; a statue
erected by the Athenians to his me-
mory, ii. 235 ; epigram thereon, ii.
236 ; ambassador of Croesus to Co-
rinth and Delphi, ibid. ; his rebuke
of Solon, ibid. ; his fellow-slave,
ii. 237 ; Fables of: see iEsopean
Fables ; Life of, the gross ignorance
it betrays, ii. 233 — 237 ; its author,
ii. 233—236.
^sop the Roman actor, ii. 224.
iEsopean Fables, by whom versified
and collected, ii. 225—227; fable
referred to by Aristophanes not in
the present collection, ii. 224, 225 ;
a fable by Socrates, quotation from,
ii. 225 ; those collected by Deme-
trius Phalereus not the same as the
present, ii. 225 ; edition in elegiac
verse, cited by Suidas under the
name of MvOoi, or MvdiKh, quota-
tions from it, ii. 225, 226 ; edition
by Babrius in choliambics, ii. 226,
227 ; quotations from it, ii. 227,
229 — 231 ; compendium of, by one
Gabrias in iambics, 226, 227 ; La-
tin versions, ii. 227 ; the Greek
fables now extant, two parcels of, ii.
227 ; the more ancient one, when
and by whom first published, ibid. ;
number of fables it contains, ibid. ;
falsely ascribed to ^Esop, ii. 227,
228 ; is nothing else but a prose
epitome of Babrius, ii. 229 ; quota-
tions from it, ii. 229 — 232; the later
parcel, by whom probably written,
ii. 232, 233 ; several passages in,
betraying a modern writer, ii. 232 ;
first appeared with ^Esop's life, ii.
233 ; quotations from it, ii. 232,
233.
^Ethiopia, king of, his problem to Ama-
sis, ii. 234.
Agathias the poet quoted, ii. 236.
Agatho the tragic poet, a friend of Eu-
ripides, ii. 208, 215 ; no comic poet
of that name, ii. 208, 209 ; lashed
by the ancients for his effeminacy,
ii. 209 ; Plato's convivium held in his
house, ibid.
Al(r(imov y^Xoiov, what meant thereby,
ii. 224.
Alexander, his remark on Xenocrates's
refusal to accept a present from
him, ii. 215 ; his munificence to the
same, ii. 220.
Allatius, Leo, first published the Epis-
tles of Socrates, &c. ii. 189 ; was
fully persuaded of their genuine-
ness, ibid. ; his inference from a
passage of Libanius disputed, ii.
191 ; gross blunder of, ii. 196, 197.
Ammonius quoted, ii. 221.
INDEX TO THE DISSERTATIONS, &C.
393
Anacharsis, spurious epistles of, ii.
222.
^AuiOfls, its meaning explained, ii.
218.
Anytus, prosecutor of Socrates, ba-
nished, ii. 197.
Aphthonius the rhetorician, his essay
upon some iEsopic fables, ii. 232.
Apollonides, Nicenus, his treatise Uepl
KaTi^€V(Tfi4uTis 'IffTopias, ii. 206, 22 1 ;
pronounces the Epistles of Euri-
pides and of Aratus to have been
forged by Sabirius Polio, ii. 206 ; a
book of his dedicated to Tiberius, ii.
221.
Aratus, epistles of, according to Apol-
lonides, spurious, ii. 206.
Archelaus king of Macedonia, his invi-
tation to Socrates, ii. 189, 190 ; en-
tertains Euripides and Agatho at
his court, ii. 208.
Arete daughter of Aristippus, ii. 199.
Aristippus, his dialogues, in what idiom
written, ii. 199; entertained at the
court of Dionysius, ii. 204.
Aristophanes quoted, ii. 223, 224 ;
explained, ii. 224; Scholiast on,
mistaken, ii. 209, 224.
Aristotle, his Uepl Evy eveias suspected
by Plutarch to be spurious, ii. 201 ;
attended by a company of scholars,
ii. 234.
Arundel Marble, its authority ques-
tioned, ii. 186.
Athenaeus quoted, ii. 205, 232 ; cor-
rected, ii. 232.
Athenians, the, banish those concerned
in the accusation of Socrates, ii.
195 ; put Melitus, his prosecutor,
to death, ii. 197 ; erect a statue to
the memory of ^sop, ii. 235.
Avienus, his Latin jEsopean fables in
elegiac verse, ii. 227 ; preface to,
quoted, ii. 224.
B.
Babrius turned the -(Esopean fables
into choliambics, ii. 226 ; by what
authors mentioned, ibid. ; age to
which he belonged, ii. 228 ; quoted,
ii. 227, 229—233 ; corrected, ii. 231.
Bachet, Monsieur, his Life of ^sop,
ii. 222.
BaXaKphs, Macedonian idiom for ^a-
\aKphs, ii. 200.
Barnes, Joshua, the epistles of Euri-
pides held by him to be genuine, ii.
206 ; his arguments answered, ii.
207,211, &c.
VOL. II.
BcpeviKT}, Macedonian idiom for ^epe-
vU-n, ii. 200.
BepvlKT], a mistake for Bcpei/iKT], ii. 200.
BlXiinros, Macedonian idiom for ♦(-
\nntos, ii- 200.
Boeau iv tt} KapSia, a Hebraism, ii. 232.
Bowevpou, a beast, the word unknown
to ancient authors, ii. 232.
BovToXis, a bird, the word unknown to
ancient authors, ii. 232.
C.
Cephisophon, his friendship with Eu-
ripides, ii. 213; the circumstance
which broke it oiF, ibid. ; this men-
tioned by all authors who speak of
him, ii. 214.
Clito the herb-woman, mother of Eu-
ripides, ii. 219.
Conon, the walls of Athens when re-
paired by him, ii. 193, 196.
Crates, spurious letters of, ii. 222.
Cyrus, his expedition, date of, 197.
D.
Demetrius Phalereus, his collections of
^sopean fables, ii. 225 ; probably
the first of their kind committed to
writing in the form of a book, ibid. ;
seem to have been in prose, ibid. ;
not the same with those now extant,
ibid.
Democritus, spurious letters of, ii. 222.
Diodorus Siculus, of high credit in a
point of chronology, ii. 188.
Diogenes, spurious letters of, ii. 222.
Diogenes Laertius quoted, ii. 192, 193,
195, 199, 225.
Dion Chrysostom quoted, ii. 224.
Dionysius the younger, when he came
to the crown, ii. 203.
E.
ElSexO^s Kopvdehs, a proverb, ii. 236.
'E^effTidScay, a mistake for 'H^otcTTm-
Scoj/, ii. 199.
Erasmus mistaken, ii. 223.
Eubulides, when magistrate, ii. 196.
Euripides, his Palamedes quoted, ii.
196; this play when acted, ibid.;
resides with Archelaus, ii. 208 ; ' a
friend and acquaintance of Agatho,
ibid. ; not likely to be concerned at
the loss of Sophocles's plays, ii.
~217 ; one cause of his leaving Athens,
ii. 213 ; his age when Archelaus
came to the crown, ii. 219 ; worried
by a pack of dogs, ii. 217 ; date of
3 £
394
INDEX TO THE DISSERTATIONS UPON
his death, ii. 196; his sons alive in
the year of his death, ii. 220.
Euripides, epistles of, spurious, ii.
206 — 221 ; by whom espoused as
genuine, ii. 206 ; according to Apol-
lonides, forged by Sabirius Polio,
ibid. ; their number, ibid. ; every one
of them contains matter enough for
a detection of its spuriousness, ii.
208 ; at variance with known facts,
ii. 208, 209, 212—214, 219; their
extravagance and air of sophistry,
ii. 214 — 221 ; quoted and explained,
ii. 218.
Eusebius, his judgment questioned, ii.
204.
G.
Gahrias, his compendium of the ^Eso-
pean fables in iambics, ii. 226, 227.
Gelo, his victory over the Carthagi-
nians, date of, ii. 186.
Gregorius Gyraldus mistaken, ii. 209.
Gryllus, son of Xenophon, elegies
jvritten on him, ii. 195.
H.
Heraclitus, spurious letters of, ii. 222.
Hermippus quoted, ii. 192; mistaken
about Polycrates's oration against
Socrates, ii. 192, 195; another mis"
take of, ii. 195.
Hesychius quoted, ii. 199, 224; mis-
taken, ii. 199.
Hiero of Syracuse, when he began to
reign, ii. 185, 186; his race-horses
and tent at the Olympian games,
ibid. ; when victorious at the Pythian
games, ii. 185.
Hieronymus, Rhodius, produces a tem-
porary Athenian statute allowing
polygamy, ii. 200 ; this suspected to
be a forgery, ii. 201, 202.
Hippocrates, spurious letters of, ii.
222.
Horace quoted, ii. 224.
Job, passage borrowed from, ii. 227.
'l^i(TTios, 'I(/)tcrTta5ot, mistakes in He-
sychius for 'Hipaiarios, &c. ii. 199.
Isocrates quoted, ii. 194 ; his censure
of Polycrates, ibid.
K.
Ke^SAT/, Macedonian idiom for KccpaXr),
ii. 200.
KT]<pevs, false reading for Nt/caevs, ii.
221.
Laches, magistrate when Socrates was
put to death, ii. 195.
Leon the Salaminian, ii. 191.
Libanius quoted and explained," ii.
190, 191 ; an evidence against the
genuineness of Socrates's epistles,
ii. 191 ; his defence of Socrates a
scholastic exercise, ii. 194.
M.
Martial quoted, ii. 207.
Melitus, prosecutor of Socrates, put
to death by the Athenians, ii. 197.
Mesatus, mentioned in Euripides's
epistles, no such person, ii. 208,
209.
Momus, his carping at the works of
the gods, ii. 228 ; the fable dili*er-
ently told by authors, ibid.
MvOoi, MvOiKa, ii. 225.
Myrto, pretended wife of Socrates, ii.
200 — 203 ; never spoken of by any
of Socrates's acquaintance, ii. 201.
N.
Neveletus, more ancient parcel of the
present ^sopean fables first pub-
lished by him, ii. 227 ; thinks them
spurious, ibid.
Panaetius the Stoic confutes the tra-
dition of Socrates's two wives, ii.
201.
Pausanias, three of Themistocles's let-
ters on the subject of his story, ii.
186 ; date of his death, ii. 187.
Pearson, Bishop, holds the epistles of
Socrates to be spurious, ii. 205.
* changed into B in the Macedonian
idiom, ii. 200.
Phaedrus, who gives the title to the
dialogue of Plato, ii. 192; dead be-
fore the days of Socrates, ibid.
Phaedrus the poet, his Latin version
of the iEsopean fables, ii. 227;
quoted, ii. 235.
Phalaris, epistles of, by whom con-
sidered genuine, ii. 190.
Phavorinus quoted and explained, ii.
193 ; detects the common mistake
about Polycrates's oration against
Socrates, ii. 193, 195, 196.
^i\6(TO(pos, the word not heard of in
the time of /Esop, ii. 233 ; by whom
invented, ii. 234.
Philostratus is silent as to ^Esop's de-
formity, ii. 235.
THE EPISTLES OF THEMISTOCLES, &C.
395
*pou5oj explained, ii. 218.
Planudes, Maximus, the present fables
of i'Esop ascribed to him by Vava-
sor, ii. 222 ; his translations into
Greek, ii. 232 ; the later portion of
the present fables probably written
by him, ii. 232, 233 ; author of the
Life of iEsop, ii. 233 ; his age, ii.
234 ; makes iEsop a monster of
ugliness, ii. 234, 235.
Plato, his story of Socrates at the bat-
tle of Delium, ii. 190; the story, in
the opinion of Athenaeus, a fiction,
ii. 192 ; wrote a defence of Socrates
as a scholastic exercise, ii. 194 ;
epistle of, to Dionysius quoted,
ii. 203 ; its date, ibid. ; entertained
at Dionysius's court, ii. 204, 205 ;
attended by a company of scholars,
ii. 234 ; makes no allusion to the
deformity of ^sop, ii. 235.
Plutarch is silent as to the deformity
of iEsop, ii. 235.
Polycrates did not draw up the charge
against Socrates, ii. 192 — 197 ; such
a report not mentioned till some
years after Socrates' s condemna-
tion, ii. 193 ; his accusation of So-
crates not a real charge at the trial,
but written afterwards as a scholastic
exercise, ii. 193, 194 ; so his apolo-
gies of Busiris and Clytsemnestra,
ibid.
Polygamy against the law of Athens,
ii. 200; its impolicy, ii. 201, 202.
Pythagoras first invented the word
<piK6<ro<pos, ii. 233.
a
Quintilian mistaken respecting Poly-
crates' s accusation of Socrates, ii.
195.
R.
Rhodopis the fellow-slave of ^sop,
proverb in memory of her beauty,
ii. 237.
S.
Sabirius Polio said to have forged the
epistles of Euripides and Aratus,
ii. 206.
'2,a$ipios UoWwv, probably a mistaken
reading for 2o;3iSios UoWluv, ii.
221.
Scaliger, J. mistaken, ii. 223.
SxoAacTt/foi, scholars, the word not
used in this sense in the time of
Aristotle, ii. 234.
Socrates denied his company to Arche-
laus, ii. 189 ; dead before Polycrates's
oration was made, ii. 194 ; his trial,
date of, ii. 203 ; his death, date of, ii.
195 — 197 ; his scholars retired to
Megara after his death, ii. 198 ;
story of his having two wives at one
time examined and refuted, ii. 200
— 203 ; his custom with respect to
presents sent him, ii. 214 ; the first
who put the iEsopic fables into
verse, ii. 225 ; fable quoted, ibid. ;
his face a subject of raillery, ii.
235.
Socrates and his scholars, epistles
of, spurious, ii. 189 — 205 ; when
first printed, ii. 189 ; defended as
genuine by their editor, ibid. ; un-
known to Athenaeus, ii. 190 ; si-
lence of the ancients respecting
them, ibid. ; their extravagance, ii.
189, 190; at variance with known
facts, ii. 197, 198 ; and with the
best authorities, ii. 201 — 205 ; in-
consistent with the character of their
supposed writers, ii. 191 ; their vio-
lations of chronology, ii. 192 — 197,
200, 203.
Sophists accustomed to make a show
of their art on difficult subjects and
paradoxes, ii. 193 ; their propen-
sity to the extravagant, ii. 184, 190 ;
those who practised forgeries gene-
rally men of small endowments, ii.
214.
Sophocles, one of the Athenian gene-
rals in the Samian war, ii. 216.
Suidas quoted, ii. 182, 208, 225—227,
229, 230; mistaken, ii. 209; the
only old writer who mentions The-
mistocles's epistles, ii. 182.
Temple, Sir William, his commenda-
tion of the iEsopean fables a para-
dox, ii. 222.
Themistius mistaken respecting Poly-
crates's accusation of Socrates, ii.
195.
Themistocles, his flight into Asia, in
whose reign, ii. 182, 183, 188 ; num-
ber of the cities given to him there,
ii. 183 ; his reception at Argos, ii.
184; advised the Greeks to plunder
Hiero's tent at Olympia, ii. 185,
186; date of his banishment, ii.
186, 187; accused of conspiring
with Pausanias, ii. 187, 188 ; amount
396
INDEX TO THE DISSERTATIONS, &C.
of his fortune before he meddled
with public affairs, ii. 220.
Themistocles, epistles of, spurious, ii.
182 — 188 ; when first printed, ii.
182 ; believed by their editor to be
genuine, ibid. ; suspected by some,
ibid. ; Suidas the only old writer
who mentions them, ibid. ; if known
to ancient authors, would have pre-
vented their disputes about the time
. of his flight, &c., ii. 153 ; why they
all bear date after his banishment,
ibid. ; the subject of many of them
worthless, ii. 184 ; their extrava-
gance, ibid. ; their violations of
chronology, ii. 185 — 188.
Theodoret, his judgment questioned,
ii. 204.
Theophrastus quoted, ii. 185 ; his au-
thority much superior to that of
JEVian, ibid.
Qeparireiov fiXefifxa, a proverb, ii. 236.
Titianus, Julius, his Latin ^sopean
fables in iambics, ii. 227.
V.
Vavasor ascribes the present iEsopean
fables to Planudes, ii. 222.
X.
Xanthippe, wife of Socrates, ii. 200 —
203.
Xanthus master of iEsop, ii. 233.
Xenocrates the philosopher, ii. 214,
215, 220.
Xenophon, his defence of Socrates a
scholastic exercise, ii. 194; his
march, date of, ii. 197 ; his memoirs
of Socrates, motive for introducing
Aristippus in them, ii. 198 ; his
splendour and hospitality at Scillus,
ibid. ; the only author who repre-
sents Xanthippe as a scold, ii. 203 ;
his character of her suspected by
Athenaeus, ibid. ; letters of, cited in
Stobaeus, Theodoret, and Eusebius,
not found in Allatius's collection,
ii. 204 ; visits the court of Dionysius,
ii. 205.
A TABLE
SHEWING THE PAGES IN THE EARLIER EDITIONS OF
THE DISSERTATIONS AND EPISTOLA AD MILLIUM,
WHICH CORRESPOND RESPECTIVELY
WITH THE PAGES IN THE PRESENT TWO VOLUMES.
DISSERTATION UPON THE EPISTLES OF PHALARIS.
1836.
1699.
1777.
1836.
1699.
1777.
1836.
1699.
177
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
iii
xxxviii Ix
XXX
76
2
1
ii
iv
xxxix
Ixi
xxxi
77
3
2
iii
v
ii
xl
Ixiii
xxxii
78
4
3
iv
vii
iii
xii
Ixiv
xxxiii
79
5
3
V
ix
iv
xiii
Ixvi
xxxiv
80
6
4
vi
X
V
xliii
be vii
xxxiv
81
7
5
vii
xii
V
xliv
Ixix
xxxv
82
8
6
viii
xiv
vi
xiv
Ixxi
xxxvi
83
10
7
ix
XV
vii
xlvi
Ixxii
xxxvii
84
11
8
X
xvii
vii
xlvii
Ixxiv
xxxvii
85
12
8
xi
xviii
ix
xlviii
Ixxv
xxxviii
86
13
9
xii
XX
X
xlix
Ixxvii
xxxix
87
14
10
xiii
xxii
X
1
Ixx viii
xl
88
16
11
xiv
xxiii
xi
Ii
Ixxx
xii
89
17
12
XV
XXV
xii
Hi
Ixxxi
xii
90
18
13
xvi
xxvi
xiii
liii
Ixxxiii
xiii
91
19
14
xvii
xxviii
xiv
liv
Ixxxiv
xliii
92
20
15
xviii
xxix
xiv
Iv
Ixxxvi
xliv
93
21
15
xix
XXX
XV
Ivi
Ixxx vii
xliv
94
23
16
XX
xxxii
xvi
Ivii
Ixxxviii
xiv
95
24
17
xxi
xxxiii
xvii
Iviii
xc
xlvi
96
25
18
xxii
xxxv
xviii
lix
xci
xlvii
97
26
19
xxiii
xxxvi
xviii
Ix
xciii
xlvii
98
27
20
xxiv
xxxviii
xix
Ixi
xciv
xlviii
99
29
20
XXV
xl
XX
Ixii
xcv
xlix
100
30
21
xxvi
xii
xxi
Ixiii
xcvii
1
101
31
22
xxvii
xliii
xxii
Ixiv
xcix
Ii
102
32
23
xxviii
xiv
xxiii
Ixv
c
Ii
103
33
24
xxix
xlvi
xxiii
Ixvi
ci
Iii
104
35
25
XXX
xlviii
xxiv
Ixvii
ciii
liii
105
36
25
xxxi
xlix
XXV
Ixviii
civ
liv
106
37
26
XXX ii
Ii
xxvi
Ixix
cvi
Iv
107
38
27
xxxiii
Iii
xxvii
Ixx
cvji
Iv
108
39
28
xxxiv
liv
xxvii
Ixxi
cix
Ivi
109
40
28
xxxv
Ivi
xxviii
Ixxii
ex
Ivii
110
41
29
xxxvi
Ivii
xxix
Ixxiii
cxi
Iviii
111
42
30
xxxvii
Iviii
XXX
75
1
1
112
43
31
398
TABLE OF PAGING.
1836.
1699.
1777.
1836. 1699.
1777.
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
113
44
32
170
109
78
227
171
123
114
45
32
171
110
79
228
173
123
115
47
33
172
112
80
229
174
124
116
48
34
173
113
81
230
175
125
117
49
35
174
114
81
231
176
126
118
50
36
175
115
82
232
177
127
119
51
37
176
116
83
233
179
128
120
52
38
177
117
84
234
180
128
121
53
38
178
118
84
235
181
129
122
54
39
179
119
85
236
182
130
123
55
40
180
120
86
237
183
131
124
56
41
181
122
87
238
184
132
125
58
41
182
123
88
239
186
132
126
58
42
183
124
89
240
187
133
127
60
43
184
125
89
241
188
134
128
61
44
185
126
90
242
189
135
129
62
45
186
127
91
213
190
136
130
63
46
187
128
92
244
191
137
131
64
46
188
129
92
245
192
137
132
65
47
189
130
93
246
194
138
133
66
48
190
132
94
247
195
139
134
67
49
191
133
95
248
196
140
135
69
50
192
134
96
249
197
140
136
70
50
193
135
96
250
198
145
137
71
51
194
135
97
251
199
142
138
72
52
195
136
97
252
200
143
139
73
53
196
137
98
253
201
144
140
74
54
197
138
99
254
202
144
141
76
54
198
139
100
255
203
145
142
77
55
199
140
100
256
205
146
143
78
56
200
141
101
257
206
147
144
79
57
201
142
102
258
207
148
145
80
58
202
143
102
259
208
148
146
81
59
203
144
103
260
209
149
147
82
59
204
145
104
261
210
150
148
84
60
205
146
104
262
211
151
149
85
61
206
147
105
263
212
152
150
86
62
207
148
106
264
213
152
151
86
63
208
150
107
265
215
153
152
88
63
209
151
108
266
215
154
153
89
64
210
152
109
267
217
155
154
90
65
211
153
109
268
218
155
155
91
66
212
154
110
269
219
156
156
92
67
213
155
111
270
219
157
157
93
68
214
156
112
271
220
157
158
95
68
215
157
113
272
222
158
159
96
69
216
158
113
273
223
159
160
97
70
217
160
114
274
224
160
161
98
71
218
161
115
275
225
160
162
99
72
219
162
116
276
226
161
163
101
72
220
163
117
277
227
162
164
102
73
221
164
118
278
227
162
165
103
74
222
165
118
279
228
163
166
104
75
223
167
119
280
229
164
167
105
76
224
168
120
281
230
164
168
107
76
225
169
121
282
232
165
1«9
108
77
226
170
122
283
232
166
1836. 1699. 1777.
TABLE OF PAGING.
399
I83fi.
1609.
1777.
1836.
1699.
1777.
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
Vol. I.
284
233
167
341
295
213
398
357
258
285
234
167
342
296
213
399
358
259
286
235
168
343
297
214
400
359
260
287
236
169
344
298
215
401
361
260
288
237
170
345
299
216
402
362
261
289
238
170
346
300
216
403
363
262
290
239
171
347
301
217
404
364
263
291
240
172
348
302
218
405
364
264
292
241
173
349
303
218
406
366
264
293
242
174
350
304
219
407
367
265
294
243
175
351
305
220
408
368
266
295
244
175
352
306
221
409
369
267
296
245
176
353
307
222
410
370
268
297
247
177
354
308
223
411
371
269
298
248
178
355
310
223
412
372
269
299
249
179
356
311
224
413
372
269
300
250
180
357
312
225
414
373
270
301
251
180
358
313
' 226
415
374
271
302
252
181
359
315
227
416
375
271
303
254
182
360
316
227
417
376
272
304
255
183
361
317
228
418
377
273
305
256
184
362
318
229
419
378
274
306
257
184
363
319
230
420
379
274
307
258
185
364
320
231
421
380
275
308
259
186
365
322
231
422
382
276
309
260
187
366
323
232
423
383
277
310
262
188
367
324
233
424
384
278
311
263
189
368
325
234
425
385
279
312
264
189
369
326
235
426
386
279
313
265
190
370
327
236
427
387
280
314
266
191
371
328
236
428
389
281
315
267
192
372
330
237
429
390
282
316
268
193
373
331
238
430
391
283
317
269
193
374
332
239
318
270
194
375
333
240
319
271
195
376
334
240
Vol. II.
320
272
196
377
335
241
1
392
283
321
273
197
378
337
242
2
393
284
322
274
197
379
338
243
3
394
285
323
275
198
380
339
244
4
395
285
324
277
199
381
340
245
5
396
286
325
277
200
382
341
246
6
398
287
326
278
200
383
342
247
7
399
288
327
280
201
384
343
247
8
400
289
328
281
202
385
344
248
9
401
290
329
282
203
386
345
249
10
402
290
330
283
204
387
346
250
11
403
291
331
284
204
388
347
251
12
404
292
332
285
205
389
349
251
13
406
293
333
286
206
390
350
252
14
407
294
334
287
207
391
351
253
15
408
294
335
288
208
392
352
254
16
409
295
336
289
209
393
353
255
17
410
296
337
290
209
394
354
255
18
412
297
338
292
210
395
355
256
19
413
298
339
293
211
396
356
257
20
414
298
340
294
212
397
357
258
21
415
299
1836. 1699.
1777.
400
TABLE OF PAGING.
1836. 1699. 1777.
1836. 1699.
1777.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
"^
22
416
300
58
458
330
94
498
23
417
301
59
459
331
95
499
24
419
302
60
460
331
96
500
25
420
302
61
461
332
97
501
26
421
303
62
462
333
98
502
27
422
304
63
462
334
99
504
28
423
305
64
463
334
100
505
29
424
306
65
464
335
101
506
30
425
306
66
465
336
102
507
31
426
307
67
466
337
103
508
32
428
308
68
467
337
104
510
33
429
309
69
469
338
105
511
34
430
310
70
470
339
106
512
35
431
311
71
471
340
107
513
36
432
311
72
472
341
108
514
37
434
312
73
473
342
109
516
38
435
313
74
474
342
110
517
39
436
314
75
476
343
111
518
40
437
315
76
477
344
112
519
41
438
316
77
478
345
113
520
42
440
316
78
479
346
114
522
43
441
317
79
481
347
115
523
44
442
318
80
482
348
116
524
45
443
319
81
483
348
117
525
46
444
319
82
484
349
118
527
47
445
320
83
485
350
119
528
48
446
321
84
487
351
120
529
49
448
322
85
488
352
121
530
60
449
323
86
489
352
122
531
51
450
324
87
490
353
123
533
52
451
325
88
491
354
124
534
53
453
326
89
493
355
125
535
54
454
326
90
494
356
126
536
55
455
327
91
495
357
127
538
56
456
328
92
496
357
128
539
57
457
329
93
497
358
129
540
1836. 1699.
A DISSERTATION UPON THE EPISTLES OF PHALARIS,
THEMISTOCLES, SOCRATES, EURIPIDES, AND ON
THE FABLES OF ^SOP.
1836.
1697. 1777.
1836.
1697. 1777.
1836.
1697
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
133
3
144
19
154
35
135
5
145
21
155
36
136
6
146
22
156
37
137
8
147
24
157
39
138
9
148
25
158
41
139
11
149
27
159
42
140
13
150
28
160
44
141
14
151
30
161
45
14a
16
152
32
162
47
143
1«
153
33
163
48
I
TABLE OF PAGING.
401
1836.
1697.
1777.
1836.
1697.
1777.
1836.
1697.
1777
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
164
50
189
89
398
214
122
420
165
52
190
90
398
215
124
421
166
53
191
91
399
216
125
422
167
55
192
93
401
217
127
423
168
57
193
94
401
218
128
424
169
58
194
96
402
219
130
425
170
60
195
98
403
220
131
426
171
61
196
99
404
221
133
427
172
63
197
100
405
222
134
429
173
65
198
102
406
223
135
430
174
66
199
103
407
224
136
430
175
68
200
105
408
225
138
431
176
69
201
106
409
226
139
432
177
71
202
108
410
227
140
433
178
73
203
110
411
228
141
434
179
74
204
111
412
229
143
434
180
76
205
113
413
230
143
435
181
77
206
114
415
231
144
435
182
79
391
207
115
415
232
146
436
183
80
391
208
117
416
233
147
437
184
81
392
209
118
417
234
148
437
185
83
393
210
120
418
235
149
438
186
85
395
211
121
419
236
150
439
187
86
396
212
121
419
237
152
440
188
88
397
213
121
419
EPISTOLA AD JOANNEM MILLIUM.
1836.
1691. 1713.
1836.
1691. 1713.
^1. II.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
241 1
1
264
18
16
287
35
31
242 1
1
265
19
17
288
36
32
243 2
2
266
19
17
289
37
32
244 3
2
267
20
18
290
38
33
245 3
3
268
21
18
291
39
34
246 4
4
269
21
19
292
39
34
247 5
4
270
22
20
293
40
35
248 6
5
271
23
20
294
41
36
249 6
6
272
24
21
295
42
36
250 7
7
273
25
22
296
42
37
251 8
7
274
26
23
297
43
38
252 9
8
275
27
23
298
44
38
253 10
9
276
27
24
299
45
39
254 11
10
277
28
25
300
46
40
255 11
10
278
29
25
301
46
40
256 12
11
279
30
26
302
47
41
257 13
11
280
30
27
303
48
42
258 13
12
281
31
28
304
49
42
259 14
13
282
31
28
305
50
43
260 15
13
283
32
28
306
51
44
261 16
14
284
33
29
307
51
44
262 16
15
285
34
30
308
52
45
263 17
15
286
34
30
309
53
46
VOL. II.
3
F
1836.
1691. 1713.
402
TABLE OF PAGING.
1836.
1691. 1713.
1836.
1691.
1713.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
Vol. II.
310
54
46
329
67
58
348
83
72
311
54
47
330
68
59
349
84
72
312
55
48
331
68
59
350
84
73
313
56
48
332
69
60
351
85
74
314
56
49
333
70
61
352
86
74
315
57
49
334
71
61
353
87
75
316
57
50
335
72
62
354
88
76
317
58
50
336
72
63
355
89
77
318
59
51
337
73
63
356
90
77
319
59
52
338
74
64
357
91
78
320
60
52
339
75
65
358
92
79
321
61
53
340
76
66
359
92
79
322
62
54
341
76
66
360
93
80
323
63
54
342
77
67
361
94
81
324
63
55
343
78
68
362
95
82
325
64
56
344
79
69
363
96
82
326
65
56
345
80
69
364
97
83
327
65
57
346
81
70
365
98
84
328
66
57
347
82
71
1836.
1691.
1713.
END OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
LONDON :
I'KINTED BY UOBSON, LEVEY, AND FRANKLYN,
46 St. Martin's Lane.
BINDING SECT. AUG 241962
University of Toronto
Library
DO NOT
u
REMOV^
THE
CARD
FROM
THIS
POCKET
Not wanted in RBSC
Acme Library Card Pocket
LOWE-MARTIN CO. umited
