818 LUCIANUS. Philosophy, and Justice, but scarce one obeys the call. Lucian undertakes to assemble them by offering rewards. Immediately a vast concourse appear, quarrelling among themselves ; but when they find that Philosophy herself is to be the judge, they all run away. In his haste to escape, a cynic drops his wallet, which, instead of lupins, brown bread, or a book, is found to contain gold, pomatum, a sacrificing knife, a mirror, and dice. Truth orders their lives to be inquired into by Logic, and the pretenders to be branded with the figure of a fox or an ape. Lucian then borrows a fishing-rod from the temple ; and having baited his hook with figs and gold, flings his line from the Acropolis. He draws up a great many different philosophers, but Plato, Chr3-sippus, Aristotle, &c., disown them all, and they are cast down headlong. This piece is valuable, not only from its own merits, but from containing some particulars of Lucian's life. 'Epjuori/xos is chiefly an attack upon the Stoics, but its design is also to show the impossi- bility of becoming a true philosopher. The irony is of a serious and Socratic turn, and the piece, though carefully written, has little of Lucian's native humour. From § 1 3 it appears he was about forty when he wrote it ; and like the Nigrinus, it was probably, therefore, one of his earliest productions in this style. The EvvoGxos, Eumichus, is a ridi- culous dispute between two philosophic rivals for the emperor's prize, the objection being that the eunuclius is {jpso facto a disqualified person, and incapable of becoming a philosopher. From § 12, it appears to have been written at Athens. The
- [Aoi|/6u5^s may be ranked in this class. It is a
dialogue on the love of falsehood, natural to some men purely for its own sake. In § 2 Herodotus and Ctesias are attacked as in the Verae Histuriae^ as well as Hesiod and Homer. Poets, however, may be pardoned, but not whole states that adopt their fictions ; and Lucian thinks it very hard to be accused of impiety for disbelieving such extra- vagancies. Some commentators liave thought that the Christian miracles are alluded to in $13 and § 16 ; but this does not seem probable. The main subject of the piece is the relation of several absurd stories of ghosts, &c., by a company of white- bearded philosophers. The ApaTrerat, Fugitivi, is directed against the cynics, by whom Lucian seems to have been attacked for his life of Peregrinus. In a conversation between Apollo and Zeus, the latter asserts that he was so anno3'^ed by the stench that ascended from the pyre, that, though he fled into Arabia, all the frankincense there could hardly drive it out. He is about to relate the whole history to Apollo, when Philosophy rushes in, in tears and trouble, and complains of the philosophers, especially the cynics. She gives a history of her progress in India, Egypt, Chaldaea, &c., before she reached the Greeks, and concludes with a complaint against the cynics. Apollo advises Jupiter to send Mercury and Hercules to inquire into the lives of the cynics, and to punish the evil doers ; the greater part being mere vagabonds and runaway slaves. 2,v!xir6aiov ri Aanldai, Convivium seu La- pUJiae, is one of Lucian's most humorous attacks on the philosophers. The scene is a wedding feast, at which a representative of each of the principal philosophic sects is present. Of all the guests these are the only absurd and troublesome ones, the un- lettered portion behaving themselves with decency and propriety. The cynic Alcidamas, who comes LUCIANUS. uninvited, is particularly offensive in his behaviour. In the midst of the banquet an absurd letter ar- rives from Hetoimocles, a stoic, expostulating with Aristaenetus, the host, for not having been invited. The discussion that ensues sets all the philosophers by the ears, and ends in a pitched battle. In the midst of the confusion, Alcidamas upsets the chandelier ; and when lights are again brought, strange scenes are discovered. The cynic is making free with one of the music-women ; the stoic, Dio- nysidorus, is endeavouring to conceal a cup under his cloak. The similarity of this piece, and the 55th epistle of the third book of Alciphron, is too marked to be the result of accident. The relative chronology of Alcipliron and Lucian cannot be ac- curately settled [Alciphron] ; but the dialogue is so much more highly wrought than the epistle, as to render Bergler's notion probable, that Lucian was the copyist. Under this head we may also notice the Nigrinus and the Parasite (Ilepl irapa- airov iJToi on rex^V TlapacriTiK-^), The Nigrinus has been reckoned one of Lucian's first efforts in this style, and this seems borne out by a passage in § 35. Wieland calls it a declaration of war against the philosophers, and thinks that it still bears traces of Lucian's rhetorical style. But though the piece may be considered as an attack on philosophic pride, its main scope is to satirise the Romans, whose pomp, vain-glorj', and luxurj'^, are unfavourably contrasted with the simple habits of the Athenians. The Parasitus is a mere piece of persiflage throughout. The dialogue is con- ducted like those of Socrates with the sophists, though the parasite, who may stand for the sophist, gets the better of the argument. The philosophical definition of parasitism in $ 9 is highly humorous, as well as the demonstration of its superiority to philosophy, on account of its unit}' and definiteness, in which it equals arithmetic ; for two and two are four with the Persians as well as the Greeks, but no two philosophers agree in their principles. So also it is shown to be superior to philosophy, be- cause no parasite ever turned philosopher, but many philosophers have been parasites. The demonstra- tion of the non-existence of philosophy, $§ 28, 29, seems directed against Plato's Parmenides. The third and more miscellaneous class of Lucian's dialogues, in which the attacks upon mythology and philosophy are not direct but in- cidental, or which are mere pictures of manners, contains some of his best. At the head must be placed TiiJLwv rj /jno-duBpwTros, Timon, which may perhaps be regarded as Lucian's mastei-piece. The storj'^ is that of the well-known Athenian mis- anthrope mentioned by Plato, whose tower, Pau- sanias tells us (i. 30. § 4), still existed in his time. The introduction affords an opportunity for some sneers at Zeus. The dialogue between Plutus and Hermes, in which the former describes his way of proceeding with mankind, is very humorous and well-sustained, though the imitation of Aris- tophanes is obvious. The story of Timon, which is very dramatically told, is too well known to need description here. The NcKpiKol AidXoyoi, Diologi Mofiuorum, are perhaps the best known of all Lucian's works. The subject affoi'ds great scope for moral reflection, and for satire on the vanity of human pursuits. Wealtli, power, beauty, strength, not forgetting the v.iin disputations of philosophy, afford the materials ; and some cynic philosopher, Diogenes or Menippus, is generally the commen-
