Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 3.djvu/337

PHILOSTRATUS. tion with this, the introduction of extempora- neous eloquence. Suidas states that this work is composed of four books, but this must be a mistake, as we have only two. Nor have two books been lost, for not only does Philostratus bring down the history to his own times, but in the dedication he expressly mentions two books, as comprising the whole work. "Of course, we have not, in a biography expressly authentic, the em- bellishments which we find in the life of Apollo- nius. The best description that can be given of them is that of Eunapius (Vit. Soph. p. 5), that Philostratus has written the lives of the most dis- tinguished sophists, without minuteness and grace- fully (e^ iiriSpofxrjs ixeroi x^P'tos). Olearius, fol- lowing the suggestion of Perizonius, and attending to the distinction made by Philostratus between the oldest and the more recent schools of rhetoric, with great propriety divides the Lives into three parts, of which the first is the shortest, and contains mere notices, in most cases, of the sophistic philosophers, beginning with Eudoxus of Cnidus, b. c. 366, and ending with Dion Chrysostom and Favorinus, a contemporary of Herodes Atticus, on whom he dwells a little more fully — eight lives in all. He then begins with the sophists proper of the old school, commencing with Gorgias (born about B. c. 480), and ending Avith Isocrates (bom B. c. 438), who (eight in all) may be said to belong to the school of Gorgias. He begins the newer school of sophists with Aeschines (who was born b. c. 389), which seems mainly introductory, and to prove his position that the modern school was not entirely new, but had its origin so far back as the time of Aeschines. He passes immediately thereafter to the time of Nicetas, about a.d. 97, and the first book ends with Secundus, who was one of the in- structors of Herodes Atticus, bringing the sophists in ten lives down to the same period as the sophistic philosophers. The second book begins with Herodes Atticus, about A. D. 143, and con- tinues with the lives of his contemporaries and of their disciples, till the reign of Philip, about A. D. 247, as has been already stated. It consists of thirty-three lives, and ends with Aspasius. The principal value of this work is the opinion which it enables us to form of the merits of the parties treated of, as the taste of Philostratus, making al- lowance for his prepossessions as a rhetorician, is pure, and is confirmed by the remains we have of some of the productions to which he refers, as in the case of Aeschines. The work is tinctured with rhetorical amplification, from which, probably, he could not wholly free his style. His opportunities of knowledge regarding the personages of his second book, stamp it strongly with genuiiieness. Begin- ning with Herodes Atticus, he had conversed with parties that knew him (ii. 1. § 5), and so of Aristo- cles (ii. 3), Philager (ii. 8. § 2), and Adrianus (ii. 23. § 2). He was personally acquainted with Da- mianus (ii. 9. §3), and had received instruction from, or was intimate with Proclus (ii. 21. § 1 ) and Antipater (ii. 24. § 2) ; he had heard Hippodromus (ii. 27. § 3) and Heliodorus (ii. 32), and, in all pro- bability, Aspasius. Hence, another valuable cha- racteristic of these Lives is the incidental glimpses they give us of the mode of training rhetoricians ; and of this Kayser has made a judicious use in his preface to the works of Philostratus. This treatise first appeared, along with the works of Lucian, the e/c^/;o(r€Js of Callistratus, our author's 'HpuiKa and PHILOSTRATUS. 325 Eik6v€s, at Florence, in 1496 ; the Aldine edition at Venice, in 1.503; and, by itself, in 1.516, eje Aedibus Schurerianis, in a Latin translation by Antonius Bonfinius. Then in Greek, along with the 'Hpwuca and Ei/coVes, and the same translation, at Venice, in 1550 (Fabric. Bibl. G'raec. vol. v. p. 553). Kayser, in 1831, published at Heidelberg critical notes on these Lives. In 1837, Jahn con- tributed at Berne Symholae to their emendation and illustration ; and Kayser published at Heidel- berg, in 1838, an elaborate edition, with Notae Vario7-um, edited and inedited, and two ti'eatises, commonly ascribed to Lucian, one of which he claim.s for Galen, and another, to be hereafter noticed, for Philostratus. III. Ileroica or Heroicus {'UpwiKoL, Olear.; 'HpojiKos, Kayser). The plan which Philostratus has followed in this work is to introduce a Phoenician merchant conversing with a Thracian vintager, near the town of Eleus {Prooem. iii.). The latter in- vites the merchant to his vineyard, and when seated, they discourse concerning the heroes en- gaged in the Trojan war. The vintager is under the especial patronage of the hero Protesilaus, with whom he is intimately acquainted, and who spends his time partly with him (Eleus was sacred to Protesilaus), and partly with the shades be- low, or at Phthia, or at the Troad. He then proceeds to discuss many points connected with the Trojan war, on the authority of Protesilaus, to the great astonishment and delight of his guest, dwell- ing longest on the great merits of Palamedes, and the wrong done to him by Homer, in concealing his fame and exalting that of his enemy Ulysses. He introduces numerous incidents from the cyclic poets, from the tragedians, and of his own invention. It is on the whole not a pleasing work ; and the source of the unpleasant feeling is rightly traced by Gothe as quoted by Kayser (p. iv. of the Prooemium to the 'VipooMos in his edition of the whole works of Philostratus). Various conjectures have been formed as to the object which Philostra- tus had in view in writing this treatise. Olearius thinks that his object was to expose the faults of Homer. Kayser thinks it was written partly to please Caracalla, who deemed himself another Achilles, — and hence he conjectures that it was composed between a.d. 211 — 217, — and partly to furnish an antidote against the false morality of Homer. In the last notion he may be correct enough ; but there is nothing to support the first, as there is not a sentence that can be strained to have any allusion to Caracalla, and Palamedes is the great object of the vintager's laudations. If one might hazard a conjecture as to the main object that Phi- lostratus had in view, if he actually intended any- thing more than a mere rhetorical description of mythological incidents, collected from various sources, it is that he wrote this work to illustrate a collection of pictures having mythological subjects, — perhaps in the palace of Julia Domna. It is certain that a great part of it is written much as the letter- press description of engravings is often composed in our own day. The vineyard in the introduction might be suggested by a landscape. Then, through- out he dwells on the personal appearance of the heroes. Hence Grote {History of Greece^ vol. i. p. 611) draws the inference that the real presence of the hero was identified with his statue. The truth seems to be that the statue or picture fur- nished the portrait of the hero. Every page of the Y 3