was their alarm that Timoleon, according to Diodorus (xvi. 78), could only induce twelve thousand men to march with him against the Carthaginians, including in that number his mercenaries, and even of them one thousand deserted him on the march. Timoleon hastened to meet the enemy with this small force, knowing that any delay, in the divided condition in which the Sicilians still were, might prove fatal to him. The Carthaginian commanders were equally anxious to bring matters to a speedy decision, confident of victory from their superior numbers. The Greeks found the Carthaginians encamped on one side of the Crimesus or Crimissus, a river which flows into the Hypsa, on the south-western coast of Sicily. Timoleon drew up his troops on the brow of a hill overlooking the Carthaginian army, who were on the further bank of the river. The Carthaginian commanders, impatient for the victory, began to cross the river in presence of the enemy. This favourable circumstance determined the movements of Timoleon. As soon as the Carthaginian army was divided by the stream, he charged them with all his forces. The Carthaginians resisted bravely, but in the hottest of the fight a dreadful storm came on, attended with lightning, hail, and rain, which beat full in the faces of the Carthaginians. Unable to bear up against the storm, and to hear the commands of their officers amidst the roar of the thunder, and the clattering of the rain and hail upon their arms, the Carthaginians began to retreat and make for the river; but pursued by the Greeks, their retreat soon became a rout; a panic spread through their ranks; and the different nations of which the vast army was composed, ignorant of one another's language, and maddened by fear, used their swords against one another, each eager to gain the stream. Numbers were killed, and still more were drowned in the river. The victory was complete, and justly ranks as one of the greatest gained by Greeks over barbarians. It was fought in the middle of summer, B. c. 339. The booty which Timoleon and his troops gained was prodigious; and some of the richest of the spoils he sent to Corinth and other cities in Greece, thus diffusing the glory of his victory throughout the mother country. The victory of the Crimesus brought Timoleon such an accession of power and influence, that he now resolved to carry into execution his project of expelling all the tyrants from Sicily. Of these, two of the most powerful, Hicetas of Leontini, and Mamercus of Catana, had recourse to the Carthaginians for assistance, who sent Gisco to Sicily with a fleet of seventy ships and a body of Greek mercenaries. Although Gisco gained a few successes at first, the war was upon the whole favourable to Timoleon, and the Carthaginians were therefore glad to conclude a treaty with the latter in B. c. 338, by which the river Halycus was fixed as the boundary of the Carthaginian and Greek dominions in Sicily. It was during the war with Gisco that Hicetas fell into the hands of Timoleon. He had been completely defeated by Timoleon at the river Damurias, and was taken prisoner a few days afterwards, with his son Eupolemus. They were both slain by Timoleon's order. His wife and daughters were carried to Syracuse; where they were executed by command of the people, as a satisfaction to the manes of Dion, whose wife Arete and sister Aristomache had both

been put to death by Hicetas. This is one of the greatest stains upon Timoleon's character, as he might easily have saved these unfortunate women, if he had chosen. After the death of Hicetas, and the treaty between the Carthaginians and Timoleon, Mamercus, being unable to maintain himself in Catana, fled to Messana, where he took refuge with Hippon, tyrant of that city. Timoleon quickly followed, and besieged Messana so vigorously by sea and land, that Ilippon, despairing of holding out, attempted to escape by sea, but was taken and put to death in the public theatre. Mamercus now surrendered, stipulating only for a public trial before the Syracusans, with the condition that Timoleon should not appear as his accuser. But as soon as he was brought into the assembly at Syracuse, the people refused to hear him, and unanimously condemned him to death. Thus almost all the tyrants were expelled from the Greek cities in Sicily, and a democratical form of government established in their place. Timoleon, however, was in reality the ruler of Sicily, for all the states consulted him on every matter of importance ; and the wisdom of his rule is attested by the flourishing condition of the island for several years even after his death. He repeopled the great cities of Agrigentum and Gela, which had been laid desolate by the Carthaginians, and also settled colonies in other cities. He did not, however, assume any title or office, but resided as a private citizen among the Syracusans, to whom he left the administration of their own affairs. Once, when his public conduct was attacked in the popular assembly by a demagogue of the name of Demaenetus, Timoleon is reported to have thanked the gods for answering his prayer that the Syracusans might enjoy freedom of speech ; and when Laphystius, another demagogue, demanded that Timoleon should give sureties to answer an indictment that was brought against him, and some of Timoleon's friends began thereupon to raise a clamour, Timoleon himself restrained them by saying, that the great object of all his toils and exertions had been to make the law the same for all the Syracusans. A short time before his death Timoleon became completely blind, but the Syracusan people notwithstanding continued to pay him the same honour as they had done before, and took his advice on all difficult cases. He died, according to Diodorus, in B. c. 337, in the eighth year after his first arrival in Sicily. He was buried at the public expense in the market-place at Syracuse, where his monument was afterwards surrounded with porticoes and a gymnasium, which was called after him the Timoleonteium. Annual games were also instituted in his honour. Timoleon certainly deserves to be regarded as one of the greatest men of Greece, and it is not the slightest eulogium paid to him, that Mitford, with all his prejudices against the destroyer of his favourite tyrants, is able to detract so little from the virtues and merits of Timoleon. (Plutarch and Cornelius Nepos, Life of Timoleon; Diod. xvi. 65–90; Polyaen. v. 3. § 3; Mitford, History of Greece, c. xxxiii.) TIMO'MACHUS (Tipáuaxos), an Athenian, of the demus of Acharnae. In B. c. 366, he commanded a body of Athenian troops, which, in conjunction with a Lacedaemonian force, had been appointed to guard the Isthmus of Corinth against

4 D 3

the Thebans. But they neglected to occupy the passes of Oneium, and Epaminondas, who was preparing to invade Achaia, persuaded Peisias, the Argive general, to seize a commanding height of the mountain. The Thebans were thus enabled to make their way through the Isthmus (Xen. Hell. vii. i. § 41 ; Diod. xv. 75). Towards the end, apparently, of B. c. 361, Timomachus was sent out to take the command in Thrace, for which he seems to have been utterly unfit, and he failed quite as much at least as his immediate predecessors, Menon and Autocles, in forwarding the Athenian interests in that quarter. Not only were his military arrangements defective, but, according to the statement of Aeschines, it was through his culpable easiness of disposition that Hegesander, his treasurer (tauías), was enabled to appropriate to his own use no less than 80 minae (more than 300l.) of the public money. Timomachus appears to have been superseded by Cephisodotus in B. c. 360, and, on his return to Athens, was impeached by Apollodorus (son of Pasion, the banker), who had been one of his trierarchs. He was condemned, and, according to Demosthenes, was heavily fined ; but his punishment was death, if we may believe the statement of the Scholiast on Aeschines (Aesch. c. Tim. p. 8; Schol. ad loc.; Dem. de Fals. Leg. p. 398, pro Phorm. p. 960, c. Polycl. pp. 1210, &c.; Rehdantz, Wit. Iph., Chabr., Tim, cap. v. §§ 7, 8). It was during the command of Timomachus in Thrace that he received a letter from Cotys, who repudiated in it all the promises he had made to the Athenians when he wanted their aid against the rebel Miltocythes. (Dem. c. Arist. p. 658.) [Cotys, No. 2.] [E. E.] TIMO'MACHUS (Tučuaxos), a very distinguished painter, of Byzantium. He lived (if the statement of Pliny, as contained in all the editions, be correct) in the time of Julius Caesar, who purchased two of his pictures, the Ajua and Medea, for the immense sum of eighty Attic talents, and dedicated them in the temple of Venus Genitrix. (Plin. H. N. vii. 38. s. 39, xxxv. 4. s. 9, 11. s. 40. § 30.) In the last of these passages, Pliny defines the artist's age in the following very distinct terms: — “Timomachus Byzantius Caesaris Dictatoris actate Ajacem et Medeam pinrit.” But here an important and difficult question has been raised. In Cicero's well-known enumeration of the masterpieces of Grecian art, which were to be seen in various cities (in Verr. iv. 60), he alludes to the A jur and Medea at Cyzicus, but without mentioning the painter's name. (Quid Cyzicenos [arbitramini merere velle], ut Ajacem, aut Medeam [amittant]?) From this passage a presumption is raised, that the two pictures should be referred to a period much earlier than the time of Caesar, namely to the best period of Grecian art, to which most of the other works, in connection with which they are mentioned, are known to have belonged: at all events, as the manner in which they are referred to by Cicero presupposes their being already celebrated throughout the Roman empire, it is not likely that they could have been painted during the life of Caesar, and it is of course impossible that they were painted during his dictatorship. But then, the question comes, whether these were the paintings mentioned by Pliny, and, as will presently be seen, celebrated by other writers. The first impulse of any reader would be to assume this, as a matter of course; and it would be strange

indeed if, while two such pictures as the Ajar and Medea, celebrated by Cicero, existed at Cyzicus, two others on the same subjects should have been painted by Timomachus, and should have been admired as we know they were, and that the pictures of Ajar and Medea should be simply mentioned by Pliny as well known, without any distinction being made between the two pairs of pictures. It is true that, from one of the passages of Pliny above cited (xxxv. 4. s. 9), the inference has been drawn that, besides the Ajar and Medea, which Caesar dedicated in the temple of Venus, there was another pair of pictures brought to Rome, by Agrippa, who purchased them from the Cyzicenes at a great price, namely, an Ajar and Venus; but the passage is extremely difficult to understand clearly ; and, even taking the above explanation, any conclusion drawn from it would apply only to the Ajar, and not to the Medea, which was evidently the more celebrated of the two. On the whole, then, it seems most probable that the pictures at Cyzicus, mentioned by Cicero, were the very pictures of Timomachus, which were purchased by Julius Caesar; and therefore that the word actate in Pliny must either be rejected, or interpreted with a considerable latitude. In confirmation of this conclusion another passage is cited from Pliny himself (l.c. § 41), in which he enu. merates, as examples of the last unfinished pictures of the greatest painters, which were more admired than even their finished works, the Medea of Timomachus, in connection with the Iris of Aristeides, the Tyndaridae of Nicomachus, and the Venus of Apelles ; whence it has been argued that Timomachus was probably contemporary with the other great painters there mentioned, and moreover that it is incredible that Caesar should have given the large price above mentioned for two pictures of a living artist, especially when one of them was unfinished. Still, any positive chronological conclusion from these arguments can only be received with much caution. They seem to prove that Timomachus flourished not later than the early part of the first century B. c., but they do not prove that he is to be carried back to the third century. The associations of works and names, in the passages of Cicero and Pliny, have respect to the order of excellence and not to that of time ; and it must be remembered that a great artist often obtains a reputation even above his merits during his life and soon after his death, and that fashion, as well as fame, will set a high pecuniary value on such an artist's works. On the other hand, a positive argument, to prove that Nicomachus lived later than the time of that flourishing period of the art which is marked by the name of Apelles, may be drawn from the absence of any mention of him by Pliny in his proper chronological order, which indicates the absence of his name from the works of the Greek authors whom Pliny followed, and that he was one of those recent artists who were only known to Pliny by their works which he had seen. Without attempting to arrive at any more precise conclusion with regard to the age of Timomachus, we proceed to state what is known of his works. (1.) The two pictures already mentioned were the most celebrated of all his works, and the Medea appears to have been esteemed his masterpiece. It is referred to, in terms of the highest praise, in several passages of the ancient writers, from which we learn that it represented Medea

[merged small][ocr errors]

meditating the murder of her children, but still hesitating between the impulses of revenge for her own wrongs and of pity for her children. A general notion of the composition is probably preserved in a painting on the same subject found at Pompeii (Mus. Borb. v. 33 ; Pompeii, vol. ii. p. 190), and the type of Medea is seen in a figure found at Herculaneum (Antiq. di Ercol. i. 13 ; Mus. Borb. x. 21), and on some gems. (Lippert. Supplem. i. 93; Panofka, Annal. d. Inst. i. p. 243; Müller, Archäol. d. Kunst, § 208, n. 2.) A minute description of the emotions expressed in the artist's Medea is given in the following epigrams from the Greek Anthology. (Anth. Plan. iv. 135,136, p. 317 ; Brunck, Anal. vol. iii. p. 214, vol. ii. p. 174; Jacobs, Anth. Pal. Append. vol. ii. p. 667.) The first is anonymous: —

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

There is a similar epigram by Ausonius (No. 129). From these descriptions it appears that the great art of Timomachus consisted in the expression of that conflict of emotions which precedes the perpetration of some dreadful act, and in exciting in the minds of the spectators the corresponding emotions of terror and pity, which are the end aimed at by all tragic exhibitions ; and, at the same time, in avoiding the excess of horror, by representing, not the deed itself, but only the conception of it in the mind. Plutarch mentions the painting as an example of one of those works of art, in which unnatural deeds (rpgée is &romot) are represented, and which, while we abhor the deed, we praise on account of the skill shown in representing it in a becoming manner (Thy Téxvny, ei usuluntai spoonróvtws to brokeiuevov, Plut. de Aud. Poet. 3, p. 18, b.). There are also two other epigrams upon the picture in the Greek Anthology (Jacobs, l.c. Nos. 137, 138), from the former of which we learn that it was painted in encaustic ; and, from the connection in which Timomachus is mentioned by Pliny, it would seem that this was the case with all his works. (2.) His Ajar resembled his Medea in the conflict of emotions which it expressed. It represented the hero in his madness, meditating the act of suicide. It is described by Philostratus (Wit. Apollon. ii. 10), in an epigram in the Greek Anthology (Jacobs, l.c. No. 83, p. 648), and by Ovid (Trist. ii. 528). (3.) His other works are mentioned by Pliny in the following words: -- “Timomachi aeque laudantur Orestes, Iphigenia in Tauris, Lecythion agilitatis exercitator, Cognatio nobilium, Palliati, quos dicturos pinxit, alterum stantem, alterum sedentem; Praecipue tamen arsei favisse in Gorgone visa est.” (Plin. H. N. xxxv. 11. s.40. § 30.) [P.S.]

TIMON (tsuww). 1. The son of Timarchus of Phlius, a philosopher of the sect of the Sceptics, and a celebrated writer of the species of satiric poems called Silli (a saxo), flourished in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about B. c. 279, and onwards. A pretty full account of his life is preserved by Diogenes Laërtius, from the first book of a work on the Silli (év to mpáto ravels robs oriaNous intouvmudraw) by Apollonides of Nicaea; and some particulars are quoted by Diogenes from Antigonus of Carystus, and from Sotion (Diog. Laërt. ix. c. 12. §§ 109–115). Being left an orphan while still young, he was at first a choreutes in the theatre, but he abandoned this profession for the study of philosophy, and, having removed to Megara, he spent some time with Stilpon, and then he returned home and married. He next went to Elis with his wife, and heard Pyrrhon, whose tenets he adopted, so far at least as his restless genius and satirical scepticism permitted him to follow any master. During his residence at Elis, he had children born to him, the eldest of whom, named Xanthus, he instructed in the art of inedicine and trained in his philosophical principles, so that he might be his successor and representative (kai Öudôoxov too Bíou katéaire ; but these words may, however, mean that he left him heir to his property). Driven again from Elis by straitened circumstances, he spent some time on the Hellespont and the Propontis, and taught at Chalcedon as a sophist with such success that he realised a fortune. He then removed to Athens, where he lived until his death, with the exception of a short residence at Thebes. Among the great men, with whom he became personally acquainted in the course of his travels, which probably extended more widely about the Aegean and the Levant than we are informed, were the kings Antigonus and Ptolemy Philadelphus. He is said to have assisted Alexander Aetolus and Homerus in the composition of their tragedies, and to have been the teacher of Aratus (Suid. s. v. "Aparos). “These indications,” says Mr. Clinton, “mark his time. He might have heard Stilpo at Megara twenty-five years before the reign of Philadelphus" (Fast. Hellen. vol. iii. s. aa. 27.9, 272). He died at the age of almost ninety. Among his pupils were Dioscurides of Cyprus, Nicolochus of Rhodes, Euphranor of Seleuceia, and Praylus of the Troad.

Timon appears to have been endowed by nature with a powerful and active mind, and with that quick perception of the follies of men, which betrays its possessor into a spirit of universal distrust both of men and truths, so as to make him a sceptic in philosophy and a satirist in every thing. According to Diogenes, Timon had that physical defect, which some have fancied that they have found often accompanied by such a spirit as his, and which at least must have given greater force to its utterances; he was a one-eyed man ; and he used even to make a jest of his own defect, calling himself Cyclops. Some other examples of his bitter sarcasms are recorded by Diogenes; one of which is worth qoting as a maxim in criticism: being asked by Aratus how to obtain the pure text of Homer, he replied, “If we could find the old copies, and not those with modern emendations.” He is also said to have been fond of retirement, and of gardening ; but Diogenes introduces this statement and some others in such a way as to suggest a doubt whether they ought to be referred to our Timon or to Timon the misanthrope, or whether they apply equally to both.


The writings of Timon are represented as very numerous. According to Diogenes, in the order of whose statement there appears to be some confusion, he composed €m, kal Tpayq'6ías, kal oratopovs, kai 8pduata kaukä Tpiákovra, Toayikā be €5%Kovra, oríAAous Te kal kwatóous. The double mention of his tragedies raises a suspicion that Diogenes may have combined two different accounts of his writings in this sentence; but perhaps it may be explained by supposing the words toayikā āt {{#kovra to be inserted simply in order to put the number of his tragedies side by side with that of his comedies. Some may find another difficulty in the passage, on account of the great number and variety of the poetical works ascribed to Timon ; but this is nothing surprising in a writer of that age of universal imitative literature; nor, when the early theatrical occupations of Timon are borne in mind, is it at all astonishing that his taste for the drama should have prompted him to the composition of sixty tragedies and thirty comedies, besides satyric dramas. One thing, however, it is important to observe. The composition of tragedies and comedies by the same author is an almost certain indication that his dramas were intended only to be read, and not to be acted. No remains of his dramas have come down to us.

Of his epic poems we know very little ; but it may be presumed that they were chiefly ludicrous or satirical poems in the epic form. Possibly his Python (Ilúðav), which contained a long account of a conversation with Pyrrhon, during a journey to Pytho, may be referred to this class; unless it was in prose (Diog. ix. 64, 105; Euseb. Praep. Er. xiv. p. 761, a.). It appears probable that his 'Apkerixáov reptăeitvov or "pööervov was a satirical poem in epic verse (Diog. ix. 115; Ath. ix. p. 406, e.). Whether he wrote parodies on Homer or whether he merely occasionally, in the course of his writings, parodied passages of the Homeric poems, cannot be determined with certainty from the lines in his extant fragments which are evident parodies of Homer, such, for example, as the verse preserved by Diogenes,

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

The most celebrated of his poems, however, were the satiric compositions called Silli (qíAAot), a word of somewhat doubtful etymology, but which undoubtedly describes metrical compositions, of a character at once ludicrous and sarcastic. The invention of this species of poetry is ascribed to Xenophanes of Colophon. [XENOPHANES.] The Silli of Timon were in three books, in the first of which he spoke in his own person, and the other two are in the form of a dialogue between the author and Xenophanes of Colophon, in which Timon proposed questions, to which Xenophanes replied at length. The subject was a sarcastic account of the tenets of all philosophers, living and dead; an unbounded field for scepticism and satire. They were in hexameter verse, and, from the way in which they are mentioned by the ancient writers, as well as from the few fragments of them which have come down to us, it is evident that they were

very admirable productions of their kind. (Diog. l. c.; Aristocles ap. Euseb. Praep. Er. xiv. p. 763, c.; Suid. s. v.v. auxAalvel, Tiuay; Ath. passim ; Gell. iii. 17.) Commentaries were written on the Silli by Apollonides of Nicaea, as already mentioned, and also by Sotion of Alexandria. (Ath. viii. p. 336, d.) The poem entitled 'Ivöaxuo, in elegiac verse, appears to have been similar in its subject to the Silli (Diog. Laërt. ix. 65). Diogenes also mentions Timon's laušot six. 110), but perhaps the word is here merely used in the sense of satirical poems in general, without reference to the metre. He also wrote in prose, to the quantity, Diogenes tells us, of twenty thousand lines. These works were no doubt on philosophical subjects, but all we know of their specific character is contained in the three references made by Diogenes to Timon's works repl algorews, repl (mTigews, and kara otospías. The fragments of his poems have been collected by H. Stephanus, in his Poêsis Philosophica, 1573, 8vo.; by J. F. Langenrich, at the end of his Dissertationes III. de Timone Sillographo, Lips. 1720, 1721, 1723, 4to, ; by Brunck, in his Analecta, vol. ii. pp. 67, foll.; by F. A. Wölke, in his monograph De Graecorum Syllis, Warsav. 1820, 8vo.; and by F. Paul, in his Dissertatio de Sillis, Berol. 1821, 8vo. (See also Creuzer and Daub's Studien, vol. vi. pp. 302, foll.; Ant. Weland, Dissert. de praecip. Parodiarum Homericarum Scriptoribus apol Graecos, pp. 50, foll. Gotting. 1833, 8vo. ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iii. pp. 623–625; Menag, ad Diog. Laërt. l.c.; Welcker, die Griech. Tragöd. pp. 1268, 1269 ; Bode, Gesch. d. Hellen. Dichtk. vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 345–347; Ulrici, vol. ii. p. 317; Clinton, F. H. vol. iii. p. 495). 2. TIMon THE Misa NTH Rope (à utgiv6pwros) is distinguished from Timon of Phlius by Diogenes (ix. 112), but, as has been remarked above, it is not clear how much, or whether any part, of the information Diogenes gives respecting Timon is to be referred to this Timon rather than the former. There was a certain distant resemblance between their characters, which may have led to a confusion of the one with the other. The great distinctions between them are, that Timon the misanthrope wrote nothing, and that he lived about a century and a half earlier than Timon of Phlius, namely, at the time of the Peloponnesian war. The few particulars that are known of Timon the misanthrope are contained in the passages in which he is attacked by Aristophanes (Lysist. 809, &c., Ar. 1548) and the other comic poets in the dialogue of Lucian, which bears his name (Timon, c. 7), and in a few other passages of the ancient writers (Plut. Anton. 70 ; Tzetz. Chil. vii. 273; Suid. s.t.) The comic poets who mention him, besides Aristophanes, are Phrynichus, Plato, and Antiphanes, the last of whom made him the subject of one of his comedies. (See Meineke, Hist. Crit. Com. oraec. pp. 327, 328.) He was an Athenian, of the demos of Colyttus, and his father's name was Echecratides. In consequence of the ingratitude he experienced, and the disappointments he sufered, from his early friends and companions, he secluded himself entirely from the world, admitting no one to his society except Alcibiades, in whose reckless and variable disposition he probably found pleasure in tracing and studying an image of the world he had abandoned ; and at last he is

[ocr errors]

The few details recorded of his eccentricities by the authors above cited have no value except as contributing to the study of his whole character. as one type of the diseased human mind, a subject which lies beyond our present limits, but for which the reader will find ample materials in comparing the ancient authorities with Shakspeare's Tinton of Athens, and in this comparison Mr. Knight's Introductory Notice to that tragedy will be found to give valuable assistance. [P. S.] TIMON, a statuary, of whom nothing is known beyond the mention of him by Pliny as one of those who made athletas et armatos et renatores sacrificantesque. (Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 8. , 19. § 34. [P.S.] TIMO'NAX (Tiuávač), wrote Xixextra and Tiepl xxvtov. (Schol ad Apoll. Rhod. iii. 1235, iv. 328. 1217.) TIMONIDES (Tuww.t5ms), accompanied Dion into Sicily, and fought on his side. On one occasion, when Dion had been wounded while fighting against the mercenaries of Dionysius, and was obliged to retire from the combat, he appointed Timonides to the command of his troops. The history of Dion's wars in Sicily was related by Timonides in some letters to the philosopher Speusippus, which are quoted by Plutarch and Diogenes Laërtius. (Plut. Dion, cc. 22, 30, 31, 35 ; Diog. Laërt. iv. 5, where Touww.t5ms must be read instead of Studevišms ; C. Müller, Fragm. Historic. Graec. vol. ii. p. 83, Paris, 1848.) The Scholiast on Theocritus (i. 63) quotes a work on Sicily by Simonides, where Timonides is probably likewise the correct reading. In the article S1Moxides (p. 836, b) an error has been committed, which may be corrected from the preceding account. TIMO PHANES (Tuopávns), the brother of Timoleon. [TIMoleon.] TIMO'STHENES (Tuorðévms), the Rhodian, was the admiral of the fleet of Ptolemy Phila

delphus, who reigned from B. c. 285 to 247. He

[ocr errors]

whose Amuotoimros is quoted by Suidas (s. r. xépaš) is an error for Todatpatos. (Meineke, Frag. Com. Graec. vol. i. pp. 499, 500, vol. iv. pp. 595, 596; Editio Minor, p. 1184.) [P. S.] TIMOTHEUS (Tuá0eos), historical. 1. Father of Conon, the famous general. (Paus. viii. 52.) 2. Son of Conon, was a native of the demus of Anaphlystus, and, according to a probable conjecture of Boeckh, belonged to the priestly family of the Eumolpidae (Corp. Inscr. 393; see Rehdantz. Wit. Iph. Chabr. Tim. p. 45). For the statement of Athenaeus (xiii. p. 577, a), that his mother was a Thracian hetaera, there appear to be no good grounds. Inheriting a considerable fortune from his father, he seems in his early years to have indulged in the display of it, as we may gather from an allusion in the Plutus of Aristophanes (B. c. 388); and we may therefore well believe the assertion, that it was through his intercourse with Isocrates that his mind was directed to higher views (Lys. de Arist. Bon. p. 155; Arist. Plut. 180; Schol. ad loc.; Dem. c. Aphol. i. p. 815, c. Aphob. de F. T. p. 862; Pseudo-Dem. Erot. p. 1415). In B. c. 378, Timotheus was made general with Chabrias and Callistratus, and it is possible that, while Chabrias was occupied in Boeotia, his colleagues commanded the fleet, and were engaged in bringing over Euboea and other islands to the Athenian confederacy (Xen. Hell. v. 4. § 34 Diod. xv. 29, 30; Plut. de Glor. Ath. 8; Rehdantz, p. 57). In B. c. 375, Timotheus was sent with sixty ships to cruize round the Peloponnesus, in accordance with the suggestion of the Thebans, that the Spartans might thus be prevented from invading Boeotia. On his voyage he ravaged Laconia, and then proceeded to Corcyra, which he brought over to the Athenian alliance, behaving after his success with great moderation. This conduct, together with his conciliatory disposition and manners, contributed mainly to the prosperous issue of his further negotiations, and he succeeded in gaining the alliance of the Cephallenians and Acarnanians, as well as that of Alcetas I., the king of Epirus. A Spartan fleet under Nicolochus was sent out against him, but he defeated it off Alyzia on the Acarnanian coast, and, being strengthened shortly after by a reinforcement from Corcyra, he entirely commanded the sea, though, having brought with him only thirteen talents from home, he was greatly embarrassed for want of funds (Xen. IIell. v. 4. §§ 62–66; Dem. c. Arist. p. 686; Isocr. trepi Avrič, Š 116; Diod. xv. 36; Corn. Nep. Tim. 2; Ael. W. H. iii. 16; Pseudo-Arist. Oecon. ii. 23; Polyaen. iii. 10). In the following year peace was concluded between Athens and Sparta, and Timotheus was recalled. On his way, however, he stopped at Zacynthus, and forcibly restored some democratic exiles who had fled to him for refuge; hereupon the oligarchical party in the island complained to Sparta, and the failure of her application to Athens for redress led to a renewal of the war (Xen. Hell. vi. 2. §§ 2, 3; Diod. xv. 45). In B. c. 373, he was appointed to the command of sixty ships destined to act against MNAsippus in Corcyra ; but he had no means of fully manning his squadron, and he was obliged therefore to cruize about the Aegean for the purpose of collecting men and money. It would appear to have been in the course of this cruize that he formed an intimacy with Amyntas, king of Macedonia, who made him a present of a quantity of timber for a house which

« 前へ次へ »