(Il. iii. 16, &c.); but when Menelaus advanced against him, he took to flight. As Hector upbraided him for his cowardice, he offered to fight in single combat with Menelaus for the possession of Helen (iii. 70). Menelaus accepted the challenge, and Paris though conquered was removed from the field of battle by Aphrodite (iii. 380). The goddess then brought Helen back to him, and as she as well as Hector stirred him up, he afterwards returned to battle, and slew Menesthius (vi. 503, vii. 2, &c.). He steadily refused to give up Helen to the Greeks, though he was willing to restore the treasures he had stolen at Sparta (vii. 347, &c.). Homer describes Paris as a handsome man, as fond of the female sex and of music, and as not ignorant of war, but as dilatory and cowardly, and detested by his own friends for having brought upon them the fatal war with the Greeks. He killed Achilles by a stratagem in the sanctuary of the Thymbraean Apollo (Hom. I. xxii. 359; Dict. Cret. iv. 11; Serv. ad Aen. iii. 85, 322, vi. 57); and when Troy was taken, he himself was wounded by Philoctetes with an arrow of Heracles (Soph. Philoct. 1426), and then returned to his long abandoned first wife Oenone. But she, remembering the wrong she had suffered, or according to others being prevented by her father, refused to heal the wound, or could not heal it as it had been inflicted by a poisoned arrow. He then returned to Troy and died. Oenone soon after changed her mind, and hastened after him with remedies, but came too late, and in her grief hung herself. (Apollod. iii. 12. § 6; Dict. Cret. iv. 19.) According to others she threw herself from a tower, or rushed into the flames of the funeral pile on which the body of Paris was burning. (Lycoph. 65; Tzetz. ad Lyc. 61; Q. Smyrn. x. 467.) By Helena, Paris is said to have been the father of Bunicus (Bunomus or Bunochus), Corythus, Aganus, Idaeus, and of a daughter Helena. (Dict. Cret. v. 5; Tzetz. ad Lyc. 851; Parthen. Erot. 34; Ptolem. Hephaest. 4.) Paris was represented in works of art as a youthful man, without a beard and almost feminine beauty, with the Phrygian cap, and sometimes with an apple in his hand, which he presented to Aphrodite. (Comp. Mus. Pro-Clément. ii. 37.) [L. S.] PARIS, the name of two celebrated pantomimes in the time of the early Roman emperors.

of his reign. (Dion Cass. lxiii. 18; Suet. Ner. 54.)

2. The younger Paris, and the more celebrated of the two, lived in the reign of Domitian. He was originally a native of Egypt (hence called sales Nili by Martial, xi. 13), and repaired to Rome, where his wonderful skill in pantomimic dances gained him the favour of the public, the love of the profligate Roman matrons, and such influence at the imperial court that he was allowed to promote his creatures to places of high office and trust. It is stated by the Pseudo-Suetonius, in his life of Juvenal, and by the ancient commentators, that this poet was banished to Egypt on account of his attack upon Paris (vii. 86-91), but there seems good reason for rejecting this story, as we have shown in the life of Juvenal [JUVENALIS]. The popularity of Paris was at length his ruin. Domitia, the wife of the emperor, fell desperately in love with him; but when Domitian became acquainted with the intrigue, he divorced his wife, and had Paris murdered in the public street. So infuriated was he against the actor, that he even put to death a youth who was a pupil of Paris, merely because he bore a resemblance to his master in form and in skill. The people deeply deplored the death of their favourite; some strewed the spot where he fell with flowers and perfumes, for which act they were killed by the tyrant; and Martial only expressed the general feeling of the city, when he called him in the epithet (xi. 13) which he composed in his honour,

"Romani decus et dolor theatri." (Dion Cass. lxvii. 3; Suet. Dom. 3, 10; Juv. vi. 82-87, and Schol.)

PARIS, JULIUS, the abbreviator of Valerius Maximus, is spoken of in the life of the latter. [Vol. II. p. 1002.]

age

PARISADES [PAERISADES.]

PARMENIDES (Пapμevions), a distinguished Greek philosopher, the son of Pyrrhes. He was born in the Greek colony of Elea in Italy, which had probably been founded not long before (Ol. 61), and was descended from a wealthy and illustrious family (Diog. Laërt. ix. 21-25, with Sim. Karsten's emendation in Parmenidis Eleatae carminis Reliquiae, Amstelodami, 1835, p. 3, note). According to the statement of Plato, Parmenides, at the of 65, came to Athens to the Panathenaea, ac1. The elder Paris lived in the reign of the companied by Zeno, then 40 years old, and became emperor Nero, with whom he was a great favourite. acquainted with Socrates, who at that time was He was originally a slave of Domitia, the aunt of quite young. This statement, which is designedly the emperor, and he purchased his freedom by pay- repeated by Plato (Plat. Parm. p. 127, b., Soph. ing her a large sum of money. Domitia availed her- p. 217, c. Theaetet. p. 183, e), may very well be self of his influence with Nero to attempt the ruin reconciled with the apparently discrepant chronoof Agrippina, whom she hated. The plot, how-logy in Diogenes Laërtius (ix. 23), and has withever, failed, and Agrippina demanded the punish-out reason been assailed by Athenaeus (xi. 15, ment of her accusers; but Paris stood too high in p. 505, f., comp. Macrobius, Saturn. i. 1). Accordthe monarch's favour to experience the punishment ing to the chronology of Plato the journey of Parwhich was inflicted on his accomplices. Shortly menides would fall in the 80th or 81st Olympiad after this Paris was declared, by order of the em- (Socrates was born in the 4th year of the 77th peror, to have been free-born (ingenuus), and Do- Olymp.), his birth in the 65th Olympiad, and the mitia was compelled to restore to him the large sum period when he flourished would only be set down which she had received for his freedom (Tac. Ann. by Diogenes Laërtius a few Olympiads too soon xiii. 19-22, 27; Dig. 12. tit. 4. s. 3. § 5). Paris, (Ol. 69). Eusebius gives the fourth year of the however, was not fortunate enough to retain the 80th Olympiad as the period when he flourished, favour of the emperor. The silly man wished to connecting him very accurately with Empedocles, become a pantomime himself; and as he was unable Zeno, and Heracleitus; whereas Theophrastus is to profit by the lessons in dancing which Paris gave stated to have set him down as a hearer of Anaxihim, and looked upon the latter as a dangerous mander (Diog. Laërt. ix. 21). The former staterival, he had him put to death towards the end ments, considering the indefiniteness of the expres

doubt of later origin, added by way of explanation (comp. Simon Karsten, l. c. p. 130).

sion flourish, may at any rate be referred to Parmenides' residence in Athens; the latter must be entirely rejected, whether it be that Theophras- In the allegorical introduction to his didactic tus made a mistake, or, what is much more poem, the Eleatic describes how Heliadic virgins likely, that Diogenes copied the statement care- conducted him on the road from Darkness to Light, lessly. The same Theophrastus had spoken of to gates where the paths of Night and Day sepahim as a disciple of Xenophanes, with whom Aris- rate; and, after Dike had unbolted the gates, to totle, with a cautious it is said, connects him (Me- the goddess Wisdom. She greets him kindly, with taph. i. 5, p. 986, b, 1. 22. Theophrastus, according the promise of announcing to him not only the to Alexander: see Schol. on Aristotle, p. 536. 8; unchangeable heart of truth (ảλndeíns evñeidéos comp. Sext. Empir. adv. Math. vii. 111; Clemens άтpеKès Tоp), but also the truthless fancy of Alex. Strom. i. 301; Diog. Laërt. ix. 21); and it is men (Parmenid. Reliqu. in Simon Karsten, l. c. 32, impossible not to see that the Colophonian did after Sextus Empiricus, adv. Math. vii. 111), and open that path of investigation which we see our indicates in this way whither each of these oppoEleatic pursuing, whether the former influenced site roads leads, while she at the same time points the latter through personal intercourse, or only by to the division of the poem into two parts. The the written exposition of his doctrine. Consider- path of truth sets out from the assumption that ably more doubt rests upon the relation in which existence is, and that non-existence is inconceivable Parmenides stood to the Pythagoreans, of whom | (Reliqu. 1. 33. &c.), but only leads to the desired two, entirely unknown to us, Ameinias and Dio-end by the avoidance, not merely of assuming a chaetes, are spoken of as his instructors (Sotion, in non-existence, but also of regarding existence and Diogenes Laert. ix. 21). Others content them- non-existence as on a par with each other, which selves with reckoning Parmenides as well as Zeno is the back-leading road of the blind and erring as belonging to the Pythagorean school (Callima- crowd (ib. 1. 43, &c.). On the former, Reason chus ap. Procl. in Parmenid. iv. p. 51, comp. (Aóyos, voûs) our guide; on the latter the eye Strab. vi. init.; Iambl. Vit. Pythag. § 166, &c. that does not catch the object (άσкотоν Ŏμμа), and with others), or with speaking of a Parmenidean re-echoing hearing (ňxýeσσa ákový, ib. 1. 52. &c. life, in the same way as a Pythagorean life is comp. 1. 89; Plat. Parmen. p. 135, d.). On the spoken of (Cebet. Tabul. c. 2); and even the cen- former path we convince ourselves that the exsorious Timon (in Diog. Laërt. ix. 23) allows Par- istent neither has come into being, nor is perishmenides to have been a high-minded man; while able, and is entirely of one sort (ovλov povvoyevés), Plato speaks of him with veneration, and Aristotle without change and limit (kal dтpeμès nd' átéλEOand others give him an unqualified preference over Tov), neither past nor future, entirely included in the rest of the Eleatics (Plat. Theaet. p. 183, e. ; the present (ib. 1. 56). For it is as impossible that Soph. p. 237, comp. Aristot. Metaph. A, 5. p. 986, it can become and grow out of the existent, as that b. l. 25; Phys. Auscult. i. 23; Clem. Alex. Strom. it could do so out of the non-existent; since the v. p. 603). His fellow-citizens, the inhabitants of latter, non-existence, is absolutely inconceivable, Elea, must have been penetrated by similar feel- and the former cannot precede itself; and every ings with regard to him, if they every year bound coming into existence presupposes a non-existence their magistrates to render obedience to the laws (1. 61, &c.). By similar arguments divisibility laid down by him (Speusippus in Diog. Laërt. ix. 23, (1. 77, &c.), motion or change, as also infinity, are comp. Strab. vi. p. 252; Plut. adv. Colot. p. 1126). shut out from the absolutely existent (1. 81, &c.), Like Xenophanes, Parmenides developed his and the latter is represented as shut up in itself, so philosophical convictions in a didactic poem, com- that it may be compared to a well-rounded ball posed in hexameter verse, entitled On Nature (1. 100, &c. ); while Thought is appropriated to it Plut. de Pyth. Orac. p. 402), the poetical power as its only positive definition, Thought and that and form of which even his admirers do not rate which is thought of (Object) coinciding (1. 93, &c.; very highly (Proclus, in Parmen. iv. 62; Plut. de the corresponding passages of Plato, Aristotle, Audit. p. 44, de audiend. Poet. p. 16, c.; comp. Theophrastus, and others, which authenticate this Cic. Acad. Quaest. iv. 23); and this judgment view of his theory, see in Commentatt. Eleat. by is confirmed by the tolerably copious fragments of the author of this article, i. p. 133, &c., and in S. it which are extant, for the preservation of which Karsten, l. c.). Thus to Parmenides the idea of we are indebted chiefly to Sextus Empiricus and Being had presented itself in its complete purity, to Simplicius, and the authenticity of which is esta- the exclusion of all connection with space, time, and blished beyond all doubt by the entire accordance multiformity, and he was compelled to decide upon of their contents with the statements in Aristotle, regarding as human fancy and illusion what appears Plato, and others, as well as by the language and to us connected with time and space, changeable style (the expressions of Diogenes Laërt. ix. 23, and multiform (1. 97, &c. 176), though he neverhave reference to Pythagoras, not to Parmenides). | theless felt himself obliged at least to attempt an Even the allegorical exordium is entirely wanting explanation of this illusion. In this attempt, in the charm of inventive poetry, while the versi- which he designates as mere mortal opinion and fication is all that distinguishes the argumentation deceptive putting together of words, he lays down from the baldest prose. That Parmenides also two primordial forms (uoppai), the fine, and light, wrote in prose (Suid. s. v.) has probably been in- and thoroughly uniform aetherial fire of flame (Aoferred only from a misunderstood passage in Plato yos aitépiov Tup), and the cold, thick, and heavy (Soph. p. 237). In fact there was but one piece body (déuas) of dark night (1. 112, &c.),—reprewritten by Parmenides (Diog. Laërt. i. 16, comp.sented by those who have preserved to us the in Plat. Parmen. p. 128, a. c.; Theophrastus in Diog. Laërt. viii. 55; Simplicius on Arist. Phys. f. 31, a. and others); and the prose passage, which is found among the fragments (Simplic. l. c. f. 7), is without

formation, as Warm and Cold, Fire and Earth (Arist. Phys. i. 3, Metaph. i. 5, de Gener. et Corrupt, i. 3; Theophrast. in Alex. l. c.); the former referred to the existent, the latter to the non-existent

(Arist. and Theophr. ll. cc.). Although the latter expressions are not found in Parmenides, he manifestly regarded the former, the primordial principle of fire, as the active and real, the other as the passive, in itself unreal, only attaining to reality when animated by the former (1. 113, 129). The whole universe is filled with light and darkness (1. 123), and out of their intermingling every thing in the world is formed by the Deity, who reigns in their midst (L 127. év dè μéoq toútwv daíμwv návтα Sepv), the primary source of the fateful procreation and intermingling (σTʊyepoło TÓKOV Kal μitios dpx, l. 127, &c.). As the first of the gods, this deity devised Eros, the principle of union between the mutually opposed primordial principles (Arist. Metaph. i. 4; Sext. Empir. adv. Math. ix. 1, 6; Plut. de Primo Frigido, p. 946, e.); and after him other gods, doubtless to represent powers and gradations of nature (Plato, Symp. p. 195, c.; Menand. de Encom.i. c. 5), amongst which Desire, War, and Strife may very well have been found (Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 11; S. Karsten's Conjecture, l. c. p. 239, does not seem requisite). But the ultimate explanatory principle of the world of originated ex-viction that Thought and Existence coincide. But, istence must, in his view, have been necessity, or destiny, and as such he may very well have designated at one time that deity that holds sway between the opposites (Stobaeus, Eclog. i. 23, p. 482; comp. Plato, Symp. p. 195, c.), at other times the opposed principles themselves (Plut. de Anim. Procreat. c. Timaeo, p. 1026, b.). Of the cosmogony of Parmenides, which was carried out very much in detail, we possess only a few fragments and notices, which are difficult to understand (1. 132, &c. ; Stob. Ecl. Phys. 1. 23, p. 482, &c. ; Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 11, &c.; comp. S. Karsten, l. c. p. 240, &c.), according to which, with an approach to the doctrines of the Pythagoreans, he conceived the spherical mundane system, surrounded by a circle of the pure light (Olympus, Uranus); in the centre of this mundane system the solid earth, and between the two the circle of the milky-way, of the morning or evening star, of the sun, the planets, and the moon; which circle he regarded as a mixture of the two primordial elements. As here, so in his anthropological attempts, he deduced the differences in point of perfection of organisation, from the different proportions in which the primordial principles were intermingled (S. Karsten, p. 257, &c.), and again deduced the differences in the mental capacities from the more or less perfect intermixture of the members (ws yap ékáσтų ěxe κράσις μελέων πολυπλάγκτων, τὼς νέος ἀνθρώTOLL, 1. 145, &c.; comp. S. Karsten, p. 266, &c.) ;-laying down in the first instance that the primordial principles are animated, and that all things, even those that have died, partake of feeling, not indeed for the warm, for light, for sound, but for the cold, for darkness, and for silence (Theophrastus, de Sensu Princ.). Accordingly, consciousness and thought also, in so far as, while conceived in a state of change, it is an object of appearance, is to be deduced from the primordial principles of the world of phaenomena, but must be abstracted from that Thought which is coincident with the absolutely existent. But, however marked the manner in which Parmenides separated the true, only, changeless Existence from the world of phaenomena, which passes off in the change of forms, and however little he may have endeavoured to trace back the latter to the former, the possi

bility of its being so traced back he could not give up, and appears for that very reason to have designated the primordial form of the Warm as that which was real in the world of phaenomena, probably not without reference to Heracleitus' doctrine of perpetual coming into existence, while he placed along with it the opposite primordial form of the Rigid, because it was only in this way that he could imagine it possible to arrive at coming into existence, and change. Thus, however, we find in him the germs of that dualism, by the more complete carrying out of which the later Ionians, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and others, imagined that they could meet the Eleatic doctrine of the absolute. Empedocles seems more immediately, and to a greater extent than the rest, to have further developed these germs; and he also, just like Parmenides, set down necessity or predestination as the ultimate ground of originated existence and change, and in like manner agreed with his Eleatic predecessor in this, that like is recognised by like; a presupposition in which, as it occurs in Parmenides, we can scarcely fail to recognise a reference to his con

little as he could deny that the really existent must in some way or other lie at the basis of change and the multiformity of phaenomena, he could not attempt to deduce the latter from the former so long as he maintained the idea of the existent as single, indivisible, and unchangeable; and this idea, again, he could not but maintain, so long as he conceived it in a purely abstract manner as pure Position.* But, however insufficient this idea is, it was necessary to develope it with sharpness and precision before it would be possible to make any successful attempts to find the absolutely existent in place of the originated, and therefore as something multiform. The first endeavours to define the idea of the existent are found in Xenophanes, and with them begins that course of development peculiar to the Eleatics. But Parmenides was the first who succeeded in developing the idea of the existent purely by itself and out of itself, without carrying it back and making it rest upon a support, like the Deity in Xenophanes. It is only from inaccurate or indistinct statements that it has been concluded that Parmenides represented the absolutely existent as a deity (Ammonius, in Arist. de Interpret. f. 58; Arist. de Xenoph. Gorg. et Melisso, c. 4). So that he was the only philosopher who with distinctness and precision recog nised that the existent, as such, is unconnected with all separation or juxtaposition, as well as with all succession, all relation to space or time, all coming into existence, and all change; from which arose the problem of all subsequent metaphysics, to reconcile the mutually opposed ideas of Existence and Coming into Existence.

After the scanty collection in H. Stephens' Poesis Philosophica, 1573, the fragments of Parmenides were collected and explained more fully by G. G. Fülleborn (Beiträge zur Gesch. der Philos. vi.; comp. C. Fr. Heinrich, Spicilegium Observationum, ib. viii.). A more complete collection was then made

It may be necessary to suggest to the reader who is unaccustomed to the terminology of metaphysics, that in connection with this word Position he must dismiss all notion of locality, and look upon it as a noun whose meaning answers to that of the adjective positive.-TRANSLator.

by the author of this article (Comment. Eleat. Al-
tona, 1815); but the best and most careful col-
lection is that of S. Karsten, who made use of the
MS. apparatus of the great Jul. Scaliger, which is
preserved in the library of Leyden. It forms the
second part of the first volume of Philosophorum
Graecorum Veterum Oper. Reliquiae, Amstelod.
1835.
[CH. A. B.]

were of the most important kind. His age and long established reputation as a military commander naturally gave great weight to his advice and opinion; and though his counsels, leaning generally to the side of caution, were frequently overruled by the impetuosity of the youthful monarch, they were always listened to with deference, and sometimes followed even in opposition to the opinion of Alexander himself. (Arrian. iii. 9.) His special post appears to have been that of commander-in-chief of the Macedonian infantry (Diod. xvii. 17), but it is evident that he acted, and was generally regarded as second in command to Alexander himself. Thus, at the three great battles of the Granicus, Issus and Arbela, while the king in person commanded the right wing of the army, Parmenion was placed at the head of the left, and contributed essentially to the victory on all those memorable occasions. (Arr. Anab. i. 14, ii. 8, iii. 11, 14, 15; Curt. iii. 9. § 8, iv. 13. § 35, 15. § 6, 16. § 1-7; Diod. xvii. 19, 60.) Again, whenever Alexander divided his forces, and either hastened forward in person with the light-armed troops, or on the contrary, despatched a part of his army in advance, to occupy some important post, it was always Parmenion that was selected to command the division where the king was not present in person. (Arr. Anab. i. 11, 17, 18, 24, ii. 4, 5, 11, iii. 18; Curt. iii. 7. § 6, v. 3. § 16; Diod. xvii. 32.) The confidence reposed in him by Alexander appears to have been unbounded, and he is continually spoken of as the most attached of the king's friends, and as holding, beyond all question, the second place in the state. Among other important employments we find him selected, after the battle of Issus, tó take possession of the treasures deposited by Dareius at Damascus (Arr. ii. 11, 15; Curt. iii. 12, 13): and again at a later period when Alexander himself determined to push on into the wilds of Parthia and Hyrcania in pursuit of Dareius, he left Parmenion in Media with a large force, with instructions to see the royal treasures taken in Persia safely deposited in the citadel of Ecbatana, under the charge of Harpalus, and then to rejoin Alexander and the main army in Hyrcania. (Arr. iii. 19; Justin. xii. 1.)

PARME'NION (Пapμevíwv). 1. Son of Philotas, a distinguished Macedonian general in the service of Philip of Macedon and Alexander the Great. Notwithstanding the prominent place that he holds in history we know nothing either of his family and origin, or of the services by which he had attained the high reputation of which we find him possessed when his name first | appears. As he was considerably older than Philip, having been born about B. c. 400 (see Curt. vii. 2. § 33) it is probable that he had already distinguished himself during the reign of Amyntas II., | but the first mention of his name occurs in the year 356, when we find him entrusted with the chief command in the war against the Illyrians, whom he defeated in a great battle (Plut. Alex. 3). Throughout the reign of Philip he enjoyed the highest place in the confidence of that monarch, both as his friend and counsellor, and as a general: the king's estimation of his merits in the latter capacity may be gathered from his well known remark, that he had never been able to find more than one general, and that was Parmenion. (Plut. Apophth. p. 177, c.) Yet the occasions on which his name is specially mentioned during the reign of Philip are not numerous. In B. C. 346 we find him engaged in the siege of Halus in Thessaly (Dem. de F. L. p. 392), and shortly after he was sent by Philip, together with Antipater and Eurylochus, as ambassador to Athens, to obtain the ratification of the proposed peace from the Athenians and their allies. (Id. ib. p. 362; Arg. ad Or. de. F. L. p. 336.) In B. c. 342, while Philip was in Thrace, Parmenion carried on operations in Euboea, where he supported the Macedonian party at Eretria, and subsequently besieged and took the city of Oreus, and put to death Euphraeus, the leader of the opposite faction. (Dem. Phil. iii. p. 126; Athen. xi. p. 508.) When Philip at length began to turn his views seriously towards But before the end of the year 330, while the conquest of Asia B. c. 336, he sent forward Parmenion still remained in Media in pursuance Parmenion and Attalus with an army, to carry on of these orders, the discovery took place in Dranpreliminary operations in that country, and secure a giana of the plot against the king's life, in which firm footing there by liberating some of the Greek Philotas, the only surviving son of Parmenion, cities. (Diod. xvi. 91, xvii. 2; Justin. ix. 5.) was supposed to be implicated [PHILOTAS]: and They had, however, little time to accomplish any- the confession wrung from the latter by the torthing before the assassination of Philip himself ture not only admitted his own guilt, but involved entirely changed the aspect of affairs: Attalus was his father also in the charge of treasonable designs bitterly hostile to the young king, but Parmenion against the life of Alexander. (Curt. vi. 11. § 21 was favourably disposed towards him, and readily-30.) Whether the king really believed in the joined with Hecataeus, who was sent by Alexander to Asia, in effecting the removal of Attalus by assassination. By this means he secured the attachment of the army in Asia to the young king: he afterwards carried on some military operations of little importance in the Troad, but must have returned to Europe before the commencement of the year 334, as we find him taking part in the deliberations of Alexander previous to his setting out on the expedition into Asia. (Diod. xvii. 2, 5, 7, 16; Curt. vii. 1. § 3.)

guilt of Parmenion, or deemed his life a necessary sacrifice to policy after the execution of his son, it is impossible for us to decide, but the sentence of the aged general was pronounced by the assembled Macedonian troops, and Polydamas was despatched in all haste into Media with orders to the officers next in command under Parmenion to carry it into execution before he could receive the tidings of his son's death. The mandate was quickly obeyed, and Parmenion was assassinated by Cleander with his own hand. (Arr. Anab. iii 26; Curt. vii. 2. § 11-33; Diod. xvii. 80; Plut. Alex. 49; Justin. xii. 5; Strab. xv. p. 724.)