Mostôov >ouxetov 816Asa we', Rome, 1545, 8vo., printed by Antonius Bladus Asulanus, containing enunciations only, without demonstrations or diagrams, edited by Angelus Cujanus, and dedicated to Antonius Altovitus. We happen to possess a little volume agreeing in every particular with this description, except only that it is in Italian, being “I quindici libri degli elementi di Euclide, di Greco iradotti in lingua Thoscana.” Here is another instance in which the editor believed he had given the whole of Euclid in giving the enunciations. From this edition another Greek text, Florence, 1545, was invented by another mistake. All the Greek and Latin editions which Fabricius, Murhard, &c., attribute to Dasypodius (Conrad Rauchfuss), only give the enunciations in Greek. The same may be said of Scheubel's edition of the first six books (Basle, folio, 1550), which nevertheless professes in the title-page to give Euclid, Gr. Lat. There is an anonymous complete Greek and Latin text, London, printed by William Jones, 1620, which has thirteen books in the title-page, but contains only six in all copies that we have seen : it is attributed to the celebrated mathematician Briggs. The Oxford edition, folio, 1703, published by David Gregory, with the title EUkxetàov gotá. ueva, took its rise in the collection of manuscripts bequeathed by Sir Henry Savile to the University, and was a part of Dr. Edward Bernard's plan (see his life in the Penny Cyclopaedia) for a large republication of the Greek geometers. His intention was, that the first four volumes should contain Euclid, Apollonius, Archimedes, Pappus, and Heron; and, by an undesigned coincidence, the University has actually published the first three volumes in the order intended : we hope Pappus and Heron will be edited in time. In this Oxford text a large additional supply of manuscripts was consulted, but various readings are not given. It contains all the reputed works of Euclid, the Latin work of Mohammed of Bagdad, above mentioned as attributed by some to Euclid, and a Latin fragment De Levi et Ponderoso, which is wholly unworthy of notice, but which some had given to Euclid. The Latin of this edition is mostly from Commandine, with the help of Henry Savile's papers, which seem to have nearly amounted to a complete version. As an edition of the whole of Euclid's works, this stands alone, there being no other in Greek. Peyrard, who examined it with every desire to find errors of the press, produced only at the rate of ten for each book of the Elements. The Paris edition was produced under singular circumstances. It is Greek, Latin, and French, in 3 vols. 4to. Paris, 1814–16–18, and it contains fifteen books of the Elements and the Data; for, though professing to give a complete edition of Euclid, Peyrard would not admit anything else to be genuine. F. Peyrard had published a translation of some books of Euclid in 1804, and a com

classical bibliographers are trustworthy as to writers with whom a scholar is more conversant than with Euclid. It is much that a Fabricius should enter upon Euclid or Archimedes at all, and he may well be excused for simply copying from bibliographical lists. But the mathematical bibliographers, Heilbronner, Murhard, &c., are inexcusable for copying from, and perpetuating, the almost unavoidable mistakes of Fabricius.

plete translation of Archimedes. It was his intention to publish the texts of Euclic, Apollonius, and Archimedes; and beginning to examine the manuscripts of Euclid in the Royal Library at Paris, 23 in number, he found one, marked No.190, which had the appearance of being written in the ninth century, and which seemed more complete and trustworthy than any single known manuscript. This document was part of the plunder sent from Rome to Paris by Napoleon, and had belonged to the Vatican Library. When restitution was enforced by the allied armies in 1815, a special permission was given to Peyrard to retain this manuscript till he had finished the edition on which he was then engaged, and of which one volume had already appeared. Peyrard was a worshipper of this manuscript, No. 190, and had a contempt for all previous editions of Euclid. He gives at the end of each volume a comparison of the Paris edition with the Oxford, specifying what has been derived from the Vatican manuscript, and making a selection from the various readings of the other 22 manuscripts which were before him. This edition is therefore very valuable; but it is very incorrectly printed: and the editor's strictures upon his predecessors seem to us to require the support of better scholarship than he could bring to bear upon the subject. (See the Dublin Ireview, No. 22, Nov. 1841, p. 34.1, &c.) The Berlin edition, Greek only, one volume in two parts, octavo, Berlin, 1826, is the work of E. F. August, and contains the thirteen books of the Elements, with various readings from Peyrard, and from three additional manuscripts at Munich (making altogether about 35 manuscripts consulted by the four editors). To the scholar who wants one edition of the Elements, we should decidedly recommend this, as bringing together all that has been done for the text of Euclid's greatest work. We mention here, out of its place, The Elements of Euclid with dissertations, by James Williamson, B.D. 2 vols. 4to., Oxford, 1781, and London, 1788. This is an English translation of thirteen books, made in the closest manner from the Oxford edition, being Euclid word for word, with the additional words required by the English idiom given in Italics. This edition is valuable, and not very scarce: the dissertations may be read with profit by a modern algebraist, if it be true that equal and opposite errors destroy one another. Camerer and Hauber published the first six books in Greek and Latin, with good notes, Berlin, 8vo. 1824. We believe we have mentioned all the Greek texts of the Elements; the liberal supply with which the bibliographers have furnished the world, and which Fabricius and others have perpetuated, is, as we have no doubt, a series of mistakes arising for the most part out of the belief about Euclid the enunciator and Theon the demonstrator, which we have described. Of Latin editions, which must have a slight notice, we have the six books by Orontius Finoeus, Paris, 1536, folio (Fabr., Murhard); the same by Joachim Camerarius, Leipsic, 1549, 8vo (Fabr., Murhard); the fifteen books by Steph. Gracilis, Paris, 1557, 4to. (Fabr., who calls it Gr. Lat., Murhard); the fifteen books of Franc. de Foix de Candale (Flussas Candalla), who adds a sixteenth, Paris, 1566, folio, and promises a seventeenth and eighteenth, which he gave in a subsequent edition, Paris. 1578, folio (Fabr. Murhard); Frederic

Commandine's first edition of the fifteen books, with commentaries, Pisauri, 1572, fol. (Fabr., Murhard); the fifteen books of Christopher Clavius, with commentary, and Candalla's sixteenth book annexed, Rome, 1574, fol. (Fabr., Murhard); thirteen books, by Ambrosius Rhodius, Witteberg, 1609, 8vo. (Fabr., Murh.); thirteen books by the Jesuit Claude Richard, Antwerp, 1645, folio (Murh.); twelve books by Horsley, Oxford, 1802. We have not thought it necessary to swell this article with the various reprints of these and the old Latin editions, nor with editions which, though called Elements of Euclid, have the demonstrations given in the editor's own manner, as those of Maurolycus, Barrow, Cotes, &c., &c., nor with the editions contained in ancient courses of mathematics, such as those of Herigonius, Dechâles, Schott, &c., &c., which generally gave a tolerably complete edition of the Elements. Commandine and Clavius are the progenitors of a large school of editors, among whom Robert Simson stands conspicuous. We now proceed to English translations. We find in Tanner (Bibl. Brit. Hib. p. 149) the following short statement: “Candish, Richardus, patria Suffolciensis, in linguam patriam transtulit Euclidis geometriam, lib. xv. Claruit* A. D. MDLVI. Bal. par. post. p. 111.” Richard Candish is mentioned elsewhere as a translator, but we are confident that his translation was never published. Before 1570, all that had been published in English was Robert Recorde's Pathway to Knowledge, 1551, containing enunciations only of the first four books, not in Euclid's order. Recorde considers demonstration to be the work of Theon. In 1570 appeared Henry Billingsley's translation of the fifteen books, with Candalla's sixteenth, London, folio. This book has a long preface by John Dee, the magician, whose picture is at the beginning: so that it has often been taken for Dee's translation; but he himself, in a list of his own works, ascribes it to Billingsley. The latter was a rich citizen, and was mayor (with knighthood) in 1591. We always had doubts whether he was the real translator, imagining that Dee had done the drudgery at least. On looking into Anthony Wood's account of Billingsley (Ath. Owon. in verb.) we find it stated (and also how the information was obtained) that he studied three years at Oxford before he was apprenticed to a haberdasher, and there made acquaintance with an “eminent mathematician” called Whytehead, an Augustine friar. When the friar was “put to his shifts” by the dissolution of the monasteries, Billingsley received and maintained him, and learnt mathematics from him. “When Whytehead died, he gave his scholar all his mathematical observations that he had made and collected, together with his notes on Euclid's Elements.” This was the foundation of the translation, on which we have only to say that it was certainly made from the Greek, and not from any of the Arabico-Latin versions, and is, for the time, a very good one. It was reprinted, London, folio, 1661. Billingsley died in 1606, at a - reat age. Edmund Scarburgh (Oxford, folio, 1705) translated six books, with copious annotations. We omit detailed mention of Whiston's translation of Tacquet, of Keill, Cunn, Stone, and other editors,

whose editions have not much to do with the pro gress of opinion about the Elements. Dr. Robert Simson published the first six, and eleventh and twelfth books, in two separate quarto editions. (Latin, Glasgow, 1756. English, London, 1756.) The translation of the Data was added to the first octavo edition (called 2nd edition), Glasgow, 1762: other matters unconnected with Euclid have been added to the numerous succeeding editions. With the exception of the editorial fancy about the perfect restoration of Euclid, there is little to object to in this celebrated edition. It might indeed have been expected that some notice would have been taken of various points on which Euclid has evidently fallen short of that formality of rigour which is tacitly claimed for him. We prefer this edition very much to many which have been fashioned upon it, particularly to those which have introduced algebraical symbols into the demonstrations in such a manner as to confuse geometrical demonstration with algebraical operation. Simson was first translated into German by J. A. Matthias, Magdeburgh, 1799, 8vo. Professor John Playfair's Elements of Geometry contains the first six books of Euclid; but the solid geometry is supplied from other sources. The first edition is of Edinburgh, 1795, octavo. This is a valuable edition, and the treatment of the fifth book, in particular, is much simplified by the abandonment of Euclid's notation, though his definition and method are retained. Eaclid's Elements of Plane Geometry, by John Walker, London, 1827, is a collection containing very excellent materials and valuable thoughts, but it is hardly an edition of Euclid. We ought perhaps to mention W. Halifax, whose English Euclid Schweiger puts down as printed eight times in London, between 1685 and 1752. But we never met with it, and cannot find it in any sale" catalogue, nor in any English enumeration of editors. The Diagrams of Euclid's Elements by the Rev. W. Taylor, York, 1828, 8vo. size (part i. containing the first book; we do not know of any more), is a collection of lettered diagrams stamped in relief, for the use of the blind. The earliest German print of Euclid is an edition by Scheubel or Scheybl, who published the seventh, eighth, and ninth books, Augsburgh, 1555, 4to. (Fabr. from his own copy); the first six books by W. Holtzmann, better known as Xylander, were published at Basle, 1562, folio (Fabr., Murhard, Kästner). In French we have Errard, nine books, Paris, 1598, 8vo. (Fabr.); fifteen books by Henrion, Paris, 1615 ((Fabr.), 1623 (Murh.), about 1627 (necessary inference from the preface of the fifth edition, of 1649, in our possession). It is a close translation, with a comment. In Dutch, six books by J. Petersz Dou, Leyden, 1606 (Fabr.), 1608 (Murh.). Dou was translated into German, Amsterdam, 1634, 8vo. Also an anonymous translation of Clavius, 1663 (Murh.). In Italian, Tartaglia's edition, Venice, 1543 and 1565. (Murh., Fabr.) In Spanish, by Joseph Saragoza, Valentia 1673, 4to. (Murh.) In Swedish, the first six books, by Martin Strömer, Upsal, 1753. (Murh.) The remaining writings of Euclid are of small interest compared with the Elements, and a shorter account of them will be sufficient.

* Hence Schweiger has it that R. Candish pub:ished a translation of Fuclid in 1556.

* These are the catalogues in which the appear

ance of a book is proof of its existence.

The first Greek edition of the Data is EökAesöov 3-001éva, &c., by Claudius Hardy, Paris, 1625, 4to. Gr. Lat., with the preface of Marinus prefixed. Murhard speaks of a second edition, Paris, 1695, 4to. Dasypodius had previously published them in Latin, Strasburg, 1570. (Fabr.) We have already spoken of Zamberti's Latin, and of the Greek of Gregory and Peyrard. There is also Euclidis Datorum Liber by Horsley, Oxford, 1803, 8vo. The Phaenomena is an astronomical work, containing 25 geometrical propositions on the doctrine of the sphere. Pappus (lib. vi. praef.) refers to the second proposition of this work of Euclid, and the second proposition of the book which has come down to us contains the matter of the reference. We have referred to the Latin of Zamberti and the Greek of Gregory. Dasypodius gave an edition (Gr. Lat., so said; but we suppose with only the enunciations Greek), Strasburg, 1571, 4to.(?) (Weidler), and another appeared (Lat.) by Joseph Auria, with the comment of Maurolycus, Rome, 1591, 4to. (Lalande and Weidler.) The book is also in Mersenne's Synopsis, Paris, 1644, 4to. (Weidler.) Lalande names it (Bibl. Astron. p. 188) as part of a very ill-described astronomical collection, in 3 vols. Paris, 1626, 16mo. Of the two works on music, the Harmonics and the Division of the Canon (or scale), it is unlikely that Euclid should have been the author of both. The former is a very dry description of the interminable musical momenclature of the Greeks, and of their modes. It is called Aristoxenean [ARISToxENUs]: it does not contain any discussion of the proper ultimate authority in musical matters, though it does, in its wearisome enumeration, adopt some of those intervals which Aristoxenus retained, and the Pythagoreans rejected. The style and matter of this treatise, we strongly suspect, belong to a later period than that of Euclid. The second treatise is an arithmetical description and demonstration of the mode of dividing the scale. Gregory is inclined to think this treatise cannot be Euclid's, and one of his reasons is that Ptolemy does not mention it; another, that the theory followed in it is such as is rarely, if ever, mentioned before the time of Ptolemy. If Euclid did write either of these treatises, we are satisfied it must have been the second. Both are contained in Gregory (Gr. Lat.) as already noted ; in the collection of Greek musical authors by Meibomius (Gr. Lat.), Amsterdam, 1652, 4to.; and in a separate edition (also Gr. Lat.) by J. Pena, Paris, 1537, 4to. (Fabr.), 1557 (Schweiger). Possevinus has also a corrected Latin edition of the first in his Bibl. Sel. Colon. 1657. Forcadel translated one treatise into French, Paris, 1566, 8vo. (Schweiger.) The book on Optics treats, in 61 propositions, on the simplest geometrical characteristics of vision and perspective: the Catoptrics have 31 propositions on the law of reflexion as exemplified in plane and spherical mirrors. We have referred to the Gr. Lat. of Gregory and the Latin of Zamberti; there is also the edition of J. Pena (Gr. Lat.), Paris, 1557, 4to. (Fabr.); that of Dasypodius (Latin only, we suppose, with Greek enunciations), Strasburg, 1557, 4to. (Fabr.); a reprint of the Latin of Pena, Leyden, 1599, 4to. (Fabr.); and some other reprint, Leipsic, 1607. (Fabr.) There is a French translation by Rol. Freart Mans, 1663, 4to.; and an Italian one by Egnatic Danti Florence. 1573, 4to. (Schweiger.)

(Proclus; Pappus; August ed cit.; Fabric. Bill Graec. vol. iv. p. 44, &c.; Gregory, Praef. edit cit.; Murhard, Bibl. Math. ; Zamberti, ed. cit.; Savile, Praelect. in Eucl. ; Heilbronner, His: Mathes. Univ.; Schweiger, Handb. der Classisch Bibl.; Peyrard, ed. cit., &c. &c.; all editions to which a reference is not added having been ac, tually consulted.) [A. DE M.] EUCLEIDES (EökAetőms), historical. 1. One of the leaders of the body of colonists from Zancle who founded Himera. (Thucyd. vi. 5.) 2. One of the sons of Hippocrates, tyrant of Gela. It was in suppressing a revolt of the Geloans against Eucleides and his brother, which broke out on the death of Hippocrates, that Gelon to get the sovereignty into his own hands, B. c. 491. (Herod. vii. 155.) 3. One of the Thirty Tyrants at Athens. (Xen. Hell. ii. 3. § 2.) 4. The archon eponymus for the year B. c. 40% His archonship is memorable for the restoration, with some modifications, of the old laws of Solm and Draco. These were inscribed on the stoa poo cile in the so-called Ionian alphabet, which was then first brought into use at Athens for public documents. (Andoc. de Myst. p. 11; Plut. Arist.l. Athenaeus (i. p. 3, a.) mentions an Athenian this name who was famous as a collector of books Whether he was the same person as the archon," not, does not appear. 5. The brother of Cleomenes III. king of Sparta He commanded a division of the forces of the lak ter at the battle of Sellasia, B. c. 223, and by his unskilful tactics in a great degree brought about the defeat of the Lacedaemonians. He fell with the whole of the wing which he commanded (Polyb. ii. 65, 67, 68; Plut. Philop. p. 358, Art p. 1046, Cleom, pp. 809, 818.) [C.P. M.] EUCLEIDES(EökAesöms), a native of MEGARA or, according to some less probable accounts, Gela. He was one of the chief of the disciples d Socrates, but before becoming such, he had studio the doctrines, and especially the dialectics, of the Eleatics. Socrates on one occasion reproved him for his fondness for subtle and captious disputes Diog. Laërt. ii. 30.) On the death of Socrats o c. 399), Eucleides, with most of the other pupil of that philosopher, took refuge in Megara, and there established a school which distinguished it self chiefly by the cultivation of dialectics. To doctrines of the Eleatics formed the basis of hi philosophical system. With these he blended thi ethical and dialectical principles of Socrates. Th Eleatic dogma, that there is one universal, un changeable existence, he viewed in a moral asped calling this one existence the Good, but giving: also other names (as Reason, Intelligence, &c. perhaps for the purpose of explaining how the re. though one, appeared to be many. He reject: demonstration, attacking not so much the premis assumed as the conclusions drawn, and also reaso ing from analogy. He is said to have been a mi of a somewhat indolent and procrastinating disp sition. He was the author of six dialogues, no of which, however, have come down to us. F has frequently been erroneously confounded wi the mathematician of the same name. The scho which he founded was called sometimes the Meg ric, sometimes the Dialectic or Eristic. (Dic Laërt. ii. 106–108; Cic. Acad. ii. 42; Plut. Fratr. Am. 18.) [C. P. M.]

[ocr errors]

sician, to whom is addressed one of the Letters attributed to Theano (Socrat. et Pythag. Epist. p. 61, ed. Orell.), and who therefore may be supposed to have lived in the fifth century B. c. 2. The author of an antidote against venomous animals, &c., the composition of which is preserved by Galen, de Antid. ii. 10, vol. xiv. p. 162. Eucleides must have lived in or before the second century after Christ. [W. A. G.] EUCLEIDES. 1. Of Athens, a sculptor, made the statues of Pentelic marble, in the temples of Demeter, Aphrodite, and Dionysus, and Eileithuia at Bura in Achaia. (Paus. vii. 25. § 5.) This town, as seen by Pausanias, had been rebuilt after its destruction by an earthquake, in B. c. 37%. (Paus. l.c., comp. § 2.) The artist probably flourished, therefore, soon after this date. 2. A medallist, whose name is seen on the coins of Syracuse. (R. Rochette, Lettre à M. le Duc de Lignes, 1831.) [P. S.] EUCLES (Eökxis). 1. Of Rhodes, a son of Callianax and Callipateira, the daughter of Diagoras, belonged to the family of the Eratidae or Diagoridae. He gained a victory in boxing at Olympia, though it is uncertain in what year; and there was a statue of him at Olympia, the work of Naucydes. (Paus. vi. 6. § 1, 7. § 1.) The Scholiast on Pindar (Ol. vii. 16) calls him Euclon, and describes him as a nephew of Callipateira. (Böckh, Eaplicat. ad Pind. Ol. vii. p. 166, &c.; DIAGoRAs, ERATIDAE.) 2. A son of Hippon of Syracuse, was one of the three new commanders who were appointed in B. c. 414. Subsequently he was one of the commanders of the fleet which the Syracusans sent to Miletus to assist Tissaphernes against the Athenians. (Thuc. vi. 103; Xen. Hell. i. 2, § 8.) . A third person of this name is Eucles, who was archon at Athens in B. c. 427. (Thuc. iv. 104.) [L. S.] EUCLOUS (Eikaows), an ancient Cyprian soothsayer, who, according to Pausanias (x. 12. § 6, 14. § 3, 24. § 3), lived before the time of Homer, who, as he predicted, was to spring from Cyprus. Pausanias quotes some lines professing to be the bard's prophecy of this event. The poem called the Cyprian Poem has been erroneously supposed to have been of his composition. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. i. p. 35.) [C.P. M.] EU'CRATES (Eökpárms), the demagogue, according to the Scholiast, alluded to by Aristophanes (Equit. 130), where he speaks of a flax-seller who ruled next but one before Cleon. (Comp. Equit. 254.) He might possibly be the same as the father of Diodotus (Thuc. iii. 41), who spoke against Cleon in the Mytilenaean debate, B. c. 427, but it is not very probable. The Eucrates mentioned in the Lysistrata (103) of Aristophanes as a general in Thrace is a different person, and probably the same as the blother of Nicias spoken of below. [A. H. C.] EU'GRATES (Elkpatns). 1. An Athenian, a brother of the noted general Nicias. The few notices we have of him are to be found in the speeches of Andocides and Lysias, and these do lot tally with each other. According to Lysias, he was made general by the Athenians, apparently after the last naval defeat of Nicias in the harbour of Syracuse (unless indeed by the last sea fight Lysias means the battle of Aegos Potami), and hewed his attachment to the principles of liberty

by refusing to become one of the Thirty Tyrants, and was put to death by them. According to Andocides, Eucrates was one of the victims of the popular ferment about the mutilation of the Hermes busts, having been put to death on the information of Diocleides. We have a speech of Lysias, composed in defence of the son of Eucrates on the occasion of a trial as to whether his hereditary property should be confiscated or not. (Lys. de Bonis Niciae frat. c. 2; Andoc. de Myst. c. 11.)

2. A writer mentioned by Hesychius (s. v. #Aarpov) as the author of a work entitled ‘Pošiaká. Athenaeus (iii. p. 111, c.) also mentions a writer of this name. [C. P. M.]

EUCRATIDES (Eörpartôms), king of Bactria, was contemporary with Mithridates I. (Arsaces VI.), king of Parthia, and appears to have been one of the most powerful of the Bactrian kings, and to have greatly extended his dominions; but all the events of his reign are involved in the greatest obscurity and confusion. It seems probable that he established his power in Bactria proper, while Demetrius, the son of Euthydemus, still reigned in the Indian provinces south of the Paropamisus [DEMETRIUs]; and, in the course of the wars that he carried on against that prince, he was at one time besieged by him with very superior forces for a space of near five months, and with difficulty escaped. (Justin, xli. 6.) At a subsequent period, and probably after the death of Demetrius, he made great conquests in northern India, so that he was said to have been lord of a thousand cities. (Strab. xv. p. 686.) Yet in the later years of his reign he appears to have suffered heavy losses in his wars against Mithridates, king of Parthia, who wrested from him several of his provinces (Strab. xi. pp. 515, 517), though it seems impossible to admit the statement of Justin (xli. 6), that the Parthian king conquered all the dominions of Eucratides, even as far as India. It appears certain at least, from the same author, that Eucratides retained possession of his Indian dominions up to the time of his death, and that it was on his return from thence to Bactria that he was assassinated by his son, whom he had associated with himself in the sovereignty. (Justin, xli. 6.) The statements of ancient authors concerning the power and greatness of Eucratides are confirmed by the number of his coins that have been found on both sides of the Paropamisus: on these he bears the title of “the Great.” (Wilson's Ariana, p. 235–237.) The date suggested for the commencement of his reign by Bayer, and adopted by Wilson, is 181 B. c.; but authorities differ widely as to its termination, which is placed by Lassen in 160 B. C., while it is extended by Bayer and Wilson to 147 B. c. (See Wilson's. Ariana, p. 234–238, where all the points relating to Eucratides are discussed and the authorities referred to.)

[merged small][graphic]

Bayer (Hist. Regn. Graec. Baciriani, p. 95, &c.) has inferred the existence of a second Eucratides, the son of the preceding, to whom he ascribes the murder of his father, and this view has been adopted by M. Raoul Rochette (Journal des Sav. 1835); but it does not seem to be established on any sufficient grounds. Wilson and Mionnet conceive Heliocles to have been the successor of Eucratides. (Wilson's Ariana, p. 237; Mionnet, Suppl. t. 8, p. 470.) [HELIOcLEs.] [E. H. B.] EUCTE'MON (Eöktijuav), the astronomer. [METoN.] EUCTE'MON (Eöktijuav), a Greek rhetorician who lived in the early part of the Roman empire. He is mentioned only by Seneca, who has preserved a few fragments of his works. (Controv. iii. 19, 20. iv. 25, v. 30, 34.) [L. S.] EUDAEMON (Eööasuav). 1. The name of two victors in the Olympian games. One of them was an Egyptian, and won the prize in boxing, but the year is not known. (Philostr. Her. ii. 6.) The other was a native of Alexandria, and gained a victory in the foot-race in Ol. 237, or A. D. 169. (African, ap. Euseb. Chron. p. 44, 2d. edit. Scalig.) 2. A Greek grammarian, and contemporary of Libanius. He was a native of Pelusium in Egypt, and wrote a work on orthography, which is lost, but is often referred to by Suidas, in the Etymologicum, and by Stephanus of Byzantium. (s. v.v. Atala, Aaakčalov, Aokfuelov, KatretøAtov, and 'Opearsa; Eudoc. p. 168.) | L.S.] još (Eöðauíðas). l. A Spartan of some note, who, when the Chalcidians sent to implore aid against Olynthus in B. c. 383, was sent at the head of 2000 men. Before his departure he prevailed on the ephors to commit the next division which should be sent to the command of his brother Phoebidas. The latter, on his march, seized the Cadmea of Thebes; and in consequence of the delay of the main body of the troops thus occasioned, Eudamidas could effect but little. He, however, garrisoned several of the Chalcidian towns; and, making Potidaea his headquarters, carried on the war without any decisive result. According to Diodorus, he was worsted in several engagements; and it would appear from Demosthenes (de Falsa Legat. p. 425), who speaks of three commanders having in this war fallen on the side of the Chalcidians and Lacedaemonians, that in one of these encounters Eudamidas was killed. (Xen. Hell. v. 2. § 24; Diod. xv. 20, 21.) 2. Two kings of Sparta bore this name. Eudamidas I. was the younger son of Archidamus III. and succeeded his brother Agis III. in B. c. 330. The exact length of his reign is uncertain, but it was probably about 30 years. Plutarch (Apophth. p. 220, 221) records some sayings of Eudamidas, which bespeak his peaceful character and policy, which is also attested by Pausanias (iii. 10. § 5). Eudamidas II. was the son of Archidamus IV. whom he succeeded) and grandson of Eudamidas I. (Plut. Agis, 3.) He was the father of Agis IV. and Archidamus W. [C. P. M.] EUDA'MUS (Eöðapos), is mentioned by Aristophanes (Plut. 884) as a contemporary, and lived therefore in the fifth century B. c. The Scholiast informs us that he was by trade either a druggist or a goldsmith, and that he sold rings as antidotes against poisons. [W. A. G.] EUDEMUS (Eöömuos). 1. One of Alexander's generals, who was appointed by him to the com

mand of the troops left in India. (Arrian, And

vi. 27. § 5.) After Alexander's death he made him self master of the territories of the Indian kin Porus, and treacherously put that monarch 1 death. He by this means became very powerf and in 317 B. c. brought to the support of Eument in the war against Antigonus a force of 3500 me and 125 elephants. (Diod. xix. 14.) With thes he rendered him active service in the first battlei. Gabiene, but seems nevertheless to have been ja lous of him, and joined in the conspiracy of Ant genes and Teutamos against him, though he wo afterwards induced to divulge their plans. Afia the surrender of Eumenes, Eudemus was putt death by order of Antigonus, to whom he hal always shewn a marked hostility. (Diod. xix. li. 27, 44; Plut. Eum. c. 16.) 2. Son of Cratewas and brother of Pithon, wo appointed by his brother satrap of Parthia in the stead of Philip, whom he displaced. (Diod. xii.

.) EUDEMUS (Eöömuos). 1. writer, a native of either Naxos or Paros, who lived before the time of the Peloponnesian was (Dionys. Jud. de Thuc. c. 5; Clem. Alex. Stron vi. 2, 26, p. 267; Vossius, de Hist. Gr. p. 44. ed. Westermann.) 2. A writer, apparently on natural history, who is frequently quoted by Aelian, in his Historyd Animals (iii. 21, iv. 8, 43, 45, 56, v. 7). 3. A writer on the history of astronomy and geometry, mentioned by Clemens Alexandrinus (Strom. i. p. 130), Diogenes Laërtius (i. 23), and Proclus (in Euclid. i. 4). 4. A rhetorician, who lived probably in the fourth century after Christ. He was the authw of a lexicon, Tepl Aéčew "PnTopków, manuscript of which are still extant at Paris, Vienna, and other places. His work appears to have been disk gently used by Suidas, and is mentioned with praise by Eudocia. (Suidas, s. v. Eöömuos; Eudocia

[ocr errors]

whom Aristotle dedicated the dialogue Eöönuos i Tepl ovXñs, which is lost, and known to us only by some fragments preserved in Plutarch (Co. solat. ad Apollon. p. 115, b.), and a few othe writers. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iii. pp. 393 599; Ionsius, De Script. Historiae Philosoph. , 15. 3.; Wyttenbach, ad Plut. l.c. p. 765; and th: commentators on Cic. de Divin. i. 25.) 2. Of Rhodes, a contemporary and discipled Aristotle. We have no particulars of his life; bu that he was one of the most important of Aristotle numerous disciples may be inferred from the anec dote of Gellius (xiii. 5, where Eudemo must b read instead of Menedemo), according to whit Eudemus and Theophrastus were the only disciple whom the Peripatetic school esteemed worthy t fill the place of Aristotle after his death. Simpli cius makes mention of a biography of Eudemus supposed to be the work of one Damas or Damas cius. (Simplic. ad Aristot. Phys. vi. 216.) Eudemu was one of those immediate disciples of Aristot who closely followed their master, and the prio cipal object of whose works was to correct, amplify and complete his writings and philosophy. It wo owing to this circumstance, as we learn from th ancient critics, that Aristotle's writings were s often confounded with those of other author

« 前へ次へ »