ページの画像
PDF

(at Scap. c. 4) says that young Antoninus was reared upon Christian milk, he refers to Proculus, the steward of Euhodus, for there is no reason to believe that either Euhodus or his wife professed the true faith, as some have imagined. (Dion Cass. LXxvi. 3, 6, lxxvii. 1.) [W. R.] F.VIPPE (Eötrirm), the name of five mythological personages, concerning whom nothing of interest is related. (Apollod. ii. 1. § 5; Paus. ix. 34. Ś 5; Parthen. Erot. 3; Eratosth. Catast. 18; Ov. Met. v. 303.) [L. S.] EVIPPUS (Eöttos). i. A son of Thestius and Eurythemis, who, together with his brothers, was killed by Meleager. (Apollod. i. 7. § 10, 8. § 3.) 2. A son of Megareus, who was killed by the Cithaeronean lion. (Paus. i. 41. § 4.) There are two other mythical personages of this name. (Hom. Il. xvi. 417; Steph. Byz. s. v. 'AAdéavôa.) [L.S.] EULAEUS (EVAatos), an eunuch, became one of the regents of Egypt and guardians of Ptolemy Philometor on the death of Cleopatra, the mother of the latter, in B. c. 173. The young king was then 13 years old, and he is said to have been brought up in the greatest luxury and effeminacy by Eulaeus, who hoped to render his own influence permanent by the corruption and consequent weakness of Ptolemy. It was Eulaeus who, by refusing the claims of Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes) to the provinces of Coele-Syria and Palestine, involved Egypt in the disastrous war with Syria in B. c. 171. (Polyb. xxviii. 16; Diod. Fragm. lib. xxx. Erc. de /leg. xviii. p. 624, de Virt. et Vit. p. 579; Liv. xlii. 29, xlv. 11, 12; App. Syr. 66; Just. xxxiv. 2.) [E. E.] EULO'GIUS. [Eclogius.] EULO'GIUS, FAWO'NIUS, a rhetorician of Carthage, and a contemporary and disciple of St. Augustin. (August. de Cur, pro Mort. 11.) Under his name we possess a disputation on Cicero's Somnium Scipionis, which contains various discussions on points of the Pythagorean doctrine of numbers. The treatise was first printed by A. Schott at the end of his Quaestiones Tullianae (Antwerp, 1613, 8vo.), and afterwards in the edition of Cicero's de Officiis, by Graevius (1688), from which it is reprinted with some improvements in Orelli's edition of Cicero, vol. v. part. 1, pp. 397 —413. [L. S.] EU'MACHUS (Eöuaxos). 1. A Corinthian, son of Chrysis, was one of the generals sent by the Corinthians in the winter of B. c. 431 in command of an armament to restore Evarchus, tyrant of Astacus, who had been recently expelled by the Athenians. (Thuc. ii. 33.) 2. A native of Neapolis, who, according to Athenaeus (xiii. p. 577), wrote a work entitled ‘Ioroplat Táv Tepl 'Avvièav. It is perhaps the same Eumachus of whose work entitled IIepiirymais a fragment is still extant in Phlegon. (Mirab. c. 18.) [C.P. M.] EUMAEUS (Eöuatos), the famous and faithful swineherd of Odysseus, was a son of Ctesius, king of the island of Syrie; he had been carried away from his father's house by a Phoenician slave, and Phoenician sailors sold him to Laërtes, the father of Odysseus. (Hom. Od. xv. 403, &c.; comp. ODYSSEUs. [L. S.] EUMA'RIDAS (EJuapúas), of Paros, a Pythagorean philosopher, who is mentioned by Iamblichus (Vit. Pyth. 36); but it is uncertain whether the reading is correct, and whether we ought not

! to read Thymaridas, who is known as a celebrated Pythagorean. (Iambl. l. c. 23, with Kiessling's note. [L. S.] EU'MARUS, a very ancient Greek painter of monochromes, was the first, according to Pliny, who distinguished, in painting, the male from the female, and who “dared to imitate all figures.” His invention was improved upon by Simon of Cleonae. (xxxv. 8. s. 34.) Müller (Arch. d. Kunst, $74) supposes that the distinction was made by a difference of colouring; but Pliny’s words seem rather to refer to the drawing of the figure. [P. S.] EUMA"THIUS. [EUsTATHIUs, No. 5.] EUMET, US (Eöumaos), a son of Admetus and Alcestis, who went with eleven ships and warriors from Pherae, Boebe, Glaphyrae, and Iaolcus to Troy. He was distinguished for his excellent horses, which had once been under the care of Apollo, and with which Eumelus would have gained the prize at the funeral games of Patroclus, if his chariot had not been broken. He was married to Iphthima, the daughter of Icarius. (Hom. Il. ii. 711, &c. 764, xxiii. 375, 536, Od. iv. 798; Strab. ix. p. 436.) There are three other mythological personages of this name. (Anton. Lib. 15, 18; Paus. vii. 18. § 2.) [L. S.] EUME'LUS (Eium\os), one of the three sons of Parysades, King of Bosporus. After his father's death he engaged in a war for the crown with his brothers Satyrus and Prytanis, who were successively killed in battle. Eumelus reigned most prosperously for five years and five months, B. c. 309—304. (Diod. xx. 22–26; Clinton, F. H. vol. ii. pp. 282, 285.) [P. S.] EUMELUS (E5um-os). 1. Of Corinth, the son of Amphilytus, a very ancient Epic poet, belonged, according to some, to the Epic cycle. His name, like Eucheir, Eugranimus, &c., is significant, referring to his skill in poetry. He was of the noble house of the Bacchiadae, and flourished about the 5th Olympiad, according to Eusebius (Chron.”), who makes him contemporary with Arctinus. (Comp. Cyril, c. Julian. i. p. 13; Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 144.) Those of the poems ascribed to him, which appear pretty certainly genuine, were genealogical and historical legends. To this class belonged his Corinthian History (Paus. ii. 1. § 1, 2, § 2, 3, § 8; Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. i. 148; Tzetz. Schol. ad Lycophr. 1024, comp. 174, 480), his irporáðtov Šs AñAov, from which some lines are quoted by Pausanias, who considered it the only genuine work of Eumelus (iv. 4. § 1, 33. §§ 2, 3, v. 19. S 2), and the Europia (Euseb. l.c.; Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 151 ; Schol. ad Hom. Il. ii. p. 121.) He also wrote Bougonia, a poem on bees, which the Greeks called Bovyóval and Bovyevels. (Euseb. l.c.; Varro. R. R. ii. 5. § 5, ed. Schneid.) Some writers ascribed to him a Titavouaxia, which also was attributed to Arctinus. (Athen. vii. p. 277, d., comp. i. p. 22, c.; Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. i. 1165.) The cyclic poem on the return of the Greeks from Troy (vártos) is ascribed to Eumelus by a Scholiast on Pindar (Ol. xiii. 31), who writes the name wrongly, Eumolpus. The lines quoted by this Scholiast are also given by Pausanias, under the name of Eumelus. (Vossius, de Hist. Graec. pp. 5, 6, ed. Westermann; Welcker, die Epische Cyclus, p.274.)

* A little lower, Eusebius places him again a

Ol. 9, but the former date seems the more correct.

2. A Peripatetic philosopher, who wrote trept ths doxalas kwuobias. (Schol. MS. ad Aeschin. c. Timarch. § 39. 4.) Perhaps he is the same from whom Diogenes Laërtius (v. 5) quotes an account of the death of Aristotle. (Meineke, Hist. Crit.Com. Graec. p. 8.) [P. S.] EUME'LUS (EöumAos), a painter, whose productions were distinguished for their beauty. There was a Helen by him in the forum at Rome. He probably lived about A. D. 190. (Philostr. Imag. Prooem. p. 4; Vit. Soph. ii. 5.) He is supposed to have been the teacher of Aristodemus, whose school was frequented by the elder Philostratus. [P. S.] EUME'LUS (Eöum\os), a veterinary surgeon, of whom nothing is known except that he was a native of Thebes. (Hippiatr. p. 12.) He may perhaps have lived in the fourth or fifth century after Christ. Some fragments, which are all that remain of his writings, are to be found in the Collection of Writers on Veterinary Surgery, first published in Latin by J. Ruellius, Paris. 1530, fol., and in Greek by S. Grynaeus, Basil. 1537, 4to. [W. A. G.] EU'MENES (Eöuévns). 1. Ruler or dynast of the city of Amastris on the Euxine, contemporary with Antiochus Soter. The citizens of Heracleia wished to purchase from him his sovereignty, as Amastris had formerly belonged to them; but to this he refused to accede. He, however, soon after gave up the city to Ariobarzanes, king of Pontus. (Memnon, 16, ed. Orelli.) Droysen (Hellenismus, vol. ii. p. 230) supposes this Eumenes to be the nephew of Philetaerus, who afterwards became king of Pergamus [EUMENEs I.]; but there do not seem any sufficient grounds for this identification. 2. Brother of Philetaerus, founder of the kingdom of Pergamus. [PHILETAERUS.] [E. H. B.] EU'MENES (Eöuévns) of CARDIA, secretary to Alexander the Great, and after his death one of the most distinguised generals among his successors. The accounts of his origin vary considerably, some representing his father as a poor man, who was obliged to subsist by his own labour, others as one of the most distinguished citizens of his native place. (Plut. Eum. l; Corn. Nep. Eum. l; Aelian, W. H. xii. 43.) The latter statements are upon all accounts the most probable : it is certain, at least, that he received a good education, and having attracted the attention of Philip of Macedon on occasion of his visiting Cardia, was taken by that king to his court, and employed as his private secretary. In this capacity he soon rose to a high place in his confidence, and after his death continued to discharge the same office under Alexander, whom he accompanied throughout his expedition in Asia, and who seems to have treated him at all times with the most marked confidence and distinction, of which he gave a striking proof about two years before his death, by giving him in marriage Artonis, a Persian princess, the daughter of Artabazus, at the same time that he himself married Stateira, the daughter of Dareius. (Arrian, Anal. vii. 4.) A still stronger evidence of the favour which Eumenes enjoyed with Alexander is, that he was able to maintain his ground against the influence of Hephaestion, with whom he was continually at enmity. (Arrian, Anab. vii. 13, 14; Plut. Eum. 2.) Nor were his services confined to those of his office as secretary: he was more than once employed by Alexander in military commands, and was ultimately appointed by him to the post of hipparch or leader of one of the chief divisions of

cavalry. (Arrian, Anal. v. 24; Plut. Eum. l; Corn. Nep. Eun. 13.) In the discussions and tumults which ensued on the death of Alexander, Eumenes at first, aware of the jealousy with which as a Greek he was regarded by the Macedonian leaders, refrained from taking any part; but when matters came to an open rupture, he was mainly instrumental in bringing about a reconciliation between the two parties. In the division of the satrapies which followed, Eumenes obtained the government of Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, and Pontus: but as these provinces had never yet been conquered, and were still in the hands of Ariarathes, Antigonus and Leonnatus were appointed to reduce them for him. Antigonus, however, disdained compliance, and Leonnatus was quickly called off to Greece by his ambitious projects. [LEONNATUS.] In these he endeavoured to persuade Eumenes, who had accompanied him into Phrygia, to join; but the latter, instead of doing so, abruptly quitted him, and hastening to Perdiccas, revealed to him the designs of Leonnatus. By this proof of his fidelity, he secured the favour of the regent, who henceforward reposed his chief confidence in him. As an immediate reward, Perdiccas proceeded in person to subdue for him the promised satrapies, defeated and put to death Ariarathes, and established Eumenes in the full possession of his government, B. c. 322. (Plut. Eum. 3; Diod. xviii. 3, 16; Arrian, ap. Phot. p. 69, a.; Corm. Nep. Eum. 2.) Here, however, he did not long remain, but accompanied the regent and the royal family into Cilicia. In the following spring, when Perdiccas determined to proceed in person against Ptolemy, he committed to Eumenes the chief command in Asia Minor, and ordered him to repair at once to the Hellespont, to make head against Antipater and Craterus. Eumenes took advantage of the interval before their arrival to raise a numerous and excellent body of cavalry out of Paphlagonia, to which he was indebted for many of his subsequent victories. Meanwhile, a new enemy arose against him in Neoptolemus, governor of Armenia, who had been placed under his command by Perdiccas, but then revolted from him, and entered into correspondence with Antipater and Craterus. Eumenes, however, defeated him before the arrival of his confederates, and then turned to meet Craterus, who was advancing against him, and to whom Neoptolemus had made his escape after his own defeat. The battle that ensued was decisive; for although the Macedonian phalanx suffered but little, Craterus himself fell, and Neoptolemus was slain by Eumenes with his own hand, after a deadly struggle in the presence of the two armies. (Plut. Eum. 4–7; Diod. xviii. 29–32; Arrian, ap. Phot. p. 70, b., 71, a.; Corn. Nep. Eum. 3, 4; Justin, xiii. 6, 8.) This took place in the summer of 321 B. c. But while Eumenes was thus triumphant in Asia, Perdiccas had met with repeated disasters in Egypt, and had finally fallen a victim to the discontent of his troops, just before the news arrived of the victory of Eumenes and the death of Craterus. It came too late: the tide was now turned, and the intelligence excited the greatest indigmation among the Macedonian soldiers, who had been particularly attached to Craterus, and who hated Eumenes as a foreigner, for such they considered him. A general assembly of the army was held, in which Eumenes, Attalus, and Alcetas,

the remaining leaders of the party of Perdiccas, were condemned to death. The conduct of the war against them was assigned to Antigonus; but he did not take the field until the following summer (b. c. 320). Eumenes had wintered at Celaenae in Phrygia, and strengthened himself by all means in his power, but he was unable to make head against Antigonus, who defeated him in the plains of Orcynium in Cappadocia; and finding himself unable to effect his retreat into Armenia, as he had designed to do, he adopted the resolution of disbanding the rest of his army, and throwing himself, with only 700 troops, into the small but impregnable fortress of Nora, on the confines of Lycaonia and Cappadocia. (Plut. Eum. 8–10; Diod. xviii. 37, 40, 41 ; Corn. Nep. Eum. 5.) Here he was closely blockaded by the forces of Antigonus; but, confident in the strength of his post, refused all offers of capitulation, and awaited the result of external changes. It was not long before these took place: the death of Antipater caused a complete alteration in the relations of the different leaders; and Antigonus, who was anxious to obtain the assistance of Eumenes, made him the most plausible offers, of which the latter only availed himself so far as enabled him to quit his mountain fortress, in which he had now held out nearly a year, and withdraw to Cappadocia. Here he was busy in levying troops and gathering his friends together, when he received letters from Polysperchon and Olympias, entreating his sup

the supreme command throughout Asia. Eumenes was, whether from interest or from real attachment, always disposed to espouse the cause of the royal family of Macedonia, and gladly embraced the offer: he eluded the pursuit of Memander, who marched against him by order of Antigonus, and arrived in Cilicia, where he found the select body of Macedonian veterans called the Argyraspids, under Antigenes and Teutamus. These, as well as the royal treasures deposited at Quinda, had been placed at his disposal by Polysperchon and Olympias: but though welcomed at first with apparent enthusiasm, Eumenes was well aware of the jealousy with which he was regarded, and even sought to avoid the appearance of commanding the other generals by the singular expedient of erecting a tent in which the throne, the crown and sceptre of Alexander were preserved, and where all councils of war were held, as if in the presence of the deceased monarch. (Plut. Eum. 11–13; Diod. xviii. 42, 53, 58–61 ; Polyaen. iv. 8. § 2; Justin. xiv. 2.) By these and other means Eumenes succeeded in conciliating the troops under his command, so that they rejected all the attempts made by Ptolemy and Antigonus to corrupt their fidelity. At the same time he made extensive levies of mercenaries, and having assembled in all a numerous army, he advanced into Phoenicia, with the view of reducing the maritime towns, and sending a fleet from thence to the assistance of Polysperchon This plan was, however, frustrated by the arrival of the fleet of Antigonus, and the advance of that general himself with a greatly superior force. Eumenes in consequence retired into the interior of Asia, and took up his winterquarters in Babylonia. (Diod. xviii. 61–63, 73.) In the spring of 317 he descended the left bank of the Tigris, and having foiled all the endeavours of Seleucus to prevent his passing that river, ad

[ocr errors]

vanced into Susiana, where he was joined by Peucestes at the head of all the forces of Media, Persia, and the other provinces of Upper Asia. Still he did not choose to await here the advance of Antigonus; and leaving a strong garrison to guard the royal treasures at Susa, he took post with his army behind the Pasitigris. Antigonus, who had followed him out of Babylonia, and effected his junction with Seleucus and Pithon, now marched against him; but having met with a check at the river Copratas, withdrew by a cross march through a difficult country into Media, while Eumenes took up his quarters at Persepolis. He had many difficulties to contend with, not only from the enemy, but from the discontent of his own troops, the relaxation of their discipline when they were allowed to remain in the luxurious provinces of Persia, and above all from the continual jealousies and intrigues of the generals and satraps under his command. But whenever they were in circumstances of difficulty or in presence of the enemy, all were at once ready to acknowledge his superiority, and leave him the uncontrolled direction of everything. The two armies first met on the confines of Gabiene, when a pitched battle ensued, with no decided advantage to either side; after which Antigonus withdrew to Gadamarga in Media, while Eumenes established his winter-quarters in Gabiene. Here Antigonus attempted to surprise him by a sudden march in the depth of the winter; but he was too

wary to be taken unprepared: he contrived by a port, and granting him, in the name of the king,

stratagem to delay the march of his adversary until he had time to collect his scattered forces, and again bring matters to the issue of a pitched battle. Neither party obtained a complete victory, and Eumenes would have renewed the combat the next day; but the baggage of the Macedonian troops had fallen into the hands of the enemy, and the Argyraspids, furious at their loss, agreed to purchase its restoration from Antigonus by delivering up their general into his hands. The latter is said to have been at first disposed to spare the life of his captive, which he was strongly urged to do by Nearchus and the young Demetrius; but all his other officers were of the contrary opinion, and Eumenes was put to death a few days after he had fallen into the hands of the enemy. (Plut. Eum. 13–19; Diod. xix. 12–15, 17–34, 37 –44; Corn. Nep. Eum. 7–12; Justin. xiv. 3, 4; Polyaen. iv. 8. § 3, 4.) These events took place in the winter of 317 to 316 B. c." Eumenes was only forty-five years old at the time of his death. (Corn. Nep. Eum. 13.) Of his consummate ability, both as a general and a states man, no doubt can be entertained; and it is proba ble that he would have attained a far more important position among the successors of Alexander, had it not been for the accidental disadvantage of his birth. But as a Greek of Cardia, and not a native Macedonian, he was constantly looked upon with dislike, and even with contempt, both by his opponents and companions in arms, at the very time that they were compelled to bow beneath his

* In the relation of these events, the chronology of Droysen has been followed. Mr. Clinton (whe places the death of Eumenes early in 315 B. c.) appears to have been misled by attacning too much importance to the archonships, as mentioned by Diodorus. See Droysen, Gesch. d. Nachf. p. 269 genius. This prejudice was throughout the greatest obstacle with which he had to contend, and it may be regarded as the highest proof of his ability that he overcame it even to the extent to which he was able. It must be borne in mind also, if we praise him for his fidelity to the royal house of Macedonia, that this same disadvantage, by rendering it impossible for him to aspire to any independent authority, made it as much his interest as his duty to uphold the legitimate occupants of the throne of Alexander. He is described by Plutarch (Eum. 11) as a man of polished manners and appearance, with the air of a courtier rather than a warrior; and his oratory was more subtle and plausible than energetic. Craft and caution seem indeed to have been the prevailing points in his character; though he was able also to exhibit, when called for, the utmost energy and activity. [E. H. B.] EU'MENES (Eöuévns) I., king, or rather ruler, of PERGAMUs. He was the son of Eumenes, brother of Philetaerus, and succeeded his uncle in the government of Pergamus (B. c. 263), over which he reigned for two-and-twenty years. Soon after his accession he obtained a victory near Sardis over Antiochus Soter, and was thus enabled to establish his dominion over the provinces in the neighbourhood of his capital; but no further particulars of his reign are recorded. (Strab. xiii. p. 624; Clinton, F. H. iii. p. 401.) According to Athenaeus (x. p. 445, d.), his death was occasioned by a fit of drunkenness. He was succeeded by his cousin Attalus, also a nephew of Philetaerus. It appears to be to this Eumenes (though styled by mistake king of Bithynia) that Justin (xxvii. 3) ascribes, without doubt erroneously, the great victory over the Gauls, which was in fact gained by his successor Attalus. [ATTALUs I., vol. i. p. 410, a.] [E. H. B.] EU'MENES (Eöuévns) II., king of PERGAMUs son of Attalus I., whom he succeeded on the throne B. c. 197. (Clinton, F. H. iii. p. 403.) He inherited from his predecessor the friendship and alliance of the Romans, which he took the utmost pains to cultivate, and was included by them in the treaty of peace concluded with Philip, king of Macedonia, in 196, by which he obtained possession of the towns of Oreus and Eretria in Euboea. (Liv. xxxiii. 30, 34.) In the following year he sent a fleet to the assistance of Flamininus in the war against Nabis. (Liv. xxxiv. 26.). His alliance was in vain courted by his powerful neighbour, Antiochus III., who offered him one of his daughters in marriage. (Appian, Syr, 5.) Eumenes plainly saw that it was his interest to adhere to the Romans in the approaching contest; and far from seeking to avert this, he used all his endeavours to urge on the Romans to engage in it. When hostilities had actually commenced, he was active in the service of his allies, both by sending his fleet to support that of the Romans under Livius and Aemilius, and facilitating the important passage of the Hellespont. In the decisive battle of Magnesia (B. c. 190), he commanded in person the troops which he furnished as auxiliaries to the Roman army, and appears to have rendered valuable services. (Liv. xxxv. 13, xxxvi. 43–45, xxxvii, 14, 18, 33, 37, 41; Appian, Syr. 22, 25, 31,33, 38, 43; Justin, xxxi. 8.) Immediately on the conclusion of peace, he hastened to Rome, to put forward in person his claims to reward : his pretensions were favourably received by the senate, who granted

not.

him the possession of Mysia, Lydia, both Phrygii and Lycaonia, as well as of Lysimachia, and t Thracian Chersonese. By this means Eumen found himself raised at once from a state of coi parative insignificance to be the sovereign of powerful monarchy. (Liv. xxxvii. 45, 52–5 xxxviii. 39; Polyb. xxii. 1–4, 7, 27; Appia Syr. 44.) About the same time, he married t daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia, as procured from the Romans favourable terms s that monarch. (Liv. xxxviii. 39.) This allian was the occasion of involving him in a war wil Pharnaces, king of Pontus, who had invaded Cal padocia, but which was ultimately terminated b the intervention of Rome. (Polyb. xxv. 2, 4, 5, xxvi. 4.) He was also engaged in hostilities wit Prusias, king of Bithynia, which gave the Roman a pretext for interfering, not only to protect E. menes, but to compel Prusias to give up Hannibal who had taken refuge at his court. (Liv. xxxii 46, 51 ; Justin. xxxii. 4; Corn. Nep. Hann. 10. During all this period, Eumenes enjoyed th highest favour at Rome, and certainly was no backward in availing himself of it. He was con tinually sending embassies thither, partly to cult vate the good understanding with the senate is which he now found himself, but frequently also t complain of the conduct of his neighbours, esped ally of the Macedonian kings, Philip and his suc cessor, Perseus. In 172, to give more weight u his remonstrances, he a second time visited Rome in person, where he was received with the utmos distinction. On his return from thence, he visited Delphi, where he narrowly escaped a design agai his life formed by the emissaries of Perseus. (Li xlii. 11–16; Diod. Erc. Leg. p. 623, Erc. P. p. 577; Appian, Mac. Erc. 9, pp. 519–526, ed Schweigh.) But though he was thus apparentlym terms of the bitterest hostility with the Macedo nian monarch, his conduct during the war that followed was not such as to give satisfaction to the Romans; and he was suspected of correspond ing secretly with Perseus, a charge which, accord ing to Polybius, was not altogether unfounded; but his designs extended only to the obtaining from that prince a sum of money for procuring his a peace on favourable terms. (Polyb. Fragm. Vo tican. pp. 427–429; Liv. xliv, 13, 24, 25; Appian Mac. Eac. 16, pp. 531–2.) His overtures wer however, rejected by Perseus, and after the victor of the Romans (B. c. 167), he hastened to send ho brother Attalus to the senate with his congratul. tions. They did not choose to take any publi notice of what had passed, and dismissed Attalu with fair words; but when Eumenes, probab alarmed at finding his schemes discovered, dete: mined to proceed to Rome in person, the senal passed a decree to forbid it, and finding that h was already arrived at Brundusium, ordered his to quit Italy without delay. (Polyb. xxx. 11 Fragm. Vatic. p. 428; Liv. Epit. xlvi.) Henc forward he was constantly regarded with suspicio by the Roman senate, and though his brother A. talus, whom he sent to Rome again in B. c. 16 was received with marked favour, this seems have been for the very purpose of exciting him again Eumenes, who had sent him, and inducing him set up for himself. (Polyb. xxxii. 5.) The la years of the reign of Eumenes seem to have bee disturbed by frequent hostilities on the part of Pr sias, king of Bithynia, and the Gauls of Galatio : he had the good-fortune or dexterity to avoid ning to an open rupture either with Rome or brother Attalus. (Polyb. xxxi. 9, xxxii. 5; »d. xxxi. Eac. Wales. p. 582.) His death, which not mentioned by any ancient writer, must have en place in B. c. 159, after a reign of 39 years. o xiii. p. 624; Clinton, F. H. iii. pp. 403, DAccording to Polybius (xxxii. 23), Eumenes s a man of a feeble bodily constitution, but of at vigour and power of mind, which is indeed ficiently evinced by the history of his reign : policy was indeed crafty and temporizing, but licative of much sagacity; and he raised his ngdom from a petty state to one of the highest nsideration. All the arts of peace were assidusly protected by him: Pergamus itself became der his rule a great and flourishing city, which adorned with splendid buildings, and in which founded that celebrated library which rose to be ‘ival even to that of Alexandria. (Strab. xiii. p. 4.) It would be unjust to Eumenes not to add a circumstance mentioned by Polybius in his aise, that he continued throughout his life on the st terms with all his three brothers, who cheerly lent their services to support him in his wer. One of these, Attalus, was his immediate ccessor, his son Attalus being yet an infant. 'olyb. xxxii. 23; Strab. xiii. p. 624.) A deiled account of the reign of Eumenes will be ind in Van Cappelle, Commentalio de Regibus et 7tiquitatibus Pergamenis, Amstel. 1842. [E. H. B.] EUME'NIDES (Eöuevsöes), also called ERIN'Es, and by the Romans FURIAE or DIRAE, were ginally nothing but a personification of curses onounced upon a guilty criminal. The name innys, which is the more ancient one, was dered by the Greeks from the verb épíva, or evváw, I hunt up or persecute, or from the Arcaan word pivow, I am angry; so that the Erinnyes ere either the angry goddesses, or the goddesses ho hunt up or search after the criminal. (Aesyl. Eum. 499; Pind. Ol. ii. 45; Cic. de Nat. eor. iii. 18.) The name Eumenides, which sigfies “the well-meaning,” or “soothed goddesses,” a mere euphemism, because people dreaded to ll these fearful goddesses by their real name, and was said to have been first given them after the quittal of Orestes by the court of the Areiopagus, hen the anger of the Erinnyes had become sooth. (Soph. Oed. Col. 128; Schol. ad Oed. Col. 42; lid. s. v. Edueviðes.) It was by a similar eupheism that at Athens the Erinnyes were called suval Seal, or the venerable goddesses. (Paus. i. 3. S 6.) Servius (ad Aen. iv. 609) makes a disnction, according to which they bore the name irae, when they were conceived as being in heain by the throne of Zeus, Furiae, when conceived being on earth, and Eumenides, as beings of the wer world; but this seems to be a purely arbitary distinction. In the sense of curse or curses, the word Erinnys Erinnyes is often used in the Homeric poems T. ix. 454, xxi. 412, Od. xi. 280), and Aeschylus Shoeph. 406) calls the Eumenides 'Apas, that is, urses. According to the Homeric notion, the rinnyes, whom the poet conceives as distinct sings, are reckoned among those who inhabit rebos, where they rest until some curse pro

ounced upon a criminal calls them to life and acvity. (Il. ix. 571, Od. xv. 234.) The crimes |

which they punish are disobedience towards pa

rents, violation of the respect due to old age, per

jury, murder, violation of the law of hospitality, and improper conduct towards suppliants. (Hom. Il. ix. 454, xv. 204, xix. 259, Od. ii. 136, xvii. 475.) The notion which is the foundation of the belief in the Eumenides seems to be, that a parent's curse takes from him upon whom it is pronounced all peace of mind, destroys the happiness of his family, and prevents his being blessed with children. (Herod. iv. 149; Aeschyl. Eum. 835.) As the Eumenides not only punished crimes after death, but during life on earth, they were conceived also as goddesses of fate, who, together with Zeus and the Moerae or Parcae, led such men as were doomed to suffer into misery and misfortunes. (Hom. Il. xix. 87, Od. xv. 234.) In the same capacity they also prevented man from obtaining too much knowledge of the future. (Il. xix. 418.) Homer does not mention any particular names of the Erinnyes, nor does he seem to know of any definite number. Hesiod, who is likewise silent upon these points, calls the Erinnyes the daughters of Ge, who conceived them in the drops of blood that fell upon her from the body of Uranus. (Theog. 185; comp. Apollod. i. 1. § 4.) Epimenides called them the daughters of Cronos and Euonyme, and sisters of the Moerae (Tzetz. ad Lycoph. 406; Schol. ad Soph. Oed. Col. 42); Aeschylus (Eum. 321) calls them the daughters of Night; and Sophocles (Oed. Col. 40, 106) of Scotos (Darkness) and Ge. (Comp. Some other genealogies in Hygin. Fab. p. 1; Serv. ad Aen. vii. 327; Orph. Hymn. 69. 2.) The Greek tragedians, with whom, as in the Eumenides of Aeschylus, the number of these goddesses is not limited to a few (Dyer, in the Class. Museum, vol. i. pp. 28.1–298; comp. Eurip. Iphig. Taur. 970; Virg. Aen. iv. 469), no particular name of any one Erinnys is yet mentioned, but they appear in the same capacity, and as the avengers of the same crimes, as before. They are sometimes identified with the Poenae, though their sphere of action is wider than that of the Poenae. From their hunting up and persecuting the cursed criminal, Aeschylus (Eum. 231, Choeph. 1055). calls them Köves or scvvmyétiães. No prayer, no sacrifice, and no tears can move them, or protect the object of their persecution (Aesch. Agam. 69, Eum. 384); and when they fear lest the criminal should escape them, they call in the assistance of Dicé, with whom they are closely connected, the maintenance of strict justice being their only object. (Aesch. Eum. 51 1,786; Orph. Argon. 350; Plut. de Eail. 11.) The Erinnyes were more ancient divinities than the Olympian gods, and were therefore not under the rule of Zeus, though they honoured and esteemed him (Eum. 918, 1002); and they dwelt in the deep darkness of Tartarus, dreaded by gods and men. Their appearance is described by Aeschylus as Gorgo-like, their bodies covered with black, serpents twined in their hair, and blood dripping from their eyes; Euripides and other later poets describe them as winged beings. (Orest. 317, Iphig. Taur. 290; Virg. Aen. xii. 848; Orph. Hymn. 68, 5.) The appearance they have in Aeschylus was more or less retained by the poets of later times; but they gradually assumed the character of goddesses who punished crimes after death, and seldom appeared on earth. On the stage, however, and in works of art, their fearful appearance was greatly softened down, for they

« 前へ次へ »