A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

ARCESILAUS.

ARCESILAUS. 259

as the discordant character of some of his later
views. He was not without reputation as a poet,
and Diogenes LaErtius (iv. 30) has preserved two
epigrams of his, one of which is addressed to Attalus, king of Pergamus, and records his admiration of Homer and Pindar, of whose works he
was an enthusiastic reader. Several of his puns and
witticisms have been preserved in his life by the
same writer, which give the idea of an accomplished
man of the world rather than a grave philosopher.
Many traits of character are also recorded of him,
some of them of a pleasing nature-, The greatness
of his personal character is shewn by the imitation
of his peculiarities, into which his admirers are
said insensibly to have fallen. His oratory is described as of an attractive and persuasive kind, the
effect of it being enhanced by the frankness of his
demeanour. Although his means were not large,
his resources being chiefly derived from king Eumenes, many tales were told of his unassuming
generosity. But it must be admitted, that there
was another side to the picture, and his enemies
accused him of the grossest profligacy-a charge
which he only answered by citing the example of
Aristippus-and it must be confessed, that the
accusation is slightly confirmed by the circumstance
that he died in the 76th year of his age from a fit
of excessive drunkenness; on which event an epigram has been preserved by Diogenes.
It was on the death of Crantor that Arcesilaus
succeeded to the chair of the Academy, in the history of which he makes so important an era. As,
however, he committed nothing to writing, his
opinions were imperfectly known to his contemporaries, and can now only be gathered from the confused statements of his opponents. There seems
to have been a gradual decline of philosophy since
the time of Plato and Aristotle: the same subjects
had been again and again discussed, until no room
was left for original thought-a deficiency which
was but poorly compensated by the extravagant
paradox or overdrawn subtlety of the later schools.
Whether we attribute the scepticism of the Academy to a reaction from the dogmatism of the
Stoics, or whether it was the natural result of ex-.ending to intellectual truth the distrust with which
Plato viewed the information of sense, it would
oeem that in the time of Arcesilaus the whole of
)hilosophy was absorbed in the single question of
he grounds of human knowledge. What were the
cculiar views of Arcesilaus on this question, it is
lot easy to collect. On the one hand, lie is said to
ave restored the doctrines of Plato in an uncorupted form; while, on the other hand, according
) Cicero (Acad.i. 12), he summed up his opinions
i the formula, "that hlie knew nothing, not even
is own ignorance." There are two ways of re)nciling the difficulty: either we may suppose
im to have thrown out such d'ropifat as an exercise,r the ingenuity of his pupils, as Sextus Empiricus
Pyrrh. I-Ippotyp. i. 234), who disclaims him as a
-eptic, would have us believe; or he may have
ally doubted the esoteric meaning of Plato, and
Ive supposed himself to have been stripping his
Drks of the figments of the Dogmatists, while he
is in fact taking from them all certain principles,
iatever. (Cic. de Orat. iii. 18.) A curious result
the confusion which pervaded the New Academy
is the return to some of the doctrines of the elder
nic school, which they attempted to harmonize
th Plato and their own views. (Euseb. Pr. Ev.

xiv. 5, 6.) Arcesilaus is also said to have restored
the Socratic method of teaching in dialogues; although it is probable that he did not confine himself strictly to the erotetic method, perhaps the
supposed identity of his doctrines with those of
Plato may have originated in the outward form in
which they were conveyed.
The Stoics were the chief opponents of Arcesilaus; he attacked their doctrine of a convincing
conception (KaraiM7rrTiKo) i pavaTria) as understood
to be a mean between science and opinion-a mean
which he asserted could not exist, and was merely
the interpolation of a name. (Cic. Acad. ii. 24.)
It involved in fact a contradiction in terms, as the
very idea of <pav-raoia implied the possibility of
false as well as true conceptions of the same object.
It is a question of some importance, in what the
scepticism of the New Academy was distinguished
from that of the followers of Pyrrhon. Admitting
the formula of Arcesilauus, "that he knew nothing,
not even his own ignorance," to be an exposition
of his real sentiments, it was impossible in one
sense that scepticism could proceed further: but
the New Academy does not seem to have doubted
the existence of truth in itself, only our capacities
for obtaining it. It differed also from the principles of the pure sceptic in the practical tendency of
its doctrines: while the object of the one was the
attainment of perfect equanimity (biroxo), the other
seems rather to have retired from the barren field
of speculation to practical life, and to have acknowledged some vestiges of a moral law within, at best
but a probable guide, the possession of which, however, formed the real distinction between the sage
and the fool. Slight as the difference may appear
between the speculative statements of the two
schools, a comparison of the lives of their founders
and their respective successors leads us to the conclusion, that a practical moderation was the characteristic of the New Academy, to which the Sceptics were wholly strangers. (Sex. Empiricus, adv.
Math. ii. 158, Pyrh'-. Hypoiyp. i. 3, 226.) [B.J.]
ARCESILAUS ('ApXsotAaos), an Athenian
comic poet of the old comedy, none of whose works
are extant. (Diog. Laert. iv. 45.) [P. S.]
ARCESILA'US, artists. 1. A sculptor who
made a statue of Diana, celebrated by an ode of
Simonides. (Diog. Lart. iv. 45.) He may, therefore, have flourished about 500 B. c.
2. Of Paros, was, according to Pliny (xxxv. 39),
one of the first encaustic painters, and a contemporary of Polygnotus (about 460 B. c.).
3. A painter, the son of the sculptor Tisicrates,
flourished about 280 or 270 B. c. (Plin. xxxv. 40.
~ 42.) Pausanias (i. 1. ~ 3) mentions a painter
of the same name, whose picture of Leosthenes
and his sons was to be seen in the Peiraeeus.
Though Leosthenes was killed in the war of Athens
against Lamia, 1. c. 323, Sillig argues, that the
faict of his sons being included in the picture favours the supposition that it was painted after his
death, and that we may therefore safely refer the
passages of Pausanias and of Pliny to the same
person. (Catal. Artif. s. v.)
4. A sculptor in the first century B. c., who, according to Pliny, was held in high esteem at Rome,
was especially celebrated by M. Varro, and was
intimate with L. Lentulus. Among his works
were a statue of Venus Genetrix in the forum of
Caesar, and a marble lioness surrounded by winged
Cupids, who were sporting with her. Of the latter
s2