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

ANTIOCHUS.
scribing Ascalon, mentions his birth there as a
mark of distinction for the city (Strab. xiv. p. 759),
and Cicero frequently speaks of him in affectionate
and respectful terms as the best and wisest of the
Academics, and the most polished and acute philosopher of his age. (Cic. Acad. ii. 35, Brut. 91.)
He studied under the stoic Mnesarchus, but
his principal teacher was Philo, who succeeded
Plato, Arcesilas, and Carneades,as the founder of the
fourth Academy. He is, however, better known as
the adversary than the disciple of Philo; and Cicero
mentions a treatise called Sosus (Cic. Acad. iv. 4),
written by him against his master, in which he
refutes the scepticism of the Academics. Another
of his works, called " Canonica," is quoted by
Sextus Empiricus, and appears to have been a
treatise on logic. (Sext. Emp. vii. 201, see not. in
loc.)
The sceptical tendency of the Academic philosophy before Antiochus, probably had its origin in
Plato's successful attempts to lead his disciples to
abstract reasoning as the right method of discovering truth, and not to trust too much to the impressions of the senses. Cicero even ranks Plato himself with those philosophers who held, that there
was no such thing as certainty in any kind of
knowledge (Acad. ii. 23); as if his depreciation
of the senses as trustworthy organs of perception,
and of the kind of knowledge which they convey,
invalidated also the conclusions of the reason.
There is, however, no doubt that later philosophers,
either by insisting too exclusively on the uncertainty of the senses (in order like Arcesilas to exaggerate by comparison the value of speculative.truth), or like Carneades and Philo, by extending
he same fallibility to the reason likewise, had
radually fallen into a degree of scepticism that
aemed to strike at the root of all truth, theoretical
nd practical. It was, therefore, the chief object
of Antiochus, besides inculcating particular doc-;rines in moral philosophy, to examine the grounds
)f our knowledge, and our capacities for discoverng truth; though no complete judgment can be
ormed of his success, as the book in which Cicero
rave the fullest representation of his opinions has
een lost. (Cic. ad Fam. ix. 8.)
He professed to be reviving the doctrines of the
Ild Academy, or of Plato's school, when he mainained, in opposition to Philo and Carneades, that
he intellect had in itself a test by which it could
istinguish truth from falsehood; or in the lanuage of the Academics, discern between the
nages arising from actual objects and those coneptions that had no corresponding reality. (Cic.
cead. ii. 18.) For the argument of the sceptics;as, that if two notions, were so exactly similar as
iat they could not be distinguished, neither of
iem could be said to be known with more certinty than the other; and that every true notion,as liable to have a false one of this kind attached
Sit: therefore nothing could be certainly known.
id. 13.) This reasoning was obviously overirown by the assertion, that the mind contained
ithin itself the standard of truth and falsehood;
id was also met more generally by the argument
lat all such reasoning refutes itself, since it pro-:eds upon principles assumed to be true, and then
includes that there can be no certain ground for
ly assumption at all. (Id. 34.) In like manner
ntiochus seems to have taken the side of the;oics in defending the senses from the charge of

ANTIOCHUS. 193
utter fallaciousness brought against them by the
Academics. (Id. 32.)
It is evident that in such discussions the same
questions were examined which had formerly been
more thoroughly sifted by Plato and Aristotle, in
analyzing the nature of science and treating of the
different kinds of truth, according as they were
objects of pure intellectual apprehension, or only
of probable and uncertain knowledge (Td io'Ftrr o'v
and Trd 8oeao'Tou): and as the result was an attempt
to revive the dialectic art which the Academics
despised, so the notices extant of Antiochus' moral
teaching seem to shew, that without yielding to
the paradoxes of the Stoics, or the latitudinarianism of the Academics, he held in the main doctrines nearly coinciding with those of Aristotle:
as, that happiness consists essentially in a virtuous
life, yet is not independent of external things.
(Id. 42, de Fin. v. 25, Tusc. Quaest. v. 8.) So
he denied the Stoic doctrine, that all crimes were
equal (Acad. ii. 43), but agreed with them in
holding, that all the emotions ought to be suppressed. On the whole, therefore, though Cicero
inclines to rank him among the Stoics (id. 43), it
appears that he considered himself an eclectic philosopher, and attempted to unite the doctrines of the
Stoics and Peripatetics, so as to revive the old
Academy. (Sext. Empir. i. 235.) [C. E. P.]
ANTIOCHUS ('AvwioXos), an ASTRONOMER
of uncertain date, whose work 'ArroTeAeoga'artcd
still exists in MS. in various libraries, and has not
yet been printed. (Fabr. Bibl. Gr.iv. p. 151.) There
is an introduction to the Tetrabiblus of Ptolemaeus,
of which the original text with a Latin translation
by H. Wolf was published at Basel, 1559, fol., as
the work of an anonymous writer. T. Gale (ad
Iambl. de Myst. p. 364) claims this introduction
as the work of Antiochus, whose name, however,
occurs in the work itself. (P. 194.) [L. S.]
ANTFOCHUS ('AvrioTLos), an ATHENIAN,
was left by Alcibiades at Notium in command of
the Athenian fleet, B. c. 407, with strict injunctions
not to fight with Lysander. Antiochus was the
master of Alcibiades' own ship, and his personal
friend; he was a skilful seaman, but arrogant and
heedless of consequences. His intimacy with Alcibiades had first arisen upon an occasion mentioned
by Plutarch (Alcib. 10), who tells us, that Alcibiades
in one of his first appearances in the popular assembly allowed a tame quail to escape from under his
cloak, which occurrence suspended the business of
the assembly, till it was caught by Antiochus and
given to Alcibiades.
Antiochus gave no heed to the injunctions of
Alcibiades, and provoked Lysander to an engagement, in which fifteen Athenian ships were lost,
and Antiochus himself was slain. This defeat
was one of the main causes that led to the second
banishment of Alcibiades. (Xen. Hell. i. 5. ~ 11,
&c.; Diod. xiii. 71; Plut. Alcib. 35.)
ANTI'OCHUS I. ('Av'roxos), king of COMMAGENE, a small country between the Euphrates
and mount Taurus, the capital of which was Samosata. It formerly formed part of the Syrian kingdom of the Seleucidae, but probably became an
independent principality during the civil wars of
Antiochus Grypus and his brother. It has been
supposed by some, that Antiochus Asiaticus, the
last king of Syria, is the same as Antiochus, the
first king of Commagene; but there are no good
reasons for this opinion. (Clinton, F.H. iii. p. 343.)
o