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

1020 MELETIUS. MELETUS.
John; on account of his pertinacious support of mained unpublished till 1836, when Dr. Cramer in,
Nestorius, he induced many persons to secede from serted it in the third volume of his' "Anecdota
the church, and, forming them into separate come Graeca," 8vo. Oxon. It is badlyedited, and the text
munities, continued to exercise the priestly office contains numerous errors, some arising from the
among them. This being regarded as an aggra- editor's evident ignorance of the subject-matter
vation of his offence, he was banished by the em- of the treatise, and others apparently from haste and
peror's order, issuedat John'sinstigation, to Melitene carelessness. The beginning of the work was pubin Armenia Minor, and placed in the charge of lished by Fred, Ritschel, Vratislav. 4to. 1837;
Acacius, bishop of that city, from whom he endured and there is an essay by L. E. Bachmann, entitled
much hard usage. In this exile Meletius died, re- "Quaestio de Meletio Graece inedito, ejusque Lataining his zeal for the cause of Nestorius till the tino Interprete Nic. Petreio," Rostoch. 4to. 1833.
last. Various epistles of Meletius were published It is uncertain whether this is the same person
in a Latin version, in the Ad Epliesinum Concilium who wrote a commentary on the Aphorisms of HipVariorum Patruns Epistolae of Christianus Lupus pocrates, some extracts from which are inserted by
of Ypres; 4to. Louvain, 1682; and were re-pub- Dietz in the second volume of his " Scholia in Hiplished by Baluzius, in his Nova Concilior. Collectio, pocratem et Galenum," Regim. Pruss. 8vo. 1834.
by Garnier, in his Auctarium Thzeodoreti, fol. Paris, It is indeed doubtful whether the commentary
1684, and by Schulze, ill his edition of Theodoret, is the work of Meletius or Stephanus Atheniensis.
5 vols. 8vo., Halae, 1769-1774. From these One of the letters of St. Basil, dated A. D. 375
letters of Meletius, and from other letters in the (Epist. 193, vol. iii. p. 285, ed. Bened.) is adsame collection, the foregoing facts of his history are dressed to a physician named Meletius, who is
derived. The letters of Meletius are contained in called by the title Archiater, but of whom no parCap. seu Epist. 92 (not 82, as Cave has it), 119, ticulars are known. [W. A. G.]
124, 141, 145, 155, 158, 163, 171, 174, and 177, MELE'TUS (MMreToS),an obscure tragic poet,
in the work of Lupus. The memorandum of his but notorious as one of the accusers of Socrates,
death is in Cap. 190. In the editions of Garnier was an Athenian, of the Pitthean demus (Plat.
and Schulze they are Epist. 76, 101, 105, 121, 125, Eutlpkh. p. 2, b.). At the time of the accusation
133, 136, 141, 149, 152, 155. The memorandum of Socrates, he is spoken of by Plato (I. c.) as
of Meletius' death is inserted after Epist. 164. young and.obscure (comp. Apol. p. 25, d., 26, e.).
(Cave, Hist. Lilt. ad ann. 428, vol. i. p. 414; Le Butthe fact that he was mentioned by Aristophanes
Quien, Oriens Christianus, vol, ii. col. 891; Fabric. in the rsEwpyot, gives rise to a difficulty (Schol. in
Biblioth. Graec. vol. ix. p. 305, vol. x. p. 348; Plat. Apol. p. 330, Bekker). For the rhopyo&
Tillemont, Mgmoires, vol. xiv.) was evidently acted during the life of Nicias (Plut.
8. PHILOSOPHUS. [See below.] Nic. 8); and not only so, but the passage cited by
9. SCRIPTOR DE AzYMIS. There are extant Plutarch seems to have been rightly understood
two short treatises, Ilepi'rwv OV &'owv, De Azymis, by him, as referring to the affair of Sphacteria,
one of them being a compendium or abridgment of and on this and other grounds Meineke assigns the
the other, which in the MSS. are, ascribed to play to the year B. C. 425 (Frag. Comr. Graec. vol.
Joannes Damascenus [DAMASCENUS], and are con- ii. pp. 983-985). Supposing Meletus to have
sequently inserted by Le Quien in his edition of been only twenty at this time, he must have been
the works of that father (Opera Damasceni, fol. upwards of forty-five when he accused Socrates.
Paris, 1712, vol i. p. 647.) But Le Quien has ob- Meineke attempts to get rid of the difficulty, by a
served that they are not his: they distinctly deny slight change in the text of the scholiast, which
the general tradition of the fathers, that our Lord would then imply that Meletus was still a boy
celebrated the passover with his disciples the day when alluded to in the rewpeyol (Frag. Comn.
before the regular time, which tradition Damascenus Graec. vol. ii. p. 993). At all events, if the Mecertainly held. But this is not the only evidence; letus thus.referred to was really the same person as
an anonymous preface to the larger tract states, the accuser of Socrates, he must at the latter period
that it was written by "one Meletius, a pious have been between thirty and forty; and in that
man (9EoqpJpos), and a diligent student of the case he might still have been called veos by Socrates.
Scriptures," and was addressed to one Syncellus, In fact, though the attack upon Socrates was his
who had asked his opinion on the subject. Of the first essay as a public politician, and was indeed
time or place where this Meletius lived nothing is made, as Plato insinuates, in order to bring himself
known. (Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. ix. p. 307.) into some notoriety (Euthyph. pp. 2, 3, Apol. p. 25,
10. Of TIBERIOPoLIs. [Seebelow.] [J. C.M.] d.), yet it is clear from Plato himself that Meletus
MELE'TIUS (MEAEr'ov), the author of a short was alreadyknown as a poet; for he imputes to
Greek work, entitled iepl ijs ror6'AvOpW'7rov Ka- Meletus, as another motive for the accusation, the
*raateusu, De Natura (or Fabrica) Hominis. He resentment felt by him and the other poets for the
appears from the inscription at the beginning of the strictures made upon them by Socrates (Apol. p.
work to have been a Christian and a monk, and to 23, e.; Diog. Laert. ii. 39). Besides, when Plato
have belonged to the city of Tiberiopolis in Phrygia calls him ayvc5us, he perhaps refers rather to his
Magna. The time at which he lived is unknown, being a man of no merit than to his being altogether
but he probably cannot be placed earlier than the unknown in the city. With respect to his trasixth or seventh century after Christ. His work gedies, we are informed by the scholiast on Plato
(the subject-matter of which is sufficiently indi- (I. c.), on-the authority of Aristotle in the Didoscated by the title) is interesting, and evidently caliae, that Meletus brought out his i0s7ro6e6ra in
written by a religious man, but is of no particular the same year in which Aristophanes brought out
value in a physiological point of view. It was first his lehapyoi, but we know nothing of the date of
published in a Latin translation by Nicolaus Pe- that play. His Scolia are referred to in the Frogs
treius, Venet. 1552, 4to. The Greek. text, though (1302), B. c. 405; and in the r1lpvTa'8rs, which
existing in MS. in several European libraries, re- Was probably acted a few years after the Frogs, to