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

820 LIJCIOANUS. LTCIANUS;
Meretricii, describe the manners of the Greek He- fernal regions is reviewed, and the folly -of grief
taerae or courtezans, with liveliness and fidelity;. demonstrated in a rather serious manner. Hpas
perhaps too much so for the interests of morality. d7rataevrov, Adversus Indoctum, is a bitter attack
INhoov I EOXani, Navigium sea Vota. In this upon a rich man who thought to acquire a character
piece the company form various wishes, which are for learning by collecting a large library. lnepl'oein turn derided by Lucian. The imitation of Plato 1uA Sqlas cr'redsEw BaLOAf&, Non temere credendwvn
in the opening is very strong. esse Delationi. The title of this piece sufficiently
Dialogues which cannot with propriety be placed explains its subject. It is in the grave style; but
under any of the preceding heads, are the EKcO'ves, is well written, and has something of the air of a
Imagines, which has been already adverted to in rhetorical declamation.
the sketch of Lucian's life.'T7rep Tr~cv ELK&OVCv, 7. POEMS. These consist of two mock tragedies,
Pro Imnaginibus, a defence of the preceding, with called Tpayo7roda'ypa and'fKicirovs, and about fifty
the flattery of which the lady who was the subject epigrams. The Tragopodagra, as its name implies,
of it pretended to be displeased. To6ZapLs, ToxaZis, turns on the subject of the gout; its malignity and
a dialogue between a Greek and Scythian, on the pertinacity are set forth, and the physicians who
subject of friendship, in which several remarkable pretend to cure it exposed. This little drama disinstances are related on both sides. It is in the plays considerable vigour of fancy. It has been
grave style. The'AJdXaprLs, Anacharsis, is an thought that Lucian wrote it to beguile a fit of the
attack upon the Greek gymnasia, in a dialogue be- malady which forms its subject. The Ocypus,
tween Solon and Anacharsis. It also turns on the which turns on the same theme, is much inferior,
education of youth. Here too the irony is of a and perhaps a frigid imitation by some other hand.
serious cast. IsEpp dpX4oeCrs, De Saltatione, a dis- Of the epigrams some are tolerable, but the greater
putation between Lucian and Crates, a stoic philo- part indifferent, and calculated to add but little to
sopher, respecting dancing. It has, been observed Lucian's fame. Of some the genuineness may be
before that Lucian was an ardent admirer of dan- suspected.
cing, especially the pantomimic sort, to which he In the preceding account of Lucian's works
here gives the advantage ~over tragedy. The piece those have been omitted, of whose spuriousness
is hardly worthy of Lucian, but contains some scarce a doubt can be entertained. These are:curious particulars of the art of dancing among the'AAcKwv /) 7repl Me'ra,uop~pcoews, Halcyon sea de
ancients. Al'esLr 7rrp~s'HCrioSov, Dissertatio cum Transformatione. This dialogue is completely op-'
Hesiodo. A charge against that poet that he cannot posed to Lucian's manner, as the fabulous tale of
predict futurity, as he gave out.. The genuineness the Halcyon, which'he would have ridiculed, is
is doubtful.' treated'seriously. It has been attributed to Leo
6. MISCELLANEOUS PIEcES. We are now to the academician. For the rest, the style is agreeenumerate those few works of Lucian which do not able enough. lEpI dSo'AorTpoAoybfs, De Astrofall under any of the preceding divisions, and which logia, containing a serious defence of astrology, can
not being in the form of dialogues,' bear some never have been Lucian's. The Ionic dialect, too,
analogy to the modern essay. I1pOS T'J sb7rdyvra condemns it; the affected use of which Lucian
Hpojur esev' etl,/ Adyor, Ad eum qui dixerat Pro- ridicules in his Quom.. Iist. ~ 18. The saime
metheus es in Verbis. A reply to somebody who objections apply to the fispi Trs UspLq aSoio, De'
had compared him to Prometheus. Allusion has Dea Syria, also in the Ionic dialect. Though the
already been made to this piece, which, as the scholiast on the Nubes of Aristophanes ascribes it
title implies, turns chiefly on his own works. Isepl to Lucian we may safely reject it. Such a narrative.
3vrowv, Do Sacrfiiis. The absurdities of the of superstitious rites could never have come from
heathen worship, especially of the Egyptian, are his pen, without at least a sneer, or a word of caspointed out in a serious style. This was probably tigation. Nor would he have sacrificed his beard
an early production. UiepI G, ebrl lwof ovvdv'owv, at the temple of Hierapolis, as in the last sentence.
De zMercede Conductis, was written to dissuade a the author represents himself as having done. The
Greek philosopher from accepting a place in a' KvrICO', Cynicus, is abjudicated by the scholiast,.
Roman household, by giving a humorous description and with reason; for the cynic worsts Lucian in
of the miseries attending it. This little piece the argument about his tenets.'-The XapiGrlos i
abounds with wit and good sense, and may be 7repl caAAovs, Clharidemus seu de Pulchlro, is a frigid
placed among Lucian's most amusing productions. imitation'of Plato, bearing no mark: of Lucian's
It is likewise valuable for the picture it contains of hand, and has been rejected by the best critics.
Roman manners, which Lucian has here painted in Nspwsv' irepl rirs dpvXir Tro0'Ior-uoo, Nero, see
highly unfavourable colours, but perhaps with some de Fossione Isthmizi. Wieland seems to have stood
exaggeration and caricature. The'AMroXola rtpi alone in- asserting this dialogue to be Lucian's,
rTV 7r A.. ovy,., Apologia pro de Mere. Cond., is From the concluding part the author appears to
Lucian's defence against a charge of inconsistency, have been alive at the time of Nero's death. It
in having accepted his Egyptian office, after having contains some curious particulars of that emperor's
written the foregoing piece. The chief ground of singing. The spuriousness of the Philopatris has
defence is the difference between a public and been already shown.
private office, and indeed the charge was absurd. It is probable that several of Lucian's works'As already mentioned, this piece contains some are lost. In theLife of Demonan, ~ 1, he-mentions
particulars of Lucian's life.'T~rep rTOi v T Trpoo- having written a life of Sostratus, which is not now
ryopeo'rLe'mrarCa'scTos, Pro Lapsu in Salutando, a extant. Of his rhetorical pieces perhaps the greater
playful little piece, though containing some curious part is lost, as Suidas says of them ysypa4rrara
learning, in which Lucian excuses himself for avTj &4r7spa.
having saluted a great man with 6ybtaive in the Lucian's merits as a writer consist in his knowmorning, instead of Xape. In the Ilepl 7re0ovs, ledge of human'nature, which, however, he geneDe Luctu, the received opinion concerning the in- rally viewed on its worst side.; his strong common