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

PHOTIUS. PI-IOTIUS. 1Mil
Hist. by Murdock, book iii. cent. ix. pt. ii. c. iii. and we think it would not be very difficult to
~ 27-.-32), and in the works cited at the close of discriminate between the genuine and supposititious
this article. Fabricius has given a list of the parts of that voluminous production." As the
councils held to determinle questions arising out of reviewer has not attempted to support his assertion
the struggle of Ignatius and Photius for the patri- by evidence, and as it is contradicted by the exarchate or out of the contests of the Eastern a',d press testimony of Photius himself, who has mlenWestern Churches with regard to Photius. He has tiened the number of volumes examined, his
also given a list of writers respecting Photius, di- judgment is entitled to but little weight. The two
vided into, 1. Those hostile to Photius; and 2. Those hundred and eighty divisions of the Bibliotlseca
more favourable to him. Of the historians of the must be understood to express the number of volower empire, Le Beau (Bas nEmpire, liv. lxx. 38, lumes (codices) or manuscripts, and not of writers
&c., lxxi. lxxii. 1-3) is outrageously partial, in- or of works: the works of some writers, e. g. of
flaming the crimes of Photius, and rejecting as Philon Judaeus (codd. 103-105), occupy several
untrue, or passing over without notice, the record divisions; and on the other hand, one division
of those incidents which are honourable to him. (e. g. cod. 125, Justzzi lMartyris Scripta Varia),
Gibbon (Decline and Fall, c. 53, 60), more favour- sometimes comprehends a notice of several different
able, has two separate, but brief and unsatisfactory, works written in one codex. The writers exnotices of the patriarch. amined are of all classes: the greater number,
The published works of Photius are the follow- however, are theologians, writers of ecclesiastical
ing:-1. MvpLOCLeXov, B&AGOeWK-q, Myriobiblion history, and of the biography of eminent churchsez Bibliotheca. This is the most important and men; but several are secular historians, philosophers,
valuable of the works of Photius. It may be de- and orators, heathen or Christian, of remote or rescribed as an extensive review of ancient Greek cent times, lexicographers, and medicalwriters; only
literature by a scholar of immense erudition and one or two are poets, and those on religious subjects,
sound judgment. It is an extraordinary monu- and there are also one or two writers of romances or
ment of literary energy, for it was written while love tales. There is no formal classification of these
the author was engaged in his embassy to Assyria, various writers;though a series of writers or writings
at the request of Photius' brother Tarasius, who of the same class frequently occurs, e.g. the Acta of
was much grieved at the separation, and desired various councils (codd. 15-20); the writers on
an account of the books whieh Photius had read the Resurrection (codd. 21-23); and the secular
in his absence. It thus conveys a pleasing im- historians of the Byzantine empire (codd. 62-67).
pression, not only of the literary acquirements and In fact the works appear to be arranged in the
extraordinary industry, but of the fraternal affection order in which they were read. The notices of
of the writer. It opens with a prefatory address the writers vary much in length: those in the
to Tarasius, recapitulating the circumstances in earlier part are very briefly noticed, the later ones
which it was composed, and stating that it con- more fully; their recent perusal apparently entained a notice of two hundred and seventy-nine abling the writer to give a fuller account of them;
volumes. The extant copies contain a notice of so that this circumstance confirms our observation
two hundred and eighty: the discrepancy, which as to the arrangement of the work. Several valuis of little moment, may have originated either in able works, now lost, are known to us chiefly by
the mistake of Photius himself, or in some alter- the analyses or extracts which Photius has given
ation of the divisions by some transcriber. It has of them; among them are the Persica and Indica
been doubted whether we have the work entire. of Ctesias [CTESIAS] in cod. 72; the De Rebus
An extant analysis, by Photius, of the Historia post Alexandrmzlm liacuynnz yestis, and the Parthicae
Ecclesiastica of Philostorgius [PHILOSTORGIUmS], and the Bitlsynica of Arrian [ARRIANUS, No. 4],
by which alone some knowledge of the contents of in codd. 58, 92, and 93; the I-Historiae of Olymthat important work has been preserved to us, is piodorus [OLYMPIODORUS, No. 3], in cod. 80; the
so much fuller than the brief analysis of that work Narrationes of Conon [CoNON, No. 1], in cod. 186;
contained in the present text of the BibliolzLeca, as the Nova Historia' of Ptolemy Hephaestion [PTOto lead to the supposition that the latter is imper- LEMAEUS], in cod. 190; the De Heracleae'onfeet. " It is to be lamented," said Valesius (De ticae Rebus of Memnon [MEMNON], in cod. 224;
Critica, i. 29), " that many such abridgments and the Vita Isidori [ISIDORus, No. 5, of Gaza] by
collections of extracts are now lost. If these were Damascius [DxAMASCIlus], in cod. 242; the lost
extant in the state in which they were completed Declamationes of Himerius [HJMERIJus, No. 1],
by Photius, we should grieve less at the loss of so in cod. 243; the lost books of the Bibliothleca of
many ancient writers." But Leiche has shown Diodorus Siculus [DIODORus, No. 12], in cod. 244;
(Diatribe in Phot. Biblioth.) that we have no just the DeErythlraeo (s. Rubro) Mari of Agatharchides
reason for suspecting that the Bibliotheca is imper- [AGATHaRCHIDERS], in cod. 250; the anonymous
fect; and that the fuller analysis of Philostorgius TVita Pauli CPolitani and Vita Athanasii, in codd.
probably never formed part of it; but was made at 257 and 258; the lost Orationes, genuine or spua later period. A hasty and supercilious writer in rious, of Antiphon [ANTIPHON, NO. 1], Isocrates
the Edinburcsh Review (vol. xxi. p. 329, &c.), whose [ISOCRATES, No. 1], Lysias [LYSIAS], Isaeus
harsh and unjust censure of Photius we have [IsAEus, No. 1], Demosthenes [DEMOSTHENES],
already noticed, affirms on the other hand that the Hyperides [HYPERDESs], Deinarchus [DEINARtwork has been swelled out to its present size by caHs, No. 1], and Lycurgus [LcvURGUS, p. 858],
spurious additions. " Our younger readers, how- in codd. 259-268; and of the Clsrestomatheia of
ever, who take the M4yriobiblonz in hand, are not to Helladius of Antinoopolis [HELLAD1US, No. 2] in
suppose that the book which at present goes under Cod. 279; besides several theological and ecclesiasthat name, is really the production of Photius; we tical and some medical works. The above enumnerabelieve that not more than half of it canl be safely tion will suffice to show the inestimable value of the
attributed to that learned and turbulent bishop; Bibliotheca of Photius, especially w-henl we reflect