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

500 PORPHYRIUS. PORPHYRIUS.
school that he ranked philosophy higher than the sophy, as connected with his exalted ideas of the
theurgic superstitions which were connected with power of reason, which is superior to nature and
the popular polytheism. With the latter, some the influence of daemons, conduced to raise him
features of his doctrines had considerable affinity. above the superstitious tendencies of his age; the
IIe insisted strongly on the contrast between the spirit of the philosopher being, in his view, sucorporeal and the incorporeal, and the power of the perior to all impressions from without. The object
latter over the former. The influence of the incor- of the philosopher should be to free himself as much
poreal was, in his view, unrestricted by the limits as possible from all desires of, or dependence on, that
of space, and independent of the accident of con- which is external, such appetites beingthe most hatetiguity. When free from intermixture with ful tyrants, from which we should be glad to be set
matter, it is omnipresent, and its power unlimited. fiee, even with the loss of the whole body (ua larlce.
His doctrine with regard to daemons pointed in the 34). We should, therefore, restrain our sensual desame direction. Over both them and the souls of sires as much as possible. It was mainly in this point
the dead power could be obtained by enchantments of view that he rejected all enjoyment of animal
(de Abst. ii. 38, 39, 41, 43, 47). Yet these no- food. Though bad genii have some power over
tions seem to have been taken up by him rather in us, yet through abstinence and the steady resistdeference to the prevalent opinion of his times, ance of all disturbing influences, we can pursue
than as forming an essential part of his philosophy. the good in spite of them. If we could abstain
Though at first somewhat disposed to favour the- from vegetable as well as animal food, he thought
urgy, he still ranked philosophy above it, consider- we should become still more like the gods. (De
ing, with Plotinus, that the true method of safety Abst. iii. 27.) It is by means of reason only that
consisted in the purgation of the soul, and the we are exalted to the supreme God, to whom
contemplation of the eternal deity. The increasing nothing material should be offered, for every thing
value set upon theurgy, and the endeavours to material is uclcleanl (de Abst. i. 39, 57, ii. 34,
raise it above philosophy itself, probably produced ad Marc. 15). He distinguishes four degrees of
something like a reaction in his mind, and strength- virtues, the lowest being political vitiate, the virtue
ened the doubts which he entertained with regard of a good man who moderates his passions. Sicto the popular superstition. These doubts he set perior to this is g?srs/ling virCtusLe, which completely
forth in a letter to the Egyptian prophet Anebos, sets the soul free from affections. Its object is to
in a series of questions. The distrust there ex- miake us resemble God, and by it we become daepressed respecting the popular notions of the gods, monical men, or good daiemoLs. In the higher
divinations, incantations, anid other theurgic arts, grald, when entirely given up to kcnowledge and
may have been, as Ritter believes (Gesch. der the soul, man becomes a god, till at last he lives
Phil. vol. iv. p. 678), the modified opinion of his only to reason, and so becomes the fither of gods,
later years, provoked, perhaps, by the progress of one with the one supreme being. (Sent. 34.)
that superstition to which at an earlier period he A great deal of discussion has taken place
had been less opposed. The observation of Au- respecting the assertion of Socrates (-I. E. iii. 23),
gustine is, doubtless, in the main correct:-" Ut that in his earlier years Porphyrius was a Christian,
videas eum inter vitium sacrilegae curiositatis et and that, having been treated with indignity by
philosophiae professionem fluctuasse, et nunc hanc the Christians, he apostatized, and revenged himartem tacmquam fallacem, et in ipsa actione pericu- self by writing against them. The authority is so
losam, et legibus prohibitam, cavendam monere, small, and the improbability of the story so great
nunec autem velut ejus laudatoribus cedentem, (for it does not appear that any of his antagonists
utileil dicere esse mundanae parti animae, non charged him with apostacy, unless it was Eusebius),
quidem intellectutali qua rerum intelligibiliumn per- while it may so easily have arisen from the fact
cipiatur veritas, nullas habentirm similitudines that in his early youth Porphyrius was instructed
corporum, sed spiritnali, qua rerum corporalium by Origen, that it may confidently be rejected.
capiantur imagines." The letter to Anebos called An able summlllary of the argumnents on both sides
forth a reply, which is still extant, and known is given by Brucker (ii. p. 251, &c.) Of the nature
under the title IlepL MvTrilpCwov, and is the pro- and merits of the work of Porphyrius against the
duction probably of Ialiblichus. The worship of Christians we are not able to ju;dge, as it has not
the national gods seems to have been upheld by come down to us. It was publicly destroyed by
Porphyrius only on the consideration that respect order of the emperor Theodosius. The attack was,
should be shown to the ancient religious usages of however, sufficiently vigorous to call down upon
the nation. He, however, set but small store by him the fiercest maledictions and most virulent
it. (Bwprol So 5o ipovp'yofutEvo' E vr oAE, abuse. His name was employed as synonymous
aX&rroVtlv, da,u-eXou-evor 6e oS3er' odeNeAov r0v, ad with everything silly, blasphemous, imipudent and
2llalc.) Ile ackowledged one absolite, supreme calumnious. Socrates (i. 9. p. 32) even adduces
deity, who is to be worshipped with pure words and an edict of Constantine the Great, ordaining that
thoughts (ard lacc. 18). He also, however, dis- the Arians should be termed Porpllyriani. A doubt
tinguished two classes of visible and invisible gods, has been raised as to the identity of the assailant
the former being comip,,sed of body and soul, and of Christianity with the Neo-platonic plhilosopher;
consequently neither eten-iial nor immutable (de but it is totally withouct ioulndamtion. The attack
Abst. ii. 34, 36, 37-39). Ile also distinguished upoi Christianlitv is said to hatve called forth
between good and evil daemons, and held that the replies froim above thirty different antagonists, the
latter ought to be appeased, but that it should be nmost distinguished of whomi were Methodius,
the object of the philosopher to free himlself as Apollinaris, and I!ctselius.
much as possible from everything placed under the As a writer i'orphyrius deserves considerable
power of evil daemons. For that reason, among praise. His style is tolerably clear, anti not
others, hie rejected all animal sacrifices (de Abst. ii. ulnfrequently exhibits both imnagination and vigour.
38, 39, 43). The ascetic tendency of his philo- His learning was most extensive. Fa.bricius (Biib.