« PoprzedniaDalej »
exists a sche am of Olympiodorus (in Phaed., Plat.— Bouilland, Testimonia de Ptolemato, p. 205), which informs us that Ptolemy passed 40 years of his life Év Trepoic roo Kavč,60w (“in the wings of Canobus”), occupied with astronomical observations, and that he placed columns there on which he caused to be cut the theorems of which he had been the author. An inscription has come down to us which illustrates this remark of Olympiodorus: 68% Xotipi K%atolo; IIrożemaios dpräç Kai Üroflégé to uatinuatukùc, K. T. A., “Claudius Ptolemy dedicates to the God, the Preserver, his mathematical principles and theses,” &c. Combining this dedication with the scholium of Olympiodorus, the Abbé Halma states, that he would be inclined to believe the deity alluded to in the inscription to be Canobus, if the inscription did not expressly declare, farther on, that the monument containing it was placed in the city of Canobus (év Kavaj69), whence he infers that the protecting deity is Serapis, and that Ptolemy made his observations in the side-buildings connected with the temple of this god. He thinks that this position is not in contradiction with the passage in which Ptolemy informs us that he made them under the parallel of Alexandrea; for, according to Halma, the city of Alexandrea was gradually extended to Canopus, which became a kind of suburbs to it, so that Ptolemy, though residing at Canopus, may nevertheless be said to have observed at Alexandrea, or that, observing at Canopus, he had no need of reducing his observations to the parallel of Alexandrea, by reason of the trifling difference of latitude. A difficulty here presents itself, of which the Abbé Halma is aware, and which he proposes to remedy by an alteration of the text. If Ptolemy had made his observations in the temple of Serapis at Canopus, Olympiodorus, in place of saying £v Trepoic Toi Kavajbov, “ in the wings of (the temple of) Canobus,” would have had Év Trepoic Tār Kavajbov, “the side-buildings of (the city of) Canobus.” Halma therefore proposes to substitute the latter reading for the former, or else to regard Canobus as the same divinity with Serapis, and to suppose that Ptolemy observed in the temple of Canobus at Cano. pus. This reasoning of Halma's has been attacked by Letronne, and ably refuted. The latter shows, that Canopus, situate at the distance of 120 stadia, or more than two and a half geographical miles, northeast of Alexandrea, never made part of that capital, since there were several places, such as Nicopolis and Taposiris Parva, between the two cities; that, consequently, the Serapeum, in which Ptolemy observed, could not have belonged to Canopus; and, finally, that Ptolemy knew the difference in latitude between Canopus and Alexandrea, and could not confound them together in one point. It is more probable, as Letronne remarks (Journal des Savans, 1818, p. 202), that Olympiodorus was mistaken as to the place where Ptolemy observed. It is ascertained that there was a temple of Serapis at Canopus as well as at Alexandrea. (Strabo, 801.) Olympiodorus, therefore, must have supposed that the word Serapeum, in the author from whom he copied his remark, belonged exclusively to the first of these cities, when it referred, in fact, in this particular instance, to Alexandrea the capital. The error of Olympiodorus, moreover, is the easier to be explained, from the circumstance of the Serapeum at Canopus having become at one time a celebrated seat of the New-Platonists, and having acquired great distinction on this account among the last apostles of paganism. A commentator on Plato, therefore, would be very ready to suppose that this last asylum of true light, as he believed it, was the place where the great Ptolemy also made his cbservations and discoveries. —We will now proceed to the works of this distinguished writer. 1. Meyážn Xàvrašic (“Great Construction”), in thirteen books. 'This work contains all the astronomical observations of the ancients, such as
those of Aristyllus, Timochares, Meton, Euctemon, and, above all, of Hipparchus. After the example of all his predecessors, excepting Aristarchus, Ptolemy regards the earth as the centre of the universe, and makes the stars to revolve around it. This system was that of all succeeding astronomers until the days of Copernicus. Ptolemy is the inventor of epicycles, as they are called, an erroneous but ingenious system, and the only one that can explain the irregular revolutions of the planets, if we deny the sun to be the centre of our system. He inserted into his work, with additions, the catalogue of the stars made by Hipparchus; the list, however, contains only 1022 stars, divided into 48 catasterisms. He corrected the theory of the lunar revolutions, by determining the equation in the mean distances between the new and full moon ; he reduced to a more regular system the parallax of the moon, though he has, in fact, traced it too large; he determined that of the sun by the size of the shadow which the earth casts on the moon in eclipses; he taught the mode of finding the diameter of the moon, and of calculating lunar and solar eclipses. “Ptolemy,” says Delambre, “was not, indeed, a great astronomer, since he observed nothing, or, rather, has transmitted to us no observation on which we can rely with the least confidence; but he was a learned and laborious man, and a distinguished mathematician. He has collected together into one body all the learning that lay scattered in the separate works of his predecessors; though, at the same time, it must be acknowledged, that he might have been more sober in his details, and more communicative respecting certain observations which are now lost to us for ever.” The same modern writer, after complaining of the little reliance that can be placed on the calculations of Ptolemy, praises the trigonometrical portion of the Terpá616Åoc, and the mathematical theory of eclipses; adding, however, the remark, that here Ptolemy would seem only to have copied from Hipparchus, who had resolved all these problems before him. Indeed, it ought to be borne in mind, as a general remark, that Ptolemy owed a part of his great reputation to the circumstance of the writings of Hipparchus being extremely rare, and having been, soon after Ptolemy's time, completely lost.—An analysis of the Meyazm XivTaşıç is given by Halma in the presace of his edition. This work of Ptolemy's was commented upon by Theon of Alexandrea, Pappus, and Ammonius. Of these commentaries we have remaining only that of Theon, and some notes of Pappus. We have, however, the labours of Nilus (or Nicolaus) Cabasilas, a mathematician of the thirteenth century, on the third book. The Meyā2m Xuvrašic of Ptolemy was translated into Arabic in the 9th century. The Arabians gave it the title of Tahrir al magesthi, the last word being corrupted from the Greek Léytaroc (“the greatest”), and this title is intended to express the admiration with which the work had inspired them. From the Arabic words just given was formed the appellation of Almagest, under which name the work is still frequently cited ; for the knowledge of this production was brought into Europe by the Arabians, who, during the middle ages, were the sole depositaries of all the sciences. The first Arabic translation was made about 827 A.D., by Al-Hacer-ben-Jusef and the Christian-Sergius. The Caliph Almamoun himself also lent his literary aid to the undertaking. The second version is that of Honain or Ishac-ben-Honain, a Christian physician, who had fled to the court of the Caliph Motaurakl. It was on these Arabic translations that a Spanish one was made by Isaac-ben-Sid-elHaza. The Emperor Frederic II., a member of that Suabian house under which Germany began to emerge from barbarism, and to enjoy a dawning of national literature before any other of the countries of Europe, directed AEgidius Tebuldinus to * * Spanish l
version into Latin. Another translation was made from the Arabic text into Latin by Gerard of Cremona, an astronomer of the twelfth century, who established himself for some time at Toledo, in order to learn the Arabic language. He did not understand it perfectly, and was therefore unable to translate certain technical terms, which he was consequently compeiled to leave in the original language. His classical erudition could not have been very profound, since he was unacquainted with Hipparchus, whom he everywhere calls Abrachir, as the Arabic translator had done.—It was not until the fifteenth century that a manuscript of the original Greek was discovered, from which the astronomer, John Müller, better known by the name of Regiomontanus, made his Latin abridgment. About the same period, George of Trebisond made a Latin translation from this original, but a very unfaithful one.—The Alexandreans called the work of Ptolemy which we have just been considering the Great Astronomer, Méyac àarpověuoc, in contradistinction to another collection which they called the Little Astronomer, Mukpot starpovóuoc, and which was composed of the works of Theodosius of Tripolis; the Datu, Optics, Catoptrics, &c., of Euclid; the works of Autolycus, Aristarchus of Samos, Hypsicles, &c.— The best and most useful edition of the Almagest is that of Halma, Paris, 1813–1828, 2 vols. 4to. It contains a new French version, and notes by Delambre.—2. The second work of Ptolemy, as we have arranged it, is the IIpóxelpot Kavóvoc. This is a collection of Manual Tables intended for makers of almanacs, to facilitate their calculations, and which are often only extracts from the Almagest. Halma gave the editio princeps of this work in the first volume of his edition of Theon's Commentary, which he published in 1822.-3. Terpá6,020c, ; Xuvrašic uat). muarukň (“Tetrahlblus, or Mathematical Syntaris”), in four books, consisting of astronomical predictions. It is commonly cited under the title of Quadripartitum. Some critics consider this work as unworthy of Ptolemy, and supposititious. Proclus has made a paraphrase of it. The latest edition is that of Melancthon, Basil, 1553, 8vo.—4. Kapiróc (“Fruit”), that is, one hundred astrological propositions collected from the works of Ptolemy. It is usually cited under the title of Centum Dicta. It is published with the Quadripartitum.–5. Págets drzavov agrépov kai avvaya); &Tuamuaguov (“Appearances of the fired stars, and a collection of the things indicated by them”). This is a species of almanac, giving the rising and setting of the stars, the prognostics of the principal changes of temperature, &c. The work is intended for all climates; and, to make, it answer this end, and prove useful to all the Greeks spread over the surface of the globe, Ptolemy gives the appearance of the stars for five parallels at once, namely, Syene, Lower Egypt, Rhodes, the Hellespout, and the Pontus Euxinus. The best edition is that of Halma, Paris, 1820, 4to. It was preceded by the edition of Ideler, Berol., 1819. –6, IIepi Avažňuuaroc (“Of the Analemma”). The Analemma was a species of sundial, and in this work we have an exposition of the whole gnomonic theory of the Greeks–7, Trátegic Töv Tzavouévoy (“Hypothesis of the Planets”). The latest edition is that of Halma, Paris, 1820, 4to.—8. "ATA watc radaveiac coatpac (“Planisphere”). This work exists only in an Arabic version, by Maslem, and a Latin translation made from this. It is a treatise on what is called stereographic projections. The work is probably one of Hipparchus’s. The latest edition is that of Commandinus, from the press of Paulus Manutius, Venet., 1558, 4to.—9. "Apurvixá (“Elements of Harmony”), in three books. Ptolemy has the merit of having reduced the thirteen or fifteen tones of the ancients to seven. It is generally supposed, also, that he determined the true relations of certain intervals, and thus ren
dered the diatonic octave more conformable to nai. mony. Some critics, however, are inclined to ascribe this improvement rather to the New-Pythagorean Didymus, whom Ptolemy has frequently criticised, though he obtained from his writings a large portion of his own work. The best edition is that of Wallis, Oron., 1682, 4to. — 10. 'OTTuki, Tpaypartia (“A treatise on Optics”), cited by Heliodorus of Larissa, and frequently also by the Arabians, but now lost. A Latin translation, from two Arabian MSS., exists in an unedited state in the Royal Library at Paris. It contains, however, only four books of the five which composed the original. In this work Ptolemy gives the most complete idea of astronomic re. fraction of any writer down to the time of Kepler.— 11. Kaviov Baau2.Éov (“Canon, or Table, of Kings"), a part, properly, of the IIpóxelpot Kavóver. This table contains fifty-five reigns, twenty of which belong to kings of Babylon subsequent to Nabonassar, ten to kings of Persia, thirteen to kings of Egypt of the line of the Ptolemies, and the remainder to Roman emperors after the time of Augustus. This canon was not prepared with an historical view, but was intended for astronomers, to facilitate the calculation of intervals of time that may have elapsed between different astronomical observations. As, however, the years of each monarch's reign are indicated in it with great exactness, it becomes, consequently, of great value and interest in historical chronology. It must be remarked, at the same time, that all the dates of this canon are given in Egyptian years, an arrangement very well adapted to the object in view, but productive of some inconvenience for chronology. Thus, for example, the reigns of the Babylonian, Persian, and Roman monarchs, calculated according to the method of their respective countries, ought to be in advance of, or behind, the years numbered in Ptolemy's canon, by some days, or even months. In the case of the Roman emperors, the difference, in Ptolemy's time, amounted to forty days, and the variation must have been still more marked as regarded the Babylonian and Persian reigns. The only exact part is that which relates to the line of the Ptolemies. Halma gave the latest edition of this work in 1820, Paris, 4to.—12. Teoypaspuri, 'Aoymato (“Geographical Narration,” or “System of Geography”). This work is in eight books, and during nearly fourteen centuries was the only known manual of systematic geography. It still remains for us one of the principal sources whence we derive our information respecting the geography of the ancients. Pursuing the plan traced out by Marinus of Tyre, Ptolemy undertook to perfect the labours of that geographer. The map of Marinus and Ptolemy was covered, as it were, with a species of network; the meridians were traced on it for every five degrees; the degrees of latitude were marked by lines running parallel to the equator, and passed through the principal cities, such as Syene, Alexandrea, Rhodes, Byzantium, and, consequently, were at unequal distances from each other. In this network were marked the points, the height of which had been taken according to their true latitude; but, in order to determine their longitude, and the positions, also, of other places, which were only known by the geometric distance, it was necessary to fix the length of a degree on one of the great circles of the globe. Marinus and Ptolemy, without themselves measuring any great distances, took the most accurate measurements existing in their day, and gave 500 stadia as the length of a degree. This was one sixth less than the truth, and from this error must necessarily have resulted many faults and erroneous deductions. Ptolemy determined the length, from west to east, of all the known part of the globe, under the parallel of Rhodes, at 72,000 stadia, following geometrical meas
urements. These 72,000 stadia make, according to his calculation, 180 degrees; and in this way he believed he had discovered the extent of one half of the globe. The fact, however, is, that he was acquainted with only 125 degrees. His error, consequently, is nearly a third, namely, one sixth by reason of the mistake he commits relative to the measurement of a degree as above mentioned, and about a sixth as the result of errors in geometric distances. With regard to latitudes, a large number of which were based on astronomical determinations, the errors committed by Ptolemy are very unimportant; and the latitude, for example, which he gives to the southern point of Spain is so exact, as to lead us to imagine that observations had been made in this quarter by some of his predecessors.-Strabo had limited to 42 degrees the latitude of the known part of the earth (situate between the 12th and 54th degree of north latitude). Ptolemy, on the other hand, makes 80 degrees, from 16° south latitude to 63° north ; and yet he believed that he knew only about a quarter more than the earlier geographers, because these allowed 700 stadia to a degree, which makes nearly 30,000 stadia altogether; whereas Ptolemy, admitting only 500 stadia, found the sum total to be 40,000.—Marinus and Ptolemy derived some information respecting the easternmost parts of Asia from the Itineraries of a Macedonian trader, who had sent his factors on overland journeys from Mesopotamia, along Mount Taurus, through India, and even to the distant capital of the Seres. These journeys must have been prosecuted very soon after the time of Alexander the Great, under the first two monarchs of the dynasty of the Seleucidae : since it is not probable that, after the defection of the Bactrians and Parthians, a route remained open through these countries to the traffic of the Greeks. Ptolemy thus could hardly have gained much information respecting these lands from the narratives of overland travellers. The communication by sea, however, between Egypt and India, became frequent in the time of the Ptolemies. Strabo speaks of fleets that sailed for India, and, in the time of Pliny, the coast of the country this side of the Ganges was perfectly well known. The navigators of the West, however, did not go beyond this stream. It was supposed that from this point the shore of Asia bent directly to the north, and joined the eastern extremity of Taurus. At a later period navigators went beyond the mouths of the Ganges, and, to their great astonishment, found that the land redescended towards the south, and formed a large gulf (Bay of Bengal—Sinus Gangeticus). They pushed their adventurous career still farther: taking their departure from the southern part of the western peninsula of India, they crossed the gulf in a straight line, and reached the coast of Siam and the peninsula of Malacca; this last they called the Golden Chersonese, a proof of the profitable trade which was there carried on by them. Having doubled the extremity of this second peninsula, they entered on a new gulf (that of Siam—Magnus Sinus). From the eastern coast of the Golden Chersonese they passed in a southern direction, and reached a large continent, on the shore of which was situate the city of Kattigara. This country was probably the Isle of Borneo. The discoverer of this country was called Alexander. (Ptol., Geogr., 2, 14.) Ptolemy, who, as well as this adventurer, believed that the coast was a prolongation of that which formed the Gulf of Siam (the coast of Cambodia), founded thereon his hypothesis, that the Indian was a mediterranean sea. He supposed that, after Kattigara, the land extended from east to west as far as the southeast coast of Africa, with which it united, forming one common continent —Marinus and Ptolemy were well acquainted with the eastern coast of Africa, and mention is no longer made, in their pages, of the fabulous monsters which the credulity of a previous age had established as the dwellers of
this region. They knew the coast, however, only to the tenth degree of south latitude, that is, to the promontory of Prasum, which is probably the same with the modern Cape Del Gardo, as his city of Rapta would seem to be Melinda. From the promontory of Prasum, Ptolemy makes the African coast bend round to the east for the purpose of joining that of Kattigara. His island of Menuthias, placed by him near Cape Prasum, but which an ancient periplus brings near to Rapta, is Zanzibar, or one of the other islands off the coast of Zanguebar. Ptolemy's acquaintance with the eastern coast does not extend beyond the modern Madagascar.—After the decline of the commerce of Carthage and Gades, no new discoveries had been made on the western coast of Africa, and hence the knowledge of Ptolemy in this quarter was not extended beyond that
of his predecessors; he introduces, however, more of
method into the information obtained from Hanno and Scylax.-Ptolemy is the first who indicates the true figure of Spain, Gaul, and the southern part of Albion; but he gives an erroneous description of the northern part of this island, which, according to him, extends towards the east. Ireland, the lerne of Strabo, and the Juvernia of Ptolemy, ceases to be situated to the north of Albion, as Eratosthenes and Strabo thought; it is placed by Ptolemy to the west, but its northern point is parallel to the northern extremity of Albion. To the north of this latter island he places the Orcades, and a little farther to the north (about 63° N. L.), the isle of Thule, the northernmost extremity of the geographical system of Ptolemy. This Thule is probably Mainland, situate about 60° N., the same that was seen by the Roman fleet under Agricola, covered with ice and eternal snow. (Tacit., Wit. Agr., c. 10.)—The description which Ptolemy gives of the shores of Germany as far as the Elbe, as well as of Scandinavia, extends no farther than the accounts already given by Pliny and Tacitus. He describes the Cimbric Chersonese, and the German coast of the Baltic as far as the Dwina, with considerable accuracy, but he is not aware that this sea is a mediterranean one, for his Gulf of Veneda is only a part of this sea, from Memel to Dantzic. The question has been asked, By what chance Ptolemy was enabled to obtain more accurate notions respecting those countries than those which Piiny and Tacitus possessed, and that, too, although the principal depôt of amber, the well-known production of the shores of the Baltic, was in the capital of Italy 4. The answer is, that if the amber was chiefly carried to Rome, the traffic was conducted by merchants from Alexandrea, and it was through them that Polemy obtained the materials for this portion of his work.-In the last book of his geography, Ptolemy teaches the mode of preparing charts or maps. We here find the first principles of projection; but the book itself has reached us in a very corrupt state through the fault of the copyists. The more modern maps long preserved traces of those of Ptolemy and his successors. The Caspian Sea, for example, retained the form traced for it by Ptolemy as late as the eighteenth century; for a part of the coasts of the Black Sea, and of Africa beyond Egypt, our maps still consorm to the general outline of Ptolemy, and the substitution of modern for ancient names is the only difference. Such, at least, is the assertion of Mannert (Geogr., vol. 1, p. 191). — No good complete edition of Ptolemy's Geography has ever ep: peared. One, however, has recently been commenced in Germany, by Wilberg, of which the first fasciculus, containing the first book, has thus far appeared. Es. sendia, 1838, 4to. In 1475, Lichtenstein (Lerilapis) printed at Cologne, in folio, the Latin translation of this work, made by Angelo, a Florentine scholar of the fisteenth century, or, rather, commenced by Chry. solaras and finished by Angelo. It was revised, for the purposes of this publication, by Vadius and Picar.
dus. The translation of Angelo was reprinted, with corrections made from a manuscript of the Greek text, by Calderino, Roma, 1478, fol. Twenty-seven maps accompany this edition, which appears to have been printed by Arnold Pannartz. This is the second work, with a date, that is accompanied with engravings on copper. In 1482, Donis, a German monk, and a good astronomer for his time, gave a new edition to the world, printed by Holi, at Ulm, in folio. It has sewer mistakes in the figures than those which preceded it, but just as many in the names. Several editions followed, but all swarming with errors. The celebrated Pico de Mirandola sent to Essler, at Strasbourg, a Greek manuscript of Ptolemy's work, by the aid of which that scholar gave a new edition, not in the translation of Angelo, but in another, very literal and somewhat barbarous, by Philesius. Essler made many changes in this version, and, to justify himself, generally added the Greek term to the Latin. He placed in it 46 maps cut on wood. Brunet calls this edition one of little value; in this he is mistaken. The edition we have just spoken of was reprinted at Strasbourg in 1520, and also in 1522. A new translation, made by the celebrated Pirckheymer, appeared in 1525, from the Strasbourg press, fol. It contains fifty maps cut on wood.—The first Greek edition was that of Erasmus, printed from a manuscript which Theobald Fettich, a physician, had sent him, and which issued from the press of Froben, at Bâle, 1533, in 4to. The manuscript was a very good one, but, through the fault of the printer, a great number of errors were allowed to creep in among the figures. Not having a sufficient quantity of the peculiar type or mark which indicated #, he employed in its place the letter o, which signifies #. He made use, also, of the same letter on many occasions, to designate #. The fraction 3 is marked by yo, but the manuscript often places the o above the y, and in a smaller character. The compositor, not attending to this, contented himself with putting in its place y alone, which is equivalent to $. The confusion resulting from such a course is apparent, and the only mode to remedy the evil is to have recourse to the Latin editions which appeared previous to 1533. The Băle edition was reprinted by Wechel, at Paris, 1546, 4to.—Michael Servetus (Villanovanus) retouched the translation of Pirckheymer, af. ter a manuscript, and published it, with fifty maps cut on wood, at Lyons, in 1530, and again, with corrections and additions, in the same city, in 1541. These two editions of Ptolemy play a conspicuous part in the history of religious sanaticism ; Calvin derived from them one of his grounds of accusation against Servetus. He was charged with having added to the description that accompanies the map of Palestine, a passage which contradicts what Moses says respecting the fertility of that country. The interpolated passage does actually exist, but it was added by Phrisius, who took charge of the edition of 1522—The last impression of the Greek text was in 1618 and 1619, in 2 vols. 4to, from the Amsterdam press, by Bertius. Many faults of the previous editions are corrected in this one, by the aid of a Heidelberg manuscript, but the same errors in the figures still remain, and, to augment the confusion, the editor has placed beside them those of the Latin editions, which often differ widely. The only recent edition of the mathematical part of Ptolemy's Geography is that of Halma, containing only the first book and the latter part of the seventh, with a French version and notes, Paris, 1828, 4to. (Schöll, Hist. Lit. Gr, vol. 5, p. 240, seqq.—Id, ibid., vol. 5, p. 271.—Id, ibid., vol. 6, p. 312, &c.—Comare Delambre, in Biogr. Univ., vol. 36, p. 263.)— JX. A native of Ascalon, who followed the prosession of a grammarian at Rome before the time of Herodian, by whom he is cited. He wrote a work on Synonymes, IIepi Öuaçopäç Aşewv (“On the difference
of Words”). It is properly the fragment merely of a larger work. Ptolemy was the author also of a Homeric Prosody, a treatise on metres, and a dissertation on Aristarchus's revision of Homer. The sragment on “the Difference of Words” is given by Fabricius, Bibl. Gr., vol. 4, p. 515, of the old edition; vol. 6, p. 117, of the new.—XX. Surnamed Chennus, flourished under the emperors Trajan and Hadrian. Photius has preserved for us some fragments of his work, IIepi Tic etc trożruatiav kawijc iaTopiac (“New History of varied Erudition”), in seven books. To give some idea of this compilation, we will mention some of the subjects of which it treats: the death of Protesilaus; that of Sophocles; that of Hercules; the history of Croesus; the death of Achilles; that of Laius; the history of Tiresias; the death of Adonis; the origin of several epithets given to the heroes of the Iliad, and to other personages of the fabulous times. Ptolemy also wrote a drama entitled the Sphinx. He dared even to enter the lists against Homer with a poem in twenty-four books or cantos, entitled "Avtoumpoc (“The Anti-Homer”). Gale has placed the fragments of Ptolemy Chennus in his Historiae Poética. Scriptores, p. 303, seqq., and to the eighth chapter is prefixed a dissertation on this writer. The fragments are also given in the edition of Conon and Parthenius by Teucher. (Scholl, Hist. Lit. Gr., vol. 5, p. 44.) PtoleMRIs, I. a seaport town of Phoenicia. (Wid. Ace.)—II. A city on the coast of Cyrenaica in Africa, and the port of Barce. It suffered so severely from want of water, that the inhabitants were obliged to relinquish their dwellings, and disperse themselves about the country in different directions. The attempts of Justinian to obviate this evil proved unavailing. The ruins are called at the present day Ptolemata. A description of the remains of this ancient city is given by Captain Beechey and others. (Modern Traveller, pt. 50, p. 114, seqq.)—III. A city of Egypt, in the northern part of Thebais, northeast of Abydus. It rose in importance as the last-mentioned city declined, and eventually rivalled Memphis in size. Ptolemais would seem to have been founded by one of the Ptolemies, or, at all events, re-established by him on the site of some more ancient city, as the Greek name, IIrożeuaic # "Epuetov (Ptol emais, the city of Hermes), would seem to indicate The city, therefore, was originally consecrated to the Egyptian Hermes. It appears to have received a sewere blow to its prosperity, by reason of its resistance to the Emperor Probus. The modern village of Men sieh is in the immediate neighbourhood of Ptolemais. (Mannert, Geogr., vol. 10, pt. 1, p. 381, seqq.)—IV. Originally a small promontory, on the western coast of the Sinus Arabicus. It was near the inland sea Monoleus. A fortified port was established here by Eumedes, a commander of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and the spot was selected on account of the large forest in the vicinity, which furnished valuable naval timber for the fleets of the Ptolemies. In this forest, also, wild elephants abounded; and, as Ptolemy wanted these animals for his armies, a regular hunting establishment was formed here, and the place received from this circumstance its second name of 9mpov, and also that of 'Erudispaç (#ri offpqc). In a commercial point of view it was of no great importance, as Arrian merely mentions among its exports tortoise-shell and ivory; but to the ancient astronomers and geographers it was directly the reverse, since they regarded it as the fittest place for measuring a degree, and thus ascertaining the circumference of the globe. The harbour of Mirza Mombank, about 15 geographical miles north of Massua, appears to indicate the ancient Piolemais. (Mannert, Geogr., vol. 10, pt. 44, scqq.) PublicãLA, a surname given to Publius Valerius, according to Dionysius and Plutarch, on account of his protectumg the rights of the people (populum and colo, Poplicola, Publicola). Niebuhr dissents from this etymology in the following remarks: “We cannot agree with the Greek Dionysius and Plutarch in translating Publicola as a compound term by Ömuokmóño, “the protector of the people;' but we must recognise therein the old Latin form of the adjective with a superfluous termination, which is sometimes mistaken for a diminutive, sometimes for a compound. It is equivalent to Publicus, in the sense of Ömuorukóc. Thus Scaevola is not the diminutive, but synonymous with Scaevus, and AEquicolus is nothing but Æquus or AEquicus; Volsculus nothing but Volscus.” (Roman History, vol. 1, p. 360, Walter's trans.) Publilia LEx, I. a law proposed by Publilius the Dictator, A.U.C. 414, ordaining that, before the people gave their votes, the senate should authorize whatever they might deterinine. (Livy, 8, 12.)—II. A law ordaining that the plebeian magistrates should be created at the comitia tributa. (Liv., 2, 56.) Publius Syrus, a celebrated composer and actor of mimes. He was a native of Syria, and was brought from Asia to Italy in early youth in the same vessel with his countryman and kinsman Manlius Antiochus, the professor of astrology, and Staberius Eros, the grammarian, who all, by some desert in learning, rose above their original fortune. . He received a good education and liberty from his master, in reward for his witticisms and his facetious disposition. He first represented his mimes in the provincial towns of Italy, whence, his fame having spread to Rome, he was summoned to the capital, to assist in those public spectacles which Caesar offered his countrymen in exchange for their freedom. (Macrob. Sat., 2, 7.) On one occasion he challenged all persons of his own profession to contend with him on the stage; and in this competition he successfully overcame every one of his rivals. By his success in the representation of these popular entertainments, he amassed considerable wealth, and lived with such luxury that he never gave a great supper without having sow's udder at table, a dish which was prohibited by the censors as being too great a luxury even for the table of patricians. (Plin., 8, 51.) Nothing farther is known of his history, except that he was still continuing to perform his mimes with applause at the period of the death of Laberius, which happened ten months aster the assassination of Caesar. (Chron. Euseb., ad Olymp., 184.) We have not the names of any of the mimes of Publius, nor do we precisely know their nature or subject; all that is preserved from them being a number of detached sentiments or maxims, to the amount of 800 or 900, seldom exceeding a single line, but containing reflections of unrivalled force, truth, and beauty, on all the various relations, situations, and feelings of human life. Both the writers and actors of mimes were probably careful to have their memory stored with commonplaces and precepts of morality, in order to introduce them appropriately in their extemporaneous performances. . The maxims of Publius were interspersed through his dramas ; but, being the only portion of these productions now remaining, they have just the appearance of thoughts or sentiments, like those of Rochefoucauld. His mimes must either have been very numerous, or very thickly loaded with these moral aphorisms. It is also surprising that they seem raised far above the ordinary tone even of regular comedy, and appear for the greater part to be almost stoical maxims. Seneca has remarked, that many of his eloquent verses are fitter for the buskin than the slipper. (Ep., 8.) How such exalted precepts should have been grafted on the lowest farce, and how passages, which would hardly be appropriate in the most serious sentimental comedy, were adapted to the actions or manners of gross and drunken buffoons, is a difficulty which could only be solved had we o received entire a larger portion of these
productions, which seem to have been peculiar to Roman genius. The sentiments of Publius Syrus now appear trite. They have become familiar to mankind, and have been re-echoed by poets and moralists from age to age. All of them are most felicitously expressed, and few of them seem erroneous, while, at the same time, they are perfectly free from the selfish or worldlyminded wisdom of Rochefoucauld or Lord Burleigh. (Dunlop's Roman Literature, vol. 1, p. 558, seqq.) The sentences of Publius Syrus are appended to many of the editions of Phaedrus. The most useful edition of these sentences is perhaps that of Gruter, Lugd. Bat., 1727, 8vo. The latest and most accurate edition, however, is that of Orellius, appended to his edition of Phaedrus, Turici, 1832, 8vo. It contains, also, thirty sentences never before published. (Bähr, Gesch Lit. Röm., vol. 1, p. 776.) Pulchería, I. sister of Theodosius the Great, and celebrated for her piety and virtues.—II. A Roman empress, daughter of Arcadius, and sister of Theodosius the younger. She was created Augusta A.D. 414, and shared the imperial power with her brother. After the death of the latter (A.D. 450), she gave her hand to Marcianus. (Vid. Marcianus I) Pulcheria died A.D. 454, and was interred at Ravenna, where her tomb is still to be seen. Pulch RUM ProMo'Ntorium, the same with Hermaeum Promontorium. (Vid. Hermaum.) PUNicum Bell'UM, the name given to the wars between Rome and Carthage. The Punic wars were three in number. The first took its rise from the af. fair of the Mamertini, an account of which will be found under the article Messana, page 836, col. 1. This was ended by the naval battle sought off the AEgates Insula: ; and it was also memorable for the naval victory of Duilius, the first ever gained by the Romans. (Vid. Carthago, © 4.—Duilius.—A gates.) The Second Punic War commenced with the affair of Saguntum, and was terminated by the battle of Zama. During its continuance Hannibal carried on his celebrated campaigns against the Romans in Italy. (Wid. Carthago, & 4.—Hannibal. —Metaurus.—Zama.) The Third Punic War was the siege and destruction of Carthage itself. (Vid. Carthago, & 4.) PUPIENUs, MARcus CLodius MaxiMUs, a man of obscure family, who raised himself by his merit to the highest offices in the Roman armies, and gradually became a praetor, consul, prefect of Rome, and a governor of the provinces. His father was a blacksmith. After the death of the Gordians, Pupienus was elected with Balbinus to the imperial throne, and, to rid the world of the usurpation and tyranny of the Maximini, he immediately marched against these tyrants; but he was soon informed that they had been sacrificed to the fury and resentment of their own soldiers. He prepared, after this, to make war against the Persians, who insulted the majesty of Rome, but was massacred, A.D. 236, by the praetorian guards. Balbinus shared his sate. Pupienus is sometimes called Maximus. In his private character he appeared always grave and serious. He was the constant friend of justice, moderation, and clemency, and no greater encomium can be passed upon his virtues than to say that he was invested with the purple without soliciting it, and that the Roman senate said they had selected him from thousands, because they knew no person more worthy or better qualified to support the dignity of an emperor. (Capitol, Vit. Maxim.—Id., Vit. Gord.) Pupius, a tragic poet at Rome, contemporary with Caesar. He was famed for his power in exciting emotion. Hence the scholiast on Horace remarks (Epist., 1, 1, 67), “Pupius, Tragadiographus, ita affectus spectantium movit, ut eos flere compelleret. Inde istum versum fecit: “‘Flebunt amici et bene noti mortem meam : . Nam populus in me vivo arma, is: satis.
* * *