Obrazy na stronie

cluding many strange varieties of complexion, dress, and language, commanded by Thessalian generals, but retaining each tribe its national armour and mode of fighting. An interval was then left, after which came 1000 picked Persian cavalry, followed by an equal number of spearmen, whose lances, which they carried with the

oints turned downward, ended in knobs of gold.

ext, ten sacred horses, of the Nisaean breed, were led in gorgeous caparisons, preceding the chariot of the Persian Jove, drawn by eight white horses, the driver following on foot. Then came the royal chariot, also drawn by Nisaean horses, in which Xerxes sat in state; but from time to time he exchanged it for an easier carriage, which sheltered him from the sun and the changes of the weather. He was followed by two bands of horse and foot, like those which went immediately before him, and by a body of 10,000 Persian infantry, the flower of the whole army, who were called the Immortals, because their number was kept constantly full. A thousand of them, who occupied the outer ranks, bore lances knobbed with gold; those of the rest were similarly ornamented with silver. They were followed by an equal number of Persian cavalry. The remainder of the host brought up the rear. In this order the army reached Abydus, and Xerxes, from a lofty throne, surveyed the crowded sides and bosom of the Hellespont, and the image of a seafight; a spectacle which Herodotus might well think sufficient to have moved him with a touch of human sympathy. The passage did not begin before the king had prayed to the rising sun, and had tried to propitiate the Hellespont itself by libations, and by casting into it golden vessels and a sword. After the bridges had been strewed with myrtle and purified with incense, the Ten Thousand Immortals, crowned with chaplets, led the way. The army crossed by one bridge, the baggage by the other; yet the living tide flowed without intermission for seven days and seven nights before the last man, as Herodotus heard, the king himself, the tallest and most majestic person in the host, had arrived on the European shore. In the great plain of Doriscus, on the banks of the Hebrus, an attempt was made to number the land force. A space was enclosed large enough to contain 10,000 men ; into this the myriads were successively poured and discharged, till the whole mass had been rudely counted. They were then drawn up according to their natural divisions, and Xerxes rode in his chariot along the ranks, while the royal scribes recorded the names, and most likely the equipments, of the different races. It is an ingenious and probable conjecture of Heeren's (Ideen, 1, p. 137), that this authentic document was the original source from which Herodotus drew his minute description of their dress and weapons. The real military strength of the armament was almost lost among the undisciplined herds which could only impede its movements as well as consume its stores. The Persians were the core of both the land and sea force; none of the other troops are said to have equalled them in discipline or in courage; and the four-and-twenty thousand men who guarded the royal person were the flower of the whole nation. Yet these, as we see from their glittering armour, as well as from their performances, were much better fitted for show than for action; and of the rest, we hear that they were distinguished from the mass of the army, not only by their superior order and valour, but also by the abundance of gold they displayed, by the train of carriages, women, and servants that followed them, and by the provisions set apart for their use. Though Xerxes himself was ela: ted by the spectacle he viewed on the plains and the shores of Doriscus, it must have filled the clearsighted Greeks who accompanied him with misgivings as to the issue of the enterprise. The language of Demaratus, in the conversation which Herodotus supposes him ‘. have had with Xerxes after the review,


though it was probably never uttered, expressed thoughts which could scarcely sail to occur to the Spartan. Poverty, he is made to observe, was tho endowment which Greece had received from nature; but law and reason had armed her with instrume, is, with which she had cultivated her barren inheritance, and might still hope to repel the invasion even of Xerxes and his host. (Thirlwall's History of Greece, vol. 2, p. 249, seqq.)—Our limits will not allow us to enter here into a detail of the movements of Xerxes; and, besides, we have already given, under other articles, a brief summary of the campaign. (Vid. Artemisium, Thermopylae, Salamis, &c.)—After the disastrous defeat at Salamis, Xerxes felt desirous of escaping from a state of things which was now becoming troublesome and dangerous, and Mardonius saw that he would gladly listen to any proposal that would facilitate his return. He was aware, that, without a fleet, the war might probably be tedious, in which case the immense bulk of the present army would be only an encumbrance, from the difficulty of subsisting it. Besides, the ambition of Mardonius was flattered with the idea of his becoming the conqueror of Greece, while he feared that, is he now returned, he might be made answerable for the ill success of the expedition which he had advised. He therefore proposed to Xerxes to return into Asia with the body of the army, leaving himself, with 300,000 of the best troops, to complete the conquest of Greece. Xerxes assented, and the army having retired into Boeotia, Mardonius made his selection, and then, accompanying the king into Thessaly, there parted from him, leaving him to pursue his march towards Asia, while he himself prepared to winter in Thessaly and Macedonia.—Widely different from the appearance of the glittering host, which a few months before had advanced over the plains of Macedonia and Thrace to the conquest of Greece, was the aspect of the crowd which was now hurrying back along the same road. The splendour, the pomp, . the luxury, the waste, were exchanged for disaster and distress, want and disease. The magazines had been emptied by the careless profusion or peculation of those who had the charge of them; the granaries of the countries traversed by the retreating multitude were unable to supply its demands; ordinary food was of. ten not to be found; and it was compelled to draw a scanty and unwholesome nourishment from the herbage of the plains, the bark and leaves of the trees. Sickness soon began to spread its ravages among them, and Xerxes was compelled to consign numbers to the care of the cities that lay on his road, already impoverished by the cost of his first visit, in the hope that they would tend their guests, and would not sell them into slavery if they recovered. The passage of the Strymon is said to have been peculiarly disastrous. The river had been frozen in the night hard enough to bear those who arrived first. But the ice suddenly gave way under the heat of the morning sun, and numbers perished in the waters. It is a little surprising that Herodotus, when he is describing the miseries of the retreat, does not notice this disaster, which is so prominent in the narrative of the Persian messenger in AEschylus. There can, however, be no doubt as to the fact ; and perhaps it may surnish a useful warning not to lay too much stress on the silence of Herodotus, as a ground for rejecting even important and interesting facts which are only mentioned by later writers, though such as he must have heard of, and might have been expected to relate. It seems possible that the story he mentions of Xerxes embarking at Eion (8,118) may have arisen out of the tragical passage of the Strymon.—In forty-five days after he had left Mardonius in Thessaly, he reached the Hellespont; the bridges had been broken up by soul weather, but the fleet was there to carry the army over to Abydus. Here it rested from its fatigues, and found 1401

plentiful quarters; but intemperate indulgence rendered the sudden change from scarcity to abundance almost as pernicious as the previous famine. The remnant that Xerxes brought back to Sardis was a wreck, a fragment, rather than a part of his huge host. —The history of Xerxes, after the termination of his Grecian campaign, may be comprised in a brief compass. He gave himself up to a life of dissolute pleasure, and was slain by Artabanus, a captain of the royal

uards, B.C. 464. (Wid. Artabanus II.-Thirlwall's

istory of Greece, vol. 2, p. 315, seq.)—II. A son of Artaxerxes Mnemon, who succeeded his father, but was slain, after a reign of sorty-five days, by his brother Sogdianus. (Wid. Sogdianus.)

Xois, a city of Egypt, situate on an island in the Phatnetic branch of the Nile, below Sebennytus. Mannert takes it to be the same with the Papremis of Herodotus (Geogr., vol. 10, p, 571). Xuthus, a son of Hellen, grandson of Deucalion.

(Wid. Hellas, 1).

[ocr errors]

ZABXtus, a river in the northern part of Assyria, rising in Mount Zagrus, and falling into the Tigris. It is called Zabatus by Xenophon, but otherwise Zabus or Zerbis, and traverses a large portion of Assyria. This stream was also termed Lycus (Aïkos), or “the wolf,” by the Greeks; but it has resumed its primitive denomination of Zab, or, according to some modern travellers, Zarb. (Polyb., 5, 51.—Amm. Marc., 23, 14. — Xen., Anab., 2, 5. — Plin., 6, 26.) Farther down, another river, named Zabus Minor, and called by the Macedonians Caprus (Kärpoo), or “the boar,” is also received by the Tigris, and is now called by the Turks Altonson, or the river of gold. (Polyb., 5, 51.) ZabdiceNE, a district in Mesopotamia, in which was situated a city named Zabda or Bezabda. It was yielded to the Persians by Jovian. (Amm. Marc., 25, 7.) Zabus, a river of Assyria, falling into the Tigris. (Wid. Zabatus.) Zacynthus (Zákvv60s), an island in the Ionian Sea, to the west of the Peloponnesus, and below Cephallenia. Pliny affirms that it was once called Hyrie ; but this fact is not recorded by Homer, who constantly uses the former name (Il , 2, 634. — Od., 1, 246), which was said to be derived from Zacynthus, the son of Dardanus, an Arcadian chief. (Pausan., 8, 24.) A very ancient tradition ascribed to Zacynthus the foundation of Saguntum in Spain, in conjunction with the Rutuli .#". (Liv., 21, 7.) Thucydides insorms us that, at a later period, this island received a colony of Achaeans from Peloponnesus (2, 66.) Not long before the Peloponnesian war, the island was reduced by Tolmides, the Athenian general, from which period we find Zacynthus allied to, or, rather, dependant upon, Athens. It subsequently fell into the hands of Philip III., king of Macedon (Polyb., 5, 4), and was asterward occupied by the Romans, under Val. Larvinus, during the second Punic war. On this occasion, the chief city of the island, which bore the same name, was captured, with the exception of its citadel. (Liv., 26, 24). Zacynthus, however, was subsequently restored to Philip. It was afterward sold to the Achaeans, and given up by them to the Romans on its being ão by the latter. The modern name is Zante. (Cramer's Anc. Greece, vol. 2, p. 56, seqq.) ZAleucus, a lawgiver in Magna Græcia, and the founder of the Locrian state in that quarter of Italy. Eusebius places him in Olymp. 29, which is 40 years before Draco, and 60 before Pythagoras was born. (Bentley, on Phalaris, vol. 1, p. 380, ed. Dyce.) According to o: ordinary account, he was of obscure 1402

birth, and in his youth lived in servitude, in the capacity of a shepherd. But his extraordinary abilities and merit obtained him his freedom, and at length raised him to the chief magistracy. The laws which he framed were severe; but they were so well adapted to the situation and manners of the Locrians, that their constitution was, for several ages, highly celebrated. So vigorous was the discipline of Zaleucus, that he prohibited the use of wine except in cases where it was prescribed as a medicine; and he ordained that adulterers should be punished with the loss of their eyes. When his own son had subjected himself to this penalty, Zaleucus, in order, at the saine time, to preserve the authority of the laws, and show some degree of paternal lenity, shared the punishment with the offender, and, that he might only be deprived of one eye, submitted to lose one of his own. (Clem. Alex, Strom., I, p. 309.—Wal. Max., 1, 2, 4.—Id., 6, 5, 3 —Diog. Laert., 8, 16. — Stob., Serm., 39.)—Bentley throws doubt on the existence of such a person as Zaleucus, and regards his code of laws as the forgery of a sophist. (Diss. on Phalaris, vol. 1, p. 378, ed. Dyce.) Against this opinion, however, seo Fabricius, Biblioth. Gr., lib. 2, c. 14, and Warburton, Div. Leg. of Moses, vol. 1, book, 2, § 3. (Dyce ad Bentl., l.c.) Zamolxis, a celebrated personage among the Scythians, whom many represent not only as the father of wisdom with respect to the Scythians, but as the teacher of the doctrines of immortality and transmigration to the Celtic Druids and to Pythagoras. (Origen., Philos., c. 25, p. 170.-Suid., s. v.) Others suppose him to have been a slave of Pythagoras, who, after having attended him into Egypt, obtained his manumission, and taught his master's doctrine among the Getae. But there can be no doubt that the doctrine of immortality was known to the northern nations long before the time of Pythagoras; and Herodotus, mentioning a common tradition, that Zamolxis was a Pythagorean, expressly says (4,95), that he flourished at a much earlier period than Pythagoras. The whole story of the connexion of Zamolxis with Pythagoras seems to have been invented by the Pythagoreans, to advance the same of their master. (Enfield, Hist. Philos., vol. 1, p. 118.) ZAMA, I. a city of Africa, called Zama Regia, and lying some distance to the southwest of Carthage, and to the northwest of Hadrumetum. Sallust describes it as a large place, and strongly sortified. It became the residence subsequently f Juba, and the deposite for his treasures. (Auct, Bell. Afr., 91.) Strabo speaks of it as being in his days a ruined city; it probably met with this fate during the civil wars. }. appears to have been afterward rebuilt, and to have become the seat of a bishopric. The modern Zoucarin marks the ancient site. (Mannert, vol. 10, pt. 2, p. 355.)—II. A city of Numidia, five days’ journey west of Carthage, according to Polybius (15, 5). Near this place was fought the famous battle between the elder Asricanus and Hannibal. (Mannert, Geogr., vol. 10, pt. 2, p. 366) ZANcle, the earlier name of Messana in Sicily. (Wid. Messana.) ZARANGAsi or DRANGAE, a nation of Upper Asia, southeast of Aria, having for their capital Prophthasia, now Zarang. (Plin., 6, 23.-Arrian, Exp. Aler, 3, 2.) Some authorities, however, make the Zarangei only a part of the Dranga. (Bischoff und Müller, Wörterb. der Geogr., p. 1013.) ZARIAspa BActra, the capital of Bactriana, on the river Bactrus, now Balkh. (Plin., 6, 16.) ZELA, a city of Pontus, southeast of, and not far from, Amasea. It was originally a village, but Pompey increased it, and raised it to the rank of a city. Here Mithradates defeated the Romans under Triarius; and here, too, Caesar defeated Pharnaces. It was

in writing home word of this victory that Caesar made use of the well-known expressions, “Veni, widi, vici.” —The modern village of Zile or Ziel occupies the site of the ancient city. (Plin., 63.-Hirtius, B. A., 72.) ZENo, I. the sounder of the sect of the Stoics, born at Citium, in the island of Cyprus. His father was by profession a merchant, but, discovering in his son a strong propensity towards learning, he early devoted him to the study of philosophy. In his mercantile capacity, the former had frequent occasions to visit Athens, where he purchased for the young Zeno several of the writings of the most eminent Socratic philosophers. These he read with great avidity; and, when he was about thirty years of age, he determined to take a voyage to a city which was so celebrated both as a mart of trade and of science. Whether this voyage was in part mercantile, or wholly undertaken for the sake of conversing with those philosophers whose writings Zeno had long admired, is uncertain. If it be true, as some writers relate, that he brought with him a valuable cargo of Phoenician purple, which was lost by shipwreck upon the coast of Attica, this circumstance will account for the facility with which he at first attached himself to a sect whose leading principle was contempt of riches. Upon his first arrival in Athens, going accidentally into the shop of a bookseller, he took up a volume of the commentaries of Xenophon, and, after reading a few passages, was so much delighted with the work, and formed so high an idea of its author, that he asked the bookseller where he might meet with such men. Crates, the Cynic philosopher, happening at that instant to be passing by, the bookseller pointed to him, and said, “ Follow that man.” Zeno soon found an opportunity of attending upon the instructions of Crates, and was so well pleased with his doctrine that he became one of his disciples. But, though he highly admired the general principles and spirit of the Cynic school, he could not easily reconcile himself to their peculiar manners. Besides, his inquisitive turn of mind would not allow him to adopt that indifference to every scientific inquiry which was one of the characteristic distinctions of the sect. He therefore attended upon other masters, who professed to instruct their disciples in the nature and causes of things. When Crates, displeased at his following other philosophers, attempted to drag him by force out of the school of Stilpo, Zeno said to him, “You may seize my body, but Stilpo has laid hold of my mind.” After continuing to attend upon the lectures of Stilpo for several years, he passed over to other schools, particularly those of Xenocrates and Diodorus Chronus. By the latter he was instructed in dialectics. At last, after attending almost every other master, he offered himself as a disciple of Polemo. This philosopher appears to have been aware that Zeno's intention in thus removing from one school to another was to collect materials from various quarters sor a new system of his own; for, when he came into Polemo's school, the latter said to him, “I am no stranger to your Phoenician arts, Zeno; I perceive that your design is to creep slyly into my garden and steal away my fruit.” Polemo was not mistaken in his opinion. Having made himself master of the tenets of others, Zeno determined to become the founder of a new sect. The place which he made choice of for his school was called the Paecile (Iloukian Xrost), or Painted Porch; a public portico, so called from the pictures of Polygnotus, and other eminent masters, with which it was adorned. This portico, being the most famous in Athens, was called, by way of distinction, Xrod, the Porch. It was from this circumstance that the followers of Zeno were called Stoics, i. e., the men of the Porch. Zeno excelled in that kind of subtle reasoning which was then popular. At the same time, he taught a strict system of moral doc...trine, and exhibited a pleasing picture of moral dis

cipline in his own life. The Stoic sect, in fact, was a branch of the Cynic, and, as far as respected morals, differed from it more in words than in reality. Its founder, while he avoided the singularities of the Cynics, retained the spirit of their moral doctrine: at the same time, from a diligent comparison of the tenets of other masters, he framed a new system of speculative philosophy. It is not at all surprising, therefore, that he obtained the applause and affection of numerous followers, and even enjoyed the savour of the great. Antigonus Gonatas, king of Macedon, while he was resident at Athens, attended his lectures, and, upon his return, earnestly invited him to his court. He possessed so large a share of esteem among the Athenians, that, on account of his approved integrity, they deposited the keys of their citadel in his hands They also honoured him with a golden crown, and a statue of brass. Among his countrymen, the inhabitants of Cyprus, and with the Sidonians, from whom his family was derived, he was likewise highly esteened. In his person Zeno was tall and slender; his aspect was severe, and his brow contracted. His constitution was feeble, but he preserved his health by great abstemiousness. The supplies of his table consisted of figs, bread, and honey; notwithstanding which, he was frequently honoured with the company of great men. He paid more attention to neatness and decorum in his personal appearance than the Cynic philosophers. In his dress, indeed, he was plain, and in his expenses frugal; but this is not to be imputed to avarice, but to a contempt of external magnificence. He showed as much respect to the poor as to the rich, and conversed freely with persons of the meanest occupations. He had only one servant, or, according to Seneca, none. Although Zeno's sobriety and continence were even proverbial, he was not without enemies. Among his contemporaries, several philosophers of great ability and eloquence employed their talents against him. Arcesilaus and Carneades, the founders of the Middle Academy, were his professed opponents. Towards the close of his life he found another powerful antagonist in Epicurus, whose temper and doctrines were alike inimical to the Severe #. and philosophical pride of the Stoic sect. Hence mutual invectives passed between the Stoics and other sects, to which little credit is due. (Wid. remarks under the article Epicurus.) Zeno lived to the extreme age of 98, and at last, in consequence of an accident, put an end to his life. As he was walking out of his school, he fell down, and in the fall broke one of his fingers. He was so affected, upon this, with a consciousness of infirmity, , that, striking the earth, he exclaimed, "Epxonal, is disc; “I am coming, why callest thou me?” and immediately went home and strangled himself. He died B.C. 264. The Athenians, at the request of Antigonus, erected a monument to his memory in the Ceramicus. From the particulars that have been related concerning Zeno, it will not be difficult to perceive what kind of influence his circumstances and character Inust have had upon his philosophical system. If his doctrines be diligently compared with the history of his life, it will appear that, having attended upon many eminent preceptors, and been intimately conversant with their opinions, he compiled out of their various tenets a heterogeneous system, on the credit of which he assumed to himself the title of a founder of a new sect. When he resolved, for the sake of establishing a new school, to desert the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, in which he had been perfectly instructed by Xenocrates and Polemo, it became necessary either to invent opinions entirely new, or to give an air of novelty to old systems by the introduction of new terms and definitions. Of these two undertakings, Zeno prudently made choice of the easier. Cicero says concerning him, that he had little reason for de

serting his masters, especially those of the Platonic school, and that he was not so much an inventor of new opinions as of new terms. That this was the real character of the Porch will fully appear from an attentive perusal of the clear and accurate comparison which Cicero has drawn between the doctrines of the Old Academy and those of the Stoics, in his Academic Questions. As to the moral doctrine of the Cynic sect, to which Zeno adhered to the last, there can be no doubt that he transferred it almost without alloy into his own school. In morals, the principal differ. ence between the Cynics and the Stoics was, that the former disd.ined the cultivation of nature, the latter affected to rise above it. On the subject of physics, Zeno received his doctrine from Pythagoras and Heraclitus through the channel of the Platonic school, as will fully appear from a careful comparison of their respective systems. The moral part of the Stoical philosophy partook of the defects of its origin. It may as justly be objected against the Stoics as the Cynics, that they assumed an artificial severity of manners and a tone of virtue above the condition of man. Their doctrine of moral wisdom was an ostentatious display of words, in which lit. tle regard was paid to nature and reason. It professed to raise human nature to a degree of persection before unknown; but its real effect was merely to amuse the ear and captivate the fancy with fictions that can never be realized. The Stoical doctrine concerning nature is as follows: according to Zeno and his followers, there existed from eternity a dark and confused chaos, in which were contained the first principles of all suture beings. This chaos being at length arranged, and emerging into variable forms, became the world as it now subsists. The world, or nature, is that whole which comprehends all things, and of which all things are parts and members. The universe, though one whole, contains two principles, distinct from elements, one passive and the other active. The passive principle is pure matter without qualities; the active principle is reason, or God. This is the fundamental doctrine of the Stoics concerning nature. If the doctrine of Plato, which derives the human mind from the soul of the world, has a tendency towards enthusiasm, much more must this be the case with the Stoical doctrine, which supposes that all human souls have immediately proceeded from, and will at last return into, the divine nature. As regards a divine providence, is we compare the popular language of the Stoics upon this head with their general system, and explain the former with the fundamental principles of the latter, we shall find that the agency of deity is, according to them, nothing more than the active motion of a celes. tial ether, or fire, possessed of intelligence, which at first gave form to the shapeless mass of gross matter, and being always essentially united to the visible world, by the same necessary agency, preserves its order and harmony. Providence, in the Stoic creed, is only another name for absolute necessity, or sate, to which God and matter, or the universe, which consists of both, is immutably subject. The Stoic doctrine of the resurrection of the body, upon which Seneca has written with so much elegance, must not be confounded with the Christian doctrine; for, according to the Stoics, men return to life, not by the voluntary appointment of a wise and merciful God, but by the law of fate; and are not renewed for the enjoyment of a better and happier condition, but drawn back into their former state of imperfection and misery. Accordingly,

Seneca says, “This restoration many would reject,

were it not that their renovated life is accompanied

with a total oblivion of past events.” Upon the prin

ciples of physics depends the whole Stoic doctrine of

morals. Conceiving God to be the principal part of

nature, by whose energy all bodies are formed, moved,

and arranged, and human reason to be a portion of the

Divinity, it was their sundamental doctrine in ethics, that, in human life, one ultimate end ought for its own sake to be pursued; and that this end is to live agreeably to nature, that is, to be consormed to the law of fate by which the world is governed, and to the reason of that divine and celestial fire which animates all things. Since man is himself a microcosm, composed, like the world, of matter and a rational principle, it becomes him to live as a part of the great whole, and to accommodate all his desires and pursuits to the general arrangement of nature. Thus, to live according to nature, as the Stoics teach, is virtue, and virtue is itself happiness; for the supreme good is to live according to a just conception of the real nature of things, choosing that which is itself eligible, and rejecting the contrary. Every man, having within himself a capacity of discerning and following the law of nature, has his happiness in his own power, and is a divinity to himself. Wisdom consists in distinguishing good from evil. Good is that which produces happiness according to the nature of a rational being. Since those things only are truly good which are becoming and virtuous, and virtue, which is seated in the mind, is alone sufficient for happiness, external things contribute nothing towards happiness, and, therefore, are not in themselves good. The wise man will only value riches, honour, beauty, and other external enjoyments as means and instruments of virtue; for, in every condition, he is happy in the possession of a mind accommodated to nature. . Pain, which does not belong to the mind, is no evil. The wise man will be happy in the midst of torture. All external things are indifferent, since they cannot afsect the happiness of man. Every virtue being a conformity to nature, and every vice a deviation from it, all virtues and vices are equal. One act of beneficence or justice is not more truly so than another; one fraud is not more a fraud than another; therefore there is no difference in the essential nature of moral actions, except that some are vicious and others virtuous. This is the doctrine which Horace ridicules in the 4th satire, 1st book. The Stoics advanced many extravagant assertions concerning their wise man; for example, that he secls neither pain nor pleasure; that he exercises no pity; that he is free from faults; that he is divine ; that he does all things well ; that he alone is great, noble, ingenuous; that he is a prophet, a priest, a king, and the like. These paradoxical vauntings are humorously ridiculed by Horace. In order to understand all this, we must bear in mind that the Stoics did not suppose such a man actually to exist, but that they framed in their imagination an image of perfection, towards which every man should continually aspire. All the extravagant notions which are to be found in their writings on this subject may be referred to their general principle of the entire sufficiency of virtue to happiness, and the consequent indifference of all external circumstances. The sum of man's duty, according to the Stoics, with respect to himself, is to subdue his passions of joy and sorrow, hope and fear, and even pity. He who is, in this respect, perfectly master of himself, is a wise man; and, in proportion as we approach a state of apathy, we advance towards perfection. A wise man, moreover, may justly and reasonably withdraw from life whenever he finds it expedient ; not only because life and death are among those things which are in their nature indifferent, but also because life may be less consistent with virtue than death. Concerning the whole moral system of the Stoics, it must be remarked, that, although deserving of high encomium for the purity, extent, and variety of its doctrines, and although it must be confessed that, in many select passages of the Stoic writings, it appears exceedingly brilliant, it is

nevertheless founded in false notions of nature and of

man, and is raised to a degree of refinement which is extravagant and impracticable. The piety which it teaches is nothing more than a quiet submission to irresistible sate; the self-command which it enjoins annihilates the best affections of the human heart; the indulgence which it grants to suicide is inconsistent, not only with the general principles of piety, but even with that constancy which was the height of Stoical perfection ; and even its moral doctrine of benevolence is tinctured with the sanciful principle, which lay at the foundation of the whole Stoical system, that every being is a portion of one great whole, from which it would be unnatural and impious to attempt a separation. (Enfield's History of Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 315, seqq.)—II. A philosopher, a native of Tarsus, or, according to some, of Sidon, and the immediate successor of Chrysippus in the Stoic school. He does not appear to have receded in any respect from the Stoic tenets, except that he withheld his assent to the doctrine of the final conflagration. (Diog. Laert, 7, 38. —Euseb., Prap. Ev., 15, 18.)—III. A philosopher of Elea, called the Eleatic, to distinguish him from Zeno the Stoic. He flourished about 444 B.C. Zeno was a zealous friend of civil liberty, and is celebrated for his courageous and successful opposition to tyrants; but the inconsistency of the stories related by different writers concerning him in a great measure destroys their credit.—The invention of the dialectic art has been improperly ascribed to him; but there can be no doubt that this philosopher, and other metaphysical disputants in the Eleatic seat, employed much ingenuity and subtlety in exhibiting examples of most of the logical arts which were afterward reduced to rule by Aristotle and others. According to Aristotle, Zeno of Elea taught that nothing can be produced either from that which is similar or dissimilar ; that there is only one being, and that is God; that this being is eternal, homogeneous, and spherical, neither finite nor infinite, neither quiescent nor moveable ; that there are many worlds; that there is in nature no vacuum, &c. Is Seneca's account of this philosopher deserves credit, he reached the highest point of scepticism, and denied the real existence of external objects. (Sencca, Ep., 58. Enfield, Hist. Philos., vol. 1, p. 419, seq.)

ZENobi A, a celebrated princess, wise of Odenatus, and after his death queen of Palmyra. (Vid. Odenatus, and Palmyra.) With equal talents for jurisprudence and finance, thoroughly skilled in the arts and duties of government, and adapting severity and clemency with nice discernment to the exigency of the circumstances, her agile and elastic frame enabled her to direct and share the labours and enterprises of war. Disdaining the female litter, she was continually on horseback, and could even keep pace on foot with the march of her soldiery. History has preserved some reminiscences of her personal appearance, her dress, and her habits, which represent this apparent amazon as a woman of the most engaging beauty, gifted with the versatile graces of a court, and accomplished in literary endowments. In complexion a brunette, her teeth were of a pearly whiteness, and her eyes black and sparkling; her mien was animated, and her voice clear and powerful. With a helmet on her head, and wearing a purple mantle fringed with gems and clasped with a buckle at the waist, so as to leave one of her arms bare to the shoulder, she presented herself at the council of war; and affecting, from the policy of her country, a regal pomp, she was worshipped with Persian prostration. Pure in her manners to the utmost refinement of delicacy, and temperate in her habits, she would nevertheless challenge in their cups her Persian and Armenian guests, and retire the victor without ebriety. Chiefly versed in the languages of Syria and Egypt, her modesty restrained her from conversing freely in Latin; but she had read the Roman history in Greek, was herself an elegant histori

an, and had compiled the Annals of Alexandrea and the East. Her authority was acknowledged by a large portion of Asia Minor when Aurelian succeeded to the empire. Envious of her power, and determined to dispossess her of some of the rich provinces comprehended in her dominions, he marched at the head of a powerful army to Asia. Having defeated the queen's general near Antioch, he compelled her to retreat to Emesa. Under the walls of this city another engagement was fought, in which the emperor was again victorious. The queen fled to Palmyra, determined to support a siege. Aurelian followed her, and, on inaking his approaches to the walls, sound them mounted in every part with mural engines, which plied the besiegers with stones, darts, and missile fires. To the summons for a surrender of the city and kingdom, on the condition of her life being spared, Zenobia replied in a proud and spirited letter, written in Greek by her secretary, the celebrated Longinus. Her hopes of victory soon vanished ; and, though she harassed the Romans night and day by continual sallies from her walls and the working of her military engines, she despaired of success when she heard that the armies which were marching to her relief from Armenia, Persia, and the East had either been intercepted or gained over by the foe. She fled from Palmyra in the night on her dromedaries, but was overtaken by the Roman horse while attempting to cross the Euphrates, and was brought into the presence of Aurelian, and tried before a tribunal at Emesa, Aurelian himself presiding. The soldiers were clamorous for her death; but she, in a manner unworthy of her former fame, saved her own life by throwing the blame on her counsellors, especially on Longinus, who was, in consequence, put to death. Zenobia was carried to Rome, to grace the emperor's triumph, and was led along in chains of gold. She is said to have almost sunk beneath the weight of jewels with which she was adorned on that occasion. She was treated with great humanity, and Aurelian gave her large possessions near Tibur, where she was permitted to pass the remainder of her days. Her two sons afterward married into distinguished families at Rome. (Flav. Vopisc., Wit. Aurel.–Treb. Pollio, Trigint. Tyrann.— Vit. Herennian.) ZeNodórus, a statuary, whose native country is uncertain. He exercised his art in Cisalpine Gaul, and also in Rome during the reign of Nero. Pliny speaks of a Mercury of his, and also of a colossal statue of Nero, afterward dedicated to the sun on the downsall of that emperor. (Thiersch, Epoch. 3, Adnot. 102. —Sillig, Dict. Art, s. v.) Zephyrium, I. a promontory of Magna Graecia, on the eastern coast of the lower extremity of Bruttium, whence the Locrians derived the appellation of Epizephyrii. It is now Capo di Bruzzano. (Strabo, 259.)—II. A promontory on the western coast of the island of Cyprus, and closing the Bay of Bafo to the west. (Strab., 683.) Zephyrus, one of the winds, son of Astraeus and Aurora, the same as the Favonius of the Latins. He had a son named Carpus (Kapitác, fruit) by one of the Seasons. (Serp. ad Virg., Eclog., 5, 48.) Zephyrus is described by Homer as a strong-blowing wind; but he was afterward regarded as gentle and softbreathing. In the days of Homer, the idea of darkness was also associated with the western regions of the world, and hence the wind Zephyrus derived its name from Ö90s, “darkness,” “gloom.” In a succeeding age, when the west wind began to be regarded as genial in its influence both on man and all nature, the name was considered as synonymous with Šomoćpoo, life-bearing. (Hesiod, Theog., 377. — Virgil, AEn. 1, 135–Orid, Met, 1, 64; 15, 700,—Propertius, 1, 16, 34, &c.) Zetes, a son of Boreas, king of To and Oriti, 1405

« PoprzedniaDalej »