)
the activity of the moving powers : he, too, like EMPC'SA ("Eurovoa), a monstrous spectre,
the Eleatics (Xenophan.
the activity of the moving powers : he, too, like EMPC'SA ("Eurovoa), a monstrous spectre,
the Eleatics (Xenophan.
William Smith - 1844 - Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities - b
509, &c.
), in the attempt to reduce his theory, whether the life-giving Hera was meant
the relations of mixture to numbers, and in a few to signify the air and Aïdoneus the earth, or
other points. (Karsten, p. 426, 33, 428, &c. , Aïdoneus the air and Hera the earth, although the
426; compare, howerer, Ed. Zeller, die Philosophie former is more probable than the latter. (Fragm.
der Griech. p. 169, &c. , Tübingen, 1844. ) With 55, &c. , 74, &c. ; comp. Brandis, l. c. p. 198. ) As,
the Eleatics he agreed in thinking that it was im- however, the elementary substances were simple,
possible to conceive anything arising out of nothing eternal, and unalterable (Karsten, p. 336, &c. ),
(Fragm. vers. 81, &c. , 119, &c. , 345, &c. ; comp. and as change or alteration was merely the con-
Parmenid. Fragin. , ed. Karsten, vers. 47, 50, 60, sequence of their mixture and separation, it was
&c. , 66, 68, 75), and it is not impossible that he also necessary to conceive them as motionless, and
may have borrowed from them also the distinction consequently to suppose the existence of moving
between knowledge obtained through the senses, powers- the necessary condition of mixture and
and knowledge obtained through reason. (Fragm. separation-as' distinct from the substances, and
49, &c. , 108; Parmenid. Fragm. 49, 108. ) Aris- equally original and eternal. But in this manner
totle with justice mentions him among the Ionic the dynamic explanations which the earlier physio
physiologists, and he places him in very close rela- logists, and especially Heracleitus, had given of
tion to the atomistic philosophers and to Anaxagoras. nature, was changed into a mechanical one. In
( Metaphys. i. 3, 4, 7, Phys. i. 4, de Generat. et order here again to avoid the supposition of an
Corr. i. 8, de Caclo, iïi. 7. ) All three, like the actnal coming into existence, Empedocles assumed
whole Ionic physiology, endeavoured to point out two opposite directions of the moving power, the
that which formed the basis of all changes, and to attractive and repulsive, the uniting and separat-
explain the latter by means of the former; but ing, that is, love and hate (Neixos, Añpıs, Kótos-
they could not, like Heracleitus, consider the | Φιλίη, Φιλότης, Αρμονίη, Στοργή), as equally
coming into existence and motion as the existence original and elementary (Fragm. 88, &c. , 138, dic. ,
of things, and rest and tranquillity as the non- 167, &c. ; Aristot. Metaphys. i. 4; Karsten, p.
existence, because they had derived from the 346, &c. ); whereas with Heracleitus they were
Eleatics the conviction that an existence could only different manifestations of one and the same
just as little pass over into a non-existence, as, rice fundamental power. But is it to be supposed that
versá, the latter into the former. In order, never- those two powers were from the beginning equally
theless, to establish the reality of changes, and active ? and is the state of mixture, i. e. the world
consequently the world and its phaenomena, aguinst and its phaenomena, an original one, or was it
the deductions of the Eleatics, they were obliged | preceded by a state in which the pure elementary
## p. 14 (#30) ##############################################
14
EMPEDOCLES.
EMPYLI'S.
substances and the two moving powers co-existed the same cause, his six original beings (Aristot. de
in a condition of repose and inertness ? Empe- Anim. iii. 3, Metaphys. i. 57; Fragm. 321, &c. ,
docles decided in favour of the latter supposition 315, &c. , 313, 310, &c. ), still he clearly distin-
(Fragm. vers. 88, &c. , 59, &c. ; comp. Plat. Soph. guished the latter as a higher state of development
p. 242; Aristot. de Cocl. i. 10, Phys. Auscult. i. 4, from the former ; he complains of the small extent
viii. 1), which agreed with ancient legends and of our knowledge obtainable through our body
traditions. This he probably did especially in or- | (Fragm. 32, &c. ), and advises us not to trust to
der to keep still more distinctly asunder existences our eyes or cars, or any other part of our body,
and things coming into existence; and he conceived but to see in thought of what kind each thing is
the original co-existence of the pure elementary by itself (Fragm. 49, &c. , comp. 108, 356, &c. );
substances and of the two powers in the form of a but he attributes the thinking cognition to the
sphere (opaipos ; comp. Karsten, p. 183, &c. ), deity alone. (Fragm. 32, &c. , 41, &c. , 354, 302,
which was to indicate its perfect independence and &c. ) We are, however, by no means justified in
self-sufficiency. As, however, these elementary supposing that Empedocles, like the Eleatics, con-
substances were to exist together in their purity, sidered that which is perceptible through the
without mixture and separation, it was necessary senses, i. e. the world and its phaenomena, to be a
to suppose that the uniting power of love predomi- mere phantom, and the unity of the divine sphere,
nated in the sphere (Aristot. Mctaphys. B. i. 4, that is, the world of love, which is arrived at only
1, 21, de Generat. c Corr. i. 1), and that the by thought, to be the sole existence. (11. Ritter
separating power of hate was in a state of limited in Woll's Anulect. I. p. 423, &c. , Gesch, der l'hilos.
activity, or, as Empedocles expresses it, guarded i. p. 5+1, &c. ; Brandis, in the Rheinisch. Museum,
the extreme ends of the sphere. (Fragm. vers. 58, iii. p. 124 ; comp. Zeller, l. c. p. 184, &c. )
comp. 107, &c. ) When the destructive hate rises Further investigations concerning Empedocles's
into activity, the bond which keeps the pure ele- derivation of the different kinds of sensuous per-
mentary substances together in the sphere is dis ception, and of the mutual influence of things upon
bolved (vers. 66, &c. ); they separate in order one another in general, from the coincidence of
partly to unite again by the power of love: and effluxes and corresponding pores, as well as the
this is the origin of our world of phaenomena. But examination of the fragments of his cosmologic and
that the elementary substances might not be com- physiologic doctrines, must be left to a history of
pletely absorbed by this world and lose their Greek philosophy.
[CH. A. B. )
purity, Empedocles assumed a periodical change of E’MPODUS ("Eurodos), an otherwise unknown
the sphere and formation of the world (Fragm. vers. writer, whose arournuoveúuata are mentioned by
88, &c. , 167, &c. ); but perhaps also, like the Athenaeus. (ix. p. 370. ) Casaubon proposed to
earlier Ionians, a perpetual continuance of pure read llogeidavios instead of "Eurodos; but our
fundamental substances, to which the parts of the ignorance about Empodus is not sufficient to justify
world, which are tired of change, return and pre- such a conjecture.
(L. S. )
pare the formation of the sphere for the next period EMPOʻRIUS, a Latin rhetorician, author of
of the world. (H. Ritter in Wolfs Analect. ii. three short tracts entitled I. De Ethopocia ac Loco
p. 415, &c. , Gesch. der Philos. i. p. 555, &c. ; but | Communi Liber ; 2. Demonstrativae Materiae prae-
comp. Zeller, l. c. p. 191, &c. ) The sphere being ceptum ; 3. De Deliberativa Specie. He is believed
the embodiment of pure existence was with him to have flourished not earlier than the sixth cen-
also the embodiment or representative of the deity, tury, chiefly from the circumstance that he refers
either conceiving the deity as a collectivity, or in his illustrations to the regal power rather than to
mainly as the uniting power of love. (Fragm. vers. the imperial dignity, which he would scarcely have
70; comp. Aristot. de Generat. et Corr. ii
. 6, Me done had he lived before the revival of the kingly
taphys. B. 4, de Anim. i. 5. ) But as existence is title.
not to be confined to the sphere, but must rather Emporius was first edited by Beatus Rhenanus,
be at the foundation of the whole visible world, so along with some other authors upon rhetoric, Basil.
the deity also must be active in it. But Empedocles 4to. 1521 ; the pieces named above will all be found
was little able to determine the how of this divine in the “ Antiqui Rhetores Latini" of F. Pithoeus,
activity in its distinction from and connexion with 4to. , Paris, 1599, p. 278.
(W. R.
)
the activity of the moving powers : he, too, like EMPC'SA ("Eurovoa), a monstrous spectre,
the Eleatics (Xenophan. Fragm. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, ed. which was believed to derour human beings. It
Karsten), strove to purify and liberate the notion could assume different forms, and was sent out by
of the deity : “ not provided with limbs, He, a Hecate to frighten travellers. It was believed
holy, infinite spirit, passes through the world with usually to appear with one leg of brass and the
rapid thoughts,” is the sublime expression of Em- other of an ass. (Aristoph. Ran. 294, Eccles.
pedocles. (Fragm. vers. 359, &c. , comp. 317. ) | 1094. ) Whenever a traveller addressed the
Along with this, however, he speaks of the eternal monster with insulting words, it used to flee and
power of Necessity as an ancient decree of the gods, utter a shrill sound. (Philostr. Vit. Apoll. ii. 4. )
and it is not clear whether the necessary succession The Lamiae and Mormolyceia, who assumed the
of cause and effect, or an unconditional predestina- form of handsome women for the purpose of attract-
tion, is to be understood by it; or, lastly, whether ing young men, and then sucked their blood like
Empedocles did not rather leave the notion of vampyrs and ate their fiesh, were reckoned among
Necessity and its relation to the deity in that the Empusae. (Philostr. Vit. Apoll. iv. 25; Suid.
mysterious darkness in which we find it in the s. v. )
[L. S. )
works of most philosophers of antiquity.
E'MPYLUS, a rhetorician; the companion, as
We perceive the world of phaenomena or changes we are told by Plutarch, of Brutus, to whom he
through the medium of our senses, but not so its dedicated a short essay, not destitute of merit, on
eternal cause; and although Empedocles traced the death of Caesar. It is not stated to what
both sensuous perception and thought to one and country he belonged. “ Empylus the Rhodian”
7
## p. 15 (#31) ##############################################
PYLUS.
15
ENANTIOPHANES.
ENCELADUS.
original beings (Aristot
. de
i. 57; Fragm. 321, &a,
), still be clearly distin
igher state of development
plains of the small extent
nable through our lody
dvises us not to trust to
other part of our bods,
-hat kind each thing is
comp. 108, 356, &c. );
anking cognition to the
&c. , 41, &c. , 354, 302,
y no means justified in
like the Eleatics, con
sceptible through the
s phaenomena, to be a
of the divine sphere,
ich is arrived at only
vistencc. (H. Ritter
Sc. , Gesch, der Philos.
e Rheinisch. Museum,
p. 184, &c. )
eming Empedocles's
ds of sensuous per-
ence of things upon
the coincidence of
res, as well as the
his cosmologic and
eft to a history of
(CH. A. B. ]
Cherwise unknown
are mentioned by
zubon proposed to
ποδος; but our
fficient to justify
(L. S. ]
ician, author of
thopoeia ac Loco
Materiae prae
He is beliered
i the sixth cen-
that he refers
rather than to
I scarcely have
of the kingly
is mentioned in a passage of Quintilian, where the mation of the present text of the Basilica, appears
text is very doubtful, as an ortor referred to by from his being several times named in the text it-
Cicero, but no such name occurs in any extant self, as in iii. p. 258, where he cites Theophilus;
work of the latter. —(Plut. Brut. 2 ; Quintil. x. 6. ii
. p. 560, where he cites the Code of Justinian;
$ 4, and Spalding's note).
(W. R. ] i. 99, where he cites the Novells of Justinian.
E'NALUS ("Evalos). The Penthelides, the According to the Scholium on the Basilica (ii. p.
first settlers in Lesbos, had received an oracle from 548, ed. Heimbach), be seems to have written
Amphitrite commanding them to sacrifice a bull to notes upon the Digest. That he was alive after
Poseidon and a virgin to Amphitrite and the Nethe death of Justinian appears from Basil. iii. p.
reides, as soon as they should, on their journey to 230 (ed. lleimbach), where he cites a Novell of
Lesbos, come to the rock Mesogeion. The leaders of Justin. On the other hand, Assemanni thinks that
the colonists accordingly caused their daughters to lie wrote after the composition of the Basilica,
draw lots, the result of which was, that the daugh which, in the Scholium, Basil. i. p. 262, he appears
ter of Sminthcus or Phincus was to be sacrificed. to cite ; but it is very likely that here, as in many
When she was on the point of being thrown into other places, that which was originally a citation
the sea, her lover, Enalus, embraced her, and leaped from the Digest has been subsequently changed for
with her into the deep. But both were saved by convenience into a reference to the Basilica. In
dolphins. Once the sca all around Lesbos rose in Busil. iii. p. 440, he cites Gregorius Doxapater,
such high billows, that no one ventured to ap- whom Pohi (followed by Zachariae), on the sup-
proach it ; Enalus alone had the courage to do so, posed authority of Montfaucon, places in the first
and when he returned from the sea, he was fol- half of the 12th century; but we have shewn
lowed by polypi, the greatest of which was carry- [Doxapater] that there is no ground for identi-
ing a stone, which Enalus took from it, and dedi- fying Gregorius Doxapater with the Doxapater
cated in a temple. (Plut. Scpt. Sapient. Conviv. p. mentioned by Montfaucon.
163, c, de Sollert, animal. p. 984. d. ) (L. S. ] An eminent jurist of the time of Justinian is
ENANTIOʻPHANES. Cujacius, in his Pre- frequently cited in the Basilica, and in the Scholia
face to the 60th book of the Basilica, prefixed to on that work by the appellation of the Anonymous.
the 7th volume of Fabrot's edition of that work, This writer composed an Index or abridgment of
supposes Enantiophanes to be the assumed name the Novells of Justinian, and was the author of
of a Graeco-Roman jurist, who wrote nepl évautio- Paratitla (a comparison of parallel passages) in the
Qaywv, or concerning the explanation of apparent Digest. To this work the treatise on apparently
legal inconsistencies; and Suarez (Notit. Basil. discordant passages would form a natural sequel;
$ 35) says that Photius, in his Nomocanon, men- and Mortreuil (Histoire du Droit Byzantin, i. p.
tions having written such a work. Fabricius, in a 296) makes it probable that Enantiophanes and
note upon the work of Suarez (which is inserted the Anonymous were the same persons; for in
in the Bibliotheca Graeca), states that Balsamo, in Basil. vi. p. 251 Schol. , a passage is ascribed to
his Preface to the Nomocanon of Photius, refers to Enantiophanes, which, in Basil. vi. p. 260, Schol. ,
Enantiophanes. Assemanni, however, shews (Bill. is attributed to the Anonymous.
Jur. Orient. ii. 18, p. 389) that there is no reason Biener (Geschichte der Novellen Justinians, p.
for attributing a work nepi vartiopavwv to Pho- 56) threw out the conjecture, that the Anonymous
tius, that there is no passage in his Nomocanon was no other than Julianus, the author of the Latin
relating to such a work, and that the sentence Epitome of the Novells; and Zachariae (Anecdota,
in which Balsamo is supposed by Fabricius to refer p. 204–7) attempts to establish this conjecture.
to Enantiophanes has no such meaning. The Mortreuil seems disposed to identify the three.
Έναντιοφανών βιβλίον is cited in Basil. v. p. 726. In order to facilitate investigation, we subjoin a
Enantiophanes (Basil. vi. p. 250) cites his own list (formed from Reiz and Fabricius) of passages
book de Legatis et Mortis Causa Donationibus, and in the Basilica where the name of Enantiophanes
the Napaypaon, or annotation, of Enantiophanes is occurs.
cited in Basil. vii. p. 496. The period when the ju- Basil
. i. pp. 70, 99, 100, 109, 260, 408, 262,
rist lived who bears this name, has been a subject | 265, 266, ii. pp. 540, 500, 609, 610, 628, iii.
of much dispute. Reiz (ad Theophilum, pp. 1234, pp. 43, 170, 258, 318, 393, 394, 412, v. p. 726,
1236) thinks that Enantiophanes wrote before the vi. 250, 251, 260, vii. 496, 499, 565, 640, 641.
composition of the Basilica, and marks his name (Heimbach, de Basil. Orig. pp. 76-79. ) [J. T. G. )
with an asterisk as an ascertained contemporary of ENAREʻPHORUS ('Evapń popos), a son of
Justinian. In Basil. iii. p. 318 Enantiophanes Hippocoön, was a most passionate suitor of Helen,
calls Stephanus his master ; but this is by no when she was yet quite young. Tyndareus, there
means conclusive. Assemanni, misled by Papado fore, entrusted the maiden to the care of Theseus.
poli, thinks that the Stephanus here meant lived (Apollod. iii. 10. § 5; Plut. Thes. 31. ) Enare
under Alexius Comnenus, and was not the Stepha- phorus had a heroum at Sparta. (Paus. iii. 15.
nus who was one of the compilers of Justinian's $ 2. )
(L. S. )
Digest. The contemporary of Justinian, however, EVA'RETE. (AEOLUS, No. 1. ]
was undoubtedly the person intended; but Stepha- ENCE'LADUS ('Eykénados), a son of Tarta-
nus was one of those early Graeco-Roman jurists rus and Ge, and one of the hundred-armed giants
who, like Domninus, Patricius, and Cyrillus, are who made war upon the gods. (Hygin. Fub. Praef.
thought by Zachariae (Anecdota, p. viii. ) to have p. 1 ; Virg. Aen, iv.
the relations of mixture to numbers, and in a few to signify the air and Aïdoneus the earth, or
other points. (Karsten, p. 426, 33, 428, &c. , Aïdoneus the air and Hera the earth, although the
426; compare, howerer, Ed. Zeller, die Philosophie former is more probable than the latter. (Fragm.
der Griech. p. 169, &c. , Tübingen, 1844. ) With 55, &c. , 74, &c. ; comp. Brandis, l. c. p. 198. ) As,
the Eleatics he agreed in thinking that it was im- however, the elementary substances were simple,
possible to conceive anything arising out of nothing eternal, and unalterable (Karsten, p. 336, &c. ),
(Fragm. vers. 81, &c. , 119, &c. , 345, &c. ; comp. and as change or alteration was merely the con-
Parmenid. Fragin. , ed. Karsten, vers. 47, 50, 60, sequence of their mixture and separation, it was
&c. , 66, 68, 75), and it is not impossible that he also necessary to conceive them as motionless, and
may have borrowed from them also the distinction consequently to suppose the existence of moving
between knowledge obtained through the senses, powers- the necessary condition of mixture and
and knowledge obtained through reason. (Fragm. separation-as' distinct from the substances, and
49, &c. , 108; Parmenid. Fragm. 49, 108. ) Aris- equally original and eternal. But in this manner
totle with justice mentions him among the Ionic the dynamic explanations which the earlier physio
physiologists, and he places him in very close rela- logists, and especially Heracleitus, had given of
tion to the atomistic philosophers and to Anaxagoras. nature, was changed into a mechanical one. In
( Metaphys. i. 3, 4, 7, Phys. i. 4, de Generat. et order here again to avoid the supposition of an
Corr. i. 8, de Caclo, iïi. 7. ) All three, like the actnal coming into existence, Empedocles assumed
whole Ionic physiology, endeavoured to point out two opposite directions of the moving power, the
that which formed the basis of all changes, and to attractive and repulsive, the uniting and separat-
explain the latter by means of the former; but ing, that is, love and hate (Neixos, Añpıs, Kótos-
they could not, like Heracleitus, consider the | Φιλίη, Φιλότης, Αρμονίη, Στοργή), as equally
coming into existence and motion as the existence original and elementary (Fragm. 88, &c. , 138, dic. ,
of things, and rest and tranquillity as the non- 167, &c. ; Aristot. Metaphys. i. 4; Karsten, p.
existence, because they had derived from the 346, &c. ); whereas with Heracleitus they were
Eleatics the conviction that an existence could only different manifestations of one and the same
just as little pass over into a non-existence, as, rice fundamental power. But is it to be supposed that
versá, the latter into the former. In order, never- those two powers were from the beginning equally
theless, to establish the reality of changes, and active ? and is the state of mixture, i. e. the world
consequently the world and its phaenomena, aguinst and its phaenomena, an original one, or was it
the deductions of the Eleatics, they were obliged | preceded by a state in which the pure elementary
## p. 14 (#30) ##############################################
14
EMPEDOCLES.
EMPYLI'S.
substances and the two moving powers co-existed the same cause, his six original beings (Aristot. de
in a condition of repose and inertness ? Empe- Anim. iii. 3, Metaphys. i. 57; Fragm. 321, &c. ,
docles decided in favour of the latter supposition 315, &c. , 313, 310, &c. ), still he clearly distin-
(Fragm. vers. 88, &c. , 59, &c. ; comp. Plat. Soph. guished the latter as a higher state of development
p. 242; Aristot. de Cocl. i. 10, Phys. Auscult. i. 4, from the former ; he complains of the small extent
viii. 1), which agreed with ancient legends and of our knowledge obtainable through our body
traditions. This he probably did especially in or- | (Fragm. 32, &c. ), and advises us not to trust to
der to keep still more distinctly asunder existences our eyes or cars, or any other part of our body,
and things coming into existence; and he conceived but to see in thought of what kind each thing is
the original co-existence of the pure elementary by itself (Fragm. 49, &c. , comp. 108, 356, &c. );
substances and of the two powers in the form of a but he attributes the thinking cognition to the
sphere (opaipos ; comp. Karsten, p. 183, &c. ), deity alone. (Fragm. 32, &c. , 41, &c. , 354, 302,
which was to indicate its perfect independence and &c. ) We are, however, by no means justified in
self-sufficiency. As, however, these elementary supposing that Empedocles, like the Eleatics, con-
substances were to exist together in their purity, sidered that which is perceptible through the
without mixture and separation, it was necessary senses, i. e. the world and its phaenomena, to be a
to suppose that the uniting power of love predomi- mere phantom, and the unity of the divine sphere,
nated in the sphere (Aristot. Mctaphys. B. i. 4, that is, the world of love, which is arrived at only
1, 21, de Generat. c Corr. i. 1), and that the by thought, to be the sole existence. (11. Ritter
separating power of hate was in a state of limited in Woll's Anulect. I. p. 423, &c. , Gesch, der l'hilos.
activity, or, as Empedocles expresses it, guarded i. p. 5+1, &c. ; Brandis, in the Rheinisch. Museum,
the extreme ends of the sphere. (Fragm. vers. 58, iii. p. 124 ; comp. Zeller, l. c. p. 184, &c. )
comp. 107, &c. ) When the destructive hate rises Further investigations concerning Empedocles's
into activity, the bond which keeps the pure ele- derivation of the different kinds of sensuous per-
mentary substances together in the sphere is dis ception, and of the mutual influence of things upon
bolved (vers. 66, &c. ); they separate in order one another in general, from the coincidence of
partly to unite again by the power of love: and effluxes and corresponding pores, as well as the
this is the origin of our world of phaenomena. But examination of the fragments of his cosmologic and
that the elementary substances might not be com- physiologic doctrines, must be left to a history of
pletely absorbed by this world and lose their Greek philosophy.
[CH. A. B. )
purity, Empedocles assumed a periodical change of E’MPODUS ("Eurodos), an otherwise unknown
the sphere and formation of the world (Fragm. vers. writer, whose arournuoveúuata are mentioned by
88, &c. , 167, &c. ); but perhaps also, like the Athenaeus. (ix. p. 370. ) Casaubon proposed to
earlier Ionians, a perpetual continuance of pure read llogeidavios instead of "Eurodos; but our
fundamental substances, to which the parts of the ignorance about Empodus is not sufficient to justify
world, which are tired of change, return and pre- such a conjecture.
(L. S. )
pare the formation of the sphere for the next period EMPOʻRIUS, a Latin rhetorician, author of
of the world. (H. Ritter in Wolfs Analect. ii. three short tracts entitled I. De Ethopocia ac Loco
p. 415, &c. , Gesch. der Philos. i. p. 555, &c. ; but | Communi Liber ; 2. Demonstrativae Materiae prae-
comp. Zeller, l. c. p. 191, &c. ) The sphere being ceptum ; 3. De Deliberativa Specie. He is believed
the embodiment of pure existence was with him to have flourished not earlier than the sixth cen-
also the embodiment or representative of the deity, tury, chiefly from the circumstance that he refers
either conceiving the deity as a collectivity, or in his illustrations to the regal power rather than to
mainly as the uniting power of love. (Fragm. vers. the imperial dignity, which he would scarcely have
70; comp. Aristot. de Generat. et Corr. ii
. 6, Me done had he lived before the revival of the kingly
taphys. B. 4, de Anim. i. 5. ) But as existence is title.
not to be confined to the sphere, but must rather Emporius was first edited by Beatus Rhenanus,
be at the foundation of the whole visible world, so along with some other authors upon rhetoric, Basil.
the deity also must be active in it. But Empedocles 4to. 1521 ; the pieces named above will all be found
was little able to determine the how of this divine in the “ Antiqui Rhetores Latini" of F. Pithoeus,
activity in its distinction from and connexion with 4to. , Paris, 1599, p. 278.
(W. R.
)
the activity of the moving powers : he, too, like EMPC'SA ("Eurovoa), a monstrous spectre,
the Eleatics (Xenophan. Fragm. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, ed. which was believed to derour human beings. It
Karsten), strove to purify and liberate the notion could assume different forms, and was sent out by
of the deity : “ not provided with limbs, He, a Hecate to frighten travellers. It was believed
holy, infinite spirit, passes through the world with usually to appear with one leg of brass and the
rapid thoughts,” is the sublime expression of Em- other of an ass. (Aristoph. Ran. 294, Eccles.
pedocles. (Fragm. vers. 359, &c. , comp. 317. ) | 1094. ) Whenever a traveller addressed the
Along with this, however, he speaks of the eternal monster with insulting words, it used to flee and
power of Necessity as an ancient decree of the gods, utter a shrill sound. (Philostr. Vit. Apoll. ii. 4. )
and it is not clear whether the necessary succession The Lamiae and Mormolyceia, who assumed the
of cause and effect, or an unconditional predestina- form of handsome women for the purpose of attract-
tion, is to be understood by it; or, lastly, whether ing young men, and then sucked their blood like
Empedocles did not rather leave the notion of vampyrs and ate their fiesh, were reckoned among
Necessity and its relation to the deity in that the Empusae. (Philostr. Vit. Apoll. iv. 25; Suid.
mysterious darkness in which we find it in the s. v. )
[L. S. )
works of most philosophers of antiquity.
E'MPYLUS, a rhetorician; the companion, as
We perceive the world of phaenomena or changes we are told by Plutarch, of Brutus, to whom he
through the medium of our senses, but not so its dedicated a short essay, not destitute of merit, on
eternal cause; and although Empedocles traced the death of Caesar. It is not stated to what
both sensuous perception and thought to one and country he belonged. “ Empylus the Rhodian”
7
## p. 15 (#31) ##############################################
PYLUS.
15
ENANTIOPHANES.
ENCELADUS.
original beings (Aristot
. de
i. 57; Fragm. 321, &a,
), still be clearly distin
igher state of development
plains of the small extent
nable through our lody
dvises us not to trust to
other part of our bods,
-hat kind each thing is
comp. 108, 356, &c. );
anking cognition to the
&c. , 41, &c. , 354, 302,
y no means justified in
like the Eleatics, con
sceptible through the
s phaenomena, to be a
of the divine sphere,
ich is arrived at only
vistencc. (H. Ritter
Sc. , Gesch, der Philos.
e Rheinisch. Museum,
p. 184, &c. )
eming Empedocles's
ds of sensuous per-
ence of things upon
the coincidence of
res, as well as the
his cosmologic and
eft to a history of
(CH. A. B. ]
Cherwise unknown
are mentioned by
zubon proposed to
ποδος; but our
fficient to justify
(L. S. ]
ician, author of
thopoeia ac Loco
Materiae prae
He is beliered
i the sixth cen-
that he refers
rather than to
I scarcely have
of the kingly
is mentioned in a passage of Quintilian, where the mation of the present text of the Basilica, appears
text is very doubtful, as an ortor referred to by from his being several times named in the text it-
Cicero, but no such name occurs in any extant self, as in iii. p. 258, where he cites Theophilus;
work of the latter. —(Plut. Brut. 2 ; Quintil. x. 6. ii
. p. 560, where he cites the Code of Justinian;
$ 4, and Spalding's note).
(W. R. ] i. 99, where he cites the Novells of Justinian.
E'NALUS ("Evalos). The Penthelides, the According to the Scholium on the Basilica (ii. p.
first settlers in Lesbos, had received an oracle from 548, ed. Heimbach), be seems to have written
Amphitrite commanding them to sacrifice a bull to notes upon the Digest. That he was alive after
Poseidon and a virgin to Amphitrite and the Nethe death of Justinian appears from Basil. iii. p.
reides, as soon as they should, on their journey to 230 (ed. lleimbach), where he cites a Novell of
Lesbos, come to the rock Mesogeion. The leaders of Justin. On the other hand, Assemanni thinks that
the colonists accordingly caused their daughters to lie wrote after the composition of the Basilica,
draw lots, the result of which was, that the daugh which, in the Scholium, Basil. i. p. 262, he appears
ter of Sminthcus or Phincus was to be sacrificed. to cite ; but it is very likely that here, as in many
When she was on the point of being thrown into other places, that which was originally a citation
the sea, her lover, Enalus, embraced her, and leaped from the Digest has been subsequently changed for
with her into the deep. But both were saved by convenience into a reference to the Basilica. In
dolphins. Once the sca all around Lesbos rose in Busil. iii. p. 440, he cites Gregorius Doxapater,
such high billows, that no one ventured to ap- whom Pohi (followed by Zachariae), on the sup-
proach it ; Enalus alone had the courage to do so, posed authority of Montfaucon, places in the first
and when he returned from the sea, he was fol- half of the 12th century; but we have shewn
lowed by polypi, the greatest of which was carry- [Doxapater] that there is no ground for identi-
ing a stone, which Enalus took from it, and dedi- fying Gregorius Doxapater with the Doxapater
cated in a temple. (Plut. Scpt. Sapient. Conviv. p. mentioned by Montfaucon.
163, c, de Sollert, animal. p. 984. d. ) (L. S. ] An eminent jurist of the time of Justinian is
ENANTIOʻPHANES. Cujacius, in his Pre- frequently cited in the Basilica, and in the Scholia
face to the 60th book of the Basilica, prefixed to on that work by the appellation of the Anonymous.
the 7th volume of Fabrot's edition of that work, This writer composed an Index or abridgment of
supposes Enantiophanes to be the assumed name the Novells of Justinian, and was the author of
of a Graeco-Roman jurist, who wrote nepl évautio- Paratitla (a comparison of parallel passages) in the
Qaywv, or concerning the explanation of apparent Digest. To this work the treatise on apparently
legal inconsistencies; and Suarez (Notit. Basil. discordant passages would form a natural sequel;
$ 35) says that Photius, in his Nomocanon, men- and Mortreuil (Histoire du Droit Byzantin, i. p.
tions having written such a work. Fabricius, in a 296) makes it probable that Enantiophanes and
note upon the work of Suarez (which is inserted the Anonymous were the same persons; for in
in the Bibliotheca Graeca), states that Balsamo, in Basil. vi. p. 251 Schol. , a passage is ascribed to
his Preface to the Nomocanon of Photius, refers to Enantiophanes, which, in Basil. vi. p. 260, Schol. ,
Enantiophanes. Assemanni, however, shews (Bill. is attributed to the Anonymous.
Jur. Orient. ii. 18, p. 389) that there is no reason Biener (Geschichte der Novellen Justinians, p.
for attributing a work nepi vartiopavwv to Pho- 56) threw out the conjecture, that the Anonymous
tius, that there is no passage in his Nomocanon was no other than Julianus, the author of the Latin
relating to such a work, and that the sentence Epitome of the Novells; and Zachariae (Anecdota,
in which Balsamo is supposed by Fabricius to refer p. 204–7) attempts to establish this conjecture.
to Enantiophanes has no such meaning. The Mortreuil seems disposed to identify the three.
Έναντιοφανών βιβλίον is cited in Basil. v. p. 726. In order to facilitate investigation, we subjoin a
Enantiophanes (Basil. vi. p. 250) cites his own list (formed from Reiz and Fabricius) of passages
book de Legatis et Mortis Causa Donationibus, and in the Basilica where the name of Enantiophanes
the Napaypaon, or annotation, of Enantiophanes is occurs.
cited in Basil. vii. p. 496. The period when the ju- Basil
. i. pp. 70, 99, 100, 109, 260, 408, 262,
rist lived who bears this name, has been a subject | 265, 266, ii. pp. 540, 500, 609, 610, 628, iii.
of much dispute. Reiz (ad Theophilum, pp. 1234, pp. 43, 170, 258, 318, 393, 394, 412, v. p. 726,
1236) thinks that Enantiophanes wrote before the vi. 250, 251, 260, vii. 496, 499, 565, 640, 641.
composition of the Basilica, and marks his name (Heimbach, de Basil. Orig. pp. 76-79. ) [J. T. G. )
with an asterisk as an ascertained contemporary of ENAREʻPHORUS ('Evapń popos), a son of
Justinian. In Basil. iii. p. 318 Enantiophanes Hippocoön, was a most passionate suitor of Helen,
calls Stephanus his master ; but this is by no when she was yet quite young. Tyndareus, there
means conclusive. Assemanni, misled by Papado fore, entrusted the maiden to the care of Theseus.
poli, thinks that the Stephanus here meant lived (Apollod. iii. 10. § 5; Plut. Thes. 31. ) Enare
under Alexius Comnenus, and was not the Stepha- phorus had a heroum at Sparta. (Paus. iii. 15.
nus who was one of the compilers of Justinian's $ 2. )
(L. S. )
Digest. The contemporary of Justinian, however, EVA'RETE. (AEOLUS, No. 1. ]
was undoubtedly the person intended; but Stepha- ENCE'LADUS ('Eykénados), a son of Tarta-
nus was one of those early Graeco-Roman jurists rus and Ge, and one of the hundred-armed giants
who, like Domninus, Patricius, and Cyrillus, are who made war upon the gods. (Hygin. Fub. Praef.
thought by Zachariae (Anecdota, p. viii. ) to have p. 1 ; Virg. Aen, iv.
