Mátw
Plaqopws
eis ap.
William Smith - 1844 - Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities - c
125, Justini Martyris Scripta Varia),
Gibbon (Decline and Full, c. 53, 60), more favour- sometimes comprehends a notice of several different
able, has two separate, but brief and unsatisfactory, works written in one codex. The writers ex-
notices of the patriarch.
amined are of all classes: the greater number,
The published works of Photius are the follow- however, are theologians, writers of ecclesiastical
ing:-1. Mup66. 620v B:6A100kn, Myriobiblion history, and of the biography of eminent church-
seu Bibliotheca. This is the most important and men ; but several are secular historians, philosophers,
valuable of the works of Photius. It may be de- and orators, heathen or Christian, of remote or re-
scribed as an extensive review of ancient Greek cent times, lexicographers, and medical writers; only
literature by a scholar of immense erudition and one or two are poets, and those on religious subjects,
sound judgment. It is an extraordinary monu- and there are also one or two writers of romances or
ment of literary energy, for it was written while love tales. There is no formal classification of these
the author was engaged in his embassy to Assyria, various writers ; though a series of writers or writings
at the request of Photius' brother Tarasius, who of the same class frequently occurs, e. g. the Acta of
was much grieved at the separation, and desired various councils (codd. 15—20); the writers on
an account of the books whieh Photius had read the Resurrection (codd. 21-23); and the secular
in his absence. It thus conveys a pleasing im- historians of the Byzantine empire (codd. 62—67).
pression, not only of the literary acquirements and in fact the works appear to be arranged in the
extraordinary industry, but of the fraternal affection order in which they were read. The notices of
of the writer. It opens with a prefatory address the writers vary much in length: those in the
to Tarasius, recapitulating the circumstances in earlier part are very briefly noticed, the later on
which it was composed, and stating that it con- more fully ; their recent perusal apparently en-
tained a notice of two hundred and seventy-nine abling the writer to give a fuller account of them ;
volumes. The extant copies contain a notice of so that this circumstance confirms our observation
two hundred and eighty: the discrepancy, which as to the arrangement of the work. Several valu-
is of little moment, may have originated either in able works, now lost, are known to us chiefly by
the mistake of Photius himself, or in some alter- the analyses or extracts which Photius has given
ation of the divisions by some transcriber. It has of them; among them are the Persica and Indica
been doubted wbether we have the work entire. of Ctesias (Ctesias] in cod. 72; the De Rebus
An extant analysis, by Photius, of the Historia post Alexandrum Magnum gestis, and the Parthica
Ecclesiastica of Philostorgius [PHILOSTORGIUS), and the Bithynica of Arrian [ARRIANUS, No. 4],
by which alone some knowledge of the contents of in codd. 58, 92, and 93; the Historiae of Olym-
that important work has been preserved to us, is piodorus (OLYMPIODORUS, No. 3], in cod. 80; the
80 much fuller than the brief analysis of that work Narrationes of Conon (Conon, No. 1], in cod. 186 ;
contained in the present text of the Bibliotheca, as the Nova Historia of Ptolemy Hephaestion [Pro-
to lead to the supposition that the latter is imper- LEMAEUS), in cod. 190; the De Heracleae Pon-
fect. “ It is to be lamented," said Valesius (De ticae Rebus of Memnon (MEMNON), in cod. 224 ;
Critica, i. 29), “ that many such abridgments and the Vita Isidori (ISIDORUS, No. 5, of Gaza) by
collections of extracts are now lost. If these were Damascius (DAMASCIUS), in cod. 242 ; the lost
extant in the state in which they were completed Declamationes of Himerius (HIMERIUS, No. 1),
by Photius, we should grieve less at the loss of so in cod. 243 ;. the lost books of the Bibliotheca of
many ancient writers. ” But Leiche has shown Diodorus Siculus (D10Dorus, No. 12), in cod. 244;
(Diatribe in Phot. Biblioth. ) that we have no just the De Erythraeo (s. Rubro) Mari of Agatharchides
reason for suspecting that the Bibliotheca is imper- (AGATHARCHIDES), in cod. 250 ; the anonymous
fect ; and that the fuller analysis of Philostorgius Vita Pauli CPolitani and Vita Athanasii
, in codd.
probably never formed part of it; but was made at 257 and 258 ; the lost Orationes, genuine or spu-
a later period. A hasty and supercilious writer in rious, of Antiphon (ANTIPHON, No. 1], Isocrates
the Elinburgh Review (vol. xxi. p. 329, &c. ), whose (Isocrates, No. 1], Lysias (Lysias), Isaeus
harsh and unjust censure of Photius we have (Isaeus, No. 1), Demosthenes [DEMOSTHENES),
already noticed, affirms on the other hand that the Hyperides (HYPERIDES), Deinarchus [Deinar-
work has been swelled out to its present size by chus, No. 1), and Lycurgus [LYCURGUS, p. 858),
spurious additions. “ Our younger readers, how- in codd. 259–268; and of the Chrestomatheia of
ever, who take the Myriobiblon in hand, are not to Helladius of Antinoopolis [Helladius, No. 2) in
suppose that the book which at present goes under Cod. 279; besides several theological and ecclesias-
that name, is really the production of Photius ; we tical and some medical works. The above enumera-
believe that not more than half of it can be safely tion will suffice to show the inestimable value of the
attributed to that learned and turbulent bishop; | Billiotheca of Photius, especially when we reflect
5
## p. 352 (#368) ############################################
352
PHOTIUS.
PIIOTIUS.
PEST
innan man
FRAUEN
M. . . . .
issa on Wauan
-rr' ܕ݁ܪ̈ mr'gs'a*
ܝܩܝܬ? £ £ ;H r
I ina u Lonas Åsa
ܕ݁ܠܳܐ ܪܬ݂ܩܪܶ
D Entina
e Erromata
fres dann Å
era de Cincin Pa
را
su una
;**
೫. ಜಾ * *
how much the value of his notices is enhanced by 4. Περί των ? οικουμενικών συνόδων, De Sy».
the soundness of his judgment. The first edition tem Conciliis. O cumenicis. This piece subjoined,
of the Bibliothcca was published by David Hoesche-with a Latin version, to the Nomocaron in the
lius, under the title of B. 611005 mm Toû swtlou, Paris editions of 1615 and 1661, and often pulu
Librorum quos legit Photius Putriarcha Eacerpta et lished elsewhere, is really part of one of the Epis
Censurue, fol. Augsburg, 1601. Some of the Epistolae of Photius, and is noticed in our account of
tolue of Photius were subjoined. The text of the them.
Bibliothecu was formed on a collation of four MSS. , 5. 'ETIOTOAal, Epistolae. There are extant a
and was accompanied with notes by the editor; considerable number of the letters of Photius. The
but there was no Latin version. A Latin version MSS. containing them are enumerated by Fabri-
and scholia, by Andreas Schottus of Antwerp, were cius, Bill. Graec. vol. xi. p. 1). It is much to be
published, fol. Augsburg, 1606; but the version is regretted that no complete collection of them has
inaccurate, and has been severely criticised. It been published. David Hoeschelius subjoined to
was however reprinted, with the Greek text, under his edition of the Bibliotheca (fol. Augsburg, 1601)
the title of Φωτίου Μυριόβιβλον ή Βιβλιοθήκη, Pliotis | mentioned above, thirty-five letters selected from a
Myriobiblon sive Bibliotheca, fol. Geneva, 1612, and MS. collection which had belonged to Maximus
fol. Rouen, 1653. This last edition is a very Margunius, bishop of Cerigo, who lived about the
splendid one, but inconvenient from its size. An end of the sixteenth century. One consolatory
edition, with a revised text, formed on a collation letter to the nun Eusebia on her sister's death,
of four MSS. (whether any of them were the same was published by Conrad Rittershausius, with a
as those employed by Hoeschelius is not men- Latin version, with some other pieces, 8vo. Nürn-
tioned) was published by Immanuel Bekker, 2 thin berg, 1601. But the largest collection is that
vols. 4to. Berlin, 1824—1825: it is convenient prepared with a Latin version and notes by
from its size and the copiousness of its index, but Richard Mountagu (Latinized Montacutius),
has neither version nor notes.
bishop of Norwich, and published after his death,
2. 'ETIT OUT) ÉK TWY KRANOICOTIKWv iotopov fol. London, 1651. The Greek text was from a
01100Topylov dno owoñis swtiou natpiápxov, MS. in the Bodleian library. The collection com-
Compendium Historive Ecclesiasticae Philostorgii prehends two hundred and forty-eight letters trans-
quod dictavit Photius patriarcha. Cave regards lated by the bishop, and a supplement of five
this as a fragment of another work similar to the letters brought from the East by Christianus Ra-
Bibliotheca ; but his conjecture rests on no solid vius, of which also a Latin version by another
foundation. The Compendium is of great import person is given. The first letter in Mountagu's
ance as preserving to us, though very imperfectly, collection is addressed to Michael, prince of the
an Arian statement of the ecclesiastical transactions Bulgarians, on the question Ti doti epyov åp-
of the busy period of the Arian controversy in the Xovtos, De Officio Principis : it is very long, and
fourth century. It was first published, with a contains the account of the seven general councils
Latin version and copious notes, by Jacobus Gotho- already mentioned (No. 4), as subjoined to the
fredus (Godefroi), 4to, Geneva, 1643 ; and was re- printed editions of the Nomocanon. This letter to
printed with the other ancient Greek ecclesiastical Prince Michael was translated into French verse by
historians by Henricus Valesius (Henri Valois), Bernard, a Theatin monk, dedicated to Louis XV.
folio, Paris, 1673, and by Reading, fol. Cambridge, and published, 4to. Paris, 1718. The second let-
1720.
ter, also of considerable length, is an encyclical
3. Nouokaváv or Nouokávovoy, Nomocanon, s. letter on various disputed topics, especially on that
Nomocanonon, s. Nomocanonus, s. Canonum Eccle- of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the leading
siasticorum et Legum Imperialium de Ecclesiastica theological question in dispute between the Eastern
Disciplina Conciliatio s. Harmonia. This work, and Western Churches. Mountagu's version has
which bears ample testimony to the extraordinary been severely criticized by Combéfis. (Fabric.
legal attainments of its author, is arranged under Bill. Graec. vol. i. p. 701 note f f f. ) Several im-
fourteen titlo, Tituli, and was prefixed to a Lúv- portant letters are not included in the collection,
Tayua TW Kavóvwv, Canonum Syntagma, or col-especially two to Pope Nicolaus I. , and one to the
lection of the Canones of the Apostles and of the archbishop or patriarch of Aquileia, on the proces-
ecclesiastical councils recognised by the Greek sion of the Holy Spirit, of all which Baronius had
Church, compiled by Photius ; from which circum- given a Latin version in his Annales Ecclesiastici
stance it is sometimes called Iporávwv, Procanon. (ad ann. 859, lxi. &c. , 861, xxxiv. &c. , and 883,
It has been repeatedly published, with the com- v. &c. ). Fragments of the Greek text of the let-
mentaries of Theodore Balsamon, who strongly ters to Pope Nicolaus were cited by Allatius in
recommended it, in preference to similar works of different parts of his works; the original of the
an earlier date : it appeared in the Latin version of letter to the archbishop of Aquileia was published
Gentianus Hervetus, fol. Paris, 1561, and in another in the Auctarium Novissimum of Gombétis, pars i.
Latin version of Henricus Agylaeus, fol. Basel. 1561, p. 527, &c. (fol. Paris, 1672), with a new Latin
and in the original Greek text with the version of version and notes by the editor ; and the original
Agylaeus, edited by Christophorus Justellus, 4to. of all the three letters, together with a previously
Paris, 1615. It was reprinted, with the version of unpublished letter, Ad Oeconomum Ecclesiae Ar-
Agylaeus, in the Billiotheca Juris Canonici, pub- tiochiae, and the encyclical letter on the procession
lished by Guillelmus Voellus and Henricus Juse of the Holy Spirit (included in Mountagu's collec-
tellus, vol. ii. p. 785, &c. fol. Paris, 1661. The tion), the Acta of the eighth oecumenical council
Nomocanon of Photius was epitomised in the kind (that held in 879, at which the second appointment
of verses called politici (see PhilIPPUS, No. 27, of Photius to the patriarchate was ratified), and some
note] by Michael Psellus, whose work was pub- other pieces, with notes by Dositheus, patriarch of
lished, with one or two other of his pieces, by Jerusalem, were published by Anthimus “ Episcopus
Franciscus Bosquetus, 8vo. Paris, 1632.
Rennicus," i. e. bishop of Rimnik, in Walachia, in
Ver
berze Beine, F
Tema gama l
lena Los da
den
Amedon o P
Cos Set
e.
2
## p. 353 (#369) ############################################
PHOTIUS.
353
PHOTIUS.
liis Tópos xapas. Fol. Rimnik, 1705. A letter, p. 329, &c. No. 42, July 1813, and Cluss. Journ.
Ad Theophanern Monachun, i. e. to Theophanes 1. c. )
Cerameus, with a Latin version by Sirmond, was 7 'Aupinbxia, Amphilochia. This work, which
published by the Jesuit Franciscus Scorsus, in his Allatius, not a friendly censor, declared to be “a
Prooemium Secundum, $ 3, to the Ilomiliue of Ce work filled with vast and varied learning, and very
rameus, fol. Paris, 1644 (CERAMEUS, THEOPHA- needful for theologians and expositors of Scripture,
NES), and another letter, Slauracio Spatharo-cundi- is in the forn of answers to certain questions, and
dato, Pruefecto insulae Cypri, was included in the is addressed 10 Amphilochus, archbishop of Cyzicus.
Ecclesiae Graecae Monumenta of Cotelerius, vol. ii. The title is thus given in full by Montfaucon
p. 104, together with a short piece, Nepi Toù uni (Biblioth. Corslin. fol. Paris, 1715, p. 326): Td
δείν προς τα εν τω βίω λυπηρά επιστρέφεσθαι, Quod | 'Αμφιλόχια ή λόγων ιερών και ζητημάτων ιερολυ-
που οφorteat ad praesentis vitae molestius attendere, (γίαι προς 'Αμφιλόχιον τον όσιώτατον μητροπολί-
which, though not bearing the form of a letter την Κυζίκου εν τω καιρώ των πειρασμών, ζητη.
(perhaps it is a fragment of one), is in the MS.
Mátw Plaqopws eis ap. Quòv tplakodiw OUVTE-
classed with the Epistolue. A Latin version, from vórtwv érinvoin altnoćuevov, Amphilochia s. Scr.
the Armenian, of some fragments of an Epistola mones et Quaestioncs Sucrac ad Amphilochium Me-
Pholü ad Zachariam Armeniae Patriarcham, in tropolitam Cyzicenum in Tempore Tentutionum ;
support of the doctrine of the Council of Chalcedon, Quuestioncs Variae sunt Numero trecentuc. The
is given in the Conciliatio Ecclesiae Armeniue cum auswers are said in one MS. (apud Fabric. Bill.
Romana of Galanus, fol. Rom. 1650. To all these Graec. vol. xi. p. 26) to be two hundred and ninety-
we may add the Epistola Turasio Fratri, usually seven in number ; but Montfaucon (l. c. ) published
subjoined to the Bibliotheca. The Epistola ad Za- an index of three hundred and eight, and a Vatican
chariam, just mentioned, and another letter, Ad MS. , according to Mai (Script. Pet. Nova Collectio,
Principem Armenium Asutium, are extant in MS. vol. i. proleg. p. xxxix. ), contains three hundred
in an Armenian version. (Comp. Mai, Scriptor. and thirteen. Of these more than two hundred
Veterum Nov. Collectio. Proleg. in vol. i. 4to. Rom. and twenty have been published, but in various
1825. )
fragmentary portions (Mai, l. c. ). The first portion
6. Mézewy ouvaywith s. AeEskóv, Lexicon. Mar- which appeared in print was in the Lectiones Anti-
quardus Gudius of Hamburg had an anonymous quae of Canisius (4to. Ingolstadt, 1604, &c. vol. v.
MS. lexicon, which he believed and asserted to be p. 188, &c. ), who gave à Latin version by Fran-
that of Photius ; but the correctness of his opinion ciscus Turrianus, of six of the Quaestiones ; but
was first doubted by some, and is now given up the work to which they belonged was not men-
by most scholars; and another lexicon, much tioned. In the subsequent edition of the Lectioncs
shorter, and which is in the MSS. ascribed to Pho- by Basnage (4to. Amsterdam, 1725, vol. ii. pt. ii.
tius, is now admitted to be the genuine work of p. 420, &c. ), the Greek text of five of the six was
that eminent man. A writer in the Classical Journal added (the original of the sixth seems never to
(No. 54. p. 358) has indeed expressed his conviction have been discovered), as well as the Greek text of a
that, “ in the composition of it the patriarch never seventh Quaestio, “De Christi Voluntatibus Gnomicis,"
stirred a finger," and that it received his name of which a Latin version by Turrianus had been
merely from having been in his possession ; but published in the Auctarium Antiquarum Canisiä
we are not aware that his opinion has found any Lectionum of the Jesuit Petrus Stewartius, 4to. In-
supporters. Of this Lexicon there exist several golstadt, 1616 ; also without notice that it was from
MSS. , but that known as the Codex Galeanus, the Amphilochia. Further additions were made
because given by Thomas Gale to the library of by Combéfis, in his SS. Patrum Amphilochii, &c.
Trinity College, Cambridge, is considered to be Opera, 2 vols. fol. Paris, 1644 (by a strange error
the archetype from which the others have been he ascribed the work not to Photius, but to Am-
transcribed; but this MS. is itself very imperfect, philochius of Iconium, a much older writer, from
containing in fact not much more than half the whose works he supposed Photius had made a
original work. Nearly the whole of the Lexicon, selection), and in his Novum Auctarium, 2 vols.
known as the Lexicon Sangermanense, a portion of fol. Paris, 1648 ; by Montfaucon, in his Bibliotheca
which was published in the Anecdota Graeca of Coisliniana, fol. Paris, 171. 5 ; and by Jo. Justus
Immanuel Bekker, vol. i. p. 319, &c. 8vo. Berlin, Spier, in Wittenbergischen Anmerkungen ueber theo-
1814, appears to have been incorporated in the logische, philosophische, historische, philologische, und
Lexicon of Photius, of which, when entire, it is kritische Materien, part i. 8vo. Wittenberg, 1738
estimated to have formed a third part (Praefut. to (Harles, Introd. år Historiam Linguae Graec. Supe
Porson's edition). The Lexicon of Photius was plem. vol. ii. p. 47). But the principal addition
first published, from Continental MSS. , by Gotho was made by Jo. Chr. Wolff, of forty-six Quacs-
fredus Hermannus, 4to Leipzig, 1808. It formed tiones, published, with a Latin version, in his Curas
the third volume of a set, of which the two first Philologicae, vol. v. ad fin. 4to. Hamb. 1735: these
volumes contained the Lexicon ascribed to Joannes were reprinted in the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland,
Zonaras (ZONARAS, JOANNES). The publication vol. xiii. fol. Venice, 1779. A further portion of
of the Lexicon was followed by that of a Libellus eighteen Quaestiones, under the title 'Ex Tây bwrlou
Animadversionum ad Photii Lexicon, 4to. Leipzig, 'Appiaoxlwv Tiva, Ex Photii Amphilocheis quaedam,
1810, and Curae Novissimae sive Appendix Notarum was published, with a Latin version, by Angelus
et Emendationum in Photii Lericon, 4to. Leipzig, Antonius Schottus, 4to. Naples, 1817 ; and some
1812, both by Jo. Frid. Schleusner. But the edi- further portions, one of twenty Quaestiones, with a
tion of Hermann having failed to satisfy the wants Latin version by Mai, in his Scriptorum Veterum
of the learned, an edition from a transcript of the Nova Collectio, vol. i. pp. 193, &c. , and another of a
Codex Galeanus, made by Porson, was published bundred and thirty Quaestiones, in vol. ix. p. 1,
after the death of that eminent scholar, 4to. and &c. As many of the Quaestiones were mere extracts
Svo. London, 1822. (Comp. Edinb. Rev. vol. xxi. from the Epistolae and other published works of
:
VOL. DI,
A4
## p. 354 (#370) ############################################
354
PHOTIUS.
PHOTIUS.
;
Photius, Mai considers that with these and with the | Joannes Veccus (Veccus), published in the Graecia
portions published by him, the whole of the Amphi- Orthodora of Allatius, vol. i. p. 154, &c. 4to.
lochia has now been published. He thinks (Scrip Rome, 1652. It is apparently the work entitled
tor. Vet. Nova Collect. vol. i. proleg. p. xl. ) that the by Crve Disputatio Compendiaria de Processione
patriarch, toward the close of his life, compiled the Spiritus Sancti a solo Patre.
work from his own letters, homilies, commentaries, 10. 'Opiniai, Homiliae. Several of these have
&c. , and addressed it to his friend Amphilochius, as been published :— 1. "Exopaois mais év Tuis Bari.
a mark of respect, and not because the questions | λείοις νέας εκκλησίας της υπεραγίας Θεοτόκου υπό
which were solved had actually been proposed to Βασιλείου του Μακεδόνος οικοδομηθείσης, Descriptio
him by that prelate ; and he thus accounts for the Novae Santissimae Dei Genitricis Ecclesiae, in Pa-
identity of many passages with those in the author's latio a Basilio Macedone erstructae ; a discourse
other works.
delivered on the day of the dedication of the church
8. Adversus Manichaeos 6. Paulicianos Libri described. It was first printed by Lambecius, in
Quatuor. No Greek title of the whole work occurs, his notes to the work of Georgius Codinus, De Ori-
but the four books are respectively thus described: yinibus CPolitanis, p. 187, fol. Paris, 1655, and is
1. Aitymous hepà rñis Mavixaiwv åvabaaothoews, contained, with a Latin version, in the Bonn re-
Narratio de Manichucis recens repullulantibus. 2. print of Codinus, 8vo. 1839. It is also contained
'Atoplai Kal dúoets TWY Mavixalwv, Dubia et Solu- in the Originum CPolitanarum Manipulus of Com-
tiones Manichaeorum. 3. Toù puriou nóyos r, béfis, 4to. Paris, 1664, p. 296, with a Latin version
Photii Sermo III. 4. Kard tas tūv Mavixalwv and notes ; and in the Imperium Orientale of Ban-
ápri uolls Târns, 'Apreviw To dywtátu uovaxa durius, pars iii. p. 117, fol. Paris, 1711. 2. Eis
πρεσβυτέρω και ηγουμένη των ιερών, Contra re- το γενέσιον της υπεραγίας Θεοτόκου, Homilia τη
pullulantein Manichaeorum Errorem ad Arsenium Sanctissimae Dei Genitricis Natalem Diem, pub-
Monachum Sanctissimum Presbyterum et Praefectum lished by Combéfis, in his Auctarium Novum, vol.
Sacrorum. The title of the second book is con- i. col. 1583, fol. Paris, 1648, and in a Latin version,
sidered by Wolff to apply to the second, third, and in his Bibliotheca Patrum concionatoria, fol. Paris,
fourth books, which formed the argumentative part of 1662, &c. Both text and version are reprinted in
the work, and to which the first book formed an his- the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland. 3. In Sepul-
torical introduction. The second book is intended turam Domini, a fragment, probably from this, is
to show that the same God who created spiritual given by Mai (Scriptor. Vet. Nora Collect. proleg.
intelligences, also created the bodies with which in vol. i. p. xli). 4. nepl Toû Men deiv apos tà
they are united, and the material world generally ; év tQ Siu dumnpa émotpeperiai, Quod non oporteat
the third vindicates the divine original of the Old ad praesentis Vitae Molestias attendere. This
Testament ; and the fourth reiterates some points piece, which is perhaps not a homily, but the
of the second and third books, and answers the fragment of a letter, was published in the Ecclesiae
objections of the Paulicians.
Gibbon (Decline and Full, c. 53, 60), more favour- sometimes comprehends a notice of several different
able, has two separate, but brief and unsatisfactory, works written in one codex. The writers ex-
notices of the patriarch.
amined are of all classes: the greater number,
The published works of Photius are the follow- however, are theologians, writers of ecclesiastical
ing:-1. Mup66. 620v B:6A100kn, Myriobiblion history, and of the biography of eminent church-
seu Bibliotheca. This is the most important and men ; but several are secular historians, philosophers,
valuable of the works of Photius. It may be de- and orators, heathen or Christian, of remote or re-
scribed as an extensive review of ancient Greek cent times, lexicographers, and medical writers; only
literature by a scholar of immense erudition and one or two are poets, and those on religious subjects,
sound judgment. It is an extraordinary monu- and there are also one or two writers of romances or
ment of literary energy, for it was written while love tales. There is no formal classification of these
the author was engaged in his embassy to Assyria, various writers ; though a series of writers or writings
at the request of Photius' brother Tarasius, who of the same class frequently occurs, e. g. the Acta of
was much grieved at the separation, and desired various councils (codd. 15—20); the writers on
an account of the books whieh Photius had read the Resurrection (codd. 21-23); and the secular
in his absence. It thus conveys a pleasing im- historians of the Byzantine empire (codd. 62—67).
pression, not only of the literary acquirements and in fact the works appear to be arranged in the
extraordinary industry, but of the fraternal affection order in which they were read. The notices of
of the writer. It opens with a prefatory address the writers vary much in length: those in the
to Tarasius, recapitulating the circumstances in earlier part are very briefly noticed, the later on
which it was composed, and stating that it con- more fully ; their recent perusal apparently en-
tained a notice of two hundred and seventy-nine abling the writer to give a fuller account of them ;
volumes. The extant copies contain a notice of so that this circumstance confirms our observation
two hundred and eighty: the discrepancy, which as to the arrangement of the work. Several valu-
is of little moment, may have originated either in able works, now lost, are known to us chiefly by
the mistake of Photius himself, or in some alter- the analyses or extracts which Photius has given
ation of the divisions by some transcriber. It has of them; among them are the Persica and Indica
been doubted wbether we have the work entire. of Ctesias (Ctesias] in cod. 72; the De Rebus
An extant analysis, by Photius, of the Historia post Alexandrum Magnum gestis, and the Parthica
Ecclesiastica of Philostorgius [PHILOSTORGIUS), and the Bithynica of Arrian [ARRIANUS, No. 4],
by which alone some knowledge of the contents of in codd. 58, 92, and 93; the Historiae of Olym-
that important work has been preserved to us, is piodorus (OLYMPIODORUS, No. 3], in cod. 80; the
80 much fuller than the brief analysis of that work Narrationes of Conon (Conon, No. 1], in cod. 186 ;
contained in the present text of the Bibliotheca, as the Nova Historia of Ptolemy Hephaestion [Pro-
to lead to the supposition that the latter is imper- LEMAEUS), in cod. 190; the De Heracleae Pon-
fect. “ It is to be lamented," said Valesius (De ticae Rebus of Memnon (MEMNON), in cod. 224 ;
Critica, i. 29), “ that many such abridgments and the Vita Isidori (ISIDORUS, No. 5, of Gaza) by
collections of extracts are now lost. If these were Damascius (DAMASCIUS), in cod. 242 ; the lost
extant in the state in which they were completed Declamationes of Himerius (HIMERIUS, No. 1),
by Photius, we should grieve less at the loss of so in cod. 243 ;. the lost books of the Bibliotheca of
many ancient writers. ” But Leiche has shown Diodorus Siculus (D10Dorus, No. 12), in cod. 244;
(Diatribe in Phot. Biblioth. ) that we have no just the De Erythraeo (s. Rubro) Mari of Agatharchides
reason for suspecting that the Bibliotheca is imper- (AGATHARCHIDES), in cod. 250 ; the anonymous
fect ; and that the fuller analysis of Philostorgius Vita Pauli CPolitani and Vita Athanasii
, in codd.
probably never formed part of it; but was made at 257 and 258 ; the lost Orationes, genuine or spu-
a later period. A hasty and supercilious writer in rious, of Antiphon (ANTIPHON, No. 1], Isocrates
the Elinburgh Review (vol. xxi. p. 329, &c. ), whose (Isocrates, No. 1], Lysias (Lysias), Isaeus
harsh and unjust censure of Photius we have (Isaeus, No. 1), Demosthenes [DEMOSTHENES),
already noticed, affirms on the other hand that the Hyperides (HYPERIDES), Deinarchus [Deinar-
work has been swelled out to its present size by chus, No. 1), and Lycurgus [LYCURGUS, p. 858),
spurious additions. “ Our younger readers, how- in codd. 259–268; and of the Chrestomatheia of
ever, who take the Myriobiblon in hand, are not to Helladius of Antinoopolis [Helladius, No. 2) in
suppose that the book which at present goes under Cod. 279; besides several theological and ecclesias-
that name, is really the production of Photius ; we tical and some medical works. The above enumera-
believe that not more than half of it can be safely tion will suffice to show the inestimable value of the
attributed to that learned and turbulent bishop; | Billiotheca of Photius, especially when we reflect
5
## p. 352 (#368) ############################################
352
PHOTIUS.
PIIOTIUS.
PEST
innan man
FRAUEN
M. . . . .
issa on Wauan
-rr' ܕ݁ܪ̈ mr'gs'a*
ܝܩܝܬ? £ £ ;H r
I ina u Lonas Åsa
ܕ݁ܠܳܐ ܪܬ݂ܩܪܶ
D Entina
e Erromata
fres dann Å
era de Cincin Pa
را
su una
;**
೫. ಜಾ * *
how much the value of his notices is enhanced by 4. Περί των ? οικουμενικών συνόδων, De Sy».
the soundness of his judgment. The first edition tem Conciliis. O cumenicis. This piece subjoined,
of the Bibliothcca was published by David Hoesche-with a Latin version, to the Nomocaron in the
lius, under the title of B. 611005 mm Toû swtlou, Paris editions of 1615 and 1661, and often pulu
Librorum quos legit Photius Putriarcha Eacerpta et lished elsewhere, is really part of one of the Epis
Censurue, fol. Augsburg, 1601. Some of the Epistolae of Photius, and is noticed in our account of
tolue of Photius were subjoined. The text of the them.
Bibliothecu was formed on a collation of four MSS. , 5. 'ETIOTOAal, Epistolae. There are extant a
and was accompanied with notes by the editor; considerable number of the letters of Photius. The
but there was no Latin version. A Latin version MSS. containing them are enumerated by Fabri-
and scholia, by Andreas Schottus of Antwerp, were cius, Bill. Graec. vol. xi. p. 1). It is much to be
published, fol. Augsburg, 1606; but the version is regretted that no complete collection of them has
inaccurate, and has been severely criticised. It been published. David Hoeschelius subjoined to
was however reprinted, with the Greek text, under his edition of the Bibliotheca (fol. Augsburg, 1601)
the title of Φωτίου Μυριόβιβλον ή Βιβλιοθήκη, Pliotis | mentioned above, thirty-five letters selected from a
Myriobiblon sive Bibliotheca, fol. Geneva, 1612, and MS. collection which had belonged to Maximus
fol. Rouen, 1653. This last edition is a very Margunius, bishop of Cerigo, who lived about the
splendid one, but inconvenient from its size. An end of the sixteenth century. One consolatory
edition, with a revised text, formed on a collation letter to the nun Eusebia on her sister's death,
of four MSS. (whether any of them were the same was published by Conrad Rittershausius, with a
as those employed by Hoeschelius is not men- Latin version, with some other pieces, 8vo. Nürn-
tioned) was published by Immanuel Bekker, 2 thin berg, 1601. But the largest collection is that
vols. 4to. Berlin, 1824—1825: it is convenient prepared with a Latin version and notes by
from its size and the copiousness of its index, but Richard Mountagu (Latinized Montacutius),
has neither version nor notes.
bishop of Norwich, and published after his death,
2. 'ETIT OUT) ÉK TWY KRANOICOTIKWv iotopov fol. London, 1651. The Greek text was from a
01100Topylov dno owoñis swtiou natpiápxov, MS. in the Bodleian library. The collection com-
Compendium Historive Ecclesiasticae Philostorgii prehends two hundred and forty-eight letters trans-
quod dictavit Photius patriarcha. Cave regards lated by the bishop, and a supplement of five
this as a fragment of another work similar to the letters brought from the East by Christianus Ra-
Bibliotheca ; but his conjecture rests on no solid vius, of which also a Latin version by another
foundation. The Compendium is of great import person is given. The first letter in Mountagu's
ance as preserving to us, though very imperfectly, collection is addressed to Michael, prince of the
an Arian statement of the ecclesiastical transactions Bulgarians, on the question Ti doti epyov åp-
of the busy period of the Arian controversy in the Xovtos, De Officio Principis : it is very long, and
fourth century. It was first published, with a contains the account of the seven general councils
Latin version and copious notes, by Jacobus Gotho- already mentioned (No. 4), as subjoined to the
fredus (Godefroi), 4to, Geneva, 1643 ; and was re- printed editions of the Nomocanon. This letter to
printed with the other ancient Greek ecclesiastical Prince Michael was translated into French verse by
historians by Henricus Valesius (Henri Valois), Bernard, a Theatin monk, dedicated to Louis XV.
folio, Paris, 1673, and by Reading, fol. Cambridge, and published, 4to. Paris, 1718. The second let-
1720.
ter, also of considerable length, is an encyclical
3. Nouokaváv or Nouokávovoy, Nomocanon, s. letter on various disputed topics, especially on that
Nomocanonon, s. Nomocanonus, s. Canonum Eccle- of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the leading
siasticorum et Legum Imperialium de Ecclesiastica theological question in dispute between the Eastern
Disciplina Conciliatio s. Harmonia. This work, and Western Churches. Mountagu's version has
which bears ample testimony to the extraordinary been severely criticized by Combéfis. (Fabric.
legal attainments of its author, is arranged under Bill. Graec. vol. i. p. 701 note f f f. ) Several im-
fourteen titlo, Tituli, and was prefixed to a Lúv- portant letters are not included in the collection,
Tayua TW Kavóvwv, Canonum Syntagma, or col-especially two to Pope Nicolaus I. , and one to the
lection of the Canones of the Apostles and of the archbishop or patriarch of Aquileia, on the proces-
ecclesiastical councils recognised by the Greek sion of the Holy Spirit, of all which Baronius had
Church, compiled by Photius ; from which circum- given a Latin version in his Annales Ecclesiastici
stance it is sometimes called Iporávwv, Procanon. (ad ann. 859, lxi. &c. , 861, xxxiv. &c. , and 883,
It has been repeatedly published, with the com- v. &c. ). Fragments of the Greek text of the let-
mentaries of Theodore Balsamon, who strongly ters to Pope Nicolaus were cited by Allatius in
recommended it, in preference to similar works of different parts of his works; the original of the
an earlier date : it appeared in the Latin version of letter to the archbishop of Aquileia was published
Gentianus Hervetus, fol. Paris, 1561, and in another in the Auctarium Novissimum of Gombétis, pars i.
Latin version of Henricus Agylaeus, fol. Basel. 1561, p. 527, &c. (fol. Paris, 1672), with a new Latin
and in the original Greek text with the version of version and notes by the editor ; and the original
Agylaeus, edited by Christophorus Justellus, 4to. of all the three letters, together with a previously
Paris, 1615. It was reprinted, with the version of unpublished letter, Ad Oeconomum Ecclesiae Ar-
Agylaeus, in the Billiotheca Juris Canonici, pub- tiochiae, and the encyclical letter on the procession
lished by Guillelmus Voellus and Henricus Juse of the Holy Spirit (included in Mountagu's collec-
tellus, vol. ii. p. 785, &c. fol. Paris, 1661. The tion), the Acta of the eighth oecumenical council
Nomocanon of Photius was epitomised in the kind (that held in 879, at which the second appointment
of verses called politici (see PhilIPPUS, No. 27, of Photius to the patriarchate was ratified), and some
note] by Michael Psellus, whose work was pub- other pieces, with notes by Dositheus, patriarch of
lished, with one or two other of his pieces, by Jerusalem, were published by Anthimus “ Episcopus
Franciscus Bosquetus, 8vo. Paris, 1632.
Rennicus," i. e. bishop of Rimnik, in Walachia, in
Ver
berze Beine, F
Tema gama l
lena Los da
den
Amedon o P
Cos Set
e.
2
## p. 353 (#369) ############################################
PHOTIUS.
353
PHOTIUS.
liis Tópos xapas. Fol. Rimnik, 1705. A letter, p. 329, &c. No. 42, July 1813, and Cluss. Journ.
Ad Theophanern Monachun, i. e. to Theophanes 1. c. )
Cerameus, with a Latin version by Sirmond, was 7 'Aupinbxia, Amphilochia. This work, which
published by the Jesuit Franciscus Scorsus, in his Allatius, not a friendly censor, declared to be “a
Prooemium Secundum, $ 3, to the Ilomiliue of Ce work filled with vast and varied learning, and very
rameus, fol. Paris, 1644 (CERAMEUS, THEOPHA- needful for theologians and expositors of Scripture,
NES), and another letter, Slauracio Spatharo-cundi- is in the forn of answers to certain questions, and
dato, Pruefecto insulae Cypri, was included in the is addressed 10 Amphilochus, archbishop of Cyzicus.
Ecclesiae Graecae Monumenta of Cotelerius, vol. ii. The title is thus given in full by Montfaucon
p. 104, together with a short piece, Nepi Toù uni (Biblioth. Corslin. fol. Paris, 1715, p. 326): Td
δείν προς τα εν τω βίω λυπηρά επιστρέφεσθαι, Quod | 'Αμφιλόχια ή λόγων ιερών και ζητημάτων ιερολυ-
που οφorteat ad praesentis vitae molestius attendere, (γίαι προς 'Αμφιλόχιον τον όσιώτατον μητροπολί-
which, though not bearing the form of a letter την Κυζίκου εν τω καιρώ των πειρασμών, ζητη.
(perhaps it is a fragment of one), is in the MS.
Mátw Plaqopws eis ap. Quòv tplakodiw OUVTE-
classed with the Epistolue. A Latin version, from vórtwv érinvoin altnoćuevov, Amphilochia s. Scr.
the Armenian, of some fragments of an Epistola mones et Quaestioncs Sucrac ad Amphilochium Me-
Pholü ad Zachariam Armeniae Patriarcham, in tropolitam Cyzicenum in Tempore Tentutionum ;
support of the doctrine of the Council of Chalcedon, Quuestioncs Variae sunt Numero trecentuc. The
is given in the Conciliatio Ecclesiae Armeniue cum auswers are said in one MS. (apud Fabric. Bill.
Romana of Galanus, fol. Rom. 1650. To all these Graec. vol. xi. p. 26) to be two hundred and ninety-
we may add the Epistola Turasio Fratri, usually seven in number ; but Montfaucon (l. c. ) published
subjoined to the Bibliotheca. The Epistola ad Za- an index of three hundred and eight, and a Vatican
chariam, just mentioned, and another letter, Ad MS. , according to Mai (Script. Pet. Nova Collectio,
Principem Armenium Asutium, are extant in MS. vol. i. proleg. p. xxxix. ), contains three hundred
in an Armenian version. (Comp. Mai, Scriptor. and thirteen. Of these more than two hundred
Veterum Nov. Collectio. Proleg. in vol. i. 4to. Rom. and twenty have been published, but in various
1825. )
fragmentary portions (Mai, l. c. ). The first portion
6. Mézewy ouvaywith s. AeEskóv, Lexicon. Mar- which appeared in print was in the Lectiones Anti-
quardus Gudius of Hamburg had an anonymous quae of Canisius (4to. Ingolstadt, 1604, &c. vol. v.
MS. lexicon, which he believed and asserted to be p. 188, &c. ), who gave à Latin version by Fran-
that of Photius ; but the correctness of his opinion ciscus Turrianus, of six of the Quaestiones ; but
was first doubted by some, and is now given up the work to which they belonged was not men-
by most scholars; and another lexicon, much tioned. In the subsequent edition of the Lectioncs
shorter, and which is in the MSS. ascribed to Pho- by Basnage (4to. Amsterdam, 1725, vol. ii. pt. ii.
tius, is now admitted to be the genuine work of p. 420, &c. ), the Greek text of five of the six was
that eminent man. A writer in the Classical Journal added (the original of the sixth seems never to
(No. 54. p. 358) has indeed expressed his conviction have been discovered), as well as the Greek text of a
that, “ in the composition of it the patriarch never seventh Quaestio, “De Christi Voluntatibus Gnomicis,"
stirred a finger," and that it received his name of which a Latin version by Turrianus had been
merely from having been in his possession ; but published in the Auctarium Antiquarum Canisiä
we are not aware that his opinion has found any Lectionum of the Jesuit Petrus Stewartius, 4to. In-
supporters. Of this Lexicon there exist several golstadt, 1616 ; also without notice that it was from
MSS. , but that known as the Codex Galeanus, the Amphilochia. Further additions were made
because given by Thomas Gale to the library of by Combéfis, in his SS. Patrum Amphilochii, &c.
Trinity College, Cambridge, is considered to be Opera, 2 vols. fol. Paris, 1644 (by a strange error
the archetype from which the others have been he ascribed the work not to Photius, but to Am-
transcribed; but this MS. is itself very imperfect, philochius of Iconium, a much older writer, from
containing in fact not much more than half the whose works he supposed Photius had made a
original work. Nearly the whole of the Lexicon, selection), and in his Novum Auctarium, 2 vols.
known as the Lexicon Sangermanense, a portion of fol. Paris, 1648 ; by Montfaucon, in his Bibliotheca
which was published in the Anecdota Graeca of Coisliniana, fol. Paris, 171. 5 ; and by Jo. Justus
Immanuel Bekker, vol. i. p. 319, &c. 8vo. Berlin, Spier, in Wittenbergischen Anmerkungen ueber theo-
1814, appears to have been incorporated in the logische, philosophische, historische, philologische, und
Lexicon of Photius, of which, when entire, it is kritische Materien, part i. 8vo. Wittenberg, 1738
estimated to have formed a third part (Praefut. to (Harles, Introd. år Historiam Linguae Graec. Supe
Porson's edition). The Lexicon of Photius was plem. vol. ii. p. 47). But the principal addition
first published, from Continental MSS. , by Gotho was made by Jo. Chr. Wolff, of forty-six Quacs-
fredus Hermannus, 4to Leipzig, 1808. It formed tiones, published, with a Latin version, in his Curas
the third volume of a set, of which the two first Philologicae, vol. v. ad fin. 4to. Hamb. 1735: these
volumes contained the Lexicon ascribed to Joannes were reprinted in the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland,
Zonaras (ZONARAS, JOANNES). The publication vol. xiii. fol. Venice, 1779. A further portion of
of the Lexicon was followed by that of a Libellus eighteen Quaestiones, under the title 'Ex Tây bwrlou
Animadversionum ad Photii Lexicon, 4to. Leipzig, 'Appiaoxlwv Tiva, Ex Photii Amphilocheis quaedam,
1810, and Curae Novissimae sive Appendix Notarum was published, with a Latin version, by Angelus
et Emendationum in Photii Lericon, 4to. Leipzig, Antonius Schottus, 4to. Naples, 1817 ; and some
1812, both by Jo. Frid. Schleusner. But the edi- further portions, one of twenty Quaestiones, with a
tion of Hermann having failed to satisfy the wants Latin version by Mai, in his Scriptorum Veterum
of the learned, an edition from a transcript of the Nova Collectio, vol. i. pp. 193, &c. , and another of a
Codex Galeanus, made by Porson, was published bundred and thirty Quaestiones, in vol. ix. p. 1,
after the death of that eminent scholar, 4to. and &c. As many of the Quaestiones were mere extracts
Svo. London, 1822. (Comp. Edinb. Rev. vol. xxi. from the Epistolae and other published works of
:
VOL. DI,
A4
## p. 354 (#370) ############################################
354
PHOTIUS.
PHOTIUS.
;
Photius, Mai considers that with these and with the | Joannes Veccus (Veccus), published in the Graecia
portions published by him, the whole of the Amphi- Orthodora of Allatius, vol. i. p. 154, &c. 4to.
lochia has now been published. He thinks (Scrip Rome, 1652. It is apparently the work entitled
tor. Vet. Nova Collect. vol. i. proleg. p. xl. ) that the by Crve Disputatio Compendiaria de Processione
patriarch, toward the close of his life, compiled the Spiritus Sancti a solo Patre.
work from his own letters, homilies, commentaries, 10. 'Opiniai, Homiliae. Several of these have
&c. , and addressed it to his friend Amphilochius, as been published :— 1. "Exopaois mais év Tuis Bari.
a mark of respect, and not because the questions | λείοις νέας εκκλησίας της υπεραγίας Θεοτόκου υπό
which were solved had actually been proposed to Βασιλείου του Μακεδόνος οικοδομηθείσης, Descriptio
him by that prelate ; and he thus accounts for the Novae Santissimae Dei Genitricis Ecclesiae, in Pa-
identity of many passages with those in the author's latio a Basilio Macedone erstructae ; a discourse
other works.
delivered on the day of the dedication of the church
8. Adversus Manichaeos 6. Paulicianos Libri described. It was first printed by Lambecius, in
Quatuor. No Greek title of the whole work occurs, his notes to the work of Georgius Codinus, De Ori-
but the four books are respectively thus described: yinibus CPolitanis, p. 187, fol. Paris, 1655, and is
1. Aitymous hepà rñis Mavixaiwv åvabaaothoews, contained, with a Latin version, in the Bonn re-
Narratio de Manichucis recens repullulantibus. 2. print of Codinus, 8vo. 1839. It is also contained
'Atoplai Kal dúoets TWY Mavixalwv, Dubia et Solu- in the Originum CPolitanarum Manipulus of Com-
tiones Manichaeorum. 3. Toù puriou nóyos r, béfis, 4to. Paris, 1664, p. 296, with a Latin version
Photii Sermo III. 4. Kard tas tūv Mavixalwv and notes ; and in the Imperium Orientale of Ban-
ápri uolls Târns, 'Apreviw To dywtátu uovaxa durius, pars iii. p. 117, fol. Paris, 1711. 2. Eis
πρεσβυτέρω και ηγουμένη των ιερών, Contra re- το γενέσιον της υπεραγίας Θεοτόκου, Homilia τη
pullulantein Manichaeorum Errorem ad Arsenium Sanctissimae Dei Genitricis Natalem Diem, pub-
Monachum Sanctissimum Presbyterum et Praefectum lished by Combéfis, in his Auctarium Novum, vol.
Sacrorum. The title of the second book is con- i. col. 1583, fol. Paris, 1648, and in a Latin version,
sidered by Wolff to apply to the second, third, and in his Bibliotheca Patrum concionatoria, fol. Paris,
fourth books, which formed the argumentative part of 1662, &c. Both text and version are reprinted in
the work, and to which the first book formed an his- the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland. 3. In Sepul-
torical introduction. The second book is intended turam Domini, a fragment, probably from this, is
to show that the same God who created spiritual given by Mai (Scriptor. Vet. Nora Collect. proleg.
intelligences, also created the bodies with which in vol. i. p. xli). 4. nepl Toû Men deiv apos tà
they are united, and the material world generally ; év tQ Siu dumnpa émotpeperiai, Quod non oporteat
the third vindicates the divine original of the Old ad praesentis Vitae Molestias attendere. This
Testament ; and the fourth reiterates some points piece, which is perhaps not a homily, but the
of the second and third books, and answers the fragment of a letter, was published in the Ecclesiae
objections of the Paulicians.
