liberty and the privileges of which they had been deprived for having supported the king of Pontus. In B.C. 59 Theophanes was sent by the senate of Rome as ambassador to Ptolemæus Auletes of Egypt, to carry to him the decree of the senate, which guaranteed him the sovereignty of the country. His conduct on this mission is blamed, because he is said to have endeavoured to direct events according to the secret wishes of Pompey. During the civil war Theophanes continued faithful to his friend, and supported him with his advice, and it was on his well-meant suggestion that after the battle of Pharsalus Pompey fled to Egypt, where he was murdered. After this event Theophanes returned to Rome, where he appears to have spent the last years of his life in retirement. After his death the Lesbians paid divine honours to his memory for the benefits which he had conferred upon them. His son, M. Pompeius Macer, held the office of prætor in the time of Augustus, and was afterwards appointed governor of Asia; but in the reign of Tiberius he and his daughter put an end to their own lives, in order to avoid the punishment of exile to which they had been condemned. Theophanes was the author of several works, both in prose and in verse, but very little of them has come down to us. Plutarch's Life of Pompey is chiefly based on the historical work of Theophanes, and we may thus possess more of it than we are aware; but besides this we have four or five fragments of it in Strabo, Plutarch, and Stobæus. The Anthologia Græca' (xv., n. 14 and 35) contains two epigrams of Theophanes, and Diogenes Laertius (ii. 104) mentions a work by Theophanes on painting, but of its nature and contents nothing is known, and it is probable that the writer was a different Theophanes to the friend of Pompey.

(Sevin, in the Mémoires de l'Académie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres, vol. xiv., p. 143, &c )

THEO PHANES NONNUS. [NONNUS.]

THEO'PHILUS, a Constantinopolitan jurist, who lived in the reign of the emperor Justinian (A.d. 527-565). He was a distinguished teacher of jurisprudence at Constantinople (antecessor), and, at the command of the emperor, he was employed among those who compiled the 'Digest;' and afterwards he undertook, along with Dorotheus and Tribonian, to compose the Institutes,' that is, the elementary treatise on jurisprudence, which was part of Justinian's plan. This Theophilus is generally supposed to be the author of the Greek paraphrase of the Institutes,' though it is maintained that the paraphrase is not the work of Theophilus himself, but was taken down from his lectures by some pupils. It was discovered in the beginning of the 16th century by Viglius ab Aytta Zuichemius at Louvain, who published and dedicated it to the Emperor Charles V. (fol., Basel, 1534). The work was frequently reprinted during the same century, but the last and best edition is that of W. O. Reitz, in 2 vols. 4to, Hagæ, 1751. It contains a Latin translation and the notes of previous editors, together with those of Reitz; and also a very interesting dissertation on the obscure and much disputed history of Theophilus. Theophilus also wrote a commentary on the first three parts of the Digest,' which however is now lost, with the exception of a few fragments which are incorporated in Reitz's edition of the Paraphrase of the Institutes.' The value of the paraphrase of Theophilus in establishing the text of the Institutes' may be estimated by an examination of the edition of the Institutes' of Gaius and Justinian by Klenze and Böcking, Berlin, 1829.

(Institutionum D. Justiniani Sacrat. Princip. Proxmium; P. B. Degen, Bemerkungen über das Zeitaltur des Theophilus, 8vo, Lüneburg, 1808; Zimmern, Geschichte des Röm. Privatrechts.)

THEO PHILUS PROTOSPATHA'RIUS, the author of several Greek medical works, which are still extant, and some of which go under the name of Philotheus' and 'Philaretus.' Everything connected with his name, his titles, the events of his life, and the time when he lived, is uncertain. He is generally styled 'Protospatharius,' which seems to have been originally a military title given to the colonel of the body guard of the emperor of Constantinople ('Spatharii,' or owμатоpúλakes). Afterwards however it became also a civil dignity, or at any rate it was associated with the government of provinces and the functions of a judge; they possessed great authority, and were reckoned among the Magnifici. In some manuscripts however he is called 'Philosophus' (Lambec., Biblioth. Vindob.,' lib. vii., p. 352, ed. Kollar.); in others, Monachus' (id., ibid., lib. vi., p. 244, 494); Archiater' (Codd. MSS. Theoph. 'De Puls.' ap. Ermerins, Anecd. Med. Gr.'); or 'Iatrosophista' ('Iaтрoσopiσтоû ñεpì Oupwv, ed. Fed. Morell, 12mo, Paris, 1608.)

Of his personal bistory we are told nothing. If, as is generally done, we trust the titles of the manuscripts of his works, and so try to learn the events of his life, we may conjecture that he lived in the seventh century after Christ; that he was the tutor of Stephanus Atheniensis (Lambec., Ibid., lib. vi., pp. 198, 223, 492; lib. vii., p. 352), who dedicated his work, De Chrysopoeia,' to the emperor Heraclius (Fabricius, 'Biblioth. Græca,' vol. xii., p. 695, ed. vet.); that he arrived at high professional and political rank, and that at last he embraced the monastic life. It must however be confessed that all this is quite uncertain, for, in the first place, Freind, in his History of Physic' ('Opera,' pp. 448, 449, ed. Lond., 1733), after remarking how little credit is sometimes due to the titles prefixed to manuscripts, doubts whether Theophilus was ever tutor to Stephanus, and

BIOG. DIV. VOL. V.

thinks, from the barbarous words that he makes use of (such as pidλiov, σTOμоμάvikov, 'De Corp. Hum. Fabr.,' p. 177, 1. 1, 2, ed. Oxon.; nox, Tрáva, Ibid., p. 181, 1. 11, 12; àraxía, 'Ibid., p. 193, 1. 11; xvuévn, wμóßpaσтos, 'De Urin.,' c. 6, p. 266, 1. 34, ed. Ideler), that he probably lived later. And, secondly, even if Theophilus was the tutor of a person named Stephanus, still it seems probable that this was not the alchemist of that name. [STEPHANUS ATHENIENSIS His date is equally uncertain. Some persons (Chronologia inconsulta, as Fabricius says, 'Biblioth. Græca,' vol. xii., p. 648, n., ed. vet.) think he was the person mentioned by St. Luke; others place him as early as the second century after Christ, and others again as late as the twelfth. He is generally supposed to have lived in the time of the Emperor Heraclius, who reigned from A.D. 610 to A.D. 641; but this opinion rests only on the conjecture of his having been the tutor of Stephanus Atheniensis. The Oxford editor thinks, from the barbarous words quoted above, that he may possibly be the same person who is addressed by the title Protospatharius, by Photius ('Epist.,' 123, p. 164, ed. Montac., Lond., 1651), and who therefore must have lived in the 9th century. He was a Christian, and a man of great piety, a appears from almost all his writings; in his physiological works espe cially, he every where points out with admiration the wisdom, power, and goodness of God as displayed in the human body. (See 'De Corp. Hum. Fabr.,' pp. 1, 2, 25, 89, 127, 153, 185, 272; 'De Urin.,' Præf., p. 262; c. 10, p. 273; c. 23, p. 283; 'De Excrem.,' c. 19, p. 408; De Puls.,' in fine, p. 77.) He appears to have embraced in some degree the Peripatetic philosophy. (De Corp. Hum. Fabr.,' pp. 2, 3, 4, 103, 105, 222, &c.; Mart. Rota, Pref. to Philothei 'Comment. in Hippocr. Aphor.')

Five of his works remain, of which the longest and most interesting is an anatomical and physiological treatise, in five books, entitled 'Пepl τῆς τοῦ ̓Ανθρώπου Κατασκευῆς, ‘De Corporis Humani Fabrica it contains very little original matter, as it is almost entirely abridged from Galen's great work, De Usu Partium Corporis Humani,' from whom however he now and then differs, and whom he sometimes appears to have misunderstood. In the fifth book he has inserted large extracts from Hippocrates, De Genitura,' and 'De Natura Pueri.' He recommends in several places the dissection of animals, but appears never to have examined a human body; in one passage he advises the student to dissect an ape, or else a bear, or, if neither of these animals can be procured, to take whatever he can get, “but by all means," adds he, "let him dissect something." The work was first translated into Latin by J. P. Crassus, and published at Venice, 8vo, 1536, together with Hippocrates, 'De Purgantibus Medicamentis.' This translation was frequently reprinted, and is inserted by H. Stephens in his Medica Artis Principes,' Paris, fol. 1567. The manuscript from which Crassus made his translation is probably lost; but, though defective, it was more complete than that which was used by Guil. Morell in editing the original text, which was published at Paris, 8vo, 1555, in a very beautiful type, but without preface or notes. This edition is now become scarce, and was reprinted, together with Crassus's translation, by Fabricius, in the twelfth volume of his 'Biblioth. Græca,' p. 783, sq., Hamb., 1724 and 1740. Two long passages which were missing in the fourth and fifth books were copied from a manuscript at Venice, and inserted by Andr. Mustoxydes and Demetr. Schinas in their collection entitled 'Zuλλon 'ATоσтаσμáтwv ̓Ανεκδότων Ἑλληνικῶν μετὰ Σημειώσεων, Venet, 8vo, 1817. The last and best edition of this work is that by Dr. Greenhill, which has lately been printed at the Oxford University press, Gr. and Lat., 8vo, 1842.

Another of the works of Theophilus is entitled “Υπόμνημα εἰς τοὺς InокрάтOUS 'Apоpiouous,' 'Commentarii in Hippocratis Aphorismos,' which also seems to be taken in a great measure from Galen's Commentary on the same work. It was first published in a Latin translation by Ludov. Coradus, at Venice, 8vo, 1549, under the name of 'Philotheus.' The Greek text appeared for the first time in the second volume of F. R. Dietz's 'Scholia in Hippocratem et Galenum,' Regim. Pruss., 8vo, 1834.

His treatiseПeрl Ouρwv,' ' De Urinis,' contains little or nothing that is original, but is a good compendium of what was known by the ancients on the subject, and was highly esteemed in the middle ages. It first appeared in a Latin translation by Pontius (or Ponticus) Virunius (or Virmius), in several early editions of the collection known by the name of the Articella.' It was first published in a separate form at Basel, 8vo, 1533, translated by Albanus Torinus, together with the treatise De Pulsibus;' and this version was reprinted at Strasburg, 8vo, 1535, and inserted by H. Stephens in his Medica Artis Principes.' The Greek text was published without the name of Theophilus, under the title 'Iatrosophista de Urinis Liber Singularis,' &c.. at Paris, 12mo, 1608, with a new Latin translation by Fed. Morell, which edition was inserted entire by Chartier in the eighth volume of his edition of the works of Hippocrates and Galen. The best edition is that by Thom. Guidot, Lugd. Bat., 8vo, 1703, Gr. and Lat.; and again with a new title-page, 1731. The text is much improved by adopting the readings of a manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford; there is a new Latin version by the editor, and also copious and learned prolegomena and notes. The Greek text only, from Guidot's edition, is inserted by J. L. Ideler in his 'Physici et Medici Græci Minores,' Berol., 8vo, 1841.

A short treatise, Пepl Alαxwpnμáтwr,' 'De Excrementis Alvinis,'

3 T

was first published by Guidot, in Greek, with a Latin translation by himself, at the end of the edition 'De Urinis' mentioned above: the Greek text alone is inserted by Ideler in his Physici et Medici Græci Minores.' The last of the works of Theophilus that remains is a treatise, 'Пepì Σpvyμŵv,' 'De Pulsibus,' which first appeared in a Latin translation, under the name of Philaretus,' in several of the old editions of the Articella.' It was first published in a separate form at Basel, 8vo, 1533; translated by Albanus Torinus, together with the treatise 'De Urinis' mentioned above. It was reprinted at Strasburg, 8vo, 1535, and inserted by H. Stephens in his Medica Artis Principes.' The Grek text was first published by F. Z. Ermerins in his 'Anecdota Medica Græca,' Lugd. Bat., 8vo, 1840, together with a new Latin translation. The text is taken from one manuscript at Leyden and four at Paris, and differs very considerably from the older Latin translation going under the name of Philaretus.

(Guidot's Notes to Theoph. De Urinis; Fabricius, Biblioth. Græca; Freind, Hist. of Physic; Haller, Biblioth. Anat. and Biblioth. Medic. Pract.; Sprengel, Hist. de la Méd.; Dietz's Preface to the second volume of his Scholia in Hippocr. et Gal.; Ermerin's Preface to his Anecd. Med. Gr.; Choulant, Handbuch der Bücherkunde für die Aeltere Medicin; Greenhill's Notes to Theoph. De Corp. Hum. Fabr.) THEOPHRASTUS was born at Eresus, in the island of Lesbos, but the year of his birth is uncertain: some writers state it to be B.C. 371; others place it much earlier. According to Hieronymus (Epist.,' 2, ad Nepotianum) he died in the year B.C. 285, and, as some say, at the age of eighty-five (Diogenes Laert., v. 40), or, according to others, at the age of 106 years. These different accounts of his age leave the date of his birth uncertain. When a youth his father Melantas sent him to Athens for the purpose of studying. Here he was first a pupil of Plato, and became an intimate friend of Aristotle, who, charmed with his talents and his beautiful pronunciation, is said to have given him the name of Theophrastus (one who speaks divinely): his real name was Tyrtamus. (Quinctilian, x. 1, 83; Cicero, Orator.,' 19.) After the death of Plato, when Speusippus had placed himself at the head of the Academy, Theophrastus, with a number of the former disciples of Plato, left the Academy. Plutarch has preserved a bare account of an event in the life of Theophrastus, which must perhaps be assigned to the time which he spent away from Athens after his withdrawal from the Academy. Plutarch says that he and Phidias delivered their country twice from the oppression of tyrants. After the battle of Charonea, Theophrastus returned to Athens, from which he had been absent for many years; and as Aristotle had then just opened his school (the Lyceum), Theophrastus ranged himself among the hearers of his friend, and cultivated most zealously all the departments of philosophy and science of which Aristotle was then the great master. When Aristotle himself withdrew, Theophrastus became his successor in the Lyceum, and acquired great reputation in his new sphere, not because he created any new system of philosophy, but because he combined the knowledge and profundity of Aristotle with the fascinating eloquence of Plato. The number of his pupils on one occasion is said to have amounted to two thousand (Diogenes Laert., v. 37), who flocked around him from all parts of Greece. This popularity, and the influence which it gave him in the public affairs of Greece through the practical character of his philosophy, roused the indignation and envy of those who saw in him an obstacle to their designs. The consequence was that Agonides, who probably acted on behalf of many others, brought against him a charge of impiety. Theophrastus pleaded his own cause before the Areopagus with his usual eloquence, and convinced that court of his innocence. His accuser would have fallen a victim to his own calumny, if Theophrastus had not generously interfered and saved him. After this event he enjoyed undisturbed peace for several years, and he saw his school, which was visited by the most eminent men of the age, daily increase. The tranquillity which he enjoyed was however chiefly owing to the influence of Demetrius Phalereus, who had himself been a pupil of Theophrastus. After the fall of Demetrius the persecutions began afresh; and, in 305 B.C., Sophocles, son of Amphiclides, carried a law which forbade all philosophers, under pain of death, to give any public instruction without permission of the state. (Diogenes Laert., v. 38; Athenæus, xiii., p. 610; J. Pollux, ix. 5.) Theophrastus left Athens; but in the following year, the law being abolished, and the mover condemned to pay a fine of five talents, Theophrastus and several other philosophers returned to Athens, where he continued his labours without interruption until his death. The whole population of Athens is said to have followed his body to the grave. His will, in which he disposed of his literary and other property, is preserved in Diogenes Laertius. His library was very valuable, as it contained the works of Aristotle, which this philosopher had bequeathed to Theophrastus. Theophrastus bequeathed them, together with his other literary property, to Neleus of Scepsis.

Theophrastus, as already observed, did not develope a new system of philosophy, but he confined himself to explaining that of his master Aristotle. With this view he wrote numerous works on various branches of philosophy and on natural history. His philosophical works may be divided into works on philosophy, in the narrower sense of the word, works on historical subjects, and works on certain arts, such as oratory, poetry, and the like. It is to be lamented that

most of his writings on these departments are now lost, and more especially those on politics (ПoλTiká), on legislators (Tepl voμobeтŵv), on laws, a work of which Cicero made great use, and his works on oratory, of which Theophrastus himself was so distinguished a master. A list of the lost books of Theophrastus is given in Fabricius ('Biblioth. Græca,' iii., p. 445, &c.). Andronicus of Rhodes, a Peripatetic philosopher of the time of Lucullus, made a list of all the works of Theophrastus, and arranged them in systematic order. The following philosophical works of Theophrastus are still extant :

1. Characteres,' or hOikol xaрактnрes, consisting of thirty, or, according to Schneider's arrangement, of thirty-one chapters. In this work the author gives thirty characteristic descriptions of vices, or rather, of the manner in which they show themselves in man. The descriptions however are mere sketches, and form a gallery of bad or ridiculous characters. Many modern critics have maintained that the work in its present form is not to be regarded as a production of Theophrastus, but that it is either an abridgment of a greater work of the philosopher, or a collection of descriptions of vicious characters, compiled either from the writings of Theophrastus, or from those of others. Neither of these opinions is incompatible with the statement of Diogenes Laertius, Suidas, and other late writers who mention Oikol Xарактipes among the works of Theophrastus; for the Characteres' which we now possess may have been compiled and published under the name of Theophrastus long before their time. Either of these hypotheses would also account for the fact that nearly all the definitions of the vices that occur in the book contain some error, which it must be presumed, would not have been the case if the work had been written by Theophrastus. Other critics, on the contrary, have vindicated the Characteres' as a genuine work of Theophrastus, and have attributed all its defects and inaccuracies to the bad manuscripts upon which the text is based. This opinion has received considerable support from the discovery of a Munich codex, part of which was published by Fr. Thiersch in 1832, in the Acta Philologorum Monascensium' (vol. iii., fasc. 3). This manuscript contains the titles of all the thirty chapters, but the text of only twenty-one. The first five chapters and the introduction, which were edited by Thiersch, are considerably shorter than the common text, the language is perfectly pure, and there is very little doubt that this is the genuine text of the work of Theophrastus, and that the common one is only a paraphrase, made perhaps by Maximus Planudes, who is known to have written a commentary on the 'Characteres' of Theophrastus. The editio princeps of the Characteres' is by Wilibald Pyrckheimer, 8vo, Nürnberg, 1527. This edition, which contains only fifteen chapters, was reprinted with a Latin translation by A. Politianus, 8vo, Basel, 1531, and fol, 1541. Chapters 16 to 23 were first added by Camotius, who published the works of Theophrastus in the sixth volume of his edition of Aristotle (Venice, 1551-52). These twentythree chapters were increased by five new ones from a Heidelberg manuscript in the excellent edition of Casaubon, of 1599 (reprinted in 8vo, 1612 and 1617). The last two chapters were added in the edition which appeared at Parma, 4to, 1786. A still more perfect, and in fact the first complete edition is that of J. P. Siebenkees, which was edited by Goetz, 8vo, Nürnberg, 1798. In 1799 there appeared two new editions, the one by Coraes (8vo, Paris), and the other by Schneider (8vo, Jena). The last edition, which is very useful, is that of Fr. Ast, 8vo, Leipzig, 1816. The Characteres' have been translated into French by Jean de la Bruyère (12mo, Paris, 1696, often reprinted, and lastly edited by Schweighauser, Paris, 1802), and by Levesque (12mo, Paris, 1782). The best German translations are those of C. Rommel (12mo, Prenzlau, 1827), and of J. J. Hottinger (8vo, Munchen, 1821). There are English translations by F. Howell, 8vo, London, 1824; by Eustace Budgell, 8vo, London, 1713; and by Taylor. There is also a translation into modern Greek by Larbaris, 8vo, Vienna, 1815.

2. A fragment of a work on Metaphysics, which consists of one book entire (Twv μerà Tà QUσiкà ȧτоστаoμáтiov BiẞXíov á). This book was not mentioned by Andronicus of Rhodes in his catalogue of the works of Theophrastus, but it is ascribed to him by Nicolaus Damascenus. It is printed in all the early editions of the works of Theophrastus in connection with those of Aristotle, as in those of Venice (1497), Basel (1541), Venice (1552), and in that of Sylburg (Frankfurt, 1587). The best edition is that of Ch. A. Brandis, who annexed it to his edition of Aristotle's 'Metaphysics,' 8vo, Berlin, 1823.

3. A Dissertation repl alo@noews, that is, on the Senses and the Imagination. There is a paraphrastic commentary on this work by Priscian, the Lydian, who lived in the 6th century of our era. It was first edited by Trincavelli (fol., Venice, 1536), with Priscian's paraphrase, and Quæstiones' by Alexander Aphrodisiensis. It is also printed in the above-mentioned collections of the works of Theophrastus, and in that published by Schneider, Leipzig, 1818-21. The fragments of other philosophical works are too brief and numerous to be noticed here.

The History of Plants,' by Theophrastus, Tepì putŵv loтopías, is one of the earliest works on botany that was written with anything like scientific precision. The work is divided into ten books, of the last of which only a fragment is preserved. The matter is arranged upon a system by which plants are classed according to their modes of generation, their localities, their size as trees or shrubs and herbs, and

and we know that he also composed Panegyrics on Mausolus, Philip, and Alexander. As regards his character as au historian, the ancients praise him as a lover of truth, but they also state that he was extra vagantly severe in his censure, and unbounded in his praise. His ardent and vehement temper did not allow him to preserve that calmness which becomes the historian. He is also charged with having been too fond of the marvellous, and with having for this reason dwelt too much upon the mythical stories cf Greece wherever he had occasion to mention them. The fragments of Theopompus have been collected by Wichers: "Theopompi Chii Fragmenta, collegit, disposuit, et explicavit, ejusdemque de Vità et Scriptis Commentationem præmisit,' &c., Lugduni Batavorum, 1829, 8vo. They are also contained in C. and J. Müller's 'Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum" (Paris, 1841), p. 278-333. Compare F. Koch, Prolegomena ad Theopompum Chium, Stettin, 1803, 4to.; A. J. E. Pflugk, De Theopompi Chii Vita et Scriptis, Berlin, 1827, 8vo.; Aschbach, Dissertatio de Theopompo Chio Historico, Frankfurt, 1823, 4to. THEOTOCOPU'LI, DOMINICO, called EL GRECO, was painter, sculptor, and architect. He is said to have been the scholar of Titian. In 1577 he was residing in Toledo, where he appears to have settled, though from his name and his surname of El Greco, the Greek, he was doubtless a native of Greece. He painted many pictures in Toledo, and acquired a great reputation in Spain. El Greco made the marble decorations of the altar (retablo), and the altarpiece of the Parting of Christ's Raiment before the Crucifixion, for the sacristy of the cathedral of Toledo, on which he was occupied from 1577 until 1587, when he was paid for the whole work 319,600 maravedis, of which 119,000 were for the picture; about 1007. sterling altogether, but owing to the change in the value of Spanish money it is now perhaps impossible to calculate the sum accurately. He was however not engaged exclusively on this work all this time; he painted other works in the meanwhile, and for Philip II. an altarpiece of the martyrdom of St. Maurice for the Escorial, which however Philip was dissatisfied with. It is now in the chapel of the college; a picture by Romulo Cincinnato was substituted for it over the altar of the chapel of St. Maurice in the Escorial. The objections to this picture were a certain hardness of colour and extravagance of design which El Greco is said to have introduced to prevent the picture being mistaken for a work of Titian, which it seems had been the fate of some of his best pictures.

As an architect he designed the Casa del Ayuntamiento, or mansionhouse, of Toledo, and the churches of La Caridad and of the convent of the bare-footed Franciscans at Illescas; and he executed also a great part of the paintings and sculptures of these churches. In 1590 he designed the church of the Augustines at Madrid, called the Donna Maria de Aragon, and painted the principal altarpiece of their college. He designed also several monuments, which are among his best works. He died at Toledo in 1625, according to Palomino, seventyseven years of age; and was buried with great pomp in the church of St. Bartholomew.

El Greco's pictures were still very numerous at the end of the last century; Cean Bermudez enumerates a great many in Toledo, Illescas, Escalona, Bayona, in Segovia, La Guarda, Mistoles, Casar rubois, Siguenza, Medina Celi, Valencia, Leon, at the Escorial, and in Madrid. Many have probably since been removed. Mr. Ford, in his 'Handbook of Spain,' notices only three pictures by this painterChrist bearing his Cross, and a Nativity, and an Adoration, in the Salon de la Sacristia al Toledo. The pictures of El Greco are greatly praised; his best works have been considered to be the Preparation for the Crucifixion and the Parting of Christ's Raiment in the cathedral of Toledo; and the Entombment of Don Gonzalo Ruiz, Count Orgaz, in the church of Santo Tomé at Toledo. The burial of Conde de Orgaz was painted in 1584 for the archbishop of Toledo, Cardinal Don Gaspar de Quiroga, for the great sum of 2000 ducats according to Cumberland. The Count Orgaz was the founder of the Augustine convent of San Estevan at Toledo, and this picture was painted in honour of the foundation-the Saints Augustine and Stephen are represented depositing the count in his tomb, and the picture contains the portraits of many distinguished persons of the time.

His son GEORGE MANUEL THEOTOCOPULI, was also a sculptor and architect of eminence. He was appointed sculptor and architect to the chapter of the cathedral of Toledo in 1625 he died at Toledo in 1631. He was the architect of the ochavo of the cathedral: it is an octagon decorated with precious marbles and a painted dome, and is used as the treasury-house of the Virgin, where her splendid dresses are kept, as well as many precious relics.

THERA'MENES was a native of Ceos, and the adopted son of Hagnon, or Agnon, an Athenian. He acted a very prominent part about the close and after the end of the Peloponnesian war. He first appears in the history of Greece as taking a part in public affairs in B.C. 411, when, in conjunction with Antiphon, Phrynichus, and Pisander, he endeavoured to upset the democratical constitution of Athens. In B.C. 410 he took part with Thrasybulus in the battle of Cyzicus, and, in B.C. 406, in the celebrated battle of Arginusae. On this occasion, on which the Athenians gained a glorious victory, many lives were lost in the wrecks of their ships, which it was thought might have been saved if proper care had been taken. Theramenes

and Thrasy bulus had been commissioned by the Athenian generals to take care of the wrecks and to save the men, but they were prevented by a storm from accomplishing this object. The generals in their despatch to Athens concealed the commission they had given to Theramenes and his colleague, as it was clear that the latter would be severely punished for their apparent neglect. After the first report, the generals themselves were summoned to return to Athens, and in self-defence they were compelled to give an accurate account of the occurrence, and the more so as they had reason to believe that Theramenes and Thrasybulus were instigating the people against them. That their suspicion was not unfounded became evident afterwards, for when six of the generals were actually brought to trial, Theramenes was base enough to appear foremost among their accusers. The generals defended themselves; and the late hour of the day rendering it impossible to take the votes of the assembly, the business was adjourned to another day. During the interval, Theramenes and the other enemies of the generals exerted themselves to excite the indignation of the people. On the day appointed for the next meeting a number of persons hired by Theramenes appeared in the assembly dressed in mourning, to rouse the sympathies of the people for the loss of their friends and exasperate them against the alleged authors of their misfortune. After various debates eight of the generals were condemned to death, and six of them who were present at Athens, were executed immediately. The blame of this act of cruelty falls mainly upon Theramenes, “who had taken advantage of the uncommon forbearance and candour of his victims, and of his own reputation, which had never before been stained by any atrocious crime, to effect their destruction."

The

Soon after the execution of the generals, the eyes of the Athenians were opened, it is said, by Thrasybulus, to their innocence, and it was decided that those who had misled the people should be proceeded against, and that they should give security for their appearance at the trial. Theramenes however, either by his skill or by accident, not only avoided the prosecution, but retained his place in the popular favour. In the following year (B.c. 405), shortly after the battle of gos Potami, when an Athenian embassy had been rejected by the Spartan ephori, Theramenes, who, though he belonged to the oligarchical party, yet kept up the appearance of a friend of the people, offered to go as ambassador to Lysander, who was blockading the city, while famine was raging within. Theramenes promised to procure favourable terms, if the people would trust him. majority readily acceded to his proposal, and he went to the camp of Lysander. Here he stayed for upwards of three months, hoping that in the meantime the city would be reduced to such a state of weakness as to accept any terms, or that in the interval the oligarchical party would gain the ascendancy. There is moreover no doubt that he made Lysander acquainted with the plans of the oligarchs. When he returned to the city, he declared that he had been detained by Lysander, who himself had no power to decide upon the terms of peace with Athens, and that at last he had been directed by the Lacedæmonian general to apply to the government at Sparta. He was accordingly sent thither with nine colleagues, and invested with full power to negociate peace on any terms. Deputies of the Spartan allies met the ambassadors, and several of them insisted upon the total destruction of Athens; but the Spartans, with an air of generosity, declared themselves willing to grant peace on condition that the long walls and fortifications of Piraeus should be demolished, that all ships of war with the exception of twelve should be delivered up to them, and that Athens should join the Peloponnesian confederacy, and follow Sparta both by land and sea. (Xenophon, Hellen.,' ii. 2.) When Theramenes and his colleagues returned to Athens with these tidings, the famine had reached its height, but there were still some who refused to submit to the humiliating conditions. Theramenes and his party anxious to get rid of these few before the report was laid before the assembly, gained over a man of the name of Agoratus to bring accusations against them and get them all arrested. The plan succeeded, and the assembly was held in the theatre of Piraeus, where Theramenes urged the necessity of concluding peace on the terms proposed. Notwithstanding the opposition of some citizens to the treaty, and the taunts of others, who saw through the plans of Theramenes, peace was ratified, and Lysander entered Piraeus. [LYSANDER.]

After the withdrawal of the Spartan general from Athens, Theramenes, Critias, and their associates, who had assumed the supreme power, wishing to upset the democratical constitution, but to maintain some appearance of decency, invited Lysander to attend the assembly in which alterations in the Attic constitution were to be discussed. Theramenes undertook the management of the business, and proposed that the supreme authority should for the present be placed in thirty persons who should draw up a new code of laws. The presence of Lysander and the neighbourhood of the Peloponne sian troops overwhelmed all attempts of the friends of the people to maintain their constitution, and the proposal of Theramenes was adopted. Theramenes himself was one of the Thirty, and he nominated ten of the others. The outrages and atrocities committed by these Thirty spread general alarm in Attica, and the future was looked to with fearful apprehensions. Theramenes, perceiving the state of feeling at Athens, remonstrated with Critias, the most cruel among his colleagues. This was not from a feeling of humanity, but

simply because he saw that the measures of the Thirty would ruin them. Critias was unconcerned about all consequences, and Theramenes gave way. Repeated warnings on his part created some fear lest he should betray them and join the popular party, for he was notorious for his political inconstancy, from which he is said to have received the nickname of Cothurnus (the shoe which fits either foot). At the same time the Thirty became sensible of their dangerous position, and in order to strengthen themselves they made out a list of 3000 Athenians on whom a kind of franchise was conferred, while all the remaining Athenians were treated as outlaws. Theramenes again was dissatisfied with these proceedings, but the tyrants insisted upon disarming the Athenians, with the exception of the three thousand and the knights. The reckless cruelty and avarice of the Thirty grew worse every day, and it was determined that each of them should select out one rich alien who was to be put to death, and whose property should be taken by his murderer. Theramenes refused to have any share in this crime. This refusal increased the fears of his colleagues, and excited their hatred against him, and they resolved to get rid of him before he could become a dangerous enemy. An accusation was brought against him in the name of the Thirty by Critias before the council. He was charged with being hostile to the exist ing government, and with betraying its interests. Theramenes defended himself, and made such an impression upon the council, that it appeared willing to acquit him. Critias perceiving this, called into the council-chamber an armed band of his followers, whom he had kept in readiness outside, and conversed for a few moments with his colleagues. Hereupon he declared that with the consent of his friends he erased Theramenes from the list of the Thirty and of the three thousand, and that he might now be condemned to death without trial. Theramenes rushed to the Hestia (the altar of Vesta), and conjured the members of the council to protect him, and not to allow Critias to dispose of the lives of citizens; but the herald of the Thirty called in the Eleven (the executioners), who apprehended Theramenes and led him away to punishment. The council was struck with amazement at this bold movement, and Theramenes was hurried across the Agora by Statyrus and the Eleven to prison. When he bad drunk the poison which was administered to him, he dashed the cup with the last few drops to the ground, and said, 'This is to the health of my dear Critias.' This happened in B.C. 404.

The manner in which Theramenes died has been admired by ancient and modern writers. But his fortitude was not based on the consciousness of a virtuous life, and he no more deserves admiration than a criminal to whom death is a matter of indifference. Thucydides (vii. 68) says of him that he was not wanting in eloquence and ability. Whether he wrote any orations is uncertain. (Cicero, 'De Orat.,' ii. 22; 'Brut.' 7.) He is said to have instructed Isocrates (Dionysius Hal., Isocrat.,' i.), and to have written on rhetoric. It may be true therefore, as Suidas says, that he wrote declamations; but it is much more probable that Suidas confounds him with a late sophist, Theramenes of Ceos. (Eudocia, 231; Fabricius, Biblioth. Græc.,' ii. 748; Ruhnken, Hist. Crit. Orat. Græc.,' p. 40, &c.)

(Xenophon, Hellen.,.ii. 3; Plutarch, Nicias, 2; Scholiast on Aristoph., Nub., 360; Ranae, 47, 546; Diodorus Sic., xiii. 38, &c.; Thirlwall; Grote; E. Ph. Hinrichs, De Theramenis, Critiae, et Thrasybuli Rebus et Ingenio, 4to, Hamburg, 1820.

THESEUS (Onoeus), the great national hero of Athens, is said to have been born at Troczen, where his father Ægeus, king of Athens, slept one night with Æthra, the daughter of Pittheus, king of the place. Egeus, on his departure, hid his sword and shoes under a large stone, and charged thra if she brought forth a son, to send him to Athens with these tokens, as soon as he was able to roll away the stone. She brought forth a son, to whom she gave the name of Theseus, and when he was grown up, informed him of his origin and told him to take up the tokens and sail to Athens, for the roads were infested by robbers and monsters. But Theseus, who was desirous of emulating the glory of Hercules, refused to go by sea, and after destroying various monsters who had been the terror of the country, arrived in safety at Athens. Here he was joyfully recognised by Egeus, but with difficulty escaped destruction from Medea and the Pallantids, the sons and grandsons of Pallas, the brother of Egeus. These dangers however he finally surmounted, and slew the Pallautids in battle.

His next exploit was the destruction of the great Marathonian bull, which ravaged the neighbouring country; and shortly after he resolved to deliver the Athenians from the tribute that they were obliged to pay to Minos, king of Crete. Every ninth year the Athenians had to send seven young men and as many virgins to Crete to be devoured by the Minotaur in the Labyrinth. Theseus volunteered to go as one of the victims, and through the assistance of Ariadne, the daughter of Minos who became enamoured of him, he slew the Minotaur and escaped from the Labyrinth. He then sailed away with Ariadne, whom he deserted in the island of Dia or Naxos, an event which frequently forms the subject of ancient works of art. The sails of the ship in which Theseus left Athens were black, but he promised his father, if he returned in safety, to hoist white sails. This however he neglected to do, and Egeus seeing the ship draw near with black sails, supposed that his son had perished, and threw himself from

a rock.

Theseus now ascended the throne of Athens. But his adventures were by no means concluded. He marched into the country of the Amazons, who dwelt on the Thermodon, according to some accounts in the company of Hercules, and carried away their Queen Antiope. The Amazons in revenge invaded Attica, and were with difficulty defeated by the Athenians. This battle was one of the most favourite subjects of the ancient artists, and is commemorated in several works of art that are still extant. Theseus also took part in the Argonautic expedition and the Calydonian hunt. He assisted his friend Pirithous and the Lapithæ in their contest with the Centaurs, and also accompanied the former in his descent to the lower world to carry off Proserpine, the wife of Pluto. When Theseus was fifty years old, according to tradition, he carried off Helen, the daughter of Leds, who was then only nine years of age. But his territory was invaded in consequence by Castor and Pollux, the brothers of Leda; his own people rose against him; and at last, finding his affairs desperate, he withdrew to the island of Scyros, and there perished either by a fall from the cliffs or through the treachery of Lycomedes, the king of the island. For a long time his memory was forgotten by the Athenians, but he was subsequently honoured by them as the greatest of their heroes. At the battle of Marathon they thought they saw him armed and bearing down upon the barbarians; and after the conclusion of the Persian war, his bones were discovered at Scyros by Cimon, who conveyed them to Athens, where they were received with great pomp, and deposited in a temple built to his honour. A festival also was instituted, which was celebrated on the eighth day of every month, but more especially on the eighth of Pyanepsion. The above is a brief account of the legends prevailing respecting Theseus. But he is moreover represented by ancient writers as the founder of the Attic commonwealth, and even of its democratical institutions. It would be waste of time to inquire whether there was an historical personage of this name who actually introduced the political changes ascribed to him: it will be convenient to adhere to the ancient account in describing them as the work of Theseus. Before this time Attica contained many independent townships, which were only nominally united. Theseus incorporated the people into one state, removed the principal courts for the administration of justice to Athens, and greatly enlarged the city, which had hitherto covered little more than the rock which afterwards formed the citadel. To cement their union he instituted several festivals, and especially changed the Athenæca into the Panathenæa, or the festivals of all the Atticans. He encouraged the nobles to reside at Athens, and surrendered a part of his kingly prerogatives to them, for which reason he is perhaps represented as the founder of the Athenian democracy, although the government which he established was, and continued to be long after him, strictly aristocratical. For he divided the people into the tribes or classes of Eupatrida, Geomori, and Demiurgi, of whom the first were nobles, the second agriculturists, the third artisans. All the offices of state and those connected with religion were exclusively in the hands of the first class. Each tribe was divided, either in his time or shortly afterwards, into three phratriæ, and each phratria into thirty gentes (yévn). The members of the separate phratriæ and gentes had religious rites and festivals peculiar to themselves, which were preserved long after these communities had lost their political importance by the democratical changes of Cleisthenes. [CLEISTHENES.]

(Plutarch, Life of Theseus; Meursius, Theseus, sive de ejus Vita Rebusque Gestis Liber Postumus, Ultraject., 1684, where all the authorities are quoted: Thirlwall, Grote, &c.)

*THESIGER, SIR FREDERICK, M.P., D,C.L., is the youngest and only surviving son of Charles Thesiger, Esq., Collector of Customs in the island of St. Vincent, and nephew of Sir Frederick Thesiger who was aide-de-camp to Lord Nelson at the battle of Copenhagen. He was born in London in July 1794, and entered the navy in 1803 as midshipman of the Cambrian frigate. His elder brother however dying while he was still a boy, and his father's West India property having been destroyed by the eruption of a volcano, he abandoned the navy for the legal profession, and after keeping the necessary terms was called to the bar at Gray's Inn in 1818. For many years he went the Home Circuit, of which he became the undisputed leader. His principal practice was in Westminster Hall and the Surrey Sessions, where he was regularly retained by the parish of Christ Church. He greatly distinguished himself before the committee on the Dublin Election in 1835, which sat daily for several months. On this occasion he was counsel for Mr. O'Connell, and though unsuccessful in the issue, he conducted a hopeless case with a degree of perseverance and quiet confidence, and a readiness of resource which were the object of general admiration. In 1834 he became a King's counsel-and in March 1840 entered parliament as M.P. for Woodstock, which he represented until 1844. In this year, he was elected for Abingdon, on being appointed Solicitor-General under the administration of Sir Robert Peel, and in the following year succeeded the late Sir W. W. Follett as Attorney-General, but resigned on the retirement of his party in 1846. He continued to represent Abingdon down to the dissolution in 1852, when he was returned for Stamford, a borough in which the influence of the Marquis of Exeter greatly preponderates. He was re-appointed Attorney-General in 1852 under the Earl of Derby, of whose political opinions he is a leading supporter. The