Page images
PDF
EPUB

him maintained by Quintilian and by Lucian may reasonably be taken to imply their agreement with Dionysius as to his merits as a master of style. On the other hand, Cicero (De off. iii. 32) describes him as "bonus auctor in primis "; in the De republica (ii. 14) he praises highly his accuracy in matters of chronology; and Cicero's younger contemporary, Marcus Brutus, was a devoted student of Polybius, and was engaged on the eve of the battle of Pharsalia in compiling an epitome of his histories (Suïdas, s.v.; Plutarch, Brut. 4). Livy, however, notwithstanding the extent to which he used his writings (see LIVY), speaks of him in such qualified terms as to suggest the idea that his strong artistic sensibilities had been wounded by Polybius's literary defects. He has nothing better to say of him than that he is by no means contemptible" (xxx. 45), and "not an untrustworthy author" (xxxiii. 10). Posidonius and Strabo, both of them Stoics like Polybius himself, are said to have written continuations of his history (Suidas, S..; Strabo p. 515). Arrian in the early part of the 2nd and Aelian in the 3rd century both speak of him with respect, though with reference mainly to his excellence as an authority on the art of war. In addition to his Histories Polybius was the author of the following smaller works: a life of Philopoemen (Polyb. x. 24), a history of the Numantine War (Cic. Ad Fam. v. 12), a treatise on tactics (Polyb. ix. 20; Arrian, Tactica; Aelian, Tact. i.). The geographical treatise, referred to by Geminus, is possibly identical with the thirty-fourth book of the Histories (Schweighäuser, Praef. p. 184. AUTHORITIES. The complete books (i.-v.) of the Histories were first printed in a Latin translation by Nicholas Perotti in 1473. The date of the first Greek edition, that by Obsopaeus, is 1530. For a full account of these and of later editions, as well as of the extant MSS., see Schweighäuser's Preface to his edition of Polybius. Our knowledge of the contents of the fragmentary books is derived partly from quotations in ancient writers, but mainly from two collections of excerpts; one, probably the work of a late Byzantine compiler, was first printed at Basel in 1549 and contains extracts from books vi.-xviii. (repl #peoßeiwr, wept αρετῆς καὶ κακίας); the other consists of two fragments from the "select passages "from Greek historians compiled by the directions of Constantine Porphyrogenitus in the 10th century. To these must be added the Vatican excerpts edited by Angelo Mai in the present century.

(v. 20), and is accepted as genuine by Harnack and Krüger. The relevant statements in the letter, moreover, are supported by the references to Polycarp which we find in the body of Irenaeus's great work.

2. The Epistle of Polycarp.-Though Irenaeus states that Polycarp wrote many "letters to the neighbouring churches or to certain of the brethren " only one has been preserved, viz. the well-known letter to the Philippians. The epistle is largely involved in the Ignatian controversy (see IGNATIUSs). The testimony which it affords to the Ignatian Epistles is so striking that those scholars who regard these letters as spurious are bound to reject the Epistle of Polycarp altogether, or at any rate to look upon it as largely interpolated. The former course has been adopted by Schwegler, Zeller, and Hilgenfeld, the latter by Ritschl and Lipsius." The rehabilitation of the Ignatian letters in modern times has, however, practically destroyed the attack on the Epistles of Polycarp. The external evidence in its favour is of considerable weight. Irenaeus (iii. 3, 4) expressly mentions and commends a "very adequate (ixarwrárn) letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, and we have no reason for doubting the identity of this letter mentioned by Irenaeus with our epistle. Eusebius (iii. 36) quotes extracts from the epistle, and some of the extracts contain the very passages which the critics have marked as interpolations, and Jerome (De Vir. Ill. xvii.) testifies that in his time the epistle was publicly read in the Asiatic churches. The internal evidence is equally strong. There is absolutely no motive for a forgery in the contents of the epistle. As Harnack says, "There is no trace of any tendency beyond the immediate purpose of maintaining the true Christian life in the church and warning it against covetousness and against an unbrotherly spirit. The occasion of the letter was a case of embezzlement, the guilty individual being a presbyter at Philippi. It shows a fine combination of mildness with severity; the language is simple but powerful, and, while there is undoubtedly a lack of original ideas, the author shows remarkable skill in weaving together pregnant sentences and impressive warnings selected from the apostolic epistles and the first Epistle of Clement. In these circumstances it would never have occurred to any one to doubt the genuineness of the epistle or to suppose that it had been interpolated, but for the fact that in several passages reference is made to Ignatius and his epistles." The date of the epistle depends upon the date of the Ignatian letters and is now generally fixed between 112 and 118. An attempt has been made in some quarters to prove that certain allusions in the epistle imply the rise of the 140. Lightfoot, however, has proved that Polycarp's statements may equally well be directed against Corinthianism or any other form of Docetism, while some of his arguments are absolutely inapplicable to Marcionism.

The following are the more important modern editions of Polybius: Ernesti (3 vols., 1763-1764); Schweighäuser (8 vols., 1793, and Oxford, 1823); Bekker (2 vols., 1844); L. Dindorf (4 vols., 1866-heresy of Marcion and that it cannot therefore be placed earlier than 1868, 2nd ed., T. Büttner-Wobst, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1882-1904); Hultsch (4 vols., 1867-1871); J. L. Strachan-Davidson, Selections from Polybius (Oxford, 1888). For the literature of the subject, see Engelmann, Biblioth. script. class.: Script. graeci, pp. 646650 (8th ed. Leipzig, 1880). See also W. W. Capes. The History of the Achaean League (London, 1888); F. Susemihl, Gesch. d. griech. Litteratur in d. Alexandrinerzeit, ii. 80-128 (Leipzig, 18911892); O. Cuntz, Polybios und sein Werk (Leipzig, 1902); R. v. Scala, Die Studien des Polybios (Stuttgart, 1890); J. B. Bury, Ancient Greck Historians (1909), a whole-hearted appreciation of Polybius"; J. L. Strachan-Davidson, in Hellenica, pp. 353387 (London, 1898), and in Appendix II. to Selections from Polybius pp. 642-668 (Oxford, 1888). (H. F. P.; X.)

POLYCARP (c. 69-c. 155), bishop of Smyrna and one of the Apostolic Fathers, derives much of his importance from the fact that he links together the apostolic age and that of nascent Catholicism. The sources from which we derive our knowledge of the life and activity of Polycarp are: (1) a few notices in the writings of Irenaeus, (2) the Epistle of Polycarp to the Church at Philippi, (3) the Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp, (4) the Epistle of the Church at Smyrna to the Church at Philomelium, giving an account of the martyrdom of Polycarp. Since these authorities have all been more or less called in question and some of them entirely rejected by recent criticism, it is necessary to say a few words about each.

1. The Statements of Irenaeus are found (a) in his Adversus haereses, iii. 3. 4. (b) in the letter to Victor, where Irenaeus gives an account of Polycarp's visit to Rome, (c) in the letter to Florinus-a most important document which describes the intercourse between Irenaeus and Polycarp and Polycarp's relation with St John. No objection has been made against the genuineness of the statements in the Adversus haereses, but the authenticity of the two letters has been stoutly contested in recent times by van Manen. The main attack is directed against the Epistle to Florinus, doubtless because of its importance. "The manifest exaggerations," says van Manen, coupled with the fact that Irenaeus never shows any signs of acquaintance with Florinus... enable us to perceive clearly that a writer otherwise unknown is speaking to us here." The criticism of van Manen has, however, found no supporters outside the Dutch school. The epistle is quoted by Eusebius

[ocr errors]

Ency. Bib. iii. 3490.

been subjected to the same criticism as has been directed against 3. The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp.-This epistle has of course the other epistles of Ignatius (see IGNATIUS). Over and above the general criticism, which may now be said to have been completely answered by the investigations of Zahn, Lightfoot and Harnack, one or two special arguments have been brought against the Epistle to Polycarp. Ussher, for instance, while accepting the other six epistles, rejected this on the ground that Jerome says that Ignatius only sent one letter to Smyrna-a mistake due to his misinterpretation of Eusebius. Some modern scholars (among whom Harnack was formerly numbered, though he has modified his views on the point) feel a difficulty about the peremptory tone which Ignatius adopts towards Polycarp. There was some force in this argument when the Ignatian Epistles were dated about 140, as in that case Polycarp would have been an old and venerable man at the time. But now that the date is put back to about 112 the difficulty vanishes, since Polycarp was not much over forty when he received the letter. We must remember, too, that Ignatius was writing under the consciousness of impending martyrdom and evidently felt that this gave him the right to criticize the bishops and churches of Asia.

4. The Letter of the Church at Smyrna to the Philomelians is a most important document, because we derive from it all our information with regard to Polycarp's martyrdom. Eusebius has preserved the greater part of this epistle (iv. 15), but we possess it entire with various concluding observations in several Greek MSS., and also in a Latin translation. The epistle gives a minute description of the persecution in Smyrna, of the last days of Polycarp and of his trial and martyrdom; and as it contains many instructive details and professes to have been written not long after the events to which it refers, it has always been regarded as one critics, however, have questioned the authenticity of the narrative. of the most precious remains of the 2nd century. Certain recent Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur, i. 593-594. Early Christian Literature (Eng. trans., 1897), p. 150. Letter to Florinus ap. Euseb. v, 20.

Nachapostolisches Zeitalter, ii. 154

A postolgeschichte, p. 52.

'Apostolische Väter, p. 272.

Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, p. 584.

•Ueber das Verhältniss, &c., p. 14.

Lipsius brings the date of the epistle down to about 260, though he admits many of the statements as trustworthy. Keim, too, endeavours to show that, although it was based on good information, it could not have been composed till the middle of the 3rd century. A similar position has also been taken up by Schürer, Holtzmann, Gebhardt, Réville, and van Manen. The last named regards the document "as a decorated narrative of the saint's martyrdom framed after the pattern of Jesus' martyrdom," though he thinks that it cannot be put as late as 250, but must fall within the limits of the 2nd century. It cannot be said, however, that the case against the document has been at all substantiated, and the more moderate school of modern critics (e.g. Lightfoot, Harnack, Krüger) is unanimous in regarding it as an authentic document, though it recognizes that here and there a few slight interpolations have been inserted." Besides these we have no other sources for the life of Polycarp; the Vita S. Polycarpi auctore Pionio (published by Duchesne, Paris, 1881, and Lightfoot Ignatius and Polycarp, 1885. ii. 1015-1047) is worthless.

Assuming the genuineness of the documents mentioned, we now proceed to collect the scanty information which they afford with regard to Polycarp's career. Very little is known about his early life. He must have been born not later than the year 69, for on the day of his death (c. 155) he declared that he had served the Lord for eighty-six years (Martyrium, 9). The statement seems to imply that he was of Christian parentage; he cannot have been older than eighty-six at the time of his martyrdom, since he had paid a visit to Rome almost immediately before. Irenaeus tells us that in early life Polycarp "had been taught by apostles and lived in familiar intercourse with many that had seen Christ" (iii. 3,4). This testimony is expanded

in the remarkable words which Irenaeus addresses to Florinus:

"I saw thee when I was still a boy (raîs érɩ wv) in Lower Asia in company with Polycarp... I can even now point out the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and describe his goings out and his comings in, his manner of life and his personal appearance and the discourses which he delivered to the people, how he used to speak of his intercourse with John and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words. And everything that he had heard from them about the Lord, about His miracles and about His teaching, Polycarp used to tell us as one who had received it from those who had seen the Word of Life with their own eyes, and all this in perfect harmony with the Scriptures. To these things I used to listen at the time, through the mercy of God vouchsafed to me, noting them down, not on paper but in my heart, and constantly by the grace of God I brood over my accurate recollections." These are priceless words, for they establish a chain of tradition (John-Polycarp-Irenaeus) which is without a parallel in early church history. Polycarp thus becomes the living link between the Apostolic age and the great writers who flourished at the end of the 2nd century. Recent criticism, however, has endeavoured to destroy the force of the words of Irenaeus. Harnack, for instance, attacks this link at both ends.12 (a) The connexion of Irenaeus and Polycarp, he argues, is very weak, because Irenaeus was only a boy (rais) at the time, and his recollections therefore carry very little weight. The fact too that he never shows any signs of having been influenced by Polycarp and never once quotes his writings is a further proof that the relation between them was slight. (b) The connexion which Irenaeus tries to establish between Polycarp and John the apostle is probably due to a blunder. Irenaeus has confused John the apostle and John the presbyter. Polycarp was the disciple of the latter, not the former. In this second 1 Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. (1874), p. 200 seq. Aus dem Urchristenthum (1878), p. 90. Zeitschr. f. hist. Theol. (1870), p. 203 seq. Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. (1877).

Zeitschr. f. hist. Theol. (1875).

De anno Polycarpi (1881).

"Oud-Christ (1861), and Ency. Bib. iii. 3479

Ignatius and Polycarp, i. 589 seq.

Gesch. d. altchrist. Lit. II. i. 341.

10 Early Christian Lit. (Eng. trans., 1897), p. 380.

"Amongst these we ought probably to include the expression καθολική Εκκλησία (xvi. 19), καθολικός being here used in the sense of orthodox-a usage which is not found elsewhere at so early a date.

Chronologie, i. 325-329.'

argument Harnack has the support of a considerable number of modern scholars who deny the Ephesian residence of John the apostle. But, as Gwatkin " has pointed out, Harnack's arguments are by no means decisive. (a) When Irenaeus describes himself as a boy (raîs), he need not have meant a very young lad, under thirteen, as Harnack makes out. Lightfoot has cited many instances which prove that the word could be used of a man of thirty." Nor does the alternative phrase which Irenaeus uses in iii. 3, 4 (ov kal ǹμeîs éwpákaμev év τĥ прwτ hμŵr λkiα) militate against this interpretation, for elsewhere Irenaeus himself distinctly says 66 'triginta annorum aetas prima indoles est juvenis " (ii. 22, 5). It is true that Harnack has adduced arguments which cannot be discussed here to prove that Irenaeus was not born till about 140;15 but against this we may quote the decision of Lipsius, who puts the date of his birth at 130,16 while Lightfoot argues for 120.17 The fact that Irenaeus never quotes Polycarp does not count for much. Polycarp wrote very little. He does not seem to have been a man of great mental capacity. "His influence was that of saintliness rather than that of intellect." (b) A discussion of Harnack's second line of argument is impossible here. His theory with regard to the confusion of names is a gratuitous assumption and cannot be proved. The tradition of St John's residence at Ephesus is too strong to be easily set aside. In spite therefore of much modern criticism there seems to be no solid reason for rejecting the statements of Irenaeus and regarding Polycarp as the link between the Apostolic age and the first of the Catholic fathers.

Though Polycarp must have been bishop of Smyrna for nearly half a century we know next to nothing about his career. We get only an occasional glimpse of his activity, and the period between 115 and 155 is practically a blank. The only points of sure information which we possess relate to (1) his relations with Ignatius, (2) his protests against heresy, (3) his visit to Rome in the time of Anicetus, (4) his martyrdom.

1. His Relations with Ignatius.-Ignatius, while on his way to Rome to suffer martyrdom, halted at Smyrna and received a warm welcome from the church and its bishop. Upon reaching Troas he despatched two letters, one to the church at Smyrna, another addressed personally to Polycarp. In these letters Ignatius charged Polycarp to write to all the churches between Smyrna and Syria (since his hurried departure from Troas made it impossible for him to do so in person) urging them to send letters and delegates to the church at Antioch to congratulate it upon the cessation of the persecution and to establish it in the faith. The letters of Ignatius illustrate the commanding position which Polycarp had already attained in Asia. It was in the discharge of the task which had been laid upon him by Ignatius that Polycarp was brought into correspondence with the Philippians. The Church at Philippi wrote to Polycarp asking him to forward their letters to Antioch. Polycarp replied, promising to carry out their request and enclosing a number of the letters of Ignatius which he had in his possession.

2. Polycarp's Attack on Heresy.-All through his life Polycarp appears to have been an uncompromising opponent of heresy. We find him in his epistle (ch. vii.) uttering a strong protest against certain false teachers (probably the followers of Cerinthus).

For every one who shall not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is antichrist; and whosoever shall not confess the testimony of the Cross is of the devil; and whosoever shall pervert the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts and say that there is neither resurrection nor judgment, that man is the first-born of Satan. Wherefore let us forsake their vain doing and their false teaching and turn unto the word which was delivered unto us from the beginning."

Polycarp lived to see the rise of the Marcionite and Valentinian sects and vigorously opposed them. Irenaeus tells us that on 13 Contemp. Review, February 1897.

Ignatius and Polycarp, i. 432, for instance, Constantine (Euseb. V.C. ii. 51) describes himself as Kou waîs, though he must have been over thirty at the time.

1 Chronologie, i. 325-333

16 See Lightfoot, op. cit. i. 432.

"Essays on Supernatural Religion, 264, 265.

one occasion Marcion endeavoured to establish relations with him and accosted him with the words, "Recognize us.' But Polycarp displayed the same uncompromising attitude which his master John had shown towards Cerinthus and answered, "I recognize you as the first-born of Satan." The steady progress of the heretical movement in spite of all opposition was a cause of deep sorrow to Polycarp, so that in the last years of his life the words were constantly on his lips, "Oh good God, to what times hast thou spared me, that I must suffer such things!"

3. Polycarp's Visit to Rome.-It is one of the most interesting and important events in the church history of the 2nd century that Polycarp, shortly before his death, when he was considerably over eighty years old, undertook a journey to Rome in order to visit the bishop Anicetus. Irenaeus, to whom we are indebted for this information (Haer. iii. 3, 4; Epist. ad victorem, ap. Euseb. v. 24), gives as the reason for the journey the fact that differences existed between Asia and Rome "with regard to certain things" and especially about the time of the Easter festival. He might easily have told us what these "certain things were and given us fuller details of the negotiations between the two great bishops, for in all probability he was himself in Rome at the time. But unfortunately all he says is that with regard to the certain things the two bishops speedily came to an understanding, while as to the time of Easter, each adhered to his own custom, without breaking off communion with the other. We learn further that Anicetus as a mark of special honour allowed Polycarp to celebrate the Eucharist in the church, and that many Marcionites and Valentinians were converted by him during his stay in Rome.

[ocr errors]

array of scholars only the following names of importance can be quoted in support of the traditional view-Keim, Wiescler1 and Uhlhorn." The problem is too complex to admit of treatment here. There seems to be little doubt that the case for the earlier date has been proved. The only point upon which there is division of opinion is as to whether Waddington's date 155, oras is suggested by Lipsius and supported by C. H. Turner 12-the following year 156 is the more probable. The balance of opinion seems to favour the latter alternative, because it leaves more room for Polycarp's visit to Anicetus, who only became bishop of Rome in 154. Harnack, however, after careful investigation, prefers 155.

The significance of Polycarp in the history of the Church is out of all proportion to our knowledge of the facts of his career. The violent attack of the Smyrnacan mob is an eloquent tribute to his influence in Asia. "This is the teacher of Asia," they shouted, "this is the father of the Christians: this is the destroyer of our gods: this is the man who has taught so many no longer to sacrifice and no longer to pray to the gods." And after the execution they refused to deliver up his bones to the Christians for burial on the ground that "the Christians would now forsake the Crucified and worship Polycarp."" Polycarp was indeed, as Polycrates says,15 "one of the great luminaries" (μeɣáda σroixeîa) of the time. It was in no small degree due to his stanch and unwavering leadership that the Church was saved from the peril of being overwhelmed by the rising tide of the pagan revival which swept over Asia during the first half of the 2nd century, and it was his unfaltering allegiance to the Apostolic faith that secured the defeat of the many forms of heresy which threatened to destroy the Church from within. Polycarp had no creative genius. He was a "transmitter, not a maker," but herein lies his greatness. Much occurred between the Apostolic age and the age when the faith of the Church was fixed in the earliest creed and protected by the determination of the canon of the New Testament. This intervening period was the most perilous epoch in the history of the ante-Nicene Church. The Apostolic tradition might have been perverted and corrupted. The purity of the Gospel might have been defiled. The Christian ideal might have been lost. That the danger was so largely averted is to no small extent the result of the faithful witness of Polycarp. As Irenaeus says (iii. 3, 4), Polycarp does not appear to have possessed qualifications for successfully conducting a controversial discussion with erroneous teachers... but he could not help feeling how unlike their speculations were to the doctrines which he had learned from the Apostles, and so he met with indignant reprobation their attempt to supersede Christ's gospel with fictions of their own devising." It is this that constitutes Polycarp's service to the Church, and no greater service has been rendered by any of its leaders in any age.

4. Polycarp's Martyrdom.-Not many months apparently after Polycarp's return from Rome a persecution broke out in Asia. A great festival was in progress at Smyrna. The proconsul Statius Quadratus was present on the occasion, and the asiarch Philip of Tralles was presiding over the games. Eleven Christians had been brought, mostly from Philadelphia, to be put to death. The appetite of the populace was inflamed by the spectacle of their martyrdom. A cry was raised “ Away with the atheists. Let search be made for Polycarp." Polycarp took refuge in a country farm. His hiding-place, however, was betrayed and he was arrested and brought back into the city. Attempts were made by the officials to induce him to recant, but without effect. When he came into the theatre the proconsul" urged him to "revile Christ," and promised, if he would consent to abjure his faith, that he would set him at liberty. To this appeal Polycarp made the memorable answer, "Eighty and six years have I served Him and He hath done me no wrong. How then can I speak evil of my King who saved me?" These words only intensified the fury of the mob. They clamoured for a lion to be let loose upon him there and then. The asiarch however refused, urging as an excuse that the games were over. When they next demanded that their victim should be burned, the proconsul did not interfere. Timber and faggots were hastily collected and Polycarp was placed upon the pyre. With calm dignity and unflinching courage he met his fate and crowned a noble life with an heroic death.

The question as to the date of the martyrdom has evoked considerable controversy. Eusebius in his Chronicon gives A.D. 166 as the date of Polycarp's death, and until the year 1867 this statement was never questioned. In that year appeared Waddington's Mémoire sur la chronologie de la vie du rhéteur Aelius Aristide, in which it was shown from a most acute combination of circumstances that the Quadratus whose name is mentioned in the Martyrium was proconsul of Asia in 155-156, and that consequently Polycarp was martyred on the 23rd of February Waddington's conclusion has received overwhelming support amongst recent critics. His views have been accepted by (amongst many others) Renan,' Hilgenfeld, Gebhardt, Lipsius, Harnack, Zahn, Lightfoot, Randell. Against this Antichrist (1873), p. 207. 2 Zeitschr. fwiss. Theol. (1874), p. 325. Zeitschr. f. hist. Theol. (1875), p. 356.

155.

Jahrb. f. prot. Theol. (1883), p. 525. Chronologie, i. 334-356.
Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol. (1882), p. 227: (1884), p. 216.

Ignatius and Polycarp, i. 629–702. Studia biblica (1885), i. 175.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.-J. B. Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, pt. ii. (2nd ed., 1889). Polycarp is dealt with in i. 417-459, 530-704; ii. 897-1086; G. Volkmar, Epistula Polycarpi Smyrnaci genuina (Zürich, 1885); T. Zahn, Forschungen zur Geschichte des Kanons, &c., iv. 249, 279; J. M. Cotterill, "The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians,' Journ. of Philol. (1891), xix., 241-285; Harnack, Chronologie der alichristlichen Litteratur (1897). See also Aro (H. T. A.) STOLIC FATHERS.

POLYCLITUS, the name of two Greek sculptors of the school of Argos; the first belonging to the fifth century, the second to the early part of the fourth.

1. The elder and best known Polyclitus was a contemporary of Pheidias, and in the opinion of the Greeks his equal. He made a figure of an Amazon for Ephesus which was regarded as superior to the Amazon of Pheidias made at the same time; and his colossal Hera of gold and ivory which stood in the temple near Argos was considered as worthy to rank with the Zeus of Pheidias. Aus dem Urchristentum, p. 90.

10 Die Christenverfolgungen der Caesaren (1878), p. 34,
"Studia biblica (1890), ii. 105-156.

Realencyk. f. prot. Theol., 2nd ed. xii. 105.
13 Martyrium, ch. 12.

14 Ibid. 17.

15 Ap. Euseb. v. 24.

As regards his chronology we have data in a papyrus published by Grenfell and Hunt containing lists of athletic victors. From this it appears that he made a statue of Cyniscus, a victorious athlete of 464 or 466 B.C., of Pythocles (452) and Aristion (452). He thus can scarcely have been born as late as 480 B.C, His statue of Hera is dated by Pliny to 420 B.C. His artistic activity must thus have been long and prolific.

It would be hard for a modern critic to rate Polyclitus so high: | set up by the people of Argos after a shameful massacre which the reason is that balance, rhythm and the minute perfection of took place in 370 B.C. The elder artist is not known to have bodily form, which were the great merits of this sculptor, do not worked in marble. (P. G.) appeal to us as they did to the Greeks of the 5th century. He POLYCRATES, tyrant of Samos (c. 535-515 B.C.). Having worked mainly in bronze. won popularity by donations to poorer citizens, he took advantage of a festival of Hera, which was being celebrated outside the walls, to make himself master of the city (about 535 B.C.). After getting rid of his brothers Pantagnotus and Syloson, who had at first shared his power, he established a despotism which is of great importance in the history of the island. Realizing clearly the value of sea-power for a Greek state, he equipped a fleet of 100 ships, and so became master of the Aegean basin. This ascendancy he abused by numerous acts of piracy which made him notorious throughout Greece; but his real purpose in building his navy was to become lord of all the islands of the archipelago and the mainland towns of Ionia. The details of his conquests are uncertain, but it is known that in the Cyclades he maintained an alliance with the tyrant Lygdamis of Naxos, and curried favour with the Delian Apollo by dedicating to him the island of Rheneia. He also encountered and heavily defeated a coalition of two great naval powers of the Asiatic coast, Miletus and Lesbos. Doubtless with the object of expanding the flourishing foreign trade of Samos, he entered into alliance with Amasis, king of Egypt, who, according to Herodotus, renounced his ally because he feared that the gods, in envy of Polycrates' excessive good fortune, would bring ruin upon him and his allies. It is more probable that the breach of the compact was due to Polycrates, for when Cambyses of Persia invaded Egypt (525) the Samian tyrant offered to support him with a naval contingent. This squadron never reached Egypt, for the crews, composed as they were of Polycrates' political enemies, suspecting that Cambyses was under agreement to slay them, put back to Samos and attacked their master. After a defeat by sea, Polycrates repelled an assault upon the walls, and subsequently withstood a siege by a joint armament of Spartans and Corinthians assembled to aid the rebels. He maintained his ascendancy until about 515, when Oroetes, the Persian governor of Lydia, who had been reproached for his failure to reduce Samos by force, lured him to the mainland by false promises of gain and put him to death by crucifixion.

Copies of his spearman (doryphorus) (see GREEK ART, Plate VI. fig. 80), and his victor winding a ribbon round his head (diadumenus) have long been recognized in our galleries. We see their excellence, but they inspire no enthusiasm, because they are more fleshy than modern figures of athletes, and want charm. They are chiefly valuable as showing us the square forms of body affected by Polyclitus, and the scheme he adopted, throwing the weight of the body (as Pliny says of him) on one leg. We must not, however, judge of a great Greek sculptor by Roman copies of his works. This has been enforced by the discovery at Delos, by the French excavators, of a diadumenus of far more pleasing type and greater finish, which also goes back to Polyclitus. The excavations at Olympia have also greatly widened our knowledge of the sculptor. Among the bases of statues found on that site were three signed by Polyclitus, still bearing on their surface the marks of attachment of the feet of the This at once gives us their pose; and following up the clue, A. Furtwangler has identified several extant statues as copies of figures of boy athletes victorious at Olympia set up by Polyclitus. Among these the Westmacott athlete in the British Museum is conspicuous. And it is certain that these boys, although the anatomy of their bodies seems to be too mature, yet have a real charm, combining beauty of form with modesty and unaffected simplicity. They enable us better to understand the merit of the sculptor."

statues.

[ocr errors]

The Amazon of Polyclitus survives in several copies, among the best of which is one in the British Museum (for its type sce GREEK ART, fig. 40). Here again we find a certain heaviness; and the womanly character of the Amazon scarcely appears through her robust limbs. But the Amazon of Pheidias, if rightly identified, is no better. The masterpiece of Polyclitus, his Hera of gold and ivory, has of course totally disappeared. The coins of Argos give us only the general type. Many archaeologists have tried to find a copy of the head. The most defensible of all these identifications is that of C. Waldstein, who shows that a head of a girl in the British Museum (labelled as Polyclitan) corresponds so nearly with that of Hera on 5th century coins of Argos that we must regard it as a reflex of the head of the great statue. It seems very hard and cold beside such noble heads of the goddess as those in the Ludovisi Gallery (Terme Museum) Rome. American archaeologists have in recent years conducted excavations on the site of the Argive temple of Hera (ARGOS and GREEK ART, fig. 39); but the sculptural fragments, heads and torsos, which seem to belong to the temple erected in the time of Polyclitus, have no close stylistic resemblance to other statues recognized as his; and at present their position in the history of art is matter of dispute.ac

The want of variety in the works of Polyclitus was brought as a reproach against him by ancient critics. Varro says that his statues were square and almost of one pattern. We have already observed that there was small variety in their attitudes. Except for the statue of Hera, which was the work of his old age, he produced scarcely any notable statue of a deity. His field was narrowly limited; but in that field he was unsurpassed. 2. The younger Polyclitus was of the same family as the elder, and the works of the two are not easily to be distinguished. Some existing bases, however, bearing the name are inscribed in characters of the 4th century, at which time the elder sculptor cannot have been alive. The most noted work of the younger artist was a statue in marble of Zeus Milichius (the Merciful)

[ocr errors]

Beside the political and commercial pre-eminence which he conferred upon Samos, Polycrates adorned the city with public works on a large scale-an aqueduct, a mole and a temple of Hera (see SAMOS; AQUEDUCTS). The splendour of his palace is attested by the proposal of the Roman emperor Caligula to rebuild it. Foreign artists worked for him at high wages; from Athens he brought Democedes, the greatest physician of the age, at an exceptional salary. He was also a patron of letters: he collected a library and lived on terms of intimate friendship with the poet Anacreon, whose verses were full of references to his patron. The philosopher Pythagoras, however, quitted Samos in order to escape his tyranny. (M.O. B. C.)

POLYCRATES, Athenian sophist and rhetorician, flourished in the 4th century B.C. He taught at Athens, and afterwards in Cyprus. He composed declamations on paradoxical themes -an Encomium on Clylaemnestra, an Accusation of Socrates, an Encomium on Busiris (a mythical king of Egypt, notorious for his inhumanity); also declamations on mice, pots and counters. His Encomium on Busiris was sharply criticized by Isocrates, in a work still extant, and Dionysius of Halicarnassus characterizes his style as frigid, vulgar and inelegant.

POLYGAMY (Gr. roλús, many, and yáμos, marriage), or as it is sometimes termed, POLYGYNY (yun, woman), the system under which a man is married to several women at the same time. Derivatively it includes the practice of polyandry, but it has become definitely restricted to expressing what has been, and still is, far the commonest type of relations between the sexes (see FAMILY and MARRIAGE). Among Oriental nations plurality of legal wives is customary. Mahommedans are allowed four. A Hindu can have as many as he pleases: the high-caste sometimes having as many as a hundred. Polygamy is the rule among

[ocr errors]

African tribes, and is common among those of Australia and Poly-in various ways, including, among other things, the Syriac of nesia. In China, however, only one wife is lawful. In many | Esther and of several apocryphal books for which it is wanting polygamous countries the practical obstacle of expense prevents in the Paris Bible, Persian versions of the Pentateuch and Gospels, men from taking advantage of their privileges. While poly- and the Psalms and New Testament in Ethiopic. Walton was gamy was the rule in biblical days among the ancient Jews, and aided by able scholars, and used much new manuscript material. was permitted and even enjoined in certain cases by the Mosaic His prolegomena, too, and collections of various readings mark an law, the Christian Church, though it is nowhere forbidden, except important advance in biblical criticism. It was in connexion for "bishops," in the New Testament, has always set its face with this polyglott that E. Castell produced his famous Heptaglott against it. There have, however, been divines who dissented Lexicon (2 vols. folio, London, 1669), an astounding monument of from this general disapproval. The Anabaptists insisted on industry and erudition even when allowance is made for the fact freedom in the matter, and Bernardino Ochino conditionally that for the Arabic he had the great MS. lexicon compiled and defended plurality of wives. When in 1540 Philip the Magnani- left to the university of Cambridge by the almost "forgotten mous, the reforming Landgrave of Hesse, determined (with his W. Bedwell. The liberality of Cardinal Ximenes, who is said wife's approval, she being a confirmed invalid) to marry a second to have spent half a million ducats on it, removed the Compluwife, Luther and Melanchthon approved "as his personal friends, tensian polyglott from the risks of commerce. The other three though not as doctors of theology"; while Martin Bucer assisted editions all brought their promoters to the verge of ruin.. The at the marriage. In later times the Mormons (q.v.) in America later polyglotts are of little scientific importance, the best provide the most notable instance of the revival of polygamy. recent texts having been confined to a single language; but every POLYGENISTS, the term applied to those anthropologists biblical student still uses Walton and, if he can get it, Le Jay. who contend that the several primary races of mankind are Of the numerous polyglott editions of parts of the Bible it may separate species of independent origin. (See MONOGENISTS.) suffice to mention the Genoa psalter of 1516, edited by GiustiniPOLYGLOTT (Gr. πoλús, many, and yλŵrra, tongue), the term ani, bishop of Nebbio. This is in Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Chaldee for a book which contains side by side versions of the same text and Arabic, and is interesting from the character of the Chaldee in several different languages; the most important polyglotts text, being the first specimen of Western printing in the Arabic are editions of the Bible, or its parts, in which the Hebrew and character, and from a curious note on Columbus and the disGreek originals are exhibited along with the great historical covery of America on the margin of Psalm xix. (A. W. Po.) versions, which are of value for the history of the text and its POLYGNOTUS, Greek painter in the middle of the 5th century interpretation. The first enterprise of this kind is the famous B.C., son of Aglaophon, was a native of Thasos, but was adopted Hexapla of Origen in which the Old Testament Scriptures were by the Athenians, and admitted to their citizenship. He painted written in six parallel columns, the first containing the Hebrew for them in the time of Cimon a picture of the taking of Ilium text, the second a transliteration of this in Greek letters, the on the walls of the Stoa Poecile, and another of the marriage of third and fourth the Greek translations by Aquila and Sym- the daughters of Leucippus in the Anaceum. In the hall at the machus, the fifth the Septuagint version as revised by Origen, entrance to the Acropolis other works of his were preserved. the sixth the translation by Theodotion. Inasmuch, however, as The most important, however, of his paintings were his frescoes only two languages, Hebrew and Greek, were employed the work in a building erected at Delphi by the people of Cnidus. The was rather diglott than polyglott in the usual sense. After the subjects of these were the visit to Hades by Odysseus, and the invention of printing and the revival of philological studies, taking of Ilium. Fortunately the traveller Pausanias has left polyglotts became a favourite means of advancing the knowledge us a careful description of these paintings, figure by figure of Eastern languages (for which no good helps were available) as (Paus. x. 25-31). The foundations of the building have been well as the study of Scripture. The series began with the recovered in the course of the French excavations at Delphi. Complutensian printed by Arnaldus Guilielmus de Brocario at From this evidence, some modern archaeologists have tried to the expense of Cardinal Ximenes at the university at Alcalá de reconstruct the paintings, excepting of course the colours of them. Henares (Complutum). The first volume of this, containing the The best of these reconstructions is by Carl Robert, who by the New Testament in Greek and Latin, was completed on the 10th help of vase-paintings of the middle of the fifth century has of January 1514. In vols. ii.-v. (finished on July 10, 1517) succeeded in recovering both the perspective of Polygnotus the Hebrew text of the Old Testament was printed in the and the character of his figures (see GREEK ART, fig. 29). The first column of each page, followed by the Latin Vulgate and figures were detached and seldom overlapping, ranged in two or then by the Septuagint version with an interlinear Latin trans- three rows one above another; and the farther were not smaller lation. Below these stood the Chaldee, again with a Latin nor dimmer than the nearer. The designs are repeated in translation. The sixth volume containing an appendix is dated Frazer's Pausanias, v. 360 and 372. It will hence appear 1515, but the work did not receive the papal sanction till March that paintings at this time were executed on almost precisely 1520, and was apparently not issued till 1522. The chief editors the same plan as contemporary sculptural reliefs. We were Juan de Vergara, Lopez de Zuñiga (Stunica), Nuñez de learn also that Polygnotus employed but few colours, and Guzman (Pincianus), Antonio de Librixa (Nebrissensis), and those simple. Technically his art was primitive. His excellence Demetrius Ducas. About half a century after the Complu- lay in the beauty of his drawing of individual figures; but tensian came the Antwerp Polyglott, printed by Christopher especially in the "ethical" and ideal character of his art. The Plantin (1569-1572, in 8 vols. folio). Of this the principal editor contemporary, and perhaps the teacher, of Pheidias, he had the was Arias Montanus aided by Guido Fabricius Boderianus, same grand manner. Simplicity, which was almost childlike, Raphelengius, Masius, Lucas of Bruges and others. This work sentiment at once noble and gentle, extreme grace and charm was under the patronage of Philip II. of Spain; it added a new of execution, marked his works, in contrast to the more language to those of the Complutension by including the Syriac animated, complicated and technically superior paintings of New Testament; and, while the earlier polyglott had only the (P. G.) Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch, the Antwerp Bible had also the Targum on the Prophets, and on Esther, Job, Psalms and the Salomonic writings. Next came Le Jay's Paris Polyglott (1645), which embraces the first printed texts of the Syriac Old Testament (edited by Gabriel Sionita, a Maronite, but the book of Ruth by Abraham Ecchelensis, also a Maronite) and of the Samaritan Pentateuch and version (by Morinus). It has also an Arabic version, or rather a series of various Arabic versions. The last great polyglott is Brian Walton's (London, 1657), which is much less beautiful than Le Jay's but more complete

a later age.

POLYGON (Gr. Tohis, many, and ywvia, an angle), in geometry, a figure enclosed by any number of lines-the sideswhich intersect in pairs at the corners or vertices. If the sides are coplanar, the polygon is said to be "plane "; if not, then it is a "skew" or "gauche" polygon. If the figure lies entirely to one side of each of the bounding lines the figure is "convex"; if not it is "re-entrant" or "concave." A "regular" polygon has all its sides and angles equal, i.e. it is equilateral and equiangular; if the sides and angles be not equal the polygon is "irregular." Of polygons inscriptible in a circle an equilateral

« PreviousContinue »