Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/756

Rh 742 LEO. wrote many other letters, which are extant in MS. in various European libraries, and are cited by Allatius in his De Consensu Eccles. Orient, et Occi- dent. ; by Beveridge in his Codex Canonum ; by Alexis Aristenus in his Synopsis Epistolarum Canonicdrum; and by Nic. Coranenus Papadopoli in his Praenotiones Myslagogicae. (Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 715; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. ii. p. 138, ed. Oxon, 1740; Oudin, De Scriptorib. et Scriptis Eccles. vol. ii. col. 603.) 3. Aegyptius, or the Egyptian. The early Christifin writers, in their controversy with the heathens, refer not unfrequently to a Leo or Leon as having admitted that the deities of the antient gentile world had been originally men, agreeing in this respect with Evemerus [Eveme- RUs], with whom he was contemporary, or perhaps rather earlier. Augustin (Z)e Conse?isu Evangel. i. 33, and De Civ. Dei., viii. 5), who is most ex- plicit in his notice of him, says he was an Egyptian priest of high rank, "• magnus antistes, " and ex- pounded the popular mythology to Alexander the Great, in a manner which, though differing from those rationalistic explanations received in Greece, accorded with them in making the gods (including even the dii majorum gentium) to have been oi-iginally men. Augustin refers to an account of the statements of Leo contained in a letter of Alex- ander to his mother. It is to be observed, that although Leon was high in his priestly rank at the time when Alexander was in Egypt (b. c. 832 — 331), his name is Greek; and Arnobius {Adv. Gentes, iv. 29) calls him Leo Pellaeus, Leo of Pella, an epithet which Fabricius does not satisfactorily explain. Worth {Not. ad Tatian. p. 9Q^ ed. Ox- ford, 1700) would identify our Leo with Leo of Lampsacus, the husband of Themista or Themisto, the female Epicurean (Diog. Laert. x. 5. 25). But the husband of Themista was more correctly called Leonteus, while the Egyptian is never called by any other name than Leo. Arnobius speaks in such a way as to lead us to think that in his days the writings of Leon on the human origin of the gods were extant and accessible ; but it is possible that he refers, like Augustin, to Alex- ander's letter. The reference to Leon in Clemens Alexandrinus is not more explicit. (Stroinata, i. 21. § 106. p. 139, ed. Sylburg. p. 382, ed. Pott. vol. ii. p. 75, ed. Klotz, 12mo. Lipsiae, 1831.) But Tatian's distinct mention of the 'Tirofj.vi]fjLaTa, or Commenta- ries of Leo, shows that his system had been com- mitted to writing by himself ; and Tertullian {De Co- rona.) c. 7 ) directs his readers to " unrol the writings of Leo the Egyptian." Hyginus {Poeticon Astrono- micon, c. 20) refers to Leon in terms which seem to intimate that he wrote a history of Egypt, " Qui res Aegyptiacus scripsit ; " and the scholiast on ApoUonius Rhodius (iv. 262) gives a reference here to what Leon had said respecting the antiquity of the Egyptians, " in the first (of the books or letters ?) to his mother." But we suspect the last referenoe is to the statements of Leon already mentioned, as given by Alexander the Great in his letter to his mother ; and perhaps the reference of Hyginus is to the same document, for the sub- ject of it belongs to the mythic period of history. {Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. vii. pp. 713, 719, vol. xi. p. 664 ; Voss. De Hist. Graec. lib. iii. p. 179, ed. Amsterdam, 1699.) 4. Of Alabanda, in Caria, a rhetorical and historical writer of uncertain date. lie wrote the LEO. following works, now lost : L KaptKuv fit§fa 5', De rebus Curiae Libri quatuor ; 2. Avkmkol iu fiiSkiois ;8', De rebus Lyciae^ Libri duo ; 3. 'O Upds TToXe/xos ^wKcocv Kol BoiwTUV, Bellum Sacrtim inter Phocenses et Boeotos ; 4. Tex^n^ Ars {sc, li/teto- rica) ; and 5. Ilepl crrcicreaii/, De Statibus, or De Seditionibus. In Villoison's edition of Eudocia the last two works are mentioned as one, the title of which is Tex? '"■f^i arda^wv^ Ars de Statibus. If the above list of the works of Leo be correct, we may conjecture that he lived not far from the time of Alexander the Great, that is, after the close of the Sacred War, of which he wrote the history ; and before the local history of Caria and Lycia had lost its interest by the absorption of those pro- vinces in the Syrian and Pergamenian kingdoms, and subsequently in the Roman empire. It is to be observed, however, that the authority of the Sacred War and of the work De Siatibus is doubt- ful, as Suidas and Eudocia enumerate works under those titles among those of Leo of Byzantium. [No. 7.] Vossius supposes that either Leo of Alabanda or Leo of Byzantium is the writer re- ferred to by Hyginus {Asiron. Poetic, c. 20), as having written a work on the history of Egypt. [See No. 3.] ( Suidas, s. v. Ai<av 'AAagafSeJs ; Eudocia, Violetum., s. v. Aecav 'AXaSavdevs ; Fabric. » Bibl. Graec. vol. vi. p. 132, vol. vii. p. 713 ; Voss. de Hist. Graec. Lib. iii. p. 179.) 5. AsiNus {'Aaivos). [No. 15.] 6. Of Bulgaria. [See No. 2.] 7. Of Byzantium, a rhetorician and historical writer of the age of Philip, and perhaps of Alex- ander the Great. Philostratus says he was a dis- ciple of Plato ; but according to Suidas and Eudocia some statements made him the disciple of Aristotle; and both Suidas and Eudocia call him a Peripa- tetic. He appears to have occupied a leading position in the Byznntine commonwealth at the time it was attacke'd by Philip of Macedon. Ac- cording to Hesychius of Miletus, he was strategos or general of the Byzantines. Philostratus has recorded a curious anecdote in reference to this invasion. Leo sent to demand of Philip the reason of the inva- sion ; and when Philip replied that the beauty of the city had made him fall in love with it, and that he came as a suitor, Leo retorted, that weapons of war were not the usual instruments employed by lovers. The city was almost taken by Philip; but the obstinate resistance of the citizens, and the arrival of succours from Athens, under Chares (b. c. 340), and subsequently under Phocion, com- pelled him to withdraw. Leo was sent as ambas- sador to Athens, whether during the siege or at some other time is not clear ; and an anecdote re- corded by Philostratus and Suidas in connection with this embassy shows the same ready wit as his reply to Philip. The dissensions of the Athenians retarded their movements ; and when Leo, on his appearance in their assembly, was received with shouts of laughter, on account of his corpulence, "What do you laugh at, Athenians.''" said he; "Is it because I am fat, and of such a size ? I have a wife fatter than myself ; yet when we agree the bed will hold us ; but when we disagree, the whole house will not." Plutarch {Praecepta Po- litica. Opera., vol. ix. p. 207, ed. Reisk.) relates the anecdote with a variation, which makes Leo re- markable, not for his corpulence, but for his dimi- nutive stature: and Athenaeus (xii. pp.550, 551), relates the story of another IByzantine, Pytho,