Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/915

Rh tion of which, as the age at which he wrote, and the testimony of the grammarian, Diomedes (iii. p. 486), cuncur in establishing, there was a great deal of coarse buffoonery. The concluding words of Aristophanes, , especially as they occur in a sort of apologetic address by that poet, who, through his whole career, prided himself on his less frequent indulgence in the extravagant jests in which other comedians were addicted, gave some countenance to the supposition that Magnes had attempted a similar restriction upon his comic licence during the latter period of his life, and had suffered, as Aristophanes himself was always exposed to suffer, for not pandering sufficiently to the taste of his audience. The words may, however, refer simply to the decline of his comic powers.

According to Suidas and Eudocia, Magnes ex- hibited nine plays, and -gained two victories, a statement obviously inconsistent with the second line of the above extract from Aristophanes. The anonymous writer (l. c.) assigns to him eleven victories, and states that none of his dramas were preserved, but that nine were falsely ascribed to him. (Comp. Athen. xiv. p, 646, e. ) Some of these spurious dramas seem to have been founded on the titles, and perhaps on some remains, of his genuine plays. (Suid. s. v. ).

It is worthy of notice that Magnes is the earliest comic poet of whom we find any victories recorded. (Comp. Aristot. Poet 5.)

Only a few titles of his works are extant. Of those mentioned by the scholiast on Aristophanes, the should probably be corrected to certain musicians who were fond of the lyre called harbiton. The seems to have been an attack on the voluptuous dances of the Lydians. (Suid. s. v. ; Hesych. s. v.  ; Athen. xv. p. 690, c; Pollux, vii. 188.) The  took its name from a sort of gall fly which infested the fig ; and both it and the belong to a class of titles common enough with the Attic comedians; but we have no indication of their contents. There are a few other titles, namely,, of which there were two editions, and which should perhaps be assigned to Crates (Athen. ix. p. 367, f., xiv. p. 646, e. ; Poll. vi. 79),, or (Suid. vol. ii. p. 640 ; Phot. s. v.  ; the true form of this title is quite uncertain), (Schol. ad Plat. p. 336, Bekker), and yuox'a, a title which does not well agree with what Ave know of the character of the plays of Magnes. (Eudoc. p. 302.) The extant fragments of Magnes scarcely exceed half a dozen lines. (Meineke, Frag. Com. Graec. vol. i. pp. 29 — 35, vol. ii. pp. 9— 11 ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. ii. p. 453 ; Bode, Gesch. d. Hellen. Dichtk. vol. iii. Pt. 2, p. 31.) [P. S.]
 * and the play was no doubt a satire on

MAGNUS, a Roman consular, accused of having organized an extensive plot against Maximinus I., in which, according to Herodian, he was supported by a great number of centurions, and the whole body of the senate. The emperor, soon after his accession ( 235), was about to commence a campaign against the Germans ; and having thrown a bridge over the Rhine, for the purpose of transporting his troops, it was proposed by the conspirators to break down the structure as soon as the prince should have passed, and thus leave him on the further bank, with a handful of men, at the mercy of the barbarians. The truth or falsehood of the charge was never ascertained, for all who were impeached, or who were open to the most remote suspicion, were instantly put to death without trial or investigation, without being allowed to confess their guilt, or to assert their innocence. The statement that the whole senate were parties to the scheme is, considering the nature and circumstances of the case, an extravagant hyperbole, contradicted by the very details of the narrative, although doubtless from the well-known hatred entertained by that body towards the sanguinary tyrant, they would have rejoiced in any event which might have caused his destruction. (Hero- dian. vii. 2 ; Capitolin. Maxim.duo, 10.) [W.R.]

MAGNUS, the name of several physicians, whom it is difficult to distinguish with certainty. (See Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. xiii. p. 313, ed. vet. ; C. G. Kühn, Additam. ad Elench. Medicor. Vet. a J. A. Fubricio exhibit. ; Guidot, Notes to Theophilus, De Urin. ; Haller, Bibl. Med. Pract. vol. iv. p. 203.)

1. A native of Antiochia Mygdonica (called more frequently Nisibis), in Mesopotamia, who studied medicine under Zenon, and was a fellow-pupil of Oribasius and lonicus, in the latter half of the fourth century after Christ. Eunapius, who has given a short account of his life (De Vit. Philos. p. 168, ed. 1568), says that he lectured on medicine at Alexandria, where he enjoyed a great reputation, though not so much for his practical skill as for his eloquence and power of argument. He is probably the person who wrote a work on the Urine, which is mentioned by Theophilus (De Urin. praef. and c. 3, 9) and Joannes Actuarius (De Urin, i. 2). If so, he bore the title {{ (Theoph. l. c.). He is also probably the physician mentioned by Philostorgius (Hist. Eccles. viii. 8) as living at Alexandria in great repute, in the time of Valentinian and Valens.

2. A native of Ephesus, in Lydia, from the second book of whose letters ("Epistolae) Caelius Aurelianus quotes (De Morb. Acut. iii. 14. p. 225J a short passage, relating to hydrophobia. He is perhaps the same physician who is elsewhere quoted by Caelius Aurelianus (De Morb. Acut.'' ii. 10, p. 96), and said to have belonged to the medical sect of the Methodici, and to have lived before Agathinus, and therefore in the first century after Christ.

3. A native of Philadelphia in Lydia, whose medical formulae are quoted by the younger Andromachus, and who must therefore have lived in or before the first century after Christ. (Galen, De Compos. Medicam. sec. Locos, vii. 4, vol. xiii. p. 80.) He is also mentioned elsewhere in Galen's works (vol. xiii. pp. 296, 829).

4. A native of Tarsus in Cilicia, who must have lived in or before the beginning of the second century after Christ, as one of his medical formulae is quoted by Asclepiades Pharmacion. (Galen, De Compos. Medicam. sec. Locos, ix. 7, voL xiii. p. 313.)

{{Sc|Magnus}}, and {{Sc|Magnus}} , whose prescriptions are mentioned by Galen (De Compos. Medicam. sec. Locos, v. 3, vol. xii. pp. 829, 844), are perhaps the same person ; perhaps also they are the same as either No. 3, or No. 4. Magnus " Sophista," whose medical formulae are quoted by Nicolaus Myrepsus (De Compos. Medicam. i. 305, ii. 5, xxxiv. 17), may also be the same person.