Nicolas V was active; in Milan, Visconti; in Verona, Della Scala; in Sicily, king Robert; in Venice, Aldus Manutius formed a circle enthusiastically devoted to classical literature, and the new art of printing was particularly serviceable to the study. The works of ancient authors were now rapidly multiplied: collections and commentators appeared, and philology was enabled to assume a scientific form, as different scholars could avail themselves with comparative ease of the fruits of each other's labors, and the standard works of taste and criticism became comparatively secure from loss and injury. The study of the classics and of ancient languages was no longer confined to the purposes of theology, but was directed to the general improvement of the human mind. Successful imitations of the ancients were now produced, and a purer Latin style arose, on which, perhaps, too great a value was laid. To this period belong Leonardo Bruni of Arezzo (1370 to 1444), Poggio Bracciolini (1380 to 1459), Lorenzo Valla (1407 to 1457), Nic. Perottus, Franc. Philelphus, Pompon. Lætus, Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499) and Angelo Poliziano (1454--1492). From Italy, this renewed zeal for the cultivation of philology first communicated itself to France. We find, in the fifteenth century, Greek and Italian teachers of philology in Paris, and many translations of Roman classics into French. This period, with its mo-, mentous consequences, is of the highest importance to the student of history. A new era begins in the history of civilization with the revival of the study of the classics, which, by degrees, exercises a decisive influence on religion and politics, the sciences and arts, and the whole tone of society. It is a most interesting task to the philosophic student, to trace the causes of this triumph of pagan civilization over Christian Europe, by means of the languages and literature of ages long gone by; to witness the gradual awakening of the nations in proportion to the enthusiasm with which they devoted themselves to the new study; to contemplate the gradual decline of this enthusiasm after it had produced its proper effects (as the blossom fades when the fruit is formed); and to analyze the injurious consequences of the exclusive hold which these studies so long possessed over the minds of men;-we say injurious consequences, for it is, perhaps, a law of our nature that the causes which strongly stir mankind, and urge them forward in civilization, must lead to excess and corruption,

eventually removed by the action of some new mighty agent; and the undue devotion to classical antiquity did produce, in some respects, deleterious effects, from which our age is now laboring to free itself. In England, a scientific philology was introduced about the end of the fifteenth century, by means of some scholars educated in Italy. In Germany, it came in principally through the Netherlands, and the way for it was prepared by a reform in the mode of teaching in schools in Lower Germany. The first philologists of Germany were educated in Italy; for example, Rud. Agricola (1442–1485), C. Celtes (1459-1508), and John Reuchlin (1454-1521). The first was a scholar of Thomas a Kempis, the second was principally distinguished as the founder of learned societies in Germany, the last by the revival of the Hebrew philology. In this century, we find one of the first humanists (humaniora was the name given, since the middle ages, to the sciences which introduced the student to an acquaintance with classical antiquities, and the teachers of these sciences were exclusively called humanists), who exerted a great influence in Germany, and particularly promoted the study of Greek literature—we mean Desiderius Erasmus (q. v.) (1467—1536). But from the end of the sixteenth century, when the study of ancient literature had again declined in Italy (in later times, it has been cultivated there almost with an exclusive reference to the history of art and to antiquities), Holland was the school of the greatest philologists, who did much service, particularly in regard to the etymology of the ancient languages, in grammar, verbal criticism and grammatical explanations, and, more lately, have applied philology principally to the study of jurisprudence. Among the scholars of Holland is the celebrated Hugo de Groot (Grotius) (1583-1645), who was a master in exegesis, and united philology more closely with theology; Justus Lipsius, Adr. Jonghe (Ju nius), Gruter, Dan. and Nic. Heinsius, the Gronovii, Burmann, Perizonius, Lamb. Bos, Siegbert Havercamp, Drakenborch, Oudendorp, Hemsterhuis, Wesseling, Lennep, Hoogeven, Valkenaer, Ruhnken, Wyttenbach, and others. Oriental philology was also here advanced; for example, by the celebrated Orientalist Erpenius (15841624), Leusden, H. Reland, Albert Schultens (1686-1750), who makes an epoch in this science, &c. Th. Creech, Barnes, John Hudson, Baxter, Clarke, John Taylor, Rich. Davis, Wakefield, Robert Wood, Zach. Pearce, Middleton, Potter, Heath,

Warton, Musgrave, Tyrwhitt, John Toup, Rich. Bentley and Rich. Porson are the most distinguished among the English classical philologists. But Oriental philology was also much cultivated in England, by Selden, Lightfoot, Walton, Sam. Clarke, Pearson, Castell, Lowth, Kennicot, &c., and the study of the modern languages has been carried, by the diffusion of the English over so many countries, to an unexampled height, while the study of classical philology has somewhat declined in that country. In France, philology, especially since the commencement of the sixteenth century, has found many patrons and friends. In that country, it has been applied particularly to theology and jurisprudence, but less cultivated as an independent branch of science. Among the French philologists of the former sort are William Bude or Budæus (1467-1540), and after him, James Cujacius, Brissonius Dionysius Gothofredus (who died in 1622), and others. Among the classical philologists of France are distinguished Lambin, Muretus, the learned printers Rob. and Hen. Stephanus (Etienne), the multifarious scholar Jul. Cæs. Scaliger (Della Scala, originally of Verona), his son Jos. Just. Scaliger, also Hadr. Turnebus (Tourneboeuf), Claudius Salmasius (Saumaise), Isaac Casaubon, Vigerius (Vigier), Du Fresne, Faber (Le Fevre), the archæologist Montfaucon and others. The study of classical literature had a great effect upon the French national literature, in which (for instance, in tragedy) they strove to imitate the ancients. In later times, philological studies have been very much neglected in that country, and it affords only a few distinguished names, as Villoison, La Rochette, Boissonade, Larcher, Gail. In the seventeenth century, Oriental philology found friends among the French-Bochart, D'Herbelot, Le Jay, La Croze, Houbigant, and others; and owes much to the celebrated scholars of our time, Silvestre de Sacy and Louis Matthieu Langlès. The knowledge of modern languages has been less necessary to the French on account of the great extension of their own. The Spanish and Portuguese have only a few distinguished philologists; but the number of Germans who have investigated profoundly and extensively the classical languages and antiquities is very great. To the sixteenth century belong Joach. Camerarius, the promoter of Grecian literature; the lexicographer Bas. Faber, and the learned antiquarian Joh. George Grævius (Gräve); to the seventeenth century, in which 9

VOL. X.

philology was less favored, the learned Caspar Barth, John Freinsheim, Weller, Chris. Cellarius; to the eighteenth, Ludolf Küster, Francis Budæus, J. A. Fabricius, Lange, Frisch, Hedericus; since the middle of that century, John Matth. Gesner established a profound and taste- . ful philological school, with which the flourishing period of independent philology begins among the Germans, which was carried to a great height by Winckelmann, Lessing and Herder. In later times, Germany can boast of Ernesti, Reiske, Heusinger, Duker, Wesseling, Fischer, Reiz, Brunck. To the nineteenth century belong the following, the greater part of whom are still living:-Heyne, Wolf, Beck, Schneider, Harles, Matthia, Buttmann, Schütz,Oberlin, Spalding, Schweighäuser, Hermann, Heindorf, Schäfer, Böckh, Creuzer, Schleiermacher, Bekker, Voss, Eichstädt, Jacobs, Passow, and others. Oriental philology, particularly the Hebrew literature and language, was cultivated in the sixteenth century, by Buxtorf; in the seventeenth, by Glass, Pfeifer; in the eighteenth and nineteenth, by Michaelis, Dantz, Dathe, Hezel, Cocceii, Schnurrer, Tychsen, Eichhorn, Paulus, Von Hammer, Vater, Gesenius; of late the Sanscrit by A. W. Schlegel, Kosegarten, Bopp, the Chinese by Montucci and Klaproth, and several others. The influence of this philological industry appears principally in theology, for we find the greatest exegetical writers among the Germans since the time of the reformation. Melanchthon and Beza were distinguished before. In the seventeenth century, there follow Jablonski, Herman von der Hardt, Reineccius, Simon; in the eighteenth, Semler, Ernesti, Morus, Koppe, Ilgen, Griesbach, Matthäi, Storr, Nősselt, Knapp, Paulus, the Rosenmüllers, De Wette, &c. Jurisprudence was investigated from its sources by means of philology, and cultivated as one of the learned sciences, which character it still bears in Germany. The study of history and geography has been, by its means, cultivated and extended in various ways, and no department of the sciences and arts has been without its support, and, conversely, the study of classical literature has been promoted by antiquarian and archæological knowledge, as in the cases of Heyne, Böttiger, Voss. In the history of philology, since the revival of learning, Creuzer distinguishes several periods. The first was characterized by the spirit of imitation, when men were enraptured with the beauty of the works of genius to

which they were for the first time introduced, and a spirit of imitation almost unconsciously took possession of them, and appeared in all their labors. At this time, they had not learned to distinguish what was accidental from what was essential to the excellence they so much admired, Representatives of this period are Poggio, Angelo Poliziano, and Marsilio Ficino, the latter a reviver of ancient philosophy. Then follows the period which Creuzer calls that of realism, when men became possessed with a love for wide and deep learning. It had its origin in the well founded opinion of the necessity of great and thorough knowledge for the restoring and illustrating of the works of antiquity, but it led to the accumulation of unwieldy stores of learning, which impeded the proper activity of the mind. Scaliger, Claude Saumaise, Gerh. and John Vossius, Casp. Barth, and others, represent this period, and partake more or less in its errors. What these great accumulators had brought together was first rendered truly useful by the critical labors of the following period, which we may call the period of understanding, when a discriminating criticism was applied to these stores. The merits and the genuineness of ancient works were now more carefully examined. A more accurate study of language and a more continual reference to the context, gave greater weight to criticism. A methodical arrangement of knowledge, judicious selection, acute thinking, and correct taste, were now more prized than vast erudition. In this period, the bold and ingenious Richard Bentley, the thorough and judicious Tib. Hemsterhuis, are distinguished. Ruhnken, Valkenaer, and several of the living philologists of Germany, including the celebrated Greek scholar Hermann, belong to the same class. The meaning of philology, even in the limited character in which it has just been considered, is not accurately settled. The famous Fr. Aug. Wolf calls it, without any qualification, the science of antiquities in general.-See Museum der Alterthumswissenschaft, edit. by Wolf & Buttmann (vol. i, No. 1, 1807). Others go equally far in restricting its meaning. Wherever the limits of the two sciences may be fixed, it is certain that philology and archæology are so intimately connected that one is indispensable to the other. Philology, as the science which embraces the languages and literature of antiquity, comprises an acquaintance with grammar, with hermeneutics, or the science of interpretation (implying, of course, the power of criticism and

emendation), with the theory of prose and metrical composition and with the history of Greek and Roman literature. Wolf says there exist 1600 Greek and Roman authors, preserved entire or in fragments, exclusive of the fathers of the church, and of this number, the Latin authors amount to little more than a quarter. The auxiliary sciences to philology are, a. ancient geography (which is divided, by Wolf, into mythical geography, or uranography, historical geography, with chorography and topography); b. the general history of the nations of antiquity, together with chronology and historical criticism as subsidiary to it; c. Greek and Roman antiquities (q. v.), or the history of particular circumstances, of the constitution and customs of the chief tribes of Greece and of the Romans; d. mythology, or a knowledge of the religious tales of the Greeks and Romans; e. the history of their philosophy and their other sciences; f. the history of ancient art, poetry included; g. archæology, to which belong epigraphics, or the knowledge of the inscriptions of both nations, and numismatics; h. the history of philology; i. æsthetics (particularly in relation to poetry) and philosophical criticism on the value of ancient authors. In the history of philology we have touched upon the remarkable hold which the literature of Greece and Rome, above that of all other nations, has acquired upon the minds of men, and it is not strange that so beautiful a literature, falling finished into an age in many respects benighted, should always retain great influence, having been, in fact, the source of our civilization, and presenting models of excellence attained under the most favorable circumstances, in addition to the beauty of the idioms in which they are clothed. The Greek, in particular, is the most finely organized and most fully developed language with which we are yet acquainted. In consequence of these circumstances, this science has been, and still is, overrated, and often pursued with an exclusive and injurious preference, which is nourished by the present system of school instruction in Europe. The Germans, we believe, are at present the most devoted to philology-a consequence of the studiousness that distinguishes the country, and which arises itself from the restraints upon action, at least to a considerable degree. To conclude, with a few words of Wolf, "The exercise of the thoughts on languages (which involve much of what is highest and most profound in the operations of the mind), particularly on foreign

languages, throws open the field of abstract inquiry, and excites to the study of the intellect. The thorough study of the written works of antiquity serves as a means for the vigorous developement of the powers. All the powers of the mind are occupied by the explanation and emendation of these works. And what a fund of knowledge is afforded by the view which they present of the developement of man and of society in ancient times! In ancient Greece, we find, what we search for in vain almost every where else, nations and states which possessed in their nature most of those qualities which conduce to perfect the character of man, a people of so lively and susceptible a spirit as to leave no field of action which presented itself untried, and who pursued, in this way, the path of improvement more independently of the nations around them, and for a longer period, than was possible in after times and under altered circumstances; who forgot the man so little in the citizen, that the civil institutions themselves aimed at the developement of the human powers by general sacrifices; who, in fine, with an extreme sensibility for every thing noble and graceful in the arts, united such depth in scientific researches, that they have produced the first adınirable masters in ideal speculation as well as the most beautiful works of art." This is the field presented to the student of philology.

PHILOPEMEN, the last great military commander of the Greeks, was born at Megalopolis, in Arcadia, B. C. 253, and, after the early death of his father, was educated by Cassander, a noble Mantinæan. Two academical philosophers were his teachers, and instilled into him high principles of honor and patriotism. Disinclined to a life of study, and thirsting for enterprise, military glory was his ambi tion, and to that all his youthful exercises were directed. No sooner had he begun to bear arms, than he joined his countrymen in their incursions into the Spartan territories. When he was thirty years old, Cleomenes, king of Sparta, surprised Megalopolis by night, and Philopomen, who had unsuccessfully endeavored to repel him, covered the retreat of his fellow-citizens to Messene, at the extreme hazard of his own life. When Antigonus, king of Macedonia, came to the assistance of the Achæans against Cleomenes, Philopoemen joined him with the cavalry of his native place, and distinguished himself in the battle of Sellasia, in which the Spartans were totally defeated. Antigonus proposed to take him into his service; but Philopomen would only consent to serve some years as a volunteer in so excellent a school of warfare, and, in that capacity, was engaged in the war in Crete. Returning with a high reputation, he received from the Achæans the command of their cavalry, which, under him, became formidable throughout all Greece. In a battle with the Etolians and Eleans, he killed, with his own hand, the commander of the Elean cavalry, and thus decided the victory in his favor. In 210 B. C., he was appointed commander-in-chief of the forces of the Achæan league. After having reorganized the Achæan army, he led it into the field against Machanidas, tyrant of Sparta, who was advancing at the head of a powerful force, against Achaia. They encountered each other at Mantinea. After a hard struggle, Philopomen killed Machanidas in single combat, and gained a complete victory. The Achæans perpetuated the memory of this achievement by the erection of a bronze statue in the temple of Delphi. When the Achæans had declared war against Nabis, a later Spartan tyrant, and Nabis had besieged Gythium, Philopomen attacked him by sea, but was defeated. He then surprised the enemy's camp, advanced against Sparta, overthrew the forces of Nabis, and destroyed a great part of them. Nabis was soon after murdered, and Sparta was taken and pillaged by the Etolians, against whom the inhabitants had risen,

PHILOMELA; a daughter of Pandion, king of Athens, who was transformed into nightingale. According to the fable, Progne, sister of Philomela, married the Thracian prince Tereus, by whom she had a son, Itys. When Itys had grown up, Tereus went to Athens, and, at the persuasion of his wife, took her sister with him on his return. On the way, Tereus violated her person, and, to conceal his crime, cut out her tongue. But Philomela made it known to Progne by means of some tapestry, on which she embroidered her story. To gratify their revenge, they murdered Itys, and served him up to his father. When he saw the remains of his son, he pursued them; but they invoked the gods for help, and they were all immediately transformed. Progne fled to the woods in the form of a nightingale, lamenting for Itys. Philomela mournfully uttered Tereu, under the form of a swallow, in broken chirpings, on account of the mutilation of her tongue; and Tereus, in the form of a lapwing, uttered a piercing poo, or woo. Another story makes Philomela the wife and the nightingale, and Progne the sister and the swallow.

when Philopomen arrived before the city with a small force. He took advantage of this emergency to prevail upon them to join the Achæan confederacy, 191. They were desirous of showing their gratitude to the restorer of peace by a present of 120 talents, but he refused to accept it. But the Spartans soon became dissatisfied, separated from the confederacy, and called in the Romans to their assistance. Philopomen, as commander of the Achæans, declared war against Sparta. The Roman consul Fulvius endeavored to mediate between the parties; but their ambassadors returned from Rome with an indecisive answer. Philopamen, however, proceeded against Sparta, and demanded the surrender of the authors of the disturbances. Accompanied by the principal Spartans, they presented themselves in the Achæan camp; but, while the complaints were under examination, an affray took place between them and the Spartan exiles, in which the Achæans also engaged. Seventy-three Spartans were seized, and executed by Philopomen, after a short trial. The city was consequently surrendered and treated by Philopomen with the same rigors as if it had been taken by storm. He commanded the Spartans to destroy their walls, to dismiss their mercenaries, to admit the exiles, to expel the slaves who had been set free by the tyrants, and substitute the Achæan code for the laws of Lycurgus. The Romans, to whom they had recourse for protection, declared these conditions too severe, but added that they had no right to violate them. Soon after, however, the Roman senate, eager to humble the powerful Achæan confederacy, sent an embassy to induce it to soften their rigor. Philopomen procured the rejection of this demand; but the Romans finally prevailed on the federal congress to admit Sparta again into the confederacy as an independent state. Hardly was this affair settled, when Messene revolted. Philopomen, though broken by infirmity and disease, marched against the insurgents, and at first beat them back, but was afterwards attacked with such fury, that he was obliged to give way. Separated from his followers, and thrown from his horse, he fell, dangerously wounded on his head, into the hands of the enemy. He was carried in chains to Messene, where his appearance moved to tears many of the inhabitants who had fought under him, and on whom he had conferred benefits. To destroy this impression, the government caused him to be thrown into a subterraneous dungeon, and, the next morning, he was obliged to drink poison. When he re

ceived the cup, having been informed that his troops had saved themselves, he said, "That is enough for me; I die content;" and emptied it with a cheerful countenance. Thus died (B. C. 183) one of the greatest generals of Greece, whom the ancients compared to Hannibal and Scipio. His ashes were transported to his native city with great pomp; statues were raised to his memory in most of the Grecian cities, and a yearly offering was made at his tomb by the city of Megalopolis. PHILOSOPHER'S STONE. (See Alchemy.) PHILOSOPHY, INTELLECTUAL. (See Appendix, end of this volume.)

PHILOSOPHY, NATURAL, or PHYSICS (physica, physice, from pois, nature), is that branch of science which treats of the laws and properties of matter. Natural history (q. v.) describes the external characters and appearances of natural objects, while chemistry (q. v.) separates them into their elements, and explains the modes of the composition and mutual action of these elements upon each other: natural philosophy, on the other hand, deals with matter in its integrant forms, and points out those properties which belong universally to matter, and those laws whose operation is implied in the very definition of the term matter. It therefore comprises astronomy (q. v.), which explains the causes that keep in motion, and bind in fixed orbits, the great train of worlds and systems of worlds composing the universe; mechanics (q. v.), in its different divisions (see Acoustics, Hydraulics, Hydrostatics, Pneumatics); optics (q. v.), or the science which explains the motions and laws of light; the laws of heat, electricity and magnetism, except in regard to their chemical properties, also fall within the jurisdiction of natural philosophy. In respect to the method of investigation, it is sometimes by mathematical calculation, and sometimes by observation (experimental philosophy); but these two instruments of truth are more commonly united in illustrating and confirming each other's results than employed in distinct departments of research. In regard to the theory of matter (q. v.), natural philosophers are at present divided, the one school maintaining that all bodies are composed of continuous matter, the different states of which are owing to the contending action of two opposite powers, expansion and attraction; the other, that matter is composed of minute particles, or atoms of unchangeable forms, which primitive forms produce particular modifications of the natural powers. (See Dynamic Theory.) The Egyptians, Chaldeans and Phoenicians were, in the earliest periods,