Diodorus

• A Peripatetic philosopher, a pupil of Critolaüs, Cic. Fin. 5, 5; id. Ac. 2 (Luc.), 24; id. Tusc. 5, 30 sq.—
• II A famous dialectician, Cic. Fat. 6; Plin. 7, 53, 54, § 180.—
• III Siculus, a well-known historian of the time of Augustus. His work, entitled Βιβλιοθήκη, of which a portion is still extant, is mentioned by Plin. H. N. praef. § 25; Lact. 1, 13, 8.

(Διόδωρος), historical.

1. A commander of Amphipolis in the reign of king Perseus of Macedonia. When the report of the king's defeat at Pella reached Amphipolis, and Diodorus feared lest the 2000 Thracians who were stationed as garrison at Amphipolis should revolt and plunder the place, he induced them by a cunning stratagem to leave the town and go to Emathia, where they might obtain rich plunder. After they had left the town, and crossed the river Strymon, he closed the gates, and Perseus soon after took refuge there. (Liv. 44.44.)

2. The tutor of Demetrius. When Demetrius was kept in captivity at Rome, Diodorus came to him from Syria, and persuaded him that he would be received with open arms by the people of Syria if he would but escape and make his appearance among them. Demetrius readily listened to him, and sent him to Syria to prepare everything and to explore the disposition of the people. (Plb. 31.20, 21.) [L.S]

(Διόδωρος),literary.

1. Of Adramyttium, a rhetorician and Academic philosopher. He lived at the time of Mithridates, tinder whom he commanded an army. In order to please the king, he caused all the senators of his native place to be massacred. He afterwards accompanied Mithridates to Pontus, and, after the fall of the king, Diodorus received the punishment for his cruelty. Charges were brought against him at Adramyttium, and as he felt that he could not clear himself, he starved himself to death in despair. (Strab. xiii. p.614.)

2. Of Alexandria, surnamed Valerius Pollio, was a son of Pollio and a disciple of Telecles. He wrote, according to Suidas (s. v. Πωλίων) and Eudocia (p. 136), a work entitled ἐξήγησις τῶν ζητουμένων παρὰ τοῖς ί ῥήτορσιν, and another Ἀττικὴ λέξις. He lived in the time of the emperor Hadrian, and is perhaps the same as the Theodorus who is mentioned by Athenaeus (xiv. p. 646, comp. xv. pp. 677, 678, 691; Phot. Bibl. Cod. 149) as the author of Ἀττικαὶ Τλῶσσαι.

3. Of Antioch, an ecclesiastical writer who lived during the latter part of the fourth century after Christ, and belonged to a noble family. During the time that he was a presbyter and archimandrita at Antioch, he exerted himself much in introducing a better discipline among the monks, and also wrote several works, which shewed that he was a man of extensive acquirements. When Meletius, the bishop of Antioch, was sent into exile in the reign of the emperor Valens, Diodorus too had to suffer for a time; but he continued to exert himself in what he thought the good cause, and frequently preached to his flock in the open fields in the neighbourhood of Antioch. In A. D. 378 Meletius was allowed to return to his see, and one of his first acts was to make Diodorus bishop of Tarsus. In A. D. 381 Diodorus attended the council of Constantinople, at which the general superintendence of the Eastern churches was entrusted to him and Pelagius of Laodiceia. (Socrat. 5.8.) How long he held his bishopric, and in what year he died, are questions which cannot be answered with certainty, though his death appears to have occurred previous to A. D. 394, in which year his successor, Phalereus, was present at a council at Constantinople. Diodorus was a man of great learning (Facund. 4.2); but some of his writings were not considered quite orthodox, and are said to have favoured the views which were afterwards promulgated by his disciple, Nestorius. His style is praised by Photius (Bibl. Cod. 223, where he is called Theodorus) for its purity and simplicity. Respecting his life, see Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. viii. p. 558, &c., and p. 802, &c., ed. Paris.

Diodorus was the author of a numerous series of works, all of which are now lost, at least in their original language, for many are said to be still extant in Syriac versions. The following deserve to be noticed : 1. Κατὰ εἱμαρμένης in 8 books or 53 chapters, was written against the theories of the astrologers, heretics, Bardesanes, and others. The whole work is said to be still extant in Syriac, and considerable Excerpta from it are preserved in Photius. (l.c.) 2. A work against Photinus, Malchion, Sabellius, Marcellus, and Ancyranus. (Theodoret. de Haeret. Fab. ii. in fin.) 3. A work against the Pagans and their idols (Facund. 4.2), which is perhaps the same as the Κατὰ Πλάτωνος περὶ Δεοῦ καὶ Δεῶν. (Hieronym. Catal. 119.) 4. Χρονικὸν διορθούμενον τὸ σφάλμα Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλον περὶ τῶν χρόνων, that is, on chronological errors committed by Eusebius. (Suid. s. v. Διόδωρος.) 5. Περὶ τοῦ εἷς Θεὸς ἐν Τριάδι, was directed against the Arians or Eunomians, and is said to be still extant in Syriac. 6. Πρὸς Γρατιανὸν κεφάλαια. (Facund. 4.2.) 7. Περὶ τῆς Ἱππάρχου σφαίρας. This Hipparchus is the Bithynian of whom Pliny (Plin. Nat. 2.26) speaks. 8. Περὶ προνοίας, or on Providence, is said to exist still in Syriac. 9. Πρὸς Εὐφρόνιον φιλόσοφον, in the form of a dialogue. (Basil. Epist. 167 ; Facund. 4.2.) 10. Κατὰ Μανιχαίων, in 24 books, of which some account is given by Photius. (Bibl. Cod. 85; comp. Theodoret. i. in fin.) The work is believed to be extant in Syriac. 11. Περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 102; Leontius, do Sectis, pp. 448.) 12. Πρὸς τοὺς Συνονσιαστάς, a work directed against the Apollinaristae. Some fragments of the first book are preserved in Leontius. (Bibl. Patr. ix. p. 704, ed. Lugdun.) This work, which is still extant in Syriac, seems to have been the principal cause of Diodorus being looked upon as heretical; for the Nestorians appealed to it in support of their tenets, and Cyrillus wrote against it. 13. A commentary on most of the books of the Old and New Testament. This was one of his principal works, and in his interpretation of the Scriptures he rejected the allegorical explanation, and adhered to the literal meaning of the text. (Suidas, l.c. ; Socrat. 6.2 ; Sozomen. 8.2; Hieronym. Catal. 119.) The work is frequently referred to by ecclesiastical writers, and many fragments of it have thus been preserved. (Cave, Hist. Lit. i. p. 217, ed. London ; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. iv. p. 380, ix. p. 277, &c.)

4. Of Ascalon, a Greek grammarian, who wrote a work on the poet Antiphanes. (Περὶ Ἀντιφάνους καὶ τῆς παρὰ τοῖς νεωτέροις ματτύης ; Athen. 14.662.)

5. Of Aspendus, a Pythagorean philosopher, who probably lived after the time of Plato, and must have been still alive in Ol. 104, for he was an acquaintance of Stratonicus, the musician, who lived at the court of Ptolemy Lagi. Diodorus is said to have adopted the Cynic mode of living. (Iambilich. Vit. Pythay. 36; Athen. 4.163 ; Bentley, Phalar. p. 62, ed. London, 1777.)

6. Surnamed Cronus, a son of Ameinias of lasus in Caria, lived at the court of Alexandria in the reign of Ptolemy Soter, who is said to have given him the surname of Cronus on account of his inability to solve at once some dialectic problem proposed by Stilpo, when the two philosophers were dining with the king. Diodorus is said to have taken that disgrace so much to heart, that after his return from the repast, and writing a treatise on the problem, he died in despair. (D. L. 2.111.) According to an account in Strabo (xiv. p.658, xvii. p. 838), Diodorus himself adopted the surname of Cronus from his teacher, Apollonius Cronus. Further particulars respecting his life are not known. He belonged to the Megaric school of philosophy, and was the fourth in the succession of the heads of that school. He was particularly celebrated for his great dialectic skill, for which he is called ὁ διαλεκτικός, or διαλεκτικώτατος. (Strab. l.c. ; Sext. Empir. ad v. Gram. i. p. 310 ; Plin. Nat. 7.54.) This epithet afterwards assumed the character of a surname, and descended even to his five daughters, who were likewise distinguished as dialecticians. Respecting the doctrines of Diodorus we possess only fragmentary information, and not even the titles of his works are known. It appears, however, certain that it was he who fully developed the dialectic art of the Megarics, which so frequently degenerated into mere shallow sophistry. (Cic. Ac. 2.24, 47.) He seems to have been much occupied with the theory of proof and of hypothetical propositions. In the same manner as he rejected in logic the divisibility of the fundamental notion, he also maintained, in his physical doctrines, that space was indivisible, and consequently that motion was a thing impossible. He further denied the coming into existence and all multiplicity both in time and in space; but he considered the things that fill up space as one whole composed of an infinite number of indivisible particles. In this latter respect he approached the atomistic doctrines of Democritus and Diagoras. In regard to things possible, he maintained that only those things are possible which actually are or will be; possible was, further, with him identical with necessary; hence everything which is not going to be cannot be, and all that is, or is going to be, is necessary; so that the future is as certain and defined as the past. This theory approached the doctrine of fate maintained by the Stoics, and Chrysippus is said to have written a work, περὶ δυνατῶν, against the views of Diodorus. (D. L. 7.191; Cic. de Fato, 6, 7. 9, ad Fam. 9.4.) He made use of the false syllogism called Sorites, and is said to have invented two others of the same kind, viz. the ἐγκεκαλυμμένος and the κερατίνης λόγος. (D. L. 2.111.) Language was, with him, as with Aristotle, the result of an agreement of men among themselves. (Lersch, Sprachphilos. der Alt. i. p. 42; Deycks, de Megaricorum Doctrina, p. 64, &c.)

7. Of Croton, a Pythagorean philosopher, who is otherwise unknown. (Iamblich. Vit. Pythag. 35.)

8. Of Elaea, is quoted as the author of elegies by Parthenius (Erot. 15), who relates from him a story about Daphne.

9. Of Ephesus, is mentioned by Diogenes Laertius (8.70) as the author of a work on the life and philosophy of Anaximander.

10. Surnamed Periegetes, was probably a native of Athens, and wrote on topographical and geographical subjects. He lived at the time of and after Alexander the Great; for it is clear, from some fragments of his works, that he wrote at the time when Athens had only twelve phylae, that is, previous to B. C. 308; and Athenaeus (xiii. p. 521) states, that Diodorus was acquainted with the rhetorician Anaximenes. Works

We know only of two works of Diodorus Periegetes, viz. 1. Περὶ δήμων

This work is frequently quoted by Harpocration and Stephanus of Byzantium, and from which a considerable number of statements are preserved in consequence. 2. Περὶ μνημάτων, or on monuments

(Plut. Themist. 32, comp. Thes. 36, Cim. 16, Vit. X Orat. p. 849; Athen. 13.591.) On Miletus(?)

It is not impossible that he may also be the author of a work on Miletus (περὶ Μιλήτον σύγγραμμα, Schol. ad Plut. Menex. p. 380; comp. Preller, Polemon. Fragm. p. 170, &c)

11. Of Priene, is mentioned as a writer upon agriculture, but is otherwise unknown. (Varro, de R. R. 1.1; Columella, 1.1; Plin. H. N. Elench. lib. xv. xvii. &c.)

12. The Sicilian, usually called Diodorus Siculus, was a contemporary of Caesar and Augustus. (Suid. s. v. Διόδωρος; Euseb. Chron. ad Ann. 1967.) He was born in the town of Agyrium in Sicily, where he became acquainted with the Latin language through the great intercourse between the Romans and Sicilians. Respecting his life we know no more than what he himself tells us (1.4). He seems to have made it the business of his life to write an universal history from the earliest down to his own time. With this object in view, he travelled over a great part of Europe and Asia to gain a more accurate knowledge of nations and countries than he could obtain from previous historians and geographers. For a long time he lived at Rome, and there also he made large collections of materials for his work by studying the ancient documents. Works The Library (Βιβλιοθήκη)

Diodorus states, that he spent thirty years upon his work, which period probably includes the time he spent in travelling and collecting materials. As it embraced the history of all ages and countries, and thus supplied the place, as it were, of a whole library, he called it Βιβλιοθήκη, or, as Eusebius (Praep. Evang. 1.6) says, Βιβλιοθήκη ἱστορική. The time at which he wrote his history may be determined pretty accurately from internal evidence : he not only mentions Caesar's invasion of Britain and his crossing the Rhine, but also his death and apotheosis (1.4, 4.19, 5.21, 25) : he further states (1.44, comp. 83), that he was in Egypt in Ol. 190, that is, B. C. 20; and Scaliger (Animadu. ad Euscb. p. 156) has made it highly probable that Diodorus wrote his work after the year B. C. 8, when Augustus corrected the calendar and introduced the intercalation every fourth year.

The whole work of Diodorus consisted of forty books, and embraced the period from the earliest mythical ages down to the beginning of J. Caesar's Gallic wars. Diodorus himself further mentions, that the work was divided into three great sections. The first, which consisted of the first six books, contains the history of the mythical times previous to the Trojan war. The first books of this section treat of the mythuses of foreign countries, and the latter books of those of the Greeks. The second section consisted of eleven books, which contained the history from the Trojan war down to the death of Alexander the Great; and the third section, which contained the remaining 23 books, treated of the history from the death of Alexander down to the beginning of Caesar's Gallic wars. Of this great work considerable portions are now lost. The first five books, which contain the early history of the Eastern nations, the Egyptians, Aethiopians, and Greeks, are extant entire; the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth books are lost; but from the eleventh down to the twentieth the work is complete again, and contains the history from the second Persian war, B. C. 480, down to the year B. C. 302. The remaining portion of the work is lost, with the exception of a considerable number of fragments and the Excerpta, which are preserved partly in Photius (Bibl. Cod. 244), who gives extracts from books 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, and 40, and partly in the Eclogae made at the command of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, from which they have successively been published by H. Stephens, Fulv. Ursinus, Valesius, and A. Mai. (Collect. Nova Script. ii. p. 1, &c., p. 568, &c.) The work of Diodorus is constructed upon the plan of annals, and the events of each year are placed by the side of one another without any internal connexion. In composing his Bibliotheca, Diodorus made use, independent of his own observations, of all sources which were accessible to him; and had he exercised any criticism or judgment, or rather had he possessed any critical powers, his work might have been of incalculable value to the student of history. But Diodorus did nothing but collect that which he found in his different authorities : he thus jumbled together history, mythus, and fiction; he frequently misunderstood or mutilated his authorities, and not seldom contradicts in one passage what he has stated in another. The absence of criticism is manifest throughout the work, which is in fact devoid of all the higher requisites of a history. But notwithstanding all these drawbacks, the extant portion of this great compilation is to us of the highest importance, on account of the great mass of materials which are there collected from a number of writers whose works have perished. Diodorus frequently mentions his authorities, and in most cases he has undoubtedly preserved the substance of his predecessors. (See Heyne, de Fontibus et Auctorib. Hist. Diodori, in the Commentat. Societ. Gotting. vols. v. and vii., and reprinted in the Bipont edition of Diodorus, vol. i. p. xix. &c., which also contains a minute account of the plan of the history by J. N. Eyring, p. cv., &c.) The style of Diodorus is on the whole clear and lucid, but not always equal, which may be owing to the different character of the works he used or abridged. His diction holds the middle between the archaic or refined Attic, and the vulgar Greek which was spoken in his time. (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 70.) Editions

The work of Diodorus was first published in Latin translations of separate parts, until Vinc. Opsopaeus published the Greek text of books 16-20, Basel, 1539, 4to., which was followed by H. Stephens's edition of books 1-5 and 11-20, with the excerpta of Photius, Paris, 1559, fol. The next important edition is that of N. Rhodomannus (Hanover, 1604, fol.), which contains a Latin translation. The great edition of P. Wesseling, with an extensive and very valuable commentary, as well as the Eclogae of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, as far as they were then known, appeared at Amsterdam, 1746, 2 vols. fol. This edition was reprinted, with some additions, at Bipont (1793, &c.) in 11 vols. 8vo.

The best modern edition is that of L. Dindorf, Leipzig, 1828, 6 vols. 8vo.

The new fragments discovered and published by A. Mai were edited, with many improvements, in a separate volume by L. Dindorf, Leipzig, 1828, 8vo. Letters Attributed to Diodorus

Wesseling's edition and the Bipont reprint of it contain 65 Latin letters attributed to Diodorus. They had first been published in Italian in Pietro Carrera's Storia di Catana, 1639, fol., and were then printed in a Latin version by Abraham Preiger in Burmann's Thesaur. Antig. Sicil. vol. x. and in the old edition of Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. xiv. p. 229, &c.

The Greek original of these letters has never been seen by any one, and there can be little doubt but that these letters are a forgery made after the revival of letters. Further Information

Fabr. Bibl. Gr. iv. p. 373, &c.

13. Of Sinope. See below.

14. Of Syracuse, is mentioned by Pliny (H. N. Elench. lib. iii. and v.) among the authorities he consulted on geographical subjects.

15. Of Tarsus (Hesych. s. v. Διαγόρας), a grammarian who is mentioned by Athenaeus (xi. p. 479) as the author ot γλῶσσαι Ἰταλικαί, and of a work πρὸς Λυκόφρονα (xi. p. 478). He appears to be the same as the Diodorus referred to in two other passages of Athenaeus (xi. p. 501, xiv. p. 642). It may also be that he is the same as the grammarian whom Eustathius describes as a disciple or follower of Aristophanes of Byzantium. (Villoison, Proleg. ad Hom. Il. p. 29.)

16. Surnamed Tryphon, lived about A. D. 278, and is described by Epiphanius (de lens. ac Pond. 20) as a good man and of wonderful piety. He was presbyter in the village of Diodoris and a friend of bishop Archelaus. When Manes took refuge in his house, he was at first kindly received ; but when Diodorus was informed, by a letter of Archelaus, of the heresies of Manes, and when he began to see through the cunning of the heretic, he had a disputation with him, in which he is said triumphantly to have refuted his errors. (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 85.) Works Letter of Archelaus to Diodorus

A letter of Archelaus to Diodorus is still extant, and printed in Valesius's edition of Socrates, p. 200.

17. Of Tyre, a Peripatetic philosopher, a disciple and follower of Critolaus, whom he succeeded as the head of the Peripatetic school at Athens. He was still alive and active there in B. C. 110, when L. Crassus, during his quaestorship of Macedonia, visited Athens. Cicero denies to him the character of a genuine Peripatetic, because it was one of his ethical maxims, that the greatest good consisted in a combination of virtue with the absence of pain, whereby a reconciliation between the Stoics and Epicureans was attempted. (Cic. de Orat. 1.11, Tusc. 5.30, de Fin. 2.6, 11, 4.18, 5.5, 8, 25, Acad. 2.42; Clem. Al. Strom. i. p. 301, ii. p. 415.)

There are some more persons of the name of Diodorus, concerning whom nothing of interest is known. See the list of them in Fabric. Bibl. Gr. iv. p. 378, &c. [L.S]

(Διόδωρος), of Sinope, an Athenian comic poet of the middle comedy, is mentioned in an inscription (Böckh, i. p. 354), which fixes his date at the archonship of Diotimus (B. C. 354-353), when he exhibited two plays, entitled Νεκρός and Μαινόμενος, Aristomachus being his actor. Suidas (s. v.) quotes Athenaeus as mentioning his Αὐλητρίς in the tenth book of the Deipnosophistae, and Ἐπίκληρος and Πανηγυρισταί in the twelfth book. The actual quotations made in our copies of Athenaeus are from the Αὐλητρίς (x. p. 431c.) and a long passage from the Ἐπίκληρος (vi. pp. 235, e., 239, b., not xii.), but of the Πανηγυρισταί there is no mention in Athenaeus. A play under that title is ascribed to Baton or to Plato. There is another fragment from Diodorus in Stobaeus. (Serm. 72.1.) In another passage of Stobaeus (Serm. 125.8) the common reading, Διονύσιος, should be retained. (Meineke, Frag. Com. Graec. i. pp. 418, 419, iii. pp. 543-546.) [P.S]

(Διόδωρος Ζωνᾶς) and DIODO'RUS the Younger, both of Sardis, and of the same family, were rhetoricians and epigrammatists. The elder was distinguished in the Mithridatic war. Strabo (xiii. pp. 627. 628) says, that he engaged in many contests on behalf of Asia, and when Mithridates invaded that province, Zonas was accused of inciting the cities to revolt from him, but was acquitted in consequence of the defence which he made. Strabo adds, that the younger Diodorus, who was his own friend, composed historical writings, lyrics, and other poems, which were written in an antique style (τὴν ἀρχαίαν γραφὴν ἐμφαίνοντα ἱκανῶς). The epigrams of the Diodori, of which there are several, were included by Philip of Thessalonica in his collection, and they now form a part of the Greek Anthology. (Brunck, Anal. 2.80, 185; Jacobs, 2.67, 170.) There is considerable difficulty in assigning each of the epigrams to its proper author, and probably some of them belong to a third Diodorus, a grammarian of Tarsus, who is also mentioned by Strabo (xiv. p.675), and as it seems, by other ancient writers. (Jacobs, 13.883, 884 ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. iv. pp. 380, 472, vi. pp. 363, 364.) [P.S]

comes and magister scriniorum, one of the commissioners appointed by Theodosius the younger, in A. D. 435, to compile the Theodosian code. Theodosius originally intended that, as an historical monument for the use of the learned, there should be compiled a general code of constitutions, supplementary to the Gregorian and Hermogenian codes. These three codes taken together were intended to comprise all the general constitutions of the emperors, not such only as were in actual force, but such also as were superseded or had become obsolete. In order, however, that in case of conflict, the reader might be able to distinguish the more modern enactment, which was to prevail over the more ancient one, the arrangement under each subject was to be chronological, and dates were to be carefully added. From this general code, with the help of the works and opinions of jurists, was to be formed a select code, excluding every thing not in force and containing the whole body of practical law. In A. D. 429, nine commissioners were appointed, charged with the task of compiling, first, the general historical, and then, the select practical code. The nine named were Antiochus, ex-quaestor and praefect; another Antiochus, quaestor palatii; Theodorus, Eudicius, Eusebius, Joannes, Comazon, Eubulus, and Apelles. This plan was not carried into execution. Theodosius changed his purpose, and contented himself with projecting a single code, which should contain imperial constitutions only, without admixture of the jus civile of the jurists, or, as an English lawyer would express it, which should exhibit a consolidation of the statutory, but not of the common or unwritten law. For the changed plan sixteen commissioners were named in A. D. 435, who were directed to dispose chronologically under the same title those constitutions, or parts of constitutions, which were connected in subject; and were empowered to remove what was superfluous, to add what was necessary, to change what was doubtful by substituting what was clear, and to correct what was inconsistent. The sixteen named were Antiochus, praefectorius and consularis; Eubulus, Maximinus, Sperantius, Martyrius, Alipius, Sebastianus, Apollodorus, Theodorus, Oron, Maximus, Epigenius, Diodorus, Procopius, Erotius, Neuterius. It will be observed that only three, (namely, Antiochus, Theodorus, and Eubulus) who belonged to the first commission were nominated upon the second. In the constitution concerning the authority of the Theodosian code, eight only of the sixteen named upon the second commission are signalized as having been actively employed in the composition of the code. These eight are Antiochus, Maximinus, Martyrius, Sperantius, Appollodorus, Theodorus, Epigenius, and Procopius. (Cod. Theod. 1, tit. 1, s. 5, ib. s. 6.2; Const. de Theod. Cod. Auct. § 7.) [J.T.G]

(Διόδωρος), a Greek physician, who must have lived some time in or before the first century after Christ, as he is quoted by Pliny. (H. N. 29.39.) He may perhaps be the same person who is said by Galen (de Meth. Med. 2.7, vol. x. p. 142) to have belonged to the medical sect of the Empirici, and whose medical formulae he several times quotes. (De Compos. Medicam. sec. Locos, 5.3, vol. xii. p. 834; 10.3, vol. xiii. p. 361.) [W.A.G]

artists.

1. A silversmith, on whose silver image of a sleeping satyr there is an epigram by Plato in the Greek Anthology. (Anth. Plan. 4.12, 248.) The idea contained in the epigram is applied by Pliny to a similar work of Stratonicus.

2. A worthless painter, who is ridiculed in an epigram. (Anth. Pal. 11.213.) [P.S]

(Διόδωρος). (1) An historian, surnamed Sicŭlus, because born at Agyrium in Sicily, and the contemporary of Iulius Caesar and Augustus. Our principal data for the events of his life are derived from his own work. In early life he travelled into Asia, Africa, and Europe, and on his return established himself at Rome, where he published a general history, in forty books, under the title of Βιβλιοθήκη Ἱστορική, or Historical Library. To this labour he devoted thirty years of his life. The history comprehended a period of 1138 years, besides the time preceding the Trojan War, and was carried down to the end of Caesar's Gallic war. His work was written after the death of Caesar. The first six books were devoted to the fabulous history anterior to the war of Troy, and of these the three former to the antiquities of barbarian States, the three latter to the archaeology of the Greeks. But the historian, though treating of the fabulous history of the barbarians in the first three books, enters into an account of their manners and usages, and carries down the history of these nations to a point of time posterior to the Trojan War. Thus, in the first book he gives a sketch of Egyptian history from the reign of Menes to Amasis. In the eleven following books he details the different events which happened between the Trojan War and the death of Alexander the Great; while the remaining twenty-three books contain the history of the world down to the Gallic War and the conquest of Britain. We have only a small part remaining of this vast compilation—namely, the first five books; then from the eleventh to the twentieth, both inclusive; and, finally, fragments of the other books from the sixth to the tenth inclusive, and also of the last twenty. These rescued portions we owe to Eusebius ; to John Malalas, Georgius Syncellus, and other writers of the Lower Empire, who have cited them in the course of their own works; but, above all, to the authors of the “Extracts respecting Embassies” and of the “Extracts respecting Virtues and Vices.” We are indebted also for a part of them to the patriarch Photius, who has inserted in his Myriobiblon extracts from several of the books, from the thirtyfirst to the thirty-third, and from the thirty-sixth to the thirty-eighth and fortieth. Important additions have also been made from MSS. in the Vatican Library.

A great advantage possessed by Diodorus over most of the ancient historians is his indicating the order of time, though it must be acknowledged at the same time that his chronology offers occasional difficulties and often needs educing. Diodorus, who wrote at Rome, and at a period when the dominion of that city extended over the greater part of the civilized world, arranges his narrative in accordance with the Roman calendar and consular fasti; but he frequently adds the names of the Athenian archons who were contemporaneous.

With regard to the historical value of the work itself and the merits of the author, the most varying opinions have been entertained by modern writers. The principal fault of Diodorus seems to have been the too great extent of his work. It was not possible for any man living in the time of Augustus to write an unexceptionable universal history. It is not, then, a matter of surprise that Diodorus, who does not appear to have been a man of superior abilities, should have fallen into a number of particular errors and should have placed too much reliance on authorities sometimes far from trustworthy. Wherever he speaks from his own observation he may, perhaps, generally be relied upon; but when he is compiling from the writings of others he has shown little judgment in the selection. The literary style of Diodorus, though not very pure or elegant, is sufficiently perspicuous and presents but few difficulties, except where the MSS. are defective, as is frequently the case. The best editions of Diodorus are those of Wesseling (1746), L. Dindorf (1867-68), and Bekker (1853-54).

(2) A native of Caria, and a disciple of the Megaric School. He was a great adept in that species of verbal combat which prevailed among the philosophers of his sect. It is said that a question was proposed to him in the presence of Ptolemy Soter by Stilpo, one of his fraternity, which he required time to answer, and on this account he was ridiculed by Ptolemy and denominated “Chronus” (Χρόνος). Mortified at this defeat, he wrote a book on the question, but nevertheless died of vexation. He is the reputed author of the famous sophism against motion: “If any body be moved, it is moved either in the place where it is or in a place where it is not, for nothing can act or suffer where it is not, and therefore there is no such thing as motion.” Diodorus was rewarded for this discovery; for, having dislocated his shoulder, the surgeon who was sent for kept him for some time in torture, while he proved from the philosopher's own mode of reasoning that the bone could not have moved out of its place.

(3) A Peripatetic philosopher, with whom the uninterrupted succession of the Peripatetic School terminated. He was a native of Tyre and a pupil of Critolaüs. Mention is often made of him in the selections of Stobaeus and also in the works of Cicero. The sovereign good, according to Diodorus, was to live in a becoming manner, free from toil and care, τὸ ἀμοχθήτως καὶ καλῶς ζῆν, or, vacare omni molestia cum honestate, as Cicero expresses it (Acad. ii. 42).

(4) An orator and epigrammatic poet, a native of Sardis. He was surnamed Zonas (Ζωνᾶς). He fought in Asia and was contemporaneous with Mithridates the Great, against whom he was charged with conspiring. He defended himself successfully. Nine of his epigrams remain.

(5) Another native of Sardis, who wrote historical works, odes, and epigrams. Strabo speaks of him as subsequent to the former and a contemporary and friend of his own. We have one of his epigrams remaining.

• Olympic victor: Paus. 7.16.10