Our short analysis shows that Ocellus did not belong to the old Pytliagorean school, whose ideas were more original, but less clear. His system is rather an eclec- tic mixture of Aristotle's physics with the metaphysics of the Eleates and the morals of the Pythagoreans. Besides this intrinsic proof of its non- authenticity, which is very strong, we have another no less convinc- ing in the fact that neither Plato nor Aristotle, nor any other pliilosopher before Pliilo, makes any mention of Ocellus or his works. Mr. MuUach supposes that the above treatise was written in the 1st century B.C., a time marked by a sort of revival of the Pythagorean system. Greek philosophy, after traversing tlie fruit- ful period of the school of Socrates, had brought forth the schools of the Academicians, the Stoics, and Epicu- reans. It is easy to understand how some minds, dis- satisfied with the doctrines of these various scliools, re- turned to that of Pythagoras, as more elevated in its dogmas and purer in its morals. Juba, king of Mauri- tania, favored the revival of the Pythagorean school by collecting at a great expense the works of IVthagoras and of his disciples, scattered through Greece and Italy. This proceeding, however, gave occasion for frauds, among which wo must count the works of Ocellus, and particularly his treatise on the Nature of the Universe. According to i\Ir. Mullach's opinion, the forger has proved very skilful, and avoided all coarse anachro- nisms in language ; he, nevertheless, copied sometimes textually the expressions of philosophers of the schools of Eleas and Aristotle. Besides, we do not now possess the treatise exactly as it was originally written.
A fragment of the lltpi vofiov, quoted in Stobtcus's and other indices, shows that the works attributed to Ocellus were probably written in the Doric dialect, while the text now extant of the Hfpi rijc row TrnvTog ytvfcreiog is written in the Attic dialect, which had in course of time become the most generally used in liter- ature. , ]\Ir. Midlach thinks that the change was made during the Byzantine period, perhaps in the 9lh cen- tury. The treatise of Ocellus was first published bj' Conrad Neobar (Paris, 1539, 4to), and translated into Latin by Chretien, physician to Francis I of France (Lyons, 1541, 8vo). The edition published, together with a Latin translation, by Kogarola (Venice, 1559, 8vo), and reprinted by Jerome Comelin (1596), is better. Em. Vizzanius, professor at Padua, reprinted that treat- ise (Bologna, 1646; Amsterdam, 1661, 4to) with a new Latin version, and a useful though diffuse commen- tary. Gale, who inserted it in his Opitscula myfholo- ffica, ethica, et physira, and D'Argens, who published it with a French translation, in his Dissertations sur les principales questions de la Metaphysique, de la Phy- sique, et de la Morale des Aneiens (Berl. 1762, 8vo), only corrected the text. Batteux, on the contrary, made good use of one of the MSS. of Ocellus, which are con- tained at the Imperial Library at Paris, and his edition, together with a French translation, first published in the Recueil de rAcademie des Inscriptions (xxix, 249- 294), was the best until the appearance of that of A. F. W. Rudolphi (Leips. 1801, 8vo), which was in turn sur- passed by Mr. Mullach's two editions, the first of them bearing the title A ristotelis de Melisso, Xenophane et Goi'- ffice disputationes, cum Jileaticorum philosopho7um fraff- mentis, et Ocelli Ijicani, qui fertur, de unirersa natura libello (Berlin, 1846). The second is included in the Fragmenta philosophortim Gracorum (A. F. Didot's Bihlioth'eque Grecqiie, Paris, 1860). Ocellus Lucanus's works were translated into English by Thomas Taylor (1841, 8vo). See Diogenes Laertius, \u\, 80; Meiners, Gesch. d. Wissensch. in Griech. und Rom. vol. i ; Bardili, Kpochen d. roi-ziiglichsten philosoph. Begriffe (Halle, 1788) ; Fiilleborn, Beitrage z. Gesch. d. Philos. pt. x, p. 1-77 ; IMullach, Introduction to the Fragm. philosoph. Grcec. p. 383; Ueberweg, //iV. of Philos. i, 43; Butler, Anc. Philos. (see Index in vol. ii); Lewes, Bist. of Philos. (see Index in vol. ii) ; Cocker, Christianity and Greek Philosophy.— lloefer, Xouv. Biog. Gener. xxxviii,
OCHIEL
292
OCHINO
428; Smith, Diet, of Greek and Roman Biog. and Myth. vol. iii.
O'chiel {'0\'(r;\oe v. r. 'O^o'/Xoc, Viilg. Oziel), a corrupt form (1 Esdr. i, 9) of the lleb. name Jeiel (2 Chroii. XXV, '■>).
Ochim (C^nS, plural of n'x), a species of animal classed with wild beasts of the desert, and described as haunting ruins (Isa. xiii, 21, A.V. '-doleful creatures"). Various identifications have been suggested, such as cats, weasels, apes, etc. ; but the view most generally entertained is tliat a species of owl is intended. The name is onomatopoetic from the interjection nS, and denotes some creature that makes a woful howling or screeching noise. This sound is very characteristic of the cry of the owl, which is sometimes like avgh-o. — Kitto. See Doleful Creatures.
Ochino (or, as he is sometimes called, Ocello), Beknai:i)Ino, one of the most noted of Italian reform- ers, who, in his generation, was reverenced almost as a saint for his piety, and by his eloquence entranced thousands wherever he preached, was born of obscure parents in 1487 at Siena, a city of Tuscany. Feeling from his earliest years a deep sense of religion, he de- voted himself, according to the notions of that age, to a monastic life, and joined, while yet a mere youth, the Franciscan Observantines, as the strictest of all the or- ders of the regular clergy. For the same reason he left them, and in 153-t became a member of the Capuchin brotherhood, which had been recently established ac- cording to the most rigid rules of holy living, or, rather, voluntary humility and mortification. During his mo- nastic retirement he acknowledges that he escaped those vices with which his life might have been tainted if he had mixed with the world; and from the studies of the cloister, barren and unprofitable as they were, reaped a portion of knowledge which was afterwards of some use to him ; but he failed completely in gaining, what was the great thing which induced him to choose that un- natural and irksome mode of life, peace of mind and as- surance of salvation ; or, as he himself ]iut it, '■ I re- mained a stranger to true peace of mind, which at last I found in searching the Scriptures, and such helps for understanding them as I had access to. I now came to be satisfied of the three following truths: 1, that Christ, by his obedience and death, has made a plenarj' satis- faction and merited heaven for the elect, which is the only righteousness and ground of salvation; 2, that re- ligious vows of human invention are not onh' useless, but hurtfid and wicked; and, 3, that the Roman Church, j though calculated to fascinate the senses by her exter- nal pomp and splendor, is uuscriptural and abominable in the sight of God."