Bibliotk.) that wo have no just reason for suspecting that the Bibliotheca i- imperfect; and that the fuller analysis of Philostorgius probably nev< r formed part of ii. hut was made at a later period. The two hundred and eighty divisions of the Bibliotheca must l»- under- stood io . xpress the numbi r h volun i r manuscripts, and not of writers or of works : the works writers, e. g. of Philo Judseus (codd. 103 !"•"". occupy several divisions; and. on the other hand, one
di\ i-i g. cod. 1 -•">. Justim Ufartyi is Scripta I aria \
sometimes comprehends a notice of several different works written in one codex. The writers examined are (if all classes: the greater number, however, are theologians, writers of ecclesiastical history, and of the biography of eminent churchmen; bul several are m e- ular historians, philosophers, and orators, heathen or Christian, of remote or recent times, lexicographers;
Vova Roma Episcopo ejusqui Scriptis Dissertatio, pre- and medical writer-: only one or two are poets, and
fixed to the Erst volume ofhis Nova ErudUorum /></i da i Florence, 17*."/. l2mo), is far more eandid than most oi the other works by mem hers of the Romish Church; and is in this respect far beyond the Memoir* surlePa- triarch Photius, by M. Weguelin, in the .1/. VAcademit Royal (de Prusse) des Sciences et Belles- Letlres, annexe 1777 (Berlin, 177!>, 4to), p. 440, etc. Shorter accounts may he found in Mosheim (Eccles. Hist, by Murdock, bk. iii. cent ix. pt ii. c. iii. ^ 27 32)', and in the works cited at the close of this article. I'a- hricius has given a 1 i — t of the councils held to determine
those on religious subjects, and there are also one or two writers of romances or love tales. There i- no formal classification of these various writers; though a series of writers or writings of the same class frequently <<•■-
curs, e. g. the Acta of various council- id. 15 20);
the writers on the Resurrection (codd. 21 23); and the secular historians of the- Byzantine empire (codd. 62- t>7). In fact, the works appear to be arranged in the order in which they were read. The notices of the writers vary much in length: those in the earlier part are very briefly noticed, the latt r ones more fullv : their
questions arising out of the struggle of Ignatius and recent perusal apparently enabling the writer to give a
Photius for the patriarchate, or out of the contests of fuller account of them; so that this circumstance con-
the Eastern and Western churches with regard to Pho- linns our observation as to the arrangement of the
tins, lie has also given a list of writers respecting worl<. Several valuable works, now Lost, arc known to
Photius, divided into- 1. Those hostile to Photius; and us chiefly bv the analyses or extracts which Photius
'.'. Those more favorable to him. (if the historians of the loner empire, Le Beau (Bas Empire, li\. Ixx, 38, lxxii, 1-3) is out raucously partial, inflaming
has given of them; among them are the Persica and Tndica of Ctesias (q. v.), in cod. 72 ; the />■ Rebus post \lexandrum Magnum gestis, and the Parthica ami the Bithynica of Arrian, in codd. .".:;. 92, and '.':'.; the Histo- ria of Olympiodorus (q. v.), in cod. 80; the Narratio- nes of Conon, in cod. 186; the Nova Bistoria of Ptol- emy Hephsestion, in cod. 190; the /'• Eeraclet /,'. bus of Memnon, in cod. 224 ; the Vita rsidori by Da- mascius, in cod. 242; the lost Declamationes of llimc- rius, in cod. 243; the Lost books of the Bibli Diodorus Siculus, in cod. 244; the D< Erythrmo s. /,'<>- bro) Mari of Agatharchides, in cod. 250; the anony-
us \",i,i Pauli CPolitani and Vita Atkanasii, in codd.
257 and 258; the Lost Orationes, genuine or spurious, of Antiphon, Isocrates, Lysias, Lsseus, Demosthenes, lly- perides, Deinarchus, and Lycurgus, in codd. 259 268; and of the Chrestomatheia of Helladius of Antinoopolis, in cod. 279; besides several theological and ecclesiasti- The above enumeration
the crimes of Photius, and rejecting as untrue, or passing
over without ice, the record of those incidents which
are honorable to him. Gibbon {Decline and Fall, c. 53, 60), more favorable, has two separate, bul brief and un- satisfactory, notices of the patriarch.
Writings. — The published works of Photius are the following: I. \lvpt6($ifi\ov ij Bii3\wSr)ien, Myriobib- Imi sin Bibliotheca. This is the most important and valuable ol the works of Photius. It may be described as an extensive review of ancient Greek literature by a scholar of immense erudition and sound judgment. Ii is an extraordinary monument of literary energy, for it was written while the author was engaged iii bis em- bassy to Assyria, at the request of Photius's brother Tarasius, « ho was much grieved at the separation, and
desired an account ofthe hook- which Photius had read cal and some medical works in his absence. Ii thus conveys a pleasing impression, will suffice to show the inestimable value ofthe Bibli- not only of the literary acquirements and extraordinary otheca of Photius, especially when we reflect how much industry, I mi ofthe fraternal affection of the writer. It i lie value of his notices is enhanced by the soundness opens with a prefatory address to Tarasius, recapitulat- of his judgment. The first edition ofthe Bibliotheca ing the circumstances in which it was composed, and was published by David Hceschelius, under the title of Btating thai ii contained a notice of two hundred and B(/3Xto&r/(c?j ror Qioriou, Librorum quos legit Photius seventy-nine volume-. The extant copies contain a Patriarcha Excerpta et Censura (Augsburg, 1601, foL). notice of two hundred ami eighty: the discrepancy. Some of the Epistola of Photius were subjoined. Tlie