I THEOPOMPUS. orations of the kind, called Epideitic by the Greeks, that is, speeches on set subjects delivered for display, such as eulogiums upon states and indi- viduals, and similar subjects. He himself tells us that there was no important city of Greece, in which he had not remained some time, and where he had not obtained great glory by the public ex- hibition of his oratorical powers. One instance of the kind is recorded. In b. c. 352 he contended at Halicarnassus with Naucrates and his master Isocrates for the prize of oratory, given by Arte- misia in honour of her husband, and gained the victory (Gell. x. 18; Plut. ViL dec. Orut. p. 838, b; Euseb. Praep. Ev. x. 3.) The other places which he visited are not mentioned ; but it appears from his own account, to which we have already referred, that he spent the greater part of the time of his exile in travelling, and in the acquisition of know- ledge. He was able to pursue this mode of life in consequence of his possessing a large fortune, which released him from the necessity of working for his livelihood, like Isocrates, by writing speeches for others, and giving instruction in oratory. (Phot. Cod. 176 ; Dionys. Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. c. 6 ; Athen. iii. p. 85, b.) On his return to his native country in B. c. 333, Theopompus, from his eloquence, acquirements and wealth, naturally took an im- portant position in the state ; but his vehement temper, haughty bearing, and above all his support of the aristocratical party, which he had inherited from his father, soon raised against him a host of enemies. Of these one of the most formidable was the sophist Theocritus, who had also been a pupil tof Isocrates, and who likewise attacked Alexander and Aristotle in the bitterest manner. (Strab. xiv. p. 645.) As long as Alexander lived, his enemies dared not take any open proceedings against Theopompus ; and even after the death of the Macedonian monarch, he appears to have enjoyed for some years the protection of the royal house. But when he lost this support, he was expelled from Chios as a disturber of the public peace. He fled to Egypt to king Ptolemy. (Phot. /. c.) Pto- lemy did not assume the title of king till b. c. 306, and consequently if the expression of Photius is to be taken literally, we may place the arrival of Theopompus in Egypt in B. c. 305, when he was seventy-five years of age. Photius adds that Pto- lemy not only refused to receive Theopompus, but would even have put him to death as a dangerous busybody, had not some of his friends interceded for his life. Of his further fate we have no par- ticulars, but he probably died soon afterwards. The following is a list of the works of Theo- pompus, none of which have come down to us. 1. 'Ettito/x^ TcJi/ 'Yipo^oTov laTopiwv, An Epitome of the History of Herodotus. This work is men- tioned by Suidas, and in a few passages of the grammarians; but it has been questioned by Vossius whether it was really drawn up by Theopompus, on the ground that it is improbable that a writer of his attainments and skill in historical composition would have engaged in such a task. It has there- fore been supposed that it was executed by some later writer, who prefixed to it the well-known name of Theopompus. It is, however, not impos- sible that Theopompus may have made the Epitome at an early period of his life as an exercise in composition. 2. 'EAT]VLKa. l(TToplai or 'S.vvTa^is 'EW-nvntuv, A Historic of Greece^ in twelve books, was a coii- THEOPOMPUS. 1093 tinuation of the history of Thucydides. It com- menced in B. c. 411, at the point where the history of Thucydides breaks off, and embraced a period of seventeen years down to the battle of Cnidus in B. c. 394 (Diod. xiii. 42, xiv. 84 ; Marcellin. Vit. Thucyd. 45). Only a few fragments of this work are preserved. 3. ^iXiinriKh, also called 'Icrropiai (kot' e|ox'^>'), Tke History of Philip, father of Alexander the Great, in fifty -eight books, from the commencement of his reign B. c. 360, to his death B. c. 336. (Diod. xvi. 3; Phot. Cod. 176.) Schweighaeuser supposed that the Hellenics and the Philippics formed one work, which was called the History of Theopompus, but this opinion has been satisfactorily refuted by Clinton. {Fasti Hell. vol. ii. pp. 374, *375, 2d ed.) Wherever the History of Theopompus is quoted by the ancient writers without any distinguishing name, the Philippics are always meant, as this was the more important work ; when the Grecian history is meant, it is cited by the title of Hellenics. Moreover, as Clinton justly remarks, these two works cannot be said to form one corpus historicum ; they did not proceed in one unbroken series, for the first work terminated in b. c. 394, and the second began in B. c. 3G0, thus leaving a space of thirty-four years between them, which did not belong to either. The great length of the Philippics was not so much owing to the minute account wiiich it gave of the life and reign of Philip, as to the numerous digressions of all kinds with which it abounded. For as it was the original intention of Theopompus to write a history of the whole of Greece (comp. Polyb. viii. 13), he eagerly availed himself of every opportunity that occurred to give an account of other Greek states. Such a digression sometimes occupied several books, as we learn from Diodorus (xvi. 71), who informs us that the 41st, 42d. and 43d books were devoted to the history of Sicily. Moreover in these digressions Theopompus did not confine himself to contempo- raneous events, but frequently ascended to fabulous times. The digressions in fact formed by far the larger part of the work ; and Philip V. king of Macedonia, was able, by omitting them and retain- ing only what belonged to the proper subject, to reduce the work from fifty-eight books to sixteen. (Phot. /. c.) Fifty-three of the fifty-eight books of the original work were extant in the ninth century of the Christian aera, and were read by Pliotius, who has preserved an abstract of the twelfth book. (Phot. /. c.) The five books lost in the time of Photius were the 6th, 7th, 9th, 20th, and 30th, and these were, without doubt, the same five books, which were missing as early as the time of Diodorus (xvi. 3). The Hellenics probably perished earlier, as they were less celebrated : Photius, at least, appears not to have read them. The two works, the Hellenics and Philippics^ con- tained together, according to Theopompus's own statement, 150,000 lines (Phot, /.c.) The Phi- lippics are constantly quoted by the ancient writers, and many fragments of them are preserved. 4. Orationcs, which were chiefly Panegyrics, and what the Greeks called 'XviJ.SovhemiKol yoi. Besides the Panegyric on Mausolus, which has been already alluded to, Theopompus wrote Pane- gyrics on Philip and Alexander (Theon, Progymn. pp. ! 9, 103; Suidas, s. v. E<popo5). Of his 2vfx€ov- AeuTtKol yot, one of the most celebrated was addressed to Alexander on the state of Chios, and 4 A i
