STILBE. Sthenis a brother of Lysistratus ; whereas Lysis- tratus was the brother, not of Sthenis, but of Ly- sippus : the true reading is given in Siilig's edi- tion.) His works, as enumerated by the same writer, were the following: the statues of Ceres, Jupiter, and Minerva, which stood in the Temple of Concord at Rome, and also flentes matronas, et adoranteSf sacrificantesque. {Ibid. § 33.) Other writers mention, as one of the best of his works, the statue of Autolycus, which was carried to Rome by Lucullus, after the taking of Sinope. (Strab. xii. p. 546, a.; Plut. Lucidl. 23, Pomp. 10; Ap- pian. Mithr. 83.) He also made two statues of Olympic victors, Pyttalus and Choerilus. (Pans, vi. 16. § 7, 17. § 3.) In addition to these notices of the artist, im- portant information may be derived from two ex- tant inscriptions. From one of these we learn that he made a statue of the philosopher Bion, the base of which still exists, bearing the words, 20ENNI2 EnOIEI. (Spon, MiscelL p. 126.) The other, which is of far more consequence, is on one of the fragments of a base discovered at Athens, in 1840, on the plateau in front of the western portico of the Parthenon. This base appears to have been a massive structure of masonry, faced with marble plates, and supporting a group of at least five statues. Several of the marble plates were found, bearing the names of the persons whose sta- tues, dedicated by themselves, the base originally supported, and of the artists who made them, or at least some of them. One of these inscriptions is 50ENNI2 EnOH2EN, and another AEHXAPHS EITOHSEN. Hence we learn, not only the true form of the artist's name, but also the important facts, that he exercised his art at Athens, in con- nection with the most distinguished artists of the later Attic school, and that he was contemporary with Leochares, who flourished about 01. 102 — 111, B. c. 370 — 335. This furnishes another striking example of the looseness with which Pliny groups artists together under certain fixed dates. A curious phenomenon is presented by inscriptions on the other sides of this base, bearing the names of Augustus, Drusus, Germanicus, and Trajan, and showing how ancient statues were appropriated. (Ross, Kunstblatt, 1840, No. 32 ; R. Rochette, Lettre a M. Scharn, pp. 407, 408; Nagler, Kilnstler- Lexicon, s. v.) [P. S.] STHE'NIUS (Sflei/Jos), i.e. "the powerful," or " the strengthening," a surname of Zeus, under which he had an altar in a rock near Hermione, where Aegeus concealed his sword and his shoes, which were found there by Theseus after he had lifted up the rock. (Pans. ii. 32. § 7, 34. § 6.) One of the horses of Poseidon also bore the name Sthenius. (Schol. ad Horn. II. xiii. 23.) [L. S.] STHE'NIUS. [Stenius.] STHE'NIUS, of Thermae (Himerenses) in Si- cily, was a friend of C. Marius, and was therefore accused before Cn. Pompey, when the latter was sent to Sicily by Sulla (Cic. Veir. ii. 46 ; comp. Plut. Pomp. 10). The unjust proceedings of Verres against this Sthenius are related at length by Cicero. ( Verr. ii. 34 — 46, comp. iii. 7, v. 42, 49.) STHENNIS. [Sthenis]. STI'CHIUS CZrixios), a commander of the Athenians in the Trojan war, was slain by Hector. (Horn. //. xiii. 195, xv. 329.) [L. S.] STILBE (2TiAgrj), a daughter of Peneius and STILTCHO. 911 Creusa, became by Apollo the mother of Lapithus and Centaurus. (Diod. iv. 69 ; Schol. ad. ApoUon. Rhod. i. 40.) [L. S.] STI'LICHO (2tiixw«' or SreXt'xwv), the mili- tary ruler of the western empire under Honorius, was the son of a Vandal captain of the barbarian auxiliaries of the emperor Valens. Stilicho rose through prowess and great military skill, combined with many other eminent qualities, which made him dear to the army and invaluable to the em- peror Theodosius. In. a. d. 384, when magister equitum, he was sent as ambassadov to Persia, and through his various accomplishments and agreeable manner of transacting business, sc pleased the Persian king, that peace was concluded on terms very advantageous for Rome. On his return, he was made comes domesticus and commander-in- chief of the army ; but his greatest reward was the hand of Serena, the niece of Theodosius, whom he married about the same time, from which we may infer the great esteem he enjoyed with his master, and the influence he exercised in the empire. Jealousy soon arose between him and Rufinus, the nefarious minister of Theodosius, which increased after the murder of his friend, the gallant Promotus, who in reward for his victories over the East Goths, was first exiled, and then put out of the way by Rufinus. Jealousy soon waxed to implacable hatred, and a struggle took place between the two rivals, which eventually ended in the destruction of Rufinus. During the period from Stilicho's return from Persia to the year 394, he distinguished himself by several victories over the bartKirians, especially the Bastarnae, and took a prominent part in the government ; but the events are not important enough to be mentioned in detail. His influence increased not a little when Theodosius confided to Serena the education of his infant son Honorius, after the death of the empress Flaccilla, and it rose to its acme in 394. In that year Theodosius pro- claimed Honorius Augustus and emperor of the West, Stilicho and Serena being appointed his guardians ; and after a touching private speech, with which Theodosius concluded the ceremony, they set out for Rome, where Stilicho took the reins of government. He, as well as Serena, were active in abolishing paganism, which had still a strong root in Rome ; but it seems that their zeal was not over pure, since several temples were stripped, by their command, of their silver and gold ornaments, which found their way into the governor's treasury, if at least the report is true, for generally speaking Stilicho was a man of re- markable integrity. The Roman emperor had now five heads — one emperor-in-chief, Theodosius, two sub-emperors, Honorius and Arcadius, and two powerful ministers, Stilicho and Rufinus, both ani- mated by boundless ambition and divided by mortal hatred ; so that evils of every description would have sprung up, had not Theodosius been the man fit to govern such heterogeneous elements, and make them all conform to his own will. No sooner, however, did his death take place (394), than the struggle for the mastery broke oui be- tween Stilicho and Rufinus. The fall of the latter could be foretold. Rufinus, although possessed of eminent qualities, was a downright scoundrel ; while with still higher natural gifts, great military expe- rience, and an eminently better character, Stilicho combined a twofold imperial alliance through hia
