[1207] III, 42.

[1208] VI, 11.

[1209] I, 23.

[1210] IV, 34.

[1211] VIII, 7.

[1212] IV, 37.

[1213] I, 22.

[1214] V, 13.

[1215] VIII, 7.

[1216] I, 20.

[1217] I, 31.

[1218] V, 25.

[1219] IV, 4.

[1220] IV, 24.

[1221] IV, 43.

[1222] V, 18.

[1223] VII, 18.

[1224] IV, 10.

[1225] VIII, 7.

[1226] IV, 44.

[1227] II, 4.

[1228] VI, 27.

[1229] IV, 20.

[1230] IV, 25.

[1231] I, 4.

[1232] I, 19.

[1233] Epist. 50.

[1234] VII, 32.

[1235] VI, 27.

[1236] IV, 11, 15-16.

[1237] VI, 43.

[1238] IV, 45.

[1239] IV, 44.

[1240] VIII, 8.

[1241] VII, 38.

[1242] VIII, 30.

[1243] The passages are not listed in Liddell and Scott, nor mentioned by Professor Bury in his note on “The ἴυγξ in Greek Magic,” Journal of Hellenic Studies (1886), pp. 157-60. Hubert’s article on “Magia” in Daremberg-Saglio cites only one passage and seems to regard the iunx solely as a magic wheel. D’Arcy W. Thompson, A Glossary of Greek Birds, Oxford, 1895, also cites but one passage from Philostratus. A. B. Cook, Zeus, Cambridge, 1914, I, 253-65, notes both main passages but tries to interpret the iunges as solar wheels rather than birds. But the iunx is found as a bird on several Greek vases of the latest period; see British Museum Catalogue of Vases, vol. IV, figs. 94, 98, 342, 163, 331b; magic wheels are also represented on the vases, but are not described as iunges in the catalogue; see vol. IV, figs. 331a, 373, 385, 399, 409, 436, 450, 458, and vol. III, E 774, F 223, F 279.

[1244] VI, 10; see also VIII, 7.

[1245] I, 25.

[1246] VI, 11.

[1247] Cited by Cook, Zeus, I, 266, who, however, fails to connect it with the iunx.

[1248] Newton’s Dictionary of Birds; a reference supplied me by the kindness of my colleague, Professor F. H. Herrick.

[1249] Professor Bury’s theory that “the bird was called ἴυγξ from its call which sounded like ἰώ ἰώ; and it was used in lunar enchantments because it was supposed to be calling on Io, the moon”: and that “ἴυγξ originally meant a moon-song independently of the wryneck,” which came to be employed in magic moon-worship on account of its cry, has already been refuted by Professor Thompson, who pointed out that “the bird does not cry ἰώ,, ἰώ, and the suggested derivation of its name and sanctity from such a cry cannot hold.”

[1250] See Chapter 49 for a fuller account of it.

[1251] See Chapter 71.

[1252] Math. 54, Liber Appollonii magi vel philosophi qui dicitur Elizinus.

[1253] BN 13951, 12th century, Liber Apollonii de principalibus rerum causis. Vienna 3124, 15th century, fols. 57v-58v, “Verba de proprietatibus rerum quomodo virtus unius frangitur per alium. Adamas nec ferro nec igne domatur .../ ... cito medetur.”

[1254] Royal 12-C-XVIII, Baleni de imaginibus; Sloane 3826, fols. 100v-101, Beleemus de imaginibus; Sloane 3848, fols. 52-8, Liber Balamini sapientis de sigillis planetarum, fols. 59-62, liber sapientis Baleym de ymaginibus septem planetarum. But these forms might suggest Balaam. We also hear of Flacius Affricus, a disciple of Belenus.

[1255] M. Steinschneider, “Apollonius von Thyana (oder Balinas) bei den Arabern,” in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, XLV (1891), 439-46.

[1256] T. Schiche, De fontibus librorum Ciceronis qui sunt de divinatione, Jena, 1875; K. Hartfelder, Die Quellen von Ciceros zwei Büchern de Divinatione, Freiburg, 1878.

[1257] Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, XIV, I.

[1258] Adv. astrol., in Opera, ed. Johannes Albertus Fabricius, Leipzig, 1718.

[1259] De divinatione, I, 39.

[1260] Ibid., I, 58.

[1261] Ibid., II, 11.

[1262] Ibid., II, 33.

[1263] Ibid., II, 36.

[1264] I, 50.

[1265] II, 3-4.

[1266] II, 5. “Quae enim praesentiri aut arte aut ratione aut usu aut coniectura possunt, ea non divinis tribuenda putas sed peritis.”

[1267] II, 30.

[1268] II, 12. An astrologer, however, would probably say that seeming contradiction could be accounted for by the varying influence of the constellations upon different regions.

[1269] II, 12.

[1270] II, 19. “Quid igitur minus a physicis dici debet quam quidquam certi significari rebus incertis?”

[1271] II, 60-71.

[1272] II, 54.

[1273] II, 16.

[1274] II, 42-47.

[1275] NH, VII, 21.

[1276] Republic, II, 10.

[1277] Ibid., II, 15.

[1278] Ibid., II, 18.

[1279] Apologia pro mercede conductis. Most of Lucian’s Essays have been translated into English by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, 1905, 4 vols.

[1280] De defectu oraculorum, 45.

[1281] Fowler’s translation.

[1282] Fowler omits it. It appears in the Teubner edition, Luciani Samosatensis opera, ed. C. Jacobitz, II (1887), 187-95, but both Jacobitz and Dindorf mark it as spurious. Croiset, Essai sur la vie et les œuvres de Lucien, Paris, 1882, p. 43, also rejects it.

[1283] See the interesting paper of J. D. Rolleston, “Lucian and Medicine,” 1915, 23 pp., reprinted from Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, VIII, 49-58, 72-84.

[1284] See the close of Nigrinus.

[1285] Rerum gestarum libri qui supersunt, XXI, i, 14.

[1286] The wording of these excerpts is that of Fowler’s translation.

[1287] See Sackur, Sibyllinische Texte und Forschungen, Halle, 1898; Alexandre, Oracula Sibyllina, 2nd ed., Paris, 1869; Charles (1913) II, 368 ff.

[1288] Besides the works to be cited later in this chapter, the reader may consult: A. Dieterich, Abraxas (Studien z. relig. gesch. d. spät. alt.), Leipzig, 1891, especially chapter II (pp. 136ff.), “Jüdisch-orphisch-gnostiche Kulte und die Zauberbücher”; and G. A. Lobeck, Aglaophamus, 1829, 2 vols.

[1289] Steinschneider (1906), 24. He mentions the dissertation of R. Pietschmann, Hermes Trismegistus, Leipzig, 1875.

[1290] See Galen, citing Pamphilus, Kühn, XI, 798.

[1291] XXI, 14, 15.

[1292] VI, 4.

[1293] I, 1; VIII, 1-4.

[1294] VIII, 1.

[1295] VIII, 2.

[1296] VIII, 4.

[1297] I, 1.

[1298] R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres, Leipzig, 1904, p. 319. This work is the fullest scientific treatment of the subject.

[1299] Citations supporting this and the preceding sentences may be found in Kroll’s article on Hermes Trismegistus in Pauly-Wissowa, 809-820. The Poimandres was translated into English by John Everard, D.D., a mystic but also a popular preacher whose outspoken sermons caused his frequent arrest and imprisonment during the reigns of James I and Charles I. James is reported to have said of him, “What is this Dr. Ever-out? His name shall be Dr. Never-out,” (Dict. Nat. Biog.). Dr. Everard’s translation was printed in 1650 and again in 1657 when the “Asclepius” was added to it. In 1884 it appeared again in the Bath Occult Reprint Series with an introduction by Hargrave Jennings, and the second volume in the same series was Hermes’ The Virgin of the World, published at London. Kroll mentions only the more recent translation by Mead, Thrice Greatest Hermes. London, 1906.

[1300] Consult the bibliography in Kroll’s article in Pauly-Wissowa.

[1301] See the various volumes of Catalogus codicum astrologorum Graecorum, passim.

[1302] Unprinted.

[1303] An English translation by John Harvey was printed in London, 1657, 12mo. It also exists in manuscript form in the British Museum; Sloane 1734, fols. 283-98, “The learned work of Hermes Trismegistus intituled hys Phisicke Mathematycke or Mathematicall Physickes, direct to Hammon Kinge of Egypte.”

[1304] Orphica, ed. Abel (1885), p. 141.

[1305] It was to a work on this last subject that Pamphilus, cited by Galen, referred in mentioning the herb ἀετοῦ, but this plant is not named in the extant treatise on the decans. Such treatises are more or less addressed to Asclepius: printed in J. B. Pitra, Analecta Sacra, V, ii, 279-90; Cat. cod. astrol. Graec., IV, 134; VI, 83; VII, 231; VIII, ii, 159; VIII, iii, 151; and by Ruelle, Rev. Phil., XXXII, 247.

[1306] Berthelot (1885), pp. 133-6, and his article on Hermes Trismegistus in La Grande Encyclopédie; also Kroll on Hermes in Pauly-Wissowa, 799.

[1307] Berthelot (1885), p. 134.

[1308] Bouché-Leclercq, L’Astrologie grecque, 1899, pp. xi, 519-20, 563-4.

[1309] NH, II, 21; VII, 50.

[1310] Kühn, XII, 207.

[1311] They have been collected and edited by E. Riess, Nechepsonis et Petosiridis fragmenta magica, in Philologus, Supplbd. VI, Göttingen (1891-93), pp. 323-394. See also F. Boll, Die Erforschung der antiken Astrologie, in Neue Jahrb. für das klass. Altert., XI (1908), p. 106, and his dissertation of the same title published at Bonn, 1890. I have found that Riess, while including some of the passages attributed to Nechepso by the sixth century medical writer, Aetius, seems to have overlooked the “Emplastrum Nechepsonis e cupresso,” Aetius, Tetrabibl., IV, Sermo III, cap. 19 (p. 771 in the edition of Stephanus, 1567).

[1312] Bouché-Leclercq, L’Astrologie grecque, 1898, p. xiii. Axt and Riegler, Manethonis Apotelesmaticorum libri sex, Cologne, 1832. Also edited by Koechly.

[1313] E. Riess, On Ancient Superstition, in Transactions American Philological Association (1895), XXVI, 40-55. Grenfell (1921), p. 151, announces that J. G. Smyly is about to publish “a remarkable fragment of an Orphic ritual” among some thirty papyrus texts in the Cunningham Memoirs of the Royal Irish Academy.

[1314] The Greek text of the Lithica is contained in Orphica, ed. E. Abel, Lipsiae et Pragae, 1885. A rather too free English verse translation, Orpheus on Gems, is given in C. W. King, The Natural History, Ancient and Modern, of Precious Stones and Gems and of Precious Metals, London, 1865.

[1315] Pp. 397-98.

[1316] Line 94, περίφρονι Θειοδάμαντι; line 165, δαιμόνιος φώς.

[1317] Lines 410-411.

[1318] Confessio S. Cypriani, in Acta Sanctorum, ed. Bollandists, Sept., VII, 222; L. Preller, Philologus (1846), I, 349ff.; cited by A. B. Cook, Zeus, Cambridge, 1914, I, 110-111. The work is treated more fully below in Chapter 18.

[1319] Franz Cumont, op. cit., Chicago, 1911, p. 189. See also Windischmann, Zoroastrische Studien, Berlin, 1863.

[1320] See below, Chapter 26.

[1321] Cap. 16.

[1322] Edited by Kroll, De oraculis Chaldaicis, in Breslau Philolog. Abhandl., VII (1894), 1-76. Cory, Ancient Fragments, London, 1832.

[1323] L. A. Gray in A. V. W. Jackson, Zoroaster, 1901, pp. 259-60.

[1324] G. Wolff, Porphyrii de philosophia ex oraculis hauriendis, Berlin, 1886. Pitra, Analecta Sacra, V, 2, pp. 192-95, Πρόκλου ἐκ τῆς Χαλδαικῆς φιλοσοφίας. Many quotations of oracles from Porphyry’s De philosophia ex oraculis hausta are made by Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica, in PG, XXI.

[1325] Bouché-Leclercq, L’Astrologie grecque, p. 599.

[1326] Paul Allard, La transformation du Paganisme romain au IVe siècle, pp. 113-33, in Compte Rendu du Congrès Scientifique International des Catholiques. Deuxième Section, Sciences religieuses. Paris, 1891.

[1327] Plotini opera omnia, Porphyrii liber de vita Plotini, cum Marsilii Ficini commentariis ... ed D. Wyttenbach, G. H. Moser, and F. Creuzer, Oxford, 1835, 3 vols. Page references in my citations are to this edition, but I have also employed: Plotini Enneades, ed. R. Volkmann, Leipzig, 1883; Select Works of Plotinus translated from the Greek with an Introduction containing the substance of Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus, by Thomas Taylor, new edition with preface and bibliography by G. R. S. Mead, London, 1909; K. S. Guthrie, The Philosophy of Plotinus, Philadelphia, 1896, and Plotinos, Complete Works, 4 vols., 1918, English Translation. Where my citations give the number of the chapter in addition to the Ennead and Book, these agree with Volkmann’s text and Guthrie’s translation,—which, however, are not quite identical in this respect. A noteworthy recent publication is W. R. Inge, The Philosophy of Plotinus, 1918, 2 vols.

[1328] H. F. Müller, Plotinische Studien II, in Hermes, XLIX, 70-89, argues that the philosophy of Plotinus was genuinely Hellenic and free from oriental influence, that all theurgy was hateful to him, and that he opposed Gnosticism and astrology. Müller seems to me to overstate his case and to be too ready to exculpate Plotinus, or perhaps rather Hellenism, from concurrence in the superstition of the time.

[1329] For Gnosticism see Chapter 15.

[1330] Ennead, II, 9, 14. Πλωτίνου πρὸς τοὺς Γνωστικούς, ed. G. A. Heigl, 1832; and Plotini De Virtutibus et Adversus Gnosticos libellos, ed. A. Kirchhoff, 1847; are simply extracts from the Enneads. See also C. Schmidt, Plotin’s Stellung zum Gnosticismus u. kirchl. Christentum, 1900; in TU, X, 90 pp.

[1331] Ennead, IV, 4, 40 (II, 805 or 434). Τὰς δὲ γοητείας πῶς; ἢ τῇ συμπαθείᾳ, καὶ τῷ πεφυκέναι συμφωνίαν εἶναι ὁμοίων καὶ ἐναντίωσιν ἀνομοίων, καί τῇ τῶν δυνάμεων τῶν πολλῶν ποικιλίᾳ εἰς ἓν ζῷον συντελούντων. Ibid. 42 (II, 808 or 436) ... καὶ τέχναις καὶ ἰατρῶν καὶ ἐπαοιδῶν ἄλλο ἄλλῳ ἠναγκάσθη παρασχεῖν τι τῆς δυνάμεως τῆς αὐτοῦ. Ennead, IV, 9 (II, 891 or 479). Greek: εἰ δὲ καὶ ἐπωδαὶ καὶ ὅλως μαγεῖαι συνάγουσι καὶ συμπαθεῖς πόῤῥωθεν ποιοῦσι, πάντως τοι διὰ ψυχῆς μιᾶς.

[1332] Ennead, IV, 4 (II, 810 or 437).

[1333] Ennead, IV, 4, 43-44.

[1334] Ennead, IV, 4, 44.

[1335] See Chapter XII, pp. 323-4.

[1336] Vita Plotini, cap. 10.

[1337] Vita, cap. 10.

[1338] Cap. 10.

[1339] A748.

[1340] Shown in the article on “Jewelry” in the eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Plate I, Figure 50. The article says of the pendant, “Here we find the themes of archaic Greek art, such as a figure holding up two water-birds, in immediate connexion with Mycenaean gold patterns.” See further A. J. Evans in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1893, p. 197.

[1341] J. E. Harrison, Themis, Cambridge, 1912. p. 114, Fig. 20.

[1342] Vita, cap. 15. It will be noted that like some of the church fathers Plotinus attacked genethlialogy rather than astrology. Προσεῖχε δὲ τοῖς μὲν περὶ τῶν ἀστέρων κανόσιν οὐ πάνυ τι μαθηματικῶς, τοῖς δὲ τῶν γενεθλιαλόγων ἀποτελεστικοῖς ἀκριβέστερον. καὶ φωράσας τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τὸ ἀνεχέγγυον ἐλέγχειν πολλαχοῦ καὶ (τῶν) ἐν τοῖς συγγράμμασιν οὐκ ὤκνησε.

[1343] Ennead II, 3, Περὶ τοῦ εἰ ποιεῖ τὰ ἄστρα. Porphyry arranged his master’s treatises in the form of six enneads of nine each and perhaps somewhat revised them at the same time.

[1344] Matheseos libri VIII, ed. Kroll et Skutsch, Lipsiae, 1897. I, 7, 14-22.

[1345] See below, pp. 353-4.

[1346] Ennead II, 3 (p. 242), Ὅτι ἡ τῶν ἄστρων φορὰ σημαίνει περὶ ἕκαστον τὰ ἐσόμενα ἀλλ’ οὐκ αὐτὴ πάντα ποιεῖ, ὡς τοῖς πολλοῖς δοξάζεται, εἴρηται μὲν πρότερον ἐν ἅλλοις. See also Ennead III, 1, and IV, 3-4.

[1347] I, 18.

[1348] Cap. 19.

[1349] Polycraticus, II, 19, (ed. C. C. I. Webb, 1909, I, 112). Mr. Webb (I, xxviii) holds that John of Salisbury “certainly did not have Plotinus,” and derived some passages from his works through Macrobius and Augustine; but he is unable to state in what intermediate source John could have found the passage now in question. It does not seem to reflect Plotinus’ doctrine very accurately.

[1350] Ennead IV, iv, 6 and 8.

[1351] Ibid., 30. Guthrie’s translation, “We have shown that memory is useless to the stars: we have agreed that they have senses, namely, sight and hearing,” is quite misleading, as caps. 40-42 make evident.

[1352] Ennead II, iii, 6 and 13 (249-50).

[1353] Ennead IV, iv, 31. ὅτι μὲν οὗν ἡ φορὰ ποιεῖ ... ἀναμφισβητήτως μὲν τὰ ἐπίγεια οὐ μόνον τοῑς σώμασιν ἀλλὰ καὶ ταῖς τῆς ψυχῆς διαθέσεσι καὶ τῶν μερῶν ἕκαστον εἰς τὰ ἐπίγεια καὶ ὅλως τὰ κάτω ποιεῖ, πολλαχῇ δῆλον.

[1354] Idem. Guthrie heads the passage, “Absurdity of Ptolemean Astrology.” See also Ennead, II, iii, 1-5.

[1355] Ennead II, iii, 6.

[1356] Ennead II, iii, 4.

[1357] Guthrie’s translation, Ennead IV, iv, 35. εἰ δὴ δρᾷ τι ὁ ἥλιος καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ἄστρα εἰς τὰ τῇδε, χρὴ νομίζειν αὐτὸν μὲν ἄνω βλέποντα εἶναι.

[1358] Idem. καὶ ἐν τοῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν εἰσι πολλαί, ἃς οὐ θερμὰ ἢ ψυχρὰ παρέχεται, ἀλλὰ γενόμενα ποιότησι διαφόροις καὶ λόγοις εἰδοποιηθέντα καὶ φύσεως δυνάμεως μεταλαβόντα, οἷον καὶ λίθων φύσεις καὶ βοτανῶν ἐνέργειαι θαυμαστὰ πολλὰ παρέχονται.

[1359] Ennead IV, iv, 34. καὶ ποιήσεις καὶ σημασίας ἐν πολλοῖς ἀλλαχοῦ δὲ σημασίας μόνον.