701 



PAUSANIAS. 



PAUSIAS. 



with the feelings of a disappointed man, went in a private capacity 

 to the Hellespont, on pretence of joining the army. After the taking 

 of Byzantium, which happened during his command, he had winked 

 at the escape of Persian fugitives of rank, and by means of an accom- 

 plice had conveyed a letter to the Persian monarch, containing an 

 offer to subjugate Greece to his dominion, and subjoiuing the modest 

 request of his daughter to wife. A favourable answer had elated him 

 to such a degree as to disgust the allies in the manner already stated. 

 On his second journey he was forcibly prevented from entering Byzan- 

 tium, upon which he retired to a city in the Troad. There too his 

 conduct was unfavourably reported at home, and a messenger was 

 despatched with orders for his immediate return, under threats of a 

 declaration of war against him. Pausanias returned ; but it was still 

 hard to bring home any definite charge against him, and the Spartans 

 were shy of adducing any but the strongest evidence. At last how- 

 ever one of his emissaries having discovered that he was, like all his 

 predecessors, the bearer of orders for his own death, as well as of his 

 master's treason, denounced him to the Ephori. By their instruc- 

 tions this slave took sanctuary, and through a partition made by a 

 preconcerted plan in a hut where he had found refuge, they had the 

 opportunity of hearing Pausanias acknowledge his own treason during 

 * visit which he paid to his refractory messenger. The Ephori pro- 

 ceeded to at rest Pausanias, but a hint from one of their number 

 enabled him to make his escape to the temple of Minerva of the 

 Brzen House, only however to suffer a more lingering death. He 

 was shut up in the temple, and when on the brink of starvation was 

 brought out to die (B.C. 467). By such means Spartan superstition 

 was satisfied, and the actors in the tragedy held themselves innocent 

 of sacrilege. Thirty-five years after a contest arose on this very point 

 [PERICLES.] 



The Hippodrome of Constantinople still contains, although sadly 

 mutilated, the brazen tripod which Pausanias dedicated at Delphi, 

 with an inscription to the effect that it was in gratitude for having 

 destroyed the Persian host. 



PAUSA'NIAS, the author of the ' Description or Itinerary of 

 Greece' ('EAAiiJos rifpifryrjiris), appears, according to his own account, 

 to have been a native of Lydia (v. 13, 7); though the passage cited 

 hardly proves this. Little or nothing is known of him, except what 

 maybe collected from his own work. The 'Description of Greece ' 

 consists of ten books : the first contains the description of Attica and 

 Megaris; the second, Corinthia, Sieyon, Phlius, and Argolis; the 

 third, Laconica; the fourth, Messenia ; the fifth and sixth, Elis ; the 

 seventh, Achxa; the eighth, Arcadia; the ninth, Bcsotia; and the 

 tenth, Pnocis. 



It appears from incidental notices in the work, that Pausanias not 

 only vixited the places which he has described, but also many other 

 remote parts. He must have been at the temple of Auitnou, in Libya 

 (ix. 16, 1) ; at Cnossus in Crete ; in the island of Delos (ix. 40, 3) ; at 

 Capua in Campania (v. 12, 3) ; and at Rome (viii. 46, 5.) A traveller 

 who visited all these places must have visited many others. Pausanias 

 made bis tour of Greece in the time of Antoninus Pius. In speaking 

 of the O'leion of Herodes, ho says that he had not described it in his 

 account of Attica (i.), because it was not built when he was writing 

 that part of hi* work (vii. 20, 6). Herodes died in Attica about the 

 end of the reign of M. Aurelius. 



The work of Pausanias is different in character from that of Strabo : 

 it contains no general geographical description of the surface of the 

 country ; it is a description of places only. He describes each place 

 an he comes to it, and every object in each place in the order in 

 which it conies before him. His description is minute and- generally 

 complete ; he seems to have busied himself as a man would do if he 

 were making an inventory or catalogue. There is no attempt to set 

 off the things which ho describes by any ornament of language ; and yet 

 such is the power of beautiful objects when portrayed in the simplest 

 words, that some of his descriptions are beautiful merely by virtue of 

 the beauty of the object* described. Buildings, monuments, statues, 

 and paintings were the chief objects which he has registered : in con- 

 nection with them be collected and recorded local traditions and mytho- 

 logical stories in abundnnce. Natural objects, as rivers, mountains, 

 eaveo, are also noticed in his description; but nearly always in con- 

 nection with the mytholi gical stories attached to them. Yet he was 

 a careful observer of natural phenomena, and many curious facts of 

 this kind are scattered through his work. In describing a kind of 

 marble (Ai'0oi xoy\(rrit) which was much used in the buildings of 

 Megam, he observes that it is very white, softer than other stone, and 

 full of MA shells (i. 44, 6). In another passage (vii. 24) he has some 

 curious remarks on earthquakes. His work also abounds in historical 

 fucts, many of which are exceedingly valuable. He not unfrequently 

 digresses, something after the manner of Herodotus, whom he 

 resemble* in some degree, and consequently a man will find in bis work 

 much curious matter that he would never expect to see there. Pau- 

 sanias was superstitious, and it would be hard to find an ancient usage, 

 however absurd, which he does not treat with reipect. This work 

 contains an inexhaustible treasure of facts, historical, topographical, 

 and mythological : iU value and accuracy as a topographical descrip- 

 tion have been well tested by norne of our own countrymen, especially 

 Leake. The style of Pausanias has often been censured as obscure, 

 and hia sentences as ill constructed. There is somo truth in this; 



but if we deduct the passages that are corrupt, and some that are 

 scarcely intelligible without ocular view of the places described, it 

 can hardly be said that he is a difficult writer to those who have 

 studied him. 



Pausanias, in his numerous accounts of work* of art, although he 

 seems to have described with equal attention and indiscriminately all 

 that came under his eye, has left us many notices of the highest value ; 

 and several of the most important productions of ancient painting 

 would be known to us merely by name but for his circumstantial 

 detail, as the great works of Polygnotus at Delphi (' Phocica,' c. 25-31) 

 and the paintings by various artists in the Poecile at Athens, and 

 others of minor importance. 



Although Pausanias made his tour of Greece nearly five hundred 

 years after the flourishing period of Grecian art, and notwithstanding 

 the extensive system of plunder which had been carried on for centu- 

 ries, he still found several hundred specimens of painting; and of 

 sculpture, probably owing to the more durable and less portable nature 

 of the material used in that art, he found a much greater number. 

 He has named altogether about two hundred artists of all descriptions : 

 nine only however are painters of great fame, Polygnotus, Micon, 

 Pauteuus, Euphranor, Parrhasius, Nicias, Apt-lies, Pauaias, and Proto- 

 genes. The proportion of sculptors is much greater, for the reason 

 already mentioned : we have notices of works of Phidias, Alcamenes, 

 Polycleitus, Myron, Naucydes, Calauiis, Onatas, Scopas, Praxiteles, 

 Lystppus, and others. Though Pausanias, in matters of art, was 

 certainly not a critic, yet perhaps in no instance does he confound an 

 obscure with a celebrated name ; his attention appears to have been 

 generally engrossed by the parts and detail of what he describes, and 

 sel'iom, if ever, by the style and composition, or any of the higher 

 merits of art. This has been adduced as a serious objection to his 

 work ; but so far from that, it rather enhances its value than other- 

 wise. Pausanias has described impartially all that h saw, without 

 distinction of either style or school ; whereas an artist probably, or 

 even a connoisseur, biassed by the prejudices of his own peculiar 

 education, would have selected only that which might have happened 

 to coincide with his own taste, neglecting everything else as unworthy 

 of notice, and thus handing down only a very partial and imperfect 

 account. Certainly no such objection can be made to the work 

 of Pausanias. On the contrary, somewhat more of system would have 

 been desirable in the description of the more important works; " but 

 the minute and scrupulous diligence," says Fuseli, " with which he 

 examined what fell under his own eye, amply makes up for what he 

 may want of method or of judgment. His description of the pictures 

 of Polygnotus at Delphi, and of the Jupiter of Phidias at Olympia 

 (T. 10), are perhaps superior to all that might have been given by men 

 of more assuming powers, mines of information and inestimable 

 legacies to our arts." (Introduction, ' Works,' vol. ii.) 



The first edition of Pausanias is that of Venice, 1516, foL, Aid. : 

 it is said to be very incorrectly printed. An edition, begun by Xylan- 

 der and finished by Sylburg, was printed at Frankfurt, 1583, fol., and 

 again at Hanau, 1613. The edition of Kuhn, Leipzig, 1696, fol., is 

 accompanied with the Latin translation of Komolo Amaseo, which first 

 appeared at Rome, 1547, 4to. The edition of Siebelis, 5 vols. 8vo, 

 Leipzig, 1828, contains a corrected text and the translation of Amaseo 

 improved, with an elaborate commentary and complete index. The 

 edition of Bekker, Berlin, 1826-27, 2 vols. 8vo, is an exact copy of the 

 Paris manuscript, 1410, in every instance in which the editor has not 

 noticed his deviation from that text : this edition has a very good 

 index. A later edition is that of Schubart and Walz, 3 vols. 8vo, 

 Leipzig, 1838-40. A new German translation, by Wiedasch, appeared 

 at Munich, 1826-28. The best French translation is by Clavier. There 

 is an English translation by Thomas Taylor, the translator of Aristotle 

 and Plato. 



PAU'SIAS, a native of Sieyon, after he had learned the rudiments 

 of his art from his father Brietes, studied encaustic in the school of 

 ParnphiluB, where he was the fellow pupil of Apelles and Melanthius. 

 Pausias was the fir.^t painter who acquired a great name for encaustic 

 with the oestrum : he excelled particularly in the management of the 

 shadows; his favourite subjects were small pictures, generally of boys, 

 but he also painted large compositions. He was the first also who 

 introduced the custom of painting the ceilings and walls of private 

 apartments with historical and dramatic subjects : the practice how- 

 ever of decorating ceilings simply with stars or arabesque figures 

 (particularly those of temples) was of very old date. Pausias under- 

 took the restoration of the paintings of Polygnotus at Tlieapiaj, which 

 had greatly suffered through time, but he was judged inferior to his 

 ancient predecessor ; his failure however is explained by the fact that 

 he generally worked with the cestruta, but the paintings of Polygno- 

 tus were with the pencil, which Pausias consequently also used in 

 this instance. 



The most famous work of Pausias was the sacrifice of an ox, which 

 in the time of Pliny was in the hall of Pompey. Jn this picture the 

 ox was foreshortened, but to show the animal to full advantage, the 

 painter judiciously threw his shadow upon a part of the surrounding 

 crowd, and he added to the effect by painting a dark ox upon a light 

 ground. 



Pausias in his youth loved a native of his own city, Qlycera, who 

 earned her livelihood by making garlands of flowers and wreaths of 



