Chapter 20

(R. L.*)

HYRCANIA.(1) An ancient district of Asia, south of the Caspian Sea, and bounded on the E. by the river Oxus, calledVirkana, or “Wolf’s Land,” in Old Persian. It was a wide and indefinite tract. Its chief city is called Tape by Strabo, Zadracarta by Arrian (probably the modern Astarabad). The latter is evidently the same as Carta, mentioned by Strabo as an important city. Little is known of the history of the country. Xenophon says it was subdued by the Assyrians; Curtius that 6000 Hyrcanians were in the army of Darius III. (2) Two towns named Hyrcania are mentioned, one in Hyrcania, the other in Lydia. The latter is said to have derived its name from a colony of Hyrcanians, transported thither by the Persians.

HYRCANUS(Ὑρκανός), a Greek surname, of unknown origin, borne by several Jews of the Maccabaean period.

John Hyrcanus I., high priest of the Jews from 135 to 105B.C., was the youngest son of Simon Maccabaeus. In 137B.C.he, along with his brother Judas, commanded the force which repelled the invasion of Judaea led by Cendebeus, the general of Antiochus VII.Sidetes. On the assassination of his father and two elder brothers by Ptolemy, governor of Jericho, his brother-in-law, in February 135, he succeeded to the high priesthood and the supreme authority in Judaea. While still engaged in the struggle with Ptolemy, he was attacked by Antiochus with a large army (134), and compelled to shut himself up in Jerusalem; after a severe siege peace was at last secured only on condition of a Jewish disarmament, and the payment of an indemnity and an annual tribute, for which hostages were taken. In 129 he accompanied Antiochus as a vassal prince on his ill-fated Parthian expedition; returning, however, to Judaea before winter, he escaped the final disaster. By the judicious mission of an embassy to Rome he now obtained confirmation of the alliance which his father had previously made with the growing western power; at the same time he availed himself of the weakened state of the Syrian monarchy under Demetrius II. to overrun Samaria, and also to invade Idumaea, which he completely subdued, compelling its inhabitants to receive circumcision and accept the Jewish faith. After a long period of rest he directed his arms against the town of Samaria, which, in spite of the intervention of Antiochus, his sons Antigonus and Aristobulus ultimately took, and by his orders razed to the ground (c.100B.C.). He died in 105, and was succeeded by Aristobulus, the eldest of his five sons. The external policy of Hyrcanus was marked by considerable energy and tact, and, aided as it was by favouring circumstances, was so successful as to leave the Jewish nation in a position of independence and of influence such as it had not known since the days of Solomon. During its later years his reign was muchdisturbed, however, by the contentions for ascendancy which arose between the Pharisees and Sadducees, the two rival sects or parties which then for the first time (under those names at least) came into prominence. Josephus has related the curious circumstances under which he ultimately transferred his personal support from the former to the latter.

John Hyrcanus II., high priest from 78 to 40B.C., was the eldest son of Alexander Jannaeus by his wife Alexandra, and was thus a grandson of the preceding. When his father died in 78, he was by his mother forthwith appointed high priest, and on her death in 69 he claimed the succession to the supreme civil authority also; but, after a brief and troubled reign of three months, he was compelled to abdicate both kingly and priestly dignities in favour of his more energetic and ambitious younger brother Aristobulus II. In 63 it suited the policy of Pompey that he should be restored to the high priesthood, with some semblance of supreme command, but of much of this semblance even he was soon again deprived by the arrangement of the pro-consul Gabinius, according to which Palestine was in 57B.C.divided into five separate circles (σύνοδοι, συνέδρια). For services rendered to Caesar after the battle of Pharsalia, he was again rewarded with the sovereignty (προστασία τοῦ ἔθνους, Jos.Ant.xx. 10) in 47B.C., Antipater of Idumaea, however, being at the same time made procurator of Judaea. In 41B.C.he was practically superseded by Antony’s appointment of Herod and Phasael to be tetrarchs of Judaea; and in the following year he was taken prisoner by the Parthians, deprived of his ears that he might be permanently disqualified for priestly office, and carried to Babylon. He was permitted in 33B.C.to return to Jerusalem, where on a charge of treasonable correspondence with Malchus, king of Arabia, he was put to death in 30B.C.

See Josephus (Ant.xiii. 8-10; xiv. 5-13;Bell. Jud.i. 2; i. 8-13). AlsoMaccabees,History.

(J. H. A. H.)

HYSSOP(Hyssopus officinalis), a garden herb belonging to the natural orderLabiatae, formerly cultivated for use in domestic medicine. It is a small perennial plant about 2 ft. high, with slender, quadrangular, woody stems; narrowly elliptical, pointed, entire, dotted leaves, about 1 in. long and1⁄3in. wide, growing in pairs on the stem; and long terminal, erect, half-whorled, leafy spikes of small violet-blue flowers, which are in blossom from June to September. Varieties of the plant occur in gardens with red and white flowers, also one having variegated leaves. The leaves have a warm, aromatic, bitter taste, and are believed to owe their properties to a volatile oil which is present in the proportion of ¼ to ½%. Hyssop is a native of the south of Europe, its range extending eastward to central Asia. A strong tea made of the leaves, and sweetened with honey, was formerly used in pulmonary and catarrhal affections, and externally as an application to bruises and indolent swellings.

The hedge hyssop (Gratiola officinalis) belongs to the natural orderScrophulariaceae, and is a native of marshy lands in the south of Europe, whence it was introduced into Britain more than 300 years ago. LikeHyssopus officinalis, it has smooth opposite entire leaves, but the stems are cylindrical, the leaves twice the size, and the flowers solitary in the axils of the leaves and having a yellowish-red veined tube and bluish-white limb, while the capsules are oval and many-seeded. The herb has a bitter, nauseous taste, but is almost odourless. In small quantities it acts as a purgative, diuretic and emetic when taken internally. It was formerly official in the Edinburgh Pharmacopoeia, being esteemed as a remedy for dropsy. It is said to have formed the basis of a celebrated nostrum for gout, calledEau médicinale, and in former times was calledGratia Dei. When growing in abundance, as it does in some damp pastures in Switzerland, it becomes dangerous to cattle. G.peruvianais known to possess similar properties.

The hyssop (’ezob) of Scripture (Ex. xii. 22; Lev. xiv. 4, 6; Numb. xix. 6, 18; 1 Kings v. 13 (iv. 33); Ps. li. 9 (7); John xix. 29), a wall-growing plant adapted for sprinkling purposes, has long been the subject of learned disputation, the only point on which all have agreed being that it is not to be identified with theHyssopus officinalis, which is not a native of Palestine. No fewer than eighteen plants have been supposed by various authors to answer the conditions, and Celsius has devoted more than forty pages to the discussion of their several claims. By Tristram (Oxford Bible for Teachers, 1880) and others the caper plant (Capparis spinosa) is supposed to be meant; but, apart from other difficulties, this identification is open to the objection that the caper seems to be, at least in one passage (Eccl. xii. 5), otherwise designated (’abiy-yônah). Thenius (on 1 Kings v. 13) suggestsOrthotrichum saxatile.The most probable opinion would seem to be that found in Maimonides and many later writers, according to which the Hebrew’ezobis to be identified with the Arabicsa’atar, now understood to beSatureja Thymus, a plant of very frequent occurrence in Syria and Palestine, with whichThymus Serpyllum, or wild thyme, andSatureja Thymbraare closely allied. Its smell, taste and medicinal properties are similar to those ofH. officinalis. In Morocco thesa’atarof the Arabs isOriganum compactum; and it appears probable that several plants of the generaThymus,Origanumand others nearly allied in form and habit, and found in similar localities, were used under the name of hyssop.

HYSTASPES(the Greek form of the PersianVishtāspa). (1) A semi-legendary king (kava), praised by Zoroaster as his protector and a true believer, son of Aurvataspa (Lohrasp). The later tradition and the Shahname of Firdousi makes him (in the modern form Kai Gushtāsp) king of Iran. As Zoroaster probably preached his religion in eastern Iran, Vishtāspa must have been a dynast in Bactria or Sogdiana. The Zoroastrian religion was already dominant in Media in the time of the Assyrian king Sargon (c.715B.C.), and had been propagated here probably in much earlier times (cf.Persia); the time of Zoroaster and Vishtāspa may therefore be put atc.1000B.C.(2) A Persian, father of Darius I., under whose reign he was governor of Parthia, as Darius himself mentions in the Behistun inscription (2. 65). By Ammianus Marcellinus, xxiii. 6. 32, and by many modern authors he has been identified with the protector of Zoroaster, which is equally impossible for chronological and historical reasons, and from the evidence of the development of Zoroastrianism itself (seePersia:Ancient History).

(Ed. M.)

HYSTERESIS(Gr.ὑστέρησις, fromὑστέρειν, to lag behind), a term added to the vocabulary of physical science by J. A. Ewing, who defines it as follows: When there are two qualities M and N such that cyclic variations of N cause cyclic variations of M, then if the changes of M lag behind those of N, we may say that there is hysteresis in the relation of M to N (Phil. Trans., 1885, 176, p. 524). The phenomenon is best known in connexion with magnetism. If an iron bar is subjected to a magnetic force which is first gradually increased to a maximum and then gradually diminished, the resulting magnetization of the bar for any given value of the magnetic force will be greater when the force is decreasing than when it is increasing; the iron always tends to retain the magnetic condition which it has previously acquired, and changes of its magnetization consequently lag behind changes of the magnetic force. Thus there is hysteresis in the relation of magnetization to magnetic force. In consequence of hysteresis the process of magnetizing a piece of iron to a certain intensity and then restoring it to its original condition, or of effecting a double reversal of its magnetization, involves the expenditure of energy, which is dissipated as heat in the iron. Electrical generators and transformers often contain pieces of iron the magnetization of which is reversed many times in a second, and in order to economize power and to avoid undue heating it is essential that hysteresis should in such cases be as small as possible. Iron and mild steels showing remarkably little hysteresis are now specially manufactured for use in the construction of electrical machinery. (SeeMagnetism.)

HYSTERIA,a term applied to an affection which may manifest itself by a variety of symptoms, and which depends upon a disordered condition of the highest nervous centres. It is characterized by psychical peculiarities, while in addition there is often derangement of the functions subserved by the lower cerebral and spinal centres. Histological examination of the nervous system has failed to disclose associated structural alterations.

By the ancients and by modern physicians down to the time of Sydenham the symptoms of hysteria were supposed to be directly due to disturbances of the uterus (Gr.ὑστέρα, whence the name). This view is now universally recognized to be erroneous. The term “functional” is often used by English neurologists as synonymous with hysterical, a nomenclature which is tentatively advantageous since it is at least non-committal. P. J. Möbius has defined hysteria as “a state in which ideas control the body and produce morbid changes in its functions.” P. Janet, who has done much to popularize the psychical origin of the affection, holds that there is “a limitation of the field of consciousness” comparable to the contraction of the visual fields met with in the disease. The hysterical subject, according to this view, is incapable of taking into the field of consciousness all the impressions of which the normal individual is conscious. Strong momentary impressions are no longer controlled so efficiently because of the defective simultaneous impressions of previous memories. Hence the readiness with which the impulse of the moment is obeyed, the loss of emotional control and the increased susceptibility to external suggestion, which are so characteristic. A secondary subconscious mental state is engendered by the relegation of less prominent impressions to a lower sphere. The dual personality which is typically exemplified in somnambulism and in the hypnotic state is thus induced. The explanation of hysterical symptoms which are independent of the will, and of the existence of which the individual may be unaware, is to be found in a relative preponderance of this secondary subconscious state as compared with the primary conscious personality. An elaboration of this theory affords an explanation of hysterical symptoms dependent upon a “fixed idea.” The following definition of hysteria has recently been advanced by J. F. F. Babinski: “Hysteria is a psychical condition manifesting itself principally by signs that may be termed primary, and in an accessory sense others that we may call secondary. The characteristic of the primary signs is that they may be exactly reproduced in certain subjects by suggestion and dispelled by persuasion. The characteristic of the secondary signs is that they are closely related to the primary phenomena.”

The causes of hysteria may be divided into (a) the predisposing, such as hereditary predisposition to nervous disease, sex, age and national idiosyncrasy; and (b) the immediate, such as mental and physical exhaustion, fright and other emotional influences, pregnancy, the puerperal condition, diseases of the uterus and its appendages, and the depressing influence of injury or general disease. Perhaps, taken over all, hereditary predisposition to nerve-instability may be asserted as the most prolific cause. There is frequently direct inheritance, and cases of epilepsy and insanity or other form of nervous disease are rarely wanting when the family history is carefully enquired into. As regards age, the condition is apt to appear at the evolution periods of life—puberty, pregnancy and the climacteric—without any further assignable cause except that first spoken of. It is rare in young children, but very frequent in girls between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five, while it sometimes manifests itself in women at the menopause. It is much more common in the female than in the male—in the proportion of 20 to 1. Certain races are more liable to the disease than others; thus the Latin races are much more prone to hysteria than are those who come of a Teutonic stock, and in more aggravated and complex forms. In England it has been asserted that an undue proportion of cases occur among Jews. Occupation, or be it rather said want of occupation, is a prolific cause. This is noticeable more especially in the higher classes of society.

An hysterical attack may occur as an immediate sequel to an epileptic fit. If the patient suffers only frompetit mal(seeEpilepsy), unaccompanied by true epileptic fits, the significance of the hysterical seizure, which is really a post-epileptic phenomenon, may remain unrecognized.

It is convenient to group the very varied symptoms of hysteria into paroxysmal and chronic. The popular term “hysterics” is applied to an explosion of emotionalism, generally the result of mental excitement, on which convulsive fits may supervene. The characters of these vary, and may closely resemble epilepsy. The hysterical fit is generally preceded by an aura or warning. This sometimes takes the form of a sensation as of a lump in the throat (globus hystericus). The patient may fall, but very rarely is injured in so doing. The eyes are often tightly closed, the body and limbs become rigid, and the back may become so arched that the patient rests on her heels and head (opisthotonos). This stage is usually followed by violent struggling movements. There is no loss of consciousness. The attack may last for half-an-houror even longer. Hysterical fits in their fully-developed form are rarely seen in England, though common in France. In the chronic condition we find an extraordinary complexity of symptoms, both physical and mental. The physical symptoms are extremely diverse. There may be a paralysis of one or more limbs associated with rigidity, which may persist for weeks, months or years. In some cases, the patient is unable to walk; in others there are peculiarities of the gait quite unlike anything met with in organic disease. Perversions of sensation are usually present; a common instance is the sensation of a nail being driven through the vertex of the head (clavus hystericus). The region of the spine is a very frequent seat of hysterical pain. Loss of sensation (anaesthesia), of which the patient may be unaware, is of common occurrence. Very often this sensory loss is limited exactly to one-half of the body, including the leg, arm and face on that side (hemianaesthesia). Sensation to touch, pain, heat and cold, and electrical stimuli may have completely disappeared in the anaesthetic region. In other cases, the anaesthesia is relative or it may be partial, certain forms of sensation remaining intact. Anaesthesia is almost always accompanied by an inability to recognize the exact position of the affected limb when the eyes are closed. When hemianaesthesia is present, sight, hearing, taste and smell are usually impaired on that side of the body. Often there is loss of voice (hysterical aphonia). It is to such cases of hysterical paralysis and sensory disturbance that the wonderful cures effected by quacks and charlatans may be referred. The mental symptoms have not the same tendency to pass away suddenly. They may be spoken of as inter-paroxysmal and paroxysmal. The chief characteristics of the former are extreme emotionalism combined with obstructiveness, a desire to be an object of interest and a constant craving for sympathy which is often procured at an immense sacrifice of personal comfort. Obstructiveness is the invariable symptom. Hysteria may pass into absolute insanity.

The treatment of hysteria demands great tact and firmness on the part of the physician. The affection is a definite entity and has to be clearly distinguished from malingering, with which it is so often erroneously regarded as synonymous. Drugs are of little value. The moral treatment is all-important. In severe cases, removal from home surroundings and isolation, either in a hospital ward or nursing home, are essential, in order that full benefit may be derived from psychotherapeutic measures.

Bibliography.—Charcot,Leçons sur les maladies du système nerveuse(1877); S. Weir Mitchell,Lectures on Diseases of the Nervous System especially in Women(1885); Buzzard,Simulation of Hysteria by Organic Nervous Disease(1891); Pitres,Leçons cliniques sur l’hystérie et l’hypnotisme(1891); Richer,Études cliniques sur la grande hystérie(1891); Gilles de la Tourette,Traité clinique et thérapeutique de l’hystérie(1891); Bastian,Hysterical or Functional Paralysis(1893); Ormerod, Art. “Hysteria,” in Clifford Allbutt’sSystem of Medicine(1899); Camus and Pagnez,Isolement et Psychotherapie(1904).

(J. B. T.; E. Bra.)

HYSTERON-PROTERON(Gr.ὕστερον, latter, andπρότερον, former), a figure of speech, in which the order of words or phrases is inverted, and that which should logically or naturally come last is put first, to secure emphasis for the principal idea; the classical example is Virgil’s “moriamur et in media arma ruamus,” “let us die and charge into the thick of the fight” (Aen. ii. 358). The term is also applied to any inversion in order of events, arguments, &c.

HYTHE,a market town and watering-place, one of the Cinque Ports, and a municipal and parliamentary borough of Kent, England, 67 m. S.E. by E. of London on a branch of the South Eastern & Chatham railway. Pop. (1901) 5557. It is beautifully situated at the foot of a steep hill near the eastern extremity of Romney Marsh, about half a mile from the sea, and consists principally of one long street running parallel with the shore, with which it is connected by a straight avenue of wych elms. On account of its fine situation and picturesque and interesting neighbourhood, it is a favourite watering-place. A sea-wall and parade extend eastward to Sandgate, a distance of 3 m. There is communication with Sandgate by means of a tramway along the front. On the slope of the hill above the town stands the fine church of St Leonard, partly Late Norman, with a very beautiful Early English chancel. The tower was rebuilt about 1750. In a vault under the chancel there is a collection of human skulls and bones supposed to be the remains of men killed in a battle near Hythe in 456. Lionel Lukin (1742-1834), inventor of the life-boat, is buried in the churchyard. Hythe possesses a guildhall founded in 1794 and two hospitals, that of St Bartholomew founded by Haimo, bishop of Rochester, in 1336, and that of St John (rebuilt in 1802), of still greater antiquity but unknown date, founded originally for the reception of lepers. A government school of musketry, in which instructors for the army are trained, was established in 1854, and has been extended since, and the Shorncliffe military camp is within 2½ m. of the town.

Lympne, which is now 3 m. inland, is thought to have been the original harbour which gave Hythe a place among the Cinque Ports. The course of the ancient estuary may be distinctly traced from here along the road to Hythe, the sea-sand lying on the surface and colouring the soil. Here are remains of a Roman fortress, and excavations have brought to light many remains of the RomanPortus Lemanis. Large portions of the fortress walls are standing. At the south-west corner is one of the circular towers which occurred along the line of wall. The site is now occupied by the fine old castellated mansion of Studfall castle, formerly a residence of the archdeacons of Canterbury. The name denotes a fallen place, and is not infrequently thus applied to ancient remains. The church at Lympne is Early English, with a Norman tower built by Archbishop Lanfranc, and Roman material may be traced in the walls. A short distance east is Shipway or Shepway Cross, where some of the great assemblies relating to the Cinque Ports were held. A mile north from Hythe is Saltwood Castle, of very ancient origin, but rebuilt in the time of Richard II. The castle was granted to the see of Canterbury in 1026, but escheated to the crown in the time of Henry II., when the murder of Thomas à Beckett is said to have been concerted here, and having been restored to the archbishops by King John remained a residence of theirs until the time of Henry VIII. It was restored as a residence in 1882. About 2 m. N.W. of Saltwood are remains of the fortified 14th-century manor-house of Westenhanger. It is quadrangular and surrounded by a moat, and of the nine towers (alternately square and round) by which the walls were defended, three remain.

The parliamentary borough of Hythe, which includes Folkestone, Sandgate and a number of neighbouring villages, returns one member. The town is governed by a mayor, 4 aldermen and 12 councillors. Area 2617 acres.

Hythe (Heda, Heya, Hethe, Hithe,i.e.landing-place) was known as a port in Saxon times, and was granted by Halfden, a Saxon thegn, to Christ Church, Canterbury. In the Domesday Survey the borough is entered among the archbishop’s lands as appurtenant to his manor of Saltwood, and the bailiff of the town was appointed by the archbishop. Hythe was evidently a Cinque Port before the Conquest, as King John in 1205 confirmed the liberties, viz. freedom from toll, the right to be impleaded only at the Shepway court, &c., which the townsmen had under Edward the Confessor. The liberties of the Cinque Ports were confirmed in Magna Carta and later by Edward I. in a general charter, which was confirmed, often with additions, by subsequent kings down to James II. John’s charter to Hythe was confirmed by Henry IV., Henry V. and Henry VI. These charters were granted to the Cinque Ports in return for the fifty-seven ships which they supplied for the royal service, of which five were contributed by Hythe. The ports were first represented in the parliament of 1365, to which they each sent four members.

Hythe was governed by twelve jurats until 1574, when it was incorporated by Elizabeth under the title of the mayor, jurats and commonalty of Hythe; a fair for the sale of fish, &c., was also granted, to be held on the feast of St Peter and St Paul. As the sea gradually retreated from Hythe and the harbour became choked up with sand, the town suffered the fate of other places near it, and lost its old importance.

Ithe ninth letter of the English and Latin alphabet, the tenth in the Greek and Phoenician, because in these the symbol Teth (the Greek θ) preceded it. Teth was not included in the Latin alphabet because that language had no sound corresponding to the Greek θ, but the symbol was metamorphosed and utilized as the numeralC= 100, which took this form through the influence of the initial letter of the Latincentum. The name of I in the Phoenician alphabet wasYōd. Though in form it seems the simplest of letters it was originally much more complex. In Phoenician it takes the form, which is found also in the earliest Syriac and Palestinian inscriptions with little modification. Ultimately in Hebrew it became reduced to a very small symbol, whence comes its use as a term of contempt for things of no importance as in “not onejotor tittle” (Matthew v. 18). The name passed from Phoenician to Greek, and thence to the Latin of the vulgate asiōta, and from the Latin the English word is derived. Amongst the Greeks of Asia it appears only as the simple uprightI, but in some of the oldest alphabets elsewhere, as Crete, Thera, Attica, Achaia and its colonies in lower Italy, it takes the formorS, while at Corinth and Corcyra it appears first in a form closely resembling the later GreeksigmaΣ. It had originally no cross-stroke at top and bottom.Ibeing notibutz. The Phoenician alphabet having no vowel symbols, the value ofyōdwas that of the Englishy. In Greek, where the consonant sound had disappeared or been converted intoh,Iis regularly used as a vowel. Occasionally, as in Pamphylian, it is used dialectically as a glide betweeniand another vowel, as in the proper nameΔαμάτριιυς. In LatinIwas used alike for both vowel and consonant, as iniugum(yoke). The sound represented by it was approximately that still assigned toion the continent. Neither Greek nor Latin made any distinction in writing between short and longi, though in the Latin of the Empire the long sound was occasionally represented by a longer form of the symbolI. The dot over theibegins in the 5th or 6th centuryA.D.In pronunciation the English shortiis a more open sound than that of most languages, and does not correspond to the Greek and Latin sound. Nor are the English short and longiof the same quality. The shortiin Sweet’s terminology is a high-front-wide vowel, the longi, in English often spelteein words likeseed, is diphthonged, beginning like the short vowel but becoming higher as it proceeds. The Latin shorti, however, in final syllables was open and ultimately becamee,e.g.in the neuter ofi-stems asutilefromutili-s. Medially both the short and the long sounds are very common in syllables which were originally unaccented, because in such positions many other sounds passed intoi:officiobutfacio,redimobutemo,quidlibetbutlubet(libetis later);collīdobutlaedo,fīdofrom an olderfeido,istis(dative plural) from an earlieristois.

(P. Gi.)

IAMBIC,the term employed in prosody to denote a succession of verses, each consisting of a foot or metre called an iambus (ἵαμβος), formed of two syllables, of which the first is short and the second long (). After the dactylic hexameter, the iambic trimeter was the most popular metre of ancient Greece. Archilochus is said to have been the inventor of this iambic verse, theτρίμετροςconsisting of three iambic fed. In the Greek tragedians an iambic line is formed of six feet arranged in obedience to the following scheme:—

Much of the beauty of the verse depends on the caesura, which is usually In the middle of the third foot, and far less frequently in the middle of the fourth. The English language runs more naturally in the iambic metre than in any other. The normal blank verse in English is founded upon an iambic basis, and Milton’s line—

exhibits it in its primitive form. The ordinary alexandrine of French literature is a hexapod iambic, but in all questions of quantity in modern prosody great care has to be exercised to recollect that all ascriptions of classic names to modern forms of rhymed or blank verse are merely approximate. The octosyllabic, or four-foot iambic metre, has found great favour in English verse founded on old romances. Decasyllabic iambic lines rhyming together form an “heroic” metre.

IAMBLICHUS(d.c.A.D.330), the chief representative of Syrian Neoplatonism, is only imperfectly known to us in the events of his life and the details of his creed. We learn, however, from Suidas, and from his biographer Eunapius, that he was born at Chalcis in Coele-Syria, the scion of a rich and illustrious family, that he studied under Anatolius and afterwards under Porphyry, the pupil of Plotinus, that he himself gathered together a large number of disciples of different nations with whom he lived on terms of genial friendship, that he wrote “various philosophical books,” and that he died during the reign of Constantine,—according to Fabricius, beforeA.D.333. His residence (probably) at his native town of Chalcis was varied by a yearly visit with his pupils to the baths of Gadara. Of the books referred to by Suidas only a fraction has been preserved. His commentaries on Plato and Aristotle, and works on the Chaldaean theology and on the soul, are lost. For our knowledge of his system we are indebted partly to the fragments of these writings preserved by Stobaeus and others, and to the notices of his successors, especially Proclus, partly to his five extant books, the sections of a great work on the Pythagorean philosophy. Besides these, Proclus (412-485) seems to have ascribed to him1the authorship of the celebrated bookOn the Egyptian Mysteries(so-called), and although its differences in style and in some points of doctrine from the writings just mentioned make it improbable that the work was by Iamblichus himself, it certainly emanated from his school, and in its systematic attempt to give a speculative justification of the polytheistic cultus of the day, marks the turning-point in the history of thought at which Iamblichus stood.

As a speculative theory Neoplatonism (q.v.) had received its highest development from Plotinus. The modifications introduced by Iamblichus were the elaboration in greater detail of its formal divisions, the more systematic application of the Pythagorean number-symbolism, and chiefly, under the influence of Oriental systems, the thorough-going mythic interpretation of what the previous philosophy had still regarded as notional. It is on the last account, probably, that Iamblichus was looked upon with such extravagant veneration. As a philosopher he had learning indeed, but little originality. His aim was to give a philosophical rendering of the popular religion. By his contemporaries he was accredited with miraculous powers (which he, however, disclaimed), and by his followers in the decline of Greek philosophy, and his admirers on its revival in the 15th and 16th centuries, his name was scarcely mentioned without the epithet “divine” or “most divine,” while, not content with the more modest eulogy of Eunapius that he was inferior to Porphyry only in style, the emperor Julian regarded him as not even second to Plato, and said that he would give all the gold of Lydia for one epistle of Iamblichus.

Theoretically, the philosophy of Plotinus was an attempt to harmonize the principles of the various Greek schools. At the head of his system he placed the transcendent incommunicable one (ἓν ἀμέθεκτον), whose first-begotten is intellect (νοῦς), from which proceeds soul (ψυχή), which in turn gives birth toφύσις, therealm of nature. Immediately after the absolute one, Iamblichus introduced a second superexistent unity to stand between it and the many as the producer of intellect, and made the three succeeding moments of the development (intellect, soul and nature) undergo various modifications. He speaks of them as intellectual (θεοὶ νοεροί), supramundane (ὑπερκόσμιοι), and mundane gods (ἐγκόσμιοι). The first of these—which Plotinus represented under the three stages of (objective) being (ὄν), (subjective) life (ζωή), and (realized) intellect (νοῦς)—is distinguished by him into spheres of intelligible gods (θεοὶ νοεροί) and of intellectual gods (θεοὶ νοεροί), each subdivided into triads, the latter sphere being the place of ideas, the former of the archetypes of these ideas. Between these two worlds, at once separating and uniting them, some scholars think there was inserted by Iamblichus, as afterwards by Proclus, a third sphere partaking of the nature of both (θεοὶ νοητοὶ καὶ νοεροί). But this supposition depends on a merely conjectural emendation of the text. We read, however, that “in the intellectual hebdomad he assigned the third rank among the fathers to the Demiurge.” The Demiurge, Zeus, or world-creating potency, is thus identified with the perfectedνοῦς, the intellectual triad being increased to a hebdomad, probably (as Zeller supposes) through the subdivision of its first two members. As in Plotinusνοῦςproduced nature by mediation ofψυχή, so here the intelligible gods are followed by a triad of psychic gods. The first of these is incommunicable and supramundane, while the other two seem to be mundane though rational. In the third class, or mundane gods (θεοὶ ἐγκόσμιοι), there is a still greater wealth of divinities, of various local position, function, and rank. We read of gods, angels, demons and heroes, of twelve heavenly gods whose number is increased to thirty-six or three hundred and sixty, and of seventy-two other gods proceeding from them, of twenty-one chiefs (ἡγεμόνες) and forty-two nature-gods (θεοὶ γενεσιουργοί), besides guardian divinities, of particular individuals and nations. The world is thus peopled by a crowd of superhuman beings influencing natural events, possessing and communicating knowledge of the future, and not inaccessible to prayers and offerings.

The whole of this complex theory is ruled by a mathematical formulism of triad, hebdomad, &c., while the first principle is identified with the monad,νοῦςwith the dyad, andψυχήwith the triad, symbolic meanings being also assigned to the other numbers. “The theorems of mathematics,” he says, “apply absolutely to all things,” from things divine to original matter (ὕλη). But though he thus subjects all things to number, he holds elsewhere that numbers are independent existences, and occupy a middle place between the limited and unlimited.

Another difficulty of the system is the account given of nature. It is said to be “bound by the indissoluble chains of necessity which men call fate,” as distinguished from divine things which are not subject to fate. Yet, being itself the result of higher powers becoming corporeal, a continual stream of elevating influence flows from them to it, interfering with its necessary laws and turning to good ends the imperfect and evil. Of evil no satisfactory account is given; it is said to have been generated accidentally.

In his doctrine of man Iamblichus retains for the soul the middle place between intellect and nature which it occupies in the universal order. He rejects the passionless and purely intellectual character ascribed to the human soul by Plotinus, distinguishing it sharply both from those above and those below it. He maintains that it moves between the higher and lower spheres, that it descends by a necessary law (not solely for trial or punishment) into the body, and, passing perhaps from one human body to another, returns again to the supersensible. This return is effected by the virtuous activities which the soul performs through its own power of free will, and by the assistance of the gods. These virtues were classified by Porphyry as political, purifying (καθαρτικαί), theoretical, and paradigmatic; and to these Iamblichus adds a fifth class of priestly virtues (ἱερατικαὶ ἀρεταί), in which the divinest part of the soul raises itself above intellect to absolute being.

Iamblichus does not seem ever to have attained to that ecstatic communion with and absorption in deity which was the aim of earlier Neoplatonism, and which Plotinus enjoyed four times in his life, Porphyry once. Indeed his tendency was not so much to raise man to God as to bring the gods down to men—a tendency shown still more plainly in the “Answer of Abamon the master to Porphyry’s letter to Anebo and solutions of the doubts therein expressed,” afterwards entitled theLiber de mysteriis, and ascribed to Iamblichus.

In answer to questions raised and doubts expressed by Porphyry, the writer of this treatise appeals to the innate idea all men have of the gods as testifying to the existence of divinities countless in number and various in rank (to the correct arrangement of which he, like Iamblichus, attaches the greatest importance). He holds with the latter that above all principles of being and intelligence stands the absolute one, from whom the first god and king spontaneously proceeds; while after these follow the ethereal, empyrean, and heavenly gods, and the various orders of archangels, angels, demons, and heroes distinguished in nature, power, and activity, and in greater profusion than even the imagination of Iamblichus had conceived. He says that all the gods are good (though he in another place admits the existence of evil demons who must be propitiated), and traces the source of evil to matter; rebuts the objection that their answering prayer implies passivity on the part of gods or demons; defends divination, soothsaying, and theurgic practices as manifestations of the divine activity; describes the appearances of the different sorts of divinities; discusses the various kinds of sacrifice, which he says must be suitable to the different natures of the gods, material and immaterial, and to the double condition of the sacrificer as bound to the body or free from it (differing thus in his psychology from Iamblichus); and, in conclusion, states that the only way to happiness is through knowledge of and union with the gods, and that theurgic practices alone prepare the mind for this union—again going beyond his master, who held assiduous contemplation of divine things to be sufficient. It is the passionless nature of the soul which permits it to be thus united to divine beings,—knowledge of this mystic union and of the worship associated with it having been derived from the Egyptian priests, who learnt it from Hermes.

On one point only does the author of theDe mysteriisseem not to go so far as Iamblichus in thus making philosophy subservient to priestcraft. He condemns as folly and impiety the worship of images of the gods, though his master held that thesesimulacrawere filled with divine power, whether made by the hand of man or (as he believed) fallen from heaven. But images could easily be dispensed with from the point of view of the writer, who not only held that all things were full of gods (πάντα πλήρη θεῶν, as Thales said), but thought that each man had a special divinity of his own—anἴδιος δαίμων—as his guard and companion.

The following are the extant works of Iamblichus: (1)On the Pythagorean(LifeΠερὶ τοῦ Πυθαγορικοῦ βίου), ed. T. Kiessling (1815), A. Nauck (St Petersburg, 1884); for a discussion of the authorities used see E. Rohde inRheinisches Museum, xxvi., xxvii. (1871, 1872); Eng. trans. by Thomas Taylor (1818), (2) TheExhortation to Philosophy(Λόγος προτρεπτικὸς εἰς φιλοσοφίαν), ed. T. Kiessling (1813); H. Piselli (1888). (3) The treatiseOn the General Science of Mathematics(Περὶ τῆς κοινῆς μαθηματικῆς ἐπιστήμης), ed. J. G. Friis (Copenhagen, 1790), N. Festa (Leipzig, 1891). (4) The bookOn the Arithmetic of Nicomachus(Περὶ τῆς Νικομάχου ἀριθμητικῆς εἰσαγωγῆς), along with fragments on fate (Περὶ εἱμαρμένης) and prayer (Περὶ εὐχῆς), ed. S. Tennulius (1688), theArithmeticby H. Pistelli (1894). (5) TheTheological Principles of Arithmetic(Θεολογούμενα τῆς ἀριθμητικῆς)—the seventh book of the series—by F. Ast (Leipzig, 1817). Two lost books, treating of the physical and ethical signification of numbers, stood fifth and sixth, while books on music, geometry and astronomy followed. The emperor Julian had a great admiration for Iamblichus, whom he considered “intellectually not inferior to Plato”; but theLetters to Iamblicus the Philosopherwhich bear his name are now generally considered spurious.The so-calledLiber de mysteriiswas first edited, with Latin translation and notes, by T. Gale (Oxford, 1678), and more recently by C. Parthey (Berlin, 1857); Eng. trans. by Thomas Taylor (1821).There is a monograph on Iamblichus by G. E. Hebenstreit (De Iamblichi, philosophi Syri, doctrina, Leipzig, 1764), and one of theDe myst.by Harless (Das Buch v. d. ägypt. Myst., Munich, 1858). The best accounts of Iamblichus are those of Zeller,Phil. d. Griechen, iii. 2, pp. 613 sq., 2nd ed.; E. Vacherot,Hist. de l’école d’Alexandrie(1846), ii. 57 sq.; J. Simon,Hist. de l’école d’Alexandrie(1845); A. E. Chaignet,Histoire de la psychologie des Grecs(Paris, 1893) v. 67-108; T. Whittaker,The Neo-Platonists(Cambridge, 1901).

The so-calledLiber de mysteriiswas first edited, with Latin translation and notes, by T. Gale (Oxford, 1678), and more recently by C. Parthey (Berlin, 1857); Eng. trans. by Thomas Taylor (1821).

There is a monograph on Iamblichus by G. E. Hebenstreit (De Iamblichi, philosophi Syri, doctrina, Leipzig, 1764), and one of theDe myst.by Harless (Das Buch v. d. ägypt. Myst., Munich, 1858). The best accounts of Iamblichus are those of Zeller,Phil. d. Griechen, iii. 2, pp. 613 sq., 2nd ed.; E. Vacherot,Hist. de l’école d’Alexandrie(1846), ii. 57 sq.; J. Simon,Hist. de l’école d’Alexandrie(1845); A. E. Chaignet,Histoire de la psychologie des Grecs(Paris, 1893) v. 67-108; T. Whittaker,The Neo-Platonists(Cambridge, 1901).

Back to Index Next