Scanned text contains errors.
titles and fragments of the orations which are lost, are collected as far as can be by Fabricius (Bibl. Gr. ii. p. 864, &c.), and more complete by Westermann. (Gesch. der griecli. Beredtsamk. p. 311, &c.) The ancients, such as Dionysius who gives an accurate account of the oratory of Deinar-ehus, and especially Hermogenes (de Form. Orat. ii. 11), speak in terms of high praise of his orations ; but there were others also who thought less favourably of him; some grammarians would not even allow him a place in the canon of the ten Attic orators (Bibl. Coislin, p. 597), and Dionysius mentions, that he was treated with indifference by Callimachus and the grammarians of Per-gamus. However, some of the most eminent grammarians, such as Didymus of Alexandria and Heron of Athens, did not disdain to write commentaries upon him. (Harpocrat. s. v, jJuzprvXtiov • Suid. s. v. "Hpcoy.) The orations still extant enable us to form an independent opinion upon the merits of Deinarchus ; and we find that Dionysius's judgment is, on the whole, quite correct. Deinarchus was a man of no originality of mind, and it is difficult to say whether he had any oratorical talent or not. His want of genius led him to imitate others, such as Lysias, Hyperides, and more especially Demosthenes; but he was unable to come up to his great model in any point, and was therefore nicknamed A77juoo"06i>7js 6 aypoutos or 6 KpiOwos. Even Hermogenes, his greatest admirer, does not deny that his style had a certain roughness, whence liis orations were thought to resemble those of Aristogeiton. Although it cannot be denied that Deinarchus is the best among the many imitators of Demosthenes, he is far inferior to him in power and energy, in the choice of his expressions, in invention, clearness, and the arrangement of his subjects.
The orations of Deinarchus are contained in the various collections of the Attic orators by Aldus (1513), Stephanus (1575), Gruter (1619), Reiske, Ducas, Bekker, and Baiter and Sauppe. The best separate edition is that of C. E. A. Schmidt (Leipzig, 1826, 8vo.), with a selection of the notes of his predecessors, and some of his own. There is also a useful commentary on Deinarchus by C. Wurm, " Commentarius in Dinarchi Orationes tres," No-rimbergae, 1828, 8vo. (Fabric. Bibl. Gr. ii. p. 862, &c. ; Westermann. Gesch. der griecli. Beredisamk. § 73.)
2. Of Corinth, a contemporary of the orator, with whom lie has frequently been confounded. He was likewise a friend of Phocion, and when the latter was dragged to Athens for execution, Deinarchus too was put to death by the command of Polysperchon. (Plut. Plioc. 33.) As this person is not mentioned elsewhere, the name Deinarchus in Plutarch may be a mistake.
3. There were three authors of the name of Deinarchus, concerning whom we know little beyond what is stated by Demetrius of Magnesia (Dionys. Deinarcli. 1), viz. that one was a poet of Delos, who lived previous to the time of the orator, and wrote poems on Bacchic subjects (comp. Euseb. Chron. dccxx. ; Cyrill. g. Julian, x. p. 341); the second, a Cretan, made a collection of Cretan legends; and the third wrote a work upon Homer. Whether any of these is the same as the one who, according to Nemesius (de Natur. Horn. 4), taught, with Aristoxenus, that the human soul was nothing but a harmony, is uncertain. [L. S.]
DEINIAS (Aeivias). 1. One of a club of wits at Athens (yeAcaroiroioi), called " the Sixty," of which the orator Callimedon also was a member. The date therefore may be placed about b. c. 325. (Athen. xiv. p. 614, e.) He is perhaps the same whom Demosthenes mentions as a skilful orator, (c. Lept. p. 501.)
2. An author of uncertain date, who wrote an historical work on Argolis. It is referred to by the following writers :—Plut. Arat, 29 ; Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. ii. 791, ad Eur. Orest. 859, ad Soph. Electr. 281, ad Tlieocr. xiv. 48, ad Find. OL vii. 49, Isthm. iv. 104. See also Meineke, Hist. Grit. Com. Graec. p. 385. It is doubtful whether this Deinias should be identified with the author of a work on the history of inventions mentioned by Athenaeus (xi. p. 471, b.; see Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. ii. p. 150). [E. E.]
DEINIAS, is mentioned by Pliny among the most ancient painters of monochromes, (xxxv. 8. s. 34.) [P. S.]
DEINOCRATES (AeivoKpdrris). 1. A Syracu-san, was originally a friend of Agathocles, who on that account spared his life in the massacre at Syracuse by which he established himself in the tyranny, b. c. 317. Afterwards, however, in b. c. 312, we find Deinocrates commanding the Syracusan exiles in the war in which the Carthaginians supported them against Agathocles. The latter, when he fled from Africa and returned to Sicily at the end of b. c. 307, found Deinocrates at the head of so formidable an army, that he offered to abdicate the tyranny and restore the exiles, stipulating only for the possession of two fortresses with the territory around them. But the ambition of Deinocrates, who preferred his present power to the condition of a private citizen in Syracuse, led him to reject the offer. Agathocles, however, defeated him in a battle, and he then submitted. He was received into favour by the tyrant, who gave him the command of a portion of his forces, and retained him in his confidence to the end. (Diod. xix. 8, 104, xx. 77, 79, 89, 90.)
2. A Messenian, went to Rome in b. c. 183, to justify the revolt of Messene from the Achaeans. On his arrival, his hopes were raised by finding that Flamininus, who was a personal friend of his and an enemy to Philopoemen, the Achaean leader, was about to pass into Greece on an embassy to Prusias and Seleucus. Flamininus promised him his services, and, when he had reached Naupactus, sent to Philopoemen and the other magistrates, desiring them to call an assembly of the Achaeans. Philopoemen, however, was aware that Flamininus had not come with any instructions on the subject from the senate, and he therefore answered, that he would comply with his request if he would first state the points on which he wished to confer with the assembly. This he did not venture to do, and the hopes of Deinocrates accordingly fell to the ground. Shortly after this, Philopoemen was taken prisoner by the Messenians, and Deinocrates was prominent among those who caused him to be put to death. In the ensuing year the authors of the revolt were obliged to yield to the wishes of the Messenian people for peace, and Lycortas, the Achaean general, having been admitted into the city, commanded the execution of Deinocrates and the chiefs of his party ; but Deinocrates anticipated the sentence by suicide. His qualifications as u