Scanned text contains errors.
unity, — cannot become a phenomenon (Arist. Met. B. 4. p. 1001, b. 7. ib. Alex.; comp. Simpl. in Phys. f. 21). Hence he asserted that he would explain what things are, if he had unity given to him. (Eudem. in Simpl. f. 21. 6.) Whether, and in what way, he nevertheless admitted the theory of Empedocles as a hypothetical explanation of phenomena, cannot be ascertained with certainty from the scanty statements of Stobaeus (Eel. Phys. p. 60) and Diogenes Laertius (ix. 29). The centre of gravity of his philosophy lies in the acuteness with tvhich he unfolded the contradictions which are against the conceivableness of the fundamental ideas of experience, in so far as the world of experience is conceived as existent, i. e. as actually real ; and consequently laid down for all subsequent meta-physic the problems of which it has still to seek the solution. It is easily comprehensible therefore that the sceptic Timon (Diog. Lae'rt. ix. 25) regarded him with special preference. (Comp. Zenon cTElee in Nouveauac Fragmens philosophiques, by V. Cousin, Paris, 1828, p. 96—150). [Cn. A. B.] ZENON (Z^j/wv), literary. 1. An historical writer, mentioned by Diogenes Laertius (vii, 35) as the author of a narrative of the expedition of Pyrrhus into Italy, and a brief history of the (first) Punic war (*H TIvppov arpareia ets 'Ira\iav /ecu
Zenon probably lived shortly after the first Punic war. (Voss. de Hist. Gr. p. HI.)
2. An historical writer, a contemporary of Poly-bius, a native of Rhodes. He wrote a work on Rhodian history (rty evroiriov tffrbpiav tviaiav, Diog. Lae'rt. vii. 35). He is quoted by Diodorus Siculus (v. 56), Cephalion (ap. Euseb. in Cliron.\ and in particular by Polybius, who contests the accuracy of several of his statements, and finds great fault with him, remarking that he had bestowed far more care upon the style of his work than upon the investigation of the facts which he records (xvi. 14, &c.). Polybius wrote to him, correcting some of his mistakes with respect to the geography of Laconia. The letter was courteously received, though it was too late to correct the errors, on account of the copies of the work having been already published (xvi. 20).
3. A native of Sidon, the son of Musaeus, whom Suidas mentions, and states to have been a disciple of Diodorus Cronus, and an instructor of Zenon of Citium. There must be some mistake, however, in calling him a Stoic philosopher, if that were the case. Suidas states that he wrote a defence of Socrates, and a work entitled ^Soowa/ca.
4. A native of Tarsus, the son of Dioscorides, a disciple of Chrysippus, and his successor in the Stoa. (Said. s. v. ; Diog. Lae'rt. vii. 35, comp. 41.) He introduced an important variation into the Stoic system, for he denied the doctrine of the conflagration of the universe, as it is termed (though that is but an inadequate account of the doctrine ; comp. zenon of citium). This must have involved a considerable modification of the whole physical theory of the Stoics. (Euseb. Praep. Evang. xv. 13, 18 ; Menag. ad Diog. Laert. vii. 35.) Fa-bricius and others improperly distinguish Zenon of Tarsus from Zenon the successor of Chrysippus. Zenon of Tarsus left but few writings. (Diog. Lae'rt. I. c.)
5. A native of Citium, respecting whom Suidas is in doubt whether he should be classed with the
philosophers or the orators. He is said to have written the following works : — Ilepi Tlepl ff-^i^drwv. tT7rojuj''fyua ets Eej>o< Aucn'ai/, ets Arjaoadevrjf. Tlspl e7nx This Zenon is by some (Harles, in Fab. vol. iii. p. 581) identified with the Zenon spoken of in no very flattering terms by Ulpianus (in Dem. Proleg.\ and with the physician of the same name who lived in the time of Julianus.
6. A grammarian mentioned by Diogenes Laertius (vii. 35), as the author of some epigrams, as well as other compositions. Casaubon and others have identified this Zenon with Zenon of Myndus, who is mentioned by Eusebius (Praep. Evang. ii. 6), Theodoretus (Serm. VIII. ad Graecos), Ste-phanus (s. v. muj/&os) and others (Menag. ad Diog. Laert. vii. 35).
7. An Epicurean philosopher, a native of Sidon. He was a contemporary of Cicero, who heard him when at Athens. He was sometimes termed Coryphaeus Epicureorum (Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 21, 33, 34). He seems to have been noted for the disrespectful terms in which he spoke of other philosophers. For instance, he called Socrates the Attic buifoon. (Cic. de Nat. D. i. 34.) He was a disciple of Apollodorus (Diog. Lae'rt. x. 25), and is described by Diogenes Laertius as a clear-headed thinker and perspicuous expounder of his views. Cicero bestows upon him similar commendation (distincte, graviter, ornate disputabat, de Nat. Deor. i. 21). Zenon held that happiness consisted in the enjoyment of present pleasures, accompanied by a confident expectation of enjoying them throughout the whole or the greater part of life. (Tusc. iii. 1 7.) Poseidonius wrote a separate treatise in confutation of his views. (Proclus ad I. Euclid, iii.)
8. Diogenes Laertius (vii. 16) speaks of Zenon the younger. Whom he means by that name is not quite clear. Some identify him with the son of Musaeus. But it seems difficult to account for the distinctive title given to him, if that were the case.
9. An orator, a native of Laodiceia. He conferred many benefits upon his native town. Like Hybreas, he roused the Laodiceans to resist La-bienus, when the latter, with Pacorus, invaded Syria and Asia Minor. (Strab. vii. p. 578, xiv. p. 660.)
10. A native of Alexandria, of Jewish extraction, mentioned by Suidas. He renounced his connection with the Jews. He is described as a worthy man in point of character, but as remarkably forgetful of what he attempted to learn, though he exhibited a perpetual anxiety to make himself acquainted with that of which he was ignorant.
ZENON (ztjj'wi/), the name of several physicians, whom it is perhaps hardly possible to distinguish with certainty, as Fabricius (Bibl. Gr. vol. xiii. p. 454) enumerates szia?, while Kiihn reduces them to three. (A. Cornelii Celsi Editio nova exoptatur. Cont. ii. p. 5, &c.)
1. One of the most eminent of the followers of Herophilus (Galen, De Differ. Puls. iv. 8, vol. viii. p. 736), whom Galen calls " no ordinary man " (Comment, in Hippocr. " Epid. III.'''' ii. 4, vol. xvii. pt. i. p. 600), and who is said by Diogenes Laertius (vii. 1. § 35) to have been better able to think than to write. He lived probably at the end of