hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
43 BC 170 170 Browse Search
44 BC 146 146 Browse Search
49 BC 140 140 Browse Search
45 BC 124 124 Browse Search
54 BC 121 121 Browse Search
46 BC 119 119 Browse Search
63 BC 109 109 Browse Search
48 BC 106 106 Browse Search
69 AD 95 95 Browse Search
59 BC 90 90 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). Search the whole document.

Found 5 total hits in 5 results.

the contrary, Philon, and therefore the rest, must have lived after the time of Archimedes, as we learn from Tzetzes (Chil. 2.5.152) that Philon, in one of his works, mentions Archimedes. There is no reason, therefore, why we should reject the express statement of Athenaeus (iv. p. 174c.), where he mentions Ctesibius as flourishing in the time of the second Euergetes, Ptolemy Physcon, who began to reign B. C. 146. Fabricius, with odd inconsistency, places the era of Philon at A. U. C. 601=B. C. 153, which is sufficiently correct. Consequently Heron must be placed latcer. (See Schweighäuser, ad Athenaeum, vol. vii. p. 637, &c.; Clinton, F. H. vol. iii. p. 535.) All that we know of his history is derived from his own notices in the work to be mentioned immediately ; that he had been at Alexandria and Rhodes, and had profited by his intercourse with the engineers of both places (pp. 51, 80, 84). Works Among his works is one wherein he took a wide range, treating of the formation of h
chanician, mentions that Ctesibius dedicated his work to Marcellus. This Marcellus has been supposed to be the illustrious captor of Syracuse, without any evidence. Again, the epigrammatist Hedylus speaks (Athen. 11.497c.) of Ctesibius in connection with a temple to Arsinoe, the wife and sister of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Hence it has been stated that Ctesibius flourished about the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Euergetes I B. C. 285-222, and Athenaeus, in that of Archimedes, who was slain B. C. 212. The inference drawn from the hydraulic invention of Ctesibius is untenable, as he might well be employed to ornament a temple already existing, and there is no ground for believing that the Marcellus, to whom Athenaeus dedicated his work, is the person assumed. On the contrary, Philon, and therefore the rest, must have lived after the time of Archimedes, as we learn from Tzetzes (Chil. 2.5.152) that Philon, in one of his works, mentions Archimedes. There is no reason, therefore, why we sh
be necessary to attend to the correct date. Athenaeus, the mechanician, mentions that Ctesibius dedicated his work to Marcellus. This Marcellus has been supposed to be the illustrious captor of Syracuse, without any evidence. Again, the epigrammatist Hedylus speaks (Athen. 11.497c.) of Ctesibius in connection with a temple to Arsinoe, the wife and sister of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Hence it has been stated that Ctesibius flourished about the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Euergetes I B. C. 285-222, and Athenaeus, in that of Archimedes, who was slain B. C. 212. The inference drawn from the hydraulic invention of Ctesibius is untenable, as he might well be employed to ornament a temple already existing, and there is no ground for believing that the Marcellus, to whom Athenaeus dedicated his work, is the person assumed. On the contrary, Philon, and therefore the rest, must have lived after the time of Archimedes, as we learn from Tzetzes (Chil. 2.5.152) that Philon, in one of his works,
ing that the Marcellus, to whom Athenaeus dedicated his work, is the person assumed. On the contrary, Philon, and therefore the rest, must have lived after the time of Archimedes, as we learn from Tzetzes (Chil. 2.5.152) that Philon, in one of his works, mentions Archimedes. There is no reason, therefore, why we should reject the express statement of Athenaeus (iv. p. 174c.), where he mentions Ctesibius as flourishing in the time of the second Euergetes, Ptolemy Physcon, who began to reign B. C. 146. Fabricius, with odd inconsistency, places the era of Philon at A. U. C. 601=B. C. 153, which is sufficiently correct. Consequently Heron must be placed latcer. (See Schweighäuser, ad Athenaeum, vol. vii. p. 637, &c.; Clinton, F. H. vol. iii. p. 535.) All that we know of his history is derived from his own notices in the work to be mentioned immediately ; that he had been at Alexandria and Rhodes, and had profited by his intercourse with the engineers of both places (pp. 51, 80, 84). Wor
t will be necessary to attend to the correct date. Athenaeus, the mechanician, mentions that Ctesibius dedicated his work to Marcellus. This Marcellus has been supposed to be the illustrious captor of Syracuse, without any evidence. Again, the epigrammatist Hedylus speaks (Athen. 11.497c.) of Ctesibius in connection with a temple to Arsinoe, the wife and sister of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Hence it has been stated that Ctesibius flourished about the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Euergetes I B. C. 285-222, and Athenaeus, in that of Archimedes, who was slain B. C. 212. The inference drawn from the hydraulic invention of Ctesibius is untenable, as he might well be employed to ornament a temple already existing, and there is no ground for believing that the Marcellus, to whom Athenaeus dedicated his work, is the person assumed. On the contrary, Philon, and therefore the rest, must have lived after the time of Archimedes, as we learn from Tzetzes (Chil. 2.5.152) that Philon, in one of his