"It is very remarkable, that although the Court of Areopagus obtained the greatest reputation for its decisions, yet very few of them have been transmitted to posterity, I hope I shall not deviate from the object of these notes, if I enter into some detail concerning the principal trials, which are reported to have taken place in the high court of Athens (Vide Marquadi Freheri Decisiones Areopagiticas).

The first of which I shall speak, I take from Aulus Gellius. A woman was cited before Dollabella for poisoning her husband and son. This affair was referred by the Roman pro-consul to the Athenian tribunal. That court discovered that the woman had had a son by a former husband, who had been assassinated by his father, and brother-in-law. The Areopagites liberated this unfortunate culprit, who had thus avenged one unnatural murder by committing another.

The story of Phryne has been told by Athenæus with his usual pleasantry; I suspect, however, that a learned antiquarian who recounts this anecdote with a scholar's gravity, is mistaken when he says, that this lady of meretricious memory was tried by the Areopagites; and that "discissis tuniculis, pectoreque nudato," she inflamed the passions of those venerable judges,

From the verses quoted shortly after by Athenæus, I think it rather appears, that it was before the the Helixa that the fair courtezan put in practice her ingenious artifice. Besides, the learned antiquarian ought not to have forgotten that the court of Areopagus was always held in the dark; and that therefore Phryne could have gained nothing by the exposure of her secret beauties. The author of the Deipnosophis assigns a curious, but natural cause for Phryne's success; v de övlws paλμαλλον ἡ φρυνη καλη ἐν τοῖς μὴ βλεπομενοις. Διοπερ ἐδε ραδιον ην ιδεῖν γυμνήν ; εχέσαρκον γαρ χιλώνιον αμπειχείο, καὶ τοις δημοσιοις ἐκ ἐχρῆο βαλανείοις.

There is a judgment of the court of Areopagus, which will perhaps appear not less extraordinary than of those I have mentioned. A woman any

became enamoured of a handsome athletic youth, whose passions, however, were cooler than the fair one could have desired. After having tried all the usual excitements, she at length resolved to give him a love potion, or poculum amatorium, as Stephanus terms it. The young man had no sooner swallowed the draught, than he became, what Ariosto would call, amatore furioso, and indulged his desires with so little moderation, that his pleasures finally proved fatal to him. The woman was cited before the great tribunal of

Athens. But that court, distinguishing well between the intention in giving the draught, and the consequences of taking it (this last being præter propositum propinantis), acquitted the wo

man.

in

A learned English antiquarian has taken much pains to explain to his readers the ingredients of which these love potions were composed. He quotes a variety of different authors; I think, however, he has forgotten a curious passage Pliny, the natural historian, who mentions several recipes, which he says cupiditates veneris accendunt, Pliny, L. xxviii. C. 30, 31, 32. Art. Scincus. See also Galenus, L. xi. de fac. simp. med.

it

The death of Socrates has been generally, but unjustly, attributed to the Areopagites. From all the evidence which I have been able to collect, appears that the Prytanes were the judges in this disgraceful trial. Stephanus acknowledges that capital crimes were sometimes tried before the tribunal of the Five hundred; and is even of opinion, that Socrates was condemned by this assembly to drink the hemlock. It is evident, indeed, that the learned critic is right in his opinion. We are told by Plato, in his apology for

Socrates, that this philosopher desired to be maintained by the Prytanes. But it is hardly probable that he would have made this claim, if he had been condemned in another court, It is rather to be supposed that he would have appealed to the Areopagites; and have demanded his maintenance from them, until the expiration of the existing festival should at once conclude his life and misfortunes. Stephanus reasons with force upon this subject; the words σίζησιν Πρυτανείε confirm his arguments: and the passages he quotes from Stobæus, leave no doubt upon the subject.

In addition to what has been urged by this intelligent writer, it may be observed, that Xenophon endeavours to refute a charge brought against Socrates for expressing his contempt of the members of the Prytaneum. Nothing could be more desirable to the calumniators of that excel, lent philosopher, than to persuade his judges that he despised their authority.

I am aware that it will be demanded from me, where this passage is to be found. I.think Xe nophon meant the Prytaneum in the following words, 1ὲς μεν Της πόλεως άρχοντας άπο κυαμε καθιςαπ Sa,&c. The Arcopagites will not answer to

those magistrates alluded to in the words of Xenophon; but the Prytaneum was even termed by Thucydides, the Council of the Bean.

It is perhaps not unworthy of remark, that the friends of Socrates were all extremely desirous that he should employ counsel; and Valerius Maximus (if I be not mistaken) mentions Lysias as having offered to plead the cause of the Athenian moralist. But if the trial had been held before the court of Areopagus, the orator would not have been permitted to have employed his eloSee Lucian de Gymnasiis, already

quence.

quoted.

After the death of Socrates, the Athenians lamented his fate, and reprobated the cruelty of the sentence which had been pronounced against him. How then could Demosthenes publicly declare (not very long after) that the Areopagites had never upon any occasion deviated from justice?

Maximus Tyrius (Diss. ix.) says, that Soerates was tried in the assembly of Helixa. I confess, I think his opinion much more probable than that which I have endeavoured to refute. The reader, however, will determine for himself. But I think it worth while to observe, that the author says, that the members of the court which condemned Socrates, were elected by bal