<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:T.timomachus_2</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:T.timomachus_2</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="T"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="timomachus-bio-2" n="timomachus_2"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Timo'machus</surname></persName></head><p>(<persName xml:lang="grc"><surname full="yes">Τιμόμαχος</surname></persName>), a very distinguished
      painter, of Byzantium. He lived (if the statement of Pliny, as contained in all the editions,
      be correct) in the time of Julius Caesar, who purchased two of his pictures, the
       <title>Ajax</title> and <hi rend="ital">Medea,</hi> for the immense sum of eighty Attic
      talents, and dedicated them in the temple of Venus Genitrix. (<bibl n="Plin. Nat. 7.38.39">Plin. Nat. 7.38. s. 39</bibl>, 35.4. s. 9, 11. s. 40.30.) In the last of these passages,
      Pliny defines the artist's age in the following very distinct terms : --" Timomachus Byzantius
       <hi rend="ital">Caesaris Dictatoris actate</hi> Ajacem et Medeam <hi rend="ital">pinxit.</hi>" But here an important and difficult question has been raised. In Cicero's
      well-known enumeration of the masterpieces of Grecian art, which were to be seen in various
      cities (<hi rend="ital">in Verr.</hi> 4.60), he alludes to the <hi rend="ital">Ajax</hi> and
       <hi rend="ital">Medca</hi> at Cyzicus, but without mentioning the painter's name. (<hi rend="ital">Quid Cyzicenos [arbitramini merere velle], ut Ajacem, aut Medeam [amittant]
       ?</hi>) From this passage a presumption is raised, that the two pictures should be referred
      to a period much earlier than the time of Caesar, namely to the best period of Grecian art, to
      which most of the other works, in connection with which they are mentioned, are known to have
      belonged : at all events, as the manner in which they are referred to by Cicero presupposes
      their being already celebrated throughout the Roman empire, it is not likely that they could
      have been painted during the life of Caesar, and it is of course impossible that they were
      painted during his dictatorship. But then, the question comes, whether these were the
      paintings mentioned by Pliny, and, as will presently be seen. celebrated by other writers. The
      first impulse of any reader would be to assume this. as a matter of course; and it would be
      strange indeed if, while two such pictures as the <title>Ajax</title> and <hi rend="ital">Medca,</hi> celebrated by Cicero, existed at Cyzicus, two others on the same subjects should
      have been painted by Timomachus, and should have been admired as we know they were, and that
      the pictures of <hi rend="ital">Ajax</hi> and <hi rend="ital">Medea</hi> should be simply
      mentioned by Pliny as well known, without any distinction being made between the two pairs of
      pictures. It is true that, from one of the passages of Pliny above cited (35.4. s. 9), the
      inference has been drawn that, besides the <title>Ajax</title> and <hi rend="ital">Medea,</hi>
      which Caesar dedicated in the temple of Venus, there was another pair of pictures brought to
      Rome, by Agrippa, who purchased them from the Cyzicenes at a great price, namely, an <hi rend="ital">Ajax</hi> and <hi rend="ital">Venus ;</hi> but the passage is extremely difficult
      to understand clearly; and, even taking the above explanation, any conclusion drawn from it
      would apply only to the <title>Ajax,</title> and not to the <title>Medea,</title> which was
      evidently the more celebrated of the two. On the whole, then, it seems most probable that the
      pictures at Cyzicus, mentioned by Cicero, were the very pictures of Timomachus, which were
      purchased by Julius Caesar; and therefore that the word <hi rend="ital">actate</hi> in Pliny
      must either be rejected, or interpreted with a considerable latitude. In confirmation of this
      conclusion another passage is cited from Pliny himself (<hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi> § 41),
      in which he enumerates, as examples of the last unfinished pictures of the greatest painters,
      which were more admired than even their finished works, the <title>Medea</title> of
      Timomachus, in connection with the <title>Iris</title> of Aristeides, the
       <title>Tyndaridae</title> of Nicomachus, and the <title>Venus</title> of Apelles; whence it
      has been argued that Timomachus was probably contemporary with the other great painters there
      mentioned, and moreover that it is incredible that Caesar should have given the large price
      above mentioned for two pictures of a <hi rend="ital">living</hi> artist, especially when one
      of them was unfinished. Still, any positive chronological conclusion from these arguments can
      only be received with much caution. They seem to prove that Timomachus flourished not later
      than the early part of the first century B. C., but they do not prove that he is to be carried
      back to the third century. The associations of works and names, in the passages of Cicero and
      Pliny, have respect to the order of excellence and not to that of time; and it must be
      remembered that a great artist often obtains a reputation even above his merits during his
      life and soon after his death, and that fashion, as well as fame, will set a high pecuniary
      value on such an artist's works. On the other hand, a positive argument, to prove that
      Nicomachus lived later than the time of that flourishing period of the art which is marked by
      the name of Apelles, may be drawn from the absence of any mention of him by Pliny in his
      proper chronological order. which indicates the absence of his name from the works of the
      Greek authors whom Pliny followed, and that he was one of those recent artists who were only
      known to Pliny by their works which he had seen. Without attempting to arrive at any more
      precise conclusion with regard to the age of Timomachus, we proceed to state what is known of
      his works.</p><p>(1.) The two pictures already mentioned were the most celebrated of all his works, and the
       <hi rend="ital">Medea</hi> appears to have been esteemed his masterpiece. It is referred to,
      in terms of the highest praise, in several passages of the ancient writers, from which we
      learn that it represented Medea <pb n="1143"/> meditating the murder of her children, but
      still hesitating between the impulses of revenge for her own wrongs and.of pity for her
      children. A general notion of the composition is probably preserved in a painting on the same
      subject found at Pompeii (<hi rend="ital">Mus. Borb.</hi> 5.33; <hi rend="ital">Pompeii,</hi>
      vol. ii. p. 190), and the type of Medea is seen in a figure found at Herculaneum (<hi rend="ital">Antiq. di Ercol.</hi> 1.13; <hi rend="ital">Mus. Borb.</hi> 10.21), and on some
      gems. (Lippert, <hi rend="ital">Supplem.</hi> 1.93 ; Panofka, <hi rend="ital">Annal d.
       Inst.</hi> i. p. 243; Müller, <hi rend="ital">Archäol. d. Kunst,</hi> § 208,
      n. 2.) A minute description of the emotions expressed in the artist's <hi rend="ital">Medea</hi> is given in the following epigrams from the Greek Anthology. (<hi rend="ital">Anth. Plan.</hi> 4.135, 136, p. 317 ; Brunck, <hi rend="ital">Anal.</hi> vol. iii. p. 214,
      vol. ii. p. 174 ; Jacobs, <hi rend="ital">Anth. Pal.</hi> Append. vol. ii. p. 667.) The first
      is anonymous : -- <quote xml:lang="grc" rend="blockquote"><l>τέχνη Τιμομάχον στοργὴν
        καὶ ζῆλον ἔδειξε</l><l>Μηδείης, τέκνων εἰς μόρον ἑλκομένων ·</l><l>τῇ μὲν γὰρ συνένευσεν ἐπὶ ξίφος, ᾗ δʼ ἀνανεύει</l><l>σώζειν καὶ κτείνειν βουλομένη τέκεα.</l></quote></p><p>The other is ascribed to Antiphilus : -- <quote xml:lang="grc" rend="blockquote"><l>τὰν
        ὀλοὰν Μήδειαν ὅτʼ ἔγραφε Τιμομάχου χείρ,</l><l>ζάλῳ καὶ τέκνοις ἀντιμεθελκομέναν,</l><l>μυρίον ἄρατο μόχθον, ἵνʼ ἤθεα δισσὰ χαράξῃ,</l><l>ᾧ τὸ μὲν εἰς ὀργάν νεῦε, τὸ δʼ εἰς ἔλεον.</l><l>ἄμφω δʼ ἐπλήρωσεν ὅρα τύπον. ἐν γὰρ ἀπειλᾷ</l><l>δάκρυον, ἐν δʼ ἐλέῳ θυμός ἀναστρέφεται.</l><l>Ἀρκεῖ δʼ ἁ μέλλησις, ἔφα σοφός · αἷμα δὲ τέκνων</l><l>ἔπρεπε Μηδείῃ, κοὐ χερὶ Τιμομάχου.</l></quote></p><p>There is a similar epigram by Ausonius (No. 129). From these descriptions it appears that
      the great art of Timomachus consisted in the expression of that conflict of emotions which
      precedes the perpetration of some dreadful act, and in exciting in the minds of the spectators
      the corresponding emotions of terror and pity, which are the end aimed at by all tragic
      exhibitions; and, at the same time, in avoiding the excess of horror, by representing, not the
      deed itself, but only the conception of it in the mind. Plutarch mentions the painting as an
      example of one of those works of art, in which unnatural deeds (<foreign xml:lang="grc">πράξεις ἄτοποι</foreign>) are represented, and which, while we abhor the deed, we praise
      on account of the skill shown in representing it in a becoming manner (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τὴν τέχνην</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">εἰ μεμίμηται
       προσηκόντως τὸ ὑποκείμενον</foreign>, Plut. <hi rend="ital">de Aud. Poet. 3,</hi> p.
      18b.). There are also two other epigrams upon the picture in the Greek Anthology (Jacobs, <hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi> Nos. 137, 138), from the former of which we learn that it was painted
      in encaustic; and, from the connection in which Timomachus is mentioned by Pliny, it would
      seem that this was the case with all his works.</p><p>(2.) His <hi rend="ital">Ajax</hi> resembled his <title xml:lang="la">Medea</title> in the
      conflict of emotions which it expressed. It represented the hero in his madness, meditating
      the act of suicide. It is described by Philostratus (<hi rend="ital">Vit. Apollon.</hi> 2.10),
      in an epigram in the Greek Anthology (Jacobs, <hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi> No. 83, p. 648), and
      by Ovid (<bibl n="Ov. Tr. 2.528">Ov. Tr. 2.528</bibl>).</p><p>(3.) His other works are mentioned by Pliny in the following words : -- "Timomachi aeque
      laudantur <hi rend="ital">Orestes, Iphigenia in Tauris, Lecythion</hi> agilitatis exercitator,
       <hi rend="ital">Cognatio nobilium, Palliati,</hi> quos dicturos pinxit, alterum stantem.
      alterum sedentem ; praecipue tamen ars ei favisse in <hi rend="ital">Gorgone</hi> visa
      est."</p><div><head>Further Information</head><p><bibl n="Plin. Nat. 35.11.40.30">Plin. Nat. 35.11. s. 40.30</bibl>.</p></div><byline>[<ref target="author.P.S">P.S</ref>]</byline></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>