Stephanus

• a Grecian sculptor, Plin. 36, 5, 4, § 33.

(Στέφανος), historical.

1. One of the two sons of Thucydides, whom Plato mentions among the instances of those sons of great men, whom their fathers, though educating them with the utmost care, have been unable to train to excellence (Menon, p. 94c. d.). He is mentioned by Athenaeus (vi. p. 234e.) as the scribe of a decree of Alcibiades, engraved on a pillar in the temple of Heracles at Cynosargos.

2. An Athenian orator, son of Menecles of Acharnae, against whom Demosthenes composed two orations, which contain scarcely any particulars of his life deserving notice here. He is also mentioned by Athenaeus (xiii. p. 593f.).

3. Ἐροιάδης, the husband of Neaera, several times mentioned by Demosthenes in his Oration against Neaera. [P.S]

emperor of Constantinople. [Romanus I.; Constantinus VII.]

(Στέφανος), literary.

1. An Athenian comic poet of the New Comedy, was probably the son of Antiphanes, some of whose plays he is said to have exhibited. (Anon. de Com. p. xxx.; Suid, s. v. Ἀντιφάνης.) The other statement of Suidas (s. v. Ἄλεξις), that he was the son of Alexis, seems to arise merely from a confusion of the names of Alexis and Antiphanes. All that remains of his works is a single fragment, quoted by Athenaeus (xi. p. 469a.), from his Φιλολάκων, a play which was evidently intended to ridicule the imitators of Lacedaemonian manners. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. ii. p. 496; Meineke, Frag. Com. Graec. vol. i. pp. 304, 376, 485, 486, vol. iv. p. 544.)

2. Of Byzantium, the author of the well-known geographical lexicon, entitled Ἐθνικά, of which unfortunately we only possess an epitome. There are few ancient writers of any importance of whom we know so little as of Stephanus. All that can be affirmed of him with certainty is that he was a grammarian at Constantinople, and lived after the time of Arcadius and Honorius, and before that of Justinian II. The ancient writers, often as they quote the Ἐθνικά, give us absolutely no information about its author, except his name. We learn from them, however, that the work was reduced to an epitome by a certain Hermolaus, who dedicated his abridgement to the emperor Justinian. [Hermolaus.] Hence, in turning to the few incidental pieces of information which the work contains respecting its author, we are met by the question, whether such passages were written by Stephanus himself, or by the epitomator Hermolaus. The most important of these passages is the following, which occurs in the article Ἀνακτόριον Καὶ Εὐγένιος δὲ, ὁ πρὸ ἡμῶν τὰς ἐν τῆ βασιλίδι σχολὰς διακοσμήσας, which cannot refer to any other Eugenius than the eminent grammarian of Augustopolis in Phrygia, who, as we learn from Suidas, taught at Constantinople, under the emperor Anastasius, at the end of the fifth century or the beginning of the sixth. (Suid. s. v.) This passage was pointed out by Thomas de Pinedo, the translator of Stephanus, as an indication of the author's age; but nearly all the editors of Stephanus, as well as Isaac Vossius and Fabricius, have chosen to regard it as an insertion made by Hermolaus, for the following reason; if Eugenius flourished under Anastasius, who died in A. D. 518, his successor in the presidency of the schools would in all probability be in office under Justinian I., who came to the throne in A. D. 527, which agrees with the statement of Suidas, that Hermolaus dedicated his epitome to Justinian. Plausible as this argument is, it is far from being conclusive. It evidently rests in part, if not chiefly, on the tacit assumption that, when a personal reference is made in an abridged work to the author, without any thing to show whether the writer of the passage is the original author or the epitomator, the presumption is, that it has been inserted by the latter. Now we believe that the presumption is just the other way; both on the general principle that, in an abridged work, whatever cannot be proved to be an interpolation should be referred to the original author, and also on account of the well-known habit of compilers and epitomators of the later period of Greek literature to copy their author almost verbatim, so far as they follow him at all, and to make their abridgement by the simple omission of whole passages, often in such a manner as even to destroy the grammatical coherence of what is left, as is frequently the case in this very epitome of Stephanus. On this presumption, we think, the question mainly turns. It would be rash to regard it as decided; but it may be safely said that the passage should probably be referred to Stephanus, unless some positive and decisive proof be produced that it was inserted by Hermolaus. The chronological argument stated above is not such a proof; for Suidas does not say to which of the two Justinians Hermolaus dedicated his epitome ; and, even if it was to Justinian I., there is nothing to prevent our supposing that the work of Stephanus was composed under Justin or in the early part of the reign of Justinian, and that the epitome was made very soon afterwards; but, considering how little Suidas troubles himself about minute distinctions, it is perhaps better to keep to the explanation that the Justinian to whom Hermolaus dedicated his epitome was Justinian II., and that Stephanus himself flourished under Justinian I., in the former part of the sixth century. Westermann argues further, that it is unlikely that a person of so little learning and judgment, as the epitomator of Stephanus appears by his work to have possessed, would have been placed at the head of the imperial schools of Constantinople, or would have written such a work as the Byzantine history quoted in the article Τότθοι, or as the disquisition on the Aethiopians referred to under Αἰθίοψ; but, in these cases also, it appears better to rest on the simple presumption that these passages proceed from the pen of the original author there being no proof to the contrary. A more important piece of collateral evidence respecting the time of Stephanus, pointed out by Westermann, is his eulogy of Petrus Patricius (s. v. Ἀκόναι), who died soon after A. D. 562, and was therefore a contemporary of Stephanus, supposing that the latter flourished at the time above assigned to him. Work

The literary history of the work of Stephanus is also involved in much obscurity. Even the title has been a subject of dispute. In the Aldine edition it is entitled περὶ πόλεων, which Dindorf has adopted; in the Juntine περὶ πόλεων καὶ δήμων, which Berkelius also places at the head of the text, while on his title-page he has Στεφάνου Βυζαντίου ἐθνικὰ κατ̓ ἐπιτομήν; and Salmasius prefers the title Στεφάνου Βυζαντίου περὶ ἐθνικῶν καὶ τοπικῶν. All these variations are supported more or less by the authority of the MSS. The numerous references, however, made to the work by ancient writers, especially by Eustathius, make it clear that the proper title of the original work was Ἐθνικά, and that of the epitome ἐκ τῶν ἐθνικῶν Στεφάνου κατ̓ ἐπιτόμην. The title prefixed to the important fragment of the original work, which is preserved in the Codex Seguerianus, deserves notice on account of its full explanation of the design of the work, although it has of course been added by a grammarian : -Στεφάνου γραμματικοῦ Κωνσταντινουπόλεως περὶ πόλεων νήσων τε καὶ ἐθνῶν, δήμων τε καὶ τόπων, καὶ ὁμωνυμίας αὐτῶν καὶ μετωνομασίας καὶ τῶν ἐντεῦθεν παρηγμένων ἐθνικῶν τε καὶ τοπικῶν καὶ κτητικῶν τε ὀνομάτων.

According to the title, the chief object of the work was to specify the gentile names derived from the several names of places and countries in the ancient world. But, while this is done in every article, the amount of information given went far beyond this. Nearly every article in the epitome contains a reference to some ancient writer, as an authority for the name of the place; but in the original, as we see from the extant fragments, there were considerable quotations from the ancient authors, besides a number of very interesting particulars, topographical, historical, mythological, and others. Thus the work was not merely what it professed to be, a lexicon of a special branch of technical grammar, but a valuable dictionary of geography.

How great would have been its value to us, if it had come down to us unmutilated, may be seen by any one who compares the extant fragments of the original with the corresponding articles in the epitome. These fragments, however, are unfortunately very scanty. They consist of : -- (1) The portion of the work from Δύμη to the end of Δ, contained.in a MS. of the Seguerian Library; but, unfortunately, there is a large gap even in this portion; (2) The article Ἰβηρίαι δύο, which is preserved by Constantinus Porphyrogennetus (de Admin. Imp. 100.23); (3) An account of Sicily, quoted by the same author from Stephanus (de Them. 2.10). The first two of these fragments are inserted by Westermann in the text, in place of the corresponding articles of the epitome, which he transfers to his preface ; the third differs so thoroughly from the article Σικελία in the epitome, that Westermann does not venture to insert it in the text, but prints it in his preface. There are also some other quotations in the ancient writers, which, from their general, but not exact, resemblance to the articles in the epitome, are presumed to be taken from the original They are particularized by Westermann in his preface.

From a careful examination of the references, it appears that the author of the Etymologicum Magnum, Eustathius, and others of the grammarians, possessed the original work of Stephanus. It also seems probable that the work, as it now exists, is not a fair representation of the epitome of Hermolaus, but that it has been still further abridged by successive copyists. The former part of the work is pretty full; the portion from Πάτραι to the middle of Σ is little more than a list of names; the articles in Τ and Ψ become fuller again; and those from Χ to Ω appear to be copied, almost without abridgement, from the work of Stephanus.

The work is arranged in alphabetical order; but it was also originally divided into books. the exact number of which cannot be determined; but they were considerably more numerous than the letters of the alphabet. Editions

The following are the chief editions of the Epitome of Stephanus : -- 1. the Aldine, Venet. 1502, fol. 2. the Juntine, Florent. 1521, fol. 3. the edition of Xylander, with several emendations in the text, and with Indices, Basil. 1568, fol. 4. that of Thomas de Pinedo, the first with a Latin version. Amst. 1678, fol. 5. the text corrected by Salmasius, from a collation of MSS.; various readings collected by Gronovius from the Codex Perusinus, with notes; a Latin Version and Commentary by Abr. Berkelius, Lugd. Bat. 1688, fol., reprinted 1694, fol. 6. that of the Wetsteins, containing the Greek text, the Latin version and notes of Thomas de Pinedo, and the various readings of Gronovius, with Indices, Amst. 1725, fol. 7. that of Dindorf, with readings from a newly-found MS., and the notes of L. Holstenius, A. Berkelius, and Thomas de Pinedo, Lips. 1825, &c., 4 vols. 8vo. 8. that of A. Westermann, containing a thoroughly revised text, with a very valuable preface, Lips. 1839, 8vo.: this is by far the most useful edition for ordinary reference. Editions of The Fragment

The chief fragment was published separately, by S. Tennulius, Amst. 1669, 4to.; by A. Berkelius, with the Periplus of Hanno and the Monumentum Adulitanum of Ptolemy Euergetes, Lugd. Bat. 1674, 8vo., reprinted in Montfaucon's Catalogus Bibliothecae Coislinianae, pp. 281, &c., Paris. 1715, fol.; by Jac. Gronovius, Lugd. Bat. 1681, 4to., and in the Thesaurus Antiq. Graec. vol. vii. pp. 269, &c.; and it is contained in all the editions, from that of Thomas de Pinedo downwards.

There is a German translation of the fragment, with an Essay on Stephanus, by S. Ch. Schirlitz, in the Ephem. Litter. Scholast. Univ. vol. ii. pp. 385-390, 393-399, 1828, 4to. Further Information

Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. iv. pp. 621-661 ; Vossius, de Hist. Graec. pp. 324, 325, ed. Westermann ; Wellauer, de Extrema Parte Operis Stephaniani de Urbibus, in Friedemann and Seebod's Miscell. Crit. vol. ii. pt. 4, pp. 692, &c.; Westermann, Stephani Byzantini Ἐθνικῶν quae supersunt, Praef.; Hoffmann, Lex. Bibl. Script. Graec. s. v. Other Greek writers named Stephanus

There are several other Greek writers of this name, but not of sufficient importance to require notice here. Further Information

See Fabric. Bibl. Graec. Index. [P.S]

artists.

1. A sculptor, who exercised his art at Rome in the first century B. C., was the disciple of Pasiteles and the instructor of Menelaus, as we learn from two inscriptions; the one on the trunk of a naked statue in the Villa Albani, ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΣ ΠΑΣΙΤΕΛΟΥΣ ΜΑΘΗΤΗΣ ΕΠΟΙΕΙ (Marini, Inscriz. d. Villa Albani, p. 174) ; and the other on the base of the celebrated group in the Villa Ludovisi, ΜΕΝΕΛΑΟΣ ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ ΜΑΘΗΤΗΣ ΕΠΟΙΕΙ. [Menelaus.] Stephanus is also mentioned by Pliny (Plin. Nat. 36.5. s. 4.10) as the maker of Hippiades in the collection of Asinius Pollio; but what be means by Hippiades is not very clear. From the connection, the word would appear to be a feminine plural. (Thiersch. Epochen, p 295.)

2. A freedman of Livia, in whose household he practised the art of a worker in gold, as we learn from a Latin inscription, in which he is designated Aurifex. (Gori, Nos. 114-122; Bianchini, p. 67, No. 220; Welcker, Kunstblatt, 1827. No. 84 ; Osann, Kunstblatt, 1830, No. 84; R. Rochette, Lettre à M. Schorn, p. 407. 2d ed.) [P.S]

was ordained bishop of Rome A. D. 253, in the place of Lucius, and suffered martyrdom four years afterwards. He is known to us solely by the dispute which he maintained with Cyprian upon baptizing heretics, which became so fierce, that Stephanus, not content with refusing audience to the deputies despatched by the African prelate, positively forbad the faithful to exercise towards them the common duties of hospitality. Works

He appears to have published two epistles in connection with this controversy. 1. Ad Cyprianum 2. Ad Episcopos Orientales contra Helenum et Firmilianum. Editions

Neither of these has been preserved, but a short fragment of the former is to be found in the letter of Cyprian Ad Pompeium (lxxiv.). and is printed in the Epistolae Pontificum Romanorum of Constant. (fol. Paris, 1721, p. 210). [W.R]

(Στέφανος), the name of several physicians : --

1. Probably a native of Tralles in Lydia, as he was the father of Alexander Trallianus. (Alex. Trail. 4.1, p. 198.) He had four other sons, Anthemius, Dioscorus, Metrodorus, and Olympius, who were all eminent in their several professions. (Agath. Hist. v. p. 149.) He lived in the latter half of the fifth century after Christ.

2. A native of Edessa, who was one of the most eminent physicians of his age. He was of great service to Kobádh (or Cabades) king of Persia, early in the sixth century after Christ, for which he was richly rewarded. During the siege of Edessa by Cosra (or Chosroes) the son of Kobádh, A. D. 544, Stephanus was sent with some of his fellow-citizens to intercede in behalf of the place ; and in his address to the king he claims for himself the credit not only of having brought him up, but also of having persuaded his father to nominate him as his successor to the throne in place of his elder brother. (Procop. de Bello Pers. 2.26.) His intercession had no effect, but the king was shortly afterwards forced to raise the siege.

3. A native of Alexandria, author of a short Greek treatise on Alchemy, who must have lived in the early part of the seventh century after Christ, as part of his work (p. 243) is addressed to the Emperor Heraclius (A. D. 610-641). Works Treatise on Alchemy

The Treatise on Alchemy consists of nine πράξεις or Lectures (see Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. xii. p. 694, note, ed. vet.), the first of which is entitled Στεφάνου Ἀλεχανδρέως οἰκουμενικοῦ φιλοσόφου καὶ διδασκάλου τῆς μεγάλης καὶ ἱερᾶς τέχνης περὶ Χρυσοποιϊͅας πρᾶξις σὺν Θεῷ πρώτη, where it is not quite clear whether Περὶ Χρυσοποιΐας, De Chrysopoeia, is meant to be the title of the whole work, or merely of the first section of it. Reinesius (apud Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. xii. p. 757) speaks highly of the work, but notices that the author falls into (p. 231 ) the common error of the Eastern and Greek churches of that age respecting the procession of the Holy Ghost. The writer was evidently a religious man, as appears from the way in which he uses his numerous quotations from the New Testament. * He quotes (p. 225) a mystic enigma in six verses from the Sibylline oracles (lib. ii. p. 115, ed. Amstel. 1689), which is wrongly printed as prose, and of which several solutions have been attempted (but with doubtful success) in modern times. See Fabr. l.c. p. 696 Latin Editions

The work was first published in a Latin translation by Dominic Pizimentus, Patav. 1573. 8vo. together with Democritus, Synesius. and other writers on the same subject. Editions

The Greek text is to be found in the second volume of Ideler's Physici et Medici Graeci Minores, Berol. 8vo. 1842. Commentaries on Hippocrates and Galen ascribed

Fabricius (l.c. p. 693) and others think that this Stephanus was the same person as the commentator on Hippocrates and Galen, who may have been called (say they) Atheniensis from being born at Athens, and Alexandrinus form having settled at Alexandria; but this conjecture seems improbable. Further Information

See Fabric. l.c. ; Lambec. Biblioth. Vindob. vol. vi. p. 380, ed. Kollar.)

4. A native of Athens, and a commentator on Hippocrates and Galen, who is said in the titles of some MSS. at Vienna to have been a pupil of Theophilus Protospatharius (Lambec. Biblioth. Vindob. vol. vi. p. 198, vol. vii. p. 352). Nothing more is known of his personal history, and his date is somewhat uncertain. Somepersons confound him with the chemist of Alexandria, and say that he lived in the seventh century after Christ; but this is probably an error, as Dietz appears to be correct in stating that some of the Greek words to be found in his writings ( e. g. Ψυχία ἀφράτα, Comment. in Hippocr. " Prognost." p. 87, τζιμβλοί, ibid. p. 89. λαγωδάτον κοιμᾶσθαι, p. 94, μάγκυπες, p. 146, ἀκατιδες, p. 154, κλοκιον, p. 159, &c.) indicate a later date. If it is true that Theophilus was his tutor, this does not help to determine the century in which he lived, as the date of the master is as uncertain as that of the pupil. If, however, we suppose Theophilus to have lived in the ninth century [Theophilus Protospatharius], Stephanus may be safely placed in the same. However this may be, he is certainly, in the opinion of Dietz (Schol. in Hippocr. et Gal. vol. i. p. xvi.) and M. Littré (Oeuvres d' Hippocr. tome i. p. 128), the most important of all the ancient commentators on Hippocrates after Galen, as his notes form a useful supplement to those of that writer, and contain quotations and explanations not to be found elsewhere. Works

His Scholia on the " Prognosticon " of Hippocrates are to be found in the first volume of Dietz's " Scholia in Hippocratem et Galenum," Regim. Pruss. 8vo. 1834. There is also a commentary on the " Aphorisms" of Hippocrates, which in some MSS. bears the name of Stephanus, but in others it is attributed to Meletius or Theophilus; some extracts are inserted in the second volume of Dietz's collection mentioned above. His commentary on Galen's Ad Glauconem de Methodo Medendi is said by Fabricius, and others who have repeated the assertion on his authority, to have been published in Greek, Venet. ap. Aldum, 1536, 8vo., but this edition is not mentioned by Renouard (Annales des Aldes), and its existence is very doubtful. It was first published in a Latin translation by Augustus Gadaldinus, 1554, 8vo. Venet., which was several times reprinted. The Greek text is inserted in the first volume of Dietz's Schol. in Hippocr. et Gal. There is a short Greek work in MS., entitled Βιβλος Διοσκορίδον καὶ Στεφάνου Ἀθηναίου τοῦ φιλοσόφου περιέχουσα φαρμάκων ἐμπειρίας κατὰ ἀλφαβήτον σαφῶς ἐκτεθεῖσα (Lambec. Biblioth. Vindob. vol. vi. p. 228), which has been published by Caspar Wolphius, in a Latin translation, 1581, 8vo. [Tiguri], with the title-- " Alphabetum Empiricum, sive, Dioscoridis et Stephani Atheniensis Philosophorum et Medicorum, de Remediis Expertis Liber, juxta Alphabeti Ordinem digestus." The treatise on Fevers, which is in some MSS. attributed to Stephanus Atheniensis, is in fact by Palladius. (Penny Cyclop.)

5. Besides the above-mentioned physicians the Arabic writers mention at least two persons of the name of Estefan (or Stephanus, who translated various Greek works into Arabic. The most eminent of these was the son of a person named Basil; he lived at Bagdad in the reign of the Chalíf Motawakkel, A. H. 232-247 (A. D. 847 --861), and translated Dioscorides and several treatises of Galen, some of which are still extant in MS. in different European libraries. It is, perhaps, his translation of Dioscorides which is quoted by Ibn Baitár (vol. i. p. 265); where Sontheimer, the translator, calls him Isthafan Ebn Nasl, by misplacing a single point, and thus confounding Nasíl with Basil. (See Nicoll and Pusey, Catal. MSS. Arab. Biblioth. Badl. p. 587; De Sacy's Translation of ' Abdallatif p. 495 ; Wenrich, De Auctor. Graecor. Version. et Comment. Syriac. Arab Armen. et Pers., 1842. pp. 36.216, &c.) [W.A.G]

the Latinized form of Estienne, in English sometimes absurdly called Stephens. The name of a celebrated family of printers, publishers, and classical scholars (descended from a noble Provençal family), found settled at Paris towards 1500 in the person of Henry, who is supposed to have been born about 1470, and died in 1520. In Paris Henry carried on the business of printer and bookseller for upwards of twenty years. In 1526 Robert, his second son, born 1503, is found in possession of the business. Every year of Robert's life is marked by the issue from his printing-press of several volumes, many of them masterpieces of art, and all of them surpassing anything of the kind previously seen in France. He was at once printer, publisher, commentator, and author. In 1532 he published a Latin dictionary (Thesaurus Linguae Latinae) which for two centuries remained the standard work. He also published editions of several classical authors and numerous Latin grammars. His Bible of 1545, and his Greek Testament of 1549, each drew down upon him a religious prosecution; and though the prosecutions failed legally, they were disastrous to his private fortune. Having first sent his family to Geneva, he followed them there in 1549. Robert, his second son, shortly afterwards returned to Paris, where he resumed his father's business.

The second Henry, born at Paris in 1528, succeeded his father, Robert, on his death in 1559. Though Henry possessed the same literary industry and ability as his father, he was unfortunately deficient in his father's practical turn of mind. Devoted to his art and to his calling, he seems to have been utterly wanting in worldly prudence. In two years we find that he had revised and published more than 4000 pages of Greek text, including some twenty editiones principes; while at the same time he was writing his Apologia pro Herodoto (1566)—a work of formidable length and learning. Rendered nervous and irritable by an overworked brain, and by pecuniary difficulties, travelling, originally undertaken from literary curiosity, grew into a necessity of his life, and he visited England, the Netherlands, and Italy, examining classical manuscripts and making the acquaintance of distinguished scholars. In 1572 appeared his great Greek lexicon (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae), in five folio volumes, on which he spent nearly his whole fortune (last reprint by Didot, 9 vols. [Paris, 1831- 65]). In 1578 he visited Paris, where for several years he became a hanger-on of the court of Henry III., who bestowed upon him a pension, which the state of the royal exchequer rendered merely nominal. Quitting Paris, he wandered in poverty over Europe, his own family often ignorant of where he was to be found. He died at Lyons in 1598. Great as a publisher and commentator, Henry Estienne does not seem to have possessed much power as an original thinker, but his mastery of Greek seems to have been almost complete, and as a critic of the French language he is still esteemed in France. The traditions of the family were kept up by Paul (1566-1627) and Antoine (1592-1674). See Feugère, Caractères et Portraits Littéraires du XVI. Siècle (Paris, 1864); also article in Quarterly Review (London, April, 1865); Bernard, Les Estiennes (Paris, 1856); Renouard, L'Imprimerie des Étiennes (Paris, 1843); and the paper in Pattison's Essays (Oxford, 1889).

(Στέφανος). (1) An Athenian comic poet of the New Comedy, probably the son of Antiphanes, some of whose plays he is said to have exhibited.

(2) Of Byzantium, the author of the geographical lexicon entitled Ethnica (Ἐθνικά), of which unfortunately we only possess an epitome. Stephanus was a grammarian at Constantinople, and lived after the time of Arcadius and Honorius, and before that of Justinian II. His work was reduced to an epitome by a certain Hermolaüs, who dedicated his abridgment to the emperor Justinian II. According to the title, the chief object of the work was to specify the gentile names derived from the several names of places and countries in the ancient world. But, while this is done in every article, the amount of information given went far beyond this. Nearly every article in the epitome contains a reference to some ancient writer, as an authority for the name of the place; but in the original, as we see from the extant fragments, there were considerable quotations from the ancient authors, besides a number of very interesting particulars, topographical, historical, mythological, and others. Thus the work was not merely what it professed to be, a lexicon of a special branch of technical grammar, but a valuable dictionary of geography. How great would have been its value to us, if it had come down to us unmutilated, may be seen by any one who compares the extant fragments of the original with the corresponding articles in the epitome. These fragments, however, are unfortunately very scanty. The best editions of the epitome of Stephanus are by Dindorf, 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1825); Westermann (Leipzig, 1839); and Meineke (Berlin, 1849). See Geffcken, De Stephano Byzantio (1886).