(Jacοby FGrHist. 71, Blass II2 373 sq. Udalr. Friedlaender, De Zοilo aliisque Homeri obtrectatoribus. Diss. Regimonti 1895.)

1. Dion. Hal. de Isaeo 20, p. 123, 14 sq. pοst Thrasymachum: τὰ δὲ αὐτὰ καὶ περὶ Κριτίου καὶ περὶ Ζωίλου τις ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοι, πλὴν ὅσον τοῖς χαρακτῆρσι τῆς ἑρμηνείας διαλλάττουσιν ἀλλήλων.

Ab eodem antea enumerati erant (p. 122, 23 sq.) Ἀντιφῶν τε ὁ Ῥαμνούσιος καὶ Θρασύμαχος ὁ Καλχηδόνιος καὶ Πολυκράτης ὁ Ἀθηναῖος Κριτίας τε ὁ τῶν τριάκοντα ἄρξας, deinde singuli eorum characteres describuntur. Cf. eiusdem de Demosth. 8, p. 143, 6 Us.-R., ubi Ἀντιφῶν… καὶ Θεόδωρος καὶ Πολυκράτης Ἰσαῖός τε καὶ Ἀναξιμένης iuxta ponuntur. Eundem esse rhetorem sophistam et decantatum illum Ὁμηρομάστιγα, cuius imprimis in scholiis Homericis memoria mansit, Spengel negaverat, nunc consentiunt omnes. Schol. Ioann. Tsets. ad Exeg. in Iliad. p. 125 H.: ὁ Ζωίλος οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Ὁμηρομάστιξ καλούμενος... καὶ ὁ μὲν Σικελιώτης Διόδωρος (fr. inc. 1) τὸν Ζωίλον τοῦτον οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἔτι γεγραφέναι φησιν ἢ τὴν καθʼ Ὁμήρου... σύνταξιν... οἳ δὲ τοῖς εὐδοκίμοις τοῦτον συντάττουσι ῥήτορσιν. Scripsisse eum τὰ καθʼ Ὁμήρου γυμνασίας ἕνεκα contendit Porphyrii Schol. B Il. K 274. Ceterum de Zoili vita et scriptis quae exstant testimonia plerumque ad Ὁμηρομάστιγα pertinentia diligenter collegit U. Friedlaender loco supra indicato p. 6 sq., καταδρομὴν Πλάτωνος Zoilo tribuit Dion. Hal. ad Pomp. Gem. II p. 222, 12, p. 226, 10 sq. Us.-R., Suda κατὰ Ἰσοκράτους τοῦ ῥήτoρος libellum. At τοῦ Ἰσοκρατικοῦ διδασκαλ(είου) eum fuisse Porphyrius in scholio Iliadis supra laudato dicit.



2. Phoebammοn περὶ σχημάτων W VIII, p. 493, 15: ὁρίζεται δὲ Ζωίλος οὕτως· σχῆμά ἐστιν, ἕτερον μὲν προσποιεῖσθαι, ἕτερον δὲ λέγειν.

3 ἕτερόν τι alii codd., ἕτερον δέ τι Spengel

Cf. Anaximenes 21 p. 57, 14 H. Alexander περὶ σχημάτων III 22, 30, Zonaeus III 164, 12 Sp., Aquila Romanus 24, 21 H., Iulius Ruf. 38, 3 H., Mart. Cap. 478, 1 H. al. – Alium esse Zoilum eumque iuniorem huius definitionis auctorem putat Blass II2 375, vix recte.


3. Quint. inst. 9, 1, 14: verum id ipsum anguste Zoilus terminavit, qui id solum putaverit schema, quo aliud simulatur dici quam dicitur, quod sane vulgo quoque sic accipi scio, unde et figuratae controversiae quaedam, de quibus post paulo dicam, vocantur.

1 Zoilus: theodulus in ras. A2 2 qui id: quod A

Recte hic τῶν ἐσχηματισμένων λόγων initium esse Quintilianus monet, cf. etiam Aristot. rhet. 1399 a 29: (τόπος) ἄλλος, ἐπειδὴ οὐ ταὐτὰ φανερῶς ἐπαινοῦσι καὶ ἀφανῶς, ἀλλὰ φανερῶς μὲν τὰ δίκαια καὶ τὰ καλὰ ἐπαινοῦσι μάλιστα, ἰδίᾳ δὲ τὰ συμφέροντα μᾶλλον βούλονται, quod, quatenus ἐπιχειρήματι materiam dat, Theodoro tribuimus. Ceterum cf. Volkmann, Rhet.2 p. 121, Barczat 20 sq.



4. Schol. A Il. A 129 (ex Herodianο): Ζωίλος δὲ ὁ Ἀμφιπολίτης καὶ Χρύσιππος ὁ Στωικὸς σολοικίζειν οἴονται τὸν ποιητὴν ἀντὶ ἑνικοῦ πληθυντικῷ χρησάμενον ῥήματι· τὸ γὰρ δῷσι, φασί, πληθυντικόν.

Cf. B III 7 = Aristot. Soph. el. 165 b 12 sq.


5. Schol. in Platonis Hipparchum 229 D: Ζωίλος ἐν τῷ εἰς Πολύφημον ἐγκωμίῳ· οὕτω γὰρ ὡμογνωμόνησαν οἱ θεοὶ περὶ τῆς τιμωρίας ταύτης, ὥστε πάντοθεν Ὀδυσσεὺς τέως ὁ σῳζόμενος καὶ τὰς ναῦς ἀκεραίους περιποιούμενος περιώφθη μετὰ τὴν ἀρὰν ὑπὸ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς.

σοφισταὶ Βουσείριδας καὶ Πολυφήμους ἐπαινοῦντες dum increpantur a Philodemo rhet. I 216, 19 S., iuxta Polycratem Ζoilus intellegendus.


6. Strab. VI 271 C: Ἀλφειὸν δὲ Ζωίλος ὁ ῥήτωρ ἐν τῷ Tενεδίων ἐγκωμίῳ φησὶν ἐκ Τενέδου ῥεῖν, ὁ τὸν Ὅμηρον ψέγων ὡς μυθογράφον.

Tenediorum encomium παίγνιον fuisse iudicat Blass II2 374. Floruisse hoc genus, postquam inventum est, docent etiam Herculis laudes, quales Caucalus rhetor, Theopompi frater, composuit secundum Athenaeum 412 b. Cf. G. Fraustadt, Encomiorum hist. Diss. Leipz. 1905. Plutarchi regum et imp. apophth. 192 C (Apophth. Lac. 217 D/E).


XXXV. Zoilus



1. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, On Isaeus: One could say the same things [as about Thrasymachus] about Kritias and Zoilus, except that they differ from one another in the characteristics of the elocution.

The same author also lists the following earlier (p. 122, 23 f.): ‘Antiphon of Rhamnus, Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, Polycrates of Athens and Critias the leader of the Thirty,’ and then the character of each is described. See also On Demosthenes by the same author 8, p. 143, 6 Us.-R., where ‘Antiphon […], Theodorus, Polycrates, Isaeus and Anaximenes’ are named besides each other. Spengel rejected the proposition that the sophistic rhetorician and the famous, widely praised ‘Homer’s scourge’, who is attested mainly in the Homeric Scholia, are the same person; today, however, everybody agrees that they are. Schol. Ioann. Tsets. ad Exeg. in Iliad. p. 125 H.: ‘This Zoilus is the one called “Homer’s scourge” […] While Diodorus of Sicily (fr. inc. 1) writes that this Zoilus had not yet written anything except the composition against Homer […], others list him among the famous rhetoricians.’ Porphyrius Schol. B Il. K 274 maintains that he wrote ‘the works against Homer for the sake of practice’. U. Friedlaender in the abovementioned book, p. 6 sq., has collected the testimonies on Zoilus’ life and writings, which mainly refer to him as ‘Homer’s scourge’. An Attack on Plato is attributed to Zoilus by Dion. Hal. To Pompeius Geminus II p. 222, 12, p. 226, 10 f. Us.-R.; the booklet Against the Rhetorician Isocrates is attributed to him by Suda. Yet Porphyrius in the abovementioned Scholium on the Iliad claims that he was ‘of Isocrates’ school’.


2. Phoebammon, On Figures: Zoillus defines it thusly: A figure is pretending to say one thing and saying another.

Cf. Anaximenes 21 p. 57, 14 H.; Alexander On Tropes 3.22.30; Zonaeus 3.164.12 Sp.; Aquila Romanus 24, 21 H.; Iulius Ruf. 38, 3 H.; Mart. Cap. 478, 1 H. and others. – Blass II2 375 claims that the author of this definition was another Zoilus, one younger than ours; this is hardly correct.


3. Quintilian 9.1.4: Zoilus defined this matter narrowly: He only regarded as a figure what says something different from what it seems to be saying at the surface, which I know is also the common view. This has given the so-called figured controversies their name; I will speak about them in a moment.


Quintilian correctly points out that this is the beginning of ‘the formalized speeches’, cf. also Aristotle Rhetoric 1399 a 29: ‘Another topos, since because they do not praise the same things openly or covertly, but they praise openly mostly what is just and honorable, but in private they rather seek what is advantageous,’ which I attribute to Theodorus to the extent that it provides material for a ‘dialectical proof.’ See also Volkmann, Rhet.2 p. 121; Barczat 20 f.


4. Scholion A on Iliad 1.129: Zoilus from Amphipolis and Chrysippus the Stoic think that the poet is committing a syntactic error by using the plural instead of the singular: They say that dôisi is plural.

Cf. B III 7 = Arist. Soph. El. 165b12-


5. Scholion on Plato’s Hipparchos: Zoilus writes in his Praise of Polyphemus: ‘The gods were so much in agreement about this punishment that Odysseus, who hitherto had managed to get out of every situation and to keep his ships unharmed, was suffered by Athena [to come to harm].’

When the ‘sophists praising Bousirises and Polyphemuses’ are badmouthed by Philodemus On Rhetoric 1.216, 19 S., we must understand Zoilus besides Polycrates.


6. Strabo: Zoilus the rhetorician says in his Praise of Tenedos that the Alpheios flows out of Tenedos, he who blames Homer as a writer of myths.

Blass II2 374 thinks that the praise of Tenedos was a ‘trifle’. That this genre flourished after it was invented is clear also from the praises of Hercules such as were written by the rhetorician Caucalus, Theopompus’s brother, according to Athenaeus 412 b. Cf. G. Fraustadt, Encomiorum hist., Diss. Leipz. 1905; Plutarch, Sayings of Kings and Commanders 192 C (Spartan Sayings 217 D/E)