Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

TIMOTHEUS

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V26, Page 993 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
» Make a correction to this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

TIMOTHEUS , Athenian statesman and See also:

general, son of See also:Conon, the restorer of the walls of See also:Athens. From 378-356 B.C. he frequently held command in the See also:war between Athens (in See also:alliance with See also:Thebes), and See also:Sparta. The See also:object of Athens was to revive the old confederacy (see PELIAN See also:LEAGUE, § B), and to regain command of the See also:sea, and in 375 Timotheus was sent with a See also:fleet to See also:sail See also:round See also:Peloponnesus by way of demonstration against Sparta. He gained over Cephallenia, secured the friend-See also:ship of the Acarnanians and Molossians, and took Corcyra, but used his victory with moderation. Want of funds and See also:jealousy of the Thebans led to a See also:short See also:peace. In 373 Timotheus was appointed to the command of a fleet for the See also:relief of Corcyra, then beleaguered by the Spartans. But his See also:ships were not fully manned, and to recruit their strength he cruised in the See also:Aegean. The delay excited the indignation of the Athenians, who brought him to trial; but, thanks to the exertions of his See also:friends—See also:Jason, See also:tyrant of Pherae, and Alcetas, See also:king of the Molossians, both of whom went to Athens to plead his cause—he was acquitted. He had previously been superseded in his command by See also:Iphicrates. Being reduced to See also:great povery—for he had pledged his private See also:property in See also:order to put the fleet in an efficient See also:state—he See also:left Athens and took service with the king of See also:Persia. We next hear of him about 366, when, having returned to Athens, he was sent to support See also:Ariobarzanes, See also:satrap of See also:Phrygia. But, finding that the satrap was in open revolt against Persia, Timotheus, in conformity with his instructions, abstained from helping him and turned his arms against See also:Samos, then occupied by a See also:Persian See also:garrison, and took it after a ten months' See also:siege (366-65).

Be then took Sestus, Crithote, Torone, Potidaea, Methone, Pydna and many other cities; but two attempts upon Amphipolls failed. An See also:

action was brought against him by Apollcdorus, the son of the banker Pasion, for the return of See also:money See also:lent by the See also:father. The speech for the See also:plaintiff is still extant, and is attributed (though not unanimously) to See also:Demosthenes. It is interesting as showing the manner in which Timotheus had exhausted the large See also:fortune inherited from his father and the straits to which he was reduced by his sacrifices in the public cause. In 358 or 357, the Athenians, in response to a spirited See also:appeal of Timotheus, crossed over to See also:Euboea and expelled the Thebans in three days. In the course of the Social War Timotheus was despatched with Iphicrates, Menestheus, son of Iphicrates, and See also:Chares to put down the revolt. The hostile fleets sighted each other in the See also:Hellespont; but a See also:gale was blowing, and Iphicrates and Timotheus decided not to engage. Chares, disregarding their opposition, lost many ships, and in his despatches he complained so bitterly of his colleagues that the Athenians put them on their trial. The accusers were Chares and Aristophon, both men of notoriously See also:bad See also:character. Iphicrates, who had fewer enemies than Timotheus, was acquitted; but Timotheus, who had always been disliked for his arrogance, was condemned to pay a very heavy See also:fine. Being unable to pay, he withdrew to See also:Chalcis, where he died soon afterwards, The Athenians showed their repentance by remitting the greater See also:part of the fine to his son Conon. His remains were buried in the Ceramicus and statues erected to his memory in the See also:agora and the See also:acropolis.

See See also:

Life by See also:Cornelius See also:Nepos; Diodorus Siculus xv., xvi. ; Isocrates, De permutation; Pseudo-Demosthenes, Adversus Timotheum; C. Rehdantz, Vitae Iphicratis, Chabriae, Timothei (1845); and especially Holm, Hist. of See also:Greece (Eng. trans., vol. iii.). xiii. 386. particularly exposed to (See also:Harnack). Their inorganic character naturally permitted later generations to bring them up to date, and accretions of this See also:kind may be suspected in I Tim. iii. I–13,v. 17–20 (22a), Vi. 17–21, as well as in Tit. i.7-9. Other verses, like iii. 11 and v.

23, have all the. See also:

appearance of misplaced glosses, perhaps from the margin. When vi. 20–21 is thus taken as a later addition, it becomes possible' to see in the reference to 1:tvrt6E Tess Ti]S ¢eu&,vuµou yvwvews an allusion to See also:Marcion's well-known See also:volume. Attempts have been made by some critics, particularly See also:Hesse (See also:Die Entstehung der neutest. Hirtenbriefe, 1889: i. 1-10, 18–2o, iv. 1–16, vi. 3–16, 20 seq.) and Knoke (Prakt. theol. Kommentar, 1887, 1889: a=i. 3 seq., 18-20, ii. I–I0, 1V. 12, V.

1-3, 4C–6, II–15i 19–23, 24 seq., written to See also:

Timothy from See also:Corinth; b=i. I2-17, iii. 14-16, iv. 1–1s, 13-16, ii. 12-15, V. 7 seq., vi. 17-19, 1. 5-11, vi. 2c–16, 20 seq., written from Caesarea), to disentangle one or more See also:original notes of See also:Paul from the subsequent additions, but the See also:comparative evenness of the See also:style does not favour such analyses .2 They have more relevance and point in 2 Tim. than in i Tim. P. See also:Ewald, in his Probabilia betr. d. See also:Text See also:des r Tim.

(19o1), falls back upon, the See also:

hypothesis of the papyri leaves or sheets having been displaced, and conjectures that i. I2–17 originally See also:lay between i. 2 and i. 3, while iii. 14-iv. 10 has been misplaced from after vi. 2. But his keen See also:criticism of Hesse and Knoke is more successful than his See also:positive explanation of the textual phenomena, and a more thorough-going See also:process of See also:literary criticism is necessary in order to solve the problems of the See also:epistle. Its irregular character, abrupt connexions and loose transitions' are due to the nature of the subject rather than to any material disarrangement of its paragraphs. The phenomena of style have to be viewed in a broad See also:light. See also:Allowance must be made for the difference of vocabulary produced by See also:change of subject. The See also:evidence of &all e6rrggiva is always to be received with caution and strict See also:scrutiny; no, hard and fast See also:rule must be set up to See also:judge the See also:language of a See also:man like Paul.

Yet such considerations do not operate against the literary See also:

judgment that the pastorals did not come from Paul's See also:pen. The words and phrases which are See also:common to the pastorals and the See also:rest of the Pauline epistles are neither so characteristic nor so numerous as those See also:peculiar to the former, and the data of style may be summed up in the See also:verdict that they point to a writer Who, naturally reproducing Paul's standpoint as far as possible, and acquainted with his epistles, yet betrays the characteristics of his later milieu in expressions as well as in ideas.' Thus, of 174 words which occur in the pastorals alone (of all the New Testament writings), 97 are See also:foreign to the See also:Septuagint and 116 to the rest of the Pauline letters. This proportion of &aaf E6prusave is extremely large, when the See also:size of the pastorals is taken into See also:account, and its significance is heightened by the further fact that several of Paul's characteristic expressions tend to be replaced by others (e.g. aep,rarsly and craggily by avaerp€¢ew, &c., K6pws by 6Eaa6r71s, rapovaia by Etrc4,6.vELa), while a large number of Pauline words are entirely absent (e,g. &SLKOS, iNEVeipta, KavadaOac, 'wcKp6s, µwpia, rapaSoacs, rel[•Emv, rsp u56ELV, crawl, &c.). Nor is this by any means all. " Difference in vocabulary may be partially explained (though only partially in this See also:case) by difference of subject-See also:matter and of date; bu. the use of particles is one of the most unfailing of literary tests. The change in the use of particles and the comparative rarity of the definite See also:article See also:form, together with the startling divergepce in vocabulary, the See also:chief ground of our perplexity " (See also:Church Quarterly See also:Review, 1903, pp. 428 seq.). Pauline particles like &pa, Sc6, See also:Scion, Ereira, Ere, 1SE and See also:Thou ' When the literary integrity of the epistle is maintained this allusion naturally drops to the ground, since the use of the epistle by See also:Polycarp rules the earlier conjectures of See also:Baur and others (who made the pastorals See also:anti-Marcionite) out of See also:court; besides, passages like i. 7 (See also:Titus i. 1o, 14) would not apply to the Marcionites. Dr See also:Hort (Judaistic See also:Christianity, pp.

113 seq.) prefers to See also:

group both the false -yearns (cf. Rom, ii. 2o) and the avrcOhrfi.s as Jewish casuistical decisions, the ysmsaXoyiac of i. 4 and Tit. iii. 9 being the legendary pedigrees of Jewish heroes, such as are prominent in See also:Philo and the See also:Book of See also:Jubilees. Cf. Wohlenberg, pp. 3o--36, and on the other See also:side Klopper in Zeits. See also:fur wiss. Theologie (1902), pp. 339 seq. I Hesse's, in particular, is shipwrecked on the See also:assumption that the Ignatian epistles must be dated under See also:Marcus Aurelius. 2 Thus ii, 11–15 seems almost like a See also:gloss (Hesse, Knoke), iv.

1–8 arts easily from its context, and the ov' of ii. I indicates a very loose relationship to the preceding paragraphs. ' So the philologist T. Nii_reli (Der Wortschatz des Apostels See also:

Paulus, 1905, pp. 85 seq.), whose See also:opinion is all the more significant on this point that he refuses to admit any linguistic features adverse to the Pauline authorship of the other epistles.disappear; the Pauline a6v is replaced by µEra, while prepositions like See also:Sari, &xpc, Eµrpoa0ee and aapa (accus.) drop out , entirely. A number of Latinisms, unexampled in the rest of- Paul's epistles, occur within the pastorals; whole families of new words, especially composite words (often compounded with a-privative, Ow-, oiw-, Kako-,5 aw¢ipo-, 4eXo-), emerge with others, e.g. EdaEpEGa, Awr6S o X6yos, &c.; and the very greeting is un-Pauline (I Tim. i. 2; 2 Tim. 1. 2). The peculiarities of syntax corroborate the impression made by such features of the vocabulary. There is less flow than in the rest of the Pauline letters; " the syntax is stiffer and more See also:regular .

. . the clauses are marshalled together, and there is a tendency to See also:

parallelism " (See also:Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p. 402). An increase of sententious imperative clauses is also to be noted. Doubtless, some of these features might be set down to Paul's See also:amanuensis .° But not all of them, more especially when the characteristic conceptions and ideas of the pastorals are taken into account. Nor can it be argued that the characteristics of the pastorals are those of private letters; they are not private, nor even semi-private as they stand; besides, the only private See also:note from Paul's See also:hand (See also:Philemon) bears no traces of the See also:special diction exhibited in the epistles to Timothy and Titus. Furthermore, throughout the pastorals, and especially in I Tim., there are traces of a wider acquaintance with See also:Greek literature i than can be detected in the letters of Paul. See also:Affinities to See also:Plutarch (cf. J. See also:Albani in Zeitschrift fur wiss. Theologie, 1902, 40–58) and to 4 as well as to 2 See also:Maccabees are not improbable. 1 Tim. also gives clearest expression to the author's ecclesiastical and doctrinal views. The See also:objective sense of ,riaris has begun to overpower the subjective.

Christianity is becoming more and more a " form of See also:

sound words," a crystallized creed, whose teaching is the vital point. The deep conceptions of Paul, viz. the fatherly love of See also:God, the faith-See also:mysticism of the See also:Christian's relation to See also:Christ, and the inward See also:witness of the Spirit, fall into the background, while unusual prominence is assigned to the more tangible and See also:practical tests of Christianity. Of all the pastorals, I Tim. is furthest from Paul.' The author writes more out of his own mind, evidently with little or no special material to fall back upon. The epistle is not a compilation from the two others (as See also:Schleiermacher thought), but it seems to denote a slightly later See also:stage.' Many critics therefore (e.g. De Wette, Mangold, See also:Reuss, See also:Bruckner, See also:Pfleiderer, von See also:Soden,See also:McGiffert, S.See also:Davidson, Bourquin, Clemen and Jillicher) conclude that the pastorals were written in this order (2 Tim., Titus, I Tim.). When _ the epistles were arranged for the See also:canon, it was natural to put 2 Tim. later than the other two, since its setting seemed to imply the See also:close of Paul's career. Its literary priority is confirmed by several resemblances between it and Philitppians, the last of Paul's epistles (e.g. avaavacs iv. 6 =aerating Phtl. i. 23, and arieSeoOac iv. 6=Phil. ii. 17). Kaa6s, which Paul neveruses as an attribute, is mainly employed in this way by the author.

On raritp as applied to God, cf. See also:

Wagner in Zeits. f. neut. Wiss. (1905), pp. 221 seq. The so-called " See also:Lucan " features (cf. See also:Holtzmann, pp. 92 seq., and Von Soden in Theologische Abhandlungen, 1892, pp. 133–135) have suggested that See also:Luke may have been the amanuensis (cf. 2 Tim. iv. II), or even the author of the pastorals. i E.g.

Tit. i. 11 (el. Plut. Moral. 967, 13), H. 3 (cf. Thuc. ii. 61 ; Xen. See also:

Mena i. 5, 5, 6, 8); 2 Tim. ii. 17 (cf. Plut.

Moral. 65 D 6 Si Kaprdvos ro?u5caxvrov iv Tw eG., an r60os); I Tim. i. 6 (cf. Plut. Moral. 414 Ei 6,aroxovac roU µerpiov Kai rpirovros), i. io (cf. Plut. De educ. See also:

lib. 5 A roO iycaivovroc Kai rerayµlpov Sloe se a/,povEiv, for 6yiiis =" normal "; cf. See also:Plato's See also:Protagoras, 346 C), i. 19 (cf. See also:Galen, x.

307, ev ds evai yiiaav of rp6sOev iarpot =" came to grief "), vi. 5 (cf. Plut. See also:

Cato See also:major, 25, Moral. 92 B with Plato's Protagoras, 313). Even linguistically Titus and I Tim. are closer to one another than either to 2 Tim. The latter has no allusion to the Kaa6v Epyov, the irspoS,.SacrKaAEly, the Sca&EflacouaOac, &c., of the others, and contains one or two specific phrases of its own. i Tim., like See also:Ephesians, is a See also:writing whose lack of greetings and general See also:tone point to the functions of an encyclical or See also:Catholic epistle. s For details, cf. Ency. Bib. 5093–5094. Of the five " faithful sayings," three occur in I Tim.; these condensed aphorisms See also:tally with liturgical fragments such as the famous See also:quotation in I Tim. iii.

16, a See also:

formula of See also:confession written in small short cola (cf. Klopper in Zeitschrift fur wiss. Theologie, 1902, pp. 336 seq.). second (cf. Luke x. 7) goes back to either Luke's See also:gospel or its source at this particular point. The hypothesis that a saying of Jesus is loosely added here to an Old Testament See also:citation is very forced, and the inference is that by the See also:time the author wrote, Luke's gospel was reckoned as ypa4n. This would be explicable if Luke could be assumed to have been the author, in whole or part, of the pastorals. (J.

End of Article: TIMOTHEUS

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
TIMOR LAUT (" Seaweed Timor '; Dutch, Timor Laae1),... 		[next]
TIMOTHY

Site © 2006 - Net Industries