is, that physical desire may be produced by physical stimuli, which are called aphrodisiacs, but it is absurd to suppose that such means can produce a passion for a particular object.

PHIPPS. (See Mulgrave.)

PHIPS, Sir William, governor of Massachusetts, was born at Pemaquid, Feb. 2, 1650. He was one of twenty-six children, twenty-one of whom were sons. His father died when he was a child. He then bound himself to a ship carpenter, and, in due time, engaged in the business on his own account. He was so illiterate as not to be able to read or write; but he soon acquired knowledge sufficient for the purposes of common life, and was fortunate enough to connect himself, by marriage, with a young widow of a respectable family. In 1683, he sailed from England, in search of a Spanish vessel which had been wrecked near the Bahamas, having gone to the mother country on hearing of the circumstance, and solicited means for the expedition. He was supplied with two frigates by the admiralty, but failed of success. Nothing discouraged, however, he made fresh importunities for means of making a second attempt, which were given to him by the duke of Albemarle. He discovered the wreck, and brought from it £300,000, £16,000 of which were appropriated to his share. He was also knighted by the king, and appointed high-sheriff of New England. After residing for a time, in that capacity, at Boston, he returned to England in consequence of some disagreement with two other functionaries, by which his situation was rendered uncomfortable. In 1690, he captured Port Royal, but was not so fortunate in the expedition against Quebec. In the same year, he was chosen by the freemen a magistrate of the colony. He did not remain long in Boston, but repaired to England to solicit an expedition to Canada. At that time, the agents of Massachusetts were soliciting a restoration of their old charter from king William; but this being refused, and a new one given, sir William was appointed captain-general and governor-inchief of the province. He discharged the duties of his office with fidelity. His impetuous temper, however, sometimes involved him in quarrels, and complaints were made against him, which he was sent for to answer. He justified himself, and was about to return to his government, when he was taken sick, and died in London, about the middle of February, 1694. He was a blunt, honest man, ardent

in every thing which he undertook, open hearted and generous, but vulgar in speech and manners. His talents were considerable.

His

PHLEBOTOMY; the act of letting blood by opening a vein. Among the ancients, great regard was had to the place where the opening was to be made. At present, the custom is to open one of the principal veins of the arm, the hand, the foot, the neck, or the tongue. The operation itself was anciently performed with a springlancet; now, for the most part, with a simple lancet. Of the arteries, that of the temples is the only one which is opened, and that is done in cases of local complaints of the head. Another mode of letting blood is by cupping, or by the application of leeches for the purpose of extracting blood from places affected by inflammations. Phlebotomy is one of the most effectual means of the medical art; but its application is differently regarded by the most distinguished physicians. Hippocrates rarely resorted to it; for he considered the cure of fevers and inflammations as the work of nature, and regarded phlebotomy as a mode of weakening the efficacy of her operations. followers applied it more frequently, sometimes even to excess. The schools of the empirics (250 B. C.), relying, like Hippocrates, on their own experience and on the observation of nature, endeavored to determine the cases in which bleeding was indispensable. But medicine declined with the general decline of science. Greek physicians, indeed, still distinguished themselves among the Romans; but the sect of empirics had degenerated. Excessive bleeding again became common, until Asclepiades of Bithynia (Cicero's physician and friend) taught a new method of phlebotomy. He considered the cause of the greatest number of diseases to be redundance of blood, and, on this account, advocated the practice of bleeding, but principally for the alleviation of pain, and applied this remedy frequently in case of local affections. After him, Celsus gave an account of the cases in which bleeding was necessary (A. D. 5), and his remarks and directions correspond exactly with those of the greatest modern practitioners. Aretaus, founder of a new school (A. D. 70), prescribed bleeding more frequently in acute than in chronic diseases, and, in extreme cases, he bled the patient to complete exhaustion. Galen (160), who referred the origin of a large class of diseases to excess of blood, ordered copious bleedings; and this practice gained great

repute, and prevailed for several centuries. After the fall of the Roman empire, physicians were so scarce in Europe, that Charlemagne died of an inflammation of the lungs, for want of bleeding and medical attendance. The Arabian physicians followed the authority of Galen, and spread his doctrine over Spain, Italy and France. Bleeding was still more generally practised by the monks, who were in the sole possession of medicine, as well as of all other science, in those ages. At a later period, astrology was connected with the medical art, and bleedings were prescribed on certain days. The popes, indeed, had often forbidden the monks to practise medicine; but they either disregarded the orders, or considered them as referring only to surgical operations. Thus surgery began to be separated from medicine, and formed a new profession, including the art of bleeding, applying leeches, and shaving. But when, after the invention of printing, the writings of the physicians of Greece, especially of Hippocrates, began to circulate, and their doctrines to revive, the practice of bleeding, at least among physicians, was again confined to certain cases. In Germany, Paracelsus (1525) overturned the system of Galen, and with it the practice of bleeding, which is now confined to the surgeons and barbers alone. In France, Italy, &c., the method of Hippocrates and the degenerated system of Galen were, however, not yet abandoned, and the practice of bleeding was carried to the greatest excess. Helmont (1600), the founder of a new system, doubted the use of extracting blood, alleging against it that it weakened too much the vital spirit, which he called archæus. Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood (1619) had some influence on the modes of phlebotomy, in as far as it led to experiments (1642) by which medicines were infused immediately into the veins, or a portion of the infected blood extracted, and supplied by the blood of healthy men or animals. In England, Sydenham rose (1673), who thought it possible to expel diseases by copious bleedings. He extracted blood in almost all cases, never less than eight ounces, generally ten or more, and, in cases of inflammation, as much as forty ounces. The pernicious consequences of this practice did not escape him, but he thought he could not subdue disease by any other means. Stahl (1707) attempted to unite the system of Hippocrates with that of Helmont, and established correct and moderate principles of phlebotomy.

He taught that abundance of blood was no disease, but might become so by a disproportion created between the solid and fluid parts of the system, in which case the proper balance ought to be restored. But he found bleeding indispensable, in cases of too great excitement succeeded by a congestion or effusion of blood. To prevent this, he prescribed occasional bleeding. His method was soon misunderstood and misapplied. The extraction of blood for the preservation of health was every where thought necessary. Bordeu endeavored to stop this abuse in France. Cullen (1777), who regarded all diseases as proceeding from an unnatural state of the nerves; all irregularities of the fluids as the consequences of weakness and spasm, recommended bleeding as the best means to diminish the activity of the whole body, and especially of the system of the blood-vessels. He recommended, however, a due regard to circumstances, and mainly adopted Stahl's doctrine of the superabundance of blood. Stoll of Vienna (1780), an admirer of Sydenham, resorted frequently to bleeding. Several of the later physicians sought, however, to limit its too frequent application. Wollstein (1791) recommended it only in a few cases. Gall, also, improved the system still more.

Brown adhered to the same maxim, and limited the practice of bleeding too much. In modern times, the abuses of phlebotomy have again considerably increased, because the antiphlogis tic method of healing has risen into great repute. Bleeding is one of the most effectual, but also one of the most dangerous means of checking disease.

PHLEGETHON (Xeyε0wv, burning), in the Grecian mythology; a river of fire in the infernal regions. (See Cocytus.)

PHLEGREAN FIELDS; a place in Macedonia, where the battle of the giants was said to have taken place. The name was also applied to a place near Naples (Forum Vulcani, Solfatara), where the ground is impregnated with sulphur. (See Giants, and Naples.)

PHLOGISTICATED AIR; nitrogen, or azote. (See Nitrogen.)

PHLOGISTON; the supposed general inflammable principle of Stahl. (See Oxygen, and Combustion; also Chemistry, vol. iii, p. 124.)

PHOCAS'S COLUMN. (See Column.)

PHOCION; an Athenian general, and one of the most virtuous characters of antiquity. Though of humble descent, he received a good education, and imbibed, under Plato and other philosophers,

those elevated sentiments which governed his whole life. His external appearance was stern and severe, but his disposition was mild and gentle. His eloquence was distinguished for clearness and brevity; and his opinion was pronounced in the assemblies of the people, freely and without hesitation. He first served under Chabrias, an officer of merit, but of a violent and unequal character. He gained his esteem and moderated his impetuosity. His activity contributed essentially to the naval victory of Naxos (377 B. C.), and he afterwards collected, with great prudence, the taxes of the islands. In the war with Philip of Macedon, the Athenians sent Phocion with some troops to Eubœa, in hopes to induce the inhabitants to form a junction with him. The gold of Philip rendered this project abortive, and Phocion was obliged to retire, with his troops, to an eminence for security. The enemy surrounded him, and made preparations for attack. Reduced to despair, Phocion made an onset, and gained a complete victory. Before the battle, he gave permission to all who desired it, to retire; and, after the battle, he liberated the prisoners, to save them from the fury of the Athenians. His conduct was marked with prudence, boldness and manliness. He banished Plutarchus, who had made himself tyrant of Eretria, and left the island secure from the attacks of Philip. Some time after, the Athenians resolved to yield assistance to the cities of the Hellespont, threatened by Philip, and the command of the fleet was intrusted to Phocion. The inhabitants of Byzantium received him, and he not only saved their city, but compelled Philip to retire from the Hellespont. Notwithstanding their success, Phocion always advised peace. His honesty, disinterestedness and patriotism were so generally acknowledged, that he was nominated commander fortyfive times, without once applying for the office. He always led a simple life, and cultivated his small farm with his own hands. When the inhabitants of Megara requested an alliance with the Athenians, Phocion zealously advocated the measure, marched to the city at the head of a large body of volunteers, and rebuilt the walls. When Philip appeared in Phocis, with a view to attack Attica, Phocion in vain advised peace. The battle of Charonea (A.C.338) proved the justness of his opinion. The Athenians disregarded the advice of Phocion, not to take part in the assembly of the Grecian states, convened by Philip, till they knew the intentions of

the king; and, in consequence, found themselves obliged to furnish Philip with a quota of cavalry and galleys. This they were reluctant to do, but Phocion advised them to submit to adversity with patience. After Philip's death, Phocion advised the Athenians not to expose themselves to new disasters by joining a confederacy against the young Alexander. His opinion was justified by the event. When, after the destruction of Thebes, Alexander demanded of the Athenians the deliverance of the orators who had spoken so violently against him, Phocion undertook the commission of appeasing the anger of the king with the happiest success. Alexander conceived a great affection for him, and sent him a present of a hundred talents, which he declined. The deputies found him carrying water, while his wife was baking bread. But, not to displease the king, he requested the liberation of some of his imprisoned friends. After Alexander's death, the project was formed of freeing Greece from the Macedonian yoke. Phocion disapproved the measure, though he accepted the command. The Athenians were at first successful; but Antipater soon obtained the superiority, and threatened Athens, which was instantly abandoned by the orators who had been so clamorous for war. In this pressing danger, Phocion was sent ambassador to Antipater, who was encamped in the territory of Thebes, and obtained, on hard terms indeed, a promise that he would conclude a treaty without entering the territory of Attica. The terms were, that Demosthenes and Hyperides should be given up, an aristocratical government formed, and a Macedonian garrison introduced into Munychia. This last condition was long opposed by Phocion, but Antipater was inflexible. Under these hard circumstances, all the efforts of Phocion (who, with other distinguished men, was then at the head of government), were directed to mitigate the heavy burdens of his country, and to turn his influence with the Macedonians to its advantage. Nevertheless, Phocion was accused of having acted against the good of his country, and of having betrayed it to the enemy. He was compelled, by clamors and accusations, to take refuge in Phocis, with Polysperchon, who soon after delivered him and other refugees to the Athenians, who demanded them. Polysperchon also sent a letter to the city, acknowledging them to be guilty of treachery. Their trial took place before the assembly of the people. Phocion, with several of his friends, was

an idea of the extent of the Phoenician trade and commerce. Safe and neighboring harbors must, therefore, have been of importance to the Sidonians. On this account they built houses around a natural harbor, and erected a castle (Zor) on a rock. Numbers gradually settled here, and if, with Josephus and Trogus Pompeius, we believe that Tyre was built about 1184, then we must suppose that at this time it received a large colony, which converted the fortress into a city. In a short time, the little town grew so important, that, from 1000 to about 600 B. C., it was the head of the Phoenician confederacy, as Sidon had previously been. They had not power to carry on foreign wars, and they had no occasion for defence; they sought to extend their dominion by the peaceful colonization of uninhabited countries, and by alliances. We hear first of the Tyrians being engaged in wars on account of the attacks of the Asiatic conquerors, who were allured by their riches; these they carried on with mercenary troops. About the year 1000, Hiram, son of Abibal, concluded treaties of commerce and friendship with David and Solomon. Ithobal, king of Tyre and Sidon, about 900 B. C., was the father of Jezabel. He built several cities in Phoenicia, and peopled Auza, in Africa. To his son, Badozor, succeeded Mutgo (Muttinus or Mutgenus), father of Pygmalion, Barca, Dido and Anna. Dido, on account of a dispute with Pygmalion (B. C. 888), fled with Barca and Anna, and founded Carthage. (q. v., and Dido.) The neighboring island Cyprus must have been then under the dominion of the Tyrians, for Pygmalion here built Carpasia. Tyre must have subsequently maintained its superiority over the Phoenician cities, and probably abused it, for we find that the Cytheans of Cyprus revolted under the conduct of Elulæus (about B. C. 700), and called the Assyrians to their aid. Elulæus, however, again submitted, and Salmanassar concluded peace. On this, Sidon, and many other Tyrian cities, revolted and submitted to Salmanassar, whom they supplied with ships. But the hostile fleet of sixty vessels was destroyed by a Tyrian squadron containing only twelve, and the Assyrians were obliged, after five years, to raise the siege of Tyre. Thus Tyre remained 100 years superior to the Israelites. In the mean time, Sidon appears to have again risen, and to have become independent of Tyre. The alliance with Zedekiah against Nebuchadnezzar proved fatal to them. Sidon was destroyed; Tyre was taken, after a

thirteen years' siege, and never recovered its former greatness. Most of the inhabitants fled with their treasures to the insular Tyre, which now became the centre of the commerce of the world. Itobal, who perished in this siege, was succeeded by Baal, who was probably a vassal of Babylon. During the seven years after his death, suffetes were chosen by the people. The government was afterwards again administered by kings subject to the Babylonian sovereignty. In the time of Cyrus (B. C. 555), Tyre, and probably all Phoenicia, fell under the Persian yoke. The kings of Tyre and Sidon, Mapenus and Tetramnestus, are mentioned as the most experienced seamen in the fleet of Xerxes, at the battle of Salamis, about B. C. 481. Sidon was at this time the richest city of Phoenicia, and was at the head of the insurrection against Artaxerxes, Mnemon and Ochus. Tennes, king of Sidon, assisted by the Greeks and Mentor, defeated (B. C. 361) the Persians; but Ochus, appearing with a formidable force, and the city, though strongly fortified, having fallen into his hands, by the treachery of Tennes, the Sidonians, in despair (B. C. 350), burned themselves and their property. Other Sidonians, who were absent at this time, rebuilt the city, on their return. When Alexander entered Phoenicia, after the battle of Issus, the Sidonians (B. C. 333) submitted without a struggle, and received for a king, instead of Strato, Abdolonymus, of the blood royal, but then a gardener. After a siege of seven months, the aid of the Carthaginians not having arrived, Tyre, at length, fell by treachery, and was reduced to ashes; part of the inhabitants were put to death, and part sold for slaves. Alexander rebuilt the city, but it never attained its former importance. It afterwards fell under the dominion of the Seleucidæ, as did Sidon under that of the Macedonians. About 65 B. C., the Romans took possession of it. From that time Phoenicia shared the fate of Syria. Tyre was an important rendezvous for the crusaders (1099). The sultan of Egypt, who took it in 1223, was soon driven out by the Franks, as were, also, the Tartars, in 1263, who had made themselves masters of it under Hou laku, together with the rest of Syria. It was finally subdued, in 1292, by the Egyptian sultan, since which it has shared the fate of the ruling country. The Phonicians are more important when considered in reference to their commerce, navigation and manufactures, than in respect of the events of their history. Compelled