Anciently the Magnetes were utterly extirpated by Treres, a Cimmerian tribe, who for a long period made successful inroads. Subsequently Ephesians got possession of the place.[101] Callinus speaks of the Magnetes as still in a flourishing state, and successful in the war against the Ephesians. But Archilochus seems to have been acquainted with the calamities which had befallen them:
“bewail the misfortunes of the Thasians, not of the Magnetes;”
whence we may conjecture that Archilochus was posterior to Callinus. Yet Callinus mentions some other earlier inroad of the Cimmerians, when he says—
“and now the army of the daring Cimmerians is advancing,”
where he is speaking of the capture of Sardis.
41. Among the illustrious natives of Magnesia were Hegesias the orator, who first introduced the Asiatic fervour, as it was called, and corrupted the established Attic style of eloquence; Simon (Simus?) the lyric poet, who also corrupted the system and plan of former lyric poets, by introducing the Simodia; it was still more corrupted by the Lysiodi and Magodi;[102] Cleomachus the pugilist, who was enamoured of a certain cinædus, and a female servant, who was maintained by the cinædus, imitated the sort of dialect and the manners of the cinædi. Sotades was the first person that employed the language of the cinædi, and he was followed by Alexander the Ætolian; but these were only prose writers. Lysis added verse, but this had been done before his time by Simus.
The theatres had raised the reputation of Anaxenor, the player on the cithara, but Antony elevated him as high as possible, by appointing him receiver of the tribute from four cities, and by giving him a guard of soldiers for the protection of his person. His native country also augmented his dignity, by investing him with the sacred purple of Jupiter Sosipolis, as is represented in the painted figure in the forum. There is also in the theatre a figure in brass, with this inscription:
“It is truly delightful to listen to a minstrel such as he is, whose voice is like that of the gods.”[103]
The artist who engraved the words was inattentive to the space which they would occupy, and omitted the last letter of the second verse, ΑΥΔΗΙ, (voice,) the breadth of the base not being large enough to allow its insertion; this afforded an occasion of accusing the citizens of ignorance, on account of the ambiguity of the inscription; for it is not clear whether the nominative ΑΥΔΗ, or the dative ΑΥΔΗΙ, is to be understood, for many persons write the dative cases without the Ι, and reject the usage, as not founded on any natural reason.