thod ranking under the 33d order, Lomentaceæ. See Polygals BOTANY Index. Polycrates all alliance with the tyrant of Samos, and observed, that sooner or later his good fortune would vanish. Some Polygala. time after Polycrates visited Magnesia on the Maander, where he had been invited by Orontes the governor. Here he was shamefully put to death, merely because the governor wished to terminate his prosperity. The daughter of Polycrates had dissuaded her father from going to the house of Orontes on account of the bad dreams which she had, but in vain. POLYCROTA, in the naval architecture of the ancients, is a word used to express such of their galleys as had three, four, five, or more tiers of rowers, seated at different heights; they were distinguished by this term from the monocrota, or those which had only single rows of oars. The number of rows of rowers in the polycrote galleys has given occasion to some to suppose those vessels of such a height from the water as is scarce credible. Commentators are not at all agreed upon the construction of these vessels. POLYDAMAS, was a famous athlete, who imitated Hercules in whatever he did. He killed a lion with his fist; and it is reported he could stop a chariot with his hand in its most rapid course. He was one day with some of his friends in a cave, when on a sudden a large piece of rock came tumbling down, and while all fled away, he attempted to receive the falling fragment in his arms. His prodigious strength, however, was insufficient, and he was instantly crushed to pieces under the rock. POLYDECTES, a son of Magnes, was king of the island of Seriphos. He received with great kindness Danae and her son Perseus, who had been exposed on the sea by Acrisius. He took great care of the education of Perseus; but becoming enamoured of Danae, he removed her from his kingdom, apprehensive of his resentment. He afterwards paid his adresses to Danae; and being rejected, he prepared to offer her violence. Danae fled to the altar of Minerva for protection; and Dictys, the brother of Polydectes, who had himself saved him from the sea-waters, opposed her ravisher, and armed himself in her defence. At this critical moment Perseus arrived; and with Medusa's head he turned into stones Polydectes, with the associates of his guilt. The crown of Seriphos was given to Dictys, who had shown himself so active in the cause of inno cence. POLYDORE VIRGIL. See VIRGIL. POLYDORUS, a son of Priam by Hecuba, or, according to others, by Laothe, the daughter of Altes, king of Pedasus. Being young and inexperienced when Troy was besieged by the Greeks, his father removed him to the court of Polymnestor, king of Thrace, to whose care he entrusted the greatest part of his treasures, till his country should be freed from foreign invasion. On the death of Priam, Polymnestor made himself master of the riches which were in his possession; and to ensure them the better, he murdered the young prince, and threw his body into the sea, where it was found by Hecuba. According to Virgil, his body was buried near the shore by his assassin; and there grew on his grave a myrtle, whose boughs dropped blood, when Eneas going to Italy, attempted to tear them from the tree. POLYGALA, MILKWORT; a genus of plants belonging to the diadelphia class; and in the natural me I # POLYGAMIA (weλus, many, and yuues, marriage), Polygamy, is a term expressing an intercommunication of sexes, and is applied by Linnæus both to plants and flowers. A polygamous plant is that which bears both hermaphrodite flowers, and male or female, or both. POLYGAMY, a plurality of wives or husbands, in the possession of one man or woman at the same time. Polygamy is so universally esteemed unlawful, and even unnatural, through Europe, and in all Christian countries, that we have generally reasoned upon this conviction. Both religion and reason appear at first sight at least to condemn it; and with this view of the subject mankind in general rest satisfied: but some boider geniuses have taken the opposite side of the question; have cast off the prejudices of education, and attempted to show that polygamy is not unlawful, but that it is just and necessary, and would be a public benefit. Such writers, to use the words of an intelligent critic *, "re-* Monthly cur to the common subterfuge, of which every setter Review, up of strange gods, and every CONSCIENTIOUS troubler of the public peace, have artfully availed themselves to silence the clamour of expostulation. TRUTH! TRUTH! is their general cry: and with this hopeful pretence, prudence and humility, and every amiable and useful virtue, are left behind; while CONSCIENCE (conscience!) blindly rushes forward to oppose order, insult authority, and overturn the customs of ages." But notwithstanding these fair pretences, it will, we doubt not, be easy to show that truth is not upon their side; prudence and delicacy are certainly at open war with them for Dr Percival, Phil. Trans. vol. lxvi. part i. p. 163. has very justly observed, that the practice is brutal, destructive to friendship and moral sentiment, inconsistent with one great end of marriage, the education of children, and subversive of the natural rights of more than half of the species. Besides, it is injurious to population, and therefore can never be countenanced or allowed in a well-regulated state; for though the number of females in the world may considerably exceed the number of males, yet there are more men capable of propagating their species than women capable of bearing children; and it is a well known fact, that Armenia, in which a plurality of wives is not allowed, abounds more with inhabitants than any other province of the Turkish empire. vol, lxui. P. 274. vels. Indeed it appears, that in some countries where it is allowed, the inhabitants do not take advantage of it. "The Europeans (says M. Niebuhr +) are mistaken in + Heron's thinking the state of marriage so different among the Translation Mussulmans from what it is with Christian nations. Iof Niecould not discern any such difference in Arabia. The bur's Truwomen of that country seem to be as free and as happy as those of Europe possibly can be. Polygamy is permitted, indeed, among Mahometans, and the delicacy of our ladies is shocked at this idea; but the Arabians rarely avail themselves of the privilege of marrying See Hinfour lawful wives, and entertaining at the same time any doos, No number of female slaves. None but rich voluptuaries marry so many wives, and their conduct is blamed by all sober men. Men of sense, indeed, think this privilege rather troublesome than convenient. A husband is by law obliged to treat his wives suitably to their condition, and to dispense his favours among them with perfect Polygamy, perfect equality: but these are duties not a little dis- tence in the ecclesiastical court. 4. Where the first Polygamy, agreeable to most Musculmans; and such modes of luxury marriage is declared absolutely void by any such sentence, are too expensive to the Arabians, who are seldom in and the parties loosed à vinculo. Or, 5. Where either easy circumstances. I must, however, except one case ; of the parties was under the age of consent at the time for it sometimes happens that a man marries a number of the first marriage; for in such case the first marriage of wives in the way of commercial speculation. I know was voidable by the disagreement of either party, which a Mullah, in a town near the Euphrates, who had mar- this second marriage very clearly amounts to. But if ried four wives, and was supported by the profits of at the age of consent the parties had agreed to the martheir labour." riage, which completes the contract, and is indeed the real marriage, and afterwards one of them should marry again, Judge Blackstone apprehends that such second marriage would be within the reason and penalties of the act. See a curious kind of polygamy under the article NAYRES. The ancient Britons, too, had a kind of polygamy among them, 12 women being common to 12 men. Selden has proved, in his Uror Hebraica, that plurality of wives was allowed of, not only among the Hebrews, but also among all other nations, and in all ages. It is true, the ancient Romans were more severe in their morals, and never practised it, though it was not forbid among them and Mark Antony is mentioned as the first who took the liberty of having two wives. : From that time it became pretty frequent in the empire till the reigns of Theodosius, Honorius, and Arcadius, who first prohibited it by express law in 393. After this the emperor Valentinian, by an edict, permitted all the subjects of the empire, if they pleased, to marry several wives: nor does it appear, from the ecclesiastical history of those times, that the bishops made any opposition to the introduction of polygamy. In effect, there are some even among the Christian casuists who do not look on polygamy as in itself criminal. Jurieu observes, that the prohibition of polygamy is a positive law, but from which a man may be exempted by sovereign necessity. Baillet adds, that the example of the patriarchs is a powerful argument in favour of polygamy of these arguments we shall speak hereafter. It has been much disputed among the doctors of the civil law whether polygamy be adultery. In the Roman law it is called stuprum, and punished as such, that is, in some cases capitally. But a smaller punishment is more consistent with the Jewish law, wherein the prohibition of adultery is perpetual, but that of polygamy temporary only. In Germany, Holland, and Spain, this offence is differently punished. By a constitution of Charles V. it was a capital crime. By the laws of ancient and modern Sweden it is punished with death. In Scotland it is punished as perjury. In England it is enacted by statute 1 Jac. I. cap. 11. that if any person, being married, do afterwards marry again, the former husband or wife being alive, it is felony, but within the benefit of clergy. The first wife, in this case, shall not be admitted as an evidence against her husband, because she is the true wife; but the second may, for she is indeed no wife at all; and so vice versa of a second husband. This act makes an exception to fives cases, in which such second marriage, though in the three first it is void, is however no felony. 1. Where either party hath been continually abroad for seven years, whether the party in England had notice of the other's being living or not. 2. Where either of the parties hath been absent from the other seven years within this kingdom, and the remaining party hath had no notice of the other's being alive within that time. 3. Where there is a divorce or separation à mensa et thoro by senVOL. XVII. Part I. Bernardus Ochinus, general of the order of Capuchins, and afterwards a Protestant, published, about the middle of the 16th century, Dialogues in favour of Polygamy, which were answered by Theodore Beza. And about the conclusion of the last century we had at London an artful treatise published in behalf of a plurality of wives, under the title of Polygamia Triumphatrix: the author whereof assumes the name of Theophilus Aletheus; but his true name was Lyserus. He was a native of Saxony. It has been answered by several. A new argument in faveur of polygamy has been adduced by Mr Bruce, on this principle, that in some parts of the world the proportion of female children is much greater than that of the males. "From a diligent inquiry (says he) into the south and scripture part of Mesopotamia, Armenia, and Syria, from Mousul or Nineveh to Aleppo and Antioch, I find the proportion to be fully two women to one man. There is indeed a fraction over, but it is not a considerable one. From Latikea, Laodicea ad mare, down the coast of Syria to Sidon, the number is nearly three, or two and threefourths, to one man. Through the Holy Land, the country called Horan, in the isthmus of Suez, and the parts of the Delta unfrequented by strangers, it is something less than three. But from Suez to the straits of Babelmandel, which contains the three Arabias, the proportion is fully four women to one man; which I have reason to believe holds as far as the line, and 30° beyond it. The Imam of Sama was not an old man when I was in Arabia Felix in 1769; but he had 88 children then alive, of whom 14 only were sons. The priest of the Nile had 70 and odd children: of whom, as I remember, above fifty were daughters. "It may be objected, that Dr Arbuthnot, in quoting the bills of mortality for 20 years, gave the most unexceptionable grounds for his opinion; and that my single exception of what happens in a foreign country, without further foundation, cannot be admitted as equivalent testimony: and I am ready to admit this objection, as there are no bills of mortality in any of these countries. I shall therefore say in what manner I attained the knowledge which I have just mentioned. Whenever I went into a town, village, or inhabited place, dwelt long in a mountain, or travelled journeys with any set of people, I always made it my business to inquire how many children they had, or their fathers, their next neighbours or acquaintance. I then asked my landlord at Sidon, suppose him a weaver, how many children he has had? He tells me how many song and how many daughters. The next I ask is a tailor, a smith, &c. in short every man who is not a stranger, R from Our author corroborates this argument by supposing that Mahomet perceived this disproportion, and that upon it he founded his institution allowing one man to have four wives. "With this view he enacted, or rather revived, the law which gave liberty to every individual to marry four wives, each of whom was to be equal in rank and honour, without any preference but what the predilection of the husband gave her." or any Polygamy, from whom I can get the proper information. I say, when there was more occasion for population than ever Polygamy. therefore, that a medium of both sexes, arising from there has been since, because the whole earth was to be three or four hundred families, indiscriminately taken, peopled from a single pair. Matters were not altered shall be the proportion in which one differs from the at the flood; for Noah had but one wife. And this other and this, I am confident, will give the result to is the very argument used by our Saviour himself when be three women in 50° of the 90° under every meridian speaking of divorce without any sufficient cause, and of the globe." then marrying another woman, which is a species of polygamy.-Again, with respect to the alleged multiplicity of females in the eastern part of the world, it is by no means probable that the calculations of Mr Bruce other person can be admitted in this case. History mentions no such thing in any nation; and consi dering the vast destruction among the male part of the human species more than that of the females by war and other accidents, we may safely say, that if four women children were born for every single male, there would in such countries be five or six grown up women for every man; a proportion which we may venture to affirm does not, nor ever did, exist anywhere in the world. That it was not so in former times, we can only judge from the particular examples recorded in history, and these are but few. We read in the Greek history, indeed, of the fifty daughters of Danaus; but these were matched by as many sons of another man. Job had only one wife, yet had seven sons and but three daughters. Jacob had two wives, who bore twelve sons, and only one daughter. Abraham had only one child by his first wife, and that was a son. By his se cond wife Keturah he had six sons; and considering his advanced age at the time he married her, it is by no means probable that he could have 24 daughters; nay, if, as Mr Bruce tells us, the women in the eastern countries bear children only for nine years, it was im possible she could have so many. Gideon, who had many wives, had no fewer than seventy sons by these wives, and even his concubine had a son; so that if all these women had produced according to Mr Bruce's proportion, of nearly three females to one male, he must have had almost 284 children; a better family than any of Mr Bruce's eastern acquaintance can probably boast of. Having thus established, as he supposes, the necessity of polygamy in the East, Mr Bruce proceeds to consider whether there is not some other reasons why it should not be practised in Britain farther than the mere equality in numbers of the sexes to one another. This reason he finds in the difference between the constitutions of the Europeans and eastern nations. "Women in England (says he) are capable of child-bearing at 14; let the other term be 48, when they bear no more; 34 years therefore an English woman bears children. At the age of 14 or 15 they are objects of our love; they are endeared by bearing us children after that time; and none, I hope, will pretend, that at 48 and 50 an Englishwoman is not an agreeable companion. The Arab, on the other hand, if she begins to bear children at 11, seldom or never has a child after 20. The time, then, of her child-bearing is nine years; and four women, taken altogether, have then the term of 36. So that the English woman that bears children for 34 years has only two years less than the term enjoyed by the four wives whom Mahomet has allowed; and if it be granted that an English wife may bear at 50, the terms are equal. But there are other grievous differences. An Arabian girl at 11 years old, by her youth and beauty, is the object of man's desire: being an infant, however, in understanding, she is not a rational companion for him. A man marries there, say at 20; and before he is 30, his wife, improved as a companion, ceases to be the object of his desires and a mother of children: so that all the best and most vigorous of his days are spent with a woman he cannot love; and with her he would be destined to live 40 or 45 years, without comfort to himself by increase of family, or utility to the public. The reasons, then, against polygamy, which subsist in England, do not by any means subsist in Arabia; and that being the case, it would be unworthy of the wisdom of God, and an unevenness in his ways, which we shall never see, to subject two nations under such different circumstances absolutely to the same observances." To all this argumentation, however, it may be replied, that whatever we may now suppose to be the constitution of nature in the warmer parts of the globe, it certainly was different at the beginning. We cannot indeed, ascertain the exact position of the Garden of Eden; but it is with reason supposed not to have been far from the ancient seat of Babylon. In that country, therefore, where Mr Bruce contends that four women are necessary to the comfort of one man, it pleased God to grant only one to the first man; and that, too, 3 With regard to the subject, however, it must be observed, that the procreation of male or female children depends in some degree on the health and vigour of the parents. It is by no means improbable, therefore that the eastern voluptuaries, whose constitutions are debilitated by their excesses, may have many more female than male children born to them. The women themselves, by premature enjoyment, will also be inclined to produce females instead of males; but neither of these circumstances can prove this to be an original law of nature. Something like this may be gathered from sacred history. Gideon above mentioned, who was a hardy and active warrior, had many sons. The same was the case with David, who led an active and laborious life; while Solonion, who was a voluptuary, had only one son, notwithstanding his multitude of wives. The most barefaced defence of polygamy that has appeared in modern times is by the Rev. Mr Madan, who published a treatise, artfully vindicating, and strongly recommending it, under the title of Thelyphthora; or A Treatise on Female Ruin, in its Causes, Effects, Consequences, Prevention, and Remedy, &c. Marriage, according to this writer, simply and wholly consists in the act of personal union, or actus coitus. Adultery, he says, Polygamy, says, is never used in the sacred writings but to denote Ruth iv. 10, 13. with Tobit vii. 13, 14. and from the Polygamy. the defilement of a betrothed or married woman, and to case of Dinah, related Gen. xxxiv. that some forms were this sense be restricts the use of the term; so that a mar- deemed essential to an honourable alliance by the patri. ried man, in his opinion, is no adulterer, if his commerce archs and saints under the Old Testament, exclusive of with the sex be confined to single women, who are un- the carnal knowledge of each other's persons. It is alder no obligations by espousals or marriage to other so evident in the case of the woman of Samaria, whose men: but, on the other hand, the woman who should connection with a man not her husband is mentioned in dare to have even but once an intrigue with any other John iv. that something besides cohabitation is necesman besides her husband, (let him have as many wives sary to constitute marriage in the sight of God. as Solomon), would, ipso facto, be an adulteress, and ought, together with her gallant, to be punished with immediate death. This, he boldly says, is the law of God and on this foundation he limits the privilege of polygamy to the man; in support of which he refers to the polygamous connections of the patriarchs and saints of the Old Testament, and infers the lawfulness of their practice from the blessings which attended it, and the laws which were instituted to regulate and superintend it. He contends for the lawfulness of Christians having, like the ancient Jews, more wives than one; and labours much to reconcile the genius of the evangelical dispensation to an arrangement of this sort. With this view he asserts, that there is not one text in the New Testament that even hints at the criminality of a polygamous connection; and he would infer from St Paul's direction, that bishops and deacons should have but one wife, that it was lawful for laymen to have more. Christ, he says, was not the giver of a new law; but the business of marriage, polygamy, &c. had been settled before his appearance in the world, by an authority which could not be revoked. Besides, this writer not only thinks polygamy lawful in a religious, but advantageous in a civil light, and highly politic in a domestic view. In defence of his notion of marriage, which, he says, But on With respect to the Mosaic law, for which Mr Madan is a warm advocate, it was certainly a local and temporary institution, adapted to the ends for which it was appointed, and admirably calculated, in its relation to marriage, to maintain and perpetuate the separation of the Jewish people from the Gentiles. In attempting to depreciate the outward forms of marriage, this writer would make his readers believe, that because none are explicitly described, therefore none existed; and consequently that they are the superfluous ordinances of human policy. But it is evident, from comparing Having stated his notion of marriage, he urges, in defence of polygamy, that, notwithstanding the seventh commandment, it was allowed by God himself, who made laws for the regulation of it, wrought miracles in support of it by making the barren woman fruitful, and declared the issue legitimate to all intents and purposes. God's allowance of polygamy is argued from Exod. xxi. 10. and particularly from Deut. xxi. 1 5. which, he says, amounts to a demonstration. This passage, however, at the utmost, only presupposes that the practice might have existence among so hard-hearted and fickle a people as the Jews; and therefore wisely provides against some of its more unjust and pernicious consequences, such as tended to affect the rights and privileges of heirship. Laws enacted to regulate it cannot be fairly urged in proof of its lawfulness on the author's own hypothesis; because laws were also made to regulate divorce, which Mr Madan condemns as absolutely unlawful, except in cases of adultery. Besides, it is more probable that the "hated wife" had been dismissed by a bill of divorcement, than that she was retained by her husband: and, moreover, it is not certain but that the two wives, so far from living with the same husband at the same time, might be dead; for the words may be rendered thus, " if there should have been to a man two wives, &c." The words expressing the original institution of marriage, Gen.ii. 24. compared with Matt. xix. 4, 5, 8. affords insuperable objections against Mr Madan's doctrine of polygamy. If we appeal, on this subject, from the authority of Scripture to the writings of the earliest fathers in the Christian church, there is not to be found the faintest trace of any thing resembling a testimony to the lawfulness of polygamy; on the contrary, many passages oceur, in which the practice of it is strongly and explicitly condemned. vol. Ixiii. We shall close this article with the words of an excel- Monthly lent anonymous writer already quoted, and to whose cri- Review, tique on Mr Madan's work we are indebted for the P 338. above remarks: "In a word, when we reflect that the See also primitive institution of marriage limited it to one man vol. lxix. and one woman; that this institution was adhered to by Noah and his sons, amidst the degeneracy in which they lived, and in spite of the examples of polygamy which the accursed race of Cain had introduced; when we consider how very few (comparatively speaking) the examples of this practice were among the faithful; how much it brought its own punishment with it; and how dubious and equivocal those passages are in which it appears to have the sanction of divine approbation; when to these reflections we add another, respecting the limited views and temporary nature of the more ancient dispensations and institutions of religion-how often the imperfections and even vices of the patriarchs and people of God, in old time, are recorded, without any express notification of their criminality-how much is said to be commanded, which our reverence for the holiness R 2 of ance, have committed depredations upon, and brought Polygars away any booty from, another province, the magistrate shall receive a share of one-sixth part of the whole. If Polygnotus, they received no command or assistance from the magistrate, they shall give the magistrate in that case onetenth part for his share, and of the remainder their chief shall receive four shares ; and whosoever among them is perfect master of his occupation, shall receive three shares: also, whichever of them is remarkably strong and stout, shall receive two shares, and the rest shall receive each one share.' Here, then, we see not only a sanction, but even an inducement, to fraudulent practices.-Another singular inconsistency among a people who, in many periods of their history, have been proverbial for innocency of manners, and for uncommon honesty in their conduct towards travellers and strangers. Polygamy, of God and his law will only suffer us to suppose, were, Polygars. for wise ends, permitted-how frequently the messengers of God adapted themselves to the genius of the people to whom they were sent, and the circumstances of the times in which they lived above all, when we consider the purity, equity, and benevolence of the Christian law; the explicit declarations of our Lord, and his apostle St Paul, respecting the institution of marriage, its design and limitation;-when we reflect, too, on the testimony of the most ancient fathers, who could not possibly be ignorant of the general and common practice of the apostolic church; and, finally, when to these considerations we add those which are founded on justice to the female sex, and all the regulations of domestic economy and national policy-we must wholly condemn the revival of polygamy; and thus bear our honest testimony against the leading design of this dangerous and ill-advised publication.' We would advise our readers to peruse the whole criticisms on Madan's book in the Monthly Review, together with their account of the several answers to it. The reverend author of the Thelyphthora has there met with a most able antagonist, who traces him through all his deceitful windings, and exposes the futility and falsehood of his arguments with singular ability. See Monthly Review, vol. lxiii. p. 273, &c.; see also Paley's Moral Philosophy, 4to. p. 262. POLYGARS, are natives of Hindostan. They inhabit almost impenetrable woods, and are under the absolute direction of their own chieftains. In time of peace they are professionally robbers, but in times of war are the guardians of the country. The general name of these people is Polygar. Their original institution, for they live in distinct clans, is not very well understood. It probably took its rise from the municipal regulations relative to the destruction of tygers and other ferocious beasts. Certain tracts of woodland were indisputably allotted as rewards to those who should slay a certain number of those animals; and those lands approximating, probably laid the foundation of the several confederacies of Polygars. "The Pollams, or woods, from which is derived the word Polygar, lying in profusion through all the southern parts of Hindostan, the ravages committed in the open countries by these adventurous clans, are both frequent and destructive. Cattle and grain are the constant booty of the Polygars. They not unfrequently even despoil travellers of their property, and sometimes murder, if they meet with opposition; yet these very Polygars are the hands into which the aged and infirm, the wives, children, and treasure, of both Hindoos and others are entrusted, when the circumjacent country unfortunately happens to be the seat of war. The protection they afford is paid for; but the price is inconsiderable, when the helpless situation of those who fly to them for shelter is considered, and especially when their own very peculiar character is properly attended to. The native governments of Hindostan are under the necessity of tolerating this honourable banditti. Many of them are so formidable as to be able to bring 15,000 and 20,000 men into the field. "The Hindoo code of laws, in speaking of robberies, bath this remarkable clause, The mode of shares amongst robbers shall be this:-If any thief or thieves, by the command of the magistrate, and with his assist "At the first sight, it would appear that the toleration of the Polygars is owing to their great numbers, and to the security of their fortresses, which are in general impenetrable but to Polygars: that the government licence, in this manner given to them, to live on the spoils of the industrious, might have originally occasioned the formal division, and encouragement to perseverance, which we have just quoted: but the cause I should rather suppose to lie in the nature of certain governments, than to have arisen from any accidental circumstance afterwards: and I am the more inclined to this opinion, from the situation of the northern parts of Hindostan, which are, and always have been, uninfested by these freebooters. "The dominion of the East was, in former days, most probably divided and subdivided into all the various branches of the feodal system. The vestiges of it remain to this hour: rajahs and zemindars are nothing more than chieftains of a certain degree of consequence in the empire. If, then, experience has shown, in other parts of the world, that clans have always been observed to commit the most pernicious acts of depredation and hostility on each other, and that the paramount lord has seldom been able effectually to crush so general and so complicated a scene of mischief-may we not reasonably venture to suppose, that the Hindoo legislature passed this ordinance for the suppression of such provincial warfare, and for the wholesome purpose of drawing the people, by unalarming degrees, more immediately under the controul of the one sovereign authority? The conclusion, I own, appears to me satisfactory. Moreover, Polygars cannot but be of modern growth; for the law relative to thefts is antecedent to the mention of Polygars in history." Sullivan's Philosophical Rhapsodies. POLYGLOTT, among divines and critics, chiefly denotes a Bible printed in several languages. See BIBLE and PRINTING. POLYGLOTTUS, a species of bird, belonging to the genus turdus. See TURDUS, ORNITHOLOGY Index. POLYGNOTUS, a famous painter of Thasos, flourished about 422 years before the Christian era, and was the son and scholar of Aglaophon. He adorned one of the public porticoes of Athens with his paintings, in which he had represented the most striking events of the Trojan war. The Athenians were so pleased with him, that they offered to reward his labours with whatever he pleased to accept ; but he declined the offer; and the Amphictyonic |