XXIII. SMOOTH COMPOSITION

The smooth (or florid) mode of composition, which I regarded

[Page 234]

τῇ τάξει, χαρακτῆρα τοιόνδε ἔχει· οὐ ζητεῖ καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον ὄνομα ἐκ περιφανείας ὁρᾶσθαι οὐδὲ ἐν ἕδρᾳ πάντα βεβηκέναι πλατείᾳ τε καὶ ἀσφαλεῖ οὐδὲ μακροὺς τοὺς μεταξὺ αὐτῶν εἶναι χρόνους, οὐδ’ ὅλως τὸ βραδὺ καὶ σταθερὸν τοῦτο φίλον αὐτῇ, ἀλλὰ κεκινῆσθαι βούλεται τὴν ὀνομασίαν καὶ 5 φέρεσθαι θάτερα κατὰ τῶν ἑτέρων ὀνομάτων καὶ ὀχεῖσθαι τὴν ἀλληλουχίαν λαμβάνοντα βάσιν ὥσπερ τὰ ῥέοντα καὶ μηδέποτε ἀτρεμοῦντα· συνηλεῖφθαί τε ἀλλήλοις ἀξιοῖ καὶ συνυφάνθαι τὰ μόρια ὡς μιᾶς λέξεως ὄψιν ἀποτελοῦντα εἰς δύναμιν. τοῦτο δὲ ποιοῦσιν αἱ τῶν ἁρμονιῶν ἀκρίβειαι, 10 χρόνον αἰσθητὸν οὐδένα τὸν μεταξὺ τῶν ὀνομάτων περιλαμβάνουσαι· ἔοικέ τε κατὰ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος εὐητρίοις ὕφεσιν ἢ γραφαῖς συνεφθαρμένα τὰ φωτεινὰ τοῖς σκιεροῖς ἐχούσαις. εὔφωνά τε εἶναι βούλεται πάντα τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ λεῖα καὶ μαλακὰ καὶ παρθενωπά, τραχείαις δὲ συλλαβαῖς καὶ ἀντιτύποις 15 ἀπέχθεταί που· τὸ δὲ θρασὺ πᾶν καὶ παρακεκινδυνευμένον δι’ εὐλαβείας ἔχει.

οὐ μόνον δὲ τὰ ὀνόματα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ἐπιτηδείως συνηρμόσθαι βούλεται καὶ συνεξέσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ κῶλα τοῖς κώλοις εὖ συνυφάνθαι καὶ πάντα εἰς περίοδον τελευτᾶν, 20 ὁρίζουσα κώλου τε μῆκος, ὃ μὴ βραχύτερον ἔσται μηδὲ μεῖζον τοῦ μετρίου, καὶ περιόδου μέτρον, οὗ πνεῦμα τέλειον ἀνδρὸς κρατήσει· ἀπερίοδον δὲ λέξιν ἢ περίοδον ἀκώλιστον ἢ κῶλον

1 ἓν EPM: om. FV 5 κεκινῆσθαι EF: κ[αὶ] κινῆσθαι cum rasura P: καὶ κινεῖσθαι MV 6 φέρεσθαι EFM: φέρεσθαι καὶ PV || τῶν ἑτέρων PMV: τῶν θατέρων F: θατέρων E || καὶ FMV: om. P || ὀχλεῖσθαι F 7 βάσιν om. F || τὰ ῥέοντα EF: τὰ ῥέοντα νάματα PMV 8 συνηλεῖφθαι F: συνειλῆφθ[αι] cum rasura P, MV 9 ὡς E: om. FPMV || μιᾶς EF: τῆς PMV || ἀποτελοῦντα PMV: διατελεῖν E: διατελοῦντα F 11 περιλαμβάνουσαι EFM: λαμβάνουσαι PV 12 τοῦτο τὸ om. EF || εὐκτρίοις PM || ὑφέσιν F: ὑφαίσιν M: ὑφαῖσιν cum rasura P, V: ὑφαῖς Es 13 τάφω τινα (sed suprascripto ε) P || σκιαροις P 14 τὰ EF: om. PMV 16 που ... παρακεκινδυνευμένον om. P 17 δι’ EF: καὶ δι’ PMV 20 εὖ E: om. FPMV 21 ὁρίζουσα Schaefer: ὁρίζουσαν EFPM 22 μέτρον EF: χρόνον PMV

1. ‘It does not expect its words to be looked at individually, and from every side, like statues.’ Cp. =210= 17 supra.

7. More literally, ‘finding firmness in mutual support.’

9. Cp. de Demosth. c. 40 τὸ γὰρ ὅλον ἐστὶν αὐτῆς βούλημα καὶ ἡ πολλὴ πραγματεία περὶ τὸ συσπασθῆναί τε καὶ συνυφάνθαι πάντα τὰ μόρια τῆς περιόδου, μιᾶς λέξεως ἀποτελοῦντα φαντασίαν, καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτῳ περὶ τὸ πᾶσαν εἶναι τὴν λέξιν, ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς μουσικαῖς συμφωνίαις, ἡδεῖαν καὶ λιγυράν. τούτων δὲ τὸ μὲν αἱ τῶν ἁρμονιῶν ἀκρίβειαι ποιοῦσι, κτλ.

14, 15. That is to say: the words it uses must be beautiful in sound and smoothly syllabled.

20. =εὖ=, which Usener adopts from E, helps to balance ἐπιτηδείως supra. At the same time, it could be spared and may have arisen from a dittography of the first two letters in συνυφάνθαι. Similarly, in l. 9 supra, the ὡς which E gives (together with the infinitive διατελεῖν, as it should be noticed) cannot be regarded as indispensable.

22. =μέτρον=: the reading of PMV (περιόδου χρόνον) may be right, in the sense of periodi ambitum. In the Epitome, μέτρον has possibly been substituted (as a clearer word) for χρόνον. F’s reading is μέτρον οὐκ ἂν ὑπομείνειεν ἐργάσασθαι, with all the four last words dotted out as having been written in error: which suggests that μέτρον may be no more than the last syllable of ἀσύμμετρον.

=οὗ πνεῦμα τέλειον ἀνδρὸς κρατήσει=: much will, clearly, depend on the person in question, since some men (as Lord Rosebery once said of Mr. Gladstone) have lungs which can utter sentences like “Biscayan rollers.” The Greeks were so rhetorical that they tended to look at a written passage constantly from the rhetorical point of view, and if a ‘period’ was too long for one breath they would try to analyze it into two periods if they could: cp. note on =232= 1 supra.

[Page 235]

as second in order, has the following features. It does not intend that each word should be seen on every side, nor that all its parts should stand on broad, firm bases, nor that the time-intervals between them should be long; nor in general is this slow and deliberate movement congenial to it. It demands free movement in its diction; it requires words to come sweeping along one on top of another, each supported by that which follows, like the onflow of a never-resting stream. It tries to combine and interweave its component parts, and thus give, as far as possible, the effect of one continuous utterance. This result is produced by so nicely adjusting the junctures that they admit no appreciable time-interval between the words. From this point of view the style resembles finely woven stuffs, or pictures in which the lights melt insensibly into the shadows. It requires that all its words shall be melodious, smooth, soft as a maiden’s face; and it shrinks from harsh, clashing syllables, and carefully avoids everything rash and hazardous.

It requires not only that its words should be properly dove-tailed and fitted together, but also that the clauses should be carefully inwoven with one another and all issue in a period. It limits the length of a clause so that it is neither shorter nor longer than the right mean, and the compass of the period so that a man’s full breath will be able to cover it. It could not endure to construct a passage without periods, nor a period

[Page 236]

ἀσύμμετρον οὐκ ἂν ὑπομείνειεν ἐργάσασθαι. χρῆται δὲ καὶ ῥυθμοῖς οὐ τοῖς μεγίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς μέσοις τε καὶ βραχυτέροις· καὶ τῶν περιόδων τὰς τελευτὰς εὐρύθμους εἶναι βούλεται καὶ βεβηκυίας ὡς ἂν ἀπὸ στάθμης, τἀναντία ποιοῦσα ἐν ταῖς τούτων ἁρμογαῖς ἢ ταῖς τῶν ὀνομάτων· 5 ἐκεῖνα μὲν γὰρ συναλείφει, ταύτας δὲ διίστησι καὶ ὥσπερ ἐκ περιόπτου βούλεται φανερὰς εἶναι. σχήμασί τε οὐ τοῖς ἀρχαιοπρεπεστάτοις οὐδ’ ὅσοις σεμνότης τις ἢ βάρος ἢ πίνος πρόσεστιν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς τρυφεροῖς τε καὶ κολακικοῖς ὡς τὰ πολλὰ χρῆσθαι φιλεῖ, ἐν οἷς πολὺ τὸ ἀπατηλόν ἐστι καὶ 10 θεατρικόν. ἵνα δὲ καὶ κοινότερον εἴπω, τοὐναντίον ἔχει σχῆμα τῆς προτέρας κατὰ τὰ μέγιστα καὶ κυριώτατα, ὑπὲρ ὧν οὐδὲν δέομαι πάλιν λέγειν.

ἀκόλουθον δ’ ἂν εἴη καὶ τοὺς ἐν ταύτῃ πρωτεύσαντας καταριθμήσασθαι. ἐποποιῶν μὲν οὖν ἔμοιγε κάλλιστα τουτονὶ 15 δοκεῖ τὸν χαρακτῆρα ἐξεργάσασθαι Ἡσίοδος, μελοποιῶν δὲ Σαπφὼ καὶ μετ’ αὐτὴν Ἀνακρέων τε καὶ Σιμωνίδης, τραγῳδοποιῶν δὲ μόνος Εὐριπίδης, συγγραφέων δὲ ἀκριβῶς μὲν οὐδείς, μᾶλλον δὲ τῶν πολλῶν Ἔφορός τε καὶ Θεόπομπος, ῥητόρων δὲ Ἰσοκράτης. θήσω δὲ καὶ ταύτης παραδείγματα 20 τῆς ἁρμονίας, ποιητῶν μὲν προχειρισάμενος Σαπφώ, ῥητόρων δὲ Ἰσοκράτην. ἄρξομαι δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς μελοποιοῦ.

1 χρήσεται P 2 ῥυθμοῖς EFM: ῥυθμῶν PV || μεγίστοις EF: μηκίστοις PMV 3 καὶ om. P 4 ἂν EF: om. PMV 6 ταύτας EV: ταῦτα F: τας αυτας P, M 7 φανεροὺς F 8 ὅσοις F: ὅσοις ἢ PMV || πῖνος PV: τὸ πῖνος M: τόνος F 9 πρόσεστιν PMV: πάρεστιν F || κολακικοῖς FPM: μαλακοῖς V: θεατρικοῖς E 11 δὲ καὶ F: δὲ PMV 12 τῆς προτέρας EFM: τῆι προτέρα P, V || καὶ κυριώτατα FM: om. PV 14 ταύτη F: αυτῆι P, MV 15 ἔμοιγε EF: ἔγωγε PMV || κάλλιστα EFP: κάλλιστα νομίζω M: μάλιστα νομίζω V 16 δοκεῖ EFP: om. MV 17 μετ’ αὐτὴν EF: μετὰ ταύτην PMV 20 ταύτης EF: ταῦτα PMV

6. =ἐκ περιόπτου=, ‘ex edito loco,’ ‘undique.’

16-20. The list that follows may seem somewhat ill-assorted if it be not remembered that the point of contact between the authors mentioned is simply smoothness of word-arrangement.—For =Hesiod= cp. de Imitat. B. vi. 2 Ἡσίοδος μὲν γὰρ ἐφρόντισεν ἡδονῆς δι’ ὀνομάτων λειότητος καὶ συνθέσεως ἐμμελοῦς: and Quintil. x. 1. 52 “raro assurgit Hesiodus, magnaque pars eius in nominibus est occupata; tamen utiles circa praecepta sententiae levitasque verborum et compositionis probabilis, daturque ei palma in illo medio genere dicendi.”—In de Demosth. c. 40 Hesiod, Sappho, Anacreon, and Isocrates are (as here) considered to be examples of the ἁρμονία γλαφυρά.

17. =Simonides= is thus characterized in de Imitat. B. vi. 2: Σιμωνίδου δὲ παρατήρει τὴν ἐκλογὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων, τῆς συνθέσεως τὴν ἀκρίβειαν· πρὸς τούτοις, καθ’ ὃ βελτίων εὑρίσκεται καὶ Πινδάρου, τὸ οἰκτίζεσθαι μὴ μεγαλοπρεπῶς ἀλλὰ παθητικῶς. The Danaë (quoted in c. 26) will illustrate the concluding clause of this estimate.

18. =Euripides:= cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 2 κλέπτεται δ’ εὖ, ἐάν τις ἐκ τῆς εἰωθυίας διαλέκτου ἐκλέγων συντιθῇ· ὅπερ Εὐριπίδης ποιεῖ καὶ ὑπέδειξε πρῶτος, and Long. de Subl. c. xl. διότι τῆς συνθέσεως ποιητὴς ὁ Εὐριπίδης μᾶλλόν ἐστιν ἢ τοῦ νοῦ.

19. With respect to =Ephorus= the opinions of Diodorus and of Suidas are somewhat at variance: (1) Diodorus Sic. v. 1 Ἔφορος δὲ τὰς κοινὰς πράξεις ἀναγράφων οὐ μόνον κατὰ τὴν λέξιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἐπιτέτευχεν, (2) Suidas ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἔφορος ἦν τὸ ἦθος ἁπλοῦς, τὴν δὲ ἑρμηνείαν τῆς ἱστορίας ὕπτιος καὶ νωθρὸς καὶ μηδεμίαν ἔχων ἐπίτασιν.

=Theopompus:= cp. an article, by the present writer, in the Classical Review xxii. 118 ff. on “Theopompus in the Greek Literary Critics: with special reference to the newly discovered Greek historian (Grenfell & Hunt Oxyrhynchus Papyri part v. pp. 110-242).” Reference may also be made to D.H. pp. 18, 96, 120-6, etc. Gibbon (Decline and Fall c. 53) classes Theopompus in high company: “we must envy the generation that could still peruse the history of Theopompus, the orations of Hyperides, the comedies of Menander, and the odes of Alcaeus and Sappho.”

20. =Isokrates=: see D.H. pp. 18, 20-22, 41, etc., and Demetr. pp. 8-11, 47, etc.

[Page 237]

without clauses, nor a clause without symmetry. The rhythms it uses are not the longest, but the intermediate, or shorter than these. It requires its periods to march as with steps regulated by line and rule, and to close with a rhythmical fall. Thus, in fitting together its periods and its words respectively, it employs two different methods. The latter it runs together; the former it keeps apart, wishing that they may be seen as it were from every side. As for figures, it is wont to employ not the most time-honoured sort, nor those marked by stateliness, gravity, or mellowness, but rather for the most part those which are dainty and alluring, and contain much that is seductive and fanciful. To speak generally: its attitude is directly opposed to that of the former variety in the principal and most essential points. I need not go over these points again.

Our next step will be to enumerate those who have attained eminence in this style. Well, among epic poets Hesiod, I think, has best developed the type; among lyric poets, Sappho, and, after her, Anacreon and Simonides; of tragedians, Euripides alone; of historians, none exactly, but Ephorus and Theopompus more than most; of orators, Isocrates. I will quote examples of this style also, selecting among poets Sappho, and among orators Isocrates. And I will begin with the lyric poetess:—

[Page 238]

Ποικιλόθρον’, ἀθάνατ’ Ἀφροδίτα, παῖ Δίος, δολόπλοκε, λίσσομαί σε, μή μ’ ἄσαισι μηδ’ ὀνίαισι δάμνα, πότνια, θῦμον·

ἀλλὰ τυῖδ’ ἔλθ’, αἴ ποτα κἀτέρωτα 5 τᾶς ἔμας αὔδως ἀίοισα πήλυι ἔκλυες, πάτρος δὲ δόμον λίποισα χρύσιον ἦλθες

ἄρμ’ ὐπασδεύξαισα. κάλοι δέ σ’ ἆγον ὠκέες στροῦθοι περὶ γᾶς μελαίνας 10 πύκνα διννῆντες πτέρ’ ἀπ’ ὠράνω αἴθε- ρος διὰ μέσσω.

αἶψα δ’ ἐξίκοντο· τὺ δ’, ὦ μάκαιρα, μειδιάσαισ’ ἀθανάτῳ προσώπῳ, ἤρε’, ὄττι δηὖτε πέπονθα κὤττι 15 δηὖτε κάλημι·

κὤττι ἔμῳ μάλιστα θέλω γένεσθαι μαινόλᾳ θύμῳ· τίνα δηὖτε πείθω μαῖς ἄγην ἐς σὰν φιλότατα, τίς σ’, ὦ Ψάπφ’, ἀδικήει; 20

καὶ γὰρ αἰ φεύγει, ταχέως διώξει, αἰ δὲ δῶρα μὴ δέκετ’, ἀλλὰ δώσει, αἰ δὲ μὴ φίλει, ταχέως φιλήσει κωὐκ ἐθέλοισα.

2 διὸς δολοπλόκε FP 4 θυμὸν FP 5 τυδ’ ἐλθε ποκα κατ ἔρωτα P: τὺ δ’ ὲ|||λ’|||θε||| ποτὲ κατ’ έρωτα F 6 ἀΐοισ ἀπόλυ P 8 χρύσειον FP 9 ἀρμύ πᾶσδευξαισα F: ἁρμα ὑποζεύξασα P 10 γ(ας) P: τὰς F 11 διννῆν τεσ F: δινῆντες P || πτερα· πτωρανω θερος F: πτὲρ’ ἀπ’ ὠρανὼ· θέρο σ P 12 διαμέσω F: δ’ άμεσ πω P 13 αἶψαδ’ F: ἀῖψ’ ἄλλ’ P || τὺ δ’ ὦ μάκαιρα P: συ δῶμα καιρα F 14 ἀθανάτω προσώπω FP sine iota (item vv. 17, 18 F) 15 ἤρε’ ὅττι δ ῆυ (ἦν E) τὸ P, E 16 δ’ ηυτε καλημμι P: δευρο καλλημμι F 17 κωττε μω F: κ’ όττ’ ἐμῶι P 18 μαινολαθυμῶι P: λαιθυμω F || δηϋτε πειθω F: δ’ ἐυτεπεί θω P 19 μαι (βαι corr.) σαγηνεσσαν P: καὶ σαγήνεσσαν FE: μαῖς Bergkius 20 ἀδικήει Gaisfordius ex Etym. Magn. 485. 41: τισ σωψαπφα δίκη· P: τισ ω ψαπφα δίκησ· F 24 κωϋ κεθέλουσα F: κ’ ώυ κ’ ἐθέλοισ, P

1. To Dionysius here, and to the de Sublimitate c. x., we owe the preservation of the two most considerable extant fragments of =Sappho’s= poetry. The Ode to Anactoria is quoted by ‘Longinus’ as a picture of παθῶν σύνοδος: it is imitated in Catullus li. Ad Lesbiam (“Ille mi par esse deo videtur”). The Hymn to Aphrodite has been rendered repeatedly into English: some eight versions are printed in H. T. Wharton’s Sappho pp. 51-64. Two recent English translations are of special interest: (1) that of the late Dr. Walter Headlam—immatura eheu morte praerepti—in his Book of Greek Verse pp. 6-9; (2) that of Dr. Arthur Way, which is printed in the present volume. Dr. Way has, it will be observed, succeeded in maintaining a double rhyme throughout.

24. “Bloomfeld’s ἐθέλοισαν was strenuously defended by Welcker RM 11. 266, who held that the subject of φιλήσει was a man. No MS. whose readings were known before 1892 settled the dispute. Now Piccolomini’s VL show ἐθέλουσα (Hermes 27),” Weir Smyth Greek Lyric Poets p. 233. Notes on the entire ode will be found in Weir Smyth op. cit. pp. 230-3, and in G. S. Farnell’s Greek Lyric Poetry pp. 327-9, and a few also in W. G. Headlam’s Book of Greek Verse pp. 265-7.

[Page 239]

Rainbow-throned immortal one, Aphrodite, Child of Zeus, spell-weaver, I bow before thee— Harrow not my spirit with anguish, mighty Queen, I implore thee!

Nay, come hither, even as once thou, bending Down from far to hearken my cry, didst hear me, From thy Father’s palace of gold descending Drewest anear me

Chariot-wafted: far over midnight-sleeping Earth, thy fair fleet sparrows, through cloudland riven Wide by multitudinous wings, came sweeping Down from thine heaven,

Swiftly came: thou, smiling with those undying Lips and star-eyes, Blessed One, smiling me-ward, Said’st, “What ails thee?—wherefore uprose thy crying Calling me thee-ward?

Say for what boon most with a frenzied longing Yearns thy soul—say whom shall my glamour chaining Hale thy love’s thrall, Sappho—and who is wronging Thee with disdaining?

Who avoids thee soon shall be thy pursuer: Aye, the gift-rejecter the giver shall now be: Aye, the loveless now shall become the wooer, Scornful shalt thou be!”

[Page 240]

ἔλθε μοι καὶ νῦν, χαλεπᾶν δὲ λῦσον ἐκ μεριμνᾶν, ὄσσα δέ μοι τέλεσσαι θῦμος ἰμμέρρει, τέλεσον· σὺ δ’ αὔτα σύμμαχος ἔσσο.

ταύτης τῆς λέξεως ἡ εὐέπεια καὶ ἡ χάρις ἐν τῇ συνεχείᾳ καὶ 5 λειότητι γέγονε τῶν ἁρμονιῶν· παράκειται γὰρ ἀλλήλοις τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ συνύφανται κατὰ τινας οἰκειότητας καὶ συζυγίας φυσικὰς τῶν γραμμάτων· τὰ γὰρ φωνήεντα τοῖς ἀφώνοις τε καὶ ἡμιφώνοις συνάπτεται μικροῦ διὰ πάσης τῆς ᾠδῆς, ὅσα προτάττεσθαί τε καὶ ὑποτάττεσθαι πέφυκεν ἀλλήλοις κατὰ 10 μίαν συλλαβὴν συνεκφερόμενα· ἡμιφώνων δὲ πρὸς ἡμίφωνα ἢ ἄφωνα <καὶ ἀφώνων> καὶ φωνηέντων πρὸς ἄλληλα συμπτώσεις αἱ διασαλεύουσαι τοὺς ἤχους ὀλίγαι πάνυ ἔνεισιν· ἐγὼ γοῦν ὅλην τὴν ᾠδὴν ἀνασκοπούμενος πέντε ἢ ἓξ ἴσως ἐν τοῖς τοσούτοις ὀνόμασι καὶ ῥήμασι καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις μορίοις ἡμιφώνων 15 τε καὶ ἀφώνων γραμμάτων συμπλοκὰς τῶν μὴ πεφυκότων ἀλλήλοις κεράννυσθαι καὶ οὐδὲ ταύτας ἐπὶ πολὺ τραχυνούσας τὴν εὐέπειαν εὑρίσκω, φωνηέντων δὲ παραθέσεις τὰς μὲν ἐν τοῖς κώλοις αὐτοῖς γινομένας ἔτι ἐλάττους ἢ τοσαύτας, τὰς δὲ συναπτούσας ἀλλήλοις τὰ κῶλα ὀλίγῳ τινὶ τούτων πλείονας. 20 εἰκότως δὴ γέγονεν εὔρους τις ἡ λέξις καὶ μαλακή, τῆς ἁρμονίας τῶν ὀνομάτων μηδὲν ἀποκυματιζούσης τὸν ἦχον.

ἔλεγον δ’ ἂν καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῆς συνθέσεως ταύτης ἰδιώματα, καὶ ἀπεδείκνυον ἐπὶ τῶν παραδειγμάτων τοιαῦτα ὄντα οἷα ἐγώ φημι, εἰ μὴ μακρὸς ἔμελλεν ὁ λόγος γενήσεσθαι καὶ 25 ταυτολογίας τινὰ παρέξειν δόξαν. ἐξέσται γὰρ σοὶ καὶ παντὶ

3 ϊμαρερερει F: ϊμέρει P 4 ἔσο F: ἔστω compendio F 5 συνεχεία EF: συνεπεία PMV 8 τε καὶ ἡμιφώνους om. EF 9 διὰ πάσης EF: δεῖν δι’ ὅλης PMV 10 πέφυκεν ... συνεκφερόμενα EF: om. PMV 11 συνεκφερόμενα E: συνεκφέρεσθαι F || ἢ ἄφωνα PM: καὶ ἀφώνων FE 13 ἔνεισιν EF: εἰσίν PMV 14 ἐν F: εὗρον ἐν PMV 15 τοσούτοις Sylburgius: τοιούτοις PMV 16 καὶ ἀφώνων F: om. PMV 18 εὑρίσκω MV: εὑρίσκων F: om. P 19 ἔτι] ὅτι F 21 εὔνους τις F 23 δὲ ἂν F 24 ἀπεδείκνυ F 25 ἐιμιμακρ(ῶς) P 26 παρέξειν δόξαν F: δόξαν παρέχειν PMV

5. W. G. Headlam (Book of Greek Verse p. 265) well says that Dionysius’ comments on the smooth style (especially in relation to Sappho) are worth the attention of those who would gather the effect which Sappho’s language made upon a Greek ear practised in the minute study of expression; and he proceeds: “There is always in the verse of Sappho a directness and unlaboured ease of language, as if every lovely sentence came by nature from the mouth at once; as though she spoke in song, and what she sang were the expression of her very soul, the voice of languorous enjoyment and desire of beauty:

My blood was hot wan wine of love, And my song’s sound the sound thereof, The sound of the delight of it.”

22. Dionysius shows good judgement in not subjecting Sappho’s Hymn to a detailed analysis, letter by letter.

24. =ἐπὶ τῶν παραδειγμάτων=, ‘in the light of the appropriate examples.’ Cp. =152= 3, =232= 23. The phrase sometimes indicates ‘familiar,’ ‘stock,’ or ‘previous’ examples; cp. de Demosth. c. 40 ἵνα δὲ μὴ δόξωμεν διαρτᾶν τὰς ἀκολουθίας, τοὺς ἀναγινώσκοντας ἐπὶ τὰ ἐν ἀρχαῖς ῥηθέντα παραδείγματα κελεύοντες ἀναστρέφειν, κτλ.—In =242= 2 infra, ‘with illustrations’ (no article in PMV, though F has τῶν).

[Page 241]

Once again come! Come, and my chains dissever, Chains of heart-ache! Passionate longings rend me— Oh fulfil them! Thou in the strife be ever Near, to defend me.[177]

Here the euphonious effect and the grace of the language arise from the coherence and smoothness of the junctures. The words nestle close to one another and are woven together according to certain affinities and natural attractions of the letters. Almost throughout the entire ode vowels are joined to mutes and semi-vowels, all those in fact which are naturally prefixed or affixed to one another when pronounced together in one syllable. There are very few clashings of semi-vowels with semi-vowels or mutes, and of mutes and vowels with one another, such as cause the sound to oscillate. When I review the entire ode, I find, in all those nouns and verbs and other kinds of words, only five or perhaps six unions of semi-vowels and mutes which do not naturally blend with one another, and even they do not disturb the smoothness of the language to any great extent. As for juxtaposition of vowels, I find that those which occur in the clauses themselves are still fewer, while those which join the clauses to one another are only a little more numerous. As a natural consequence the language has a certain easy flow and softness; the arrangement of the words in no way ruffles the smooth waves of sound.

I would go on to mention the remaining characteristics of this kind of composition, and would show as before by means of appropriate illustrations that they are such as I say, were it not that my treatise would become too long and would create an impression of needless repetition. It will be open to you, as to

[Page 242]

ἄλλῳ καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον τῶν ἐξηριθμημένων ὑπ’ ἐμοῦ κατὰ τὴν προέκθεσιν τοῦ χαρακτῆρος ἐπιλέγεσθαί τε καὶ σκοπεῖν ἐπὶ παραδειγμάτων κατὰ πολλὴν εὐκαιρίαν καὶ σχολήν· ἐμοὶ δ’ οὐκ ἐγχωρεῖ τοῦτο ποιεῖν, ἀλλ’ ἀπόχρη παραδεῖξαι μόνον ἀρκούντως ἃ βούλομαι τοῖς δυνησομένοις παρακολουθῆσαι. 5

ἑνὸς ἔτι παραθήσομαι λέξιν ἀνδρὸς εἰς τὸν αὐτὸν κατεσκευασμένου χαρακτῆρα, Ἰσοκράτους τοῦ ῥήτορος, ὃν ἐγὼ μάλιστα πάντων οἴομαι τῶν πεζῇ λέξει χρησαμένων ταύτην ἀκριβοῦν τὴν ἁρμονίαν. ἔστι δὲ ἡ λέξις ἐκ τοῦ Ἀρεοπαγιτικοῦ ἥδε· 10

πολλοὺς ὑμῶν οἴομαι θαυμάζειν, ἥντινά ποτε γνώμην ἔχων περὶ σωτηρίας τὴν πρόσοδον ἐποιησάμην, ὥσπερ τῆς πόλεως ἐν κινδύνοις οὔσης ἢ σφαλερῶς αὐτῇ τῶν πραγμάτων καθεστώτων, ἀλλ’ οὐ πλείους μὲν τριήρεις ἢ διακοσίας κεκτημένης, εἰρήνην δὲ καὶ τὰ περὶ τὴν χώραν 15 ἀγούσης καὶ τῶν κατὰ θάλατταν ἀρχούσης, ἔτι δὲ συμμάχους ἐχούσης πολλοὺς μὲν τοὺς ἑτοίμους ἡμῖν ἤν τι δέῃ βοηθήσοντας, πολὺ δὲ πλείους τοὺς τὰς συντάξεις ὑποτελοῦντας καὶ τὸ προσταττόμενον ποιοῦντας. ὧν ὑπαρχόντων ἡμᾶς μὲν ἄν τις φήσειεν εἰκὸς εἶναι θαρρεῖν 20 ὡς πόρρω τῶν κινδύνων ὄντας, τοῖς δ’ ἐχθροῖς τοῖς ἡμετέροις προσήκειν δεδιέναι καὶ βουλεύεσθαι περὶ σωτηρίας. ὑμεῖς μὲν οὖν οἶδ’ ὅτι τούτῳ χρώμενοι τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ

1 τὴν] τ(ων) P 2 πρόθεσιν F 3 παραδειγμάτων PMV: τῶν παραδειγμάτων F || δὲ F 4 ποιεῖ P || παραδεῖξαι Us.: πᾶσι δεῖξαι FM: δεῖξαι PV 5 ἀρκοῦντος F 6 παραθήσομαι F: παραθήσω PMV || αὐτὸν om. F || κατεσκευασμένου P: κατεσκευασμένον FV: κατεσκευασμένην M 7 ὃν] ἡ F 8 πεζῆ F: πεζῆι τῆι P, MV 9 ἀρεοπαγητικου ἡδε F 11 ὑμῶν] τούτων F || οἴομαι] οἶμαι Isocratis libri 12 ὥσπερ EPMV Isocr.: ὡς περὶ εἰ F 14 καθεστηκότων Isocr. 15 εἰρήνης F || καὶ τὰ PMV Isocr.: τὰ EF 16 [ἐ]χούσης cum litura P, MV || ἔτι ... ἐχούσης om. F 17 τοὺς om. E 18 τοὺς om. PM 19 ὑποτελοῦντας PMV Isocr.: ἐπιτελοῦντας EF 20 ἡμᾶς PMV Isocr.: ὑμᾶς EF 21 ὑμετέροις F 23 ἡμεῖς PV || οἶδ’] οἵ δ’ F

6. =παραθήσομαι=: the Middle, as given by F, is to be preferred (cp. =182= 12). In =122= 14, on the other hand, F gives παρέξω, where the other MSS. supply the right reading παρέξομαι.

11. In the English translation of this passage of Isocrates no attempt has been made to reproduce the effects to which Dionysius calls attention: to do so would involve sacrificing equivalence of meaning to equivalence of letter-combinations.—Bircovius compares, in Latin, the opening passage of Cic. pro Caecina: “si, quantum in agro locisque desertis audacia potest, tantum in foro atque in iudiciis impudentia valeret, non minus nunc in caussa cederet A. Caecina Sex. Aebutii impudentiae, quam tum in vi facienda cessit audaciae. verum et illud considerati hominis esse putavit, qua de re iure decertare oporteret, armis non contendere: et hoc constantis, quicum vi et armis certare noluisset, eum iure iudicioque superare.” Batteux (p. 253) quotes from Fléchier’s oratorical picture of M. de Turenne: “Soit qu’il fallût préparer les affaires ou les décider; chercher la victoire avec ardeur, ou l’attendre avec patience; soit qu’il fallût prévenir les desseins des ennemis par la hardiesse, ou dissiper les craintes et les jalousies des alliés par la prudence; soit qu’il fallût se modérer dans les prospérités, ou se soutenir dans les malheurs de la guerre, son âme fut toujours égale. Il ne fit que changer vertus, quand la fortune changeait de face; heureux sans orgueil, malheureux avec dignité... Si la licence fut réprimée; si les haines publiques et particulières furent assoupies; si les lois reprirent leur ancienne vigueur; si l’ordre et le repos furent rétablis dans les villes et dans les provinces; si les membres furent heureusement réunis à leur chef; c’est à lui, France, que tu le dois.” Batteux maintains that this passage shows the same qualities of style as Dionysius’ extract from Isocrates.

13. =ἢ σφαλερῶς=: Koraes would read καὶ σφαλερῶς. His note (Isocr. ii. 102) runs: “οὐκ ἀλόγως ὑπενόησεν ὁ Λάγγιος γραπτέον εἶναι, Καὶ σφαλερῶς· ἔοικε δὲ καὶ ὁ Ἰταλὸς μεταφραστής, συμπλεκτικῶς, οὐ διαζευκτικῶς, ἀνεγνωκέναι, ἢ ἀναγνωστέον εἶναι κεκρικέναι, Quasi che la città in alcun pericolo si trovasse, et le cose sue in pessima conditione fossero.”

18. =συντάξεις=: Koraes l.c. κακῶς τὸ ἐμὸν ἀντίγραφον, Συνάξεις. Συντάξεις δὲ λέγει, κατ’ εὐφημισμὸν Ἀττικόν, τοὺς φόρους, ἐπειδή, ὥς φησιν Ἁρποκρατίων (λέξ. Σύνταξις), χαλεπῶς ἔφερον οἱ Ἕλληνες τὸ τῶν φόρων ὄνομα. ὡσαύτως ἡ τῶν Γαλλῶν φωνή, τὴν πρόθεσιν παραλιποῦσα, Taxe ὠνόμασε τὴν σύνταξιν, τὴν τοῖς Ἰταλοῖς καλουμένην Tassa, καὶ ῥῆμα ἐποίησε Taxer (Ἰταλ. Tassare), ἐπὶ τοῦ τάσσειν καὶ ἐπιβάλλειν τοὺς φόρους· ὅθεν ἡ τῶν Γραικῶν φωνή, τὰ ἴδια παρὰ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων λαμβάνουσα, ἐσχημάτισε τὰ χυδαῖα, #Τάσσα# καὶ #Τασσάρω#.

[Page 243]

any one else, at your full leisure and convenience, to take each single point enumerated by me in describing the type, and to examine and review them with illustrations. But I really have no time to do this. It is quite enough simply to give an adequate indication of my views to all who will be able to follow in my steps.

I will quote a passage of one more writer who has fashioned himself into the same mould—Isocrates the orator. Of all prose-writers he is, I think, the most finished master of this style of composition. The passage is from the Areopagiticus, as follows:—

“Many of you, I imagine, are wondering what can be my view in coming before you to speak on the question of the public safety, as though the State were actually in danger, or its interests imperilled, and as though it did not as a matter of fact possess more than two hundred warships, and were not at peace throughout its borders and supreme at sea, and had not many allies ready to help us in case of need, and many more who regularly pay their contributions and perform their obligation. Under these circumstances it might be said that we have every reason for confidence on the ground that all danger is remote; and that it is our enemies who have reason to be afraid and to form plans for self-preservation. Now you, I know, are inclined on this account

[Page 244]

τῆς ἐμῆς προσόδου καταφρονεῖτε καὶ πᾶσαν ἐλπίζετε τὴν Ἑλλάδα ταύτῃ τῇ δυνάμει κατασχήσειν· ἐγὼ δὲ δι’ αὐτὰ ταῦτα τυγχάνω δεδιώς. ὁρῶ γὰρ τῶν πόλεων τὰς ἄριστα πράττειν οἰομένας κάκιστα βουλευομένας, καὶ τὰς μάλιστα θαρρούσας εἰς πλείστους κινδύνους καθισταμένας. 5 αἴτιον δὲ τούτων ἐστίν, ὅτι τῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ τῶν κακῶν οὐδὲν αὐτὸ καθ’ αὑτὸ παραγίνεται τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ συντέτακται καὶ συνακολουθεῖ τοῖς μὲν πλούτοις καὶ ταῖς δυναστείαις ἄνοια καὶ μετὰ ταύτης ἀκολασία, ταῖς δὲ ἐνδείαις καὶ ταῖς ταπεινότησιν σωφροσύνη καὶ πολλὴ 10 μετριότης. ὥστε χαλεπὸν εἶναι διαγνῶναι, ποτέραν ἄν τις δέξαιτο τῶν μερίδων τούτων τοῖς παισὶ τοῖς αὑτοῦ καταλιπεῖν· ἴδοιμεν γὰρ ἂν ἐκ μὲν τῆς φαυλοτέρας εἶναι δοκούσης ἐπὶ τὸ βέλτιον ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ τὰς πράξεις ἐπιδιδούσας, ἐκ δὲ τῆς κρείττονος φαινομένης ἐπὶ τὸ 15 χεῖρον εἰθισμένας μεταπίπτειν.

ταῦθ’ ὅτι συνήλειπταί τε καὶ συγκέχρωσται, καὶ οὐ καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον ὄνομα ἐν ἕδρᾳ περιφανεῖ καὶ πλατείᾳ βέβηκεν οὐδὲ μακροῖς τοῖς μεταξὺ χρόνοις διείργεται καὶ διαβέβηκεν ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων, ἀλλ’ ἐν κινήσει τε ὄντα φαίνεται καὶ φορᾷ καὶ 20 ῥύσει συνεχεῖ, πραεῖαί τε αὐτῶν εἰσι καὶ μαλακαὶ καὶ προπετεῖς αἱ συνάπτουσαι τὴν λέξιν ἁρμονίαι, τὸ ἄλογον ἐπιμαρτυρεῖ τῆς ἀκοῆς πάθος. ὅτι δ’ οὐκ ἄλλα τινὰ τούτων ἐστὶν αἴτια ἢ τὰ προειρημένα ὑπ’ ἐμοῦ περὶ τῆς ἀγωγῆς ταύτης τῶν λόγων, ῥᾴδιον ἰδεῖν. φωνηέντων μὲν γὰρ ἀντιτυπίαν 25 οὐκ ἂν εὕροι τις οὐδεμίαν ἐν γοῦν οἷς παρεθέμην ἀριθμοῖς, οἴομαι δ’ οὐδ’ ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ λόγῳ, πλὴν εἴ τί με διαλέληθεν· ἡμιφώνων δὲ καὶ ἀφώνων ὀλίγας καὶ οὐ πάνυ

2 ταύτηι (ταύτην M) τῆι δυνάμει P, MV Isocr.: τῆι δυνάμει ταύτη F, E 5 πλείστους κινδύνους PM Isocr.: πλείους κινδύνους V: πλεῖστον κίνδυνον EF 8 πλουσίοις F (cum Isocratis codd. quibusdam) 9 ἄνοια ... ἐνδείαις om. F || ἀκολασίαι PMV 10 σωφροσύνη EPMV Isocr.: καὶ σωφροσύνη F 12 δέξαιτο PMV Isocr.: εὔξαιτο EF || τῶν μερίδων τούτων PMV Isocr.: τούτων τῶν μερίδων EF || αὐτοῦ libri 13 καταλιπεῖν PMV Isocr.: om. EF || ἴδοιμεν PV Isocr.: ἴδοι μὲν M: ἴδοι EF || ἂν om. F: ἄν τις E || εἶναι δοκούσης PMV Isocr.: om. EF 17 συνείληπταί τε EPMV: συνήλειπτέται F || οὐ καθ’ ἓν PMV: οὐδὲν EF 18 ἕδρα ... πλατεία (sine iota) P 19 οὐδὲ EF: οὐδ’ ἐν PMV 20 φορᾶι P 21 τε ... μαλακαὶ om. F 22 προπετεῖς PV: προσφυεῖς FM γρ V 25 ῥαίδιον P 26 εὕροι F: om. PM, post οὐδεμίαν ponit V 27 οὐθ F || ὅλωι τωῖ λόγωι P 28 πάνυ PMV: σφόδρα F

17 ff. When expressing admiration, Dionysius often tends (as here) to reproduce the style admired.—For further estimates of Isokrates’s style reference may be made to Dionysius’ separate essay on Isokrates (in his de Antiq. Or.); Jebb Att. Or. ii. 54 ff.; Blass Att. Bereds. ii. 131 ff.

19. The reading οὐδ’ ἐν is possibly right, viz. ‘at long time-intervals’; cp. =222= 5.

[Page 245]

to make light of my appeal; you expect to maintain supremacy over the whole of Greece by means of your existing forces. But it is precisely on these grounds that I really am alarmed. I observe that it is those States which think they are at the height of prosperity that adopt the worst policy, and that it is the most confident that incur the greatest danger. The reason is that no good or evil fortune comes to men entirely by itself: folly and its mate intemperance have been appointed to wait on wealth and power, self-restraint and great moderation to attend on poverty and low estate. So that it is hard to decide which of these two lots a man would desire to bequeath to his children, since we can see that from what is popularly regarded as the inferior condition men’s fortunes commonly improve, while from that which is apparently the better they usually decline and fall.”[178]

The instinctive perception of the ear testifies that these words are run and blended together; that they do not individually stand on a broad foundation which gives an all-round view of each; and that they are not separated by long time-intervals and planted far apart from one another, but are plainly in a state of motion, being borne onwards in an unbroken stream, while the links which bind the passage together are gentle and soft and flowing. And it is easy to see that the sole cause lies in the character of this style as I have previously described it. For no dissonance of vowels will be found, at any rate in the harmonious clauses which I have quoted, nor any, I think, in the entire speech, unless some instance has escaped my notice. There are also few dissonances of semi-vowels and mutes, and those not very glaring or

[Page 246]

ἐκφανεῖς οὐδὲ συνεχεῖς. ταῦτα δὲ τῆς εὐεπείας αἴτια τῇ λέξει γέγονε καὶ ἡ τῶν κώλων συμμετρία πρὸς ἄλληλα, τῶν τε περιόδων ὁ κύκλος ἔχων τι περιφερὲς καὶ εὔγραμμον καὶ τεταμιευμένον ἄκρως ταῖς συμμετρίαις. ὑπὲρ ἅπαντα δὲ ταῦτα οἱ σχηματισμοὶ πολὺ τὸ νεαρὸν ἔχοντες· εἰσὶ γὰρ 5 ἀντίθετοι καὶ παρόμοιοι καὶ πάρισοι καὶ οἱ παραπλήσιοι τούτοις, ἐξ ὧν ἡ πανηγυρικὴ διάλεκτος ἀποτελεῖται. οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι δοκῶ μηκύνειν καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ διεξιών· ἱκανῶς γὰρ εἴρηται καὶ περὶ ταύτης τῆς συνθέσεως ὅσα γε ἥρμοττεν.

XXIV

ἡ δὲ τρίτη καὶ μέση τῶν εἰρημένων δυεῖν ἁρμονιῶν, ἣν 10 εὔκρατον καλῶ σπάνει κυρίου τε καὶ κρείττονος ὀνόματος, σχῆμα μὲν ἴδιον οὐδὲν ἔχει, κεκέρασται δέ πως ἐξ ἐκείνων μετρίως καὶ ἔστιν ἐκλογή τις τῶν ἐν ἑκατέρᾳ κρατίστων. αὕτη δοκεῖ μοι τὰ πρωτεῖα ἐπιτηδεία εἶναι φέρεσθαι, ἐπειδὴ μεσότης μέν τίς ἐστι (μεσότης δὲ ἡ ἀρετὴ καὶ βίων καὶ 15 ἔργων [καὶ τεχνῶν], ὡς Ἀριστοτέλει τε δοκεῖ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ὅσοι κατ’ ἐκείνην τὴν αἵρεσιν φιλοσοφοῦσιν), ὁρᾶται δ’, ὥσπερ ἔφην καὶ πρότερον, οὐ κατὰ ἀπαρτισμὸν ἀλλ’ ἐν πλάτει, καὶ τὰς εἰδικὰς ἔχει διαφορὰς πολλάς· οἵ τε χρησάμενοι

1 δὲ PMV: δὴ F || εὐπρεπείας P 2 τε om. P 3 ἔχων τι] ἔχοντι P || περιφερὲς F: περιφανὲς PMV || καὶ εὐθύγραμμον F 4 ἄκρως F: ἄκραις PMV 5 πολὺ F: οἱ πολὺ PM: οἱ πολλοὶ V 7 συντελεῖται cum rasura P 8 δοκῶ FP: μοι δοκῶ MV 9 συνθέσεως FP: θέσεως MV 10 τρίτη EF: τρίτη τε PMV || δυεῖν FPM: δυοῖν V 11 εὔκρατον F: κοινὴν PMV || σπάνει τε PMV: ἐγὼ ἀντὶ F: τε delevit Usenerus || τε F: om. PMV 12 δή P || πως PMV: ὡς EF || ἐκείνων] ἐκείνου F 13 ἑκατέραι P || κρατίστων] κρατίστη· ὧν F: κρατίστων· ὧν E 14 αὐτὴ PV 15 τις ἐστὶ E: τις F: ἐστι PMV 16 καὶ τεχνῶν om. FE 17 ὅσοι] οἳ F || αἴρεσιν FP || δὲ PMVE 19 εἰδικὰς EF: ἰδίας PMV

8. =καὶ=: i.e. ‘by going through details as well (as by taking this general view).’

9. This chapter (c. 23) should be compared throughout with chapter 40 of the de Demosth., which begins ἡ δὲ μετὰ ταύτην ἡ γλαφυρὰ καὶ θεατρικὴ καὶ τὸ κομψὸν αἱρουμένη πρὸ τοῦ σεμνοῦ τοιαύτη, κτλ.

10. The treatment of the third harmony in this chapter seems somewhat curt and vague.

12. The third style (Dionysius means) has no special character of its own: it is a combination of the best things in the two others: this, in fact, constitutes its superiority, since, according to Aristotle, virtue is a mean (Aristot. Eth. Nic. ii. 5, 1106 b 27 μεσότης τις ἄρα ἐστὶν ἡ ἀρετή, στοχαστική γε οὖσα τοῦ μέσου).

13. =ἐκλογή τις τῶν ἐν ἑκατέρᾳ κρατίστων=: it is interesting to find Homer represented (=248= 8-10) as a kind of eclectic in style. There are many indications that Dionysius regards him as a diligent literary craftsman. See generally de Demosth. c. 41 init. τῆς δὲ τρίτης ἁρμονίας ... ῥήτορες.

16. =καὶ τεχνῶν=: it may possibly be better to bracket these words, as they are omitted by F as well as by E. But their retention would not be inconsistent with Aristotelian doctrine. Cp. Eth. Nic. ii. 5, 1106 b 8 εἰ δὴ πᾶσα ἐπιστήμη οὕτω τὸ ἔργον εὖ ἐπιτελεῖ, πρὸς τὸ μέσον βλέπουσα καὶ εἰς τοῦτο ἄγουσα τὰ ἔργα (ὅθεν εἰώθασιν ἐπιλέγειν τοῖς εὖ ἔχουσιν ἔργοις ὅτι οὔτ’ ἀφελεῖν ἔστιν οὔτε προσθεῖναι, ὡς τῆς μὲν ὑπερβολῆς καὶ τῆς ἐλλείψεως φθειρούσης τὸ εὖ, τῆς δὲ μεσότητος σῳζούσης, οἱ δ’ ἀγαθοὶ τεχνῖται, ὡς λέγομεν, πρὸς τοῦτο βλέποντες ἐργάζονται), ἡ δ’ ἀρετὴ πάσης τέχνης ἀκριβεστέρα καὶ ἀμείνων ἐστίν, ὥσπερ καὶ ἡ φύσις, τοῦ μέσου ἂν εἴη στοχαστική. Reference may also be made to Politics iii. 13, 1284 b 7-13, and to Eth. Eud. ii. 1220 b 21 ἐν ἅπαντι συνεχεῖ καὶ διαιρετῷ ἐστιν ὑπεροχὴ καὶ ἔλλειψις καὶ μέσον, καὶ ταῦτα ἢ πρὸς ἄλληλα ἢ πρὸς ἡμᾶς, οἷον ἐν γυμναστικῇ, ἐν ἰατρικῇ, ἐν οἰκοδομικῇ, ἐν κυβερνητικῇ, καὶ ἐν ὁποιᾳοῦν πράξει, καὶ ἐπιστημονικῇ καὶ ἀνεπιστημονικῇ, καὶ τεχνικῇ καὶ ἀτέχνῳ, κτλ.

18. =πρότερον=: cp. =210= 6-10.

19. Batteux (p. 257) well explains Dionysius’ meaning, and suggests the names of certain French authors who may be held to exemplify and adorn the ‘mean’ (‘middle’) style: “Denys d’Halicarnasse observe avec justesse que le mélange des deux extrêmes dans la composition mixte ne se fait pas dans un milieu précis, mais avec une certaine latitude; qu’on ne pouvait être plus près et plus loin de l’un des deux extrêmes; que le même auteur pouvait l’être plus dans une partie de son ouvrage, et l’être moins dans une autre partie. C’est ce que nous venons d’observer dans l’oraison funèbre de M. de Turenne, et qu’ainsi il n’est pas aisé de fixer avec précision la place des auteurs qui tiennent le milieu entre les deux compositions. Avec cette restriction, nous pouvons placer dans le milieu Fénelon, Racine, Despréaux, Molière, La Fontaine, Voltaire, qui ont les deux mérites de la force et de l’élégance, qui ont les nerfs et la grâce, les fruits et les fleurs.”

[Page 247]

continuous. The euphonious flow of the passage is due to these circumstances, combined with the balance of the clauses and the cycle of the periods which has about it something rounded and well-defined and perfectly regulated in respect of symmetrical adjustment. Above all there are the rhetorical figures, full of youthful exuberance: antithesis, parallelism in sound, parallelism in structure, and others like these, by which the language of panegyric is brought to its highest perfection. I do not think it necessary to lengthen the book by dealing with the points that are still untouched. This kind of composition also has now received adequate treatment on all points where it was appropriate.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

XXIV. HARMONIOUSLY-BLENDED, OR INTERMEDIATE, COMPOSITION

The third kind of composition is the mean between the two already mentioned. I call it harmoniously blended for lack of a proper and better name. It has no form peculiar to itself, but is a sort of judicious blend of the two others and a selection from the most effective features of each. This kind, it seems to me, deserves to win the first prize; for it is a sort of mean, and excellence in life and conduct [and the arts] is a mean, according to Aristotle and the other philosophers of his school. As I said before, it is to be viewed not narrowly but broadly. It has many specific varieties. Those who have adopted it have not all had the same

[Page 248]

αὐτῇ οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ πάντες οὐδ’ ὁμοίως ἐπετήδευσαν, ἀλλ’ οἱ μὲν ταῦτα μᾶλλον, οἱ δ’ ἐκεῖνα, ἐπέτεινάν τε καὶ ἀνῆκαν ἄλλως ἄλλοι τὰ αὐτά, καὶ πάντες ἐγένοντο λόγου ἄξιοι κατὰ πάσας τὰς ἰδέας τῶν λόγων. κορυφὴ μὲν οὖν ἁπάντων καὶ σκοπός, 5

ἐξ οὗ περ πάντες ποταμοὶ καὶ πᾶσα θάλασσα καὶ πᾶσαι κρῆναι,

δικαίως ἂν Ὅμηρος λέγοιτο. πᾶς γὰρ αὐτῷ τόπος, ὅτου τις ἂν ἅψηται, ταῖς τε αὐστηραῖς καὶ ταῖς γλαφυραῖς ἁρμονίαις εἰς ἄκρον διαπεποίκιλται. τῶν δ’ ἄλλων ὅσοι τὴν αὐτὴν 10 μεσότητα ἐπετήδευσαν, ὕστεροι μὲν Ὁμήρου μακρῷ παρ’ ἐκεῖνον ἐξεταζόμενοι φαίνοιντ’ ἄν, καθ’ ἑαυτοὺς δὲ εἰ θεωροίη τις αὐτούς, ἀξιοθέατοι, μελοποιῶν μὲν Στησίχορός τε καὶ Ἀλκαῖος, τραγῳδοποιῶν δὲ Σοφοκλῆς, συγγραφέων δὲ Ἡρόδοτος, ῥητόρων δὲ Δημοσθένης, φιλοσόφων δὲ κατ’ ἐμὴν δόξαν Δημόκριτός 15 τε καὶ Πλάτων καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης· τούτων γὰρ ἑτέρους εὑρεῖν ἀμήχανον ἄμεινον κεράσαντας τοὺς λόγους. καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν χαρακτήρων ταῦθ’ ἱκανά. παραδείγματα γὰρ τούτων οὐκ οἴομαι δεῖν φέρειν, φανερῶν πάνυ ὄντων καὶ οὐδὲν δεομένων λόγου. 20

εἰ δέ τινι δοκεῖ καὶ πόνου πολλοῦ ταῦτα καὶ πραγματείας

8 ἂν om. F || ὅτου EF: ὅπου M: τὸ οὗ P 9 ἅψοιτο EF || ταῖς γλαφυραῖς] ἀνθηραῖς EF 10 αὐτὴν EF: αὐτὴν ἐκείνωι P, MV 11 μὲν] μέντοι EF 13 Στησίχορος ... τραγῳδοποιῶν δὲ om. F 16 γὰρ F: δὲ PMV 19 φέρειν om. F 21 τινι MV (τῳ Demosth.): τι μοι F: τις P

5. Homer is a beacon (a watchtower) set upon a hill.—The close correspondence between Dionysius and Quintilian has often been illustrated in these notes; and with the present page should be compared Quintil. x. 1. 46 “igitur, ut Aratus ab Iove incipiendum putat, ita nos rite coepturi ab Homero videmur. hic enim, quemadmodum ex Oceano dicit ipse amnium fontiumque cursus initium capere, omnibus eloquentiae partibus exemplum et ortum dedit.”

10. Neither here nor elsewhere does Dionysius say anything about the poets of the Epic Cycle. Attention is called to his silence by T. W. Allen in the Classical Quarterly ii. 87.

13. =Stesichorus=: cp. de Imitat. B. vi. 2 ὅρα δὲ καὶ Στησίχορον ἔν τε τοῖς ἑκατέρων τῶν προειρημένων πλεονεκτήμασι κατορθοῦντα, κτλ.; Long. de Sublim. xiii. 3 (as to Stesichorus, Herodotus and Plato, in relation to Homer) μόνος Ἡρόδοτος Ὁμηρικώτατος ἐγένετο; Στησίχορος ἔτι πρότερον ὅ τε Ἀρχίλοχος, πάντων τε τούτων μάλιστα ὁ Πλάτων ἀπὸ τοῦ Ὁμηρικοῦ κείνου νάματος εἰς αὑτὸν μυρίας ὅσας παρατροπὰς ἀποχετευσάμενος.

14. =Alcaeus=: de Imitat. B. vi. 2 Ἀλκαίου δὲ σκόπει τὸ μεγαλοφυὲς καὶ βραχὺ καὶ ἡδὺ μετὰ δεινότητος κτλ.; Quintil. x. 1. 63 “Alcaeus in parte operis aureo plectro merito donatur, qua tyrannos insectatus multum etiam moribus confert; in eloquendo quoque brevis et magnificus et diligens et plerumque oratori similis: sed et lusit et in amores descendit, maioribus tamen aptior.”

=Sophocles=: Σοφοκλῆς δὲ ἔν τε τοῖς ἤθεσι καὶ τοῖς πάθεσι κτλ. (de Imitat., ut supra).

=Herodotus=: cp. D.H. pp. 10, 11, 12, etc.

15. =Demosthenes=: cp. D.H. pp. 13, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, etc., and Demetr. pp. 11, 12, etc.

=Democritus=: cp. Cic. Orat. 20, 67 “itaque video visum esse nonnullis, Platonis et Democriti locutionem, etsi absit a versu, tamen, quod incitatius feratur et clarissimis verborum luminibus utatur, potius poëma putandum quam comicorum poëtarum”; id. de Orat. i. 49 “quam ob rem, si ornate locutus est, sicut et fertur et mihi videtur, physicus ille Demokritus, materies illa fuit physici, de qua dixit, ornatus vero ipse verborum oratoris putandus est”; id. ib. i. 42 “Democritii ... ornati homines in dicendo et graves.”

16. =Plato=: cp. D.H. pp. 16, 19, 27-30, 36, etc. and Demetr. pp. 12, 13, 14, etc.

=Aristotle=: cp. de Imitat. B. vi. 4 παραληπτέον δὲ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλην εἰς μίμησιν τῆς τε περὶ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν δεινότητος καὶ τῆς σαφηνείας, καὶ τοῦ ἡδέος καὶ πολυμαθοῦς· τοῦτο γὰρ ἔστι μάλιστα παρὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς τούτου λαβεῖν.

[Page 249]

aims nor the same methods; some have made more use of this method, others of that; while the same methods have been pursued with less or greater vigour by different writers, who have yet all achieved eminence in the various walks of literature. Now he who towers conspicuous above them all,

Out of whose fulness all rivers, and every sea, have birth, And all upleaping fountains,[179]

is, we must admit, Homer. For whatever passage you like to take in him has had its manifold charms brought to perfection by a union of the severe and the polished forms of arrangement. Of the other writers who have cultivated the same golden mean, all will be found to be far inferior to Homer when measured by his standard, but still men of eminence when regarded in themselves: among lyric poets Stesichorus and Alcaeus, among tragedians Sophocles, among historians Herodotus, among orators Demosthenes, and among philosophers (in my opinion) Democritus, Plato, and Aristotle. It is impossible to find authors who have succeeded better in blending their writings into harmonious wholes. As regards types of composition the foregoing remarks will suffice. I do not think it necessary to quote specimen passages from the authors just mentioned, since they are known to all and need no illustration.

Now if any one thinks that these things are worth much toil

[Page 250]

μεγάλης ἄξια εἶναι, καὶ μάλα ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν λογίσηται τοὺς ἐξακολουθοῦντας αὐτοῖς κατορθουμένοις ἐπαίνους καὶ τὸν καρπὸν τὸν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ὡς γλυκύς, εὐπαθείας ἡγήσεται τοὺς πόνους. Ἐπικουρείων δὲ χορόν, οἷς οὐδὲν μέλει τούτων, παραιτοῦμαι· τὸ γὰρ “οὐκ 5 ἐπιπόνου τοῦ γράφειν ὄντος,” ὡς αὐτὸς Ἐπίκουρος λέγει, “τοῖς μὴ στοχαζομένοις τοῦ πυκνὰ μεταπίπτοντος κριτηρίου” πολλῆς ἀργίας ἦν καὶ σκαιότητος ἀλεξιφάρμακον.

XXV

τούτων δή μοι τέλος ἐχόντων, ἐκεῖνά σε οἴομαι ποθεῖν ἔτι ἀκοῦσαι, πῶς γίνεται λέξις ἄμετρος ὁμοία καλῷ ποιήματι ἢ 10 μέλει, καὶ πῶς ποίημά γε ἢ μέλος πεζῇ λέξει καλῇ παραπλήσιον. ἄρξομαι δὲ πρῶτον ἀπὸ τῆς ψιλῆς λέξεως, ἕνα τῶν ἀνδρῶν προχειρισάμενος ὃν ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα οἶμαι τὴν ποιητικὴν ἐκμεμάχθαι φράσιν, βουλόμενος μὲν καὶ πλείους, οὐκ ἔχων δὲ χρόνον ἱκανὸν ἅπασι. φέρε δὴ τίς οὐκ ἂν 15 ὁμολογήσειεν τοῖς κρατίστοις ἐοικέναι ποιήμασί τε καὶ μέλεσι

3 τὸν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν F: τῶν ἁπάντων PMV 5 οὐκἐπὶ πόνου P, MV 6 ἐπίπονον F 10 λέξις ἄμετρος] πεζὴ λέξις F || ἄμετρος ... πεζῇ om. F 13 ὃν ... βουλόμενος om. P

1. =κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην=: cp. de Demosth. c. 52 εἰ δὲ τῷ δοκεῖ ταῦτα καὶ πόνου πολλοῦ καὶ πραγματείας μεγάλης εἶναι, καὶ μάλα ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην· οὐδὲν γὰρ τῶν μεγάλων μικρῶν ἐστι πόνων ὤνιον. ἀλλ’ ἐὰν ἐπιλογίσηται τοὺς ἀκολουθοῦντας αὐτοῖς καρπούς, μᾶλλον δ’ ἐὰν ἕνα μόνον τὸν ἔπαινον, ὃν ἀποδίδωσιν ὁ χρόνος καὶ ζῶσι καὶ μετὰ τὴν τελευτήν, πᾶσαν ἡγήσεται τήν [τε] πραγματείαν ἐλάττω τῆς προσηκούσης. The reference in both cases is to Demosth. Chers. § 48 εἰ δέ τῳ δοκεῖ ταῦτα καὶ δαπάνης μεγάλης καὶ πόνων πολλῶν καὶ πραγματείας εἶναι, καὶ μάλ’ ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν λογίσηται τὰ τῇ πόλει μετὰ ταῦτα γενησόμενα, ἂν ταῦτα μὴ ’θέλῃ, εὑρήσει λυσιτελοῦν τὸ ἑκόντας ποιεῖν τὰ δέοντα.

4. For the general attitude of =Epicurus= cp. Quintil. ii. 17. 15 “nam de Epicuro, qui disciplinas omnes fugit, nihil miror,” and ib. xii. 2. 24 “nam in primis nos Epicurus a se ipse dimittit, qui fugere omnem disciplinam navigatione quam velocissima iubet [Diog. Laert. Vit. Epic. 6 παιδείαν δὲ πᾶσαν (i.e. τὴν ἐγκύκλιον παιδείαν), μακάριε, φεῦγε τὸ ἀκάτιον ἀράμενος]”; Cic. de Finibus i. 5. 14 “sed existimo te minus ab eo [sc. Epicuro] delectari, quod ista Platonis, Aristotelis, Theophrasti orationis ornamenta neglexerit.”—Probably the Epicurean philosopher Philodemus is among those who are criticized in the πραγματεία ἣν συνεταξάμην ὑπὲρ τῆς πολιτικῆς φιλοσοφίας πρὸς τοὺς κατατρέχοντας αὐτῆς ἀδίκως (de Thucyd. c. 2).

5-8. Usener (Epicurea, fragm. 230) gave this passage as follows: τὸ γὰρ ἐπίπονον τοῦ γράφειν ὄντως, ὡς αὐτὸς Ἐπίκουρος λέγει, τοῖς μὴ στοχαζομένοις τοῦ πυκνὰ μεταπίπτοντος κριτηρίου πολλῆς ἀργίας ἦν καὶ σκαιότητος ἀλεξιφάρμακον.

5. =οὐκ ἐπιπόνου=: cp. Sheridan Clio’s Protest: “You write with ease, to shew your breeding; | But easy writing’s vile hard reading”; Quintil. x. 3. 10 “summa haec est rei: cito scribendo non fit, ut bene scribatur; bene scribendo fit, ut cito.”

7. =κριτηρίου=: for κριτήριον as an Epicurean term cp. Diog. Laert. Vit. Epic. 147 ὥστε τὸ κριτήριον ἅπαν ἐκβαλεῖς. The ‘variable criterion’ or ‘shifting standard,’ in Dionysius’ quotation, is either the judgment of the ear (regarded as a part of sensation generally) or the literary fashion of the day.

8. Chapter 24 may be compared throughout with de Demosth. c. 41.

9. For the relations of Prose to Verse see Introduction, pp. 33-9.

16. The metrical lines which Dionysius thinks he detects in Demosthenes are not more (nor less) convincing than the rude hexameters which have been pointed out in Cicero: latent lines cannot be expected to be obvious. Ad Quirites post reditum 16 “sed etiam rerum mearum gestarum auctores, testes, laudatoresque fuere” [but the better reading here is laudatores fuerunt]. Pro Archia Poëta i. 1 “si quid est in me ingenii, iudices, quod sentio quam sit exiguum, aut si qua exercitatio dicendi, in qua me non infiteor mediocriter esse versatum,” etc. Tusc. Disp. iv. 14. 31 “illud animorum corporumque dissimile, quod animi valentes morbo temptari possunt, ut corpora possunt.” Pro Roscio Amer. i. 1 “credo ego vos, iudices, mirari quid sit quod, cum tot summi oratores hominesque nobilissimi sedeant, ego potissimum surrexerim.” Cp. Livy xxi. 9 “nec tuto eos adituros inter tot tam effrenatarum gentium arma, nec Hannibali in tanto discrimine rerum operae esse legationes audire,” and Tacitus Ann. i. 1 “urbem Romam a principio reges habuere.” In most of these passages except the last, the natural pauses in delivery would destroy any real hexameter effect. See further in Quintil. ix. 4. 72 ff.—Among later Greek writers, St. John Chrysostom, in his de Sacerdotio iii. 14 and 16, is supposed to yield one entire hexameter and part of another: [ἀπ’ ἐκείνου] τοῦ καπνοῦ προέφλεξε καὶ ἠμαύρωσεν ἅπασαν, and βιάζωνται διὰ τὴν τῆς γαστρὸς ἀνάγκην.

[Page 251]

and great effort, he is, according to Demosthenes, decidedly in the right.[180] Nay, if he considers the credit which attends success in them and the sweetness of the fruit they yield, he will count the toil a pleasure. I beg pardon of the Epicurean choir who care nothing for these things. The doctrine that “writing,” as Epicurus himself says, “is no trouble to those who do not aim at the ever-varying standard”[181] was meant to forestall the charge of gross laziness and stupidity.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

XXV. HOW PROSE CAN RESEMBLE VERSE

Now that I have finished this part of the subject, I think you must be eager for information on the next point—how unmetrical language is made to resemble a beautiful poem or lyric, and how a poem or lyric is brought into close likeness to beautiful prose. I will begin with the language of prose, choosing by preference an author who has, I think, in a pre-eminent degree taken the impress of poetical style. I could wish to mention a larger number, but have not time for all. Who, then, will not admit that the speeches of Demosthenes

[Page 252]

τοὺς Δημοσθένους λόγους, καὶ μάλιστα τάς τε κατὰ Φιλίππου δημηγορίας καὶ τοὺς δικανικοὺς ἀγῶνας τοὺς δημοσίους; ὧν ἐξ ἑνὸς ἀρκέσει λαβεῖν τὸ προοίμιον τουτί·

“Μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα 5 τουτουί, μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν· ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι καὶ σκοπῶ, περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς, περὶ 10 τούτου ἐστί μοι ἅπασα ἡ σπουδή.”

πειρατέον δὴ καὶ περὶ τούτων λέγειν ἃ φρονῶ. μυστηρίοις μὲν οὖν ἔοικεν ἤδη ταῦτα καὶ οὐκ εἰς πολλοὺς οἷά τε ἐστὶν ἐκφέρεσθαι, ὥστ’ οὐκ ἂν εἴην φορτικός, εἰ παρακαλοίην “#οἷς θέμις ἐστὶν#” ἥκειν ἐπὶ τὰς τελετὰς τοῦ λόγου, “#θύρας δ’ 15 ἐπιθέσθαι#” λέγοιμι ταῖς ἀκοαῖς τοὺς “#βεβήλους#.” εἰς γέλωτα γὰρ ἔνιοι λαμβάνουσι τὰ σπουδαιότατα δι’ ἀπειρίαν, καὶ ἴσως οὐδὲν ἄτοπον πάσχουσιν. ἃ δ’ οὖν βούλομαι λέγειν, τοιάδε ἐστί.

πᾶσα λέξις ἡ δίχα μέτρου συγκειμένη ποιητικὴν μοῦσαν 20 ἢ μελικὴν χάριν οὐ δύναται προσλαβεῖν κατὰ γοῦν τὴν σύνθεσιν αὐτήν· ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ ἐκλογὴ τῶν ὀνομάτων μέγα τι δύναται, καὶ ἔστι τις ὀνομασία ποιητικὴ γλωττηματικῶν τε καὶ ξένων καὶ τροπικῶν καὶ πεποιημένων, οἷς ἡδύνεται ποίησις, εἰς κόρον ἐγκαταμιγέντων τῇ ἀμέτρῳ λέξει, ὃ ποιοῦσιν ἄλλοι 25 τε πολλοὶ καὶ οὐχ ἥκιστα Πλάτων· οὐ δὴ λέγω περὶ τῆς ἐκλογῆς, ἀλλ’ ἀφείσθω κατὰ τὸ παρὸν ἡ περὶ ταῦτα σκέψις. περὶ τῆς συνθέσεως αὐτῆς ἔστω ἡ θεωρία τῆς ἐν τοῖς κοινοῖς ὀνόμασι καὶ τετριμμένοις καὶ ἥκιστα ποιητικοῖς τὰς ποιητικὰς

3 ἀρκέσει] ἀρμόσει F 4 με om. P, Demosth. || μήτε F 5 ἔχθρας ἐμὲ Demosth. || μηδεμιᾶς om. F || ἕνεκα PMV 7 ἐπὶ τούτῳ om. EF 8 ἆρ’ E: ἆρα P: ἄρα M: οὖν V: om. F || ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ EFM: ἐγὼ ὀρθῶς PV 9 περὶ] ὑπὲρ Demosth. || τοῦ EFPM: τοῦ τὴν V || χερόνησον PV^1: χερρόνησον FMV^2 || ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς PMV: ὑμᾶς ἀσφαλῶς EF, D 11 τούτου] τούτων EF || ἔστι μοι M: νῦν ἐστί μοι P: τοίνυν ἔστι μοι V: ἔστι μοι νῦν E: ἐστὶν F: μοί ἐστιν D || ἡ EPM D.: ἡ ἐμὴ F: om. V 12 cum φρονῶ voce deficit codex Florentinus (F) 16 ἐπίθεσθε PM: ἐπίθεσθαι V || μέλωτ(α) P: γελοῖα MV 18 οὐδὲν] οὐδ’ P 20 συγκειμένη EP: ἐγκειμένη MV || μοῦσαν MV: οὖσαν P: om. E 23 τις ὀνομασίας P: τὴν ὀνομασίαν MV 25 ἐγκατατεταγμένους EPM: ἐγκαταμεμιγμένους V

4-11. In Butcher’s and in Weil’s texts (which are here identical) the opening of the Aristocrates runs as follows: μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἐμὲ μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουί, μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημ’ ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν, ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἄρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι καὶ σκοπῶ, ὑπὲρ τοῦ Χερρόνησον ἔχειν ὑμᾶς ἀσφαλῶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς, περὶ τούτου μοί ἐστιν ἅπασ’ ἡ σπουδή. The minute differences between this text and that presented with metrical comments by Dionysius deserve careful notice.—The collocation τῆς ἰδίας ἕνεκ’ ἔχθρας is found in de Cor. § 147.

12. Here, with the word φρονῶ, the codex Florentinus Laurentianus (F) unfortunately ends.

24. It is hardly necessary to insert ὀνομάτων before οἷς, since the word may be supplied from l. 22 supra.

[Page 253]

are like the finest poems and lyrics: particularly his harangues against Philip and his pleadings in public law-suits? It will be enough to take the following exordium from one of these:—

“Let none of you, O ye Athenians, think that I have come forward to accuse the defendant Aristocrates with intent to indulge personal hate of my own, or that it is because I have got my eye on some small and petty error that I am thrusting myself with a light heart in the path of his enmity. No, if my calculations and point of view be right, my one aim and object is that you should securely hold the Chersonese, and should not again be deprived of it by political chicanery.”[182]

I must endeavour, here again, to state my views. But the subject we have now reached is like the Mysteries: it cannot be divulged to people in masses. I shall not, therefore, be discourteous in inviting those only “for whom it is lawful” to approach the rites of style, while bidding the “profane” to “close the gates of their ears.”[183] There are some who, through ignorance, turn the most serious things into ridicule, and no doubt their attitude is natural enough. Well, my views are in effect as follows:—

No passage which is composed absolutely without metre can be invested with the melody of poetry or lyric grace, at any rate from the point of view of the word-arrangement considered in itself. No doubt, the choice of words goes a long way, and there is a poetical vocabulary consisting of rare, foreign, figurative and coined words in which poetry takes delight. These are sometimes mingled with prose-writing to excess: many writers do so, Plato particularly. But I am not speaking of the choice of words: let the consideration of that subject be set aside for the present. Let our inquiry deal exclusively with word-arrangement, which can reveal possibilities of poetic grace in common everyday

[Page 254]

χάριτας ἐπιδεικνυμένης. ὅπερ οὖν ἔφην, οὐ δύναται ψιλὴ λέξις ὁμοία γενέσθαι τῇ ἐμμέτρῳ καὶ ἐμμελεῖ, ἐὰν μὴ περιέχῃ μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμούς τινας ἐγκατατεταγμένους ἀδήλως. οὐ μέντοι προσήκει γε ἔμμετρον οὐδ’ ἔρρυθμον αὐτὴν εἶναι δοκεῖν (ποίημα γὰρ οὕτως ἔσται καὶ μέλος ἐκβήσεταί τε ἁπλῶς τὸν αὑτῆς 5 χαρακτῆρα), ἀλλ’ εὔρυθμον αὐτὴν ἀπόχρη καὶ εὔμετρον φαίνεσθαι μόνον· οὕτως γὰρ ἂν εἴη ποιητικὴ μέν, οὐ μὴν ποίημά γε, καὶ ἐμμελὴς μέν, οὐ μέλος δέ.

τίς δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ τούτων διαφορά, πάνυ ῥᾴδιον ἰδεῖν. ἡ μὲν ὅμοια περιλαμβάνουσα μέτρα καὶ τεταγμένους σῴζουσα ῥυθμοὺς 10 καὶ κατὰ στίχον ἢ περίοδον ἢ στροφὴν διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν σχημάτων περαινομένη κἄπειτα πάλιν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ῥυθμοῖς καὶ μέτροις ἐπὶ τῶν ἑξῆς στίχων ἢ περιόδων ἢ στροφῶν χρωμένη καὶ τοῦτο μέχρι πολλοῦ ποιοῦσα ἔρρυθμός ἐστι καὶ ἔμμετρος, καὶ ὀνόματα κεῖται τῇ τοιαύτῃ λέξει μέτρον καὶ μέλος· ἡ δὲ 15 πεπλανημένα μέτρα καὶ ἀτάκτους ῥυθμοὺς ἐμπεριλαμβάνουσα καὶ μήτε ἀκολουθίαν ἐμφαίνουσα αὐτῶν μήτε ὁμοζυγίαν μήτε ἀντιστροφὴν εὔρυθμος μέν ἐστιν, ἐπειδὴ διαπεποίκιλταί τισιν ῥυθμοῖς, οὐκ ἔρρυθμος δέ, ἐπειδὴ οὐχὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς οὐδὲ κατὰ τὸ αὐτό. τοιαύτην δή φημι πᾶσαν εἶναι λέξιν ἄμετρον, ἥτις 20 ἐμφαίνει τὸ ποιητικὸν καὶ μελικόν· ᾗ δὴ καὶ τὸν Δημοσθένη κεχρῆσθαί φημι. καὶ ὅτι ἀληθῆ ταῦτ’ ἐστὶ καὶ οὐδὲν ἐγὼ καινοτομῶ, λάβοι μὲν ἄν τις καὶ ἐκ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους μαρτυρίας τὴν πίστιν· εἴρηται γὰρ τῷ φιλοσόφῳ τά τε ἄλλα περὶ τῆς λέξεως τῆς πολιτικῆς ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ βίβλῳ τῶν ῥητορικῶν 25 τεχνῶν οἵαν αὐτὴν εἶναι προσῆκεν, καὶ δὴ καὶ περὶ τῆς εὐρυθμίας ἐξ ὧν ἂν τοιαύτη γένοιτο· ἐν ᾗ τοὺς ἐπιτηδειοτάτους

3 ἀδήλως MV: ἀδήλους EP 5 αὐτῆς PV 6 ἔμμετρον E 9 ῥάιδιον P 10 σωίζουσα P 20 ἄμετρον EPM: ἔμμετρον V 21 μελιχρὸν M || δημοσθένην EM 25 τρίτω P 26 προσηκ(εν) P: προσήκει MV 27 ἂν MV: τίσ P

1. Cp. Coleridge Biogr. Lit. c. 18: “Whatever is combined with metre must, though it be not itself essentially poetic, have nevertheless some property in common with poetry.”

3. So de Demosth. c. 50 οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἄλλως γένοιτο πολιτικὴ λέξις παρ’ αὐτὴν τὴν σύνθεσιν ἐμφερὴς ποιήμασιν, ἂν μὴ περιέχῃ μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμούς τινας ἐγκατακεχωρισμένους ἀδήλως. οὐ μέντοι γε προσήκει αὐτὴν ἔμμετρον οὐδ’ ἔρρυθμον εἶναι δοκεῖν, ἵνα μὴ γένηται ποίημα ἢ μέλος, ἐκβᾶσα τὸν αὑτῆς χαρακτῆρα, ἀλλ’ εὔρυθμον αὐτὴν ἀπόχρη φαίνεσθαι καὶ εὔμετρον. οὕτω γὰρ ἂν εἴη ποιητικὴ μέν, οὐ μὴν ποίημά γε, καὶ μελίζουσα μέν, οὐ μὴν μέλος.

4. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8 τὸ δὲ σχῆμα τῆς λέξεως δεῖ μήτε ἔμμετρον εἶναι μήτε ἄρρυθμον ... διὸ ῥυθμὸν δεῖ ἔχειν τὸν λόγον, μέτρον δὲ μή· ποίημα γὰρ ἔσται: and Cic. Orat. 56. 187 “perspicuum est igitur numeris astrictam orationem esse debere, carere versibus,” and 57. 195 ibid. “quia nec numerosa esse, ut poëma, neque extra numerum, ut sermo vulgi, esse debet oratio.” So Isocr. (fragm. of his τέχνη preserved by Joannes Siceliotes, Walz Rhett. Gr. vi. 156) ὅλως δὲ ὁ λόγος μὴ λόγος ἔστω· ξηρὸν γάρ· μηδὲ ἔμμετρος· καταφανὲς γάρ. ἀλλὰ μεμίχθω παντὶ ῥυθμῷ, μάλιστα ἰαμβικῷ καὶ τροχαϊκῷ (Isocr. Tech. fr. 6 Benseler-Blass).

5. =ἐκβήσεται ... τὸν αὑτῆς χαρακτῆρα=: cp. the construction of excedere and egredi with the accusative.

6. ἔμμετρον is given not only by E but by Joannes Sicel. (Walz Rhett. Gr. vi. 165. 28) and by Maximus Planudes (ibid. v. 473. 4) καὶ Διονύσιος δέ φησιν, ἀπόχρη τὴν πολιτικὴν λέξιν εὔρυθμον εἶναι καὶ ἔμμετρον.

17. Cp. Cic. de Orat. iii. 44. 176 “nam cum [orator] vinxit [sententiam] forma et modis, relaxat et liberat immutatione ordinis, ut verba neque alligata sint quasi certa aliqua lege versus neque ita soluta, ut vagentur.”

25. The reference is to Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8 (the passage of which part is quoted in the note on l. 4 supra).

27. =τοιαύτη=: i.e. εὔρυθμος, the subject to γένοιτο being ἡ πολιτικὴ λέξις. The τίσ of P may be due to a dittography of the first syllable of τοιαύτη: or it may originally have stood with τοιαύτη (τοιαύτη τις = talis fere).

[Page 255]

words that are by no means reserved for the poets’ vocabulary. Well, as I said, simple prose cannot become like metrical and lyrical writing, unless it contains metres and rhythms unobtrusively introduced into it. It does not, however, do for it to be manifestly in metre or in rhythm (for in that case it will be a poem or a lyric piece, and will absolutely desert its own specific character); it is enough that it should simply appear rhythmical and metrical. In this way it may be poetical, although not a poem; lyrical, although not a lyric.

The difference between the two things is easy enough to see. That which embraces within its compass similar metres and preserves definite rhythms, and is produced by a repetition of the same forms, line for line, period for period, or strophe for strophe, and then again employs the same rhythms and metres for the succeeding lines, periods or strophes, and does this at any considerable length, is in rhythm and in metre, and the names of “verse” and “song” are applied to such writing. On the other hand, that which contains casual metres and irregular rhythms, and in these shows neither sequence nor connexion nor correspondence of stanza with stanza, is rhythmical, since it is diversified by rhythms of a sort, but not in rhythm, since they are not the same nor in corresponding positions. This is the character I attribute to all language which, though destitute of metre, yet shows markedly the poetical or lyrical element; and this is what I mean that Demosthenes among others has adopted. That this is true, that I am advancing no new theory, any one can convince himself from the testimony of Aristotle; for in the third book of his Rhetoric the philosopher, speaking of the various requisites of style in civil oratory, has described the good rhythm which should contribute to it.[184] He

[Page 256]

ὀνομάζει ῥυθμοὺς καὶ πῇ χρήσιμος ἕκαστος αὐτῶν καταφαίνεται, καὶ λέξεις παρατίθησί τινας αἷς πειρᾶται βεβαιοῦν τὸν λόγον. χωρὶς δὲ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους μαρτυρίας, ὅτι ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ἐμπεριλαμβάνεσθαί τινας τῇ πεζῇ λέξει ῥυθμούς, εἰ μέλλοι τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐπανθήσειν αὐτῇ κάλλος, ἐκ τῆς πείρας 5 τις αὐτῆς γνώσεται.

αὐτίκα ὁ κατὰ Ἀριστοκράτους λόγος οὗ καὶ μικρῷ πρότερον ἐμνήσθην ἄρχεται μὲν ἀπὸ κωμικοῦ στίχου τετραμέτρου δι’ ἀναπαίστων τῶν ῥυθμῶν ἐγκειμένου, λείπεται δὲ ποδὶ τοῦ τελείου, παρ’ ὃ καὶ λέληθεν· “#μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες 10 Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με#”· τοῦτο γὰρ εἰ προσλάβοι τὸ μέτρον πόδα ἤτοι κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἢ διὰ μέσου ἢ ἐπὶ τελευτῆς, τέλειον ἔσται τετράμετρον ἀναπαιστικόν, ὃ καλοῦσίν τινες Ἀριστοφάνειον·

μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με παρεῖναι, 15

ἴσον δὲ τῷ

λέξω τοίνυν τὴν ἀρχαίαν παιδείαν ὡς διέκειτο.

τάχα τις ἐρεῖ πρὸς ταῦτα, ὅτι οὐκ ἐξ ἐπιτηδεύσεως τοῦτο ἀλλ’ ἐκ ταὐτομάτου ἐγένετο· πολλὰ γὰρ αὐτοσχεδιάζει μέτρα ἡ φύσις. ἔστω τοῦτο ἀληθὲς εἶναι. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ συναπτόμενον 20 τούτῳ κῶλον, εἰ διαλύσειέ τις αὐτοῦ τὴν δευτέραν συναλοιφὴν ἣ πεποίηκεν αὐτὸ ἄσημον ἐπισυνάπτουσα τῷ τρίτῳ κώλῳ, πεντάμετρον ἐλεγειακὸν ἔσται συντετελεσμένον τουτί

μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεκα

ὅμοιον τούτοις

κοῦραι ἐλαφρὰ ποδῶν ἴχνι’ ἀειράμεναι.

3 ἀναγκαῖον V γρ M: ἂν δίκαιον PM^1 6 τ(ις) P, V: τῆς M 8 δι’ MV: δι^ς sic P 11 με παρεῖναι M 15 μηδεὶς] μηδε P 18 τουτω M, E: τοῦτο PV 24 τουτί EP: ἀκριβῶς τουτί MV 27 ἐλαφροποδῶν sic P: ἐλαφροπόδων MV || ἴχνι’ PM: ἴχνεα V

7. =πρότερον=: viz. =252= 3 supra.

9. ἀναπαιστικῶν has been suggested here and in =260= 2; but cp. δάκτυλον πόδα =84= 21 and ῥυθμοῖς δακτύλοις =202= 19.

10. =παρ’ ὅ=: cp. note on =80= 4 supra.

11. =νομίσῃ με=: this (together with the other remarks that follow) confirms the reading adopted in =252= 4 supra.—Dionysius’ metrical arrangement of the clauses may be indicated thus:—

μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ [ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ,] μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν· ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι [καὶ σκοπῶ,] περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς, [περὶ τούτου ἐστί μοι ἅπασα ἡ σπουδή.]

Lines, or truncated lines, of verse are thus interspersed with pieces of pure prose,—those here inclosed in brackets. In constituting the verse-lines Dionysius has damaged a rather strong case by overstating it.

21. =διαλύσειε=: from this it is clear that ἕνεχ’ (rather than ἕνεκα) should be read in =252= 5. The verse-arrangement in line 25 infra shows the same thing and also that we must not follow F in reading μήτε (without elision) in =252= 4.

27. For this line cp. Schneider’s Callimachea pp. 789, 790, where it is classed among the Fragmenta Anonyma.

[Page 257]

names the most suitable rhythms, shows where each of them is clearly serviceable, and adduces some passages by which he endeavours to establish his statement. But apart from the testimony of Aristotle, experience itself will show that some rhythms must be included in prose-writing if there is to be upon it the bloom of poetical beauty.

For example, the speech against Aristocrates which I mentioned a moment ago begins with a comic tetrameter line (set there with its anapaestic rhythms), but it is a foot short of completion and in consequence escapes detection: μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με. If this line had an additional foot either at the beginning, in the middle, or at the end, it would be a perfect anapaestic tetrameter, to which some give the name “Aristophanic.”

Let none of you, O ye Athenians, think that I am standing before you,

corresponds to the line

Now then shall be told what in days of old was the fashion of boys’ education.[185]

It will perhaps be said in reply that this has happened not from design, but accidentally, since a natural tendency in us often improvises metrical fragments. Let the truth of this be granted. Yet the next clause as well, if you resolve the second elision, which has obscured its true character by linking it on to the third clause, will be a complete elegiac pentameter as follows:—

Come with intent to indulge personal hate of my own,

similar to these words:—

Maidens whose feet in the dance lightly were lifted on high.[186]

[Page 258]

καὶ τοῦτ’ ἔτι κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν ὑπολάβωμεν αὐτοματισμὸν ἄνευ γνώμης γεγονέναι. ἀλλ’ ἑνὸς τοῦ μεταξὺ κώλου συγκειμένου λεκτικῶς τοῦ “#ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουί#” τὸ συμπλεκόμενον τούτῳ πάλιν κῶλον ἐκ δυεῖν συνέστηκεν μέτρων· “#μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον 5 ἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ#”· εἰ γὰρ τὸ Σαπφικόν τις ἐπιθαλάμιον τουτί

οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάϊς, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα <ποτα>

καὶ τοῦ κωμικοῦ τετραμέτρου, λεγομένου δὲ Ἀριστοφανείου τουδί 10

ὅτ’ ἐγὼ τὰ δίκαια λέγων ἦνθουν καὶ σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστο

τοὺς τελευταίους πόδας τρεῖς καὶ τὴν κατάληξιν ἐκλαβὼν συνάψειε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον

οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάϊς, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα <ποτα> καὶ 15 σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστο·

οὐδὲν διοίσει τοῦ “#μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ#.” τὸ δ’ ἀκόλουθον ἴσον ἐστὶν ἰαμβικῷ τριμέτρῳ τὸν ἔσχατον ἀφῃρημένῳ πόδα “#προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν#”· τέλειον γὰρ ἔσται 20 πόδα προσλαβὸν καὶ γενόμενον τοιοῦτο

προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειάν τινα.

παρίδωμεν ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα ὡς οὐκ ἐξ ἐπιτηδεύσεως ἀλλ’ αὐτοματισμῷ γενόμενα; τί οὖν βούλεται πάλιν τὸ προσεχὲς τούτῳ κῶλον; ἰαμβεῖον γάρ ἐστι καὶ τοῦτο τρίμετρον ὀρθόν 25

ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι,

τοῦ #ἄρα# συνδέσμου μακρὰν λαμβάνοντος τὴν πρότεραν συλλαβήν, καὶ ἔτι γε, νὴ Δία, μέσου παρεμπεσόντος τοῦ “#καὶ#

1 καὶ P: εἰ δὲ καὶ M: ἐὰν καὶ V 4 δυεῖν P: δυοῖν MV 5 μέτρων V et suprascr. ῥυθμῶν M: μερῶν P 6 εἰ γὰρ τὸ Sauppius: εἰ γέ τοι P: καὶ τὸ M: γάρ τοι V 7 τις PV: om. M 8 ἦν ἀτέρα] ἑτέρα νῦν PM: ἑτέραν ὗν V: correxit Blomfieldius: ἀτέρα Seidlerus || ποτα add. Usenerus 10-11 τοῦδε τοτ’ P, i.e. τουδεί ὅτ’: τοῦδε ὅτ’ MV 13 τοὺς PM: τούς τε V || ἐκλαβὼν Sauppius: ἐκβαλῶν P: ἐμβαλὼν MV 15 ἑτέρα νῦν PM: ἑτέραν ϋν V: cf. adnot. ad l. 8 supra 21 πόδα προσλαβὸν PM: προσλαβὸν πόδα V || τοιοῦτο P: τοιοῦτον MV 22 τινά PM: τινι V 24 γενόμεν(ον); P 25 ἰάμβιων P: ἰάμβειον MV 26 ἄρ’ P, V: ἄρα M 27 ἄρα compendio P

8. ‘For no other girl, O bridegroom, was like unto her.’—Usener’s insertion of =ποτα=, here and in l. 15 infra, will secure metrical correspondence between this passage and that of Demosthenes. Blass would attain the same result by reading ἁμάρτημ’ ἰταμῶς in the passage of Demosthenes. If ἁμάρτημ’ ἑτοίμως be read (as in the best texts of Demosthenes), then the choice will be to suppose either (1) that the first syllable of ἑτοίμως is to be suppressed in the ‘scansion’, or (2) that Dionysius has pressed his case too far and that it is just by means of this extra syllable that Demosthenes escapes any unduly poetical rhythm.

26. The scansion here supports those manuscripts which give ἆρ’ in =252= 8.

For =ἆρα= as being “in Poets sometimes much like ἄρα” see L. & S. s.v. (with the examples there quoted).

28. =νὴ Δία=: cp. μὰ Δία in =260= 25. The general sense of the passage is well brought out in the Epitome: καὶ ἔτι τὸ “καὶ σκοπῶ” παρεμπεσὸν ἐπισκοτούμενον τὸ μέτρον ἠφάνισε.

[Page 259]

Let us suppose that this, too, has happened once more in the same spontaneous way without design. Still, after one intermediate clause arranged in a prose order, viz. ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουί, the clause which is joined to this consists of two metrical lines, viz. μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ. For if we were to take this line from Sappho’s Bridal Song—

For never another maiden there was, O son-in-law, like unto this one,[187]

and were also to take the last three feet and the termination of the following comic tetrameter, the so-called “Aristophanic”

When of righteousness I was the popular preacher, and temperance was in fashion,[188]

and then were to unite them thus—

οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάις, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα <ποτα> καὶ σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστο,

it will precisely correspond to μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ. What follows is like an iambic trimeter docked of its final foot, προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν. It will be complete if a foot is added and it takes this shape:—

προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειάν τινα.

Are we once more to neglect these facts as if they were brought about not on purpose but by accident? What, then, is the significance of the next clause to this? For this too is a correct iambic trimeter line—

ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὸ λογίζομαι,

if the connective ἄρα has its first syllable made long, and if further—by your leave!—the words καὶ σκοπῶ are regarded as

[Page 260]

#σκοπῶ#,” ὑφ’ οὗ δὴ τὸ μέτρον ἐπισκοτούμενον ἠφάνισται. τὸ δ’ ἐπὶ τούτῳ παραλαμβανόμενον κῶλον ἐξ ἀναπαίστων σύγκειται ῥυθμῶν καὶ προάγει μέχρι ποδῶν ὀκτὼ τὸ αὐτὸ σχῆμα διασῷζον

περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας, 5

ὁμοίον τῷ παρ’ Εὐριπίδῃ τῷδε

βασιλεῦ χώρας τῆς πολυβώλου Κισσεῦ, πεδίον πυρὶ μαρμαίρει.

καὶ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο πάλιν κείμενον τοῦ αὐτοῦ κώλου μέρος 10 τουτί “#ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς#” ἰαμβικὸν τρίμετρόν ἐστι ποδὶ καὶ ἡμίσει λειπόμενον· ἐγένετο δ’ ἂν τέλειον οὕτως

ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς ἐν μέρει.

ταῦτ’ ἔτι φῶμεν αὐτοσχέδια εἶναι καὶ ἀνεπιτήδευτα, οὕτω ποικίλα καὶ πολλὰ ὄντα; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ ἀξιῶ· καὶ γὰρ τὰ 15 ἑξῆς τούτοις ὅμοια εὑρεῖν ἔστι, πολλῶν καὶ παντοδαπῶν ἀνάμεστα μέτρων τε καὶ ῥυθμῶν.

ἀλλ’ ἵνα μὴ τοῦτον ὑπολάβῃ τις μόνον οὕτως αὐτῷ κατεσκευάσθαι τὸν λόγον, ἑτέρου πάλιν ἅψομαι τοῦ πάνυ ἡρμηνεῦσθαι δαιμονίως δοκοῦντος, τοῦ ὑπὲρ Κτησιφῶντος, ὃν 20 ἐγὼ κράτιστον ἀποφαίνομαι πάντων λόγων· ὁρῶ δὴ κἀν τούτῳ μετὰ τὴν προσαγόρευσιν τῶν Ἀθηναίων εὐθέως τὸν κρητικὸν ῥυθμόν, εἴτε ἄρα παιᾶνά τις αὐτὸν βούλεται καλεῖν (διοίσει γὰρ οὐδέν), τὸν ἐκ πέντε συγκείμενον χρόνων, οὐκ αὐτοσχεδίως μὰ Δία ἀλλ’ ὡς οἷόν τε μάλιστα ἐπιτετηδευμένως 25 δι’ ὅλου τοῦ κώλου πλεκόμενον τούτου

#τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις.#

οὐ τοιοῦτος μέντοι κἀκεῖνός ἐστιν ὁ ῥυθμός

4 διασωῖζον P 5 χερόνησον P: χερρόνησον MV 7 τῷδε Us.: τῶι P, M: ὦ V 8 βασιλεῦ MV: βασιλεῖ P 9 πεδίον MV: παιδι(ον) P 10 μέρος om. P 11 τρίμετρον MV: μέτρον P 12 λειπόμενον Us.: λεῖπον libri 14 ταῦτ’ ἔτι Us.: ταῦτα τί PMV: ταυτὶ s 15 καὶ πολλὰ om. P 17 ἀνάμεστα MV: ἀναλύεσθαι P 18 οὕτως αὐτῷ Us.: οὕτω MV: αὐτ(ω) P 23 βούλεται αὐτὸν PV 26 τούτου Us.: τοῦτον libri

5. Here, again, is a serious metrical difficulty. We can hardly believe that Dionysius scanned ἀσφαλῶς (or βεβαίως) as an anapaest: it is more likely that he regarded the middle syllable of ἀσφαλῶς as slurred (compare note on =258= 8 supra, and also the reading λιποῦσ’ ἀνδρότητα καὶ ἥβην in Il. xvi. 857).—If (against the manuscripts) we should omit ἀσφαλῶς and read περὶ τοῦ τὴν Χερρόννησον ἔχειν ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας, the metre would be comparatively normal.

12. A comparison of this line with =256= 9 seems to confirm the conjecture =λειπόμενον=, though λείπω is sometimes intransitive.

13. A rude iambic trimeter of the colloquial kind: cp. =258= 26 supra.

26. The metrical analysis of the following passage of Demosthenes should be compared and contrasted with its previous division into feet—on =182= 17 ff.

27. A rough metrical equivalent in English might be: ‘Hear me, each god on high, hear me, each goddess.’ Cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 63 (as quoted on =114= 20 supra).—Demosthenes’ much-admired exordium in the Crown may be compared with the Homeric invocation—

κέκλυτέ μευ πάντες τε θεοί, πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι.

[Page 261]

an intermediate excrescence by means of which the metre is obscured and vanishes from sight. The clause placed next to this is composed of anapaestic feet, and extends to eight feet, still keeping the same form:—

πρὸ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας,

like to this in Euripides—

O King of the country with harvests teeming, O Cisseus, the plain with a fire is gleaming.[189]

And the part of the same clause which comes next to it—ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς—is an iambic trimeter short of a foot and a half. It would have been complete in this form—

ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς ἐν μέρει.

Are we to say that these effects too are spontaneous and unstudied, many and various as they are? I cannot think so; for it is easy to see that the clauses which follow are similarly full of many metres and rhythms of all kinds.

But lest it be thought that he has constructed this speech alone in this way, I will touch on another where the style is admitted to show astonishing genius, that on behalf of Ctesiphon, which I pronounce to be the finest of all speeches. In this, too, immediately after the address to the Athenians, I notice that the cretic foot, or the paeon if you like to call it so (for it will make no difference),—the one which consists of five time-units,—is interwoven, not fortuitously (save the mark!) but with the utmost deliberation right through the clause—

τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις.[190]

Is not the following rhythm of the same kind—

[Page 262]

Κρησίοις ἐν ῥυθμοῖς παῖδα μέλψωμεν;

ἐμοὶ γοῦν δοκεῖ· ἔξω γὰρ τοῦ τελευταίου ποδὸς τά γε ἄλλα παντάπασιν ἴσα. ἔστω καὶ τοῦτο, εἰ βούλεταί τις, αὐτοσχέδιον· ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ συναπτόμενον τούτῳ κῶλον ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν ὀρθόν, συλλαβῇ τοῦ τελείου δέον, ἵνα δὴ κἀνταῦθα 5 ἄσημον γένηται τὸ μέτρον, ἐπεὶ μιᾶς γε συλλαβῆς προστεθείσης τέλειον ἔσται

“#ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ.#”

κἄπειτα ὁ παιὰν ἢ ὁ κρητικὸς ἐκεῖνος ὁ πεντάχρονος ἥξει ῥυθμὸς ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς τούτοις “#τῇ πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν 10 τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα#.” τοῦτο γοῦν ἔοικεν, ὅ τι μὴ κατακλωμένους ἔχει δύο πόδας ἐν ἀρχαῖς, κατὰ γοῦν τὰ ἄλλα πάντα τῷ παρὰ Βακχυλίδῃ

οὐχ ἕδρας ἔργον οὐδ’ ἀμβολᾶς, 15 ἀλλὰ χρυσαίγιδος Ἰτωνίας χρὴ παρ’ εὐδαίδαλον ναὸν ἐλ- θόντας ἁβρόν τι δεῖξαι.

ὑφορῶμαί τινα πρὸς ταῦτα καταδρομὴν ἀνθρώπων τῆς μὲν ἐγκυκλίου παιδείας ἀπείρων, τὸ δὲ ἀγοραῖον τῆς ῥητορικῆς 20 μέρος ὁδοῦ τε καὶ τέχνης χωρὶς ἐπιτηδευόντων, πρὸς οὓς ἀναγκαῖον ἀπολογήσασθαι, μὴ δόξωμεν ἔρημον ἀφεικέναι τὸν ἀγῶνα. ἐροῦσι δὴ ταῦτα· ὁ Δημοσθένης οὖν οὕτως ἄθλιος

3 παντάπασιν Us.: ἐν ἁπάση PM: ἐν πᾶσιν V || ἴσα ἔστω· PM: ἴσα ὥρισται V 4 ἀλλὰ] μάλα P || ἰαμβι(ον) P: ἰαμβικὸν MV 10 τῇ τε πόλει Demosth. 11 ὑπάρξαί μοι P 12 κατ(α)κλ(ω)μεν(ως) P: κατακλώμενος M: κατακεκλωμένους V: κατακεκλασμένους Sylburgius 13 τῷ V: τὸ PM 15 ἀμβολας P: ἀμβολὰς V 22 ἀναγκαίωνον P: ἀναγκαῖόν μοι M || δόξομ(εν) P || ἀφεικέναι MV: ἀφηκέναι P

1. =ῥυθμοῖς=: with the first syllable short, as (e.g.) in Aristoph. Nub. 638. As already pointed out, the lengthening of such syllables would be abnormal in prose. Cp. mediocriter in the passage of Cicero on p. 251 supra.

7. Dionysius can surely only mean that we have here the materials, so to say, for an iambic line, and that but one additional syllable is needed (e.g. the substitution of διατελέω for διατελῶ). He can hardly have intended to retain εὔνοιαν in its present position, but must have had in mind some such order as ὅσην ἔχων εὔνοιαν. His language, however, has subjected him to grave suspicion, and Usener reads ἔγωγε in place of ἐγώ, remarking that “Dionysius numerorum in verbo εὔνοιαν vitium non sensit.” This particular insensibility of Dionysius does not seem borne out by =182= 22 supra (see note ad loc.), where the last, but not the first, syllable of εὔνοιαν is represented as doubtful.

12. Here, too, there are metrical difficulties. The close correspondence of which Dionysius speaks is not obvious; and, in particular, the reference of ἐν ἀρχαῖς is far from clear. According to Usener, “Dionysius pedes τῇ πόλει καὶ et (τοσαύ)την ὑπάρξαι dicit.” Perhaps the ἀρχαί rather are: (1) τῇ [τε] πόλει (if the τε be added, in l. 10, from Demosthenes), and (2) [καὶ] πᾶσιν ὑμ-.

14. See Long. de Sublim. xxxiii. 3 for an estimate of =Bacchylides’= poetry which has been confirmed by the general character of the newly discovered poems (first published by Kenyon in 1897).

15. The prose translation of this hyporcheme, as given in Jebb’s edition (p. 416), is: “This is no time for sitting still or tarrying: we must go to the richly-wrought temple of Itona [viz. Athena Itonia] with golden aegis, and show forth some choice strain of song”: δεῖξαι <μέλος>. Jebb’s notes (pp. 415, 416 ibid.) may be consulted.

19. =καταδρομήν=, ‘vehement attack,’ ‘invective.’ Used in this sense by Aeschines and Polybius, as well as by Dionysius (e.g. de Thucyd. c. 3 ἔστι δὴ τὸ βούλημά μου τῆς πραγματείας οὐ καταδρομὴ τῆς Θουκυδίδου προαιρέσεώς τε καὶ δυνάμεως). Cp. the verb κατατρέχειν, and D.H. p. 194; and our own use of ‘run down.’

22. =ἔρημον=: cp. de Antiqq. Rom. iv. 4 ἐὰν δὲ ἐρήμους ἀφῶσιν (τὰς κρίσεις), and iv. 11 ibid. τάς τε δίκας ἐρήμους ἐκλιπόντας.

23. With this and the following pages should be compared the later version found in the de Demosth. cc. 51, 52. There ἄθλιος (which in itself as a good prose word, used frequently by Demosthenes himself as well as by Dionysius =94= 11 supra) is represented by κακοδαίμων. The Philistine critics of Dionysius’ day, and indeed of that of Demosthenes, regarded the capacity for taking pains as anything but a necessary adjunct of genius: cp. Plut. Vit. Demosth. c. 8 ἐκ τούτου δόξαν ἔσχεν ὡς οὐκ εὐφυὴς ὤν, ἀλλ’ ἐκ πόνου συγκειμένῃ δεινότητι καὶ δυνάμει χρώμενος. ἐδόκει δὲ τούτου σημεῖον εἶναι μέγα τὸ μὴ ῥᾳδίως ἀκοῦσαί τινα Δημοσθένους ἐπὶ καιροῦ λέγοντος, ἀλλὰ καθήμενον ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ πολλάκις τοῦ δήμου καλοῦντος ὀνομαστὶ μὴ παρελθεῖν, εἰ μὴ τύχοι πεφροντικὼς καὶ παρεσκευασμένος. εἰς τοῦτο δ’ ἄλλοι τε πολλοὶ τῶν δημαγωγῶν ἐχλεύαζον αὐτὸν καὶ Πυθέας ἐπισκώπτων ἐλλυχνίων ἔφησεν ὄζειν αὐτοῦ τὰ ἐνθυμήματα. The really artistic Athens had, as Dionysius so forcibly indicates in this passage, always considered as a crime not preparation, but the want of preparation.

[Page 263]

Cretan strains practising, Zeus’s son sing we[191]?

In my judgment, at all events, it is; for with the exception of the final foot there is complete correspondence. But suppose this too, if you will have it so, to be accidental. Well, the adjacent clause is a correct iambic line, falling one syllable short of completion, with the object (here again) of obscuring the metre. With the addition of a single syllable the line will be complete—

ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ.

Further, that paeon or cretic rhythm of five beats will appear in the words which follow: τῇ πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα. This, except that it has two broken feet at the beginnings, resembles in all respects the passage in Bacchylides:—

This is no time to sit still nor wait: Unto yon carven shrine let us go, Even gold-aegis’d Queen Pallas’ shrine, And the rich vesture there show.[192]

I have a presentiment that an onslaught will be made on these statements by people who are destitute of general culture and practise the mechanical parts of rhetoric unmethodically and unscientifically. Against these I am bound to defend my position, lest I should seem to let the case go by default. Their argument will doubtless be: “Was Demosthenes, then, so poor a creature

[Page 264]

ἦν, ὥσθ’, ὅτε γράφοι τοὺς λόγους, μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμοὺς ὥσπερ οἱ πλάσται παρατιθέμενος, ἐναρμόττειν ἐπειρᾶτο τούτοις τοῖς τύποις τὰ κῶλα, στρέφων ἄνω καὶ κάτω τὰ ὀνόματα, καὶ παραφυλάττων τὰ μήκη καὶ τοὺς χρόνους, καὶ τὰς πτώσεις τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ τὰς ἐγκλίσεις τῶν ῥημάτων καὶ πάντα τὰ 5 συμβεβηκότα τοῖς μορίοις τοῦ λόγου πολυπραγμονῶν; ἠλίθιος μέντἂν εἴη εἰς τοσαύτην σκευωρίαν καὶ φλυαρίαν ὁ τηλικοῦτος ἀνὴρ ἑαυτὸν διδούς. ταῦτα δὴ καὶ τὰ τούτοις παραπλήσια κωμῳδοῦντας αὐτοὺς καὶ καταχλευάζοντας οὐ χαλεπῶς ἄν τις ἀποκρούσαιτο ταῦτα εἰπών· πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄτοπον 10 ἦν, εἰ <ὁ> τοσαύτης δόξης ἠξιωμένος ἀνὴρ ὅσης οὐδεὶς τῶν πρότερον ὀνομασθέντων ἐπὶ δεινότητι λόγων, ἔργα συνταττόμενος αἰώνια καὶ διδοὺς ἑαυτὸν ὑπεύθυνον τῷ πάντα βασανίζοντι φθόνῳ καὶ χρόνῳ ἐβουλήθη μηδὲν εἰκῇ μήτε πρᾶγμα παραλαμβάνειν μήτ’ ὄνομα, πολλὴν δ’ ἀμφοῖν ἔχειν τούτων 15 πρόνοιαν τῆς τε ἐν τοῖς νοήμασιν οἰκονομίας καὶ τῆς εὐμορφίας τῆς περὶ τὰ ὀνόματα, ἄλλως τε καὶ τῶν τότε ἀνθρώπων οὐ γραπτοῖς ἀλλὰ γλυπτοῖς καὶ τορευτοῖς ἐοικότας ἐκφερόντων λόγους, λέγω δὲ Ἰσοκράτους καὶ Πλάτωνος τῶν σοφιστῶν· ὁ μὲν γὰρ τὸν πανηγυρικὸν λόγον, ὡς οἱ τὸν ἐλάχιστον 20 χρόνον γράφοντες ἀποφαίνουσιν, ἐν ἔτεσι δέκα συνετάξατο, ὁ δὲ Πλάτων τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ διαλόγους κτενίζων καὶ βοστρυχίζων καὶ πάντα τρόπον ἀναπλέκων οὐ διέλειπεν ὀγδοήκοντα γεγονὼς ἔτη· πᾶσι γὰρ δήπου τοῖς φιλολόγοις γνώριμα τὰ περὶ τῆς φιλοπονίας τἀνδρὸς ἱστορούμενα τά τε ἄλλα καὶ 25 δὴ καὶ τὰ περὶ τὴν δέλτον, ἣν τελευτήσαντος αὐτοῦ λέγουσιν

1 ὥσθ’] ὥστ’ ἔστιν M || ὅτε compendio P: ὅταν MV || γράφη MV 4 τὰ μήκη ... ὀνομάτων om. P 8 διδουσα· P 10 ᾱ μὲν P 11 ὁ inseruit Sadaeus (coll. commentario de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 51) 13 διδοῦσ(ιν) P || ἑαυτὸν EM: αὐτὸν PV 14 φθόνω καὶ χρόνω PMV: χρόνῳ E || ἠβουλήθη E: om. PMV || εἰκῆι P 20 μὲν γὰρ MV: μέν γε EP 21 ἀποφαίνουσιν, ἐν MV: om. EP || συνετάξαντο V 23 διέλειπεν PM: διέλιπεν EV 24 γνώριμα PV: γνώρισμα E: γνωρίσματα M

4. =τὰ μήκη=: we cannot (for example) imagine Thucydides as anxiously counting the long syllables that find a place in his striking dictum οὕτως ἀταλαίπωρος τοῖς πολλοῖς ἡ ζήτησις τῆς ἀληθείας (i. 20). But they are there, all the same, and add greatly to the dignity of the utterance.

6. =ἠλίθιος=: a slight word-play on ἄθλιος in =262= 23 supra may be intended.

14. =φθόνῳ καὶ χρόνῳ=: the word-play might be represented in English by some such rendering as “submitting himself to the revision of those scrutineers of all immortality, the tooth of envy and the tooth of time,” or (simply) “envious tongues and envious time.” To such jingles Dionysius shows himself partial in the C.V. (cp. note on =64= 11 supra). It may be that, in his essay on Demosthenes, he omits the words φθόνῳ καί deliberately and on the grounds of taste; but the later version differs so greatly from the earlier that not much significance can be attached to slight variations of this kind.

18. =γραπτοῖς=, ‘mere mechanical writing,’ ‘scratching,’ ‘scribbling.’

21. For this period of ten years cp. Long. de Sublim. iv. 2, and also Quintil. x. 4. 4. Quintilian writes: “temporis quoque esse debet modus. nam quod Cinnae Smyrnam novem annis accepimus scriptam, et Panegyricum Isokratis, qui parcissime, decem annis dicunt elaboratum, ad oratorem nihil pertinet, cuius nullum erit, si tam tardum fuerit, auxilium.” In using the words “qui parcissime” Quintilian may have had the present passage of the C.V. in mind.

26. =δέλτον=, ‘tablet’: originally so called because of its delta-like, or triangular, shape.

[Page 265]

that, whenever he was writing his speeches, he would work in metres and rhythms after the fashion of clay-modellers, and would try to fit his clauses into these moulds, shifting the words to and fro, keeping an anxious eye on his longs and shorts, and fretting himself about cases of nouns, moods of verbs, and all the accidents of the parts of speech? So great a man would be a fool indeed were he to stoop to all this niggling and peddling.” If they scoff and jeer in these or similar terms, they may easily be countered by the following reply: First, it is not surprising after all that a man who is held to deserve a greater reputation than any of his predecessors who were distinguished for eloquence was anxious, when composing eternal works and submitting himself to the scrutiny of all-testing envy and time, not to admit either subject or word at random, and to attend carefully to both arrangement of ideas and beauty of words: particularly as the authors of that day were producing discourses which suggested not writing but carving and chasing—those, I mean, of the sophists Isocrates and Plato. For the former spent ten years over the composition of his Panegyric, according to the lowest recorded estimate of the time; while Plato did not cease, when eighty years old, to comb and curl his dialogues and reshape them in every way. Surely every scholar is acquainted with the stories of Plato’s passion for taking pains, especially that of the tablet which they say was found after his

[Page 266]

εὑρεθῆναι ποικίλως μετακειμένην τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς Πολιτείας ἔχουσαν τήνδε “Κατέβην χθὲς εἰς Πειραιᾶ μετὰ Γλαύκωνος τοῦ Ἀρίστωνος.” τί οὖν ἦν ἄτοπον, εἰ καὶ Δημοσθένει φροντὶς εὐφωνίας τε καὶ ἐμμελείας ἐγένετο καὶ τοῦ μηδὲν εἰκῇ καὶ ἀβασανίστως τιθέναι μήτε ὄνομα μήτε νόημα; πολύ 5 τε γὰρ μᾶλλον ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ προσήκειν ἀνδρὶ κατασκευάζοντι λόγους πολιτικοὺς μνημεῖα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ δυνάμεως αἰώνια μηδενὸς τῶν ἐλαχίστων ὀλιγωρεῖν, ἢ ζῳγράφων τε καὶ τορευτῶν παισὶν ἐν ὕλῃ φθαρτῇ χειρῶν εὐστοχίας καὶ πόνους ἀποδεικνυμένοις περὶ τὰ φλέβια καὶ τὰ πτίλα καὶ τὸν χνοῦν καὶ 10 τὰς τοιαύτας μικρολογίας κατατρίβειν τῆς τέχνης τὴν ἀκρίβειαν. τούτοις τε δὴ τοῖς λόγοις χρώμενος δοκεῖ μοί τις ἂν οὐδὲν ἔξω τοῦ εἰκότος ἀξιοῦν καὶ ἔτι ἐκεῖνα εἰπών, ὅτι μειράκιον μὲν ὄντα καὶ νεωστὶ τοῦ μαθήματος ἁπτόμενον αὐτὸν οὐκ ἄλογον πάντα περισκοπεῖν, ὅσα δυνατὰ ἦν εἰς ἐπιτήδευσιν 15

3 Ἀρίστωνος] κεφάλου P 4 εὐμελείας M^1 5 εἰκῆι P || νόημα Schaeferus (dittographiam suspicatus et coll. =264= 16, =66= 5): μήτ’ (μήτε V) ἐννόημα MV: om. P 9 ἀποδεικνομένοις Us.: ὑποδεικνυμένοις libri 10 φλέβια PMV: φλεβία E 12 τούτοις τε PM: τούτοις V || τις ἂν PM: τις V

2. Demetrius (de Eloc. § 21) calls attention to the studied ease and intentional laxity of the opening period of the Republic: “The period of dialogue is one which remains lax, and is also simpler than the historical. It scarcely betrays the fact that it is a period. For instance: ‘I went down to the Piraeus,’ as far as the words ‘since they were now celebrating it for the first time.’ Here the clauses are flung one upon the other as in the disjointed style, and when we reach the end we hardly realize that the words form a period” (see also § 205 ibid.). In the passage of Dionysius it may well be meant that the words whose order was changed by Plato were not merely κατέβην ... Ἀρίστωνος, but the sentence, or sentences, which these introduce. (Usener suggests that P’s reading Κεφάλου points to a longer quotation than that actually found in existing manuscripts; and Persius’ Arma virum, and Cicero’s O Tite, i.e. the De Senectute, may be recalled.) Quintilian, however, seems to think that the first four words only, or chiefly, are meant: though the possible permutations of these are few and would hardly need to be written down. He says (Inst. Or. viii. 6. 64): “nec aliud potest sermonem facere numerosum quam opportuna ordinis permutatio; neque alio ceris Platonis inventa sunt quattuor illa verba, quibus in illo pulcherrimo operum in Piraeeum se descendisse significat, plurimis modis scripta, quam quod eum quoque maxime facere experiretur.” Diog. Laert. iii. 37 makes a more general statement: Εὐφορίων δὲ καὶ Παναίτιος εἰρήκασι πολλάκις ἐστραμμένην εὑρῆσθαι τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς Πολιτείας. But be the words few or many, the main point is that trouble of this kind was reckoned an artistic (and even a patriotic) duty. Upton has stated the case well, in reference to Cicero’s anxiety to express the words ‘to the Piraeus’ in good Latin: “Quod si Platonis haec industria quibusdam curiosa nimis et sollicita videtur, ut quae nec aetati tanti viri, nec officio congruat: quid Cicero itidem fecerit, quantum latinitatis curam gravissimis etiam reipublicae negotiis districtus habuerit, in memoriam revocent. is annum iam agens sexagesimum, inter medios civilium bellorum tumultus, qui a Caesare Pompeioque excitarentur, cum nesciret, quo mittenda esset uxor, quo liberi; quem ad locum se reciperet, missis ad Atticum litteris [ad Att. vii. 3], ab eo doceri, an esset scribendum, ad Piraeea, in Piraeea, an in Piraeum, an Piraeum sine praepositione, impensius rogabat. quae res etsi levior, et grammaticis propria, patrem eloquentiae temporibus etiam periculosissimis adeo exercuit, ut haec verba, quae amicum exstimularent, addiderit: Si hoc mihi ζήτημα persolveris, magna me molestia liberaris.” Nor was Julius Caesar less scrupulous in such matters than Cicero himself: their styles, different as they are, agree in exhibiting the fastidiousness of literary artists. Compare the modern instances mentioned in Long. p. 33, to which may be added that of Luther as described by Spalding: “non dubito narrare in Bibliotheca nostrae urbis regia servari chirographum Martini Lutheri, herois nostri, in quo exstat initium versionis Psalmorum mirifice et ipsum immutatum et subterlitum, ad conciliandos orationi, quamquam salutae, numeros.” See also Byron’s Letters (ed. Prothero) Nos. 247-255 and passim, and Antoine Albalat’s Le Travail du style enseigné par les corrections manuscrites des grands écrivains, passim.

8. =τῶν ἐλαχίστων=: an interesting addition is made in the de Demosth. c. 51 πολιτικὸς δ’ ἄρα δημιουργός, πάντας ὑπεράρας τοὺς καθ’ αὑτὸν φύσει τε καὶ πόνῳ, τῶν ἐλαχίστων τινὸς εἰς τὸ εὖ λέγειν, #εἰ δὴ καὶ ταῦτα ἐλάχιστα#, ὠλιγώρησε.

9. ἐνδεικνυμένοις may perhaps be suggested in place of =ἀποδεικνυμένοις=: cp. de Demosth. c. 51 οὐ γὰρ δή τοι πλάσται μὲν καὶ γραφεῖς ἐν ὕλῃ φθαρτῇ χειρῶν εὐστοχίας ἐνδεικνύμενοι τοσούτους εἰσφέρονται πόνους, ὥστε κτλ. If, on the other hand, ὑποδεικνυμένοις be retained, we may perhaps translate ‘pupils who have exercises in manual dexterity, and studies of veins, etc., given them to copy (cp. ὑπόδειγμα).’—With χειρῶν εὐστοχίας cp. χερὸς εὐστοχίαν (‘well-aimed shafts’) in Eurip. Troad. 811.

10. =τὸν χνοῦν=: cp. Hor. Ars P. 32 “Aemilium circa ludum faber imus et ungues | exprimet et molles imitabitur aere capillos, | infelix operis summa, quia ponere totum | nesciet.” χνοῦς is the ‘lanugo plumea.’ Cp. de Demosth. c. 38 χνοῦς ἀρχαιοπινής.

11. =κατατρίβειν= κτλ. = κατατήκειν εἰς ταῦτα τὰς τέχνας, de Demosth. c. 51.

15. After =ἄλογον=, ἦν may be inserted with Sauppe, who compares de Demosth. c. 52 ὅτι μειράκιον μὲν ἔτι ὄντα καὶ νεωστὶ τοῦ μαθήματος ἁπτόμενον αὐτὸν οὐκ ἄλογον ἦν καὶ ταῦτα καὶ τἆλλα πάντα διὰ πολλῆς ἐπιμελείας τε καὶ φροντίδος ἔχειν. But the verb may have been omitted in the C.V. in order to avoid its repetition with ὅσα δυνατὰ ἦν.

[Page 267]

death, with the beginning of the Republic (“I went down yesterday to the Piraeus together with Glaucon the son of Ariston”[193]) arranged in elaborately varying orders. What wonder, then, if Demosthenes also was careful to secure euphony and melody and to employ no random or untested word or thought? For it appears to me far more reasonable for a man who is composing public speeches, eternal memorials of his own powers, to attend even to the slightest details, than it is for the disciples of painters and workers in relief, who display the dexterity and industry of their hands in a perishable medium, to expend the finished resources of their art on veins and down and bloom and similar minutiae.

These arguments seem to me to make no unreasonable claim; and we may further add that though when Demosthenes was a lad, and had but recently taken up the study of rhetoric, he naturally had to ask himself consciously what the effects attainable

[Page 268]

ἀνθρωπίνην πεσεῖν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἡ χρόνιος ἄσκησις ἰσχὺν πολλὴν λαβοῦσα τύπους τινὰς ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ παντὸς τοῦ μελετωμένου καὶ σφραγῖδας ἐνεποίησεν, ἐκ τοῦ ῥᾴστου τε καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ἕξεως αὐτὰ ἤδη ποιεῖν. οἷόν τι γίνεται κἀν ταῖς ἄλλαις τέχναις, ὧν ἐνέργειά τις ἢ ποίησις τὸ τέλος· 5 αὐτίκα οἱ κιθαρίζειν τε καὶ ψάλλειν καὶ αὐλεῖν ἄκρως εἰδότες ὅταν κρούσεως ἀκούσωσιν ἀσυνήθους, οὐ πολλὰ πραγματευθέντες ἀπαριθμοῦσιν αὐτὴν εὐθὺς ἐπὶ τῶν ὀργάνων ἅμα νοήσει· μανθάνοντες δέ γε χρόνῳ τε πολλῷ καὶ πόνῳ τὰς δυνάμεις τῶν φθόγγων ἀναλαμβάνουσιν, καὶ οὐκ εὐθὺς αἱ 10 χεῖρες αὐτῶν ἐν ἕξει τοῦ δρᾶν τὰ παραγγελλόμενα ἦσαν, ὀψὲ δέ ποτε καὶ ὅτε ἡ πολλὴ ἄσκησις αὐταῖς εἰς φύσεως ἰσχὺν κατέστησε τὸ ἔθος, τότε τῶν ἔργων ἐγένοντο ἐπιτυχεῖς. καὶ τί δεῖ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων λέγειν; ὃ γὰρ ἅπαντες ἴσμεν, ἀπόχρη καὶ πᾶσαν αὐτῶν διακόψαι τὴν φλυαρίαν. τί δ’ ἐστὶ τοῦτο; 15 τὰ γράμματα ὅταν παιδευώμεθα, πρῶτον μὲν τὰ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν ἐκμανθάνομεν, ἔπειτα τοὺς τύπους καὶ τὰς δυνάμεις, εἶθ’ οὕτω τὰς συλλαβὰς καὶ τὰ ἐν ταύταις πάθη, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἤδη τὰς λέξεις καὶ τὰ συμβεβηκότα αὐταῖς, ἐκτάσεις τε λέγω καὶ συστολὰς καὶ προσῳδίας καὶ τὰ παραπλήσια 20 τούτοις· ὅταν δὲ τὴν τούτων ἐπιστήμην λάβωμεν, τότε ἀρχόμεθα γράφειν τε καὶ ἀναγινώσκειν, κατὰ συλλαβὴν <μὲν> καὶ βραδέως τὸ πρῶτον· ἐπειδὰν δὲ ὁ χρόνος ἀξιόλογος προσελθὼν τύπους ἰσχυροὺς αὐτῶν ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἡμῶν ἐμποιήσῃ, τότε ἀπὸ τοῦ ῥᾴστου δρῶμεν αὐτὰ καὶ πᾶν 25 ὅ τι ἂν ἐπιδῷ τις βιβλίον ἀπταίστως διερχόμεθα ἕξει τε καὶ τάχει ἀπίστῳ. τοιοῦτο δὴ καὶ περὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ περὶ τὴν εὐέπειαν τῶν κώλων ὑποληπτέον γίνεσθαι παρὰ τοῖς ἀθληταῖς τοῦ ἔργου. τοὺς δὲ τούτου

1 πεσεῖν EP: ἐλθεῖν MV 3 σφαγίδας P: σφραγίδας V 4 ᾔδει ποιεῖν E 8 ἅμα Us.: ἀλλὰ PMV^1: ἀλλὰ καὶ V^2 21 δὲ EM: τε PV 23 μὲν inseruit Sadaeus coll. comment. de Demosth. c. 52 || ἐπειδὰν E: ἐπεὶ PV: ἔπειτα M 25 ποιήση EM^1: ποιήσει PM^2V 27 τοιοῦτο EM: τοιούτω P: τοιοῦτον V 29 τοὺς ... ἀπείρους E: τοῖς ... ἀπείροις PMV

3. =ἐκ τοῦ ῥᾴστου=: cp. ἀπὸ τοῦ ῥᾴστου l. 25 infra.

5. Dionysius is thinking of Aristot. Eth. Nic. i. 1 διαφορὰ δέ τις φαίνεται τῶν τελῶν· τὰ μὲν γάρ εἰσιν ἐνέργειαι, τὰ δὲ παρ’ αὐτὰς ἔργα τινά. ὧν δ’ εἰσὶ τέλη τινὰ παρὰ τὰς πράξεις, ἐν τούτοις βελτίω πέφυκε τῶν ἐνεργείων τὰ ἔργα.

8. If ἀλλὰ νοήσει be retained, the meaning will be ‘not with much trouble, but by means of their acquired skill.’ But =ἅμα νοήσει= derives support from the parallel passages in de Demosth. c. 52 ἅμα νοήσει [νοήσει Sylburg, for the manuscript reading νοήσεις] and ὥστε ἅμα νοήσει κεκριμένον τε καὶ ἄπταιστον αὐτῆς εἶναι τὸ ἔργον.

16. Referring to this description in the Cambridge Companion to Greek Studies p. 507, the late Dr. A. S. Wilkins remarks: “Some have supposed that Dionysius here describes the method of acquiring the power of reading, not by learning the names of the letters first, but by learning their powers, so combining them at once into syllables. But this is hardly consistent with his language, and is directly contradicted by a passage in Athenaeus, which tells how there was a kind of chant used in schools:—βῆτα ἄλφα βα, βῆτα εἶ βε, etc. A terracotta plate found in Attica, doubtless intended for use in schools, contains a number of syllables αρ βαρ γαρ δαρ ερ βερ γερ δερ κτλ.”

26. =ἀπταίστως=: Usener reads ἀπταίστῳ. But the adverb goes better with διερχόμεθα than the adjective would with ἕξει τε καὶ τάχει. Cp. de Demosth. c. 51 (the later version of the present passage) ἀπταίστως τε καὶ κατὰ πολλὴν εὐπέτειαν, and Plato Theaet. 144 B ὁ δὲ οὕτω λείως τε καὶ ἀπταίστως καὶ ἀνυσίμως ἔρχεται ἐπὶ τὰς μαθήσεις τε καὶ ζητήσεις μετὰ πολλῆς πρᾳότητος, οἷον ἐλαίου ῥεῦμα ἀψοφητὶ ῥέοντος (these last words are echoed in the de Demosth. c. 20).

29. =ἀθληταῖς=: cp. de Demosth. c. 18 καίτοι γε τοῖς ἀθληταῖς τῆς ἀληθινῆς λέξεως ἰσχυρὰς τὰς ἁφὰς προσεῖναι δεῖ καὶ ἀφύκτους τὰς λαβάς, and de Isocr. c. 11 fin.; also δεινοὺς ἀγωνιστάς =282= 3 infra.

[Page 269]

by human skill were, yet when long training had issued in perfect mastery, and had graven on his mind forms and impressions of all that he had practised, he henceforth produced his effects with the utmost ease from sheer force of habit. Something similar occurs in the other arts whose end is activity or production. For example, when accomplished players on the lyre, the harp, or the flute hear an unfamiliar tune, they no sooner grasp it than with little trouble they run over it on the instrument themselves. They have mastered the values of the notes after much toiling and moiling, and so can reproduce them. Their hands were not at the outset in condition to do what was bidden them; they attained command of this accomplishment only after much time, when ample training had converted custom into second nature.

Why pursue the subject? A fact familiar to all of us is enough to silence these quibblers. What may this be? When we are taught to read, first we learn off the names of the letters, then their forms and their values, then in due course syllables and their modifications, and finally words and their properties, viz. lengthenings and shortenings, accents, and the like. After acquiring the knowledge of these things, we begin to write and read, syllable by syllable and slowly at first. And when the lapse of a considerable time has implanted the forms of words firmly in our minds, then we deal with them without the least difficulty, and whenever any book is placed in our hands we go through it without stumbling, and with incredible facility and speed. We must suppose that something of this kind happens in the case of the trained exponent of the literary profession as regards the arrangement of words and the euphony of clauses. And it is not unnatural that those who

[Page 270]

ἀπείρους ἢ ἀτριβεῖς ἔργου ὁτουοῦν θαυμάζειν καὶ ἀπιστεῖν, εἴ τι κεκρατημένως ὑφ’ ἑτέρου γίνεται διὰ τέχνης, οὐκ ἄλογον. πρὸς μὲν οὖν τοὺς εἰωθότας χλευάζειν τὰ παραγγέλματα τῶν τεχνῶν ταῦτα εἰρήσθω.

XXVI

περὶ δὲ τῆς ἐμμελοῦς τε καὶ ἐμμέτρου συνθέσεως τῆς 5 ἐχούσης πολλὴν ὁμοιότητα πρὸς τὴν πεζὴν λέξιν τοιαῦτά τινα λέγειν ἔχω, ὡς πρώτη μέν ἐστιν αἰτία κἀνταῦθα τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὅνπερ ἐπὶ τῆς ἀμέτρου ποιητικῆς ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων αὐτῶν ἁρμογή, δευτέρα δὲ ἡ τῶν κώλων σύνθεσις, τρίτη δὲ ἡ τῶν περιόδων συμμετρία. τὸν δὴ βουλόμενον ἐν τούτῳ 10 τῷ μέρει κατορθοῦν τὰ τῆς λέξεως μόρια δεῖ πολυειδῶς στρέφειν τε καὶ συναρμόττειν καὶ τὰ κῶλα ἐν διαστήμασι ποιεῖν συμμέτρως, μὴ συναπαρτίζοντα τοῖς στίχοις ἀλλὰ διατέμνοντα τὸ μέτρον, ἄνισά τε ποιεῖν αὐτὰ καὶ ἀνόμοια, πολλάκις δὲ καὶ εἰς κόμματα συνάγειν βραχύτερα κώλων, τάς τε περιόδους 15 μήτε ἰσομεγέθεις μήτε ὁμοιοσχήμονας τὰς γοῦν παρακειμένας ἀλλήλαις ἐργάζεσθαι· ἔγγιστα γὰρ φαίνεται λόγοις τὸ περὶ τοὺς ῥυθμοὺς καὶ τὰ μέτρα πεπλανημένον. τοῖς μὲν οὖν τὰ ἔπη καὶ τοὺς ἰάμβους καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ ὁμοειδῆ μέτρα κατασκευάζουσιν οὐκ ἔξεστι πολλοῖς διαλαμβάνειν μέτροις ἢ 20 ῥυθμοῖς τὰς ποιήσεις, ἀλλ’ ἀνάγκη μένειν ἀεὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ σχήματος· τοῖς δὲ μελοποιοῖς ἔξεστι πολλὰ μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμοὺς εἰς μίαν ἐμβαλεῖν περίοδον· ὥσθ’ οἱ μὲν τὰ μονόμετρα

1 ἀτριβεῖς Reiskius: ἀτριβέσιν libri 2 κεκρατημένως PM: κεκροτημένως V 5 συνθήκης M 10 συμμετρία M: ἐμμετρία EPV 17 ἀλλήλαις EM: ἀλλήλοις PV

2. =κεκρατημένως=, ‘vigorously’: cp. Sext. Empir. p. 554 (Bekker) οὐ κεκρατημένως ὑπέγραψαν οἱ δογματικοὶ τὴν ἐπίνοιαν τοῦ τε ἀγαθοῦ καὶ κακοῦ. The other reading κεκροτημένως would mean ‘with tumult of applause’; or perhaps ‘in a welded, well-wrought way.’

5. For the relation of Verse to Prose see Introduction, pp. 33-9.

8. Other references to poetical prose occur in =208= 5, =250= 10, 16 supra.

13. =μὴ συναπαρτίζοντα τοῖς στίχοις=, ‘not allowing the sense of the clauses to be self-contained in separate lines,’ lit. ‘not completing the clauses together with the lines.’ Dionysius means that verse-writers must (for the sake of variety) practise enjambement, i.e. the completion of the sense in another line. It is the neglect of this principle that makes the language of French classical tragedy [with exceptions, of course; e.g. Racine Athalie i. 1 “Celui qui met un frein,” etc.] so monotonous when compared with that of the Greek or Shakespearian tragedy. Besides the examples adduced by Dionysius, compare that quoted from Callimachus in the note on =272= 4 infra and, in English, Tennyson’s Dora and Wordsworth’s Michael. Such English poems without rhyme might be written out as continuous prose, and their true character would pass unsuspected by many readers, pauses at the ends of lines being often studiously avoided; e.g. the opening of Tennyson’s Dora: “With farmer Allen at the farm abode William and Dora. William was his son, and she his niece. He often look’d at them, and often thought, ‘I’ll make them man and wife.’ Now Dora felt her uncle’s will in all, and yearn’d toward William; but the youth, because he had been always with her in the house, thought not of Dora.” Similarly Homer’s “ἀλλά μ’ ἀνήρπαξαν Τάφιοι ληίστορες ἄνδρες ἀγρόθεν ἐρχομένην, περάσαν δέ με δεῦρ’ ἀγαγόντες τοῦδ’ ἀνδρὸς πρὸς δώμαθ’· ὁ δ’ ἄξιον ὦνον ἔδωκε” (Odyss. xv. 427-9) might almost be an extract from a speech of Lysias. Some remarkable examples of enjambement (or ‘overflow’) might also be quoted from Swinburne’s recent poem, The Duke of Gandia.

17. Cp. Cic. de Orat. i. 16. 70 “est enim finitimus oratori poëta, numeris astrictor paulo, verborum autem licentia liberior, multis vero ornandi generibus socius, ac paene par.”

[Page 271]

are ignorant of this or unversed in any profession whatsoever should be surprised and incredulous when they hear that anything is executed with such mastery by another as a result of artistic training. This may suffice as a rejoinder to those who are accustomed to scoff at the rules of the rhetorical manuals.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

XXIII. SMOOTH COMPOSITION…

Cite this passage

MLA

APA

Chicago